¿Qué impulsa el uso posterior a la adopción de tecnologías educativas en la educación superior? Una revisión sistemática exploratoria
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37711/Palabras clave:
tecnología educativa, educación superior, profesores universitarios, uso posterior a la adopción, intención de continuidad, integración tecnológica, revisión sistemática exploratoriaResumen
Aunque se ha prestado considerable atención a investigar la aceptación inicial y la adopción de tecnologías educativas en la educación superior por parte de los docentes, mucho menos seguro es si estas tecnologías se convierten en una parte sostenida de la práctica docente. En un intento de abordar tal brecha, esta revisión sistemática exploratoria examinó los factores asociados con el uso posterior a la adopción de tecnología educativa entre profesores universitarios, distinguiendo entre la intención de continuar con el uso, la implementación y la discontinuación, ya sea que se reporten como continuos o profundos. Este artículo buscó en las bases de datos ERIC, OpenAlex y Crossref estudios empíricos en inglés revisados por pares publicados entre 2015 y 2026. La búsqueda dio lugar a cincuenta y cinco informes completos para evaluación, de los cuales solo veinte cumplían los criterios de inclusión. Dada la diversidad de tecnologías, resultados y métodos, los hallazgos se sintetizaron narrativamente. Surgieron cuatro dominios recurrentes: valor pedagógico y ajuste tarea-tecnología; satisfacción, confirmación y calidad del sistema; competencia, autonomía y afecto docentes; y factores institucionales y sociales. El uso o la intención tras la adopción se asociaron con un valor pedagógico percibido, calidad del sistema, competencia, autonomía, apoyo institucional, tiempo, reconocimiento y compromiso estudiantil. Las barreras incluían tecnoestrés, preocupaciones sobre la privacidad, infraestructura inadecuada, mala adaptación y uso obligatorio. Como la base de evidencia estuvo dominada en gran medida por estudios transversales de autoinforme sobre la intención de continuidad, las conclusiones sobre el comportamiento sostenido deben interpretarse con cautela.
Descargas
Referencias
Alfoudari, A. M., & Durugbo, C. M. (2026). What determines university instructors’ continuance intentions for smart classroom use: Examining the role of service quality, connectedness and technostress. British Journal of Educational Technology, 57(1), 321-345. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.70020
Al-Freih, M. (2022). From the Adoption to the Implementation of Online Teaching in a Post-COVID World: Applying Ely’s Conditions of Change Framework. Education Sciences, 12(11), 757. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12110757
Almogren, A. S. (2022). Art education lecturers’ intention to continue using the blackboard during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: An empirical investigation into the UTAUT and TAM model. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 944335. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.944335
Alqabandi, F., & Durugbo, C. M. (2026). Examining university instructors’ continuance intentions for online assessment: the role of safeguards, openness and cognitive reactions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 51(2), 263-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2591557
Al-Samarraie, H., Teng, B. K., Alzahrani, A. I., & Alalwan, N. (2018). E-learning continuance satisfaction in higher education: a unified perspective from instructors and students. Studies in Higher Education, 43(11), 2003-2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1298088
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351-370. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250921
Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
Bong, W. K., & Chen, W. (2024). Increasing faculty’s competence in digital accessibility for inclusive education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 28(2), 197-213. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1937344
Campbell, M., McKenzie, J. E., Sowden, A., Katikireddi, S. V., Brennan, S. E., Ellis, S., Hartmann-Boyce, J., Ryan, R., Shepperd, S., Thomas, J., Welch, V., & Thomson, H. (2020). Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: Reporting guideline. BMJ, 368, 16890. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l6890
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Du, J., & Phongsatha, T. (2025). Teachers Continuance Intention to Use E-Learning Platforms for Blended Teaching in The Post-Epidemic Era. International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews, 5(1), 419-436. https://doi.org/10.60027/ijsasr.2025.5364
El Guermat, A. M. (2026). Technology integration in English for medical purposes A TPACK-based study of Moroccan EMP teachers. The International Journal of Technology, Innovation, and Education, 4(2), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20291282
El Guermat, A. M., Largou. S., & El Boubekri, A. (2025). Social Media as a Pedagogical Tool: Investigating Faculty Perceptions, Practices, and Institutional Challenges in Moroccan Higher Education. Innovation, Technology, Education and Communication, (9). https://doi.org/10.60590/PRSM.itec-iss10.157
Gao, Y., Teo, T., Wong, S. L., Geng, J., & Diao, F. (2026). Unpacking Chinese University EFL Teachers’ Continuance Intention Toward LMS: A Qualitative Extension of the UTAUT2 Framework. SAGE Open, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440261487318
Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Carga, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O’Cathain, A., Rousseau, M.-C., & Vedel, I. (2018). Mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT), version 2018: User guide. https://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/127916259/MMAT_2018_criteria%20manual_2018%20-08-01_ENG.pdf
Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O'Cathain, A., Rousseau, M.-C., & Vedel, I. (2019). Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a modified e-Delphi study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 111, 49-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.008
Jasperson, J., Carter, P. E., & Zmud, R. W. (2005). A Comprehensive Conceptualization of Post-Adoptive Behaviors Associated with Information Technology Enabled Work Systems. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 525-557. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148694
Kamali, A., Alavi, S. B., & Arasti, M. R. (2024). The role of basic psychological needs satisfaction (BPNS) during the initial use of online teaching platforms on faculty members’ continuance intention. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(3), 819-838. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-02-2023-0080
Kaqinari, T., Makarova, E., Audran, J., Döring, A. K., Göbel, K., & Kern, D. (2022). A Latent Class Analysis of University Lecturers’ Switch to Online Teaching during the First COVID-19 Lockdown: The Role of Educational Technology, Self-Efficacy, and Institutional Support. Education Sciences, 12(9), 607. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090607
Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 6-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404
Li, J. (2024). An investigation on factors impacting satisfaction and continuance intention to use e-learning among university lecturers in Zhejiang, China. Scholar: Human Sciences, 16(3), 247-256. https://doi.org/10.14456/shserj.2024.77
Lidolf, S., & Pasco, D. (2020). Educational Technology Professional Development in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Research. Frontiers in Education, 5, 35. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00035
Limayem, M., Hirt, S. G., & Cheung, C. M. K. (2007). How Habit Limits the Predictive Power of Intention: The Case of Information Systems Continuance. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 705-737. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148817
Lythreatis, S., Singh, S. K., & El-Kassar, A.-N. (2022). The digital divide: A review and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175, 121359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121359
Mercader, C., & Gairín, J. (2020). University teachers’ perception of barriers to the use of digital technologies: the importance of the academic discipline. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0182-x
Mitra, S. (2022). Role of LMS Assessment Tools. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 22(2), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v22i2.5034
Mouakket, S., & Bettayeb, A. M. (2015). Investigating the factors influencing continuance usage intention of Learning management systems by university instructors: The Blackboard system case. International Journal of Web Information Systems, 11(4), 491-509. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWIS-03-2015-0008
Mtebe, J. S., & Gallagher, M. (2022). Continued usage intentions of digital technologies post-pandemic through the Expectation-Confirmation Model: the case of a Tanzanian university. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 18(1), 125-145. http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu/viewarticle.php?id=3041
Murire, O. T., & Gavaza, B. K. (2025). Transitional Challenges in Technology Adoption and Continued Use in Tertiary Institutions. Trends in Higher Education, 4(2), 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu4020028
Nair, P. (2022). Determinants of Satisfaction and Deep Structure Usage of Post-acceptance Learning Management Systems by Malaysian Higher Education Lecturers. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 12(7), 599-608. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.7.1659
Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura. (2023). Informe de seguimiento de la educación en el mundo 2023. Tecnología en la educación: ¿una herramienta en términos de quién? https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., . . . Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pieper, D., & Rombey, T. (2022). Where to prospectively register a systematic review. Systematic Reviews, 11, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01877-1
Porter, W. W., & Graham, C. R. (2016). Institutional drivers and barriers to faculty adoption of blended learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(4), 748-762. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12269
Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., Koffel, J. B., & PRISMA-S Group. (2021). PRISMA-S: An extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
Şahin, F., Doğan, E., & İliç, U. (2025). Instructors’ Continuance Intention to Use Technology in Online and Hybrid Settings: Integrating Psychological Needs and Emotions. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 41(2), 1028-1041. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2309002
Seale, J. (2014). E-learning and disability in higher education: Accessibility research and practice (2.a ed.). Routledge.
Selwyn, N. (2017). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (2.a ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Shelton, C. (2017). Giving up technology and social media: Why university lecturers stop using technology in teaching. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(3), 303-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2016.1217269
Song, C., Helikar, R., Smith, W., & Helikar, T. (2023). Factors Influencing Instructors’ Adoption and Continued Use of Computing Science Technologies: A Case Study in the Context of Cell Collective. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 22(3), ar29. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-11-0239
Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., Curtis, R., Akcaoglu, M., & Bernstein, M. (2020). Digital divide among higher education faculty. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00191-5
Sum, M., & Oancea, A. (2022). The use of technology in higher education teaching by academics during the COVID-19 emergency remote teaching period: a systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19, 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00364-4
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Xiao, W., Wang, M., & Mo, J. (2024). Factors influencing college teachers’ adoption of live online teaching: a conditional process model of technology acceptance, user satisfaction and privacy concerns. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1293879. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1293879
Ye, S. (2023). An empirical study of the university teachers’ continuance usage of online teaching platform. International Journal of Science and Business, 21(1), 67-82. https://doi.org/10.58970/IJSB.2077
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Abdel Moula El Guermat
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
a. Los autores conservan los derechos de propiedad intelectual (copyright) de las obras publicadas, cediendole a la revista el derecho de primera publicación.
b. Los autores retienen sus derechos de marca y patente, y también sobre cualquier proceso o procedimiento descrito en el artículo.
c. Los autores retienen el derecho de compartir, copiar, distribuir, ejecutar y comunicar públicamente el artículo publicado en la RD (por ejemplo, colocarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en la RD.
d. Los autores retienen el derecho a hacer una posterior publicación de su trabajo, de utilizar el artículo o cualquier parte de aquel (por ejemplo: una compilación de sus trabajos, notas para conferencias, tesis, o para un libro), siempre que indiquen la fuente de publicación (autores del trabajo, revista, volumen, número y fecha).
