Unlocking the potential of technology usage in fostering education quality and students' satisfaction: a case of Pakistani higher education
Abstract
Purpose This research aims to determine the levels of education quality (EQ), technology usage (TU), students' satisfaction (SS) and the impact of EQ on SS. Also, it seeks to find out how TU as a moderator affects EQ and SS in Pakistani private higher education institutions (HEIs). Design/methodology/approach A total of 440 postgraduate students at eleven private universities in Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan, participated in empirical research and data were obtained through the use of an online questionnaire. Simple random sampling was used to choose participants and partial least square structural equation modeling was employed to analyze the data. Findings The findings revealed that Pakistani private HEIs have a medium level of EQ, TU and SS. Furthermore, the data reveal the existence of a significant positive relationship between EQ and SS, whereas TU as a moderator was found to negatively affect EQ and SS. Research limitations/implications Postgraduate students of private HEIs in Pakistan were considered for this investigation and this study was limited to testing only in Punjab province. Another limitation of this study is that it was based on a research framework from previous research and literature. This study employed questionnaire surveys to conduct evaluations of teachers' teaching quality by university students. Furthermore, the questionnaire employed student self-evaluations to assess the quality of teaching. The research data would be more detailed if it wer…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Infrastructural problems, uneven digital literacy among staff and students, and constrained technology budgets characterize Pakistani universities.
“Pakistani universities operate within a context of infrastructural challenges, uneven digital literacy among teachers and students, and limited budgets for technology (Ikram and Kenayathulla et al., 2025).”
From AI Adoption in Higher Education: A Comparative Study of Institutional Readiness and Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Ikram and Kenayathulla et al., 2025
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AI Adoption in Higher Education: A Comparative Study of Institutional Readiness and Challenges
Huma, T., Ahmed, D. S., Mahmood, W., khan, D. A., & Afridi, D. A. K. (2025) · Social Science Review Archives · doi:10.70670/sra.v3i4.1117 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ikram, M., Kenayathulla, H. B., & Saleem, S. M. U.
- Affiliations
- University of Malaya (MY)
- Universiti Utara Malaysia (MY)
- Venue
- Kybernetes
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2023-12-21
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1938-1965
- ISSN
- 0368-492X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4389989593
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 11.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Kybernetes (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Outcomes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Management and Quality
- Keywords
- educational quality, technology use, student satisfaction, private higher education, graduate students, virtual learning environments, Web 4.0, teaching quality, Pakistani universities, quality education
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review