Systematization of Management Models of Digital Transformation of the Education Sector

Nurmaganbetova  Meruyert; Maksat  Yelikbay; Darikul  Kulanova; Sissenova  Asse; Imanbayev  Aliy; Himmet  Karadal

doi:10.48161/qaj.v6n3a2320

Authors

Nurmaganbetova Meruyert Department of Higher School of Economics and Management, Faculty of Economics, Turan University, Almaty 050013, Kazakhstan;
Maksat Yelikbay Faculty of Law, M. Auezov South Kazakhstan University, Shymkent 160000, Kazakhstan; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3579-2365
Darikul Kulanova Department of Marketing and Management, Faculty of Economics, M. Auezov South Kazakhstan University, Shymkent 160000, Kazakhstan;
Sissenova Asse Department of Higher School of Economics and Management, Faculty of Economics, Turan University, Almaty 050013, Kazakhstan;
Imanbayev Aliy Department of Economics and Management, Central Asian Innovation University, Shymkent 160000, Kazakhstan;
Himmet Karadal Department of Communication, Faculty of Communication, Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu 14030, Turkey.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48161/qaj.v6n3a2320

Keywords:

Digital transformation, Educational management, Digital maturity, Strategic management, Educational digitalization.

Abstract

Digital transformation in education requires adaptive management models that align institutional strategy with technological change and human-capital development. This study aims to systematize and classify management models of digital transformation in Kazakhstan’s education sector. A mixed-methods approach was applied: a survey of 250 administrators from schools, colleges, and universities (2024), expert interviews with policy makers, and Pearson correlation analysis to assess relationships between digital maturity, leadership competencies, financing, and the adoption of analytics-driven tools. Results show that only 27% of institutions have formal digital strategies, while digital maturity strongly correlates with the number of implemented solutions (r = 0.72) and managers’ digital competence (r = 0.71). Regional disparities persist: access to high-speed internet reaches 92% in Almaty but only 60% in Atyrau. The study proposes four types of management models—innovative-adaptive, platform-oriented, process-modular, and hybrid—and outlines conditions for their application. Findings provide evidence-based guidance for policy-makers and institutional leaders to advance equitable, analytics-driven digital transformation. The four proposed management models are grounded in established theories of organizational change, digital transformation, and institutional governance, providing a conceptual framework for understanding how educational institutions can implement digital transformation effectively.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144.

Al-Bdour, N. T., Al-Bustanji, M. A., Alhroub, R. H., Alzyoud, S. A., Rababah, S., & Al-Orani, O. I. (2025). Technology Specialists’ Perspectives on Nano-technology Applications Used for University Students with Disabilities. Qubahan Academic Journal, 5(4), 493-507.

Gill, R., & VanBoskirk, S. (2016). The digital maturity model 3.0. Forrester Research.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

OECD. (2023). OECD digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem.

UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education—A tool on whose terms?

Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., & McAfee, A. (2014). Leading digital: Turning technology into business transformation. Harvard Business Review Press.

Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567–1579.

OECD. (2021). OECD digital education outlook 2021: Pushing the frontiers with artificial intelligence, blockchain and robots.

Selwyn, N. (2022). Education and technology: Key issues and debates. Bloomsbury.

Papanastasiou, E. C., & Mavridis, D. (2023). Leadership for digital transformation in education. Springer.

Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2017). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W. W. Norton & Company.

Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., Aznar-Díaz, I., Cáceres-Reche, M. P., Trujillo-Torres, J. M., & Romero-Rodríguez, J. M. (2019). Factors influencing the development of digital competence in teachers: Analysis of the teaching staff of permanent education centres. IEEE Access, 7, 178744–178752.

Fullan, M., & Scott, G. (2019). The new pedagogy: Students and teachers as learning partners. Corwin Press.

Williamson, B., & Hogan, A. (2020). The datafication of education: Policy, pedagogy, and the politics of learning. Routledge.

Hodges, C. B., Moore, S., Lockee, B. B., Trust, T., & Bond, M. A. (2020, March 27). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review.

European Commission. (2020). Digital education action plan 2021–2027: Resetting education and training for the digital age (COM(2020) 624 final).

Kolosova, I. A. (2020). Digital transformation of educational institutions in Russia: Challenges and prospects. Higher Education in Russia, 29(1), 89–102.

Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2017). State program “Digital Kazakhstan” (Resolution No. 827, December 12, 2017).

Kurbanaliev, A. M., & Zhurgenov, A. Z. (2023). Цифровизация образования в Казахстане: проблемы и решения. Journal of Education and Science, 6(2), 134–141.

Zhumagalieva, A. K. (2021). Цифровая трансформация образования в Казахстане: пути и проблемы внедрения. Вестник Казахского национального университета, 62(4), 114–123.

Seifullin, D. A., & Tokhtarova, D. A. (2022). Development of digital leadership in Kazakhstani educational institutions. Journal of Pedagogical Sciences of Kazakhstan, 27(3), 56–70.

Yumasheva, L. I., & Samygin, S. I. (2022). Гибридные модели управления цифровыми образовательными системами. Современные тенденции в управлении образованием, 5(1), 78–89.

Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., & Thomas, D. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. Agile Alliance.

Highsmith, J. (2010). Agile project management: Creating innovative products (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley.

Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1996). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. Simon & Schuster.

Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking creates new alternatives for business and society. HarperBusiness.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3/4), 591–611.

Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement of association between two things. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 72–101.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.

Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

Hook, D. W., Porter, S. J., & Herzog, C. (2018). Dimensions: Building context for search and evaluation. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 3, 23.

JSC A. Baitursynuly National Center for Research and Evaluation of Education “Taldau”. (2024). Education statistics of Kazakhstan: National collection.

Kazinform. (2018, November 8). Digitalization in education: New technologies to support the learning process [Russian-language news report on the pilot project at Lyceum No. 134, Almaty].

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2018). United Nations e-government survey 2018: Gearing e-government to support transformation towards sustainable and resilient societies. United Nations.

Bureau of National Statistics of the Agency for Strategic Planning and Reforms of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2024). Statistics of education, science and innovation.

Pearson, K. (1895). Notes on regression and inheritance in the case of two parents. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 58, 240–242.