Figure 1.
Socio-technical framework of educational digitalization
Table 1.
The characteristics of elite interviewees
| Interviewee | Interviewee's gender | Interviewee's position | Experience in current position (in years) | Roles and responsibilities in digital transformation processes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | Female | Representative of the Legal Advisers’ Team management | 4 | Responsible for formal and legal matters, e.g., giving opinions on the Rector's notices and orders, receiving and processing legal problems raised by faculty and students. |
| B | Female | Associate dean for teaching in one of the faculties | 3 | Organization and management of the educational process, including its supervision, i.e. conducting and organizing online classes, ensuring the achievement of learning outcomes and introduction of technological teaching solutions. |
| C | Male | Representative of the Teaching Support Center management | 12 | Participation and coordination of processes, e.g., design of educational services, recruitment and support for implementation of the educational process. |
| D | Female | Representative of the Students’ Self-government | 2 | Recipient of educational services as a student; opinion-giving on issues connected to the organization of the educational processes. |
| E | Male | Representative of the Informatics Center management | 10 | Providing IT tools and training for employees and students during the digitalization of educational processes. |
| F | Male | Head of the Multimedia and Computer Laboratory in one of the faculties | 14 | Supporting activities related to digital transformation, maintaining access to the Internet and tools. Technical support for employees and students (including training), creating new digital tools and solutions. |
| G | Male | Representative of the university's authorities responsible for teaching | 7 | Participation in all educational processes and their digital transformation, decision-making and directional role. |
Table 2.
Codebook sample
| Aggregate dimension | Second-order theme | First-order concepts | Definition | Example indicators/quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Process tensions | Standardization vs teaching autonomy | Unified procedures; mandatory platforms; restricted flexibility | Conflict between institutional standardization and lecturer autonomy | Templates limit individual teaching styles |
| Flexibility vs educational quality | Easier access; asynchronous learning; concerns about outcomes; | Tension between accessibility and maintaining educational standards | Flexibility increased, but engagement decreased | |
| Technological capabilities vs digital competencies | advanced systems; insufficient training; adaptation difficulties | Misalignment between technologies and users’ competencies | The tools were available, but the staff lacked experience | |
| Central coordination vs local adaptation | Central policy; faculty-specific needs; local practices | Tension between centralized governance and local educational needs | Faculty needs differed from university-wide policies |
Table 3.
Analytical framework for regulatory-oriented document analysis
| Regulatory Level | Document Types | Key Legal Acts & References | Analytical Purpose (Rationale) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MACRO (National) | Statutory Law & National Regulations | Act on COVID-19 (Journal of Laws 2020, item 374); Law on Higher Education and Science (Law 2.0). | Identify external legal boundaries and the state-mandated transition to remote public administration. |
| MEZZO (Institutional) | Senate Resolutions & Development Strategies | Senate Resolution No. 11/IV/2005 (Est. of Center for Distance Learning); JU Strategy 2030. | Assess long-term institutional readiness and the historical trajectory of adoption of e-learning (path dependency). |
| Rector's Ordinances & Systemic Decisions | Rector's Decision No. 10/2019 (Electronic Document Management Implementation); Ordinance No. 151/2020 (Remote Work Regulations). | Evaluate the formalization of the digital operating model and the transition from paper-based to digital-first workflows. | |
| OPERATIONAL (Micro) | Dean's Communications & Faculty Directives | Management & Social Communication Faculty Directives (2020–2022); Chancellor's Communiqués on administrative support. | Investigate the actual implementation of digital protocols at the departmental level and faculty-specific adaptations. |
Regulatory milestones in the university's digital transformation.
| Year | Key Document/Legal Act | Transformation Phase | Strategic Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | Senate Resolution No. 11/IV/2005 | Pre-pandemic Incubation | Early institutionalization of e-learning; establishment of the Center for Distance Learning (CZN) as a dedicated support unit. |
| 2017 | JU Organizational Regulations (2017) | Structural Baseline | Established the traditional administrative framework and IT governance before the large-scale digital shift. |
| 2019 | Rector's Decision No. 10/2019 | Systemic Transition | Formal initiation of the Electronic Document Management (EZD) project; appointment of the Steering Committee to oversee digital workflows. |
| 2020 (Mar) | Chancellor's Communiqué No. 8/2020 | Emergency Adaptation | Immediate operational shift to remote administrative communication and restricted physical access during the first lockdown. |
| 2020 (Apr) | Rector's Ordinance No. 40/2020 | Systemic Transition | Pilot implementation of the EZD system, accelerating the transition to a paperless office under crisis conditions. |
| 2020 (Dec) | Rector's Ordinance No. 151/2020 | Institutionalization | Formalization of ‚Remote Work Regulations'; establishing legal standards for data security and teleworking duties. |
| 2021/22 | Faculty-level Directives (WZiKS) | Operationalization | Translation of central mandates into faculty-specific protocols for remote examinations and virtual student services. |
| 2021–30 | University Strategy 2030 | Future Vision | Strategic consolidation of digital maturity as a long-term developmental pillar of the institution. |