TECHNOLOGY-ENABLED IMPLEMENTATION OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF UDL, MTSS, AND LEARNING ANALYTICS

Widya Angelia; Ardin Sianipar; Natalina Damayanthi

doi:10.19166/derema.v21i1.10356

Authors

Widya Angelia Universitas Pelita Harapan
Ardin Sianipar Universitas Pelita Harapan https://orcid.org/0009-0004-3952-2006
Natalina Damayanthi Universitas Pelita Harapan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19166/derema.v21i1.10356

Abstract

This article synthesises evidence on the implementation of inclusive education policies by examining the interplay of technology, pedagogical frameworks, and systemic support in shaping adoption, consistency, adherence, and feasibility across various school contexts. Design/methodology/approach: A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Seventeen Scopus-indexed articles (2016–2024) were analysed, focusing on study characteristics, theoretical foundations, and implementation indicators. Quality was assessed using JBI checklists. Findings reveal that the combination of assistive technologies, learning management systems, and analytics dashboards enhances adoption and consistency when paired with teacher professional development and Leadership support. The UDL and MTSS frameworks strengthen coherence in curriculum adaptation and monitoring. Nevertheless, affordability, teacher readiness, and infrastructure gaps particularly in LMICs remain significant challenges. Temporal differences emerged: pre-COVID studies emphasised classroom level interventions, while post COVID research highlighted systemic digital infrastructure and accountability. Research limitations include reliance on English only sources, methodological heterogeneity, and potential publication bias. Implications: Policymakers must align inclusion mandates with funding and infrastructure, while school leaders should integrate teacher training and data driven monitoring to support inclusive practices. Researchers are encouraged to adopt mixed method and longitudinal designs across contexts. This study presents a comparative synthesis of pre and post COVID literature, highlighting systemic strategies and justice-oriented perspectives as crucial for sustaining inclusive education.

References

Almeqdad, Q. I., Alghamdi, A. K. H., & Ihmeideh, F. M. (2023). The effectiveness of universal design for learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2218191. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2218191

Ariesty, W. (2018). Pengaruh relationship satisfaction dalam business performance. DeReMa Jurnal Manajemen, 13, 248–249. https://doi.org/10.19166/derema.v13i2.719

Ardianuari, S., Pasaribu, E., Amannullah, G., & Prana, A. (2023). Assistive technology unmet needs in Indonesia: Challenges and opportunities for enhancing equitable access. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 19(6), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2023.2244996

Bouck, E. C. (2016). A national snapshot of assistive technology for students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31(1), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643416633330

Bouck, E. C., & Flanagan, S. M. (2016). Exploring assistive technology and post-school outcomes for students with severe disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 11(8), 645–652. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2015.1029537

Damschroder, L. J., Reardon, C. M., Widerquist, M. A. O., & Lowery, J. (2022). The updated consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR): Enhancements for equity and construct clarity. Implementation Science, 17, 75. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01245-1

Durach, C. F., Kembro, J., & Wieland, A. (2017). A new paradigm for systematic literature reviews in supply chain management. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 53(4), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12145

Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Román-Graván, P., & Montenegro-Rueda, M. (2022). Assistive technology for the inclusion of students with disabilities: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70, 1589–1620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10127-7

Hardy, I., & Woodcock, S. (2024). Inclusive education policies—Objects of observance, omission and obfuscation, ten years on. International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2023.2257697

Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., & Wang, M. (2023). Learning analytics in supporting student agency: A systematic review. Sustainability, 15(18), 13662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813662

Huang, L., Liang, M., Xiong, Y., Wu, X., & Lim, C. P. (2024). A systematic review of technology-enabled teacher professional development during the COVID-19 pandemic. Computers & Education, 223, 105168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105168

JBI. (2020). JBI manual for evidence synthesis. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01

King-Sears, M. E., Stefanidis, A., Evmenova, A. S., Rao, K., Brunsell, E., & Strimel, M. (2023). Achievement of learners receiving UDL instruction: A meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103956

Majeika, C. E., & Rafferty, L. A. (2024). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support in elementary schools: Practical applications. Intervention in School and Clinic, 60(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512241254031

Matsieli, M., & Mutula, S. (2024). COVID-19 and digital transformation in higher education institutions: Towards inclusive and equitable access to quality education. Education Sciences, 14(8), 819. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080819

McKenzie, J. (2023). Implementation of universal design for learning in low- and middle-income countries. Access: Inclusive Education and Technology, 3(4), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/access3040043

Mukhtarkyzy, K., Smagulova, L., Tokzhigitova, A., Amanzholov, T., Abdibaitova, G., & Omarova, A. (2025). A systematic review of the utility of assistive technologies for SEND students in schools. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1523797. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1523797

Navas-Bonilla, C. R., Jiménez-Carvajal, K., & Chaves-García, C. (2025). Inclusive education through technology: A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1527851. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1527851

Nordström, T., Nilsson, S., Gustafson, S., & Svensson, I. (2019). Assistive technology applications for students with reading and writing difficulties. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 14(8), 797–806. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1499142

Novrizal, N., & Manaf, S. (2024). The policy of inclusive education in Indonesia. Multicultural Islamic Education Review, 2(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.23917/mier.v2i1.4297

Ozdowska, A., & Scanlon, A. (2021). Using assistive technology with SRSD to support students on the autism spectrum with persuasive writing. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 624–641. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13063

Page, M. J., et al. (2021). PRISMA 2020 statement. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Paolucci, C., et al. (2024). Learning analytics opportunities and challenges for K–12 education. Heliyon, 10(4), e25767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25767

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing.

Rethlefsen, M. L., et al. (2021). PRISMA-S extension. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 134, 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.006

Rundquist, R., et al. (2024). Use of learning analytics in K–12 mathematics education. Journal of Learning Analytics, 11(3), 174–191. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2024.8299

Samaniego López, M. E., et al. (2025). Technologies in inclusive education: Solution or challenge? Education Sciences, 15(6), 715. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15060715

Shepley, C., Lane, J. D., & Graley, D. (2022). Progress monitoring data for learners with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 44(4), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325221128907

Soeharto, S., Subasi Singh, S., & Afriyanti, F. (2024). Attitudes toward inclusive education and teaching for creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 51, 101469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101469

Thelwall, M. (2018). Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and Web of Science? Journal of Informetrics, 12(2), 430–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.006

Tuğtekin, E. B. (2023). Scrutinising learning management systems in practice. IRRODL, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v24i2.6905

Zhang, Z., Wu, Y., Li, J., & Sun, H. (2025). Factors influencing teacher adoption of digital education management systems. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 1552. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-01552-8