Purpose and Context of the Special Issue
In an era defined by rapid technological change and the transformative impact of artificial intelligence (AI), the concept of technology leadership has never been more critical — or more contested. Educators and researchers, alike, are grappling with how to lead systemic innovation in post-COVID and AI-integrated learning environments while navigating unprecedented technological improvement. These challenges sparked a pivotal conversation at the 2023 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE) conference, where members of the Technology Leadership Special Interest Group (SIG) recognized the urgent need to revisit and redefine what technology leadership in education means today.
The Technology Leadership Literature Review special issue originated from these much-needed discussions during the 2023 Technology Leadership SIG meeting. SIG members engaged in a productive dialogue on the evolving definition of technology leadership in the context of post-COVID education and the rapid emergence of AI tools (AlAjmi, 2022; Brandon, 2024; Fang & Broussard, 2024; Karaköse et al., 2021; Menon & Motala, 2021). Members highlighted the unprecedented urgency created by the accelerated integration of emerging technologies into educational settings, which requires educators to lead systemic initiatives for their teaching and learning contexts (Belair & Waskie-Laura, 2021; Gruszczynska et al., 2013; Oliveria et al., 2019; Supriyatno et al., 2020).
Technology leadership has long been recognized as a critical factor in the diffusion of innovation (Dou et al., 2017; Leithwood & Sun, 2018; Tajasom et al., 2015). However, existing literature reveals a lack of consensus on its definition, and most conceptualizations offer limited guidance for practical implementation (Nguyen et al., 2019; Simpson, 2021). SIG members unanimously agreed that redefining technology leadership is both timely and essential for advancing the field.
Goals of the Special Issue
Further discussion revealed that technology leadership is not a one-dimensional construct; rather, it encompasses multiple dimensions and carries different implications for various stakeholders. This realization led to the conceptualization of a framework for defining technology leadership through systematic and integrative literature reviews. A special issue that captures these layered perspectives provides an ideal platform for contributing to scholarly discourse and informing practice. This special issue is organized into six literature review articles, each addressing technology leadership from distinct stakeholder perspectives in both K-12 schools and higher education, offering conceptual clarity and practical implications for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers.
Overview of the Special Issue
Theme and Scope
This special issue offers a multidimensional redefinition of technology leadership for both K–12 schools and higher education, addressing current challenges and opportunities in leading technology initiatives within educational contexts. The collection comprises six literature review papers published across two issues of CITE-General: Volume 25(4) and Volume 26(1).
Part 1 (Volume 25, Issue 4) featured three papers that examine technology leadership for teacher educators, academic leaders, and instructional designers in higher education. Part 2 (Volume 26, Issue 1) features three papers that focus on technology leadership for teachers, coaches, and administrators in K–12 schools.
Together, these six papers reconceptualize technology leadership as a multidimensional construct, providing actionable guidance for practice across diverse roles and educational settings. While each part addresses distinct educational contexts, they share common themes of distributed leadership, innovation, and systemic change, creating a cohesive framework that bridges higher education and K–12 perspectives.
Process
As noted earlier, this special issue emerged from extensive discussions within the Technology Leadership SIG. Members strongly agreed on the need to redefine the concept of technology leadership for the post-COVID and AI-integrated era that is both meaningful and provides a solid foundation for future empirical research. In response, the SIG cochairs conceptualized the special issue and invited SIG members to contribute scholarly work. More than 30 scholars expressed interest. The cochairs reviewed all submitted CVs and selected a smaller group based on expertise and publication record for initial conversations.
Two online meetings were organized to refine ideas, during which the group agreed to develop six papers for the special issue. Some scholars later opted out due to capacity constraints. After confirming availability, 12 authors formed six teams aligned with their topic interests. The cochairs also facilitated discussions on potential themes, methodological approaches, and paper formats. Subsequently, they contacted 11 journals to gauge interest in publishing the special issue. Four journals responded positively, and the authors voted to select the final outlet.
Following this decision, the authors began developing their manuscripts. The cochairs, serving as guest editors, met monthly with team leads to review progress, discuss methods, and address emerging questions. Once drafts were submitted, the guest editors assigned peer reviewers from other author groups, ensuring that each manuscript received at least two to three reviews. The guest editors stressed the importance of reviewing the papers objectively and making recommendations based on quality to all the reviewers.
After the authors revised their papers based on reviewer feedback, the guest editors conducted two to three additional rounds of editorial review to ensure quality and coherence. For the two papers led by the guest editors themselves, an intentional process was followed: the other guest editor conducted the editorial review, and additional feedback was sought to maintain impartiality. The entire process remained transparent and well-documented, with all decisions grounded in the quality of the manuscripts. This collaborative effort not only strengthened the rigor and relevance of each paper but also fostered a shared vision for advancing technology leadership research and practice across educational contexts.
Highlights of Contributions
Methodological Rigor
The six papers included in this special issue exemplify rigorous methodological standards. From the project’s inception, the Technology Leadership SIG engaged in sustained discussions to establish robust methodological frameworks and ensure consistency across contributions. Each paper adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol for systematic or integrative literature reviews, following its structured, stepwise procedures that encompassed search strategy development, inclusion and exclusion criteria, data extraction, and synthesis (Page et al., 2021). This systematic approach enhances transparency, reproducibility, and validity, thereby reinforcing the credibility of the findings. Notably, the methodological rigor underpinning these reviews provides a strong foundation for theory building, enabling the advancement of conceptual clarity and the development of frameworks that inform future empirical research and practice.
Key Insights
Part 1 of the special issue featured three papers on technology leadership in higher education. “Practices, Attributes, and Contextual Factors Shaping Teacher Educators’ Technology Leadership: A Systematic Literature Review” (Hassan et al., 2025) zooms in on teacher educators’ technology leadership in leading and integrating emerging technologies initiatives into teacher education programs. The authors carefully reviewed 29 peer-reviewed journal articles and provided a functional definition, essential attributes, practices, and contextual factors. This paper shares a vision for technology leadership in teacher education contexts. The authors strongly advocate for the importance of teacher educators’ leadership in technology integration efforts.
“Transformational Technology Leadership in Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Pedagogical Practice” (Carlson et al., 2025) studied technology leadership and pedagogical practices for academic leaders in higher education. The authors analyzed 13 peer-reviewed journal articles and synthesized leadership practices that cultivate innovation, collaboration, and faculty development. They found that intellectual stimulation and technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) are the most frequently used factors to inspire faculty members, support professional learning, and shape an inclusive digital learning culture. The authors underscore the crucial role of higher education academic leaders in practicing technology leadership in sharing the pedagogical and technological landscapes.
“AI-Integrated Instructional Design in Higher Education: A Systematic Exploration of Tools, Roles, and Challenges” (Qian & Hassan, 2025) focuses on instructional designers in higher education, particularly their role in leading the integration of AI. The authors analyzed 35 peer-reviewed journal articles. They argue that AI is becoming a codesign and cocreative partner to the instructional designers. Thus, instructional designers need to lead the paradigm shift and systemic change to redefine design partnership and their technology leadership. The authors call for the instructional designers to assume the leadership in ethically steering the AI integration and other incoming emerging technologies into meaningful integration into teaching, learning, and assessment.
Part 2 of the special issue has three papers on technology leadership in K-12 settings. “Expanding frontiers: A Systematic Literature Review on the Definition, Factors, Best Practices, and Recommendations on K-12 Administrators’ Technology Leadership” (Jin et al., 2026) focuses on K-12 administrators’ technology leadership. It analyzed 36 peer-reviewed journal articles and introduced an expanded definition comprising seven domains, a set of 67 best practices, a list of factors affecting leadership, and a range of recommendations. The authors argue that K-12 administrators should learn and practice transformative, distributed, and leading-from-the-middle leadership models to drive innovation and initiatives. They call upon educators, preparation programs, and policymakers to equip administrators with the necessary leadership skills in the digital age.
“Driving Educational Change: An Integrative Review of K-12 Teachers’ Technology Leadership” (Mishnick & Jin, 2026) reviews literature on teachers’ technology leadership. The authors emphasize the significance of teacher technology leadership in promoting and integrating technology initiatives. They carefully examined 10 papers to propose an updated definition of teacher technology leadership, along with best practices, key influencing factors, and recommendations. They strongly advocate for more teacher technology leadership, which is also a less-researched area. They argue that we need systemic change in teacher education and K-12 systems to fully support teacher technology leaders.
“The ever-changing and evolving role of K-12 technology coaches and specialists: A systematic literature review” (Harron & Shannon, 2026) discusses K-12 coaches’ technology leadership. The authors acknowledge that coaches are in a unique position for technology leadership and should be better supported as middle leaders. They analyzed 18 articles and clearly explained the responsibilities involved in coaches’ technology leadership. The authors also discussed the barriers to effective coaching and leadership and provided best practices and recommendations to support the coaches. The authors emphasize the importance of having coaches in schools to support students, teachers, and technology initiatives, and urge the field to provide better support structures for them.
Collectively, the six papers in this special issue advance a multidimensional understanding of technology leadership across higher education and K–12 contexts. In higher education, the papers highlight the pivotal roles of teacher educators, academic leaders, and instructional designers in driving the integration of technology and innovation. Key contributions include the functional definition of technology leadership, the identification of essential attributes and practices, and a call for leadership in ethically guiding technology integration.
In K–12 settings, the papers expand the conceptualization of technology leadership for administrators, teachers, and coaches, offering comprehensive frameworks that include domains, best practices, and influencing factors. Innovations across these reviews emphasize transformative and distributed leadership models, systemic change, and equity-driven approaches. Together, these papers provide actionable recommendations and conceptual clarity, positioning technology leadership as a dynamic, multi-role construct essential for shaping inclusive, future-ready educational ecosystems.
Closing Remarks
The contributions in this special issue advance theory by offering multidimensional frameworks that clarify the concept of technology leadership, while also informing practice and policy through actionable recommendations for diverse educational roles. Collectively, these papers highlight critical gaps, including the need for empirical validation of proposed models, a more profound exploration of equity in technology leadership, and strategies for integrating emerging technologies such as AI. The timeliness of this issue lies in its response to post-COVID and AI-integrated challenges, as well as rapid technological change, positioning technology leadership as a cornerstone for systemic innovation. We encourage researchers to expand on this work through longitudinal studies, cross-contextual comparisons, and collaborative projects that bridge theory and practice. By doing so, the field can continue to evolve, ensuring technology leadership remains relevant, inclusive, and impactful in shaping the future of education.
The insights presented in this special issue underscore the urgent need for policies that recognize technology leadership as a multidimensional construct, essential for driving systemic innovation in education. Policymakers can leverage these findings to design frameworks that support distributed leadership models, prioritize equitable access to technology, and provide sustained professional learning for educators at all levels. As emerging technologies such as AI reshape learning environments, policy must move beyond infrastructure investment to include ethical guidelines, capacity-building initiatives, and mechanisms for continuous evaluation. We envision a future where policy serves as a catalyst for collaboration among researchers, practitioners, and decision-makers, ensuring that technology leadership not only responds to current challenges but also anticipates and shapes the evolving educational landscape.
Finally, we celebrate the countless technology leaders, whether in formal positions or informal roles, who dare to imagine what education can become. Through their vision and persistence, they lead transformative initiatives, break barriers, and ignite innovation that shapes the future of learning. Their efforts deserve not only recognition but unwavering support, as they are the catalysts driving education toward a more inclusive, dynamic, and forward-thinking world.
Acknowledgments
The 12 authors of this special issue devoted significant time and effort to conducting research, writing and revising manuscripts, and providing peer reviews, all with the goal of creating a high-quality, thoughtfully interconnected collection that advances multi-dimensional definitions of technology leadership for diverse stakeholders in education. The editor and guest editor extend their sincere gratitude to the authors for their scholarship, commitment, and dedication. We also express our appreciation to our general editor, Dr. Chrystalla Mouza, and journal coordinator, Lynn Pechuekonis, for their invaluable support throughout the development of this special issue. The insights presented in this special issue will serve as a foundation for future scholarly inquiry, inform evidence-based practices, and contribute to the ongoing discourse on technology leadership within educational contexts.
Closing the Chapter and Looking Ahead
This special issue not only marks a significant scholarly milestone but also serves as the final issue of the CITE-General section of CITE Journal before its merger with CITE-Current Practice section to form the new CITE-Current Research section. Founded in 2000 and publishing articles for over two decades, the CITE-General section has been a cornerstone in advancing research and dialogue on technology integration, leadership, and innovation in teacher education. It has published hundreds of articles that shaped conceptual frameworks, informed evidence-based practices, and fostered interdisciplinary collaboration across global contexts. These contributions have influenced teacher preparation programs, guided technology policy, and inspired systemic change in education.
We extend our deepest gratitude to the past editors whose vision and dedication sustained this section and nurtured a vibrant scholarly community. Their leadership ensured that CITE-General remained a trusted venue for rigorous research and meaningful discourse.
As we transition to the CITE-Current Research section, we envision a more dynamic platform that bridges theory and practice, embraces emerging technologies, and addresses pressing questions about equity, ethics, and sustainability. This evolution reflects our commitment to rigorous scholarship with real-world impact. We invite researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to join us in shaping this next chapter of inquiry and innovation, ensuring that technology leadership continues to drive transformative change in education.
References
AlAjmi, M. K. (2022). The impact of digital leadership on teachers’ technology integration during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kuwait. International Journal of Educational Research, 112, 101928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.101928
Brandon, B. (2024). Use AI intelligently: Design challenges and considerations. The Learning Guild. https://www.learningguild.com/articles/use-ai-intelligently-design-challenges-considerations
Belair, J., & Waskie-Laura, N. (2021). Preparing students for a technology-rich world. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 10(1), 155–164. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1324362.pdf
Carlson, K., Webb, C., L., & Comstock, K. (2025). Transformational technology leadership in higher education: A systematic review of pedagogical practice. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4). https://citejournal.org/volume-25/issue-4-25/general/transformational-technology-leadership-in-higher-education-a-systematic-review-of-pedagogical-practice
Dou, D., Devos, G., & Valcke, M. (2017). The relationships between school autonomy gap, principal leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(6), 959–977.
Fang, B., & Broussard, K. (2024, August 7). Augmented course design: Using AI to boost efficiency and expand capacity. Educause. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2024/8/augmented-course-design-using-ai-to-boost-efficiency-and-expand-capacity
Gruszczynska, A., Merchant, G., & Pountney, R. (2013). “Digital futures in teacher education”: Exploring open approaches towards digital literacy. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 11(3), 193–206. https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejel/article/view/1669
Harron, J. & Shannon, K. (2026). The ever-changing and evolving role of K-12 technology coaches and specialists: A systematic literature review. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 26(1). https://citejournal.org/volume-26/issue-1-26/general/the-ever-changing-and-evolving-role-of-k-12-technology-coaches-and-specialists-a-systematic-literature-review
Hassan, R., Fu, Y., & Fry Ware, T. (2025). Practices, attributes, and contextual factors shaping teacher educators’ technology leadership: A systematic literature review. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4). https://citejournal.org/volume-25/issue-4-25/general/practices-attributes-and-contextual-factors-shaping-teacher-educators-technology-leadership-a-systematic-literature-review
Jin, Y., Mishnick, N., & Kiekel, J. (2026). Expanding frontiers: A systematic literature review on the definition, factors, best practices, and recommendations on K-12 administrators’ technology leadership. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 26(1). https://citejournal.org/volume-26/issue-1-26/general/expanding-frontiers-a-systematic-literature-review-on-the-definition-factors-best-practices-and-recommendations-on-k-12-administrators-technology-leadership
Karaköse, T., Polat, H., & Papadakis, S. (2021). Examining teachers’ perspectives on school principals’ digital leadership roles and technology capabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 13(23), 13448. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313448
Leithwood, K., & Sun, J. (2018). The nature and effects of transformational school leadership: A meta-analytic review of unpublished research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(3), 486–523.
Menon, K., & Motala, S. (2021). Pandemic leadership in higher education: New horizons, risks and complexities. Education as Change, 25, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.25159/1947-9417/8880
Mishnick, N. & Jin, Y. (2026). Driving educational change: An integrative review of K-12 teachers’ technology leadership. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 26(1). https://citejournal.org/volume-26/issue-1-26/general/driving-educational-change-an-integrative-review-of-k-12-teachers-technology-leadership
Nguyen, D., Harris, A., & Ng, D. (2019). A review of the empirical research on teacher leadership (2003–2017). Journal of Educational Administration, 58(1), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-02-2018-0023
Oliveira, A., Feyzi-Behnagh, R., Ni, L., Mohsinah, A., Burgess, K., & Guo, L. (2019). Emerging technologies as pedagogical tools for teaching and learning science: A literature review. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 1(2), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.141
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Qian, Y. & Hassan, R. (2025). AI-Integrated instructional design in higher education: A systematic exploration of tools, roles, and challenges. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4). https://citejournal.org/volume-25/issue-4-25/general/ai-integrated-instructional-design-in-higher-education-a-systematic-exploration-of-tools-roles-and-challenges
Supriyatno, T., & Kurniawan, F. (2020, October). A new pedagogy and online learning system on pandemic COVID 19 era at Islamic higher education. In Proceedings of the 2020 6th International Conference on Education and Technology (pp. 7–10). IEEE.
Simpson, J. (2021). Fostering teacher leadership in K-12 schools: A review of the literature. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 34(3), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21374
Tajasom, A., Hung, D. K. M., Nikbin, D., & Hyun, S. S. (2015). The role of transformational leadership in innovation performance of Malaysian SMEs. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 23(2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/19761597.2015.1074513
