Home All Issues Issue articles Previous article Next article

Is Digital Inclination Associated with Lifelong Learning in Aging South Korea?

Sun Joo Yoo 1 2 * ,
Heekyong Teresa Pyon 3
1 Design for Learning Lab, Independent Institute, SOUTH KOREA2 Sookmyung Women's University, SOUTH KOREA 3 Seoul Women’s University, SOUTH KOREA* Corresponding Author
Educational Point, 3(1), 2026, e145, https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17846
Publication date: Feb 03, 2026
Research Article
Open Access Open Access
Download PDF

ABSTRACT

This study examines the relationship between digital learning inclination and lifelong learning participation among Korean adults through generational and educational level analysis. Using data from the Korean Educational Development Institute's 2024 Individual Survey on Lifelong Learning (N = 30,829, ages 25-79), this research analyzed relationships between age, educational attainment, digital learning preferences, and participation rates through an ecological analysis approach using aggregated cross-sectional survey data. Digital learning inclination was operationalized using proxy indicators including learning media preferences, informal digital learning participation patterns, and information access pathways. Korea's overall lifelong learning participation rate was 33.1% in 2024, declining from 44.6% (ages 25-29) to 24.1% (ages 70-79). Educational attainment emerged as a critical moderating variable, with university graduates showing participation rates (40.4%) that were 17.8 percentage points higher than those with middle school education or less (22.6%). The Digital Learning Inclination Index revealed a five-fold difference between the youngest (81.2) and oldest (16.1) age groups, with age 50 emerging as a critical threshold. Statistical analysis revealed significant associations between age and educational level (χ² = 1,847.3, p < .001) and moderate correlations between digital learning inclination and participation rates (r = .52, p < .001). The findings highlight the necessity for digital literacy support policies tailored to specific generational and educational characteristics. This study provides a replicable methodological framework for contexts where comprehensive digital competency assessments are unavailable, offering valuable insights for policymakers and educators in nations facing similar demographic transitions and digital transformation challenges in adult education systems.

KEYWORDS

digital learning inclination lifelong learning participation generational differences educational attainment Korea adult education policy

CITATION (APA)

Yoo, S. J., & Pyon, H. T. (2026). Is Digital Inclination Associated with Lifelong Learning in Aging South Korea?. Educational Point, 3(1), e145. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17846
Harvard
Yoo, S. J., and Pyon, H. T. (2026). Is Digital Inclination Associated with Lifelong Learning in Aging South Korea?. Educational Point, 3(1), e145. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17846
Vancouver
Yoo SJ, Pyon HT. Is Digital Inclination Associated with Lifelong Learning in Aging South Korea?. Educational Point. 2026;3(1):e145. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17846
AMA
Yoo SJ, Pyon HT. Is Digital Inclination Associated with Lifelong Learning in Aging South Korea?. Educational Point. 2026;3(1), e145. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17846
Chicago
Yoo, Sun Joo, and Heekyong Teresa Pyon. "Is Digital Inclination Associated with Lifelong Learning in Aging South Korea?". Educational Point 2026 3 no. 1 (2026): e145. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17846
MLA
Yoo, Sun Joo et al. "Is Digital Inclination Associated with Lifelong Learning in Aging South Korea?". Educational Point, vol. 3, no. 1, 2026, e145. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17846

REFERENCES

  1. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood.
  2. Dede, C., & Richards, J. (2021). Digital teaching platforms: Customizing classroom learning for each student (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
  3. Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269-277. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.269.18845
  4. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
  5. Ferrari, A. (2013). DIGCOMP: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe [EUR 26035 EN]. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2788/52966
  6. Hänninen, R. (2025). Revisiting digital participation as a prerequisite of digital inclusion. The Information Society, 41(4), 256-268. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2025.2500507
  7. Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people's online skills. First Monday, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v7i4.942
  8. Hart, D. (2011). On ecological studies: A short communication. Dose-Response, 10(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.2203/dose-response.10-046.Hart
  9. Kang, H., Baek, J., Chu, S. H., & Choi, J. (2023). Digital literacy among Korean older adults: A scoping review of quantitative studies. Digital Health, 9, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231197334
  10. Korean Educational Development Institute (KEDI). (2024). Korean adult lifelong learning survey 2024. Korean Educational Development Institute.
  11. Lai, J., & Widmar, N. O. (2021). Revisiting the digital divide in the COVID-19 era. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 43(1), 458-464. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13104
  12. Livingstone, D. W., & Guile, D. (Eds.). (2012). The knowledge economy and lifelong learning: A critical reader (Vol. 4). Springer Science & Business Media.
  13. Mann, C. J. (2012). Observational research methods—Cohort studies, cross sectional studies, and case–control studies. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2(1), 38-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2011.12.004
  14. Morgenstern, H. (1995). Ecologic studies in epidemiology: Concepts, principles, and methods. Annual Review of Public Health, 16(1), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pu.16.050195.000425
  15. OECD (2019). OECD skills outlook 2019: Thriving in a digital world. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/df80bc12-en
  16. OECD (2021). OECD digital education outlook 2021: Pushing the frontiers with artificial intelligence, blockchain and robots. OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/589b283f-en
  17. OECD (2023). Education at a glance 2023: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en
  18. OECD (2025). Trends shaping education 2025. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/ee6587fd-en
  19. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.). Routledge.
  20. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15(3), 351-357. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087176
  21. Schugurensky, D. (2000). The forms of informal learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field [NALL Working Paper No. 19]. Centre for the Study of Education and Work, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
  22. Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
  23. Singaram, S., Mayer, C. H., & Oosthuizen, R. M. (2023). Leading higher education into the fourth industrial revolution: An empirical investigation. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1242835. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1242835
  24. Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797-811. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797
  25. UNESCO. (2025). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. UNESCO. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/ai-and-education-guidance-policy-makers
  26. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. (2022). 5th global report on adult learning and education: Citizenship education—Developing democratic participation and civic engagement through adult learning and education. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. https://doi.org/10.54675/KPEX8783
  27. Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2020). The digital divide. Polity Press.
  28. Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens—With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376
  29. World Economic Forum. (2020). The future of jobs report 2020. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020/
  30. Yoo, S. J. (2025). Resilience and volatility in lifelong learning participation: A crisis-response analysis of South Korea's 18-year journey (2007-2024). Educational Point, 2(2), e130. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17291
  31. Yoo, S. J., & Huang, W. D. (2016). Can e-learning system enhance learning culture in the workplace? A comparison among companies in South Korea. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(4), 575-591. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12240
  32. Yoo, S. J., & Kim, S. (2017). Gender and age matter: Acceptance of smart phones for learning in higher education in South Korea. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 9(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2017040101

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.