Quo vadis higher education? Post-pandemic success digital competencies of the higher educators – a Hungarian university case and actions

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted global society and economies and forced higher education (HE) institutions to rapidly switch to digital teaching. Motivated by this context, the study investigates how COVID-19 affected lecturers’ work and which competencies are required for success in post-pandemic HE. The University of Pécs (UP), the oldest and one of the largest Hungarian universities, transitioned to digital education in Spring 2019/2020. The research aims to provide data to help HE leaders support and motivate staff in the post-COVID environment characterized by rapid digitalization and non-presence education. The central research question: whether the competencies required of lecturers will change, making digitalization central after the pandemic, or whether other fundamental professional competencies also play a key role. A focused literature review and a survey among UP lecturers (322 respondents from 1426; 22.6% response rate) explored digital and broader competence needs and informed institutional competence development initiatives, including the Digital Education and Learning Support Centre established in 2020.

The literature highlights widespread organizational, workplace, and educational impacts of COVID-19, including challenges with communication infrastructures and online teaching effectiveness (Marinoni et al., 2020; Walker et al., 2020). HEIs faced weakened partnerships, reduced mobility, canceled conferences, postponed research, and widespread adoption of online communication and events. Anticipated future challenges include new forms of collaboration, online research dissemination, and understanding COVID-driven needs. In education, rapid mass shifts to online modalities prompted concerns about uneven quality and increased workloads, along with ergonomic and equipment challenges for home offices. Most scholars foresee lasting changes with a move towards digital and blended methodologies (Gruenwald, 2020; Ali and Kaur, 2020; Korkmaz and Toraman, 2020; Nikdel Teymori and Fardin, 2020). Competence frameworks for lecturers now emphasize digital competence—conscious, critical use and content creation (EU, 2006; EC, 2018; Ferrari, 2012; Sá and Serpa, 2020)—as well as remote teaching capabilities and online pedagogy (Yunusa et al., 2020; Chaharbashloo et al., 2023). Beyond digital skills, professional competencies are strongly linked to student achievement and effective teaching (Prasetio et al., 2017; Azis et al., 2020), encompassing responsibility, decision-making, and functional expertise (Žeravíková et al., 2015). Soft skills (personal, social, methodological) are essential but often under-examined (Balcar, 2016; Succi and Wieandt, 2019; Haselberger et al., 2012). Pandemic-era studies in Hungary highlighted critical competencies: expertise, professional experience, digital/IT knowledge, problem-solving, planning/organization, change/crisis management, adaptability, self-development, communication, assertiveness, conflict management, leadership, teamwork, resilience, stress tolerance, empathy, and social skills (Poór et al., 2020a,b; Dajnoki et al., 2023). For post-COVID HE, high levels of ICT and digital pedagogy (e-learning, blended learning) are expected to remain central (Kara, 2021; Fauzi, 2022; Devlin and Samarawickrema, 2022).

Context and instrument development: UP’s competence assessment builds on the Kabai model (Kabai et al., 2011) and CHEERS research (García-Aracil & Van der Velden, 2007). Earlier pilots (2010) established a competence vocabulary via EFA, identifying 16 variables. Methodological controls using paired-sample t-tests and factor analyses led to structural corrections to align with EU expectations, resulting in a validated competence list (Kuráth & Sipos, 2020). Survey design and administration: An online questionnaire (EvaSys) was distributed to 1426 UP lecturers (Hungarian citizenship) in April–May 2020; participation was voluntary. 322 responses were received (22.6%). The instrument covered digital education, home office, organizational communication and culture, and future plans; this study focuses on digital education and competencies. Respondents answered items on a 1–5 Likert scale. Sample characteristics: Female respondents were overrepresented; age distribution was relatively balanced except for small shares under 25 and above 66; more than 60% had at least 10 years of tenure at UP. Competence items: Awareness and Professional competence groups from prior UP surveys were included, with digital-education-related competencies added. Descriptive statistics indicated ICT competencies were rated most important and nonverbal communication least important for effective digital education; skewness and kurtosis supported normality. Analytical procedures: Data were analyzed in SPSS. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) prerequisites: Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7; KMO and Bartlett’s Test required acceptable thresholds (KMO > 0.7; Bartlett p < 0.05). EFA used Principal Component Analysis with varimax rotation; communalities < 0.4 were excluded; items < 0.5 not considered in factor loadings. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) then tested a three-factor latent structure (Digital, Awareness, Professional). Model validity assessed via Composite Reliability (CR > 0.7), Average Variance Extracted (AVE ≥ 0.5), and fit indices: RMSEA ≤ 0.10, CFI/TLI > 0.8, SRMR < 0.10, CD > 0.8. One-way ANOVA examined how factor scores related to lecturers’ expectations about the future extent of digital education (three response options). Significance was evaluated using Levene, Welch, and ANOVA p-values (difference significant if Levene p > 0.05 or Welch p ≤ 0.05 and ANOVA p ≤ 0.05).

Sample and descriptive results: 322 lecturers responded (22.6% of 1426). ICT competencies received the highest importance ratings (mean 4.74), while nonverbal communication was rated lowest (mean 3.33). EFA: Reliability and suitability were established (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.839; KMO = 0.828; Bartlett’s Test p < 0.001; χ² ≈ 1116, df = 66). Three factors emerged with total explained variance of 62.2%: - Digital: Information and communication technology competencies (D1), Online methodological competencies (D2), Digital curriculum development competencies (D3). - Awareness: Creativity/new vision (A1), Emotional intelligence (A2), Nonverbal communication (A3), Conflict management (A4), Teamwork (A5). - Professional: Flexibility (P1), Good time management (P2), Ability to analyze and synthesize (P3), Organizational skills (P4). CFA: Strong measurement properties and fit: AVE/CR/Cronbach’s alpha supported reliability and convergent validity (Digital AVE=0.653, CR=0.847, Alpha=0.777; Awareness AVE=0.662, CR=0.906, Alpha=0.794; Professional AVE=0.793, CR=0.938, Alpha=0.800). Model fit indices: χ²=168.16, p<0.001; RMSEA=0.090; CFI=0.963; TLI=0.951; SRMR=0.034; CD=0.998. Minor correlated errors were allowed between D2–D3 and A1–A4, consistent with content. Future of digital education and competencies (One-way ANOVA): Response distribution: 25.2% (n≈78) “There will be a lot of new online programs”; 63.5% (n≈197) “Education will be altered to have a little more online programs”; 11.3% (n≈35) “Everything will be the same as before the pandemic.” While higher mean factor scores were observed among those expecting more digitalization, only the Professional factor showed a statistically significant difference across the three groups (ANOVA p=0.043; Welch p=0.015). Associations for Professional by response category: 0.327 (many new online programs), −0.070 (a little more online), −0.098 (same as before). Digital and Awareness factors did not reach significance (ANOVA p=0.107 and 0.126, respectively). Overall: Digital competencies are necessary but not sufficient; higher professional competence is significantly associated with expectations of sustained digitalization in HE.

The study addresses whether post-pandemic lecturer success hinges primarily on digital competencies or also on broader competencies. Findings indicate that while digital competencies are essential, professional competencies uniquely and significantly differentiate lecturers’ expectations for sustained digitalization. This suggests that successful, sustainable digital education requires not only technical skills and online pedagogy but also strong professional capabilities such as flexibility, time management, analytical/synthesis ability, and organizational skills. This aligns with the view that fluency in teaching with technology, not just technology use, is critical. The results reinforce the importance of integrating soft and professional skills with digital competence for high-quality, student-centered online and blended learning. In response, UP operationalized findings through the creation and scaling of the Digital Education and Learning Support Centre (DOT), which implemented workshops (AI, gamification, online assessment, Moodle, M365/SharePoint), supported blended course redesigns (104 courses by Dec 2023, 120+ professors), and produced a White Book to embed digital education in institutional strategy. Student surveys (2021, n=2999) highlighted lecturers’ digital competence gaps and a preference for physical learning with digital support, prompting further initiatives and planned student-facing e-learning support on time management, digital literacy, tools, and ethics. These actions demonstrate how institutions can leverage competence insights to build resilient, effective post-pandemic education systems.

COVID-19 forced HEIs to adopt online instruction rapidly. Beyond the imperative to develop digital teaching competencies, frameworks like TPACK emphasize the interplay of content, pedagogy, and technology knowledge. The study’s evidence shows that professional competencies remain vital alongside digital competencies for long-term success in digital HE. As organizations increasingly rely on digital communication and data, complementary capacities such as data literacy and technology attitudes/operations are gaining importance. Overall, the ‘how’ of digital teaching does not replace the ‘what’ of disciplinary-professional competence; both remain essential. Institutions should therefore invest in integrated professional development that enhances digital, pedagogical, and professional skills, embed quality assurance for online learning, and foster sustainable, blended learning ecosystems.

The research was conducted in a single Hungarian HEI (University of Pécs); while one of the largest, generalizability is limited. The first-wave pandemic context imposed heavy workloads on lecturers, constraining the breadth of competencies assessed, and responses were collected after an intense initial transition period. Future research should triangulate with qualitative methods (e.g., interviews), incorporate student perspectives (e.g., 360-degree assessments), expand to international samples to explore national differences, and examine disciplinary variations (e.g., life vs. social sciences).