Research Article

Digital divide and social inequalities: Sociological approaches to the Greek education system and family roles

Panagiotis Giavrimis 1 *
More Detail
1 Department of Sociology, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, GREECE* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 8(1), 2026, e2606, https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/18038
Submitted: 06 November 2025, Published: 04 March 2026
OPEN ACCESS   10 Views   9 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The digital divide is a multifaceted social phenomenon that perpetuates and exacerbates pre-existing social inequalities within education. This study explores teachers’ views on integrating ICT in Greek schools, emphasizing how the digital divide influences classroom practices. Findings indicate that the education system often acts as a mechanism of social reproduction rather than equalization, such as infrastructural deficiencies, particularly in rural areas, and the persistence of hidden curricula reinforce passivity and limit critical thinking. Teachers play a crucial role in either bridging or reinforcing digital inequalities. However, gaps in digital skills, resistance to pedagogical change, and insufficient training help maintain hierarchical relationships and traditional teaching methods. Family background further emerges as a decisive factor, as economic, cultural, and social capital shape access to digital resources and opportunities, perpetuating cycles of inequality. Geographical factors exacerbate these disparities, particularly in remote regions, where access to infrastructure is limited. Policy implications emphasize that bridging the digital divide requires more than just providing technological equipment, underscoring the need for comprehensive interventions in teacher training, digital literacy, and equity-focused reforms. Ultimately, coordinated action among institutions, educators, and families is essential to transform education into a driver of inclusion and empowerment.
Keywords: digital divide, ICT in education, social reproduction, teachers’ perceptions, sociological approach, Greece

CITATION (APA)

Giavrimis, P. (2026). Digital divide and social inequalities: Sociological approaches to the Greek education system and family roles. International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 8(1), e2606. https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/18038

REFERENCES

  1. Anastasopoulou, E., Gkika, K., Tsagri, A., Travlou, C., Spanou, A., & Katsivelou, V. (2025). ICT in Greek primary education: A literature review. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 51(6), 959-973. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2025/v51i62049
  2. Anyon, J. (2011). Marx and education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203829615
  3. Apps, T. L. (2015). ICT literacy and the digital divide: Understanding primary students’ ICT practices and possibilities [PhD thesis, University of Wollongong]. University of Wollongong Research Online. https://hdl.handle.net/10779/uow.27660924
  4. Beckman, K., Apps, T., Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2018). Conceptualising technology practice in education using Bourdieu’s sociology. Learning, Media and Technology, 43(2), 197-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1462205
  5. Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In R. Brown (Ed.), Knowledge, education, and social change (pp. 71-112). Tavistock. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351018142-3
  6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  7. Dimopoulos, K., & Koutsampelas, Ch. (2024). Towards a new approach for understanding educational inequality: The Sen-Bourdieu-Bernstein theoretical framework. International Journal of Educational Research, 125, Article 102347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102347
  8. Drucker, M. (2006). Commentary: Crossing the digital divide: How race, class, and culture matter. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 6(1), 43-45. https://citejournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/v6i1languagearts2.pdf
  9. Fuchs, C. (2014). Digital labour and Karl Marx. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315880075
  10. Giavrimis, P. (2022). Sociology and education: Theory and research. Benos.
  11. Giavrimis, P. (2023). The digital divide: Greek primary teachers’ conceptualisations. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 3(2), Article ep2308. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/13350
  12. Giavrimis, P., & Nikolaou, S.-M. (2020). Teachers’ views on the digital divide in Greece: A qualitative approach. International Journal of Social Science Research, 8(2), 46-58. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijssr.v8i2.16579
  13. Gounopoulos, E., Kokkonis, G., Valsamidis, S., & Kontogiannis, S. (2014). Digital divide in Greece: A quantitative examination of internet non-use. In A. Karasavvoglou, S. Goić, P. Polychronidou, & P. Delias (Eds.), Economy and society in the era of ICT (pp. 889-903). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70377-0_61
  14. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
  15. IEP. (2021). Curriculum for the ICT and information technology course in primary education. Institute of Educational Policy. https://iep.edu.gr/
  16. IEP. (2023). Skills platform. Institute of Educational Policy. https://www2.iep.edu.gr/el/psifiako-apothetirio/skill-labs
  17. Iosifidis, T. (2008). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Kritiki.
  18. Iosifidis, T. (2017). Qualitative research methods and epistemology of social sciences. Tziola.
  19. Jamil, S. (2021). From the digital divide to digital inclusion: Challenges for wide-ranging digitalisation in Pakistan. Telecommunications Policy, 45(8), Article 102206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2021.102206
  20. Karatrantou, A., & Panagiotakopoulos, C. (2023). Digital divide issues in Greece: A systematic review. In L. Tomczyk, F. D. Guillén-Gámez, J. Ruiz-Palmero, & A. Habibi (Eds.), From digital divide to digital inclusion (pp. 263-290). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7645-4_12
  21. Khalid, M. S., & Pedersen, M. J. L. (2016). Digital exclusion in higher education contexts: A systematic literature review. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 228, 614-621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.094
  22. Kyriazi, N. (2002). Sociological research: A critical review of methods and techniques. Ellinika Grammata.
  23. Law 4692/2020—School upgrade and other provisions (Government Gazette A’ 111/12‑6‑2020).
  24. Leigh, P. R. (2010). International exploration of technology equity and the digital divide. IGI Global.
  25. Morgan, H. (2020). Best practices for implementing remote learning during a pandemic. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 93(3), 135-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2020.1751480
  26. OECD. (2000a). Learning to bridge the digital divide. OECD Publishing.
  27. OECD. (2020b). School education during COVID-19: Were teachers and students ready? Greece. OECD Publishing.
  28. Ragnedda, M. (2017). The third digital divide: A Weberian approach to digital inequalities. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315606002
  29. Ragnedda, M. (2019). Conceptualising the digital divide. In B. Mutsvairo, & M. Ragnedda (Eds.), Mapping the digital divide in Africa: A mediated analysis (pp. 27-44). Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh4zj72.6
  30. Ragnedda, M., & Muschert, G. (2013). The digital divide: The internet and social inequality in international perspective. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203069769
  31. Ragnedda, M., & Ruiu, M. L. (2020). Digital capital: A Bourdieusian perspective on the digital divide. Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781839095504
  32. Roberts, K., Dowell, A., & Nie, JB. (2019). Attempting rigour and replicability in thematic analysis of qualitative research data: A case study of codebook development. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19, Article 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0707-y
  33. Tissot, P. (2004). Terminology of vocational training policy: A multilingual glossary for an enlarged Europe. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
  34. Tomczyk, Ł., Guillén-Gámez, F. D., Ruiz-Palmero, J., & Habibi, A. (2024). From digital divide to digital inclusion. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7645-4
  35. van Dijk, J., & Hacker, K. (2011). The digital divide is a complex and dynamic phenomenon. The Information Society, 19(4), 315-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240309487
  36. World Bank. (2023). Greece–Primary education, teachers (% female). World Bank. https://genderdata.worldbank.org/en/indicator/se-prm-tchr-fe-zs
  37. YPEPTH. (2003). Intra-thematic integrated framework of studies programmes (DEPPS). Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.
  38. YPEPTH. (2022). Teaching guidelines for ICT. Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. https://www.esos.gr/