Beyond Digital Access: An Exposure Audit of Industry 4.0 Learning among 1,025 Students in Malaysian Accredited TVET Programmes

Résumé fourni par la source

Digital transformation in technical and vocational education and training (TVET) is often evaluated through technology availability, although access alone does not show whether learners receive sustained and occupationally relevant Industry 4.0 practice. This study audited digital access, learning arrangements, and technology-supported learning exposure among 1,025 students enrolled in Malaysia's Accredited Programme Training System (Sistem Latihan Program Bertauliah; SLaPB) under the Malaysian Skills Certification System. A cross-sectional bilingual online survey captured eight categorical indicators covering prior experience, current programme exposure, learning mode, primary device, internet quality, and four-week use of digital platforms, simulation-related practical activities, and digital assessment. Frequencies, transparent category combinations, and percentage-point contrasts were calculated; no causal or person-centred class claims were made. Moderate or high prior experience was reported by 57.1% of respondents, and 63.5% experienced digital or Industry 4.0-supported learning often or very often. Face-to-face provision remained the main mode for 55.5%, while 44.5% studied in blended, hybrid, or mostly online arrangements. Smartphone-only or shared devices were the primary resource for 31.7%, and 32.1% reported poor or moderate internet access. At least weekly use was reported for digital platforms by 73.8%, simulation-related practical activities by 64.0%, and digital assessment by 74.0%. Thus, simulation-related activity was approximately 10 percentage points less prevalent than platform use and digital assessment at the same threshold. The findings indicate substantial digital reach alongside persistent material constraints and a less intensive layer of authentic technology-supported practice. TVET digitalisation should therefore be monitored through separate indicators of access, learning arrangement, and activity-specific exposure rather than a single technology-adoption measure.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.