###### Abstract
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{142.3 pt} p{142.3 pt}} \hline \hline
**Smart Education** & **Traditional Education** \\ \hline Flexibility is a key benefit of smart schooling. It enables students to study in their own environment. Teachers can be accessed as needed [14]. & Traditional education is less adaptable. Students must attend classes in person [15]. \\ Location and time are not factors in smart education. Students can access lessons anytime, anywhere [16]. & Traditional education relies on specific locations and is bound by time constraints. \\ Smart education reduces operational costs through paperless work, reducing travel, testing, and administrative expenses. Smart education enables educators to teach on a global scale, offering a diverse array of courses [17]. & Traditional education relies on specific locations and is bound by time constraints. \\ Smart education offers various collaboration and communication tools (e.g., Zoom [18], Google Meet [19], Skype [20]). & Traditional education necessitates a physical presence, incurring daily and travel expenses. \\ Smart education’s deficiency in social interaction impacts the social and communication skills of students [21]. & Traditional education promotes social learning through face-to-face interaction, improving social skills [15]. \\ Smart education lacks extracurricular activities. & Traditional education provides extracurricular activities, enhancing students’ readiness for learning [22]. \\ While operational costs are minimized, smart education requires a significant capital investment for system installation. & Traditional education remains expensive overall. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} The leading challenges to the traditional education system are as follows:  
1. Educational technology (EdTech) has transformed teaching and learning methods. Teachers and learners follow outdated patterns that are not comfortable with cutting-edge innovations.
2. Traditional methods for monitoring employee and learner progress are time-consuming and do not ensure accurate information for decision-makers, which results in wrong decisions.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Comparison between smart education and traditional education. Similarly, management practices within the institution are antiquated, and these conventional approaches lack transparency in the reporting system. Considering the aforementioned challenges, there is a pressing need for a smart system that effectively caters to the needs of administrators, teachers, parents, and students. We extended our framework to tackle the above issues and handle them smartly [8]. Smart institutions reduce costs and make transparent performance monitoring possible [23; 24]. They improve the quality of education in ways that some might not have thought possible a few years ago. The proposed structure (as shown in Figure 1) has five key elements: administrators, teachers, parents, learners, and finally smart devices for connecting stakeholders. The SIF utilizes smart devices, fog, and cloud computing technologies to overcome most of the drawbacks of traditional education systems. The following are the main objectives of this study:  
1. To introduce Education Technology (EduTech) for teaching and learning to supersede outdated methodologies. The inclusion of innovative technologies is aimed at elevating the educational system to par with other systems that make extensive use of these technologies. 2. To propose an innovative solution to smartly monitor the progress of teachers and learners. This will help in generating real smart data. Decisions made on these true data will transform the educational system. 3. To utilize cutting-edge management technologies to smartly manage the institution and process the workload of months in hours. The proposed model further extends existing schooling theories. The existing theories [7] focus on a student, teacher, and parent paradigm for effective learner engagement. However, these theories need to be revised to align them with current smart needs.