Digital Competence Assessment Methods in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review

被引:57
作者
Sillat, Linda Helene [1 ]
Tammets, Kairit [1 ]
Laanpere, Mart [1 ]
机构
[1] Tallinn Univ, Sch Digital Technol, EE-10120 Tallinn, Estonia
关键词
digital competence; assessment higher education; trends; validity; TEACHERS; INFORMATION; STUDENTS; SKILLS;
D O I
10.3390/educsci11080402
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
The rapid increase in recent years in the number of different digital competency frameworks, models, and strategies has prompted an increasing popularity for making the argument in favor of the need to evaluate and assess digital competence. To support the process of digital competence assessment, it is consequently necessary to understand the different approaches and methods. This paper carries out a systematic literature review and includes an analysis of the existing proposals and conceptions of digital competence assessment processes and methods in higher education, with the aim of better understanding the field of research. The review follows three objectives: (i) describe the characteristics of digital competence assessment processes and methods in higher education; (ii) provide an overview of current trends; and, finally, (iii) identify challenges and issues in digital competence assessment in higher education with a focus on the reliability and validity of the proposed methods. On the basis of the findings, and as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, digital competence assessment in higher education requires more attention, with a specific focus on instrument validity and reliability. Furthermore, it will be of great importance to further investigate the use of assessment tools to support systematic digital competence assessment processes. The analysis includes possible opportunities and ideas for future lines of work in digital competence evaluation in higher education.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 57 条
[11]  
Carretero S., 2017, DigComp 2.1: The digital competence framework for citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use, publications office, DOI [DOI 10.2760/38842, 10.2760/38842]
[12]  
Casillas S., 2017, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality - TEEM 2017, Part F1322, P1, DOI DOI 10.1145/3144826.3145372
[13]  
Chandler J., 2017, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
[14]  
Costa FA, 2015, 2015 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON COMPUTERS IN EDUCATION (SIIE), P92, DOI 10.1109/SIIE.2015.7451655
[15]  
Cukurova M., 2017, EVIDENCE CTR DESIGN
[16]  
Deshpande N., 2016, J CONT MED ED, V4, P149, DOI [10.5455/jcme.20170119025603, DOI 10.5455/JCME.20170119025603]
[17]  
Evangelinos G., 2014, EUROPEAN DISTANCE E, V1, P206
[18]  
Garcia-Figuerola Corona A., 2017, ACM INT C P SERIES, DOI [10.1145/3144826.3145367, DOI 10.1145/3144826.3145367]
[19]  
Gough D., 2012, INTRO SYSTEMATIC REV
[20]   A mixed research-based model for pre-service science teachers' digital literacy: Responses to "which beliefs" and "how and why they interact" questions [J].
Gunes, Erhan ;
Bahcivan, Eralp .
COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2018, 118 :96-106