Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies

for Different Groups and Devising

a Conceptual Model to Support Teaching
and Training

Xhelal Jashari1(&), Bekim Fetaji2, Alexander Nussbaumer1,

and Christian Gütl1
1
Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria
[email protected],
{alexander.nussbaumer,c.guetl}@tugraz.at
2
Mother Teresa University, Skopje, North Macedonia
[email protected]

Abstract. The assessment of digital skills and competencies required to make

use of digital resources poses several challenges. In order to evaluate the current
situation and trends, this research study initially presents a review of history,
existing trends and digital competence frameworks, learning and teaching
methodologies for digital literacy and provides insights and recommendations.
The review of existing framework and methods used to assess digital skills of
different groups has revealed that self-assessment is an assessment category that
most often results in an overestimation of own digital skills by respondents. To
address such deficiencies, a digital competency model (DigComp) was created
in 2013, as part of the EU Education and Training Agenda 2020. This model
describes which skills and competencies are needed to use digital technologies
in a confident, critical, collaborative and creative way and to accomplish the
goals related to work, learning, and leisure in a digital society. Starting from the
existing framework, this research study devises a conceptual model to support
teaching and training. Each user group requires a different approach in order to
accurately evaluate their digital competences; therefore, the use of a flexible and
integrated approach is necessary. The model proposed in this study describes
which skills should be learned, how they should be taught, and how they can be
assessed.

Keywords: Digital skills
Digital competencies
Assessment
DigComp

framework
Conceptual model

1 Introduction

Nowadays data, information and knowledge have been widely digitalized which makes
it easier to be accessed by almost everyone. According to [2] in 2019 there are more
than 4.3 billion internet users, including 3.4 billion active social media users and
approximately 3 billion mobile social media users. With an increase of 3.1% from the

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

M. E. Auer and D. May (Eds.): REV 2020, AISC 1231, pp. 982–995, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52575-0_82
 Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies for Different Groups 983

previous year, there are more than 2.8 billion people purchasing goods via e-commerce,
where by penetration of consumer goods is 37% of total population.
To acquire and make use of digital resources, one must possess the appropriate
skills and digital competencies needed. However, it has also been observed that there is
a deficiency of those competencies. In order to assess the current situation, a literature
review of current trends and situations have been performed, which revealed that some
people cannot adequately assess their digital skills. Respondents incorrectly evaluate
their competences and usually over-estimate their skills. For example, in Austria, 94%
of survey participants assessed their general computer skills as ‘average’ to ‘very
good’. However, in the practical test, only 39% of them scored on the presumed level
[1]. Obviously, the method of self-assessment of the digital skills and competencies
realized currently is not appropriate. As part of EU Education and Training Agenda
2020, in 2013, a digital competence model DigComp was created. This model is a
framework for developing and understanding digital competency in Europe, whose aim
is beside other things to create a common understanding of digital competence at
European level, that would promote social inclusion. DigComp describes which skills
and competencies are needed to use digital technologies in a confident, critical, col-
laborative and creative way thus accomplish the goals related to work, learning and
leisure in digital society. In order to do a thorough analysis of these processes, this
research study has been focused on a literature review of current trends and situations
related to the assessment of digital skills and competencies. Based on the review
performed, issues were identified and insights and recommendations have been stated,
discussed, and argued. The assessment of the digital skills cannot be performed through
a single component, and be tested with just one type of assessment, and this is crucial in
this process. Therefore, a flexible and integrated approach is quite necessary.
The aim of this study is to explore the required digital skills and competencies for
specific groups as youth, vocational training students, and elderly people, and devise a
conceptual model to support teaching and the training. It is based on the literature
review of current trends and situations used for the assessment of digital skills and
competences.
This paper is structured as follows. It starts with the introductory section, followed
by Sect. 2 that reports on the history, current trends of the digital competence and
related aspects. Section 3 summarizes three digital competence frameworks that have
been considered throughout the paper. Section 4 consists of learning and teaching
methodologies for digital literacy. Section 5 considers the instruments used to assess
digital literacy and competence. Section 6 provides a conceptual model. Finally,
Sect. 7 concludes the paper.

2 Background and Related Work

In 2006, recommendations on the crucial competences for lifelong learning that

included digital competence were published by the European Parliament and Council.
The recommendations implied that competence was “a combination of knowledge,
984 X. Jashari et al.

skills and attitudes”, stressing out the fact that key competences are those “which all
individuals need for personal fulfilment and development, active citizenship, social
inclusion and employment” [3].
In the Communication provided by European Parliament and Council on the Key
Competences for Lifelong Learning, the following definition of digital competence was
proposed: “Digital competence involves the confident and critical use of Information
Society Technology (IST) for work, leisure and communication. It is underpinned by
basic skills in ICT: the use of computers to retrieve, assess, store, produce, present and
exchange information, and to communicate and participate in collaborative networks
via the Internet” [3]. On the other hand, according to [4] digital literacy is defined as
the ability to access, manage, understand, integrate, communicate, evaluate and create
information safely and appropriately through digital technologies for employment,
decent jobs and entrepreneurship. It includes competences that are variously referred to
as computer literacy, ICT literacy, information literacy and media literacy.
According to [3] The concept of ‘digital competence’ (first acknowledged as a Key
Competence in December 2006, Official journal of the European Union) has been
described as a human right: “A multifaceted moving target, covering many areas and
literacies and rapidly evolving as new technologies appear. Digital competence is at
the convergence of multiple fields. Being digitally competent today implies the ability to
understand media (as most media have been/are being digitalized), to search for
information and be critical about what is retrieved (given the wide uptake of the
Internet) and to be able to communicate with others using a variety of digital tools and
applications (mobile, internet). All these abilities belong to different disciplines: media
studies, information sciences, and communication theories”.

3 Digital Competence Frameworks

Nowadays an increasingly higher number of governmental and non-governmental

organizations and companies are creating different frameworks that are used to
describe, categorize, and enhance digital skills, literacy and competencies. Below, we
have summarized three Digital Competencies’ Frameworks: The European Commis-
sion’s Digital Competence Framework; UNESCO’s Digital Literacy Global Frame-
work (DLGF); and the Digital Intelligence (DQ) Framework.
DigComp Framework
The European Digital Competence Framework for Citizens, also known as DigComp,
is used as a tool to describe, categorize, and improve citizens’ digital competences.
According to [6] DigComp 2.0 Framework competences are divided into the following
5 areas as shown in Table 1.
 Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies for Different Groups 985

Table 1. DigComp competence areas [6]

Digital competence area Competencies
1. Information and data 1.1 Browsing, searching and filtering data, information and
literacy digital content
1.2 Evaluating data, information and digital content
1.3 Managing data, information and digital content
2. Communication and 2.1 Interacting through digital technologies
collaboration 2.2 Sharing through digital technologies
2.3 Engaging in citizenship through digital technologies
2.4 Collaborating through digital technologies
2.5 Netiquette
2.6 Managing digital identity
3. Digital content creation 3.1 Developing digital content
3.2 Integrating and re-elaborating digital content
3.3 Copyright and licenses
3.4 Programming
4. Safety 4.1 Protecting devices
4.2 Protecting personal data and privacy
4.3 Protecting health and well-being
4.4 Protecting the environment
5. Problem solving 5.1 Solving technical problems
5.2 Identifying needs and technological responses
5.3 Creatively using digital technologies
5.4 Identifying digital competence gaps

UNESCO Global Framework of Reference on Digital Literacy Skills

UNESCO proposed a framework that included seven competency areas. Through the
mapping process that analyzed 20 existing frameworks in fourteen countries from four
different regions, it also identified two areas of digital literacy competences in addition
to the existing DigComp 2.0 framework. It also proposed the addition of one com-
petence under area 5, Problem solving [4].
According to UNESCO proposed competence areas and competences for the
Digital Literacy Global Framework that should be included in addition to the com-
petencies in DigComp 2.0 are (see Table 2):

Table 2. UNESCO proposed competence areas and competences [4]

Digital competence area Competencies
0. Devices and software 0.1 Physical operations of digital devices
operations 0.2 Software operations in digital devices
5. Problem solving 5.5 Computational thinking
6. Career-related 6.1 Operating specialized digital technologies for a particular
competences field
6.2 Interpreting and manipulating data, information and digital
content for a particular field
986 X. Jashari et al.

Competence Area 0 - Devices and software operations result from the consultation
showed general agreement that a digital literacy framework should include compe-
tences needed for basic operations of devices and software, particularly in the context
of low-income and developing countries. The proposed addition of CA0 (Devices and
software operations) comprises two additional competences, 0.1 Physical operations of
digital devices and 0.2 Software operations in digital devices.
Competence Area 5 - DigComp 2.0 (solving technical problems) also involves the
operation of devices and software, while competence 5.5 refers to higher levels of
understanding and skills involved in the problem-solving process.
Competence Area 6 - Career-related competences frameworks which target adults
include career-specific competences, such as the use of digital technology in engi-
neering (e.g. computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing equipment) and in
education (e.g. use of Learning Management Systems). Career-specific knowledge,
skills and attitudes should be included depended on the specific socioeconomic context,
which also change over time. CA6, Career-related competences, is an addition to
DigComp 2.0, comprising competences 6.1 (Operating specialized digital technologies
for a particular field) and 6.2 (Interpreting and manipulating data, information and
digital content for a particular field). One advantage of the openness and flexibility for
this competence area is that countries can identify the competences required for eco-
nomic growth and development in targeted fields and in specific contexts.
Digital Intelligence (DQ) Framework (Global Standards for Digital Literacy,
Skills, and Readiness)
The Digital Intelligence (DQ) was formed by a coalition of a cross-sector cooperative
network of organizations comprised of Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), the IEEE Standards Association, and the DQ Institute in
association with World Economic Forum and launched on September 26, 2018 [7].
Digital Intelligence (DQ) is a comprehensive set of technical, cognitive, meta-
cognitive, and socio-emotional competencies grounded in universal moral values that
enable individuals to face the challenges of digital life and adapt to its demands.
The DQ Framework offers a holistic set of digital competencies with a systematic
structure as a reference framework. The aim is to enable any organization to adopt the
DQ Framework, and to be able to practically tailor the framework to meet their needs.
The DQ Framework is structured around two categories: “areas” and “levels” of
digital intelligence. Eight broad areas of one’s digital life have been identified: Digital
Identity, Digital Use, Digital Safety, Digital Security, Digital Emotional Intelligence,
Digital Communication, Digital Literacy, and Digital Rights. The competencies within
these eight areas can be further differentiated by three different “levels” of maturity -
Digital Citizenship, Digital Creativity, and Digital Competitiveness.
 Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies for Different Groups 987

4 Learning and Teaching

Learning and teaching for digital literacy consist of the ability to access digital media
and ICT, to understand and critically evaluate different aspects of skills: to create and
access contents, and to communicate effectively in a variety of contexts. Main elements
of learning and teaching that the learner will acquire at the end of the process are
categorized in three important categories: knowledge, digital skills and competencies
(see Table 3).
The Knowledge that the learner will obtain can be theoretical which involves
different concepts such as; scientific concepts, mathematical concepts, theorems and
axioms. The knowledge obtained can also be factual which is fact-based.
Digital skills that the learner will gain can be cognitive, which is accessed by
acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought and reflection. The other form
of digital skills can be practical skills which are accessed through applied methods and
experience.
The competences are divided into two forms: individual autonomy type and group
type. The first form being self-experience and self-directed activities and the latter,
group, guided and team-managed learning processes.

Table 3. Main elements of digital competences: knowledge, digital skills and competence type
Main Aspects/Forms
elements
Knowledge Theoretical Factual
Digital skills Cognitive Practical
Competence Individual autonomy type and socially Group (team) type and socially
type responsible level responsibility level

Lifelong learning strategies need to answer to the growing need for advanced
digital competence for all jobs and for all learners including the digital natives and
older generations and address the gap in between them. Learning digital skills not only
needs to be addressed as a separate subject but also embedded within teaching in all
disciplines and fields of study, scientific and art. According to [8] Building digital
competence by embedding and learning ICT should start as early as possible, i.e. in
primary education, by learning to use digital tools critically, confidently and creatively,
with attention paid to security, safety, and privacy. Teachers, educators in general need
to be equipped with the new digital skills and competence themselves, in order to
support this process. There is a need for Digital Skills and Competencies passport for
educators as well as for learners.
Educational policies should make sure that digital literacy in its widest sense is
included in educational curricula in primary and secondary education. Education
should start building digital competences as early as possible in primary education,
through learning to use digital tools confidently, critically and creatively.
988 X. Jashari et al.

According to [9] currently, the concept of digital competence is re-shaped by the

emergence and use of new social computing tools, which give rise to new skills related
to collaboration, sharing, openness, reflection, identity formation and also to challenges
such as quality of information, trust, liability, privacy and security.
However, as technologies and their usages evolve, and new knowledge, digital
skills and competences arise with them. According to [10] the development of infor-
mation literacy and critical thinking skills it important that students successfully gain
domain knowledge in the designed digital classrooms. The students’ information lit-
eracy and critical thinking skills should be fostered. Teacher professional development
related to digital classrooms is needed in future.
It is often assumed that young people are ‘digitally native’ whose skills with digital
technology far surpass those of their ‘digital immigrant’ parents and teachers.
According to [11] It is true that many young people are confident in using a wide range
of technologies and often turn to the internet for information. They seem able to learn
to operate unfamiliar hardware or software very quickly and may take on the role of
teaching adults how to use computers and the internet.
However, several important qualifications are needed to the ‘digital natives’ con-
cept. For one thing, digital skills and knowledge are not evenly spread amongst all
young people. Their distribution is affected by class, race, gender and nationality,
creating a ‘participation gap’ [12].
According to [13] young people’s confidence with technology can also be mis-
leading. Students frequently struggle when applying ICT to research tasks, and teachers
sometimes complain of ‘copy and paste syndrome’. Students can find it difficult to
work out whether information on an unfamiliar website is trustworthy, with many of
them relying on their chosen search engine’s rankings for their selection of material.
According to [14] many have little understanding of how search terms work or of the
powerful commercial forces that can result in a particular company being top of the
search engine’s list.
According to [14] for general education (levels 1 to 4), the same three dimensions
are grouped as follows:
(a) knowledge:
(i) language and communication;
(ii) mathematics and natural sciences;
(iii) social functioning;
(b) skills:
(i) language and communication;
(ii) mathematics and natural sciences;
(iii) social functioning;
(iv) learning;
(c) social competence:
(i) language and communication;
(ii) health and the environment;
(iii) social functioning.
Educators therefore have a crucial role to play in ensuring that students are digitally
literate across a set number of dimensions of learning.
 Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies for Different Groups 989

5 Assessment and Feedback

In order to assess digital literacy or digital competence, nowadays there are numerous
instruments developed by national, regional, international and commercial agencies.
Based on [4] the mapping of cross-national and national ICT and digital literacy
frameworks, has found that the competences described in these frameworks can all be
mapped to the DigComp 2.0 framework. Therefore, these instruments can be mapped
as part of the proposed DLGF.
According to [4] the digital literacy assessment instruments that already exist were
developed to serve different purposes, starting from certification until the evaluation of
individuals or population groups, to research, and other purposes, and are structured
into four major assessment categories (see Table 4).

Table 4. Assessment categories and descriptions [4]

Assessment categories
1. Performance assessment Performance assessment requires the individual to demonstrate
how he/she performs certain tasks
2. Knowledge-based Knowledge-based assessment requires the individual to explain
assessment how he/she would perform certain tasks
3. Self-assessment Self-assessments are subjective evaluations of one’s own
competence and may not really reflect a person’s competence
in real-life situations
4. Secondary data- Secondary data-gathering and analysis may provide some
gathering and analysis information about competence at the group or population level
but not at the individual level

According to [4] performance assessment is used by the International Computer

and Information Literacy Study 2013 to investigate, in a range of countries, the ways in
which young people are developing computer and information literacy (CIL) to support
their capacity to participate in the digital age [15]. It is used for certification or com-
parison of digital literacy achievements (such as in the ICIL Study 2013 and 2018) [4].
According to [16] the DigComp proposal comprises two different interrelated
outputs:
• a framework identifying, for each area, all the related competences, and providing
for each competence a general description, descriptors on three levels, examples of
the knowledge, attitudes and skills, and examples of applicability for different
purposes.
• a self-assessment grid that proposes the areas of Digital Competence and descriptors
for three proficiency levels;
The self-assessment grid could also be used as a tool for each of the citizens to tell
about their own level of digital competence to the interested third parties and to
understand the ways and methods to improve their own digital competence. The
990 X. Jashari et al.

self-assessment grid can be used as a communication tool too, because it represents the
model in a brief and easy-to-grasp way [16].
According to [16] curricula and initiative developers can use this framework to
develop the digital competence of a specific target group. The level of abstraction of the
competences that are foreseen in the framework allows stakeholders to refine and
specify sub-competences in the terms they consider most appropriate for the target
groups or context. The framework could also be used as a reference tool to compare
existing frameworks and initiatives, in order to map which areas and which levels are
taken into account by a currently existing framework (or certification scheme, or
syllabi).
The shell of the DigComp framework is structured in five dimensions. These
dimensions reflect different aspects of the descriptors and different stages of
granularity.
These five dimensions are:
Dimension 1: Competence areas identified to be part of digital competence;
Dimension 2: Competence descriptors and titles that are pertinent to each area;
Dimension 3: Proficiency levels for each competence;
Dimension 4: Knowledge, skills and attitudes applicable to each competence;
Dimension 5: Examples of use, on the applicability of the competence to different
purposes.

Table 5. The overview and differences between DigComp 2.0 and DigComp 2.1. [17]
DigComp 2.0 (year 2016) DigComp 2.1 (year 2017)
Competence Competences Proficiency levels Examples of use (dimension 5)
areas (dimension 2) (dimension 3)
(dimension 1)
Five 21 competences Eight proficiency Examples of use of the eight
competence levels for each of proficiency levels applied to
areas the 21 learning and employment
competences scenario in the 21 competences

As shown in Table 5, DigComp 2.1 has eight proficiency levels for each of the 21
competences and provides examples of using them.
DigComp 1.0 Framework had three proficiency levels in Dimension 3 (1. Foun-
dation, 2. Intermediate and 3. Advanced). According to [17] these have now been
increased to eight levels in DigComp 2.1. A wider and more detailed range of profi-
ciency levels supports the development of learning and training materials. It also helps
in the design of instruments for assessing the development of citizens’ competence,
career guidance and promotion at work.
Eight proficiency levels for each competence have been defined through learning
outcomes using action verbs, following Bloom’s taxonomy and inspired by the
structure and vocabulary of the European Qualification Framework (EQF). Moreover,
 Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies for Different Groups 991

each level description contains knowledge, skills and attitudes, described in one single
descriptor for each level of each competence (see Table 6); this equals to 168
descriptors (8  21 learning outcomes) [17].

Table 6. Eight proficiency levels in DigComp 2.1 [17]

Level Complexity of tasks Autonomy Cognitive
domain
L1 Simple tasks With guidance Remembering
L2 Simple tasks Autonomy and with guidance Remembering
where needed
L3 Well-defined and routine On my own Understanding
tasks, and straightforward
problems
L4 Tasks, and well-defined and Independent and according to Understanding
non-routine problems my needs
L5 Different tasks and problems Guiding others Applying
L6 Most appropriate tasks Able to adapt to others in a Evaluating
complex context
L7 Resolve complex problems Integrate to contribute to the Creating
with limited solutions professional practice and to
guide others
L8 Resolve complex problems Propose new ideas and processes Creating
with many interacting to the field
factors

Programming, as one of the 21 competencies, is thoroughly explained in (see

Table 7 below) through a given scenario, as stated on [17]. The level of autonomy of
the example is as seen in the Table 6. L4: independent and according to my needs.

Table 7. Learning scenario example [17]

Area 3: Digital content creation
Competence 3.4: Programming
Example: Learning scenario:
Prepare a presentation on a certain topic that I will make to my classmates
Scenario Using a simple graphical programming interface (e.g. Scratch Jr), I can
developed: develop a smartphone app that presents my work to my classmates
If a problem appears, I know how to debug the programme and I can fix
easy problems in my code
Proficiency L4
level
992 X. Jashari et al.

Areas and Competences

According to [16] the areas of digital skills’ competences can be summarized as
follows:

1. Information: identify, locate, retrieve, store, organize and analyses digital infor-
mation, judging its relevance and purpose.
2. Communication: communicate in digital environments, share resources through
online tools, link with others and collaborate through digital tools, interact with and
participate in communities and networks, cross-cultural awareness.
3. Content-creation: Create and edit new content (from word processing to images
and video); integrate and re-elaborate previous knowledge and content; produce
creative expressions, media outputs and programming; deal with and apply intel-
lectual property rights and licenses.
4. Safety: personal protection, data protection, digital identity protection, security
measures, safe and sustainable use.
5. Problem-solving: identify digital needs and resources, make informed decisions on
most appropriate digital tools according to the purpose or need, solve conceptual
problems through digital means, creatively use technologies, solve technical
problems, update own and other’s competence.
Areas 1, 2 and 3 are rather for linear assessment while areas 4 and 5 are more
transversal. This means that while areas 1 to 3 deal with competences that can be re-
traced in terms of specific activities and uses, areas 4 and 5 apply to any type of activity
that is been carried out through digital means.

6 Conceptual Model

This section proposes a conceptual model for teaching and learning digital skills and
competences. This model strives for integrating two strands of research in technology-
enhanced learning. According to [5] Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) refers to
the support of teaching and learning through the use of technology and can be used
synonymously with e-learning.
First, work and frameworks on digital skills and competences as described in the
previous sections are taken into account. This work describes which skills should be
learned, how they should be taught, and how they can be assessed. The research second
strand addresses research and practice of adaptive e-learning and personalization. This
strand provides models for learning general domain-related skills, such as mathematics
or science.
The conceptual model (see Fig. 1) integrates the digital skills framework with an
adaptive learning strategy. Traditional concepts for adaptive learning consist of user
models, content and domain models, and tutoring model [18, 20]. The domain model is
consisted of digital skills and domain knowledge. The content model includes infor-
mation about the available content that can be presented to the learner. The user (or
student) model includes characteristics and information about the student by whom the
content should be adapted. The tutoring model provides an adaptive strategy that
 Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies for Different Groups 993

calculates learning paths out of the content and user model. An assessment (e.g.
knowledge tests) as a strategy that includes self-reporting and formal and informal
assessment, before and during the learning process gathers information for the user
model. More recent learning analytics initiatives include non-invasive assessment and
behavior tracking methods to gather user information that are used for direct feedback
to the learner [19].
In order to design a general framework for learning, teaching, and assessing digital
skills, we propose to enrich the traditional adaptation concepts with the digital skills
framework. The domain content would include either only content for learning digital
skills or a combination for digital skills and a different domain to be learned. This
allows both the teaching of digital skills in combination with or without a different
domain. The digital skills framework includes skills to be learned and also has refer-
ences to content objects. The user model includes information about currently available
digital skills, as well as other user characteristics needed for the teaching strategy. The
learning and teaching strategy includes a model that selects appropriate content based
on current available skills. The learning environment presents the selected content and
provides a user interface for the student. The assessment strategy module includes
different strategies to assess the current available skills. Based on Sect. 5, it provides
knowledge tests, self-assessment, and non-invasive strategies. The results are stored in
the user model.

Fig. 1. The conceptual model for learning, teaching, and assessing digital skills and
competences.

For exemplifying the conceptual approach, we present a use case that deals with
teaching digital skills in primary schools. The goal is to teach basic skills to understand
data. To this end, several content modules are created that allow the pupils to interact
with weather data. In particular, modules are created that can be used to get an
994 X. Jashari et al.

overview of all data, to filter data, to represent data with different graphical diagrams,
and to perform simple statistical analyses. Digital skills are defined as skills that are
trained with each module. These skills are also related to the DigComp framework.
A pedagogical model that provides a story line for the usage of the content modules.
For example, a student could start with filtering temperature data within a certain time
frame, viewing the filtered data as bar chart and line chart, and calculate the mean value
of the filtered data. After such a learning sequence, the pupil is asked to answer some
questions about the performed actions. In addition, the log data of the interactions with
the modules are analyzed by assessment component. Both assessment types lead to an
update of the user model regarding the available digital skills. Based on this update, the
teaching strategy can focus on presenting certain content modules to learn missing
skills or improve existing ones (e.g. by selecting certain diagram types).

7 Conclusion

Digital competence stands as an important challenge for the educational systems in

Europe. From the literature review realized and analyzed frameworks we have come to
conclude that there are many issues concerning the assessment of digital skills in EU.
Respondents incorrectly evaluate their digital competences, most often by overesti-
mating. This varies and also depends based on the targeted respondents. Each group
requires a different approach.
Self-assessment is always a challenging task because people always attempt to
conduct a self-assessment but they do not always succeed in this regard. The main
reason for the lack of success in self-assessment is the inadequate self-esteem or self-
awareness.
The assessment of the digital skills cannot be reduced to a single component, nor
can it be assessed with just one type of test which is the real crucial point. The adoption
of a flexible and integrated approach is therefore needed, without renouncing to define
criteria and methodologies.
Therefore, in order to approach this, we have created a conceptual model. The
devised conceptual model strives for integrating two strands of research in technology-
enhanced learning. Initially, work and frameworks on digital skills and competencies as
described in the previous sections are taken into account. Furthermore, the model
describes which skills should be learned, how they should be taught, and how they can
be assessed. Finally, this model can contribute in further research to this field which
will investigate in detail the differences and similarities between self-assessment and
assessment.

References
1. ECDL Foundation: Perception and Reality - Measuring Digital Skills in Europe. ECDL
Foundation (2016)
2. Kemp, S.: Digital 2019: Global Digital Overview. Datareportal.com, 31 January 2019.
https://datareportal.com/reports/digital2019globaldigitaloverview
 Assessing Digital Skills and Competencies for Different Groups 995

3. European Parliament and Council: Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of
the European Union, L 394/10 (2006)
4. Law, N.W.Y., Woo, D.J., de la Torre, J., Wong, K.W.G.: A global framework of reference
on digital literacy skills for indicator 4.4.2 (2018)
5. IGI Global (n.d.): Technology enhanced learning (TEL). https://www.igi-global.com/
dictionary/technology-enhanced-learning-tel/29510
6. Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., Gomez, S., Van Den Brande, G., et al.: DigComp 2.0: The digital
competence framework for citizens. Update phase 1: The conceptual reference model.
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2016). https://doi.org/10.2791/
11517
7. DQ Institute: DQ Global Standards Report 2019 Digital Intelligence (2019)
8. CareerBuilder. Press release 10 September 2008. http://www.careerbuilder.com/share/
aboutus/pressreleasesdetail.aspx?id=pr459&sd=9/10/2008&ed=12/31/2008&cbRecursion
Cnt = 2&cbsid = 2ece1ba5ca224298adebb8cdc4994e70-279121665-J2-5&ns_siteid = ns_
xx_g_CareerBuilder.com_res. Accessed 5 May 2019
9. Ala-Mutka, K., Malanowski, N., Punie, Y., Cabrera, M.: Active Ageing and the Potential of
ICT for Learning. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,
Luxembourg (2008). ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/JRC45209.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2019
10. Ala-Mutka, K.: Social Computing: Use and Impacts of Collaborative Content. IPTS
Exploratory Research on Social Computing. Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg (2008). http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC47511.pdf. Accessed 7
May 2019
11. ComScore. Press release 10 October 2007. https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Press-
Releases/2007/10/UK-Social-Networking. Accessed 5 Mar 2019
12. Cachia, R.: Social Computing: Study on the Use and Impact of Online Social Network-
ing IPTS Exploratory Research on the Socio-economic Impact of Social Computing. Office
for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg (2008). https://
publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC48650/jrc48650.pdf
13. Cachia, R., Kluzer S., Cabrera, M., Centeno, C., Punie, Y.: ICT, Social Capital and Cultural
Diversity. Report on a Joint IPTS-DG INFSO Workshop. EUR 23047 EN (2007). http://ipts.
jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=1534
14. Chou, C., Chan, P.-S., Wu, H.-C.: Using a two-tier test to assess students’ understanding and
alternative, conceptions of cyber copyright laws. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 38(6), 1072–1084
(2007)
15. Fraillon, J., Schulz, W., Ainley, J.: International computer and information literacy study:
assessment framework. IEA, Amsterdam (2013). https://www.iea.nl/sites/default/files/2019-
04/ICILS_2013_Framework.pdf
16. Ferrari, A.: DIGCOMP: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence
in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2013). http://doi.org/
10.2788/52966
17. Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., et al.: DigComp 2.1: The Digital Competence
Framework for Citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use. Joint Research
Centre. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2017). https://publications.
jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC106281/web-digcomp2.1pdf_(online).pdf
18. Brusilovsky, P.: Methods and techniques of adaptive hypermedia. J. User Model. User-
Adap. Interact. 6, 87–129 (1996)
19. Siemens, G.: Learning analytics: the emergence of a discipline. Am. Behav. Sci. 57(10),
1380–1400 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213498851
20. Shute, V., Towle, B.: Adaptive e-learning. Educ. Psychol. 38(2), 105–114 (2003)