https://doi.org/10.37815/rte.v36n2.1200
Original articles
Revisión
sistemática de instrumentos de medición de competencias digitales de doce=
ntes
universitarios en carreras de Enseñanza de Inglés
Mario
Esteban Alpizar RodrÃguez1
1Uni=
versidad
mario.alpizarrodriguez@ucr.ac.cr=
Â
Sent:Â Â Â Â Â 2024/07/02
Accepted:Â Â Â Â Â Â 2024/12=
/13
Published: Â Â Â Â Â 2024/12=
/30
                        =
Â
Abstract
The research presents a systematic review=
of
measurement instruments for assessing digital competencies among university
teachers in English teaching majors in Costa Rica. The study aimed to analy=
ze
the digital competencies of educators across various models and regions,
identifying the most common competences and categorizing them into distinct
dimensions. Data were gathered using a systematic bibliographic review
methodology, and relevant literature was analyzed qualitatively. The findin=
gs
reveal key elements contributing to an ideal measurement instrument,
highlighting essential competencies university teachers should possess to
effectively integrate digital tools into their teaching practices. This rev=
iew
sheds light on the current state of digital competence among educators and
serves as a foundation for developing robust assessment tools tailored to t=
he
specific needs of English teaching professionals in Costa Rica. By delineat=
ing
the critical dimensions of digital competencies, this research provides
valuable insights for educational institutions aiming to enhance the digital
proficiency of their teaching staff.
=
Keywords: D=
igital
competencies, teachers' competencies, use of didactic resources, technologi=
cal
competencies, Information and Communication Technologies.
Summary: Introductio=
n, Literature review, Â Methodology, Procedure, Conclusion=
s and recommendations.. How to cite: Alpizar, M.=
(2024).
A systematic review on measurement instruments of digital competencies=
of
university teachers in English Teaching majors. Revista
Tecnológica - Espol, 36(2), 73-94. https://rte.espol.edu.ec/index.php/tecnologica/article/view/1200=
Resumen
Esta investigación presenta u=
na
revisión sistemática de los instrumentos de medición para evaluar las
competencias digitales de los docentes universitarios de las carreras de
enseñanza de inglés en Costa Rica. El estudio tiene como objetivo analiza=
r las
competencias digitales de los educadores en diversos modelos y regiones del
planeta, identificando las competencias más comunes y categorizándolas en
dimensiones distintas. Se utilizó una metodologÃa de revisión bibliográ=
fica
sistemática, se recopiló y analizó la literatura relevante a través de =
un
enfoque cualitativo. Los hallazgos revelan elementos clave que contribuyen =
a un
instrumento de medición ideal, destacando las competencias esenciales que =
los
docentes universitarios deben poseer para integrar eficazmente herramientas
digitales en sus prácticas de enseñanza. Esta revisión no solo resalta el
estado actual de la competencia digital de los educadores, también sirve c=
omo
base para desarrollar herramientas de evaluación robustas adaptadas a las
necesidades especÃficas de los profesionales de la enseñanza de inglés e=
n Costa
Rica. Al delinear las dimensiones crÃticas de las competencias digitales, =
esta
investigación proporciona valiosos conocimientos para las instituciones
educativas que buscan mejorar la competencia digital de su personal docente=
.
Introduction
C=
urrently,
education as a pillar of the development of society, as in other areas, has=
been
permeated by the integration of Information and Communication Technologies
(hereinafter ICT) in the formation processes of all educational levels.
Specifically in English teaching, these tools have become an essential reso=
urce
for transformation, strategic management, and favorable empowerment,
intensifying their use in this 21st century (GarcÃa et al, 2018).
<= o:p>
T=
eachers
are an essential part of the teaching process and greatly influence learnin=
g,
so they must have the appropriate abilities, knowledge, and competencies to
promote and establish suitable spaces for knowledge creation and skills
development through ICT, according to the demands of the 21st century (Carb=
allo
et al., 2015, p. 3).
<= o:p>
W=
ithin the
multiplicity of existing competencies involved in teaching, digital teaching
competencies turn out to be essential given the current technological deman=
ds
and the role that universities play as centers for the professional trainin=
g of
teachers, specifically in English language teaching, which is the focus of =
this
research.
<= o:p>
<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>Â In previous studies conducted at the
Universidad de Costa Rica, Charpentier and Escalante (2015) found that the =
use
of ICT as a teaching resource among university educators was limited and not
linked to the development of language skills. As a result, examining how th=
is
situation has evolved in the current national context becomes relevant,
especially considering that the role of a university educator in the English
teaching program should be of a designer and mediator of spaces for knowled=
ge
construction and include the adoption and integration of the tools, devices,
and digital applications provided by the use of ICTÂ (Cruz, 2018).
<= o:p>
F=
rom this
premise, and since there is no definition of a measuring instrument of digi=
tal
teaching competencies in the country, the following questions arose: What
digital competencies can be measured to define an English teacher at a
university level as efficient and competent? How have these competencies be=
en
measured in other parts of the world? What competencies could be adapted and
measured in the context of higher education in Costa Rica?
<= o:p>
T=
he main
purpose of this bibliographical systematic review is to collect information=
and
data on instruments for measuring the digital competencies of university
teachers from different regions of the world, to understand their adaptatio=
n to
each different context and thus define the appropriate elements for an ideal
instrument for measuring these competences in university teachers of Englis=
h in
Costa Rica.
<= o:p>
Lite=
rature
review
V=
arious
documents were analyzed, including models of digital competencies related to
the use of ICT and their implementation in different areas of the world,
indexed articles, and previous research, which provide a broader perspectiv=
e on
the topic. The research was selected based on the specific topic, methodolo=
gy,
and theoretical frameworks. The documents were organized in a contextual or=
der
from the international level to the regional level and finally to the local
level. They are presented in two main areas: teacher digital competencies a=
nd
the didactic use of ICT in English teaching at the university level.
<= o:p>
T=
eacher
digital competencies result from the knowledge and use of ICT, as well as t=
he
abilities and skills for information search and evaluation and timely
problem-solving that arise from the constant use of these technological too=
ls
to promote the education of informed individuals capable of social developm=
ent
(UNESCO, 2008).
<= o:p>
F=
or this
research and as a reference for teacher digital competencies, the INTEF mod=
el
(2017) was considered, which focuses on the technical knowledge of ICT and =
its
use to promote communication, creation, collaboration, and problem-solving =
in
the teaching practice.
<= o:p>
T=
his model
is divided into five areas, namely:
<= o:p>
·
Informational
literacy: This focuses on navigation, search, and filtering of information,=
as
well as the evaluation, storage, and retrieval of digital data. RamÃrez and
Casillas (2014) included a similar area in their knowledge framework called
programs and information systems specific to the subject discipline, which
covers programs related to a particular field through the use of electronic
journals, websites, blogs, specialized databases, virtual libraries, and
content repositories. According to Carrera and Coiduras (2012), one of the
components of the digital competence of university teachers should be the
treatment and efficient management of information on the web, which corresp=
onds
to the aforementioned area.
·
Communication
and collaboration: This focuses on interaction with the community, exchange=
of
information, online citizen participation, collaboration through official
channels, netiquette, and management of digital identity, which defines the
user profile of ICT. RamÃrez and Casillas (2014) also included two areas
related to these competencies. The first is the communication area, which
covers the use of WhatsApp, chat, email, social networks, learning platform=
s,
blogs, video calls, and text messages. The second area is socialization and
collaboration, which includes the use of social web services to follow, rea=
d,
publish (in blogs), participate in forums, consult wikis, and use social
networks. Additionally, this aligns with the RUTE model analyzed by Bosco
(2008), specifically in its fifth area, referring to communication competen=
cies
through ICT, such as acquiring communication skills and collaborative work
strategies among teachers through virtual spaces and networks. Lastly, Carr=
era
and Coiduras (2012) also mention that one of the components of the digital
competence of university teachers is the use of the Internet for collaborat=
ive
work, communication, and interpersonal interaction.
·
Digital
content creation: This includes the development, integration, and reworking=
of
digital content while respecting authorship rights, licenses, and programmi=
ng.
As shown earlier, RamÃrez and Casillas (2014) align with this model, but in
this case, they divide digital content creation into three areas. The first=
is
the creation and manipulation of text and enriched text content, which incl=
udes
editing functions (text formatting, images, hyperlinks, comments, automatic
indexes, citations, numbering, spelling check) in word processors and
presentation functions in presentation management programs. The second area=
is
the creation and manipulation of data, which encompasses competencies such =
as
using and managing information sets, databases, and spreadsheets. Lastly, t=
he
third area is the creation and manipulation of multimedia content, which
includes the creation, capture, recording, transfer, viewing, editing, and
conversion of audio, video, and images. All of this aligns with Bosco (2008=
) in
terms of instrumental computer competencies that include the knowledge and
skills of individuals and computer resources, both hardware and software, w=
hich
is more related to software due to the use of programs to create the variet=
y of
files mentioned by RamÃrez and Casillas (2014). For this research, it is
considered important to include editing, as programs allow for changing and
even converting files into different formats for various uses.
·
Safety
and cybersecurity: Device usage involves the protection of personal data,
management of digital identity, and health in the use of ICT and the digital
environment. Once again, RamÃrez and Casillas (2014) coincide and expand o=
n the
aspect of digital citizenship, which includes a variety of knowledge within
this area, such as conventional use of writing in different communication
contexts, use of emoticons, abbreviations, omission of spelling rules,
different font types (color, size, style), exclusive use of capital letters,
and use of formal/informal language. Additionally, relevant aspects for
security are considered, such as publishing information on the web (passwor=
ds,
geolocation), information integrity (antivirus, backups, website access), a=
nd responsible
use of information and computer services (author licenses and open-source
software). In this regard, other components considered by Carrera and Coidu=
ras
(2012) as part of the digital competence of university teachers can be
included, such as the implementation and ethical, legal, and responsible us=
e of
ICT, which are also part of the digital identity that should be fostered in
both teachers and students. Up to this point, technical aspects related mai=
nly
to the use and care of software and programs have been addressed, but it is
important to consider hardware aspects as well, such as the management,
maintenance, and troubleshooting of computer equipment and peripherals. Thi=
s is
in line with what Bosco (2008) analyzed, incorporating instrumental computer
competencies related to the knowledge and skills of individuals in managing
computer resources, including hardware.
·
Problem-solving:
This refers to the ability to identify needs and problems in the educational
context and to propose and implement technological solutions. This includes=
the
ability to analyze, evaluate, and select appropriate digital tools and
resources for teaching and learning. RamÃrez and Casillas (2014) also addr=
ess
this aspect, including areas related to the use of ICT as a tool for
problem-solving, such as the use of software for problem-solving, the use of
educational applications, and the use of virtual reality and augmented real=
ity.
Carrera and Coiduras (2012) also coincide with this area, including the abi=
lity
to integrate, adapt, and create educational resources using ICT.
<= o:p>
I=
t is
important to note that these areas of teacher digital competencies are not
isolated. They are interconnected and complement each other, forming a
comprehensive framework for the use of ICT in education. Teachers with stro=
ng
digital competencies are able to effectively and creatively integrate
technology into their teaching practice, fostering student engagement and
enhancing learning outcomes.
<= o:p>
I=
n 2016,
UNESCO proposed six levels to understand digital competencies in the
educational context. These levels encompass different aspects related to
teachers' use of information and communication technologies (ICT). Below is=
a
brief description of each level:
<= o:p>
·
Policy
level: This refers to the policies that teachers must consider regarding the
use of ICT in their individual contexts and teaching objectives
·
Curriculum
level: At this level, teachers should be able to integrate ICT into the
curriculum and comply with technological regulations. It also involves
acquiring specific competencies for virtual teaching, such as planning,
developing, monitoring, and evaluating teaching and learning processes in
virtual environments.
·
Pedagogical
level: Teachers should know when and how to use technology in class activit=
ies.
It involves designing educational scenarios supported by ICT to facilitate
meaningful learning and student formation. This level relates to creating a
motivating learning environment and establishing empathy with students.
·
Didactic
level: At this level, teachers should understand the functioning of devices=
and
software and apply activities based on their experiences. They should also
evaluate the effectiveness of ICT-supported educational scenarios.
· Organizational level: Teachers use technology during whole-class activities and ensure equitable access to its use. It also includes providing guidance in the learning process, attending to students' individual needs and interests, and conducting research on their own teaching practice in online environments.<= o:p>
·
Teacher's
digital competence level: This level encompasses helping students use
appropriate ICT and develop competence. It involves supporting students in
using ICT appropriately and becoming competent in its handling.
<= o:p>
T=
hese are
proposals to understand and develop teachers' digital competencies in the
educational context, considering both political and curricular aspects and
pedagogical and didactic dimensions.
<= o:p>
Rese=
arch
Question
B=
ased on
the previous information, the research question for the main problem in this
research is the following:
<= o:p>
<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>Â What are the appropriate elements for a=
n ideal
instrument for measuring the digital competencies of university English
teachers in Costa Rica?
<= o:p>
Gene=
ral
objective
T=
o define
the elements of an ideal instrument for measuring the digital competencies =
of
university teachers of English in Costa Rica.
<= o:p>
<= o:p>
Meth=
odology
T=
he present
research project is based on descriptive research, which aims to review what
different authors propose or prove about the research question. This
systematized literature review allows the researcher to find similarities a=
nd
differences in the research topic through thematic analysis, enabling them =
to
draw logical conclusions by confirming what was proposed and spotting
opportunities for further research by determining where little or no resear=
ch
has been conducted. Through the thematic analysis, it was possible to ident=
ify
and categorize the relevant digital competencies according to specific
dimensions.
<= o:p>
T=
his
research project combines a literature review and a systematic literature
review. According to the University of Edinburgh (2022), a literature review
allows the researcher to demonstrate "knowledge and understanding of t=
he
academic literature on a specific topic placed in context. A review of the
literature also includes a critical evaluation of the material" (p. 1)=
. In
other words, a literature review allows the researcher to collect informati=
on
considering that the literature must be related to the research question and
the topic to be analyzed; therefore, it becomes the beacon for the type of
literature sought.
<= o:p>
O=
n the
other hand, a systematic review of the literature is carried out, according=
to
Petticrew and Roberts (2006), as a method of making sense of a large amount=
of
information and a means of contributing to answers to questions about what
works and what does not, and many other types of questions as well. They ar=
e a
method of mapping areas of uncertainty and identifying where little or no
relevant research has been done but where further study is needed. Systemat=
ic
reviews also point to areas where false certainty abounds. These are areas
where we think we know more than we do but where there is little compelling
evidence to support our beliefs. (p. 2).
<= o:p>
T=
herefore,
the method in this research project allows us to do what Khan et al. (2003)
proposed as the steps of a systematic review of the literature, which are to
frame the question, identify relevant publications, assess the quality of t=
he
study, summarize the evidence, and interpret the findings (p. 5-18). This
enables the researcher to find convergences and divergences based on what t=
he
different authors present, giving them a broader view of the phenomenon and
leading them to draw logical conclusions based on what the literature says.=
 Qualitative Research
The research approach is qualitative, whi=
ch,
according to Barrantes (2006): "…postulates a phenomenological, indu=
ctive,
process-oriented conception. It seeks to discover or generate theories. It
emphasizes depth, and its analyses are not necessarily translated into
mathematical terms". (p.71).
In turn, Hernández et al. (2014) mention=
that
this approach "uses data collection without numerical measurement to
discover or refine research questions in the interpretation process" (=
p.
7). Considering these definitions, this approach allows intense field work,
repeated encounters with the study subjects, and an exhaustive record of ev=
ents
to conduct a detailed analysis. Since the research question is often framed=
to
explore phenomena, understand experiences, or examine conceptual frameworks=
, it
is designed to elicit in-depth insights rather than numerical data.
The criteria for including studies focuse=
d on
specific digital competencies research and how they have been organized,
arranged, and measured in other regions; also, the search strategies were b=
ased
on indexed databases and documents from international institutions related =
to
the topic. The studies were selected based on how well they addressed the
research question and met the inclusion criteria. This included assessing t=
he
relevance and rigor of the qualitative research, such as methodological sou=
ndness
and depth of analysis. The focus was on extracting themes, patterns, and
findings from previous studies related to the topic, which involved summari=
zing
key insights, concepts, and interpretations presented by the authors. The
synthesis involved thematically or conceptually organizing the findings from
different studies.
Considering the objectives of this study,
fieldwork characterized the qualities of the events and experiential scenar=
ios
under study to find the definition of an appropriate instrument for measuri=
ng
the digital competencies of university teachers of English in Costa Rica.
Procedure
Framing question for review
Considering the subject in hand, the first
specific objective of the research about identifying the elements of the
instruments for measuring teacher digital competencies used in different
contexts, and the research question of this process "what are the
appropriate elements to consider for an ideal instrument for measuring the
digital competencies of university teachers of English in Costa Rica?",
there has been some research that may turn not only useful but also give a
greater insight on the topic. Within the great diversity of models on digit=
al
teacher competencies, as well as the instruments used to address and measure
these competencies, the following information is presented, <=
!--[if supportFields]>Â REF _Ref184997132 \h Table 1:
Table 1
Frameworks, models, and proposals for dig=
ital
teaching competencias
Teacher Digital
Competencies
|
Authors |
Model/Framework |
Dimensions and Competences, it covers |
|
Educational Testing Service (ETS, 2007) |
iSkills |
·=
Access: k=
now
and know how to collect and/or retrieve information. ·=
Manage: a=
pply
from an existing classification or organization scheme. ·=
Integrate:
interpret and represent the information. It is about summarizing, compari=
ng,
and contrasting. ·=
Evaluate:
make judgments about the quality, relevance, usefulness, or efficiency of=
the
information. ·=
Create:
adapt, apply, design, invent, or author the information. |
|
ISTE (2008) |
NETSÂT |
This model includes t=
he
following areas: · =
Creativity · =
Design and develop
learning experiences and assessments · =
Work and learning in =
the
digital age · =
Promote responsibility
and digital citizenship · =
•Participate in
professional development and leadership. |
|
Koehler and Mishra,
(2008) |
TPACK Model |
This model includes the following dimensions: ·
Technological competencies described as knowledge about technologi=
cal
capacities and applications. ·
Pedagogical competencies, as its name implies, general pedagogical
competencies. ·
Disciplinary competencies that cover the competencies on the matter
and discipline to be dealt with. These, in turn, intertwine, creating more specific ramifications s=
uch
as: ·
Pedagogical technological skills ·
Technological content competencies ·
Pedagogical competencies of the content ·
Technological and pedagogical competencies of the content accordin=
g to
the context in which the proposal is developed. |
|
Generalitat de Cataluña (2009)<=
/span> |
ACTIC |
·=
Culture a=
nd
digital participation ·=
Use of the
computer and the operating system ·=
Navigation
and communication ·=
Treatment=
of
written communication ·=
Treatment=
of
graphic, sound, and image information ·=
Treatment=
of
numerical information ·=
Data
processing ·=
Presentat=
ion
of contents |
|
Pozos (2010) |
Integration of the Digital Competence of
University Professors in their Professional Teaching Development |
In this model, seven
Digital Competence Units are structured: ·= Planning = and design of learning experiences in face-to-face and virtual environments.<= o:p> ·=
Developme=
nt
and management of face-to-face and online collaborative learning experien=
ces. ·=
Guidance =
and
evaluation of knowledge construction processes in face-to-face and virtual
environments. ·=
Managemen=
t of
growth and professional development with the support of ICT. ·=
Research,
development, and pedagogical innovation with/for the use of ICT in educat=
ion. ·=
Diversity,
ethics and responsible use of ICT in professional teaching performance. ·=
Environme=
nt,
occupational health and safety with the use of ICT in the teaching
profession. |
|
Prendes (2010) |
ICT skills for teaching at the Spanish
Public University |
This model includes the following areas: ·=
General
computer knowledge and ICT possibilities. ·=
Knowledge=
and
use of methodological strategies for networking. ·=
Possibili=
ties
and limitations of ICT in the teaching-learning process ·=
Choice of=
ICT
resources for the classroom ·=
Knowledge=
and
use of tools ·=
Publicati=
on
of material on the net ·=
Use of ICT
for different teaching tasks ·=
Teacher
training and innovation with ICT |
|
UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for
Teachers |
This model includes t=
he
following areas: ·=
Understan=
ding
ICT in Education ·=
Curriculum
and Assessment ·= Pedagogy<= o:p> ·=
ICT ·=
Organizat=
ion
and Administration ·=
Teacher's
professional learning |
|
|
Carrera and Coiduras (2012) |
Exploratory study |
·=
Knowledge=
of
devices, computer tools, and network applications, and the ability to ass=
ess
their educational potential. ·=
The desig=
n of
learning and evaluation activities and situations that incorporate ICT
according to their didactic potential, with the students, and with their
context. ·=
The imple=
mentation
and ethical, legal, and responsible use of ICT. ·=
The
transformation and improvement of professional teaching practice, both
individually and collectively. ·=
The treat=
ment
and efficient management of existing information on the network. ·=
The use of
the network (Internet) for collaborative work, communication, and
interpersonal interaction. ·=
The help
provided to students so that they appropriate ICT and show themselves
competent in its use. |
|
Ferrari (2013) |
DIGCOMP |
In this model, the fo=
llowing
areas are categorized: ·=
Informati=
on ·=
Communica=
tion ·=
Content
creation ·= Security<= o:p> ·=
Problem
resolution |
|
Fraser et al., 2013 |
DigiLit Leicester |
This model includes the following areas: ·=
Search,
evaluation, and organization ·=
Create and
share ·=
Evaluation
and feedback ·=
Communica=
tion ·=
Collabora=
tion
and participation ·=
eSecurity=
and
online identity ·=
Technology
that supports professional development |
|
Larraz (2013) |
Digital Competence at the University |
·=
Informati=
onal:
This includes competencies such as: Recognizing information needs, locati=
ng
information, Evaluating the results found, organizing information, buildi=
ng
knowledge, and Communicating knowledge. ·=
Technolog=
ical:
This dimension includes skills such as digital citizenship, organization =
and
management of hardware and software, data processing in different formats,
and network communication. ·=
Multimedi=
a:
This dimension includes competencies such as Analyzing and creating
multimedia messages from a critical dimension, accessing multimedia messa=
ges,
understanding multimedia messages, and Creating multimedia messages. ·=
Communica=
tive:
This last dimension includes competencies such as Knowledge Communication
(Information Literacy), Communication (Technological Literacy), Digital
Citizenship (Technological Literacy), and Creation of Multimedia Messages
(Multimedia Literacy). |
|
RamÃrez and Casillas, (2014) |
Digital knowledge |
The digital knowledge used to measure the degree of technological
appropriation (which implies knowledge, use and application, frequency and
intention) is made up of eight pieces of computer knowledge and two piece=
s of
informational knowledge that are grouped as follows: ·=
File
Handling: Local (USB flash drives, CD) and global (cloud computing) file
handling ·=
Device
Management: Use and care of digital devices (tablets, smartphones, laptop=
s,
printers, guns) ·=
Programs =
and
information systems specific to the discipline of the subject: Programs
related to a particular discipline or field of study, use of electronic
journals, web pages, blogs, specialized databases, virtual libraries, and
content repositories. ·=
Creation =
and
manipulation of text and rich text content: Use of editing functions (text
formatting, images, hyperlinks, comments, automatic indexes, citations,
numbering, spell checking) in word processors and presentation functions =
in
administrator programs. of presentations ·=
Creation =
and
manipulation of data: Use and administration of information sets, databas=
es,
spreadsheets ·=
Creation =
and
manipulation of multimedia content: Create, capture, record, transfer,
display, edit, audio, video, and image conversion. ·=
Communica=
tion:
Use of WhatsApp, chat, email, social networks, distributed learning
platforms, blogs, video calls and text messages. ·=
Socialize=
and
collaborate: Use of social web services to follow, read, publish (in blog=
),
participate in forums, consult wikis, and use social networks. ·=
Digital
Citizenship: Conventional use of spelling in various communication contex=
ts;
use of emoticons, abbreviated words, omission of spelling rules, non-stan=
dard
font type (color, size, font type), exclusive use of capital letters, use=
of
formal/informal language; as well as security considerations for the
publication of information on the web (passwords, geolocation), informati=
on
integrity (antivirus, backups, access to websites) and responsible use of
information and computer services (author licenses and free software) ·=
Digital
literacy. Strategies for content creation and search and validation of
specialized information in search engines and digital repositories |
|
Rangel, (2015) |
Teacher digital competences profile |
In this case, thirteen
competencies grouped into three dimensions are proposed: ·=
Technolog=
ical
dimension, which includes basic concepts and functions of the computer, b=
asic
connectivity tasks, installation and security of the computer equipment,
basic functions of the productivity programs, and the positive attitude f=
or
the permanent updating in topics related to ICT. ·= Informati= onal dimension that includes information location and retrieval skills, effici= ent analysis and selection of information, organization of information retrie= ved from the Internet, and effective, ethical, and legal use of information.<= o:p> ·=
Pedagogic=
al
dimension that includes critical and favorable attitude towards the
possibility of integrating ICT in teaching practice, design and
implementation of ICT-mediated teaching and learning strategies, design a=
nd
evaluation of educational materials or resources for integration in teach=
ing
practice, ICT to support administrative-teaching tasks and ICT to exchange
ideas, information, experiences or knowledge with the community. |
|
Pinto, Cortés and Alfaro, (2017) |
TICTACTEP spiral competence model |
This spiral model speaks of 3 components: ·=
ICT (Info=
rmation
and Communication Technologies) ·=
TAC (Lear=
ning
and Knowledge Technologies) ·=
TEP
(Technologies of Empowerment and Participation) Each of these components contemplates degrees of appropriation in =
the
following aspects: ·=
Technolog=
ical ·=
Pedagogic=
al ·=
Communica=
tive ·=
Managemen=
t ·=
Investiga=
tive |
Source: Own elaboration and based on the study by
Durán, Gutiérrez, and Prendes, (2016)
Assessing the quality of the studies
As explained before, the investigation fo=
cused
on academic and research papers and documents published by international
institutions, universities, and expert scholars. This means the information
obtained has been considered reliable based on these types of investigation=
s.
In addition, it can be determined by the number of studies that the abiliti=
es
this type of approach seeks have been developed.
Summarizing evidence
Considering the second specific objective=
of
the research about understanding the components of the measurement instrume=
nts
according to the needs of each context and the analysis of the data reviewe=
d,
it can be noticed that
· =
The
iSkills (2007) model, developed by the Educational Testing Service (hereina=
fter
ETS), besides measuring the ability to think critically in a digital
environment through a series of real-world tasks, also focuses on integrati=
ng
technology skills and cognitive skills. According to their recommendations,
governments should begin including large-scale global assessments of ICT
literacy. Also, education experts and researchers should conduct new public
policy research using the data derived from these assessments. Following the
example of ETS, there is community work to develop specific diagnostic
assessments focusing on the measurement of ICT literacy.
· =
The
National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETST, 2008) model
developed by the International Society for Technology in Education (from no=
w on
ISTE) specifies the conditions for adequate integration of technology in
education and the standards teachers must develop at different levels
contemplating higher education. The model is divided into five dimensions, =
and
each dimension is made up of four indicators.
a) Facilitate and inspire learn=
ing and
creativity.
b) Design and develop digital-a=
ge
learning experiences and assessments.
c) Model of work and learning i=
n the
digital age.
d) Promote and model responsibi=
lity and
digital citizenship.
e) Participate in professional
development and leadership.
These five dimensions and their indicator=
s are
considered based on four performance levels:
a) Initial or beginner: what a =
student
teacher or trainee teacher is expected to know
b) Medium: teachers with more
experience in the use of ICT.
c) Expert: apart from extensive
experience with ICT, demonstrates efficient and effective use and focuses o=
n student
learning.
d) Transformative: the teacher
explores, adapts, and applies ICT in a way that substantially changes
teaching-learning processes to meet the needs of an increasingly globalized=
and
digitized society.
· =
Koehler
and Mishra's (2008) TPACK model (an acronym for Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge, updated in 2016 with a second edition) focuses on the
knowledge and skills teachers need to integrate technology into content-area
instruction meaningfully. The previous table explains the different dimensi=
ons
in detail.
· =
The
ACTIC project's model (Accreditation of Competencies in Information and
Communication Technologies), prepared jointly by various departments of the
Government of Catalonia, highlights eight competencies broken down into
competency actions as they can be reviewed in the chart. This model is base=
d on
general political frameworks such as the Information Society Strategy of the
European Council defined in Lisbon in 2000 and renewed in 2010.
· =
The
Pozos model (2010) focuses on the integration of the Digital Competence of
University Professors in their Professional Teacher Development. As can be =
seen
in the chart, seven dimensions construct this model, but each one is measur=
ed
according to three different categories such as: Basic, Deep, and Complex
competencies in the knowledge and use of ICT.
· =
The
"ICT Competences for Teaching at the Spanish Public University" m=
odel
by Prendes (2010) allows the analysis of competencies exclusively within the
university context. This model is structured around three basic university
teaching areas: teaching, research, and management. There are three levels =
of
ICT competence domain for each of these areas.
· =
The
"UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers" is an update of the
original version published in 2008 by UNESCO in collaboration with CISCO,
INTEL, ISTE, and Microsoft. This framework encompasses both technological
aspects and aspects related to pedagogical work within the term competence.=
· =
Carrera
and Coiduras' model (2012) resulted from an exploratory study focused on
investigating the components of digital competence common to university
teachers and students.
· =
Larraz
(2013) developed the "Digital Competence at the University" model,
which defines the concept of digital competence and proposes a rubric to wo=
rk
on it around four literacies: informational, technological, multimedia, and
communicative.
· =
The
DIGCOMP model (Ferrari, 2013), prepared by Instituto de Prospectiva TecnolÃ=
³gica
(IPTS) of the European Commission, is a project to improve the understanding
and development of digital competence in a European context. In this projec=
t, a
total of 21 competencies organized into five dimensions are specified, as c=
an
be seen from the table.
· = The DigiLit Leicester framework (Fraser et al., 2013), created in collaboration with the Leicester Department of Education (UK), Montfort University and 25 Leicester schools, distinguishes six competency areas named in the table. <= o:p>
· =
RamÃrez
and Casillas, in 2014, through their book called "Háblame de Tic. Dig=
ital
Technology in Higher Education", talk about new skills and digital
knowledge for university teachers.
· =
In
2015, Rangel presented a proposal for a profile of digital teaching
competencies and described thirteen competencies grouped into three dimensi=
ons:
technological, informational, and pedagogical.
· =
The
Common Framework for Teacher Digital Competence developed by Instituto Naci=
onal
de TecnologÃas Educativas y de Formación del Profesorado de España (here=
inafter
INTEF) makes a proposal that specifies digital competence through 21
sub-competences organized into three domain levels and five areas.
· =
The
TICTACTEP Spiral Competence Development Model by Pinto, Cortés, and Alfaro
(2017) focuses on teaching practices, flexible and genuine use of digital
technology beyond its instrumental use and pedagogical articulation, orient=
ed
towards educational innovation.
The similarities between the models of di=
gital
competencies were classified into the following categories:
a) The first category is relate=
d to
aspects of information such as access, collection, and retrieval of data bo=
th
at the level of personal equipment and the network (ETS, 2007 and Ferrari,
2013), as well as navigation, location, evaluation, organization, analysis,=
and
selection of data effectively (Fraser et al., 2013; Larraz, 2013, RamÃrez =
and
Casillas, 2014; Rangel, 2015). Within this category are the software, tools=
, or
useful applications to achieve these purposes, such as office software for
treating information in its different formats (RamÃrez and Casillas, 2014)=
.
b) A second category refers to
communication skills. In this case, Carrera y Coiduras (2012), Ferrari (201=
3),
and Fraser et al. (2013) agree on the following competencies: participation,
collaborative work, and interpersonal interaction. The models by Larraz (20=
13)
and RamÃrez and Casillas (2014) are more specific about the tools and
applications, including multimedia messages, instant messaging, email, soci=
al
networks, platforms, blogs, and wikis.
c) A category shared by the ETS=
(2007)
and Ferrari (2013) models is the creation and publication of content,
coinciding with Fraser et al. (2013), Prendes (2010), and Ramirez and Casil=
la
(2014) not only in creating data or information but in encouraging creativi=
ty,
innovation and the publication of results for the educational community.
d) Another category of great im=
portance
is digital citizenship. Its definition may vary according to the model used=
, be
it ISTE (2008), Pozos (2010), Carrera and Coiduras (2012), and Larraz (2013=
);
however, they share elements similar to identify it, such as digital identi=
ty,
participation, digital culture, responsibility, diversity, ethics, and
security, all these characteristics allow defining a user profile when using
ICT and encourage awareness of actions in the digital field and virtual.
e) Among the ISTE (2008), Pozos=
(2010),
Prendes (2010), UNESCO (2011), Carrera and Coiduras (2012), and Fraser et a=
l.
(2013) models, teacher professional training is identified. It focuses on
practice, constant talks, training, and workshops on ICT, which allows for =
the
identification of areas for improvement and complementing them through the
necessary action routes.
f) =
The competencies with the gr=
eatest
coincidence in the models of Koehler and Mishra (2008), Prendes (2010), UNE=
SCO
(2011), Carrera and Coiduras (2012), Larraz (2013), RamÃrez and Casillas
(2014), Rangel (2015) and Pinto, Cortés, and Alfaro (2017) is digital lite=
racy.
It is understood as the technical knowledge of devices, software, data, and
other ICT elements, allowing users to perform their tasks effectively and
efficiently. Additionally, from the models of ISTE (2008), Pozos (2010),
Prendes (2010), UNESCO (2011), Rangel (2015), and Pinto, Cortés, and Alfaro
(2017), the combination of digital literacy with pedagogy as parallel eleme=
nts
include aspects such as methodology, curriculum and didactics that allow
structuring, organizing, integrating and evaluating ICT by teachers as dida=
ctic
support within a structured study plan. As an example, we can point out the
model with its initials in English (TPACK) by Koehler and Mishra (2008), wh=
ich
intersects technological with pedagogical competencies, resulting in more
specific competencies.
The differences or elements present in so=
me
models but not others are identified below.
a) Assessment as a competence is
defined and approached from various perspectives, as in the ETS model (2007=
),
which alludes to evaluating the quality, relevance, usefulness, and efficie=
ncy
of the information to be used. In the case of the ISTE (2008), Pozos (2010),
UNESCO (2011), and Fraser et al. (2013) models, they refer to the evaluatio=
n of
learning experiences and are separated from the previous one since they foc=
us
on a purely curricular point. Finally, the Carrera and Coiduras (2012) model
aims to evaluate the didactic potential of ICT. Therefore, it can be seen t=
hat,
although similarities have been found previously, at certain points, the
differences can be focused on different components of the process that the =
use
of ICT entails. Some models can center on aspects of efficiency and
effectiveness of the use of the information obtained from the network, while
others are based on the potentiality and didactic use of these technologies=
, as
well as on the learning experiences that they can generate, being all
perspectives and completely valid approaches.
b) ICT administration, organiza=
tion,
and management competencies are only present in three models: ETS (2007),
Prendes (2010), and UNESCO (2011). This category includes skills such as the
identification, assessment, choice, structure, and approach of different
technologies to be used by teachers in their courses and programs.
c) Lastly, other competencies a=
re
included in only a few models, such as the following: research, reflection,=
and
innovation in the use of ICTs from the Koehler and Mishra (2008) model,
cybernetic security aspects of institutions and users appear in the models =
of
Pozos (2010), Prendes (2010), and Pinto, Cortés and Alfaro (2017) and fina=
lly
the resolution of problems specific to each discipline is seen in the model=
s of
Ferrari (2013) and Fraser et al (2013).
As can be noticed in the analysis carried=
out,
a variety of teacher digital competencies or groups of them are identified =
and
structured in different dimensions, depending on the educational contexts of
each model. Among the similarities that these models present are information
use skills, communication skills in the training process, as well as content
creation and publication, digital citizenship, professional teacher trainin=
g,
and digital literacy. Regarding the differences between the models analyzed=
, it
was identified that only some of them incorporate competencies related to t=
he
evaluation, administration, organization, and management of ICT, research,
reflection, and innovation in the use of ICT, cyber security, and
problem-solving. The information collected allows us to understand the dyna=
mics
of grouping teacher digital competencies into dimensions and categories, us=
eful
for the purposes of this research.
Interpreting and Discussing Findings
Based on the previous review and for this
research, a grouping of digital competencies of university teachers was car=
ried
out first, and in order to achieve the third specific objective of this
research about analyzing the potential of the components of the instruments=
for
their adaptation to the context of English teaching at a university level in
Costa Rica. The first dimension of competencies encompassed Digital literac=
y,
which is divided into four sub-dimensions. The first sub-dimension is calle=
d Information
literacy, which includes competencies related to aspects of navigation, sea=
rch,
and filtering of information, as well as access to websites and knowledge a=
nd
skills for navigating the internet. The second sub-dimension is called
Communication and collaboration, which encompasses competencies related to
knowledge, skills, strategies, and tools for communication and interaction =
with
the community through ICT. The next sub-dimension is called Creation and
manipulation of digital content and includes competencies related to file
management and software skills to work with them. The last sub-dimension in
this section is called technological devices, linked to competencies for us=
ing,
managing, maintaining, and updating technological devices.
The next dimension is called Security, wh=
ich is
further divided into two sub-dimensions. The first one deals with the Secur=
ity
of ICT users, including competencies related to the security of each user's
data, as well as aspects of digital citizenship and occupational health when
using the necessary ICT accessories. The second sub-dimension is related to=
the
Security of institutional data, including competencies such as access to
updated software licenses, antivirus and other protection programs, ethical=
and
legal use of ICT, and having the appropriate infrastructure.
The third dimension, called the Integrati=
on of
ICT in teaching, encompasses competencies related to the teaching task of
integrating and implementing the use of ICT in classes. This dimension is a=
lso
divided into four sub-dimensions. The first one is linked to the Curricular
scope, including competencies in planning, development, monitoring, and
evaluation of the use of ICT in teaching processes. The second sub-dimensio=
n is
related to the Pedagogical scope, including competencies in designing suita=
ble
educational scenarios supported by the use of ICT. The third sub-dimension =
is
associated with the Didactic scope, focusing on competencies in the design =
of
activities, learning situations, and assessment that integrate the use of I=
CT.
Finally, the fourth sub-dimension is defined in the Organizational scope,
encompassing competencies related to ensuring equitable access to ICT for t=
hose
involved and providing guidance to students in the learning process based on
their individual needs and interests.
The last dimension is called Appropriatio=
n and
teacher commitment and includes competencies related to ongoing teacher
training in the use of ICT, self-reflection on the use of ICT, teacher
commitment, innovation, and creativity in digital media, as well as knowled=
ge
of policies related to the use of these technologies.
The following chart refers to the dimensi=
ons,
sub-dimensions, and digital competencies established based on the previous
information, Table 2:
Table 2
Dimensions and Teacher Digital Competence=
s
|
=
Dimension |
=
Sub-Dimension |
=
Digital
Competences |
|
Digital Liter=
acy |
Information
Literacy |
Navigation,
search, and filtering of information, data, and digital content (using
different software and browsers to access websites) |
|
Management,
evaluation, storage, and retrieval of data |
||
|
Use of electr=
onic
journals |
||
|
Creation,
editing, use, and administration of websites |
||
|
Creation, use,
and administration of blogs |
||
|
Use of
specialized databases, libraries, and repositories |
||
|
Communication=
and
Collaboration |
Promotion of
communication and interaction skills and strategies with the community
through ICT |
|
|
Exchange of d=
ata
and information with other users |
||
|
Promotion of
online citizen participation |
||
|
Promotion of
collaboration through official channels |
||
|
Promotion of
netiquette, language used in networks, behavior, and respect towards other
users |
||
|
Management of
digital identity and profile |
||
|
Use of instant
messaging and video calling through applications (Messenger, built-in
messaging service in social networks, messaging on platforms such as Mood=
le
or Blackboard, among others) |
||
|
Use of email<= o:p> |
||
|
Use and
administration of spaces, groups, and posts on social networks |
||
|
Use of learni=
ng
management platforms (Moodle, Blackboard, Schoology, Google Classroom, am=
ong
others) |
||
|
Use of text
messages |
||
|
Use, administ=
ration,
and moderation of users and content in online forums |
||
|
Creation,
editing, use, and administration of wikis |
||
|
Creation and
Manipulation of Digital Content |
Promotion of
respect for authorship rights, licenses, and programming |
|
|
Use of editin=
g,
creation, and manipulation functions of files through word processors (do=
c,
docx, txt, pdf, cbr, among others) |
||
|
Creation,
conversion, and editing of images (png, jpeg, bmp, gif, psd, tiff, among
others) |
||
|
Use of
presentation functions (ppt, Canva, Prezi, among others) |
||
|
Use and
management of information sets and databases |
||
|
Use of editin=
g,
creation, and manipulation functions of spreadsheets |
||
|
Creation,
recording, conversion, and editing of audio files (mp3, wav, among others=
) |
||
|
Creation,
recording, conversion, and editing of video files (mp4, avi, flash, open
source) |
||
|
Technological
Devices |
Use,
administration, installation, and updating of laptops and PCs |
|
|
Use,
administration, installation, and updating of tablets |
||
|
Use, administ=
ration,
installation, and updating of smartphones |
||
|
Use and
manipulation of local storage devices (USB, CD, DVD, external memory, amo=
ng
others) |
||
|
Use and
manipulation of global storage media (iCloud, Drive, Dropbox) |
||
|
Basic technic=
al knowledge
management by the teacher regarding networks, connections, software, and
hardware, among others that do not require immediate intervention from a
technical support department. |
||
|
Security |
User Security=
|
Ensuring
cybersecurity for users in spaces used for activity development, which sh=
ould
not compromise personal information or family data of teachers and studen=
ts. |
|
Health and
well-being when using ICT (having suitable space, accessories, chair, des=
k,
and other supplies for their tasks when using ICT). |
||
|
Digital
citizenship and responsibility. |
||
|
Web informati=
on
publication (passwords and geolocation). |
||
|
Institutional
Data Security |
Access to and
integrity of suitable equipment and information (valid author licenses an=
d open-source
software) |
|
|
Ethical and l=
egal
use of ICT |
||
|
Access to and
verification of the intra-institutional network and the internet |
||
|
Ensuring the
protection and security of institutional data |
||
|
Integration of
ICT in Teaching |
Curricular Sc=
ope |
Integration of
ICT use in the curriculum |
|
Planning, development, monitoring, and evaluation of ICT use in teaching processes<= o:p> |
||
|
Use of didact=
ic
materials and ICT resources |
||
|
Recognition,
understanding, and expression of emotions through the use of ICT |
||
|
Pedagogical S=
cope |
Design of
educational scenarios supported by ICT |
|
|
Assessment of
student training in the use of ICT |
||
|
Creating a
climate of motivation, empathy, and learning through the use of ICT |
||
|
Didactic Scop=
e |
Application o=
f activities
based on previous experiences related to the use of ICT |
|
|
Evaluation and
feedback on the effectiveness of ICT-mediated educational scenarios |
||
|
Provision and
definition of ICT environment, resources, and activities |
||
|
Designing act=
ivities,
learning situations, and assessments that integrate the use of ICT |
||
|
Organizational
Scope |
Identification
and definition of the most appropriate use of ICT |
|
|
Ensuring
equitable access to the use of ICT |
||
|
Providing
guidance to students in the learning process based on individual needs and
interests |
||
|
Appropriation=
and
Teacher Commitment |
Identificatio=
n of
technological needs (equipment, ICT knowledge, connectivity, among others=
) |
|
|
Implementatio=
n of
aspects of innovation and creativity |
||
|
Self-reflecti=
on
on the use of ICT |
||
|
Teacher
commitment to continuous practice and training in the didactic use of ICT=
|
||
|
Knowledge of
policies on the use of ICT at institutional, local, national, regional, a=
nd
international levels by different competent entities |
Fuente: Own Elaboration
In the proposed framework, the different
dimensions of digital competencies can interrelate and support each other in
matters of constant improvement for university teachers of English. Within =
the competencies
from the dimension named Integration of ICT in Teaching, the decision-making
process becomes crucial for managing teaching activities and integrating the
ICT in the curricula through the appropriate Digital Literacy, considering =
the
following fundamental components:
· =
Organization
of Spaces:Â The environmental cond=
itions
in which didactic interaction occurs become important. This includes
identifying the people involved, the methodological alternatives, the level=
of
student engagement, and the distribution of students within the classroom.
These elements help create authentic learning environments and develop a mo=
re
autonomous, diversified, and situational learning style.
· =
Spaces
as Structures of Opportunity: Higher education institutions must have a pur=
pose
as structures of opportunity, defined by the teacher's actions in organizing
these spaces. These spaces are viewed as learning agents, active for workin=
g in
various ways and providing greater variety and prominence to the space.
· =
Phases
of the Learning Process: The teacher structures phases within the learning
process, which include stages such as presenting information, a remedial pl=
an,
reinforcement, consolidation, and the elaboration and re-elaboration of con=
tent
information.
· =
Incorporating
New Technologies and Resources: Within the Digital Literacy and Security
dimensions, the English teacher verifies the available ICT and considers the
following resources:
a) Updated equipment
b) Integration (opportunities)<= o:p>
c) Enrichment and updating of t=
eaching
and learning processes
d) Transfer and exchange of inf=
ormation
among users
e) Autonomous learning
f) =
Technical discourse and form=
ative
discourse
Additionally, the influence of the intern=
et
must be considered, along with the new tools, scenarios, and educational
purposes that should address cognitive, socio-cognitive, and theory and
activity approaches. These new tools should have characteristics related to
adaptability, accessibility, usability, and mobility as we transition from
e-learning to m-learning.
· =
Characteristics
of the Subjects: This point appropriately considers the characteristics of
students as members of the Information Society. According to Coll and Moner=
eo
(2008), this entails a certain complexity, interdependence, and
unpredictability in the activities these students engage in, as well as the=
ir
relationships and individual attributes. Significant aspects include
information, over-information, speed of processes and consequences, and the
scarcity of time and space for abstraction and reflection. In the context of
ICT, factors such as the predominance of culture and spectacle, transformat=
ion
of geolocation, spatial and temporal aspects of communication, cultural
homogenization, and the emergence of new social classes are relevant. Accor=
ding
to Salamanca and RamÃrez (2020), it is essential to address questions such=
as
who the teacher is, who the students are, and the teacher-student relations=
hip.
· =
The
Context: At this point, it is appropriate to include what Turull (2020) sta=
tes
about competence knowledge, which is holistic (implying the integration of
diverse knowledge) and has a context of application in which it makes sense.
Comprehensive training prepares students for professional practice based on
learning activities conducted in real work contexts; it facilitates their
ability to apply the theoretical and practical knowledge acquired at univer=
sity
and complement it with experience, fostering the development of technical,
methodological, personal, and participatory competencies. In the case of us=
ing
ICT, it has allowed certain academic contexts to reach social groups that
previously had limited access to content, tools, and resources.
The elements mentioned above generally sh=
aped
the formative process being developed; however, they also require alignment=
of
educational intentions, assessment, and methodology as a system. According =
to
Paricio, Fernández, and Fernández (2019), the alignment of all curriculum
elements must ensure coherence in the student's entire learning experience,
which constitutes the fundamental objective of didactics.
A detailed and clear plan allows for a
predictable process and enables the student to engage with it autonomously =
and
confidently, knowing what is expected of them and the framework in which th=
ey
should carry out their work (Paricio, Fernández, and Fernández, 2019).
Conclusions
and recommendations
Teaching in the
digital age requires a coherent and comprehensive set of digital competenci=
es
beyond technical skills. The framework presented in Chart N°2 covers a wide
range of competencies across literacy, security, integration, and commitmen=
t,
identifying the necessary elements for instruments to measure teacher digit=
al
competencies used in different contexts. There is a clear
emphasis on using ICT and effectively integrating it into curriculum, pedag=
ogy,
and classroom management in meaningful ways. The findings and discussion of
them allowed us to contrast the theory, in the case of Garzón (2017), how
didactics mediated by ICT in the context of foreign language teaching is
defined as the science and technology that promote practice in organized en=
vironments
with communicative intent, where the processes of teaching a foreign langua=
ge
can be visualized, organized, and evaluated for substantial purposes solely=
for
the student's benefit.
The extensive systematic bibliographical research has made
understandable the required components for potential measurement instruments
according to the needs of the Costa Rican context based on the Common Europ=
ean
Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), providing a common basis for
developing language practice programs, curricular guidelines, exams, textbo=
oks,
among others.
Throughout the analysis based on the potential components for these
instruments, it is possible to affirm that developing teacher digital
competencies is critical to ensure effective ICT integration and support
student learning with digital tools corresponding to the needs of 21st-cent=
ury
higher education. According to Quintana (2019), the integration of technolo=
gies
in the educational field should be developed within the framework of pedago=
gy,
meaning that technologies should be incorporated as part of a planned proce=
ss
that considers characteristics such as:
Finally, to define the elements of an ideal instrument for measuring=
the
digital competencies of university teachers of English in Costa Rica, the
framework shown in Chart N°2 indicates a shift towards a more holistic,
competence-based approach to teacher digital skills, moving beyond basic ICT
skills. The integration of ICT in English teaching specifically should aim =
to
develop students' communicative competence through work on productive skills
(Speaking and Writing) and comprehension skills (Listening and Reading),
supported by the technological mediation of class activities, which conside=
rs
ICT as resources for teaching, learning, and production (Quintana, 2019).
Some recommendations that resulted from the research and should be
considered are:
· =
Conduct comprehensive assessments of current
teacher digital competencies to identify strengths, gaps, and areas for
professional development.
· =
Develop structured training programs and support
systems to help teachers systematically build their competencies outlined in
the framework.
· =
Integrate the digital competence framework into
pre-service teacher education curricula to ensure new teachers are
well-prepared.
· =
Establish institutional policies and guidelines=
to
promote the integration of ICT in teaching and learning while addressing
security and ethical concerns.
· =
Foster a culture of continuous learning and
innovation around educational technology among teachers through communities=
of
practice, mentoring, and shared learning opportunities.
· =
Regularly review and update the digital compete=
nce
framework to ensure it keeps pace with evolving technologies and pedagogical
practices.
Provide adequate
technological infrastructure, resources, and technical support to enable
teachers to apply their digital competencies effectively.
References
Bosco, A. (2008). Las tecnologÃas de la
información y la comunicación en la formación del profesorado: lineamien=
tos,
realidad y prospectiva. Razón y Palabra, 63.https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3D=
2771038
Cantón Mayo, I. (2019). CartografÃa de =
la
buena docencia universitaria. Un marco para el desarrollo del profesorado
basado en la investigación. Revista Practicum, 4(2), 98–101. https://doi.org/10.24310/RevPracticumrep.v4i2.7807
Carballo, O. C., Fernández, L. C., &
Cerdas, D. R. (2015). La realidad del uso de las TIC y su mediación pedagÃ=
³gica
para enriquecer las clases de inglés. Revista Ensayos Pedagógicos, 10<=
/i>(1),
159–183. https://doi.org/10.15359/rep.10-1.8<=
span
lang=3DES-CR style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-=
ansi-language:
ES-CR;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>
Carrera, F y Coiduras, J., (2012).
Identificación de la competencia digital del profesor universitario: un es=
tudio
exploratorio en el ámbito de las ciencias sociales. REDU. Revista de
Docencia Universitaria, 10(2), 273–298.Â
https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2012.6108Â Â
Charpentier, W. (2014a). The use of ICTs in theBA in English teach=
ing.
Actualidades
Investigativas en Educación, 14(1), 115-137. https://doi.org/10.15517/aie.v14i1.13211
Charpentier, W. (2014b). Costa Rican Teachers' Use of ICTs in the English
Language Class. Revista de Leng=
uas
Modernas, (19). https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/rlm/article/view/=
13955Â
Coll, C., y Monereo, C. (2008). Psicol=
ogÃa
de la educación virtual: Aprender y enseñar con las TecnologÃas de la
Información y la Comunicación. Ediciones Morata S.L.
Cruz, E. (2019). Importancia del manejo de
competencias tecnológicas en las prácticas docentes de la Universidad Nac=
ional
Experimental de la Seguridad (UNES). Revista Educación, 43(1), 196-=
219.
Departament de Governació i Administraci=
ons
Públiques. (2009). 89/2009, de 9 de juny, pel qual es regula l'acreditaciÃ=
³ de
competències en tecnologies de la informació i la comunicació (ACTIC).
Barcelona: Diari Oficial de la Generalitat de Catalunya. https://cido.diba.cat/legislacio/1194689/decret-892009=
-de-9-de-juny-pel-qual-es-regula-lacreditacio-de-competencies-en-tecnologie=
s-de-la-informacio-i-la-comunicacio-acticÂ
Durán, M., Gutiérrez, I., & Prendes=
, M.
(2016). Análisis Conceptual de Modelos de Competencia Digital del Profesor=
ado
Universitario. Revista Latinoamericana de TecnologÃa Educativa - RELATE=
C, 15(1),
97-114. https://doi.org/10.17398/1695-288X.15.1.97<=
/span>
Escalante, P. (2015). Estado actual de la
integración de tecnologÃas digitales en la enseñanza de idiomas en la Es=
cuela
de Lenguas Modernas de la Universidad de Costa Rica. Revista de Lenguas Modernas, (23).=
https://doi.org/10.15517/rlm.v0i23.22356
ETS, (2007) Digital Transformation: A
Framework for ICT Literacy. A Report of the International ICT Literacy Pane=
l.
Educational Testing Service, USA.
Ferrari, A. (2013). DIGCOMP: A framewo=
rk
for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe.
Publlications Office of the European Union. Seville, Spain. doi: 10.2788/52966
Fraser, J., Atkins, L. y Richard, H. (201=
3). DigiLit
Leicester. Supporting teachers, promoting digital literacy, transforming
learning. Leicester City Council. http://www.josiefraser.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/=
DigiLit-Leicester-report-130625-FINAL.pdf
Hernández, L., Acevedo, J., MartÃnez, C.
& Cruz, B., (2014). El uso de las TIC en el aula: un análisis en
términos de efectividad y eficacia. Congreso Iberoamericano de Ciencia,
TecnologÃa, Innovación y Educación, Buenos Aires, Argentina. https://dokumen.tips/documents/articulo-uso-de-las-tic=
-en-el-aula-eficiencia-y-efectividad.html
Gallart, M. A. y Jacinto, C. (1995): C=
ompetencias
laborales: tema clave en la articulación educación-trabajo. Buenos Ai=
res:
CIID-CENEP. https://rieoei.org/historico/oeivirt/rie15a07.pdf
GarcÃa, K., Monroy, O., Castaño, B. y
Granados, H. (2018). Las TIC como mediación pedagógica y su relación con=
la
autoeficacia en el aprendizaje del inglés como lengua extranjera. Revis=
ta de
Investigaciones UCM, 18(32), 60-68. =
Gros, B., (2011). Evolución y Retos d=
e la
Educación Virtual, Construyendo el e-learning del Siglo XXI. UOCInnova.
Editorial UOC, Barcelona, España. INTEF, (2017). Marco Común de Compet=
encia
Digital Docente. Instituto Nacional de TecnologÃa Educativa y de Formació=
n del
Profesorado. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte, Gobierno de
España. ISTE, (2008).
Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, & Antes =
G.
(2003). Five steps to conducting a systematic review.
Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G. Five
Steps to Conducting a Systematic Review. Journal of the Royal Society of
Medicine. 96(3):118-121. doi:10.1177/014107680309600304Koehler, M. J. &=
amp;
Mishra, P. (2008). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowled=
ge
(TPCK) for educators. New York: Routledge. Larraz, V. (2013). La competència digital a la
Universitat. [Tesis Doctoral. Programa de doctorat de la Universitatd'Andor=
ra]
Andorra. . https://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/113431
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H.
(2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guid=
e.
Wiley-Blackwell.=
Pozos, K. (2010).  LaÂ=
Â
Competencia  Digital  del=
 Â
Profesorado  Universitari=
o  para Â
la  Sociedad  del=
 Â
Conocimiento: Aproximación a un Modelo y Validación de un Cuestion=
ario
de Detección de Necesidades de Formación Continua. https://www.academia.edu/485126/La_Competencia_Digital=
_del_Profesorado_Universitario_para_la_Sociedad_del_Conocimiento_Un_Modelo_=
para_la_Integraci%C3%B3n_de_la_Competencia_Digital_en_el_Desarrollo_Profesi=
onal_Docente
Prendes, M. (2010). Competencias  TIC=
 Â
para  la  docencia Â
en  la  Universidad Â
Pública  Española: Indi=
cadores y
propuestas para la definición de buenas prácticas: Programa de Estudio y
Análisis. Informe del Proyecto EA2009Â0133 de la SecretarÃa del Esta=
do de
Universidades e Investigación. Universidad de Murcia, España. http://www.um.es/competenciastic   <=
/span>
Quintana, J. (2019). Relación entre l=
as
competencias digitales docentes y la integración de las TecnologÃas de la
Información y Comunicación en la Enseñanza del idioma inglés como lengua
extranjera. [Tesis de MaestrÃa, Pontificia Universidad Católica del P=
erú],
Perú. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/14394
RamÃrez, A. & Casillas, M.A. (2014).
Háblame de TIC: TecnologÃa Digital en Educación Superior. Córdoba, Arge=
ntina:
Editorial Brujas. Rangel, A. (201=
5).
Competencias docentes digitales: propuesta de un perfil. Pixel-Bit.
Revista de Medios y Educación, (46),235-248. ISSN: 1133-8482. en:&nbs=
p;https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.=
oa?id=3D368/36832959015Â
Ruiz, U. (2020). Competencia digital de
estudiantes universitarios para el aprendizaje del inglés en tiempos de la
COVID-19. Revista Lengua y Cultura Biannual Publication, Vol. 2, No.
3(2020)102-109. https:=
//doi.org/10.29057/lc.v2i3.6575
Ruiz Zamora, U. (2020). Competencia digit=
al
de estudiantes universitarios para el aprendizaje del inglés en tiempos de=
la
COVID 19. Revista Lengua y Cultura, 2(3), 102-109.
https://doi.org/10.29057/lc.v2i3.6575
Sánchez, C., Gama, J., & Zanatta, E.
(2015). Competencias Digitales en Docentes Universitarios. Memorias =
del
XIII Congreso Nacional de Investigación Educativa. México. Turull (2020).=
Manual
de docencia universitaria. Octaedro. Colección Educación Universitari=
a.
UNESCO. (2008). Normas UNESCO sobre
Competencias en TIC para Docentes. UNESCO, CI/INF/ICT
UNESCO, (2011). UNESCO ICT Competency
Framework for Teachers. Â UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000213475
UNESCO. (2016). Normas UNESCO sobre
Competencias en TIC para Docentes Competencias y estándares TIC desde la
dimensión pedagógica: Una perspectiva desde los niveles de apropiación d=
e las
TIC en la práctica educativa docente. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana University of Edinburgh. (2022). Li=
terature
review. Pr. 1, 2. https://www.ed.ac.uk/institute-academic-development/st=
udy-hub/learning-resources/literature-review
5
A systematic review on
measurement instruments of digital competencies of university teachers =
in
English Teaching majors