An Instrument for Measuring Students’ Perceived Digital Competence According to the DIGCOMP Framework

  • Leo A. Siiman
  • Mario Mäeots
  • Margus PedasteEmail author
  • Robert-Jan Simons
  • Äli Leijen
  • Miia Rannikmäe
  • Külli Võsu
  • Maarja Timm
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9753)


The ability to use digital technologies to live, work and learn in today’s knowledge-based society is considered to be an essential competence. In schools, digital technologies such as smart devices offer new possibilities to improve student learning, but research is still needed to explain how to effectively apply them. In this paper we developed an instrument to investigate the digital competences of students based on constructs from the DIGCOMP framework and in the contexts of learning science and mathematics in school and outside of school. Pilot testing results of 173 students from the 6th and 9th grades (M = 12.7 and 15.7 years of age, respectively) were analyzed to remove unnecessary items from the instrument. The pilot study also showed preliminary smart device usage patterns that require confirmation by a large-scale study. Digitally competent use of smart devices may help facilitate widespread use of computer-based resources in science education.


Digital competence Mobile learning Use of smart devices ICT in education 



This study was partially funded by the Estonian Research Council through the institutional research funding project “Smart technologies and digital literacy in promoting a change of learning” (Grant Agreement No. IUT34-6). This study was also partially funded by the European Union in the context of the Go-Lab project (Grant Agreement No. 317601) under the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) theme of the 7th Framework Programme for R&D (FP7). This document does not represent the opinion of the European Union, and the European Union is not responsible for any use that might be made of its content.


  1. 1.
    European Parliament and the 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, L394/310 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ferrari, A.: DIGCOMP: A Framework for Developing and Understanding Digital Competence in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ala-Mutka, K.: Mapping Digital Competence: Towards a Conceptual Understanding. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ferrari, A.: Digital Competence in Practice: Analysis of Frameworks. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Janssen, J., Stoyanov, S.: Online Consultation on Experts’ Views on Digital Competence. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Põhikooli riiklik õppekava: [National curriculum for basic schools]. Riigi Teataja I, 29.08.2014, 20 (2014). Accessed 26 Feb 2016
  7. 7.
    Republic of Estonia Ministry of Education and Research: The Estonian Lifelong Learning Strategy 2020. Tallinn (2014).
  8. 8.
    European Schoolnet and University of Liege: Survey of schools: ICT in education. Benchmarking access, use and attitudes to technology in Europe’s schools. Final Report (ESSIE). European Union, Brussels (2013).
  9. 9.
    Sjøberg, S., Schreiner, C.: The ROSE project. An overview and key findings (2010).
  10. 10.
    Teppo, M., Rannikmäe, M.: Paradigm shift for teachers: more relevant science teaching. In: Holbrook, J., Rannikmäe, M., Reiska, P., Ilsley, P. (eds.) The Need for a Paradigm Shift in Science Education for Post-Soviet Societies: Research and Practice (Etonian Example), pp. 25–46. Peter Lang GmbH, Frankfurt (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Song, Y.: Bring your own device (BYOD) for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Comput. Educ. 74, 50–60 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Jong, T., Sotiriou, S., Gillet, D.: Innovations in STEM education: the Go-Lab federation of online labs. Smart Learn. Environ. 1, 1–16 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mäeots, M., Siiman, L., Kori, K., Eelmets, M., Pedaste, M., Anjewierden, A.: The role of a reflection tool in enhancing students’ reflection. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED), 7th–9th March 2016, Valencia, Spain (2016, in press)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Crompton, H., Burke, D., Gregory, K.H., Gräbe, C.: The use of mobile learning in science: a systematic review. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. (2016). doi: 10.1007/s10956-015-9597-x, (Published online before print 14 Jan 2015)
  15. 15.
    OECD: PISA 2012 ICT Familiarity Questionnaire. OECD, Paris (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maderick, J.A., Zhang, S., Hartley, K., Marchand, G.: Preservice teachers and self-assessing digital competence. J. Educ. Comput. Res. (2015). doi: 10.1177/0735633115620432, (Published online before print 24 Dec 2015)
  17. 17.
    Dunning, D., Heath, C., Suls, J.: Flawed self-assessment: implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychol. Sci. Publ. Interest 5, 69–106 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fraillon, J., Schulz, W., Ainley, J.: International Computer and Information Literacy Study: Assessment Framework. IEA, Amsterdam (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    OECD: PISA 2015: Draft Collaborative Problem Solving Framework (Web-Based Material) (2013). Accessed 29 Sept 2015

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leo A. Siiman
    • 1
  • Mario Mäeots
    • 1
  • Margus Pedaste
    • 1
    Email author
  • Robert-Jan Simons
    • 1
  • Äli Leijen
    • 1
  • Miia Rannikmäe
    • 1
  • Külli Võsu
    • 1
  • Maarja Timm
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TartuTartuEstonia

Personalised recommendations