How to Design an Intervention to Raise Digital Competences: ALL DIGITAL Week – Dortmund 2018

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11572)


The article describes and evaluates a local campaign to support digital skills of marginalized persons. Due to the increasing digitization which is taking place all over the world, it becomes necessary to support the expansion of people’s digital competences and close the “digital gap” that causes multiple disadvantages for certain groups of people. In March 2018, eleven students of Rehabilitation Science at University of Dortmund (Germany) conducted five different courses for disadvantaged persons in Dortmund. The courses lasted around two hours and aimed at raising awareness for the potentials and pitfalls of digital tools used in the everyday life of people from different target groups. In total, 417 people attended these courses, mostly 6 to 10 participants per course. The article describes the best practices in designing, developing, conducting and evaluating these courses. An extensive survey (338 participants) is used to analyze successful means in delivering courses on IT topics to diverse target groups. The student activities were linked to the “ALL DIGITAL Week”, a pan-European campaign that organizes courses in 25 countries with more than 92,460 participants. The “Get Online Week” Dortmund 2018, which is part of the European “ALL DIGITAL” campaign and carried out in Germany, is listed as an example in this article, to show how a project to raise digital competences can be designed and what is essential for a successful implementation. The article closes with recommendations for conducting alike interventions in other circumstances.


Digital inclusion Digital gap 


  1. 1.
    Steinbicker, J.: Informationsgesellschaft. In: Mau, S., Schöneck, N.M. (eds.) Handwörterbuch zur Gesellschaft Deutschlands, pp. 408–421. Springer, Wiesbaden (2013). Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Federal Agency for Civic Education: Informationsgesellschaft und Europa (n.d.).
  5. 5.
    Krotz, F., Hepp, A. (eds.): Mediatisierte Welten: Beschreibungsansätze und Forschungsfelder. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    State Chancellery of North Rhine-Westphalia: IM BLICKPUNKT: Medienkonvergenz (2008).
  7. 7.
    Initiative D21 e.V.: D21-DIGITAL-INDEX 2016: Jährliches Lagebild zur Digitalen Gesellschaft (2016).
  8. 8.
    Bengler, K., Schmauder, M.: Digitalisierung. Z. Arb. Wiss. 70, 75–76 (2016). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hippmann, S., Klingner, R., Leis, M.: Digitalisierung—Anwendungsfelder und Forschungsziele. In: Neugebauer, R. (ed.) Digitalisierung, pp. 9–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2018). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Federal Agency for Civic Education: Digitale Teilhabe als Voraussetzung für soziale Teilhabe (Hamburg, 11 May 2017): Keynote zum DIVSI-Bucerius Forum in Hamburg (2017).
  11. 11.
    European Commission: Use of Internet and Online Activities (2018).
  12. 12.
    European Commission: Human Capital: Digital Inclusion and Skills. Digital Economy and Society Index Report 2018 (2018).
  13. 13.
    Initiative D21 e.V.: D21 DIGITAL INDEX 2017/2018: Jährliches Lagebild zur Digitalen Gesellschaft (2018).
  14. 14.
    Zillien, N.: Digitale Ungleichheit: Neue Technologien und alte Ungleichheiten in der Informations- und Wissensgesellschaft, 2nd edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2009). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wilson, E.J.: The Information Revolution and Developing Countries. MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Dijk, J.A.G.M.: A theory of the digital divide. In: Ragnedda, M., Muschert, G.W. (eds.) The Digital Divide: The Internet and Social Inequality in International Perspective, pp. 29–51. Routledge, Abingdon (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Disability Equality Act North Rhine-Westphalia (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (2011). UN Konvention. [Online]. Verfügbar unter: 14 May 2018
  20. 20.
    Kubicek, W., Welling, S.: Vor einer digitalen Spaltung? Annäherung an ein verdecktes Problem von wirtschafts- und gesellschaftspolitischer Brisanz. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft 48, 497–517 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berger, A., et al.: Web 2.0/barrierefrei: Eine Studie zur Nutzung von Web 2.0 Anwendungen durch Menschen mit Behinderungen (2010).
  22. 22.
    Haage, A.: Studie: Wie behinderte Menschen die Medien nutzen.
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
    European Comission: DigComp: Digital Competence Framework for citizens (2018).
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Baur, N., Blasius, J. (eds.): Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. Springer VS, Wiesbaden (2014). Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bortz, J., Döring, N.: Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler, 4th edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). Scholar
  28. 28.
    Häder, M.: Empirische Sozialforschung: Eine Einführung, 2nd edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2010). Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pelka, B., et al.: Get Online Week 2017: Eine Woche zur Verbesserung der digitalen Teilhabe in Dortmund. TU Dortmund, Dortmund (2017).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Rehabilitation SciencesTU Dortmund UniversityDortmundGermany
  2. 2.Social Research Centre DortmundTU Dortmund UniversityDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations