essay on computer literacy

Chapter 6: 21st-century media and issues

6.14.2 Literacy in computer science (research essay)

John Parker

English 102, April 2021

Introduction.

Computer Science is one of the fastest growing fields as the world transitions to increased automation. Schools of all levels are putting a greater emphasis on educating the younger generation on programming. This suggests that schools are growing their STEM departments, which house the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. In order to understand why many educators are approaching the field of Computer Science in this way, it must be understood what Computer Science is. It is most commonly defined as the study of computer software and computing systems. More specifically, it deals with creating, reading, and error-checking programming or code. While it is true that STEM is very important within the field of programming, there are other important aspects of coding that are not frequently considered by many educators. Coding includes being able to read, write, and communicate in a unique way, which implies that literacy involved in the field. Any form of literacy that is not directly learning how to read, write, or communicate in standard English is often not considered to be literacy, which is a major reason that its importance within programming is not recognized. The fact that many educators within the field of Computer Science do not realize the importance of literacy alludes to the idea that the teaching of programming may be flawed in its methods and implementation.

Computer Science is very important in my life, as I am currently pursuing a degree in the field. I have been programming for just over a year now and have experience in Python and Java programming languages. I have taken three courses on programming/computer science in college, in which I have learned so much about programming and Computer Science in general. In addition to coursework, I frequently work on coding projects for my own entertainment and read/watch articles and videos on programming. Any knowledge that I gain on the most effective ways to learn programming is very important to my future. Even more important than gaining this knowledge for myself, being able to spread this knowledge to grow the field is paramount.  Although I am not an expert in programming, I have had many learning experiences with programming that qualify me to discuss my personal experiences with learning how to program. Since the focus of this essay deals with the teaching methods and learning experiences of programming, the relative freshness of my learning experiences with programming provides me with an advantage over industry professionals in this discussion.

Writing in Computer Science

   Although it may be somewhat difficult to discover the parallels between computer programming and literacy, the literacy aspect of writing can be understood very easily. When thinking of what a programmer does, one of the simplest and high-level descriptions could be “someone who writes code.” The main similarity between the two practices is the exist in the process of creating a finalized piece of work, whether it be a novel for an application. In Felienne Hermans and Marlies Aldewereld’s article, “Programming is Writing is Programming,” the authors describe the beginning of the writing process and programming workflow to include a high-level plan (1). The next step in both processes is to convert these high-level designs into low-level, workable steps. For writers, these low-level steps include sentences and words; for programmers, they include methods, functions, and lines of code. For both practices, intermediate steps are needed manage the organization of the work, such as chapters in writing and classes and objects in programming (Hermans and Marlies 2). In the programming course that I am currently enrolled in, every coding assignment that is submitted must be accompanied by pseudocode, which is essentially a plan for how the final code will look. This pseudocode, which is written in a mix of English and Java syntax, begins with high-level plans that are broken down into smaller, more manageable steps. The process of writing pseudocode was not all that difficult to me when I realized that it was just like the outlines that I have been writing for English courses for years. These outlines broke up the goal of the essay into manageable portions and consisted of some wording that would be directly added to the essay and some rough ideas that would need to be converted into cohesive writing.

In Ziva R. Hassenfeld’s et al article, “If you can Program you can Write,” explores the constructs shared by computer programming and writing in great detail. The authors discuss the similar constructs between the two practices as, “planning and prewriting, creating and drafting, testing and evaluating, and debugging and editing and revising” (Hassenfeld et al. 68). The study described in this article, which focuses on the correlation between elementary student’s ability to write and ability to learn programming, showed that these similarities between the two practices produce a correlation between students’ ability to write and their ability to program (Hassenfeld et al. 75). In the section titled “Programming as Literacy” of Annette Vee’s novel, “Coding Literacy: How Computer Programming is Changing Writing,” she discusses an extremely interesting way to observe the similarities between writing and programming. Vee dives into exploring the ways in which programming is treated like writing within United States law. The United States Congress amended the 1976 Copywrite Act in 1980 to categorize computer code as a “literary work” and a “form of writing” (Vee 450). Since a law protecting writing and forms of creative expression, it can be alluded that the United States law views computer programming as a form of writing.

Reading in Computer Science

Reading is also extremely prevalent within the world of programming and Computer Science in general. Peg Grafwallner’s article, “Encoding Literacy in Computer Science,” examines an instructional coach and computer science teacher’s attempt to implement literacy lessons into a computer science class. The article states that reading within Computer Science requires students to focus on one specific area at a time, thinking in a linear and conceptual manner (Grafwallner). The computer science class discussed in this article was taught with an emphasis on literacy through directions, ultimately proving to boost the success of the students’ ability to program. The ability to read instructions was determined to be the most vital skill in programming (Grafwallner).

In Marthie Schoeman’s article, “Reading Skills Can Predict the Programming Performance of Novices,” the relationship between reading and ability to code is discussed extensively. In the study described in the article, the reading level of students were determined using eye-tracking technology. The students then took an introductory course in computer programming that would be followed by a final examination (Schoeman 44). The results of the study show that students with low reading skills failed the programming component, while those with higher reading skills did better overall. These results depict the fact that reading skills do play a role in one’s ability to learn programming (Schoeman 48). This relation can be attributed to the fact that programming is a form high-level written language in its own sense. In my own experiences, reading programming has proved to be one of the most vital skills that a computer programmer can possess. One of the main points of emphasis within Computer Science classes is being able to read and debug others’ code. Since there are so many different ways that a program can be created, I initially struggled with reading others’ code. The skill of reading code is very similar to reading literary works, as some authors are naturally easier to follow along with than others. Reading code is a vital aspect of computer programming and is a skill that I am still working on improving.

Communication in Computer Science

Although communication is not necessarily involved in the creation of all computer programs, communication in vital within the professional setting of Computer Science, in addition to engaging in programming within a team environment. In Gilles Dubochet’s article, “Computer Code as a Medium for Human Communication,” it is stated that communication between a human and a computer is the main objective of computer programming. The article goes on to state that computer programming itself has become a channel for human communication (Dubochet 1). The article explores the increase in team usage in the field of computer science, suggesting that the ability to understand the code that other’s write is extremely important (2). Understanding the code that others write is not only dependent on one’s ability to read and understand coding syntax and standards, but also the ability of the person reading the code and the person who wrote the code to communicate effectively with one another. The article suggests that communication is not only prevalent through oral dialect, but that programming languages are becoming a channel for communication between programmers (Dubochet 13). In other words, programmers are able to convey their thoughts through a programming language.

At the start of my college career, I did not expect for communication to be as prevalent as it was within my Computer Science courses. Throughout the entire Fall Semester of my introduction to programming course, a team of students that we were assigned to were required to code a robot. Due to the business of the group members’ schedules, we often had to do portions of the project on our own. This meant that I would often log in to add a portion to the code and would be confused by the code that was just written above. Through a simple phone call or text, all of the team members were able to understand the others’ work. The communication between our team was extremely important for this reason, as the project would have fallen apart without it. Throughout the semester, our team began to “comment” our code, which is simply inserting explanation within the code that do not affect how the code runs. If “//” is used before a line, the programming software environment understands that this is just for programmers to read. This simple addition to our code meant that we were actually able to communicate directly through the code, without having to text, call, or talk at all.

Marc Riemer breaks down the importance of communication and language skills in a broader field of engineering in the article titled, “Communication Skills for the 21st Century Engineer.” Riemer discusses the importance of communication skills in engineering, primarily focusing on the English language. He states that English is the most widespread language in the world and that effective communication in English is a skill that develops more successful engineers (91). Riemer examines the importance of communication between engineers and stakeholders (95). After engineers’ years of education in upper-level concepts, it can be difficult to decipher what stakeholders are familiar and not familiar with. Being able to effectively break down the concepts into more common terminology plays a major role in one’s success within the field of Computer Science as well as all other engineering disciplines. The findings of this article suggest that an increase in communication and language courses in college curriculums will produce more successful engineers (Riemer 98). Although this article focuses more broadly on engineering, Computer Science is a major branch of engineering that shares in the same challenges of communication as all other major fields of engineering.

Computer Programming as a Language in Itself

Computer Programming is much more than a computational practice, as learning programming languages comes with many of the same challenges as learning human languages, uncovering the fact that computer programming is its own unique form of literacy or language. When I was applying for colleges and deciding on a major, I honestly did not know what I wanted to do. I knew that I loved math and problem solving and would want to pursue a career in math-based field. The reason that I chose to pursue a career in Computer Science was purely for this reason, as I have never taken a coding course or had any prior experience. Once I began coding in my collegiate level courses, I fell in love with the problem-solving aspect. I was grasping the various coding techniques and problem-solving methods, but found that the portion I was struggling with the most was syntax and coding conventions. I thought that learning to program would be like learning Calculus, but, in reality, it was actually like learning a new language.

The world of programming is extremely complex, with syntax and grammar of its own, comparable to the grammar and structure used in human languages. The article, “Classifying Programming languages,” is an excellent source for understanding how programming languages are classified and the many similarities and differences between. The authors state that there are eight major categories of programming languages, categorized by “linguistic structure, expressive features, possibility of efficient implementation, direct support for certain programming models, and similar concerns” (“Classifying Programming Languages”). This practice of categorizing languages based on various features is used extensively in human languages also. For example, the Romance Languages are all rooted in Latin and have similar sounds, sentence structure, etc. The article goes on to explain there are many styles of programming that can be used within one language (“Classifying Programming Languages”). This is also a construct that is common throughout human languages, as there are many styles of writing within the English language. Programming languages also have their own grammar and syntax. The grammar portion of coding could be described through common code standards, such as camel case being used for variable names or uppercase being used for constant names. The syntax portion of coding is slightly different than in English, as errors in syntax within programming will cause the program to crash, losing functionality.

In Ana Harris’ article, “Human Languages vs. Programming Languages,” she breaks down the criteria for something to be considered a language. Harris states that the main function of language is communication. She goes on to explain that the function of programming languages is to communicate a series of an instructions to a computer or machine, alluding to the idea that programming languages are indeed unique forms of literacy/language. Harris zooms in on another major similarity between human languages and programming languages, being structure. She discusses the concepts of semantics (meaning connected to a certain concept) and syntax (rules for aligning words and phrases) from the perspective of a linguist. She states that programming uses semantics, as every program has a specific intention, and syntax, which includes following rules for the use of variables, functions, parenthesis, colons, etc. (Harris). These many similarities allow for programming to be considered its own unique form of literacy or language.

Connection between Literacy Skills and Programming Ability

Due to the many parallels between computer programming and literacy, it can be gathered that programming ability and literacy skills benefit one another. Although I enjoy and excel in mathematics and problem solving more-so, I have always loved reading and writing. Throughout my journey of learning programming, this love and ability has helped to excel in the field. Although many of my peers are more advanced than myself in mathematics, this ability has proved to give me a slight upper hand in some aspects of coding. Many of my peers who lack in this ability often have trouble with their code simply because they missed a portion of the instruction when reading, misunderstood what was being asked of them, or they had trouble recalling the semantics and syntax required for the program.

In Sharin Jacob and Mark Warschauer’s article, “Computational Thinking and Literacy,” the authors discuss how literary skills can lead to stronger computational skills. The authors describe in detail how computational thinking (computer programming) is a form of literacy, which was discussed earlier extensively (Jacob and Warschauer 3). The authors then switch gears to focus on how literacy skills can improve programming ability. The article describes the importance of verbal analysis of game architecture to their implementation of game design. The example that the authors use to back up this statement is as follows: The statement “the hunter killed the monkey” is implemented into the coding as “the monkey disappears when it touches the hunter” (Jacob and Warschauer 8). This example shows the importance of one literary element, transitive verb structures, to the success of a game developer. Jacob and Warschauer state, “students cannot master programming syntax without understanding the semantic meaning of commands if they cannot produce correct linguistic forms without considering their corresponding meanings” (10). The authors are saying that students are required to use the same skills within literacy courses that they are required to use within programming, just manifest in different ways. Therefore, skills that are taught in literacy primarily can assist in improving programming ability.

Marthie Schoeman’s article discussed above, “Reading Skills Can Predict the Programming Performance of Novices,” further displays how literacy skill can affect programming performance. This article discusses a study of the relationship between reading skills and the ability to code. The method of the study involved performing an initial eye tracking test on participants as they were reading to determine their reading proficiency. The participants were then given a short introductory course in programming, which would be followed by a knowledge exam (Schoeman 42). The results of the study displayed that those students with low reading skills failed the programming component, while students with higher reading skills did better overall (Shoeman 48). These results suggest that the literary skill of reading does indeed play a role in one’s ability to learn programming.

All of the findings discussed throughout the entirety of this essay display the fact that teaching programming to young people more similarly to the ways in which that literacy is taught may be more effective than just the typical STEM approach. Marina Bers’ article, “Coding as Another Language,” discusses a new method of teaching computer science to young children starting in kindergarten called “Coding as Another Language” (499). The method of teaching coding described in this article deviates from the typical STEM approach, offering the proposition that computer science teaching can be enhanced by incorporating the design of literacy instruction, due to the parallels that exists between natural languages and programming languages (Bers 504). According to Bers, research shows that teaching children how to read and write artificial languages in the same way as natural languages leads to a greater cognitive understanding of programming (503).

In Ziva R. Hassenfeld’s et al. article, “If you can Program you can Write,” the authors examine a study of elementary students learning through the “Coding as Another Language” curriculum. The article discusses results from a test on literacy and an assessment of students’ understanding of an introductory program language, drawing conclusions based upon their correlation (Hassenfeld et al. 73). The results of this study show that there is a connection between students’ literacy levels and their height of achievement in grasping an introductory programming language (Hassenfeld et al. 75). This indicates that there are fundamental understandings and constructs that are shared by literacy and computer programming, which are described in detail earlier. All of these articles suggest that the instruction of programming in early years is more effective when taught more similarly to literacy instruction than just being taught in the typical STEM approach.

The future of Computer Science is limitless, due to the increase in automation throughout societies. As the field continues to grow, programming education will become more and more prevalent within elementary and high schools across the country. The ways in which programming is taught needs to transition to a more literacy-based approach for younger children to improve the effectiveness of the education. If the instruction of programming evolves according to the findings displayed in this essay, so will the growth of the field of Computer Science. Just as most people hold the belief that literacy is not involved in the field of Computer Science, many people are unaware of its presence within all STEM fields, whether it be biology, nursing, or engineering. If the style of teaching programming is holding back the future of programming so drastically by ignoring literacy approaches, imagine how much the world is being held back by this issue.

Although approaching the instruction of computer programming from a literacy point of view is more effective than just the STEM approach overall, there are still many individuals that have disadvantages in learning programming no matter what teaching method that is used. According to Antonio Byrd’s article, “Between Learning and Opportunity: A Study of African American Coders’ Networks of Support,” racially marginalized individuals are not as likely to develop coding literacy skills for problem-solving applications (Byrd 31). A core issue for these marginalized communities gaining access to programming knowledge and experience is financial stability. Computer Programming boot camps and college education are both very expensive investments, which is often not an option for individuals from marginalized communities. Byrd expands on this by stating that even those that do not need to pay tuition for coding bootcamps are required to give of their emotional and physical labor (34). Since coding bootcamps require many hours of work a week, many individuals often have to take time away from their jobs and/or their families. This is something that many marginalized people can simply not afford. The study described in this article takes place at Clearwater Academy, where marginalized students do not pay tuition, which taught courses on programming languages such as JavaScript, HTML, and CSS (Byrd 35). The results of this confirm that African American adult’s access to coding literacy is limited by the social, emotional, and economic repercussions of white supremacy (Byrd 49). Unfortunately, there is no one easy solution that completely resolves this issue, as it stems from years of oppression and discrimination. In order to best combat this issue, universities, training centers, and employers need to take steps to accommodate the needs of marginalized groups. Taking steps in this direction will cultivate the field of Computer Science to grow exponentially and move towards equality.

Works Cited

Bers, Marina Umaschi. “Coding as another language: a pedagogical approach for teaching  computer science in early childhood.”  Journal of Computers in Education  6.4 (2019):  499-528.

Byrd, Antonio. “Between learning and opportunity: A study of African American coders’  networks of support.” Literacy in Composition Studies 7.2 (2019): 31-56.

Cencelj, Zvonka, et al. “Role and meaning of functional science, technological and engineering  literacy in problem-based learning.”  Journal of Baltic Science Education  18.1 (2019):  132-146.

“Classifying Programming Languages.” Pltypes, Loyola Marymount University,

cs.lmu.edu/~ray/notes/pltypes/.

Dubochet, Gilles. “Computer Code as a Medium for Human Communication: Are Programming  Languages Improving?” Proceedings of the 21st Working Conference on the Psychology  of Programmers Interest Group. No. CONF. University of Limerick, 2009.

Grafwallner, Peg. “Encoding Literacy in Computer Science.”  Edutopia , George Lucas Educational Foundation, 10 Jan. 2018, www.edutopia.org/article/encoding-literacy-computer-science.

Harris, Ana. “Human Languages vs. Programming Languages.”  Medium , Medium, 1 Nov. 2018,  medium.com/@anaharris/human-languages-vs-programming-languages-c89410f13252.

Hermans, Felienne, and Marlies Aldewereld. “Programming is writing is  programming.”  Companion to the first International Conference on the Art, Science and  Engineering of Programming . 2017.

Jacob, Sharin Rawhiya, and Mark Warschauer. “Computational thinking and literacy.”  Journal  of Computer Science Integration  1.1. 2018.

Riemer, Marc J. “Communication skills for the 21st century engineer.” Global J. of Engng.  Educ 11.1 (2007): 89-100.

R Hassenfeld, Ziva, et al. “If You Can Program, You Can Write: Learning Introductory Programming Across Literacy Levels.”  Journal of Information Technology Education: Research , vol. 19, 2020, pp. 065–085., doi:10.28945/4509.

Schoeman, Marthie. “Reading skills can predict the programming performance of novices: an eye-tracking study.”  Perspectives in Education  37.2 (2019): 35-52.

Vee, Annette. “Computer Programming as Literacy.”  Coding Literacy , 2017, pp. 445–452., doi:10.7551/mitpress/10655.003.0003.

Understanding Literacy in Our Lives by John Parker is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

The Knowledge Hub

Unlocking the power of information

What is Computer Literacy? Benefits, History, Skills & Assessing Your Level

Introduction

Computer literacy is the ability to understand and use computers and other technology. In today’s world, having a basic understanding of computers is essential for almost all aspects of life, from finding a job to engaging with online communities. In this article, we will explore what computer literacy is, the benefits of being computer literate, the history of computer literacy, tips and strategies for developing computer literacy skills, and how to assess your computer literacy level.

The Benefits of Being Computer Literate

Having a basic understanding of computers can open up many doors in terms of job opportunities and other life skills. Here are some of the main benefits of being computer literate:

Increased Job Opportunities

In today’s job market, having a basic understanding of computers is essential. Most employers expect their employees to be able to use computers and other technology, so having a good grasp of computer literacy can give you an edge when applying for jobs. Even if the job you’re applying for doesn’t require you to use a computer, having computer literacy skills can still be beneficial as it shows potential employers that you have the ability to learn new skills quickly.

Improved Communication

Being computer literate also makes it easier to communicate with others. Whether you’re using email, video conferencing, or social media, having a good understanding of computers can help you stay connected with friends, family, and colleagues. Additionally, having a basic understanding of computers can make it easier to search for information online and keep up with the latest news and trends.

Enhanced Problem-Solving Skills

Having a basic understanding of computers can also help you develop problem-solving skills. By learning how to troubleshoot computer issues and research solutions online, you can become more adept at solving problems both on and off the computer.

History of Computer Literacy: How We Got Here

Computer literacy has come a long way since its beginnings in the early days of computing. Let’s take a look at how we got here.

Early Days of Computing

The first computers were large and complex machines that required highly skilled operators. These machines were mainly used for scientific and military purposes, and only a small number of people had access to them. As such, there was no need for widespread computer literacy.

Emergence of Personal Computers

The emergence of personal computers in the 1980s changed the landscape of computing. These machines made computers more accessible to the general public, and people began to realize the potential of computers for everyday tasks. This led to the development of computer education courses and the rise of computer literacy.

Growth of the Internet

The growth of the internet in the 1990s further increased the need for computer literacy. With the internet came a whole new range of possibilities, from shopping online to researching topics and communicating with people around the world. This led to the creation of more computer literacy courses and resources.

Developing Computer Literacy Skills: Tips and Strategies

If you want to become computer literate, there are several things you can do to improve your skills. Here are some tips and strategies for developing your computer literacy skills:

Learn the Basics

The first step to becoming computer literate is to learn the basics. You should familiarize yourself with the different components of a computer (such as the monitor, keyboard, and mouse) and understand how they work together. Additionally, you should learn how to use the operating system and common software programs such as word processors, spreadsheets, and web browsers.

Practice, Practice, Practice

Once you’ve learned the basics, it’s time to start practicing. The best way to learn is by doing, so try out different tasks on the computer and see how they work. This will help you get a better understanding of the different functions and features of a computer.

Utilize Online Resources

There are also plenty of online resources available to help you learn computer literacy. From online tutorials to forums and discussion groups, you can find a wealth of information online to help you become more comfortable with computers.

Exploring the Different Types of Computer Literacy

When it comes to computer literacy, there are three main types: basic computer literacy, digital literacy, and information literacy. Let’s take a look at each one in more detail.

Basic Computer Literacy

Basic computer literacy refers to the ability to understand and use technology. This includes being able to use a computer’s operating system, performing basic tasks such as sending emails or using a word processor, and troubleshooting basic computer issues.

Digital Literacy

Digital literacy is the ability to use technology to create and share content. This includes creating websites, writing blog posts, and using social media. It also involves understanding how to protect yourself online, such as avoiding scams and phishing attempts.

Information Literacy

Information literacy is the ability to find and evaluate information from a variety of sources. This includes knowing how to search for information online and being able to critically evaluate the reliability of a source.

Assessing Your Computer Literacy Level

Once you’ve developed your computer literacy skills, you may want to assess your level. Here are some tools you can use to do so:

Self-Assessment Tools

Many websites offer self-assessment tools that allow you to gauge your computer literacy level. These tools ask you questions about your knowledge and experience with computers, and then provide you with an overall score.

Online Tests and Quizzes

You can also take online tests and quizzes to assess your computer literacy level. These tests usually cover a wide range of topics, from understanding computer hardware to using common software programs.

Teaching Computer Literacy in the Classroom

Computer literacy is an important skill for students to have, and schools are beginning to recognize this. Here are some ways schools are incorporating computer literacy into their curriculums:

Implementing Technology Into the Curriculum

Many schools are incorporating technology into their curriculums, such as teaching students how to use computers and software programs. This helps prepare students for the future and gives them a better understanding of how to use technology in their everyday lives.

Offering Computer Literacy Courses

Some schools are now offering dedicated computer literacy courses, which teach students the basics of computers and how to use them. These courses can be beneficial for those who don’t have much experience with computers.

Utilizing Technology to Enhance Learning

Technology can also be used to enhance learning in the classroom. For example, teachers can use interactive whiteboards and tablets to engage students and make lessons more interesting. Additionally, students can use computers to research topics, write papers, and collaborate with classmates.

Computer literacy is an important skill to have in today’s world. Having a basic understanding of computers can open up many doors, from increased job opportunities to improved communication and enhanced problem-solving skills. To become computer literate, you should learn the basics, practice, and utilize online resources. Additionally, you can assess your computer literacy level with self-assessment tools and online tests and quizzes. Finally, schools are beginning to recognize the importance of computer literacy and are implementing technology into their curriculums and offering dedicated computer literacy courses.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Open access
• Published: 08 June 2022

A systematic review on digital literacy

• Hasan Tinmaz   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4310-0848 1 ,
• Yoo-Taek Lee   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1913-9059 2 ,
• Mina Fanea-Ivanovici   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2921-2990 3 &
• Hasnan Baber   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8951-3501 4  

Smart Learning Environments volume  9 , Article number:  21 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

70k Accesses

58 Citations

10 Altmetric

Metrics details

The purpose of this study is to discover the main themes and categories of the research studies regarding digital literacy. To serve this purpose, the databases of WoS/Clarivate Analytics, Proquest Central, Emerald Management Journals, Jstor Business College Collections and Scopus/Elsevier were searched with four keyword-combinations and final forty-three articles were included in the dataset. The researchers applied a systematic literature review method to the dataset. The preliminary findings demonstrated that there is a growing prevalence of digital literacy articles starting from the year 2013. The dominant research methodology of the reviewed articles is qualitative. The four major themes revealed from the qualitative content analysis are: digital literacy, digital competencies, digital skills and digital thinking. Under each theme, the categories and their frequencies are analysed. Recommendations for further research and for real life implementations are generated.

Introduction

The extant literature on digital literacy, skills and competencies is rich in definitions and classifications, but there is still no consensus on the larger themes and subsumed themes categories. (Heitin, 2016 ). To exemplify, existing inventories of Internet skills suffer from ‘incompleteness and over-simplification, conceptual ambiguity’ (van Deursen et al., 2015 ), and Internet skills are only a part of digital skills. While there is already a plethora of research in this field, this research paper hereby aims to provide a general framework of digital areas and themes that can best describe digital (cap)abilities in the novel context of Industry 4.0 and the accelerated pandemic-triggered digitalisation. The areas and themes can represent the starting point for drafting a contemporary digital literacy framework.

Sousa and Rocha ( 2019 ) explained that there is a stake of digital skills for disruptive digital business, and they connect it to the latest developments, such as the Internet of Things (IoT), cloud technology, big data, artificial intelligence, and robotics. The topic is even more important given the large disparities in digital literacy across regions (Tinmaz et al., 2022 ). More precisely, digital inequalities encompass skills, along with access, usage and self-perceptions. These inequalities need to be addressed, as they are credited with a ‘potential to shape life chances in multiple ways’ (Robinson et al., 2015 ), e.g., academic performance, labour market competitiveness, health, civic and political participation. Steps have been successfully taken to address physical access gaps, but skills gaps are still looming (Van Deursen & Van Dijk, 2010a ). Moreover, digital inequalities have grown larger due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and they influenced the very state of health of the most vulnerable categories of population or their employability in a time when digital skills are required (Baber et al., 2022 ; Beaunoyer, Dupéré & Guitton, 2020 ).

The systematic review the researchers propose is a useful updated instrument of classification and inventory for digital literacy. Considering the latest developments in the economy and in line with current digitalisation needs, digitally literate population may assist policymakers in various fields, e.g., education, administration, healthcare system, and managers of companies and other concerned organisations that need to stay competitive and to employ competitive workforce. Therefore, it is indispensably vital to comprehend the big picture of digital literacy related research.

Literature review

Since the advent of Digital Literacy, scholars have been concerned with identifying and classifying the various (cap)abilities related to its operation. Using the most cited academic papers in this stream of research, several classifications of digital-related literacies, competencies, and skills emerged.

Digital literacies

Digital literacy, which is one of the challenges of integration of technology in academic courses (Blau, Shamir-Inbal & Avdiel, 2020 ), has been defined in the current literature as the competencies and skills required for navigating a fragmented and complex information ecosystem (Eshet, 2004 ). A ‘Digital Literacy Framework’ was designed by Eshet-Alkalai ( 2012 ), comprising six categories: (a) photo-visual thinking (understanding and using visual information); (b) real-time thinking (simultaneously processing a variety of stimuli); (c) information thinking (evaluating and combining information from multiple digital sources); (d) branching thinking (navigating in non-linear hyper-media environments); (e) reproduction thinking (creating outcomes using technological tools by designing new content or remixing existing digital content); (f) social-emotional thinking (understanding and applying cyberspace rules). According to Heitin ( 2016 ), digital literacy groups the following clusters: (a) finding and consuming digital content; (b) creating digital content; (c) communicating or sharing digital content. Hence, the literature describes the digital literacy in many ways by associating a set of various technical and non-technical elements.

• Digital competencies

The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens (DigComp 2.1.), the most recent framework proposed by the European Union, which is currently under review and undergoing an updating process, contains five competency areas: (a) information and data literacy, (b) communication and collaboration, (c) digital content creation, (d) safety, and (e) problem solving (Carretero, Vuorikari & Punie, 2017 ). Digital competency had previously been described in a technical fashion by Ferrari ( 2012 ) as a set comprising information skills, communication skills, content creation skills, safety skills, and problem-solving skills, which later outlined the areas of competence in DigComp 2.1, too.

• Digital skills

Ng ( 2012 ) pointed out the following three categories of digital skills: (a) technological (using technological tools); (b) cognitive (thinking critically when managing information); (c) social (communicating and socialising). A set of Internet skill was suggested by Van Deursen and Van Dijk ( 2009 , 2010b ), which contains: (a) operational skills (basic skills in using internet technology), (b) formal Internet skills (navigation and orientation skills); (c) information Internet skills (fulfilling information needs), and (d) strategic Internet skills (using the internet to reach goals). In 2014, the same authors added communication and content creation skills to the initial framework (van Dijk & van Deursen). Similarly, Helsper and Eynon ( 2013 ) put forward a set of four digital skills: technical, social, critical, and creative skills. Furthermore, van Deursen et al. ( 2015 ) built a set of items and factors to measure Internet skills: operational, information navigation, social, creative, mobile. More recent literature (vaan Laar et al., 2017 ) divides digital skills into seven core categories: technical, information management, communication, collaboration, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving.

It is worth mentioning that the various methodologies used to classify digital literacy are overlapping or non-exhaustive, which confirms the conceptual ambiguity mentioned by van Deursen et al. ( 2015 ).

• Digital thinking

Thinking skills (along with digital skills) have been acknowledged to be a significant element of digital literacy in the educational process context (Ferrari, 2012 ). In fact, critical thinking, creativity, and innovation are at the very core of DigComp. Information and Communication Technology as a support for thinking is a learning objective in any school curriculum. In the same vein, analytical thinking and interdisciplinary thinking, which help solve problems, are yet other concerns of educators in the Industry 4.0 (Ozkan-Ozen & Kazancoglu, 2021 ).

However, we have recently witnessed a shift of focus from learning how to use information and communication technologies to using it while staying safe in the cyber-environment and being aware of alternative facts. Digital thinking would encompass identifying fake news, misinformation, and echo chambers (Sulzer, 2018 ). Not least important, concern about cybersecurity has grown especially in times of political, social or economic turmoil, such as the elections or the Covid-19 crisis (Sulzer, 2018 ; Puig, Blanco-Anaya & Perez-Maceira, 2021 ).

Ultimately, this systematic review paper focuses on the following major research questions as follows:

Research question 1: What is the yearly distribution of digital literacy related papers?

Research question 2: What are the research methods for digital literacy related papers?

Research question 3: What are the main themes in digital literacy related papers?

Research question 4: What are the concentrated categories (under revealed main themes) in digital literacy related papers?

This study employed the systematic review method where the authors scrutinized the existing literature around the major research question of digital literacy. As Uman ( 2011 ) pointed, in systematic literature review, the findings of the earlier research are examined for the identification of consistent and repetitive themes. The systematic review method differs from literature review with its well managed and highly organized qualitative scrutiny processes where researchers tend to cover less materials from fewer number of databases to write their literature review (Kowalczyk & Truluck, 2013 ; Robinson & Lowe, 2015 ).

Data collection

To address major research objectives, the following five important databases are selected due to their digital literacy focused research dominance: 1. WoS/Clarivate Analytics, 2. Proquest Central; 3. Emerald Management Journals; 4. Jstor Business College Collections; 5. Scopus/Elsevier.

The search was made in the second half of June 2021, in abstract and key words written in English language. We only kept research articles and book chapters (herein referred to as papers). Our purpose was to identify a set of digital literacy areas, or an inventory of such areas and topics. To serve that purpose, systematic review was utilized with the following synonym key words for the search: ‘digital literacy’, ‘digital skills’, ‘digital competence’ and ‘digital fluency’, to find the mainstream literature dealing with the topic. These key words were unfolded as a result of the consultation with the subject matter experts (two board members from Korean Digital Literacy Association and two professors from technology studies department). Below are the four key word combinations used in the search: “Digital literacy AND systematic review”, “Digital skills AND systematic review”, “Digital competence AND systematic review”, and “Digital fluency AND systematic review”.

A sequential systematic search was made in the five databases mentioned above. Thus, from one database to another, duplicate papers were manually excluded in a cascade manner to extract only unique results and to make the research smoother to conduct. At this stage, we kept 47 papers. Further exclusion criteria were applied. Thus, only full-text items written in English were selected, and in doing so, three papers were excluded (no full text available), and one other paper was excluded because it was not written in English, but in Spanish. Therefore, we investigated a total number of 43 papers, as shown in Table 1 . “ Appendix A ” shows the list of these papers with full references.

Data analysis

The 43 papers selected after the application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, respectively, were reviewed the materials independently by two researchers who were from two different countries. The researchers identified all topics pertaining to digital literacy, as they appeared in the papers. Next, a third researcher independently analysed these findings by excluded duplicates A qualitative content analysis was manually performed by calculating the frequency of major themes in all papers, where the raw data was compared and contrasted (Fraenkel et al., 2012 ). All three reviewers independently list the words and how the context in which they appeared and then the three reviewers collectively decided for how it should be categorized. Lastly, it is vital to remind that literature review of this article was written after the identification of the themes appeared as a result of our qualitative analyses. Therefore, the authors decided to shape the literature review structure based on the themes.

As an answer to the first research question (the yearly distribution of digital literacy related papers), Fig.  1 demonstrates the yearly distribution of digital literacy related papers. It is seen that there is an increasing trend about the digital literacy papers.

Yearly distribution of digital literacy related papers

Research question number two (The research methods for digital literacy related papers) concentrates on what research methods are employed for these digital literacy related papers. As Fig.  2 shows, most of the papers were using the qualitative method. Not stated refers to book chapters.

Research methods used in the reviewed articles

When forty-three articles were analysed for the main themes as in research question number three (The main themes in digital literacy related papers), the overall findings were categorized around four major themes: (i) literacies, (ii) competencies, (iii) skills, and (iv) thinking. Under every major theme, the categories were listed and explained as in research question number four (The concentrated categories (under revealed main themes) in digital literacy related papers).

The authors utilized an overt categorization for the depiction of these major themes. For example, when the ‘creativity’ was labelled as a skill, the authors also categorized it under the ‘skills’ theme. Similarly, when ‘creativity’ was mentioned as a competency, the authors listed it under the ‘competencies’ theme. Therefore, it is possible to recognize the same finding under different major themes.

Major theme 1: literacies

Digital literacy being the major concern of this paper was observed to be blatantly mentioned in five papers out forty-three. One of these articles described digital literacy as the human proficiencies to live, learn and work in the current digital society. In addition to these five articles, two additional papers used the same term as ‘critical digital literacy’ by describing it as a person’s or a society’s accessibility and assessment level interaction with digital technologies to utilize and/or create information. Table 2 summarizes the major categories under ‘Literacies’ major theme.

Computer literacy, media literacy and cultural literacy were the second most common literacy (n = 5). One of the article branches computer literacy as tool (detailing with software and hardware uses) and resource (focusing on information processing capacity of a computer) literacies. Cultural literacy was emphasized as a vital element for functioning in an intercultural team on a digital project.

Disciplinary literacy (n = 4) was referring to utilizing different computer programs (n = 2) or technical gadgets (n = 2) with a specific emphasis on required cognitive, affective and psychomotor skills to be able to work in any digital context (n = 3), serving for the using (n = 2), creating and applying (n = 2) digital literacy in real life.

Data literacy, technology literacy and multiliteracy were the third frequent categories (n = 3). The ‘multiliteracy’ was referring to the innate nature of digital technologies, which have been infused into many aspects of human lives.

Last but not least, Internet literacy, mobile literacy, web literacy, new literacy, personal literacy and research literacy were discussed in forty-three article findings. Web literacy was focusing on being able to connect with people on the web (n = 2), discover the web content (especially the navigation on a hyper-textual platform), and learn web related skills through practical web experiences. Personal literacy was highlighting digital identity management. Research literacy was not only concentrating on conducting scientific research ability but also finding available scholarship online.

Twenty-four other categories are unfolded from the results sections of forty-three articles. Table 3 presents the list of these other literacies where the authors sorted the categories in an ascending alphabetical order without any other sorting criterion. Primarily, search, tagging, filtering and attention literacies were mainly underlining their roles in information processing. Furthermore, social-structural literacy was indicated as the recognition of the social circumstances and generation of information. Another information-related literacy was pointed as publishing literacy, which is the ability to disseminate information via different digital channels.

While above listed personal literacy was referring to digital identity management, network literacy was explained as someone’s social networking ability to manage the digital relationship with other people. Additionally, participatory literacy was defined as the necessary abilities to join an online team working on online content production.

Emerging technology literacy was stipulated as an essential ability to recognize and appreciate the most recent and innovative technologies in along with smart choices related to these technologies. Additionally, the critical literacy was added as an ability to make smart judgements on the cost benefit analysis of these recent technologies.

Last of all, basic, intermediate, and advanced digital assessment literacies were specified for educational institutions that are planning to integrate various digital tools to conduct instructional assessments in their bodies.

Major theme 2: competencies

The second major theme was revealed as competencies. The authors directly categorized the findings that are specified with the word of competency. Table 4 summarizes the entire category set for the competencies major theme.

The most common category was the ‘digital competence’ (n = 14) where one of the articles points to that category as ‘generic digital competence’ referring to someone’s creativity for multimedia development (video editing was emphasized). Under this broad category, the following sub-categories were associated:

Problem solving (n = 10)

Safety (n = 7)

Information processing (n = 5)

Content creation (n = 5)

Communication (n = 2)

Digital rights (n = 1)

Digital emotional intelligence (n = 1)

Digital teamwork (n = 1)

Big data utilization (n = 1)

Artificial Intelligence utilization (n = 1)

Virtual leadership (n = 1)

Self-disruption (in along with the pace of digitalization) (n = 1)

Like ‘digital competency’, five additional articles especially coined the term as ‘digital competence as a life skill’. Deeper analysis demonstrated the following points: social competences (n = 4), communication in mother tongue (n = 3) and foreign language (n = 2), entrepreneurship (n = 3), civic competence (n = 2), fundamental science (n = 1), technology (n = 1) and mathematics (n = 1) competences, learning to learn (n = 1) and self-initiative (n = 1).

Moreover, competencies were linked to workplace digital competencies in three articles and highlighted as significant for employability (n = 3) and ‘economic engagement’ (n = 3). Digital competencies were also detailed for leisure (n = 2) and communication (n = 2). Furthermore, two articles pointed digital competencies as an inter-cultural competency and one as a cross-cultural competency. Lastly, the ‘digital nativity’ (n = 1) was clarified as someone’s innate competency of being able to feel contented and satisfied with digital technologies.

Major theme 3: skills

The third major observed theme was ‘skills’, which was dominantly gathered around information literacy skills (n = 19) and information and communication technologies skills (n = 18). Table 5 demonstrates the categories with more than one occurrence.

Table 6 summarizes the sub-categories of the two most frequent categories of ‘skills’ major theme. The information literacy skills noticeably concentrate on the steps of information processing; evaluation (n = 6), utilization (n = 4), finding (n = 3), locating (n = 2) information. Moreover, the importance of trial/error process, being a lifelong learner, feeling a need for information and so forth were evidently listed under this sub-category. On the other hand, ICT skills were grouped around cognitive and affective domains. For instance, while technical skills in general and use of social media, coding, multimedia, chat or emailing in specific were reported in cognitive domain, attitude, intention, and belief towards ICT were mentioned as the elements of affective domain.

Communication skills (n = 9) were multi-dimensional for different societies, cultures, and globalized contexts, requiring linguistic skills. Collaboration skills (n = 9) are also recurrently cited with an explicit emphasis for virtual platforms.

‘Ethics for digital environment’ encapsulated ethical use of information (n = 4) and different technologies (n = 2), knowing digital laws (n = 2) and responsibilities (n = 2) in along with digital rights and obligations (n = 1), having digital awareness (n = 1), following digital etiquettes (n = 1), treating other people with respect (n = 1) including no cyber-bullying (n = 1) and no stealing or damaging other people (n = 1).

‘Digital fluency’ involved digital access (n = 2) by using different software and hardware (n = 2) in online platforms (n = 1) or communication tools (n = 1) or within programming environments (n = 1). Digital fluency also underlined following recent technological advancements (n = 1) and knowledge (n = 1) including digital health and wellness (n = 1) dimension.

‘Social intelligence’ related to understanding digital culture (n = 1), the concept of digital exclusion (n = 1) and digital divide (n = 3). ‘Research skills’ were detailed with searching academic information (n = 3) on databases such as Web of Science and Scopus (n = 2) and their citation, summarization, and quotation (n = 2).

‘Digital teaching’ was described as a skill (n = 2) in Table 4 whereas it was also labelled as a competence (n = 1) as shown in Table 3 . Similarly, while learning to learn (n = 1) was coined under competencies in Table 3 , digital learning (n = 2, Table 4 ) and life-long learning (n = 1, Table 5 ) were stated as learning related skills. Moreover, learning was used with the following three terms: learning readiness (n = 1), self-paced learning (n = 1) and learning flexibility (n = 1).

Table 7 shows other categories listed below the ‘skills’ major theme. The list covers not only the software such as GIS, text mining, mapping, or bibliometric analysis programs but also the conceptual skills such as the fourth industrial revolution and information management.

Major theme 4: thinking

The last identified major theme was the different types of ‘thinking’. As Table 8 shows, ‘critical thinking’ was the most frequent thinking category (n = 4). Except computational thinking, the other categories were not detailed.

Computational thinking (n = 3) was associated with the general logic of how a computer works and sub-categorized into the following steps; construction of the problem (n = 3), abstraction (n = 1), disintegration of the problem (n = 2), data collection, (n = 2), data analysis (n = 2), algorithmic design (n = 2), parallelization & iteration (n = 1), automation (n = 1), generalization (n = 1), and evaluation (n = 2).

A transversal analysis of digital literacy categories reveals the following fields of digital literacy application:

Technological advancement (IT, ICT, Industry 4.0, IoT, text mining, GIS, bibliometric analysis, mapping data, technology, AI, big data)

Networking (Internet, web, connectivity, network, safety)

Information (media, news, communication)

Creative-cultural industries (culture, publishing, film, TV, leisure, content creation)

Academia (research, documentation, library)

Citizenship (participation, society, social intelligence, awareness, politics, rights, legal use, ethics)

Education (life skills, problem solving, teaching, learning, education, lifelong learning)

Professional life (work, teamwork, collaboration, economy, commerce, leadership, decision making)

Personal level (critical thinking, evaluation, analytical thinking, innovative thinking)

This systematic review on digital literacy concentrated on forty-three articles from the databases of WoS/Clarivate Analytics, Proquest Central, Emerald Management Journals, Jstor Business College Collections and Scopus/Elsevier. The initial results revealed that there is an increasing trend on digital literacy focused academic papers. Research work in digital literacy is critical in a context of disruptive digital business, and more recently, the pandemic-triggered accelerated digitalisation (Beaunoyer, Dupéré & Guitton, 2020 ; Sousa & Rocha 2019 ). Moreover, most of these papers were employing qualitative research methods. The raw data of these articles were analysed qualitatively using systematic literature review to reveal major themes and categories. Four major themes that appeared are: digital literacy, digital competencies, digital skills and thinking.

Whereas the mainstream literature describes digital literacy as a set of photo-visual, real-time, information, branching, reproduction and social-emotional thinking (Eshet-Alkalai, 2012 ) or as a set of precise specific operations, i.e., finding, consuming, creating, communicating and sharing digital content (Heitin, 2016 ), this study reveals that digital literacy revolves around and is in connection with the concepts of computer literacy, media literacy, cultural literacy or disciplinary literacy. In other words, the present systematic review indicates that digital literacy is far broader than specific tasks, englobing the entire sphere of computer operation and media use in a cultural context.

The digital competence yardstick, DigComp (Carretero, Vuorikari & Punie, 2017 ) suggests that the main digital competencies cover information and data literacy, communication and collaboration, digital content creation, safety, and problem solving. Similarly, the findings of this research place digital competencies in relation to problem solving, safety, information processing, content creation and communication. Therefore, the findings of the systematic literature review are, to a large extent, in line with the existing framework used in the European Union.

The investigation of the main keywords associated with digital skills has revealed that information literacy, ICT, communication, collaboration, digital content creation, research and decision-making skill are the most representative. In a structured way, the existing literature groups these skills in technological, cognitive, and social (Ng, 2012 ) or, more extensively, into operational, formal, information Internet, strategic, communication and content creation (van Dijk & van Deursen, 2014 ). In time, the literature has become richer in frameworks, and prolific authors have improved their results. As such, more recent research (vaan Laar et al., 2017 ) use the following categories: technical, information management, communication, collaboration, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving.

Whereas digital thinking was observed to be mostly related with critical thinking and computational thinking, DigComp connects it with critical thinking, creativity, and innovation, on the one hand, and researchers highlight fake news, misinformation, cybersecurity, and echo chambers as exponents of digital thinking, on the other hand (Sulzer, 2018 ; Puig, Blanco-Anaya & Perez-Maceira, 2021 ).

This systematic review research study looks ahead to offer an initial step and guideline for the development of a more contemporary digital literacy framework including digital literacy major themes and factors. The researchers provide the following recommendations for both researchers and practitioners.

Recommendations for prospective research

By considering the major qualitative research trend, it seems apparent that more quantitative research-oriented studies are needed. Although it requires more effort and time, mixed method studies will help understand digital literacy holistically.

As digital literacy is an umbrella term for many different technologies, specific case studies need be designed, such as digital literacy for artificial intelligence or digital literacy for drones’ usage.

Digital literacy affects different areas of human lives, such as education, business, health, governance, and so forth. Therefore, different case studies could be carried out for each of these unique dimensions of our lives. For instance, it is worth investigating the role of digital literacy on lifelong learning in particular, and on education in general, as well as the digital upskilling effects on the labour market flexibility.

Further experimental studies on digital literacy are necessary to realize how certain variables (for instance, age, gender, socioeconomic status, cognitive abilities, etc.) affect this concept overtly or covertly. Moreover, the digital divide issue needs to be analysed through the lens of its main determinants.

New bibliometric analysis method can be implemented on digital literacy documents to reveal more information on how these works are related or centred on what major topic. This visual approach will assist to realize the big picture within the digital literacy framework.

Recommendations for practitioners

The digital literacy stakeholders, policymakers in education and managers in private organizations, need to be aware that there are many dimensions and variables regarding the implementation of digital literacy. In that case, stakeholders must comprehend their beneficiaries or the participants more deeply to increase the effect of digital literacy related activities. For example, critical thinking and problem-solving skills and abilities are mentioned to affect digital literacy. Hence, stakeholders have to initially understand whether the participants have enough entry level critical thinking and problem solving.

Development of digital literacy for different groups of people requires more energy, since each group might require a different set of skills, abilities, or competencies. Hence, different subject matter experts, such as technologists, instructional designers, content experts, should join the team.

It is indispensably vital to develop different digital frameworks for different technologies (basic or advanced) or different contexts (different levels of schooling or various industries).

These frameworks should be updated regularly as digital fields are evolving rapidly. Every year, committees should gather around to understand new technological trends and decide whether they should address the changes into their frameworks.

Understanding digital literacy in a thorough manner can enable decision makers to correctly implement and apply policies addressing the digital divide that is reflected onto various aspects of life, e.g., health, employment, education, especially in turbulent times such as the COVID-19 pandemic is.

Lastly, it is also essential to state the study limitations. This study is limited to the analysis of a certain number of papers, obtained from using the selected keywords and databases. Therefore, an extension can be made by adding other keywords and searching other databases.

Availability of data and materials

The authors present the articles used for the study in “ Appendix A ”.

Baber, H., Fanea-Ivanovici, M., Lee, Y. T., & Tinmaz, H. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of digital literacy research and emerging themes pre-during COVID-19 pandemic. Information and Learning Sciences . https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-10-2021-0090 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Beaunoyer, E., Dupéré, S., & Guitton, M. J. (2020). COVID-19 and digital inequalities: Reciprocal impacts and mitigation strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 111 , 10642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106424

Blau, I., Shamir-Inbal, T., & Avdiel, O. (2020). How does the pedagogical design of a technology-enhanced collaborative academic course promote digital literacies, self-regulation, and perceived learning of students? The Internet and Higher Education, 45 , 100722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100722

Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., & Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use (No. JRC106281). Joint Research Centre, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC106281

Eshet, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia , 13 (1), 93–106, https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/4793/

Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2012). Thinking in the digital era: A revised model for digital literacy. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 9 (2), 267–276. https://doi.org/10.28945/1621

Ferrari, A. (2012). Digital competence in practice: An analysis of frameworks. JCR IPTS, Sevilla. https://ifap.ru/library/book522.pdf

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). Mc Graw Hill.

Google Scholar  

Heitin, L. (2016). What is digital literacy? Education Week, https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/what-is-digital-literacy/2016/11

Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2013). Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement. European Journal of Communication, 28 (6), 696–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323113499113

Kowalczyk, N., & Truluck, C. (2013). Literature reviews and systematic reviews: What is the difference ? . Radiologic Technology, 85 (2), 219–222.

Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59 (3), 1065–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016

Ozkan-Ozen, Y. D., & Kazancoglu, Y. (2021). Analysing workforce development challenges in the Industry 4.0. International Journal of Manpower . https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-03-2021-0167

Puig, B., Blanco-Anaya, P., & Perez-Maceira, J. J. (2021). “Fake News” or Real Science? Critical thinking to assess information on COVID-19. Frontiers in Education, 6 , 646909. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.646909

Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., Schulz, J., Hale, T. M., & Stern, M. J. (2015). Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information, Communication & Society, 18 (5), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1012532

Robinson, P., & Lowe, J. (2015). Literature reviews vs systematic reviews. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39 (2), 103. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12393

Sousa, M. J., & Rocha, A. (2019). Skills for disruptive digital business. Journal of Business Research, 94 , 257–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.051

Sulzer, A. (2018). (Re)conceptualizing digital literacies before and after the election of Trump. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 17 (2), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-06-2017-0098

Tinmaz, H., Fanea-Ivanovici, M., & Baber, H. (2022). A snapshot of digital literacy. Library Hi Tech News , (ahead-of-print).

Uman, L. S. (2011). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 20 (1), 57–59.

Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2015). Development and validation of the Internet Skills Scale (ISS). Information, Communication & Society, 19 (6), 804–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1078834

Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2009). Using the internet: Skills related problems in users’ online behaviour. Interacting with Computers, 21 , 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2009.06.005

Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2010a). Measuring internet skills. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 26 (10), 891–916. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2010.496338

Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2010b). Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 13 (6), 893–911. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810386774

van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & Van Deursen, A. J. A. M. (2014). Digital skills, unlocking the information society . Palgrave MacMillan.

van Laar, E., van Deursen, A. J. A. M., van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & de Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computer in Human Behavior, 72 , 577–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010

Download references

This research is funded by Woosong University Academic Research in 2022.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

AI & Big Data Department, Endicott College of International Studies, Woosong University, Daejeon, South Korea

Hasan Tinmaz

Endicott College of International Studies, Woosong University, Daejeon, South Korea

Yoo-Taek Lee

Department of Economics and Economic Policies, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania

Mina Fanea-Ivanovici

Abu Dhabi School of Management, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Hasnan Baber

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors worked together on the manuscript equally. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hasnan Baber .

Ethics declarations

Competing of interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Tinmaz, H., Lee, YT., Fanea-Ivanovici, M. et al. A systematic review on digital literacy. Smart Learn. Environ. 9 , 21 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00204-y

Download citation

Received : 23 February 2022

Accepted : 01 June 2022

Published : 08 June 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00204-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Digital literacy
• Systematic review
• Qualitative research

7 Digital literacies and the skills of the digital age

Cathy L. Green, Oklahoma State University

Oklahoma State University

Abstract – This chapter is intended to provide a framework and understanding of digital literacy, what it is and why it is important. The following pages explore the roots of digital literacy, its relationship to language literacy and its role in 21 st century life.

Introduction

Unlike previous generations, learning in the digital age is marked by the use of rapidly evolving technology, a deluge of information and a highly networked global community (Dede, 2010). In such a dynamic environment, learners need skills beyond the basic cognitive ability to consume and process language. In other words: To understand what the characteristics of the digital age, and of digital learners, means for how people learn in this new and changing landscape, one may turn to the evolving discussion of literacy or, as one might say now, of digital literacy. The history of literacy contextualizes digital literacy and illustrates changes in literacy over time. By looking at literacy as a historical phenomenon, the characteristics of which have evolved over time, we can glean the fundamental characteristics of the digital age. Those characteristics in turn illuminate the skills needed in order to take advantage of digital environments. The following discussion is an overview of digital literacy, its essential components and why it is important for learning in a digital age.

Moving from Literacy to Digital Literacy

Literacy refers to the ability of people to read and write (UNESCO, 2017). Reading and writing then, is about encoding and decoding information between written symbols and sound (Resnick, 1983; Tyner, 1998). More specifically, literacy is the ability to understand the relationship between sounds and written words such that one may read, say and understand them (UNESCO, 2004; Vlieghe, 2015). Literacy is often considered a skill or competency and is often referred to as such. Children and adults alike can spend years developing the appropriate skills for encoding and decoding information.

Over the course of thousands of years, literacy has become much more common and widespread with a global literacy rate ranging from 81% to 90% depending on age and gender (UNESCO, 2016). From a time when literacy was the domain of an elite few, it has grown to include huge swaths of the global population. There are a number of reasons for this, not the least of which are some of the advantages the written word can provide. Kaestle, (1985) tells us that “literacy makes it possible to preserve information as a snapshot in time, allows for recording, tracking and remembering information, and sharing information more easily across distances among others” (p. 16). In short, literacy led “to the replacement of myth by history and the replacement of magic by skepticism and science. Writing allowed bureaucracy, accounting, and legal systems with universal rules and has replaced face-to-face governance with depersonalized administration” (Kaestle, 1985, p. 16). This is not to place a value judgement on the characteristics of literacy but rather to explain some of the many reasons why it spread.

There are, however, other reasons for the spread of literacy. In England, throughout the middle ages literacy grew in part, because people who acquired literacy skills were able to parlay those skills into work with more pay and social advantages (Clanchy, 1983). The great revolutions of the 19th and 20th centuries also relied on leaders who could write and compatriots who could read as a way to spread new ideas beyond the street corners and public gatherings of Paris, Berlin, and Vienna. Literacy was perceived as necessary for spreading information to large numbers of people. In the 1970’s Paulo Freire insisted that literacy was vital for people to participate in their own governance and civic life (Tyner, 1998). His classic “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” begins from the premise that bringing the traditional illiterate and uneducated into learning situations as partners with their teachers awakens the critical conscience necessary as a foundation for action to foment change (Freire, 1973). UNESCO (2004) also acknowledges the role that literacy plays in enabling populations to effect change and achieve social justice aims. They speak even more broadly, moving beyond the conditions necessary for revolution, contending that literacy is a fundamental right of every human being, providing employment opportunities, and the fundamental skills necessary to accrue greater wealth and improve one’s quality of life.

Although the benefits of literacy were a driving force in its spread, technological advances also enabled the spread of literacy to greater and greater numbers of people. From stamped tokens, tally sticks and clay tablets, to ancient scrolls, handwritten volumes, the printing press, typewriters, and finally computers, technology is largely responsible for driving the evolution of literacy into the particular forms of encoding and decoding information associated with the digital age. Technology has made it possible for literacy to move from the hands of the few to the hands of the masses and to morph into a digital environment with characteristics extending far beyond anything that has been seen before.

Not only did computers and electronic technology deliver literacy into the hands of many but also created an environment that made it possible to store vast amounts of information. Books and libraries led the way to making information easily available to the public, but within the age of computers and the internet the volume of accessible information is larger than ever, more readily available than ever, and changing more quickly than ever before. In the early 21st century, technology continues to develop more quickly than at any time in the past creating an environment that is constantly changing. These changes contribute to the need for different skills beyond traditional literacy skills also called new media literacy (Jenkins, 2018). For a short video on the reasons why digital literacy is important visit “ The New Media Literacies ” located on YouTube.com and created by the research team at Project New Media Literacies.

Literacy in the Digital Age

If literacy involves the skills of reading and writing, digital literacy requires the ability to extend those skills in order to effectively take advantage of the digital world (ALA, 2013). More general definitions express digital literacy as the ability to read and understand information from digital sources as well as to create information in various digital formats (Bawden, 2008; Gilster, 1997; Tyner, 1998; UNESCO, 2004). Developing digital skills allows digital learners to manage a vast array of rapidly changing information and is key to both learning and working in an evolving digital landscape (Dede, 2010; Koltay, 2011; Mohammadyari & Singh, 2015). As such, it is important for people to develop certain competencies specifically for handling digital content.

People who adapt well to the digital world exhibit characteristics enabling them to develop and maintain digital literacy skills. Lifelong learning is a key characteristic necessary for handling rapid changes in technology and information and thus, critical to digital literacy. Successful digital learners have a high level of self-motivation, a desire for active modes of learning and they exercise the ability to learn how to learn. Maintaining and learning new technical skills also benefits learners in the digital age and an attitude of exploration and play will help learners stay engaged and energized in a world where speed of change and volume of information could otherwise become overwhelming (Dede, 2010; Jenkins, 2018; Visser, 2012). A final characteristic of a digital learner includes the ability to engage in a global network with a greater awareness of one’s place and audience in that network. Together, these characteristics of the digital age guide us in understanding what traits a learner will require to be successful in the digital environment. The following section will help understand what lies at the intersection of digital skills and traits of successful digital learners by reviewing existing digital literacy frameworks.

Reviewing Existing Frameworks for Digital Literacy/ies

Digital literacy is alternately described as complicated, confusing, too broad to be meaningful and always changing (Heitin, 2016; Pangrazio, 2014; Tyner, 1998; Williams, 2006). Due to this confusion, some feel it best to completely avoid the term digital literacy altogether and instead opt for the terms such as digital competencies (Buckingham, 2006), 21st century skills (Williamson, 2011) or digital skills (Heitin, 2016). Another way to sort out the confusion is to look at digital literacy as multiple literacies (Buckingham, 2006; Lankshear & Knobel, 2008; UNESCO, 2004)

Here, I take the latter approach and look at digital literacy as a collection of literacies each of which play a significant role in learning in a digital world. Ng (2012), operationalizes digital literacy as a framework of multiple, specific competencies which, when combined, form a cohesive collection of skills. By taking this approach, we link the characteristics of the digital environment as well as those of the digital learner not to a single digital skill but rather a set of digital literacy practices. In this way, we can consider the various skills needed to navigate the digital world in an organized and consistent manner.

Ng (2012) proposes a three-part schema for discussing the overlapping functional characteristics of a digitally competent person: technical, cognitive, and social (see Figure 1).

Technical literacy, also referred to as operational literacy, refers to the mastery of technical skills and tasks required to access and work with digital technology such as how to operate a computer; use a mouse and keyboard; open software; cut, copy and paste data and files, acquire an internet connection and so on (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008). The cognitive area of digital literacy focuses on activities such as critical thinking, problem solving and decision making (Williamson, 2011) and includes the ability to “evaluate and apply new knowledge gained from digital environments”(Jones-Kavalier & Flannigan, 2006, p. 5). The third of Ng’s three categories – social literacies – covers a wide range of activities which together constitute the ability to communicate in a digital environment both socially and professionally, understand cyber security, follow “netiquette” protocols, and navigate discussions with care so as not to misrepresent or create misunderstandings (Ng, 2012). Of particular note, Ng captures the essence of digital literacy by showing how digital literacy exists at the intersection of the technical, cognitive and social aspects of literacy which are referred to as dimensions. Ng’s framework is not, however, a digital literacy framework itself. Instead it provides a vehicle for exploring the various components of digital literacy at a conceptual level while remaining clear that the individual skills are at all times connected to and dependent upon each other.

There are a number of organizations that publish their own framework for digital literacies including the International Society for Technology in Education ICT Skills (ISTE), the American Association of College and Universities (AACU), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the American Library Association (ALA), and the Partnership for 21st Century Skills among others (Dede, 2010). The digital frameworks exhibit many similarities, and a few differences. There are some differences in the terminology and organization of these frameworks, but they all include similar skills. What follows is a brief overview of the different digital frameworks. See Figure 2 for a composite of these frameworks.

Figure 2. Major Frameworks for 21st Century Skills (American Library Association, 2013; Dede, 2010; SCONUL, 2016; Vockley & Lang, 2008)

Each of the frameworks come from a slightly different angle and will at times reflect the background from which they come. The American Library Association (ALA) framework evolved out of the information literacy tradition of libraries, while the American Association of College and Universities (AACU) and the Society of College and University Libraries (SOCNUL) evolved from higher education perspective, the Partnership for 21st century learning addresses K-12 education, and the ISTE is steeped in a more technical tradition. Even with these different areas of focus the components of each framework are strikingly similar although some in more detail than others. Three of the six specifically address the skills necessary for accessing, searching and finding information in a digital environment while the other three have broader categories in which one might expect to find these skills including, research and information fluency, intellectual skills, and ICT literacy. Cognitive skills required for digital literacy are also covered by all of the frameworks in varying degrees of specificity. Among them one will find references to evaluating, understanding, creating, integrating, synthesizing, creativity and innovation. Finally, four of the six digital frameworks pay homage to the necessity of solid communication skills. They are in turn, referred to as life skills, personal and social responsibility, communication, collaboration, digital citizenship and collective intelligence.

What seems oddly missing from this list of skills is the technical component which only appears explicitly in the ISTE list of skills. The partnership for 21st century learning uses ICT literacy as a designation for the ability to use technology and the ALA, in discussing its framework, makes it clear that technical proficiency is a foundational requirement for digital literacy skills. Even with these references to technical skills the digital literacy frameworks are overwhelmingly partial to the cognitive and social focus of digital skills and technical proficiency tends to be glossed over compared to the other dimensions. Even though technical skills receive relatively little attention by comparison we will assume for this discussion, technical skills are a prerequisite to the other digital skills, and we will look more carefully at each of them in the next section.

To fully understand the many digital literacies, we will use the ALA framework as a point of reference for further discussion using the other frameworks and other materials to further elucidate each skill area. The ALA framework is laid out in terms of basic functions with enough specificity to make it easy to understand and remember but broad enough to cover a wide range of skills. The ALA framework includes the following areas:

• Understanding,
• Evaluating,
• Creating, and
• Communicating (American Library Association, 2013).

Finding information in a digital environment represents a significant departure from the way human beings have searched for information for centuries. The learner must abandon older linear or sequential approaches to finding information such as reading a book, using a card catalog, index or table of contents and instead use lateral approaches like natural language searches, hypermedia text, keywords, search engines, online databases and so on (Dede, 2010; Eshet, 2002). The shift from sequential to lateral involves developing the ability to construct meaningful search parameters (SCONUL, 2016) whereas before, finding the information would have meant simply looking up page numbers based on an index or sorting through a card catalog. Although finding information may depend to some degree on the search tool being used (library, internet search engine, online database, etc.) the search results also depend on how well a person is able to generate appropriate keywords and construct useful Boolean searches. Failure in these two areas could easily return too many results to be helpful, vague or generic results, or potentially no useful results at all (Hangen, 2015).

Not immediately obvious, but part of the challenge of finding information is the ability to manage the results. Because there is so much data, changing so quickly, in so many different formats it can be challenging to organize and store it in such a way as to be useful. SCONUL (2016) talks about this as the ability to organize, store, manage and cite digital resources while the Educational Testing Service also specifically mentions the skills to access and manage information. Some ways to accomplish these tasks is through the use of social bookmarking tools such as Diigo, clipping and organizing software such as Evernote and OneNote, and bibliographic software. Many sites, such as YouTube allow individuals with an account to bookmark videos as well as create channels or collections of videos for specific topics or uses. Other websites have similar features.

Understanding

Understanding in the context of digital literacy perhaps most closely resembles traditional literacy in so much as it too, is the ability to read and interpret text (Jones-Kavalier & Flannigan, 2006). In the digital age, however, the ability to read and understand extends much further than text alone. For example, searches may return results with any combination of text, video, sound, and audio as well as still and moving pictures. As the internet has evolved, there have evolved a whole host of visual languages such as moving images, emoticons, icons, data visualizations, videos and combinations of all of the above. Lankshear & Knoble, (2008) refer to these modes of communication as “post typographic textual practice”. Understanding the variety of modes of digital material may also be referred to as multimedia literacy (Jones-Kavalier & Flannigan, 2006), visual literacy (Tyner, 1998), and digital literacy (Buckingham, 2006).

Evaluating digital media requires competencies ranging from evaluating the importance of a piece of information to determine its accuracy and its source. Evaluating information is not new to the digital age, but the nature of digital information can make it more difficult to understand who the source of information is and whether it can be trusted (Jenkins, 2018). When there is abundant and rapidly changing data across heavily populated networks, anyone with access can generate information online, making decisions about its authenticity, trustworthiness, relevance, and significance daunting. Learning evaluative digital skills means learning to ask questions about who is writing the information, why they are writing it, and who the intended audience is (Buckingham, 2006). Developing critical thinking skills is part of the literacy of evaluating and assessing the suitability for the use of a specific piece of information (SCONUL, 2016).

Looking for secondary sources of information can help confirm the authenticity and accuracy of online data and researching the credentials and affiliations of the author is another way to find out more about whether an article is trustworthy or valid. One may find other places the author has been published and verify they are legitimate. Sometimes one may be able to review affiliated organizations to attest to the expertise of the author such finding out where an employee works if they are a member of a professional organization or a leading researcher in a given field. All of these provide essential clues for use in evaluating information online.

Creating in the digital world makes explicit the production of knowledge and ideas in digital formats. While writing is a critical component of traditional literacy, it is not the only creative tool in the digital toolbox. Other tools are available and include creative activities such as podcasting, making audio-visual presentations, building data visualizations, 3D printing, writing blogs and new tools that haven’t even been thought of yet. In short, all formats in which digital information may be consumed, a digitally literate individual will also want to be able to use in the creation of a product. A key component of creating with digital tools is understanding what constitutes fair use and what is considered plagiarism. While this is not new to the digital age, it may be more challenging to find the line between copying and extending someone else’s work.

In part, the reason for the increased difficulty of finding the line between plagiarism and new work is the “cut and paste culture” of the internet referred to as “reproduction literacy” (Eshet 2002, p.4) also referred to as appropriation in Jenkins’ New Media Literacies (Jenkins, 2018). The question is, what can one change and how much can one change work without being considered copying? This skill requires the ability to think critically, evaluate a work and make appropriate decisions. There are tools and information to help understand and find those answers such as the creative commons. Learning about these resources and learning how to use them is part of this digital literacy.

Communicating

Communicating is the final category of digital skills in the ALA digital framework. The capacity to connect with individuals all over the world creates unique opportunities for learning and sharing information for which developing digital communication skills is vital. Some of the skills required for communicating in a digital environment include digital citizenship, collaboration, and cultural awareness. This is not to say that one does not need to develop communication skills outside of the digital environment but that the skills required for digital communication go beyond what is required in a non-digital environment. Most of us are adept at personal, face to face communication but digital communication needs the ability to engage in asynchronous environments such as email, online forums, blogs and social media platforms where what we say can’t always be deleted but can be easily misinterpreted. Add that to an environment where people number in the millions and the opportunities for misunderstandings and cultural miscues are much more likely.

The communication category of digital literacies covers an extensive array of skills above and beyond what one might need for face to face interactions. It includes competencies around ethical and moral behavior, responsible communication for engagement in social and civic activities (Adam Becker et al., 2017), an awareness of audience and an ability to evaluate the potential impact of one’s actions online. It also includes skills for handling privacy and security in online environments. These activities fall into two main categories of activity including digital citizenship and collaboration.

Digital citizenship refers to one’s ability to interact effectively in the digital world. Part of this skill is good manners, often referred to as “netiquette. There is a level of context which is often missing in digital communication due to physical distance, lack of personal familiarity with people online and the sheer volume of people who may come in contact with our words. People who know us well may understand exactly what we mean when we say something sarcastic or ironic, but those and other vocal and facial cues are missing in most digital communication making it more likely we will be misunderstood. Also, we are also more likely to misunderstand or be misunderstood if we remain unaware of cultural differences amongst people online. So, digital citizenship includes an awareness of who we are, what we intend to say and how it might be perceived by other people we do not know (Buckingham, 2006). It is also a process of learning to communicate clearly and in ways that help others understand what we mean.

Another key digital skill is collaboration, and it is essential for effective participation in digital projects via the internet. The internet allows people to engage with others we may never see in person and work towards common goals be they social, civic or business oriented. Creating a community and working together requires a degree of trust and familiarity that can be difficult to build given the physical distance between participants. Greater awareness must be paid to inclusive behavior, and more explicit efforts need to be made to make up for perceived or actual distance and disconnectedness. So, while the promise of digital technology to connect people is impressive it is not necessarily an automatic transition, and it requires new skills.

Parting thoughts.

It is clear from our previous discussion of digital literacy that technology and technical skills underpin every other digital skill. A failure to understand hardware, software, the nature of the internet, cloud-based technologies and an inability to learn new concepts and tools going forward handicaps one’s ability to engage with the cognitive and social literacies. While there are sometimes tacit references to technical skills and ability, extant digital literacy frameworks tend to focus more on the cognitive and social aspects of digital environments. There is an implied sense that once technical skills are learned, we the digitally literate person can forget about them and move on to the other skills. Given the rapid pace of technological change in the last 40 years, however, anyone working in a digital environment would be well advised to keep in mind that technical concepts and tools continue to develop. It does not seem likely that we will ever reach a point where people can simply take technological skills for granted and to do so would undermine our ability to address the other digital skills.

Another way to think of this is to recognize that no matter what the skill, none of them operate independently of one another. Whether searching, creating, evaluating, understanding or communicating, it is a combination of skills (or literacies) that allow us to accomplish our goals. Thinking critically, and evaluating information and sources leads to sound decision-making. Understanding and synthesizing information is necessary for creating and again the technical tools are necessary for completing the product. Finding information is of little use if one is unable to analyze its usefulness and creating a great video or podcast will not mean much if one is unable to navigate social and professional networks to communicate those works to others. If only understood in isolation, digital literacies have little meaning and can be of little use in approaching digital environments.

Ng’s (2012) conceptual framework reminds us that digital literacy is that space where technical, cognitive and social literacies overlap. A digital skill is not the same thing as digital literacy but the two are fully intwined. Acquiring digital skills is only the beginning of a study of digital literacies, however, and it would be a mistake to stop here. Furthermore, digital literacies span multiple areas including both the cognitive and the social. The real value of digital literacy lies in understanding the synergistic effect of individual digital literacy skills integrated with sets of competencies that enable one to work effectively in the digital world.

Learning Activities.

Literacy Narratives are stories about reading and composing in any form or context. They often include poignant memories that involve a personal experience with literacy. Digital literacy narratives can sometimes be categorized as narratives that focus on how the writer came to understand the importance of technology in his/her life or teaching pedagogy. More often, they are simply narratives that use a medium beyond the print-based essay to tell the story.

Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, 20(1), available at http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/20.1/praxis/bourelle-et-al

• Combining both aspects of the genre, write a piece based on your technological literacy, choosing a medium you feel best conveys the message you want to share with your audience.
• Find and read 2-4 literacy narratives online that emphasize the use of technology and write a short reflection that discusses the main digital literacies used, summarizes the main points made and describes the elements you felt were most important. Also, describe any digital literacy skills you utilized to complete the assignment.
• Create your literacy narrative that tells the story of a significant experience of your own with digital literacy. Use a multi-modal tool that includes audio and images or video. Share with your classmates and discuss the most important ideas you noticed in others’ narratives.
• Compare two of the literacy frameworks in Figure 2. How are they alike? How are they different? Do you like one better than the other? Why or Why not?
• Digital Literacy and why it matters – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2k3C-iB88w
• The essential elements of digital literacies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8yQPoTcZ78
• What is a Literacy Narrative? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Mhl2j-cpZo
• Benji Bissman’s computer literacy narrative – http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/2327 [site can’t be reached, KE 6.12.24]  
• Global Digital Literacy Council [page not found, KE 6.12.24]
• International Society for Technology in Education
• Information and Communication Technologies [site can’t be reached, KE 6.12.24]
• Education Development Center, Inc.
• International Visual Literacy Association
• http://mediasmarts.ca/digital-media-literacy-fundamentals/digital-literacy-fundamentals
• https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/digitalliteracy/overview.aspx [page not found, KE 6.12.24]
• . http://info.learning.com/hubfs/Corp_Site/Sales%20Tools/12EssentialSkills_Brochure_Apr16.pdf [page not found, KE 6.12.24]
• http://www. digitalliteracy.us
• https://k12.thoughtfullearning.com/FAQ/what-are-literacy-skills

References.

Adam Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall Gieseinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. NMC Horizon Report. https://doi.org/ISBN 978-0-9977215-7-7

Association, A. L. (2013). Digital literacy, libraries, and public policy (January). Washington, D.C. Retrieved from http://www.districtdispatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2012_OITP_digilitreport_1_22_13.pdf

Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.) (pp. 17–32).

Buckingham, D. (2006). Defining digital literacy. District Dispatch, 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92133-4_4

Clanchy, M. (1983). Looking back from the invention of printing. Resnick (Ed.), Literacy in historical perspective (pp. 7–22). Library of Congress.

Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn, 51–76.

Eshet, Y. (2002). Digital literacy: A new terminology framework and its application to the design of meaningful technology-based learning environments. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, 1–7.

Gilster, P. (1997). Digital Literacy. New York: Wiley Computer Pub.

Hangen, T. (2015). Historical digital literacy, one classroom at a time. Journal of American History. https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/jav062

Heitin, L. (2016). Digital Literacy: Forging agreement on a definition. Retrieved from www.edweek.org/go/changing-literacy

Jenkins, H. (2018). This page has a content security policy that prevents it from being loaded in this way . Retrieved from http://www.newmedialiteracies.org/

Jones-Kavalier, B. B. R., & Flannigan, S. L. (2006). Connecting the digital dots : Literacy of the 21st century. Workforce, 29(2), 8–10. https://doi.org/Article

Kaestle, C. F. (1985). Review of Research in Education. The History of Literacy and the History of Readers, 12(1985), 11–53. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1167145

Koltay, T. (2011). The media and the literacies: Media literacy, information literacy, digital literacy. Media, Culture & Society, 33(2), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710393382

Lankshear, Colin & Knobel, M. (2008). Introduction. In C. & K. M. Lankshear (Ed.), Digital Literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. https://doi.org/9781433101694

Mohammadyari, S., & Singh, H. (2015). Understanding the effect of e-learning on individual performance: The role of digital literacy. Computers and Education, 82, 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.025

Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers and Education, 59(3), 1065–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016

Pangrazio, L. (2014). Reconceptualising critical digital literacy. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(2), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.942836

Reynolds, R. (2016). Defining, designing for, and measuring social constructivist digital literacy development in learners: a proposed framework. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9423-4

SCONUL. (2016). The SCONUL7 pillars of information literacy through a digital literacy “ lens .” Retrieved from https://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Digital_Lens.pdf

Tyner, K. (1998). Tyner, Kathleen. Literacy in a digital world: Teaching and learning in the age of information (Kindle). Routledge.

UNESCO. (2004) The plurality of literacy. UNESCO, (The plurality of literacy and its Implications for Policies and Programmes UNESCO Education Sector Position Paper). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Visser, M. (2012). Digital literacy definition. Retrieved from http://connect.ala.org/node/181197

Vlieghe, J. (2015). Traditional and digital literacy. The literacy hypothesis, technologies of reading and writing, and the “grammatized” body. Ethics and Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2015.1039288

Vockley, M., & Lang, V. (2008). 21st century skills , education & competitiveness. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/21st_century_skills_education_and_competitiveness_guide.pdf

Williams, B. T. (2006). Girl power in a digital world: Considering the complexity of gender, literacy, and technology. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(4), 300–307. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.50.4.6

Williamson, R. (2011). Digital literacy. EPI Education Partnerships, inc. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/aspx

This resource is no cost at https://open.library.okstate.edu/learninginthedigitalage/

Links checked 6.12.24 KE

Learning in the Digital Age Copyright © 2020 by Cathy L. Green, Oklahoma State University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essay Examples >
• Essays Topics >
• Essay on Education

Computer Literacy Essay

Type of paper: Essay

Topic: Education , Computers , Students , Learning , Pollution , Information , Future , Literacy

Published: 12/02/2019

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Recently, computers are being used in most of the current jobs students will be taking on in the future. Computers are known to make many tasks easier and faster to perform while still being accurate. For instance, computers are being used in finance, business, education, and medical fields. With this, students should be taught at least the basic skills that they will need in the future. There are several reasons why computer literacy should be considered as a requirement: First, computers make the student learning process easier. Second, these machines are used in almost all working fields. Finally, technological developments depend mostly on computers.

A computer is an important tool for learning. Students can write their school paper using computers. They can conveniently look-up information using the Internet. If students, for example, were asked to write a paper about pollution, but they do not know the meaning of the word, they could use a search engine to search for its meaning. They will find different information from the definition of the word, to the types of solutions to prevent pollution from happening. They can also find recently published studies on pollution as well as new techniques for its prevention. All these information can be found easily if the student was taught how to use the computer and on how to use search engines. This will be useful for them in their future.

Finally, the massive improvements in computer technology invite us to utilize it in the field of education in an innovative way. It is a must that students possess the basic knowledge of using computers in order to cope up with this development. An example for this massive improvement is the newly developed way for communication such as using the web camera to communicate via computers as well as through smart phones.

It is not exaggerated to say that those who do not know how to use computers are ill equipped for the future. We definitely have to make computer literacy a requirement for high school graduation.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 161

This paper is created by writer with

ID 267180765

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Chemistry literature reviews, self sufficiency argumentative essays, self sacrifice argumentative essays, military capability argumentative essays, diagram argumentative essays, physical therapy argumentative essays, fundamentalism argumentative essays, security measures argumentative essays, tea party argumentative essays, mentally retarded argumentative essays, mental state argumentative essays, borderline argumentative essays, scientific research argumentative essays, africana essays, biologic essays, arbs essays, biophysical essays, news corp essays, ante essays, accreta essays, asherman essays, franks essays, ruddick essays, free thesis proposal on design therapy, carolyn richardson drake research paper examples, free essay on in a co ed fraternity what is the difference between frater and pledge, information systems at the national level course work example, good example of criteria for evaluation case study research essay, good example of book review on breaking the chains of psychological slavery, good essay about successful brands are built on successful products, grades and money essay, sample research paper on sociological perspective human suffering and narcoviolencia in mexico, report on financial analysis blue inc, what does orgon see in tartuffe might this happen today essay example, pricing cue article review sample, what do you feel are the preferred readings of stardust memories and the kid movie review, market forces essay, good example of creative writing on hamlet, argument essay examples 2, good example of essay on conservation biology.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Advertisement

Key factors in digital literacy in learning and education: a systematic literature review using text mining

• Open access
• Published: 10 February 2022
• Volume 27 , pages 7395–7419, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Catherine Audrin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2905-6000 1 &
• Bertrand Audrin 2  

41k Accesses

59 Citations

6 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This research aims at providing an overview of the research field of digital literacy into learning and education. Using text mining, it reviews 1037 research articles published on the topic between 2000 and 2020. This review reveals that there is a plurality of terms associated with digital literacy. Moreover, our research identifies six key factors that define the literature, which are information literacy, developing digital literacy, digital learning, ICT, social media, and twenty-first century digital skills. These factors can be grouped into three main streams, which are 1) digital literacy, 2) digital learning and 3) twenty-first century digital skills. These three streams are supported by informational and technological foundations. These results provide research avenues and offer a framework for digital literacy in education.

Similar content being viewed by others

A systematic review on digital literacy

Information literacy trends in higher education (2006–2019): visualizing the emerging field of mobile information literacy

Mapping digital literacy in language education: A comparative analysis of national curriculum standards using text as data approach

Explore related subjects.

• Digital Education and Educational Technology

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

With the rise of digitalization over the last decades, digital literacy has taken a central role in our society and has become an important concern for institutions and policy makers (European Commission, 2020 ; U.S. Department of Education, 2014 ). It is also a particular topic of interest for research, be it in the definition of this digital literacy (Gilster, 1997 ; van Laar et al., 2017 ) or its development (List, 2019 ; Ng, 2012 ). The impact of digital society is also studied in relation to education (Di Giacomo et al., 2017 ; Pinto et al., 2020 ) and research (Ferreira-Mello et al., 2019 ; Stopar & Bartol, 2019 ).

In the same way that the term digital transformation covers a vast and varied set of phenomena (Audrin, 2019 ; Vial, 2019 ), there is a wide range of concepts for addressing the notions of digital skills in education literature, with some specificities and overlaps among definitions. In going beyond issues of terminology, the very purpose of research on the subject of digital literacy varies, as does the context in which it is led.

Over the last twenty years, the number of publications on digital literacy has grown almost exponentially. This abundance of scientific production is, of course, beneficial because it increases knowledge on the subject, but it also represents a significant challenge for scholars: given the proliferation of studies on the subject, it is very difficult to make sense of the field of research and to fully understand its specificities and areas of interest. Scholars benefit from using digital and quantitative research methods to give sense to the field of research. For example, Stopar & Bartol ( 2019 ) analyze clusters of co-citations and co-citing sources to understand how research is organized. The rationale of this study is to make sense of the abundant body of literature on the theme of digital literacy in the context of education and learning. This study uses text mining to structure the field of research.

The purpose of this study is twofold. First, we want to map how digital literacy and its related notions are investigated in the context of learning and educational research. More specifically, we are interested in studying which concepts are used by researchers, and if these refer to distinct specific skills. The second purpose of this article is to study the key research streams on the topic of digital literacy and its related notions in the literature. Thus, our purpose is to both provide an overview of the field, as well as to highlight how research integrates digital literacy into learning and education. Our research questions are the following:

1) What place does digital literacy hold in the literature on education and learning?

2) How is digital literacy conceptualized in the educational context and what are the main research streams on the topic?

To answer these research questions, we conducted a systematic review of the literature using text mining (Ignatow & Mihalcea, 2018 ; Thomas et al., 2011 ). This method is particularly suitable for our systematic literature review because it allows us to automate to a certain extent the content analysis process, and thus to process very large volumes of data in a systematic way. Text mining works by associating words or sentences and allows patterns to be extracted from a multitude of documents (Fabbri et al., 2013 ; Thomas et al., 2011 ). Our study is based on all articles published between 2000 and 2020 in English peer-reviewed journals collected on all relevant databases (Web of Science, ERIC and PsycINFO).

As defined by Moher et al. ( 2015 ), the purpose of a systematic review is “to collate all relevant evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a specific research question” (Moher et al., 2015 , p. 3). A systematic review allows a clear synthesis of the characteristics and findings of the studies included in the review by adopting a systematic search to identify all studies that meet given eligibility criteria. While traditional systematic literature reviews are mostly performed manually, we propose using (semi) automatic methods. We believe that due to the huge amount of relevant literature available in the early stage of the literature review process (Ananiadou et al., 2009 ; Fabbri et al., 2013 ), researchers may benefit from the automatic extraction allowed by textual analyses (Thomas et al., 2011 ). Text mining is being increasingly used in research in education (Ferreira-Mello et al., 2019 ), as it helps provide new insights by analyzing huge quantities of information. Text mining has been used in the field of education on a variety of data, but has not been used, to the best of our knowledge, to conduct a systematic literature review on scientific articles in the field of education and on the topic of digital literacy.

Having said that, given the power of such a tool to conduct analyses on large volumes of data (such as the body of literature on digital skills in education), we believe this method could be very fruitful in order to get an understanding of the literature focusing on digital literacy in learning and education. More specifically, text mining is designed to 1) foster information retrieval, 2) extract information and 3) perform data mining by highlighting both direct and indirect associations between various pieces of information (Thomas et al., 2011 ). Such processes are central when conducting a systematic literature review. We thus used textual analysis to 1) filter and categorize journal articles and 2) summarize central topics emerging from these articles. Text mining allowed us to extract information about the main concepts studied in the selected articles and to organize said concepts based on their co-occurence.

2.1 Inclusion criteria

To select the studies included in this systematic review, we used the following criteria:

The article had to be published in a peer-reviewed journal and written in English. These criteria not only guaranteed scientific quality but also allowed us to gather the most important body of research focusing on digital literacy in learning and education. The language criterion was also necessary in order to perform the analysis with WordStat.

The article had to be published between January 2000 and November 2020. We chose 2000 as the milestone because this year represents the emerging year of the field of digital literacy in education, shortly after Gilster’s seminal work on digital literacy.

The study had to mention the constructs of interest (i.e. “digital*”, “learn*”, “educ*”) in its title and/or abstract.

2.2 Literature research strategy

The studies were identified by searching the databases PsycINFO, Web of Science and ERIC. We searched for all available records starting from January 2000 until November 2020, using the following combination of keywords in the title or abstract of the article: “digital competenc*” OR “digital (NEAR/2) skills” OR (“digital literacy” OR “e-skills”) AND (“learn*” OR “education”). We based this query on van Laar et al. ( 2017 )‘s systematic literature review. This research held an initial pool of 1460 articles. After removing duplicates, there were 1037 articles left.

2.3 Data analysis

We performed text mining with the software WordStat 8 on the titles and abstracts of the 1037 articles selected in the previous section. WordStat is a software that offers quantitative analysis of textual data (Pollach, 2011 ). Through dictionaries, it allows to explore a corpus of texts and to identify key factors underlying said corpus. Recent literature reviews have been realized using WordStat (Ćurlin et al., 2019 ; Jede & Teuteberg, 2015 ). As specified by Durach et al. ( 2017 ), researchers performing a literature review are required to summarize the findings of the different studies. Relying on a textometric analysis allows for more objectivity in summarizing studies as researchers do not intervene in the coding and thus, do not tend to introduce biases during the analysis, coding and synthesis of the literature review.

The principle of text mining is that “the frequency with which a content word appears, the statistical relationships between content words and their context all witness to thematic patterns specific to a corpus” (Lavissière et al., 2020 , p. 136). Our textometric analysis uses both processes of stemming and lemmatization. Stemming compiles and removes derivations and inflections of words to gather them into roots – or stems. We used Lovins’ algorithm (Allahyari et al., 2017 ; Vijayarani et al., 2015 ). Lemmatization identifies the basic form of the words used in the corpus and relates them to their dictionary form. It thus returns to the lemma of the world, which is the dictionary form of a given word (Schütze et al., 2008 ).

Thus, our analysis first consisted in assessing the frequency of phrases across titles and abstracts in our corpus of articles. Then, we performed a co-occurrence analysis on the frequencies of phrases in titles and abstracts. Such analysis is based on the construction of a specific dictionary for the corpus. We built this dictionary based on the results of the frequency analysis. Items were included in the dictionary if they 1) occurred more than 100 times and 2) were directly related to learning, education and digital technologies. This dictionary accounted for 11.4% of the total words of the whole corpus. When considering excluded words (such as “a”, “the”, etc.), our dictionary accounted for 96% of the corpus. This analysis allowed us to find common phrases in our corpus, and further to perform factor analysis, multidimensional scaling and link analysis on our data. Note that we considered “phrases” to be the sequence of two to eight co-occurring words. We used the Phi coefficient to measure the association between words, as its interpretation is similar to the Pearson correlation coefficient. We selected the second order clustering method, as it is based on the idea that two words are close to each other, not necessarily because they occur near each other or in a same document, but because they occur in similar environments.

Finally, we performed a latent semantic analysis by applying a factor analysis with Varimax Rotation in order to extract a small number of factors from synthesizing the data. Data was segmented between documents, meaning that the topic modeling used was based on the cooccurrence of words in one article (its title and abstract). Phrases that occurred less than 30 times were removed, as it is advised to ensure the stability of the factorial solution. We selected factors which accounted for at least 20% of the cases. To define our factors, we retained words whose loadings (standardized link between a word and its factor) were higher than .3. We chose to perform a factor analysis instead of a hierarchical cluster analysis given that in a factor analysis one word may be associated with more than one factor, which we believe is more realistic. Indeed, this may not only reveal the polysemous nature of words but also highlight that some words may appear in multiple contexts.

3.1 An ever-growing proliferation of publications in numerous journals

Results reveal a growing interest in the study of digital literacy and education, as reported in Fig.  1 . This figure reveals that very few studies were published on the topic of digital literacy and learning in 2001, while almost 300 articles were published on this topic in 2020. These results can seem logical and obvious, as digitalization as such is quite a recent concept that has really boomed over the last decade. It shows, however, how research adopts a topic and makes it a fundamental topic of research in a relative short span of time, as illustrated by the progression between 2011 (42 articles published) and 2019 (242 articles published). More precisely, we can say that a threshold has been crossed in 2015 when the number of publications got higher than a hundred in a year, almost doubling the numbers from the previous year. The numbers for the next few years confirm this trend, highlighting the growing importance of digital literacy and its relevance for research.

Number of publications by year

Four journals have published more than 20 papers on the topic, with “Computer & Education” leading at 41 articles and “International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence” following with 27 articles. Behind these big contributors, there is a very high number of journals that have published on the topic. The topic of digital literacy and learning is not limited to journals in the field of education but is also studied in other fields such as medicine and health, technology, organizational behavior, and so on. This highlights how digital literacy as a topic is widespread in literature, appearing in numerous journals with several terminologies, research angles, methods, and concerns that strongly differ.

3.2 A plurality of terms

We now turn to the content of our analysis itself. In Table  1 , we report a frequency table of the phrases which were mostly cited across all articles. As specified in the methods section, we considered “phrases” to the sequence of at least two co-occurring words. Phrases were kept if they occurred more than 100 times in the data. This table clearly highlights that “digital literacy” is a central concept, as it occurred 1734 times within 849 articles of our corpus of 1037 articles. It is then followed by “digital competence” (556 occurrences among 235 articles), “digital skills” (455 occurrences among 308 articles), and “digital competencies” (255 occurrences among 148 articles).

A first striking point is to notice the plurality of the terms used on this topic. This point has already been highlighted in various literature reviews on the topic (Aviram & Eshet-Alkalai, 2006 ; Spante et al., 2018 ), where scholars have tried to decipher the relationships between e-skills, digital literacy, information and communication technology (ICT) literacy, digital skills, digital competence, and so on. The biggest issue when trying to make sense of the relationships between such a variety of terms is to understand to which extent they are similar or distinct. By going back to the very definitions of the concepts used in the literature, we can note some differences in the way the concepts are defined and used.

Definitions of digital literacy are numerous in education literature, but all trace back to the original definition suggested by Gilster ( 1997 ) who defines digital literacy as “the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources when it is presented via computers” (Gilster, 1997 , p.1). This definition offers a very interesting starting point as to what digital literacy encompasses by emphasizing that digital literacy is not only about technical skills but also encompasses a cognitive dimension (van Laar et al., 2017 ; Spante et al., 2018 ). Avila and Pandya ( 2013 ) further emphasize the critical-thinking dimension of digital literacy by coining the term “critical digital literacies” (Avila & Pandya, 2013 , p. 3). Other scholars such as Aviram and Eshet-Alkalai ( 2006 ); Ng ( 2012 ); Tuamsuk and Subramaniam ( 2017 ) even go beyond in suggesting that there is another dimension to digital literacy, which is the socio-emotional dimension. In this perspective, digital literacy also integrates online behaviors and the sensibility that is required to behave appropriately (Eshet, 2004 ). One of the first things that is striking when comparing these definitions is that there is no consensus on the actual definition of digital literacy. Scholars agree that digital literacy goes beyond technical aspects to include cognitive aspects. Beyond that, digital literacy appears as a multifaceted notion with some scholars emphasizing specific elements and others emphasizing others.

The second most recurring term in our corpus is “digital competence” or “digital competencies”. It is broadly defined by Picatoste ( 2018 ) as “a set of different skills for achieving a good performance on digital society” (Picatoste et al., 2018 , p. 1033). This definition is interesting because it emphasizes the notion of performance. Other existing definitions of digital competence further insist on the notion of technology use (Scuotto & Morellato, 2013 ) and knowledge production (Cazco et al., 2016 ). These definitions are interesting because they articulate digital competence around practical aspects of using digital tools. In contrast, digital literacy seems to be focusing more on processing and communicating information.

The third term that appears most frequently in our corpus is “digital skills”. Here again, the term has been widely used in the literature and many definitions exist. Van Dijk for example defines digital skills as the “set of skills that users need to operate computers and their networks, to search and select information, and the ability to use them for the fulfillment of one’s goals” (van Dijk, 2006 , p.73). This definition distinguishes three dimensions of digital skills: technical skills (i.e. the ability to operate a computer or other kinds of digital technologies), information-seeking skills (i.e. ability to browse and select relevant information), and strategic skills (i.e. using technical and information skills in order to achieve something) (van Dijk, 2006 ). van Deursen and van Dijk ( 2009 ) further make a distinction between the technical aspects and the content aspects in the digital skills to account for the specificities of online content. The way digital skills are defined in the literature seems to put emphasis on both the technological and medium of communication aspects.

Table 1 further highlights that the term ‘twenty-first century’ appears 160 times. This term can be associated with twenty-first century skills or twenty-first century digital skills, terms that have been made popular by van Laar et al. ( 2017 , 2019 ). They provide a framework for defining twenty-first century digital skills as it identifies seven core skills, which are technical, information management, communication, collaboration, creativity, critical thinking and problem solving. Twenty-First century digital skills as such, consist of a broad array of competencies that are crucial in order to successfully accomplish tasks in the digital twenty-first century. Van Laar and colleagues further study how some determinants such as education level, age, and social support influence 21st digital skills, and are as such needed to be taken into account by educators and policy-makers (van Laar et al., 2019 ).

Based on Table 1 and on the definitions available in the literature, it appears that there is a multiplicity of overlapping concepts in education literature, all of which have their specificities and their particular inclinations. The pervasiveness of various terms such as digital literacy, digital competence(s), digital skills, and twenty-first century digital skills casts doubt on the overall appropriateness of use of the terms in the literature. It raises questions about the extent to which scholars use them with a specific intent in mind, with Fieldhouse and Nicholas ( 2008 ) noting that terms are often interchangeable in taking the example of ‘literacy’, ‘fluency’, and ‘competency’. Table 1 highlights the breadth and heterogeneity of the terminology used in the literature; the results of our co-occurrence analysis emphasize this global lack of precision in the terminology and in its use.

3.3 Co-occurrence analysis: Classroom versus everyday life

In the following section, we report the results of a co-occurrence analysis based on the frequencies of phrases in titles and abstracts. Figure  2 represents a dendrogram describing the similarities between the phrases, and Table  2 shows a table of similarity, where the coefficients can be interpreted as correlation coefficients. Note that the values of the coefficients are not based on the frequencies of the words but rather on the co-occurrences of specific words in a case.

Dendrogram of the co-occurrence of phrases – generated by WordStat

Two main groups of phrases can be extracted from the dendrogram and from the similarities table. On the one hand, themes related to information literacy, digital media, literacy and social media appear to form one group of concepts. Indeed, social media and social networks are related to “online” (both phi higher than .5) and “internet” (phi = .486). Surprisingly, the term “internet” is negatively associated with concepts related to learning and education (such as “pedagogy”, phi = −.729; teaching, phi = −.652, teaching and learning, phi = −.642, school, phi = −.517 and student, phi = −.523).This leads us to the second main group of phrases, which are related to the classroom. This group includes phrases such as “learning”, “language”, “pedagog*”, “school”, “student”, “teach*, “teacher education”, “teaching and learning”, which all have an association higher than .5 with the concept of “classroom”. These terms are also strongly related with the term “competence” (association higher than .4). Moreover, competence is strongly related to “train*” (phi = .713) and “universit*” (phi = .443).

This dendrogram provides a visual representation of how the terms in our corpus are associated. It is interesting to note that two groups of phrases emerge, with terms associated with the educational and learning environment on the one hand, and those with a more practical focus on the other. We can therefore distinguish in our corpus a literature that deals with the development of digital skills from a literature that focuses on the operationalization of such digital skills. Figure 2 therefore displays two major research streams on digital literacy.

4 Discussion

The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of the research field of digital literacy into learning and education. More precisely, it aimed at answering the following two questions: 1) What place does digital literacy hold in the literature on education and learning? 2) How is digital literacy conceptualized in the educational context and what are the main research streams on the topic?

Using text mining, this review maps the field of educational research in line with digital literacy. A number of 1037 studies performed between 2000 and 2020 on this topic were included, as they explicitly mentioned digital skills (or related terms such as digital literacy or competence), education and learning either in their title and/or in their abstract. This number of studies shows that there is a great deal of interest in this topic. The first question that this rapid growth raises is that of the sustainability of this research area: is digital literacy a long-lasting research topic or is it going to be out-of-date in a few years because of the emergence of new technologies? On one hand, the fact that digital literacy is tightly linked to ICT and digital media suggests that it might not be relevant in a post-digital world. On the other hand, the very concept of digital literacy is more than twenty years old and still relevant, even if technological evolution has been tremendous over that period of time. Moreover, the concept of digital literacy covers more than the sole technical dimension, which suggests that research on the subject still has a long way to go.

Our analysis suggests that the terms used (most notably, digital skills, digital literacy, digital competence(s)) need to be clearly defined, as authors tend to use them interchangeably although each term has its own specificities. These results are consistent with other literature reviews (Spante et al., 2018 ). The relative youth of the literature field (about twenty years old) might explain why the terminology is not yet fully established. Nonetheless, this may generate some confusion and potential misunderstandings, as well as a dispersion in the field of research. Our descriptive results shed light on this plurality and our analysis of the corpus provide an overview of the research field and highlights how research integrates digital literacy into learning and education. This allows researchers to better position their research on the subject and to use the appropriate terminology.

Our research allows us to go beyond the issues of terminology to offer a mapping of the field of research in education sciences on digital literacy. Text mining allows us to give an overview of the field, but also to investigate in detail the different elements that compose it.

Our results highlight a fragmentation in this field: on the one hand, there are studies focusing on digital literacy in an educational context (i.e. in classrooms and other learning contexts). On the other hand, there is research highlighting practical aspects related to digital world, such as the use of social media and social network and more generally to information literacy. This fragmentation of research in this field is in line with Stopar and Bartol ( 2019 ) who also identify distinct research clusters. This allows us to identify three main streams of research, namely: learning digital literacy, digital learning and twenty-first century digital skills, as well as two fundamental dimensions that support the digital ecosystem that are the informational and the technological base.

Digital literacy and digital learning are at heart of the research field, as they constitute its core focus. Research is booming and there are more and more studies investigating either the development of digital literacy or digital learning setups. There is a high correlation between these two research streams, but more research needs to be led in order to combine these two research streams. Research could for example focus on how digital literacy enables digital learning, or, at the opposite, how digital learning creates a fruitful environment to develop digital literacy (e.g. Cazco et al., 2016 ; Hatlevik, 2017 ; Yu et al., 2017 ). Research could also specifically target vocational teachers, as their role in both fostering digital literacy and creating digital learning environments are crucial (e.g. Area-Moreira et al., 2016 ; Gómez-Trigueros et al., 2019 ; Gudmundsdottir et al., 2020 ; Guillén-Gámez et al., 2019 ; Martín et al., 2020 ; Mynaříková & Novotný, 2020 ). Research also advocates that teacher training should focus more on the vocational teachers’ development of digital skills, notably by integrating ICT in their curriculum (Pombo et al., 2017 ).

The twenty-first century digital skills factor shows another axis of research in the literature field bridging the technological base and the informational base. Rather than asking the question of digital learning or learning digital literacy, the issue here is the operationalization of these skills between technology and information and communication. This factor therefore illustrates a third research axis in the literature on digital skills, which is more concerned with understanding what these digital skills are made of and how they can be used in everyday life. Research in this stream can step out of the traditional education and learning field of research to tackle other issues related to twenty-first century digital skills, for example in the workplace (van Laar et al., 2019 ).

The technological aspect is very important and can be found in the ICT and social media factors. They represent the “technological base” without which the whole digital ecosystem would not exist, demonstrating their central role in research. The particularity of digital communication tools is that they are constantly evolving, which is why studies focusing on tools are always relevant as they deal with a constantly evolving reality that needs to be understood. The social media factor, beyond its technological dimension, also has to be linked to its daily life dimension in which social media is used for all kinds of activities. This factor therefore has an embeddedness in daily life that is important to take into account.

Information and communication are also a key element of this research area, constituting what could be called the “informational base” without which the whole digital ecosystem does not exist. In this sense, the information literacy factor puts the emphasis on data and on information and communication, which are the core forms of expression in digital literacy. The performance of information and communication tasks is at the heart of digital literacy, and this “informational base” appears in both research streams.

Our study has several limitations. The first limitation is methodological in nature and concerns text mining. In contrast to traditional systematic literature reviews which focus on the most relevant articles by establishing very precise selection criteria and analyze them in depth, our approach via text mining aims rather at processing a very large number of articles (the whole body of articles published on the topic) and analyzing them in an automated way. This does not allow us to obtain the depth of analysis of traditional systematic literature reviews, but it is very useful in order to have a global understanding of the field of research. This objective of mapping the entire literature is incompatible with a more in-depth work on the content of the articles. Future studies, however, could dig deeper into the factors that have been identified in our analysis and analyze how these operate in the field of research in order to make sense of their specificities.

Another issue with text mining is that it works through keywords and can thus miss important topics if they are not signaled through the appropriate keywords. For example, private context does not appear in our analysis, even though there is an important body of literature that highlights the importance of personal factors. This literature focuses on children’s first use of ICT (Juhaňák et al., 2019 ), cultural background (Gui & Argentin, 2011 ), socioeconomic status (Hatlevik et al., 2015 ; Jara et al., 2015 ; Zhong, 2011 ), parental active mediation of ICT use (Livingstone et al., 2017 ), parental level of education (Cabello-Hutt et al., 2018 ). The absence of this dimension in our analysis might be explained by the fact that there is no term that encompasses all these sub-themes, no keyword that the automatic analysis could retrieve. This factor, however, plays an important role in the research as it seems to be a determinant of digital literacy.

Finally, one limitation of our study is its focus on education. This focus on educational research allows us to have a comprehensive view of the whole field, but limits our understanding of digital skills and their applications in daily life and notably within the world of work. Future studies could aim at bridging the classroom with the workplace in order to have a more global perspective on digital skills and results that benefit both (Ahlquist, 2014 ; Alvermann et al., 2012 ; Kivunja, 2014 ).

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our parents for their continuous support and guidance.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Media, digital use and informatics didactics teaching and research unit, University of Teacher Education, Avenue de Cour 33, 1004, Lausanne, Switzerland

Catherine Audrin

Chair of Human Resources and Organization, University of Fribourg, Boulevard de Pérolles 90, 1700, Fribourg, Switzerland

Bertrand Audrin

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine Audrin .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests/competing interests.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Audrin, C., Audrin, B. Key factors in digital literacy in learning and education: a systematic literature review using text mining. Educ Inf Technol 27 , 7395–7419 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10832-5

Download citation

Received : 25 June 2021

Accepted : 22 November 2021

Published : 10 February 2022

Issue Date : July 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10832-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Twenty-first century abilities
• Information literacy
• Text mining, digital skills and digital literacy
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research