INTRODUCTION

By increasing the use of Digital Technologies (DT), ^{Brynjolfsson & McAfee (2014}) argue that the parts of the knowledge society have modified and conditioned how we live, relate, communicate, learn, and generate new knowledge. This requires subjects to have Digital Competences (DC) in order to handle all of these changes. Studies on the concept of DC, such as ^{OECD (2003)}, ^{Unesco (2006)}, and ^{European Commission (2012)}, have defined a list of digital competences for the profile of subjects using these technologies based on an international context. According to ^{UNESCO reports (2006)}, digital competence is one of the eight core competences for lifelong development. However, the context and data is primarily European and few studies have been conducted in Brazil to understand the concept of these skills in education in this context.

Analysis of these studies shows that DC have been interpreted in different ways, therefore producing multiple meanings and a broad range of nomenclatures. Although there is a vast bibliography conceptualizing the term, its definition is not always clear. In fact, all descriptions seek to refer to how people should deal with Digital Information and Communication Technologies (DICT)² in different areas of life. Thus, there is no common, or globally agreed upon, concept of digital competences, making it quite difficult to understand and properly use them in the educational context.

Hence we believe that a systematic review will help to provide a clearer understanding of the concept of DC, define it from an educational point of view, and clarify the difference between related terms, such as Computational Literacy, Informational Literacy, Media Literacy, Digital Literacy, among others that are found within the studies.

This work therefore aims to provide a broad view of the field of education related to the concept of Digital Competences by presenting research that has been carried out in the area.

This article is organized in five sections, beginning with the introduction. This is followed by the methodology, discussion of the results, and lastly the final considerations.

A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF DIGITAL COMPETENCES

A systematic analysis was carried out in order to clarify the concept of digital competences and to compare different terms. The following steps were taken:

The data from the searches, which were conducted in 2017, were organized in tables by database, containing the year, title, authors, type of publication, and language. The analysis of the data was done by reading the full article, identifying the author’s definition of the concept of Digital Competences, and then reflecting and discussing the concept based on the differences and similarities presented by the authors.

RESULTS OF THE SYSTEMATIC SURVEY

Three Master’s Theses were found in the Capes Thesis and Dissertation Database, see Table 1.

A total of 93 articles emerged from the search of the Capes’ Periodicals database, based on the previously mentioned criteria. However, only 16 papers were selected for final analysis, based on their focus on the concept of digital competences. The majority were based on experiments carried out in European countries, such as Spain, Russia, Norway, Portugal, Slovakia and Poland, as illustrated in Table 2.

Furthermore, a total of 391 papers were found through the Google Scholar search. Then 21 were chosen for analysis, 5 of which are Brazilian publications, according to Table 3. The same criteria was used for selecting the papers, and in this case most relevant works were chosen.

A total of 40 works were used in this study, 8 were Brazilian. The first publication is from 2007 from Palácios, presenting the European Commission’s concept of digital competences. Other works were developed subsequently, however a surge in publications can be seen since 2012. These are primarily international, promoting and discussing models of digital competences focused on subject profiles. Few Brazilian publications on the subject of digital competences were found. Since the first published work in 2007 until the most recent in 2017, only eight Brazilian articles were found that discuss digital competences focused on education.

Thus, the following section presents a discussion of the analysis of the articles, beginning with the concept of Digital Competences. It then discusses concepts that are often used as synonyms for Digital Competences but are understood as foundations for understanding digital competence. The initial purpose is to clarify the concept of DC and then present how it differs from the terms that are commonly associated with it.

DISCUSSING DIGITAL COMPETENCES

The term Digital Competence first appeared in 2006 in the report on key competences for lifelong education and training,³ from the European Parliament in conjunction with the European Commission on culture and education. This document aimed to identify emerging European approaches and trends in Media Literacy by presenting eight core competences for lifelong learning. One was digital competence, which was defined as secure and critical use of information technologies for work, leisure, and communication. Therefore based these reports, in 2006 Europe began developing research focused on the concept and frameworks for digital competences for European citizens.

In the same year in Norway, research projects emerged that were aimed at developing and conceptualizing digital competences in education by changing school curriculum. This new model incorporated the development of digital competences specifically for the Norwegian context into each level of the curriculum. The concept of DC was based on ^{ITU (2005)} and ^{Erstad (2005}). According to ^{ITU (2005}, page 7), digital competence is understood as “skills, knowledge, creativity and attitudes required to use digital media for learning and comprehension in a knowledge society.” ^{Erstad (2005}, p. 133) strengthens this concept, adding that digital competences are “skills, knowledge, creativity and attitudes required to use digital media for learning and comprehension in a knowledge society.”

Furthermore, Jorgi ^{Adell (2005}, ²⁰⁰⁷) argue that digital competences can be systematized in five points: 1. Information Competence; 2. Technological Competence; 3. Multiple Literacy Competence; 4.Cognitive Literacy Competence; and 5. Digital Citizenship Competence. The author presents a relational map between the competences, with their levels of dependence, presented below in Figure 1.

Source: Jordi Adell (2010).

FIGURE 1 Relational Map of Digital Competence 

In 2008, Calvani, Cartelli, Fini and ^{Ranieri (2008}, p. 186) defined a digital competence as:

Being able to explore and face new technological situations in a flexible way, to analyze, select and critically evaluate data and information, to exploit technological potentials in order to represent and solve problems and build shared and collaborative knowledge, while fostering awareness of one’s own personal responsibilities and the respect of reciprocal rights/obligations.

Then in 2010, the authors presented the three dimensions of digital competences, being technological, cognitive, and ethical, as shown in Figure 2.

Source: Digital Competence in K-12: theoretical models, assessment tools and empirical research

FIGURE 2 Digital Competence Framework 

The authors point to subdivisions for each dimension, which can be seen in detail in Figure 3.

Source: Digital Competence in K-12: theoretical models, assessment tools and empirical research

FIGURE 3 Digital Competence dimensions and subdivisions 

In 2010, the European Commission mapped Digital Competences in knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Knowledges includes: understanding the functioning of computer applications, the risks of the Internet and online communication, the role of technology to support creativity and innovation, the truthfulness and reliability of online information, and ethical principles and legal aspects of collaborative tools. Skills include: information management, the ability to distinguish the virtual from the real world and see the connections between these two domains, the ability to use basic internet services to support creation and innovation. In terms of attitudes, one must be critical and reflective regarding information.

Based on different authors’ definitions, ^{Gutiérrez (2011}, p.21, author’s translation) defines digital competence as “the set of values, beliefs, knowledge, abilities, and attitudes to properly use technologies, including computers as well as different programs and the Internet, that allow and enable one to search, access, organize, and use of information in order to build knowledge.”⁴

^{Gisbert and Esteve (2011})⁵ present a very similar definition, being the sum knowledge skills and, attitudes not only in terms of their technological aspects, but also informational, multimedia, and communication. Based on all of these works, ^{Ferrari (2012}) defines a digital competence as:

The set of knowledge, skills, attitudes (thus including abilities, strategies, values and awareness) that are required when using ICT and digital media to perform tasks; solve problems; communicate; manage information; collaborate; create and share content; and build knowledge effectively, efficiently, appropriately, critically, creatively, autonomously, flexibly, ethically, reflectively for work, leisure, participation, learning, socializing, consuming, and empowerment.

Ferrari’s construction of digital competences is presented in Figure 4.

Source: ^{Ferrari (2012}).

FIGURE 4 Parts of the division of the concept of Competences 

Figure 4 first lists the primary elements of competences (knowledge, skills, and attitudes) together with domains, strategies, values, and awareness. The tools are then presented, followed by the areas of competence. Therefore the teacher can best determine how to organize activities based on competences.

In 2013, the DIGCOMP report (^{Ferrari, 2013}) defined it as knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to be digitally proficient in twelve different areas.

Similarly, ^{Larraz (2013}) understands Digital Competences as: the ability to mobilize different literatures, to generate information and communicate knowledge by solving situations in a constantly evolving society (^{LARRAZ, 2013}, p. of the author).

This author argues that four literacies are necessary: 1. Information Literacy, to manage the digital information; 2. Technological Literacy, to analyze of the data in different formats; 3. Multimedia Literacy, to analyze and create multimedia messages; and 4. Communicative Literacy, to participate through a digital identity in a safe, ethical, and civic way.

Table 4 presents and organizes all of the concepts of digital competences addressed in this section.

These elements were then selected and arranged with the authors to tabulate and compare the most recurrent. The last column presents the total amount of times this term was used, which can be seen in Table 5.

In summary, as can be seen in Tables 4 and 5, most authors treat digital competences as a set of elements, Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes, Digital/Technological Means and problem solving. However, three distinct groups of concepts were found. According to the authors of the ^{ITU, 2005}; ^{Erstad, 2005}; ^{Gutiérrez, 2011}; ^{Gisbert and Esteves, 2001}; ^{Ferrari, 2012}, digital competence is composed of knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

On the other hand, the ^{European Union (2006)} and Calvani, Cartelli, Fini and Ranieri (2008), the concept is the explanation of how the subject should act in when faced with ICTs, unlike ^{Larraz (2013}), who presents the concept of digital competence as the sum of multiple literacies.

According to ^{Ferrari, Punie and Redecker (2012}), there are two camps regarding the concept of digital competences. The first understands digital competence as the convergence of literacies, whereas the second sees it as a new literacy, with new components and greater complexity. In fact, it sees that digital literacy is modified with the emergence of new technological tools and societal needs, meaning that new situations and necessary competences are increasingly arising. This treating digital competence as a new literacy is not enough, since the concept of competence is complex and involves a set of elements that must be mobilized to address each new situation.

In light of the concepts presented, Digital Competences are understood to be linked to the technological domain by mobilizing a set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA) to solve problems in digital media. It is important to emphasize that digital competences are linked to a specific context and subject profile, as can be seen in Figure 5.

Source: created by the authors(2018).

FIGURE 5 Representation of Digital Competences 

In the educational case, the context is education, the subjects are all of those involved in this context.

In addition to the main concepts and authors, the data also revealed a range of terms presented by different references that are used synonymously and/or erroneously for digital competences. This highlighted the need to clarify these expressions. The following section will therefore present the history of these concepts, which will be presented in the next section.

DISCUSSION OF THE TERMS LINKED TO DIGITAL COMPETENCES: FROM COMPUTER LITERACY, TO DIGITAL FLUENCY

The Concept of Digital Competences is commonly linked to different terms and concepts found in the literature reviewed, including: Computer Literacy, Information Literacy, Media Literacy, Digital Literacy, Digital Fluency.

In order to clarify the different terms and concepts, we illustrated the history based on the literature review. The term Computer Literacy was coined in the 1980s, and its variations, ICT Literacy, IT Literacy, Technology Literacy, which dealt with levels of experience and familiarity with the computer, especially with applications, according to ^{Hawkins and Paris (1997)}. ICT Literacy, which was used at the time as a synonym for Computer Literacy, was actually understood as a part of Computer Literacy and focused on information skills, according to ^{Katz (2005)}. According to the ICT International Literacy Panel (2002),⁶ ICT Literacy is using digital technology, communications tools, and/or networks to access, manage, integrate, evaluate, and create information in order to function in a knowledge society.

Next the term Information Literacy arose in the 1990s due to needs beyond computer use, according to ^{Bawden and Robinson (2002}). The concept emphasizes identifying, locating, and evaluating information. Moreover, ^{Alexandria (2005)} adds that Information Literacy empowers people in all walks of life to seek, evaluate, use, and effectively create through information. Many authors point to critical thinking as one of the main components of Information Literacy, which has become even more important when linked to digital media, due to the vast amount of information available.

In Brazil, there was no specific translation for the term Information Literacy. ^{Hatschbach (2002}) points out that the diversity of uses of expressions makes solidifying this area even more difficult in Brazil. At the time, ^{Hatschbach (2002)} presented some terms that translated the expression. However, there was a great deal of controversy regarding the translation itself, and several researchers did not use the expression in Portuguese. This began the discussion about the translation of Literacy into Portuguese in Brazil, and it only intensified with the expression Digital Literacy in 1997.

However in the 1990s, terms related to Media Education and Media Literacy were also discussed. Media Literacy was understood as a part of Information Literacy, focused on how information is accessed, evaluated, defined, constructed, and interpreted. It’s one’s ability to deal with information in different formats, such as print and audiovisual media (radio and television).

Originally, Media Literacy composed a field of research seeking to evaluate mass media. Authors Thoman and Jolls (2003) define it as the ability to access, analyze, evaluate, and create media in a variety of ways. ^{Brandtweiner, Donat & Kerschbaun (2010)} add critical and reflective thinking based on four dimensions: 1. Selecting and using appropriate media and content (knowledge about media, use, and participation); 2. Understanding content and evaluating media (analysis and evaluation); 3. Recognizing and responding to the influences of media content; and 4. Identifying and evaluating the circumstances of production (seriousness and credibility).

The concept of Digital Literacy, coined by ^{Gilster (1997}) in his book with the same name, defines the term as the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources through the computer. Therefore, terms related to Literacy, such as Technology Literacy or Technological Literacy, New Literacies, ICT Literacy, Media Literacy, eLiteracy, are included.

^{Gilster (1997}, apud ^{Bawden, 2002}, p.395) also adds that “[...] Digital Literacy has to do with the domain of ideas rather than the keys.” Thus, the concept is linked more closely with critical thinking about use of digital technologies than with the technical aspects. It absorbs many of the elements of Computer Literacy, Information Literacy, and Media Literacy, as shown in Figure 6.

Source: Created by the authors (2018).

FIGURE 6 Elements of Digital Literacy 

Though Figure 6 represents a model to exemplify the relationships between these concepts, according to the authors, it does not mean that Digital Literacy is the sum of these literacies. ^{Aquino (2004}) for example, treats Digital Literacy as an evolution of Information Literacy, since the transition from print culture to digital culture has affected environments multiple environments. They are required to adapt to new formats, including the acquisition of new skills and abilities for the development of information services.

According to Eshet-Alkalai (2004), the concept is more than the ability to use software or operate a digital device, a user must also have a variety of emotional, motor, and cognitive abilities to function in digital environments. Jones-Kavalier and Flannigan (2006) argue that Digital Literacy represents a person’s ability to perform tasks efficiently in a digital environment. Moreover, ^{Martin & Grudziecki (2006}) add that there are individual attitudes and skills to properly use digital tools: identifying, accessing, analyzing, and synthesizing resources, building new knowledge, communicating, and other situations in digital contexts.

Lastly, the ^{European Commission (2007)} defines Digital Literacy as abilities similar to reading and writing, but using new technologies. ^{Gilster (1997}) argued that new technologies require new skills. One must not only to find information, but also to acquire the skills to use it in one’s life. Table 6, below, presents the main concepts discussed so far according to the analysis of the articles, along with their definition, authors, and variations.

Regarding the works published in Brazil using the concept of Digital Literacy, different translations are found: Alfabetização Digital, Letramento Digital, Fluência Digital and even Competência Digital. Digital Literacy was the translation chosen by some authors such as Educarede (2008), ^{Xavier (2003}) and ^{Buzato (2003)}.

However, these terms are understood as different processes, the correct translation is Letramento or Critical Digital Literacy (from English to Portuguese in Brazil). In the United States and England, ^{Soares (2004}) points out that there are different levels of literacy, such as Reading Instruction and Beginning Literacy, which focus on traditional reading and writing literacy. The concept of Literate was introduced later, with research on the understanding of reading and writing acquisition and its social role. In this context, in order differentiate those who could use reading and writing socially, were referred to as Functionally Literate, a term coined by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (^UNESCO ). The author also points out that this discussion occurred in the 1980s in the United States, although the word Literacy had already been in the dictionaries since the end of the XIX century.

In Brazil, these levels are differentiated through the concepts of functional literacy and Critical literacy, or Literacia in Portugal. According to ^{Soares (2003}), literacy in its own specific sense would be the system of acquisition of written code, reading, and writing skills. Thus, the literate individual is one who can read and write. For ^{Buzato (2006}, p. 5), literacy is a way of acting, affirming, constructing, and sustaining a worldview shared by a group and, therefore, carries the identity and significant traits shared by this group. The literate individual has the knowledge and practice to speak, read, and write in a variety of ways. Based on the situations or activities one is involved in, the individual can elevate the degree of literacy. Thus for Soares (2004), critical literacy is beyond functional literacy.

With the incorporation of technologies, literacy has been changing over time. It has been integrating the new competences of the DICTs through reading and writing practices that transform according to social needs. According to ^{Teberosky (2004}: 160), “technology can influence the way in which reading and writing are defined.” That is, with technological changes, literacy can no longer be presented only as the comprehension of written and spoken the language without including the digital. Instead they must be treated as complementary processes. According to ^{Coll and Illera (2010}: 290), speaking of Digital Literacy is equivalent to postulating that, just as in literate societies it is necessary to have a functional domain of reading and writing technologies to have access to knowledge, in the Information Society (IS) it is imperative to have a mastery of digital reading and writing technologies. In other words, speaking about “functional digital literacy” implies accepting, that the learning how to master and manage DITCs are as basic in the IS as learning related to reading and written in literate societies.

The term Digital Literacy for ^{Soares (2002}, apud COUTO, 2012, page 48) is a state or condition acquired by those who master the new digital technology and read and write on the screen, different from the state or condition of literacy of those who read and write on paper. The digitally literate person interacts with the technologies and knows how to search, select, evaluate information, make exchanges between peers, share, and author, always using Web resources and different tools ^{(Silva, 2012)}. ^{Silva (2012)} proposes a vision about the appropriation of functional and critical literacy and digital literacy, according to Figure 7.

FIGURE 7 Appropriation of functional and critical literacy 

According to Figure 7, the interlaced lines correspond to different learning moments, starting with functional literacy, then functional digital literacy, moving on to critical literacy and critical digital literacy. Although both literacies develop together, they concretely still happen at different moments. However, functional literacy is of a finite character, and the lines of begin and have an end, whereas those of critical literacy are continuous and unending. According to Silva (2012), digital literacy is a process that does not depend on functional literacy, but when it comes to digital literacy, we need functional literacy, which will develop precisely in the context of social practices of reading and writing in the virtual environment, with activities focused on functional literacy.

However, there was still confusion regarding the translations carried out in Brazil, mainly focused on technology. The expression Digital Literacy was translated as Functional Digital Literacy and now as Critical Digital Literacy.

In order to minimize the difficulty of differentiating the concepts of Digital Literacy, in 1999 the Committee of Information Technology Literacy, created by the USA’s National Research Council, proposed the notion of Digital Fluency in contrast to Digital Literacy. This study entitled “Being Fluent with Information Technology,” defines digital fluency as the ability to reorganize knowledge, to express oneself creatively and appropriately, as well as to produce and generate information (rather than merely understanding it) (1999, p.VIII).

Fluency according to the Michaelis dictionary (2017) is defined as: “1 Quality or nature of what flows; fluidity; 2 Characteristic of what is spontaneous, natural; spontaneity.” In learning a language, it means ease of use of the language, and according to ^{Ager (2009}, p. 5 apud NIESSEN, 2015, p.4):

Communication involves both the out flowing aspects, such as speech, writing, and representing and the inflowing aspects, such as hearing, reading, and viewing. Each of these require abilities in understanding and interpreting, and at the level of fluency this would involve understanding humour, catching nuances, irony-all of which involve ‘not only speaking the language effortlessly and accurately, but also being familiar with different registers of the language’.

^{Tarouco (2013}, 285) argues that while both students and teachers, are “functionally literate” in the digital world, they need more to effectively function in the information society. This implies the notion of fluency, which according to ^{Tarouco (2013)} is a personal capacity, in the sense that fluent individuals in information technology evaluate, select, learn and use new information technologies appropriately for their personal and professional activities (p. 297).

In summary, functional digital literacy, critical digital literacy and digital fluency can be understood, according to Figure 8, as different interconnected processes that represent the subjects’ experience and practice regarding the use of digital technologies.

Source: created by the authors (2018).

FIGURE 8 Functional Digital Literacy, Critical Digital Literacy and Digital Fluency 

Thus, Table 7 (below) aims to summarize the relationship between these three concepts.

Based on this survey of the terms linked to the concept of digital competences, it is clear that a new process of socialization and culture has arisen through the DITCs. This has therefore influenced ways of learning, communicating and interacting, transforming the manner in which one interprets and responds to the real and virtual world. Hence, the concept of digital competences emerges as a response to these transformations. It has been demonstrated to be is a concept that goes beyond literacy, since it is a complex concept that involves a set of elements, KSA, that must be mobilized to address a new situation.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

We will conclude with a discussion based on our systematic analysis of national and international data that is considered relevant for understanding the concept of digital skills in education. At the international level, there have been various efforts to define digital competences in education. However they translate a subject profile and educational level that does not fit with the Brazilian reality. There are few published works on the subject in Brazil, which make international works the primary reference.

The concept of digital competences was identified as emerging as DITCs provoked transformations in all areas of society. Since then, technological complexity has continuously created ever increasing distinct needs, because having digital tools does not guarantee that the subject is digitally competent. Thus, it is understood that the concept has a particular resonance in the current context, just as different terms have made more sense in different time periods. Figure 9 summarizes and highlights the expressions used through to the current discussion about the concept of digital competences

Source: created by the authors (2018).

FIGURE 9 Construction of the concept of digital competence 

Therefore, it is clear that the changes in relation to concepts are linked to technological development, emerging new needs and ways of dealing with DITCs in everyday life. In the 1980s, the need was to understand how to use the computer; in the early 1990s, the use of information and different media. Since 1997, digital literacy is needed to deal with digital tools and the internet.

The figure above illustrates why some authors conceptualize digital competences as the sum of literacies, since they adopt the historical formation as a constituent element of the concept. However, ^{Krumvisky (2011)} argues that the definition of digital competence is broader and more complex, going beyond ^{Larraz’s (2013}) multiple literacies. In fact, soon new elements will need to be incorporated and the concept adapted.

Hence, the issues related to the concept are not simple or clear, as the literature review demonstrates the extensive theoretical diversity around the term which has created terminological chaos for various reasons (^{LARRAZ, 2013}). However, it was possible to elaborate a definition of Digital Competences based the review that was carried out. In spite of the diversity of documents and ways of approaching the concept, there is a tendency with respect to the compositional elements. These elements are understood as knowledge, skills, and attitudes, aimed at the use of DITCs and considered fundamental for this society that is fully utilizing exploring the possibilities of technologies.

Lastly, a digitally competent subject is a subject can understand technological means media enough to know how to critically use the information and be able to communicate using a variety of tools. This article was aimed to provide a better understanding of the concept of digital competences, highlighting that technology constantly evolves which generates great transformations in education, society, and beyond. Digital competences are therefore dynamic and must be constantly updated.