Digital transformation and digital literacy in the context of complexity within higher education institutions: a systematic literature review

Abstract

The incessant changes in technology generate new products and services, presenting multiple opportunities for the complex educational environment. Consequently, higher education institutions must be attentive to these changes to ensure that students have the knowledge and skills necessary for the work environment. This research aimed to identify studies related to digital transformation and digital literacy in higher education institutions through a systematic study of literature. The search resulted in 830 articles published in the Scopus and Web of Science databases from 2015 to 2022. Quality questions, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied where 202 articles were selected for the study. The results show (a) interest of educational institutions in empirical studies where technologies are incorporated for didactic purposes, (b) challenges of opportunity in training programs to develop digital competences of teachers and students, (c) little interest in the development of media literacy, (d) the methodological aspects of the studies allow exploring new perspectives of digital transformation in higher education. This article may be of interest to academics, decision-makers and trainers of future professionals to introduce educational technology into learning processes in line with the complex demands of the world of work and society.

Introduction

At the end of the twentieth century, the emergence of the internet led to organizations’ digital transformation from analogous to digital information (“digitization”), followed by the incorporation of information technologies into business processes (“digitalization”) (Verhoef et al., 2019). Several authors make no distinction between digitalization and digital transformation (Hess et al., 2016; Tratkowska, 2020; Xiao, 2020). Verhoef et al. (2021) propose that digital transformation goes further; its impact generates new business models and value creation. Organizations’ various areas are influenced and committed to change to remain relevant (Anderson and Ellerby, 2018). For this study, the term “digital transformation” (DT) was used.

Digital transformation goes beyond just incorporating technologies. An example of this is to consider that digital technologies and automation demand that the workforce develop digital skills and human-centered skills (Digital Transformation Expert Panel, 2021), which impacts aspects such as culture, processes, as well as the strategy of the organization (Fischer et al., 2020) consequently the organization must make the necessary adjustments for its effective implementation. These impacts reach all business lines including higher education.

Higher education institutions, in particular, must be attentive to the changes in the environment and society to ensure that students have the knowledge and skills demanded. Morin (2019, 2020) invites us to think of complexity as a challenge of contemporary thinking, which requires a reform of our way of thinking, since classical scientific thinking was previously built on three foundations: order, separability and reason, but developments in science have undermined these foundations. In this sense, high-level competences such as reasoning for complexity become indispensable in the formation of critical, systemic, scientific and innovative thinking (Ramírez-Montoya et al., 2022; Vázquez-Parra et al., 2022). Complex environments require active (Patiño et al., 2023), collaborative (Romero-Rodríguez et al., 2022), open education (Suárez-Brito et al., 2022) and digital technology systems (George-Reyes et al., 2023; Ponce et al., 2022). Because of this, education systems around the world have made various efforts to address the influence of digital technologies and DT, such as UNESCO’s ‘Working Group on Education on Digital Skills and Work’ (UNESCO, 2017), the “Bologna Digital 2020” report in Europe (Rampelt et al., 2019), the “Outline of China’s National Plan for Medium and Long-term Educational Reform and Development (2010–2020)” of the Chinese government (Xiao, 2020), and the Digital Educational Agenda ADE.mx in Mexico (SEP, 2019). Likewise, this transformation has triggered the development of topics of interest that intertwine education with technology as proposed by González-Pérez et al. (2019) (Table 1):

Table 1. Specific emerging issues in the use of educational technology.

Categories
• Digital pedagogies: adapting pedagogical and technological resources to each area of knowledge. An example is b-learning, an environment with multimedia technologies.
• Technology models: integrating innovation models with technology, such as smart innovation systems and research-based design.
• Adaptive technologies: introducing new e-learning systems that adapt to the new needs of society and foster adaptive learning and educational systems (e.g., e-portfolios and Web 2.0).
• Open technologies: enable open access to disseminate open knowledge, including open platforms, repositories, open resources, MOOCs, and open science.
• Smart technologies: using smart tools and devices, such as Big Data, data mining, data analytics, cloud technologies, cloud computing in educational contexts, and m-learning.
• Disruptive technologies: involving new processes and services with leapfrog technologies, such as augmented reality, sensory stimulation, abstract imagery, and virtual and remote laboratories.

Currently, skills performed in digital environments have been added to the basic skills performed in analog environments. Digital literacy involves mastering software and hardware, development, analysis, and interaction with digital content (Chetty et al., 2018). Skills such as problem-solving and applying technology were derived from digital technologies (UNESCO, 2017), and are considered essential for workers to adapt to digital transformation (Digital Transformation Expert Panel, 2021). As new technology becomes available to users, it demands from them continuous learning to remain relevant.

Due to the above, it is worthwhile to research the use and impact of technologies in the educational field on the delivery of content, pedagogical practices, and evaluation and management of learning (Williamson and Hogan, 2020), as well as its impact on users, teachers and students. Systematic studies of related literature are scarce, during this investigation, we found four reviews ranging from 2020 to 2021; they focused on the development of digital skills of students (Starkey, 2020), or university professors (Bilbao Aiastui et al., 2021), on digital competence assessment processes and methods in higher education (Sillat et al., 2021), and one focused on media literacy (Manca et al., 2021). This study contributes to the subject by integrating digital transformation practices in education, as well as studies on digital competencies of students and teachers, which are key roles of higher education institutions.

This article aims to identify recent studies (2015–2022) related to the issues of digital transformation and digital literacy in higher education institutions through a systematic study of literature. The study seeks to answer what educational trends higher education institutions are using, as well as what studies they have carried out in this regard, and the opportunities they have identified to advance in digital transformation and digital literacy. This study can serve as a basis for higher education institutions interested in exploring educational innovations to identify these implementations and their outcomes and seek inter-institutional collaborations with common interests.

Methodology

The study was conducted through a systematic literature review (SLR) based on the guidelines proposed by Kitchenham and Charters (2007, p. 11), “a means to identify, evaluate and interpret relevant research on a particular topic". The phases to carry out the study were adapted from Kitchenham et al. (2010) and are described as follows:

• Phase 1 Planning: The research starts from the objective of analyzing studies related to the topics of digital transformation and digital literacy in higher education institutions. A series of questions were defined to guide the review; these questions were derived from the integration of elements that would contribute to identify trends in digital transformation, research methods and instruments used in assessing such practices, as well as opportunities for future research; such findings would be useful to other researchers interested in the subject (Kitchenham and Charters, 2007) (Table 2).

  Table 2. Research questions.

  Research questions	Possible responses
  RQ1 What are the trends and topics addressed in the articles?	Digital pedagogies Technological models Adaptive technologies Open technologies Smart technologies Disruptive technologies
  RQ2 What are the trends in research methods observed in the articles?	Mixed methods Qualitative method Quantitative method
  RQ3 What are the main findings in digital transformation and digital literacy?	Content creation Digital skill level Educational technology
  RQ4 What are the authors’ recommendations for future studies?	Larger scale Literacy Longitudinal studies New instruments Technology
  RQ5 What are the opportunities identified in the studies?	Training programs Use of educational technology Improving learning design Security & Privacy Open practices
  RQ6 What are the stated limitations in digital literacy studies involving digital transformation?	Sample Feasibility Technological problems Instruments

• Phase 2 Execution: The articles were selected using inclusion criteria such as the publication period between 2015 and 2022, studies in higher education institutions, focus on students and professors, and empirical research or mixed studies. Articles not arbitrated or published in languages other than Spanish and English were excluded (Table 3).

  Table 3. Inclusion, exclusion and quality criteria.

  Inclusion	Exclusion	Quality criteria
  Studies in the Scopus and WoS databases.	Studies on subjects other than students or teachers.	Coherence between the objective, method, and results.
  Studies in higher education institutions.	Studies in languages other than Spanish and English.
  Studies published between 2015–2022.	Conference papers, books, articles not arbitrated.
  Empirical or mixed studies.

  The search was conducted based on the above criteria in the Scopus and WoS databases (Table 4). 202 studies met the specified criteria (Fig. 1).

  Table 4. Search strings in Scopus and WOS.

  Scopus	WoS
  TOPIC: ((“digital transformation” OR “digital*”)) AND TOPIC: ((“university” OR “higher education” OR “tertiary education”)) AND TOPIC: ((“model” OR “framework” OR “system”)) AND TOPIC: ((“media literacy” OR “digital competenc*” OR “digital literacy”))	“digital transformation” OR “digital*” (Topic) AND “university” OR “higher education” OR “tertiary education” (Topic) AND “model” OR “framework” OR “system” (Topic) AND “media literacy” OR “digital competenc*” OR “digital literacy” (Topic) and Article or Review Article (Document Types) and English or Spanish (Languages)

  Fig. 1 [Images not available. See PDF.]

  Flow diagram.

  The flowchart presents the process of classifying the articles based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and the resulting number of articles. The flowchart was adapted from Moher et al. (2009).

• Phase 3 Results: The results of each research question were analyzed to determine the educational trends higher education institutions incorporate, the studies they have carried out in this regard, and the opportunities to advance in digital transformation.

Results

Results are presented based on the research questions. For data analysis, Excel and Power BI were used. The database is available at the following link: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21972170.v2.

RQ1 What are the trends and topics addressed in the articles?

The trends identified were determined based on the emerging themes of educational technology by González-Pérez et al. (2019), highlighting digital pedagogies (166 articles), which “link pedagogical and technological supports to adapt to each area of knowledge” (González-Pérez et al., 2019, p. 189). Examples include implementing the “blended learning” strategy (Power and Kannara, 2016; Tang and Chaw, 2016; Wang et al., 2022) and studies on digital skills (Ting, 2015; Tømte et al., 2015; Torres-Gastelú et al., 2019) and media competencies (Koc and Barut, 2016; Jormand et al., 2022) Second place went to adaptive technologies (21 articles) that “introduce systems that adapt to the needs of society and encourage learning” (González-Pérez et al., 2019, p. 189). Examples are the use of Web 2.0 tools (Sichel et al., 2019), e-portfolio (Carl and Strydom, 2017), e-Learning (Divya and Mohamed Haneefa, 2018; Feriady et al., 2020), adaptive systems (Murray and Pérez, 2015), and social networks (Amaro-Jiménez et al., 2016; Robles Moral and Fernández Díaz, 2021).

To a lesser extent, the rest of the trends were found in 6 articles on technological models (Andrew et al., 2018; Bond et al., 2018; Kör et al., 2017) and open technologies (Cronin, 2017; Paskevicius and Irvine, 2019; Spieler et al., 2020). Finally, there were articles on disruptive technologies that use extended reality resources (Astudillo Torres, 2019; Bucea-Manea-Ţoniş et al., 2020) and smart technologies for mobile learning (Pinto Molina et al., 2019) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 [Images not available. See PDF.]

Trends addressed by the articles.

The rectangles show the proportion and number of published articles classified according to specific emerging issues in the use of educational technology as proposed by González-Pérez et al. (2019).

The analysis of the author’s keywords highlighted the issue of digital competence and digital literacy (de Ovando Calderón and Jara, 2019; Liu et al., 2020; Oria, 2020) and, to a lesser extent, digital teaching and media literacy (Tetep and Suparman, 2019; Sánchez-Caballé and Esteve-Mon, 2022) Also notable were keywords regarding technology in these topics (Roa Banquez et al., 2021; Rodríguez-Hoyos et al., 2021) (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 [Images not available. See PDF.]

Authors’ keywords analysis in a word cloud.

Main keywords identified in the reviewed articles.

RQ2 What are the trends in research methods observed in the articles?

Studies on digital literacy and digital transformation increased in the last three years; in 2022, it rose 53% compared to the previous year. The most commonly used research method (56%) was quantitative (Guillén-Gámez and Peña, 2020; Kim et al., 2018; Miguel-Revilla et al., 2020). Qualitative methods were found in similar proportions (Kajee, 2018; Önger and Çetin, 2018), and mixed methods (Pozos Pérez and Tejada Fernández, 2018; Techataweewan and Prasertsin, 2018) (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 [Images not available. See PDF.]

Trends in research methods.

Number of published articles during 2015–2022 classified by research method, qualitative, quantitative or mixed method.

Also, the highest number of articles was found in Spain, which represents 32% of the total, and shows an interest in digital transformation and digital literacy issues in higher education institutions; followed by Turkey with ten, the United States with nine, and Chile, China and Mexico with seven research papers each (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5 [Images not available. See PDF.]

Location of the studies by country.

Proportion of published articles distributed by country.

RQ3 What are the main findings in digital transformation and digital literacy?

The principal findings center on studies on the level of digital skills, and use of educational technology (Fig. 6). The most significant number of articles (121) focuses on digital competency (Blayone, 2018; Hong and Kim, 2018; Torres-Coronas and Vidal-Blasco, 2015; Zhao et al., 2021). The use of educational technology involves 2.0 technologies (Novakovich, 2016), virtual communities (Robin Sullivan et al., 2018), online education, or e-Learning (Aznar Díaz et al., 2019; Hamutoğlu et al., 2019; Gumede and Badriparsad, 2022). Regarding media literacy, it was found in eight articles (Altamirano Galván, 2021; Brown et al., 2016; Koc and Barut, 2016; Jormand et al., 2022; Leier and Gruber, 2021; Olivia-Dumitrina et al., 2019; Reyna and Meier, 2018; Robles Moral and Fernández Díaz, 2021). Two additional issues identified were environmental protection (Amador-Alarcón et al., 2022) and educational process (Makarova et al., 2021) both of interest to today’s situation faced by higher education institutions.

Fig. 6 [Images not available. See PDF.]

Main findings addressed in the literature review.

Trends, topics and main findings from the reviewed articles.

RQ4 What are the authors’ recommendations for future studies? And RQ5 What are the opportunities identified in the studies?

By correlating these two questions, we identified four opportunities regarding digital literacy and digital transformation (Fig. 7); first, that higher education institutions have training programs for both students and teachers to help them develop digital skills (Igbo and Imo, 2020; Martzoukou et al., 2020; Sandí Delgado, 2020), media skills (López-Meneses et al., 2020; Reyna and Meier, 2018; Romero-Rodriguez et al., 2016), and critical thinking (Kocak et al., 2021; Nagel et al., 2022; Vetter and Sarraf, 2020). Second, that the development of skills requires to enhance learning design by incorporating new didactic strategies, and educational technologies in academic programs (Boulton, 2020; del Prete and Almenara, 2020; Foster, 2020; Liesa-Orús et al., 2020; McGrew et al., 2019), and that the impact of these changes improves learning (Castellanos et al., 2017; Dafonte-Gómez et al., 2018; Sosa Díaz and Palau Martín, 2018).

Fig. 7 [Images not available. See PDF.]

Recommendations and opportunities for future studies.

Frequency of recommendations and opportunities for future studies.

On the other hand, methodological recommendations for future studies included incorporating new instruments and variables to collect more information (Kamardeen and Samaratunga, 2020; Khalil and Srinivasan, 2019; Varga-Atkins, 2020; Vetter and Sarraf, 2020). Others pointed to increasing the sample size (Amhag et al., 2019; Kolodziejczyk et al., 2020; Munoz-Repiso and del Pozo, 2016; Pozo-Sánchez et al., 2020). To a lesser extent, longitudinal studies were recommended to test the models used (He et al., 2018; Johnston, 2020). In addition, we found that 28% of the studies did not include recommendations, and 31% did not include opportunities for future studies.

RQ6 What are the stated limitations in digital literacy studies involving digital transformation?

The limitations indicated in the studies refer primarily to the small sample size (45%) (Arango et al., 2020; Romero-Tena et al., 2020; Tugtekin and Koc, 2020). To a lesser extent, limitations were found with the instrument used to carry out the study (Heuling et al., 2021; Nikou and Aavakare, 2021; Sánchez-Caballé and Esteve-Mon, 2022). Problems with the technology used was another limitation highlighted in eight studies (Castellano, 2016; Pozo-Sánchez et al., 2020). Finally, seven studies reported limitation regarding its feasibility (Dafonte-Gómez et al., 2018; Fázik and Steinerová, 2020; Kerr et al., 2019) and one on the low response obtained (Myyry et al., 2022); 36% of the studies did not include limitations (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8 [Images not available. See PDF.]

Limitations identified in the studies.

Frequency of limitations found in the reviewed articles. The figure does not include data from articles that did not specify the limitations (36%).

Discussion

Incorporating educational trends and new technologies in the educational environment has highlighted the need to continue developing skills that allow their adoption by teachers and students. The interest in digital pedagogies and the study of digital competencies were relevant trends among higher education institutions aiming to use adaptive, intelligent, open, or disruptive technologies and technological models (Fig. 2). The transition from the analog to the digital world in both processes and products of organizations is part of their journey towards digital transformation (Hess et al., 2016; Tratkowska, 2020). It also includes organizational and cultural changes among users and operators (Anderson and Ellerby, 2018). However, we must point out that technology is not the end in itself but should be a means to facilitate learning.

Therefore, studies employing the scientific method where the benefit can be determined are relevant, and those that examine areas of opportunity by adopting technologies in the learning process. In the last three years, empirical studies on incorporating educational innovations in teaching practice in higher education institutions increased, most applying mainly quantitative methods (Figs. 4 and 5). Spain is the country that stands out with the most studies (64). In some cases, the impetus for these efforts has come from the establishment of educational strategies at the national (SEP, 2019; Xiao, 2020) and regional level (Rampelt et al., 2019). These studies denote international interest in the influence of digital transformation, and digital literacy on the educational process.

Digital technology skills and knowledge are hallmarks of the twenty-first-century generations. Digital literacy and educational technology accounted for 95% of the study findings, and only 4% focused on media literacy. Required job competencies include software and hardware skills, critical thinking, information analysis, and the ability to create and communicate content (Chetty et al., 2018; Silva et al., 2021; UNESCO, 2017). “Workers who can combine ‘human’ skills like empathy, cooperation and negotiation with cognitive skills such as problem-solving, will thrive in an economy that increasingly relies on both types of skill” (Digital Transformation Expert Panel, 2021). As the work environment and education continue to evolve along new technologies.

In addition to the conceptual components, the methodological aspects of the studies allow exploring new perspectives of digital transformation in higher education. In the studies reviewed, 44% of the recommendations concerned using new instruments, and exploring new variables, while 56% were about sample size increase and longitudinal studies (Fig. 7). Although they have not been conceived or designed for the educational field, the technologies are embedded today in the learning process (González-Pérez et al., 2019). Studies on their adoption allow testing and validating methodologies and instruments to have reliable data for their implementation (García-Ruiz et al., 2014). Though used simultaneously by teachers and students, the adoption of technology may require the implementation of different strategies or approaches to meet the needs of each group.

The ability to learn and unlearn is being tested by constantly introducing technologies into human activities. The opportunities reported by the studies coincide with the need for institutions to have training programs to develop skills for larger groups (27%). In the case of students, other topics of interest are the use of technology, enriched learning experiences, and security and privacy issues (Fig. 7). Organizations’ digital transformation strategy must consider the training of their members and their users because the skills required for the job become increasingly specialized (Anderson and Ellerby, 2018; Hess et al., 2016; Verhoef et al., 2019). In order to get the best out of educational technology, users are required to have a minimum level of digital literacy (Kerr et al., 2019). Higher education institutions are a fertile place to continue studies on digital transformation and the development of digital literacy of their members.

Therefore, empirical studies on the experiences and challenges faced by higher education institutions in adopting technologies in the learning process and strategies implemented to train teachers and students are relevant. The limitations reported in the studies focused on methodological issues, with the sample size being the most crucial aspect to consider (45%). These studies were carried out in groups managed by the researcher, making it difficult to project the results. The systematic literature review methodology emphasizes the analysis of variables to answer research questions so that similarities and differences among studies can be identified (Kitchenham et al., 2010; Kitchenham and Charters, 2007). Inter-institutional collaboration can contribute to achieving results that help find joint strategies to promote the adoption of educational innovations and the development of competencies in both teachers and students.

Limitations

This study was limited to trends in higher education institutions in a specific period of time (2015–2022). Another limitation was the selection of two databases, Scopus and Web of Science, which although they include high-impact journals, articles from other databases were not considered; future research can continue the timeline and include other systems and databases.

Conclusions

The digital transformation of higher education institutions goes beyond its impact on administrative and operational processes. The study showed that teachers have incorporated educational trends, new pedagogies and technologies for didactic purposes, and this has highlighted the need to develop the level of digital literacy of both teachers and students. Higher education institutions, as trainers of future professionals, must acknowledge the need for digital transformation and act upon to develop strategies so students and teachers are prepared for the demands of the workplace.

The pandemic spurred the urgency of developing digital skills for both teachers and students. Technologies they used for socializing and leisure became necessary tools for study and work. Higher education institutions are conducting studies on their experiences of adopting educational technologies and the impact on their users. Although related empirical studies on media literacy were scarce, since it is linked to the use of technology, future studies have an opportunity to assess how it develops in the following years. These should examine teachers’ and students’ performance, their critical capacity as media users, and content creators.

The development of teachers’ digital competencies involves not only the mastery of technology but also the improvement of their teaching practice with the appropriate pedagogical use of technology to contribute to student learning. There are opportunities for higher education institutions in measuring digital competencies to find strengths and weaknesses to focus their training programs. The same applies to students, who should be provided with the relevant training for the development of digital skills and prevent the lack of these from becoming an obstacle to their performance in the classroom.

This study aimed to identify the state of digital transformation and digital literacy in higher education institutions and their impact on students and teachers. Digital transformation and new technologies are generating complex environments that demand the development of digital and high-level skills. Technological progress provides opportunities to enhance the learning process. Research must continue to assess the performance and students’ learning gains. This study can serve as a basis for higher education institutions interested in exploring educational innovations to identify these implementations and their outcomes and seek inter-institutional collaborations with common interests.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the support from Tecnologico de Monterrey through the “Challenge-Based Research Funding Program 2022”. Project ID # I003-IFE001-C2-T3–T. Also, academic support from Writing Lab, Institute for the Future of Education, Tecnologico de Monterrey, México.

Author contributions

Three authors contributed to the content of the article, conceptualizing the approach: IA, M-SR-M; supporting the study theoretically and methodologically: SF-G, M-SR-M; and discussing the data: SF-G, IA.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed in the current study are available in Figshare repository: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21972170.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

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

References

Altamirano Galván, SG. Perfil de alfabetización mediática de estudiantes y docentes de educación superior. CPU-e, Revista de Investigación Educativa; 2021; 32, pp. 88-110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25009/cpue.v0i32.2735]

Amador-Alarcón, MP; Torres-Gastelú, CA; Lagunes-Domínguez, A; Medina-Cruz, H; Argüello-Rosales, CA. Perceptions of environmental protection of university students: a look through digital competences in Mexico. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 18 11141. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su141811141]

Amaro-Jiménez, C; Hungerford-Kresser, H; Pole, K. Teaching with a technological twist: exit tickets via Twitter in literacy classrooms. J Adolesc Adult Lit; 2016; 60, 3 pp. 305-313. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jaal.572]

Amhag, L; Hellström, L; Stigmar, M. Teacher educators’ use of digital tools and needs for digital competence in higher education. J Digit Learn Teach Educ; 2019; 35, 4 pp. 203-220. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1646169]

Anderson C, Ellerby W (2018) Digital Maturity Model. Achieving digital maturity to drive growth. In: Deloitte (Issue February). https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Technology-Media-Telecommunications/deloitte-digital-maturity-model.pdf

Andrew, M; Taylorson, J; Langille, DJ; Grange, A; Williams, N. Student attitudes towards technology and their preferences for learning tools/devices at two universities in the UAE. J Inf Technol Educ Res; 2018; 17, pp. 309-344. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.28945/4111]

Arango, DAG; Fernández, JEV; Carrillo, JAO; Rojas, ÓAC; Villa, CFH. Dimensions of digital competence in university teachers: Relational analysis based on components | Dimensiones de competencia digital en docentes universitarios: Análisis relacional basado en componentes. RISTI-Revista Iberica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informacao; 2020; 2020, E28 pp. 945-960.

Astudillo Torres, MP. Aplicación de la realidad aumentada en las prácticas educativas universitarias. RELATEC: Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnología Educativa; 2019; 18, 2 pp. 203-218. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17398/1695-288X.18.2.203]

Aznar Díaz, I; Cáceres Reche, MP; Romero Rodríguez, JM. Digital competence of an E-learning tutor: an emerging model of good teaching practices in ICT. Texto Livre; 2019; 12, 3 pp. 49-68. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17851/1983-3652.12.3.49-68]

Bilbao Aiastui, E; Arruti Gómez, A; Carballedo Morillo, R. A systematic literature review about the level of digital competences defined by DigCompEdu in higher education. Aula Abierta; 2021; 50, 4 pp. 841-850. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17811/rifie.50.4.2021.841-850]

Blayone, T. Reexamining digital-learning readiness in higher education: Positioning digital competencies as key factors and a profile application as a readiness tool. Int J E-Learn Corp Gov Healthcare High Educ; 2018; 17, 4 pp. 425-451.

Bond M, Marín VI, Dolch, Bedenlier S, Zawacki-Richter O (2018) Digital transformation in German higher education: student and teacher perceptions and usage of digital media. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0130-1

Boulton, P. Digitally proficient but disconnected from the outdoor world? A reflection on pedagogies used in an Early Years degree in higher education. J Appl Res High Educ; 2020; 13, 1 pp. 195-210. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-03-2019-0066]

Brown, C; Czerniewicz, L; Noakes, T. Online content creation: looking at students’ social media practices through a Connected Learning lens. Learn Media Technol; 2016; 41, 1 pp. 140-159. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1107097]

Bucea-Manea-Ţoniş R, Bucea-Manea-Ţoniş R, Simion VE, Ilic D, Braicu C, Manea N (2020) Sustainability in higher education: The relationship between work-life balance and XR e-learning facilities. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145872

Carl A, Strydom S (2017) e-Portfolio as reflection tool during teaching practice: The interplay between contextual and dispositional variables. South Afr J Educ 37(1). https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v37n1a1250

Castellano, J. Advanced media english–a modern PrOCALL course. CALL-EJ; 2016; 17, 1 pp. 52-66.

Castellanos, A; Sánchez, C; Calderero, JF. Nuevos modelos tecnopedagógicos. Competencia digital de los alumnos universitarios. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa; 2017; 19, 1 pp. 1-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24320/redie.2017.19.1.1148]

Chetty K, Qigui L, Gcora N, Josie J, Wenwei L, Fang C (2018). Bridging the digital divide: measuring digital literacy. Economics. https://doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2018-23

Cronin, C. Openness and praxis: exploring the use of open educational practices in higher education. Int Rev Res Open Dist Learn; 2017; 18, 5 pp. 15-34. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.3096]

Dafonte-Gómez, A; García-Crespo, O; Ramahi-García, D. ‘Flipped learning’ y competencia digital: diseño tecnopedagógico y percepción del alumnado universitario. Index Comunicación; 2018; 8, 2 pp. 275-294. http://plataformarevistascomunicacion.org/2018/11/articulo-flipped-learning-competencia-digital-diseno-tecnopedagogico-percepcion-del-alumnado-universitario/

de Ovando Calderón, JS; Jara, VJ. Digital competence of health sciences teachers of a Chilean university. Pixel-Bit, Revista de Medios y Educacion; 2019; 56, pp. 193-211. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2019.i56.10]

del Prete A, Almenara JC (2020) Use of the virtual learning environment among higher education teaching staff: a gender analysis | El uso del Ambiente Virtual de Aprendizaje entre el profesorado de educación superior: Un análisis de género. Revista de Educacion a Distancia, 20(62). https://doi.org/10.6018/RED.400061

Digital Transformation Expert Panel. (2021) The Learning Country. Digital Transformation Skills Strategy. https://www.digitalskillsformation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Digital-Transformation-Skills-Strategy-010521.pdf?v=2

Divya, P; Mohamed Haneefa, K. Digital reading competency of students: A study in universities in Kerala. DESIDOC J Libr Inf Technol; 2018; 38, 2 pp. 88-94. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14429/djlit.38.2.12233]

Fázik J, Steinerová J (2020) Technologies, knowledge and truth: the three dimensions of information literacy of university students in Slovakia. J Doc https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-05-2020-0086

Feriady, M; Nurkhin, A; Mahmud, N; Setiani, R; Astuti, DP. Influence of organizational suport and digital literacy on lecturer acceptance of e-learning in indonesia: a modification of technologi acceptance model. Int J Sci Technol Res; 2020; 9, 1 pp. 2229-2233.

Fischer M, Imgrund F, Janiesch C, Winkelmann A (2020) Strategy archetypes for digital transformation: defining meta objectives using business process management. Inf Manage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103262

Foster, B. Information literacy beyond librarians: a data/methods triangulation approach to investigating disciplinary IL teaching practices. Evid Based Libr Inf Pract; 2020; 15, 1 pp. 20-37. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18438/EBLIP29635]

García-Ruiz, R; Ramírez-García, A; Rodríguez-Rosell, M. Educación en alfabetización mediática para una nueva ciudadanía prosumidora. Comunicar; 2014; XXII, 43 pp. 15-23. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C43-2014-01]

George-Reyes, CE; Ramírez-Montoya, MS; López-Caudana, EO. Imbrication of the Metaverse in the complexity of education 4.0: Approach from an analysis of the literatura [Imbricación del Metaverso en la complejidad de la educación 4.0: Aproximación desde un análisis de la literatura]. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación; 2023; 66, pp. 199-237. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.97337]

González-Pérez LI, Ramírez-Montoya MS, García-Peñalvo FJ (2019) Innovación educativa en estudios sobre el desarrollo y uso de la tecnología: un mapeo sistemático. In: Ramírez Montoya MS, & Valenzuela González JR (eds.), Innovación educativa: tendencias globales de investigación e implicaciones prácticas (Primera, pp. 137–160). Ediciones OCTAEDRO, S. L. https://octaedro.com/libro/innovacion-educativa-tendencias-globales-de-investigacion-e-implicaciones-practicas/

Guillén-Gámez, FD; Peña, MP. Univariate analysis of digital competence in physical education: an empirical study | Análisis Univariante de la Competencia Digital en Educación Física: Un estudio empírico. Retos; 2020; 37, pp. 326-332.

Gumede, L; Badriparsad, N. Online teaching and learning through the students’ eyes –Uncertainty through the COVID-19 lockdown: a qualitative case study in Gauteng province, South Africa. Radiography; 2022; 28, 1 pp. 193-198.[COI: 1:STN:280:DC%2BB2cfjslyltw%3D%3D] [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2021.10.018] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34785145]

Hamutoğlu NB, Savaşçı M, Sezen-Gültekin G (2019) Digital literacy skills and attitudes towards e-learning. J Educ Fut, August, 93–107. https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.509293

He, T; Zhu, C; Questier, F. Predicting digital informal learning: an empirical study among Chinese University students. Asia Pac Educ Rev; 2018; 19, 1 pp. 79-90. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12564-018-9517-x]

Hess, T; Matt, C; Benlian, A; Wiesböck, F. Options for formulating a digital transformation strategy. MIS Q Executive; 2016; 15, 2 pp. 103-119. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291349362

Heuling, LS; Wild, S; Vest, A. Digital competences of prospective engineers and science teachers: a latent profile and correspondence analysis. Int J Educ Math Sci Technol; 2021; 9, 4 pp. 760-782. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1831]

Hong, AJ; Kim, HJ. College students’ Digital Readiness for Academic Engagement (DRAE) Scale: scale development and validation. Asia-Pac Educ Res; 2018; 27, 4 pp. 303-312. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0387-0]

Igbo HU, Imo NT (2020) Digital libraries and access to information in Nigerian Federal Universities: The impact of technology variables. J Inf Knowl Manage 19(2). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219649220500136

Johnston, N. The shift towards digital literacy in Australian University libraries: developing a digital literacy framework. J Aust Libr Inf Asso; 2020; 69, 1 pp. 93-101.MathSciNet ID: 581671[DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2020.1712638]

Jormand, H; Bashirian, S; Barati, M; Rezapur-Shahkolai, F; Babamiri, M. Evaluation of a web-based randomized controlled trial educational intervention based on media literacy on preventing substance abuse among college students, applying the integrated social marketing approach: a study protocol. Trials; 2022; 23, 1 [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06913-6] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36510235][PubMedCentral: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9744034]

Kajee L (2018) Teacher education students engaging with digital identity narratives. S Afr J Educ 38(2). https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n2a1501

Kamardeen, I; Samaratunga, M. Digiexplanation driven assignments for personalising learning in construction education. Constr Econ Build; 2020; 20, 3 pp. 103-123. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v20i3.7000]

Kerr, J; Dale, VH; Gyurko, F. Evaluation of a MOOC Design Mapping Framework (MDMF): Experiences of academics and learning technologists. Electron J E-Learn; 2019; 17, 1 pp. 38-51. http://www.ejel.org/volume17/issue1/p38

Khalil, R; Srinivasan, V. Massive open online courses/ MOOCS: a gateway to enrich e-learning in management education. Int J Innov Creat Change; 2019; 7, 5 pp. 112-124.

Kim HJ, Hong AJ, Song H-D (2018) The relationships of family, perceived digital competence and attitude, and learning agility in sustainable student engagement in higher education. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124635

Kitchenham, B; Pretorius, R; Budgen, D; Brereton, OP; Turner, M; Niazi, M; Linkman, S. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering-a tertiary study. Inf Softw Technol; 2010; 52, 8 pp. 792-805. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.03.006]

Kitchenham B, Charters S (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500

Koc, M; Barut, E. Development and validation of New Media Literacy Scale (NMLS) for university students. Comput Hum Behav; 2016; 63, pp. 834-843. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.035]

Kocak, O; Coban, M; Aydin, A; Cakmak, N. The mediating role of critical thinking and cooperativity in the 21st century skills of higher education students. Think Ski Creat; 2021; 42, 100967. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100967]

Kolodziejczyk, I; Gibbs, P; Nembou, C; Sagrista, MR. Digital skills at divine word university, Papua New Guinea. IAFOR J Educ; 2020; 8, 2 pp. 107-124. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22492/ije.8.2.06]

Kör, H; Erbay, H; Engin, M; Dünder, E. An examination of the correlation between science and technology attitudes scale, frequency of smartphone usage scale and lifelong learning scale scores using the structural equation model. J Baltic Sci Educ; 2017; 16, 1 pp. 86-99. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.33225/jbse/17.16.86]

Leier, V; Gruber, A. Team New Zealand-Sweden-Germany: a joint venture exploring language learning in digital spaces. JALT CALL J; 2021; 17, 3 pp. 298-324. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v17n3.410]

Liesa-Orús M, Latorre-Cosculluela C, Vázquez-Toledo S, Sierra-Sánchez V (2020) The technological challenge facing higher education professors: perceptions of ICT tools for developing 21st Century skills. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135339

Liu, ZJ; Tretyakova, N; Fedorov, V; Kharakhordina, M. Digital literacy and digital didactics as the basis for new learning models development. Int J Emerg Technol Learn; 2020; 15, 14 pp. 4-18.[COI: 1:CAS:528:DC%2BB3cXjsFKrsQ%3D%3D] [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i14.14669]

López-Meneses, E; Sirignano, FM; Vázquez-Cano, E; Ramírez-Hurtado, JM. University students’ digital competence in three areas of the DigCom 2.1 model: a comparative study at three European universities. Australas J Educ Technol; 2020; 36, 3 pp. 69-88. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14742/AJET.5583]

Makarova, O; Ldokova, G; Egorova, R. Analysis of students’ views of the quality of pedagogical education in Russia. Int J Educ Math Sci Technol; 2021; 9, 3 pp. 462-481. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1624]

Manca, S; Bocconi, S; Gleason, B. “Think globally, act locally”: a glocal approach to the development of social media literacy. Comput Educ; 2021; 160, 104025. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104025]

Martzoukou, K; Fulton, C; Kostagiolas, P; Lavranos, C. A study of higher education students’ self-perceived digital competences for learning and everyday life online participation. J Doc; 2020; 76, 6 pp. 1413-1458. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2020-0041]

McGrew, S; Smith, M; Breakstone, J; Ortega, T; Wineburg, S. Improving university students’ web savvy: an intervention study. Br J Educ Psychol; 2019; 89, 3 pp. 485-500. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12279] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30993684]

Miguel-Revilla, D; Martínez-Ferreira, JM; Sánchez-Agustí, M. Assessing the digital competence of educators in social studies: an analysis in initial teacher training using the TPACK-21 model. Australas J Educ Technol; 2020; 36, 2 pp. 1-12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5281]

Moher, D; Liberati, A; Tetzlaff, J; Altman, DG PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med; 2009; 6, 7 pp. 1-6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097]

Morin E (2019) Pensar la Complejidad. Crisis ymetamorfosis. Universitat de Valencia

Morin E (2020) Cambiemos de Via. Lecciones de la pandemia. Paidos

Munoz-Repiso, A; del Pozo, M. Analysis of the digital competences of graduates of university degrees to be a teacher. Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnologia Educativa-RELATEC; 2016; 15, 2 pp. 155-168. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17398/1695-288X.15.2.155]

Murray, MC; Pérez, J. Informing and performing: a study comparing adaptive learning to traditional learning. Inform Sci; 2015; 18, 1 pp. 111-125. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.28945/2165]

Myyry L, Kallunki V, Katajavuori N, Repo S, Tuononen T, Anttila H, Kinnunen P, Haarala-Muhonen A, Pyörälä E (2022) COVID-19 accelerating academic teachers’ digital competence in distance teaching. Front Educ 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.770094

Nagel M-T, Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia O, Fischer J (2022) Validation of newly developed tasks for the assessment of generic Critical Online Reasoning (COR) of university students and graduates. Front Educ 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.914857

Nikou, S; Aavakare, M. An assessment of the interplay between literacy and digital technology in higher education. Educ Inf Technol; 2021; 26, 4 pp. 3893-3915. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10451-0]

Novakovich, J. Fostering critical thinking and reflection through blog-mediated peer feedback. J Comput Assist Learn; 2016; 32, 1 pp. 16-30. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12114]

Olivia-Dumitrina, N; Casanovas, M; Capdevila, Y. Academic writing and the internet: Cyber-plagiarism amongst university students. J New Approach Educ Res; 2019; 8, 2 pp. 112-125. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7821/naer.2019.7.407]

Önger, S; Çetin, T. An investigation into digital literacy views of social studies preservice teachers in the context of authentic learning. Rev Int Geogr Educ Online; 2018; 8, 1 pp. 109-124.

Oria, B. Edmodo como herramienta de aprendizaje telecolaborativo online en el aula de inglés. Encuentro.; 2020; 28, pp. 49-70. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.37536/ej.2020.28.1914]

Paskevicius M, Irvine V (2019) Open education and learning design: Open pedagogy in praxis. J Interact Media Educ 2019(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.512

Patiño A, Ramírez-Montoya MS, Buenestado-Fernández M (2023) Active learning and education 4.0 for complex thinking training: analysis of two case studies in open education. Smart Learn Environ 10(8). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00229-x

Pinto Molina, M; Gómez-Hernández, J-A; Sales, D; Cuevas-Cerveró, A; Fernández Pascual, R; Caballero Mariscal, D; Guerrero-Quesada, DJ; Navalón, C. Aprender y enseñar competencias digitales en un entorno móvil: avances de una investigación aplicada a profesorado y alumnado universitario de Ciencias Sociales. Revista Ibero-Americana de Ciencia Da Informacao; 2019; 12, 2 pp. 585-596. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.26512/10.26512/rici.v]

Ponce, P; Ramirez, R; Ramirez-Montoya, MS; Molina, A; MacCleery, B; Ascanio, M. From understanding a simple DC motor to developing an electric vehicle AI controller rapid prototype using MATLAB-Simulink, real-time simulation and complex thinking. Front Educ; 2022; 7, 941972. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.941972]

Power J, Kannara V (2016) Best-practice model for technology enhanced learning in the creative arts. Res Learn Technol 24. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v24.30231

Pozos Pérez, KV; Tejada Fernández, J. Competencias digitales en docentes de educación superior: niveles de dominio y necesidades formativas. Revista Digital de Investigación En Docencia Universitaria; 2018; 12, 2 pp. 59-87. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.19083/ridu.2018.712]

Pozo-Sánchez, S; López-Belmonte, J; Fuentes-Cabrera, A; Moreno-Guerrero, A-J. Incidence of retro-innovation in higher education. Radio and television as complementary tools when using the educational model known as flipped learning. Form Univ; 2020; 13, 3 pp. 139-146. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-50062020000300139]

Ramírez-Montoya MS, Castillo-Martínez IM, Sanabria-Zepeda JC, Miranda J (2022) Complex thinking in the framework of education 4.0 and open innovation—a systematic literature review. J Open Innov Technol Market Complex 8(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010004

Rampelt F, Orr D, Knoth A (2019) Bologna Digital 2020–White Paper on Digitalisation in the European Higher Education Area. Publisher: Geschäftsstelle Hochschulforum Digitalisierung beim Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft e.V

Reyna J, Meier P (2018). Using the Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) framework in tertiary science education: a pilot study. Educ Sci 8(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8030106

Roa Banquez, K; Viviana Rojas Torres, CG; González Rincón, LJ; Ortiz Ortiz, EG. El docente en la era 4.0: una propuesta de formación digital que fortalezca el proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje. Revista Virtual Universidad Católica Del Norte; 2021; 63, pp. 126-160. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.35575/rvucn.n63a6]

Robin Sullivan, R; Neu, V; Yang, F. Faculty development to promote effective instructional technology integration: a qualitative examination of reflections in an online community. Online Learn J; 2018; 22, 4 pp. 341-359. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i4.1373]

Robles Moral, FJ; Fernández Díaz, M. Future primary school teachers’ digital competence in teaching science through the use of social media. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 5 2816. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13052816]

Rodríguez-Hoyos, C; Fueyo Gutiérrez, A; Hevia Artime, I. Competencias digitales del profesorado para innovar en la docencia universitaria. Analizando el uso de los dispositivos móviles. Pixel-Bit, Revista de Medios y Educación; 2021; 61, pp. 71-97. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.86305]

Romero-Rodriguez, L; Torres-Toukoumidis, D; Pérez-Rodríguez, M; Aguaded, I. Analfanauts and fourth screen: lack of infodiets and media and information literacy in Latin American University Students. Fonseca-J Commun; 2016; 12, pp. 11-25. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60674744.pdf

Romero-Rodríguez JM, Ramirez-Montoya, MS, Glasserman-Morales LD, Ramos Navas-Parejo M (2022) Collaborative online international learning between Spain and Mexico: a microlearning experience to enhance creativity in complexity. Educ+Train. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-07-2022-0259

Romero-Tena R, Barragán-Sánchez R, Llorente-Cejudo C, Palacios-Rodríguez A (2020) The challenge of initial training for early childhood teachers. A cross sectional study of their digital competences. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114782

Sánchez-Caballé A, Esteve-Mon FM (2022) Digital teaching competence of university teachers: a comparative study at two European universities. Australas J Educ Technol 50–61. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7408

Sandí Delgado JC (2020) Desarrollo de competencias digitales en el profesorado a través de juegos serios: un estudio de caso aplicado en la Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR). E-Ciencias de La Información. https://doi.org/10.15517/eci.v10i2.38946

SEP (2019) Agenda Digital Educativa ADE.mx. In: Secretaría de Educación Pública. https://infosen.senado.gob.mx/sgsp/gaceta/64/2/2020-02-05-1/assets/documentos/Agenda_Digital_Educacion.pdf

Sichel, CE; Javdani, S; Ueberall, S; Liggett, R. Leveraging youths’ digital literacies: the E-Responder social media violence interruption model and pilot evaluation. J Prevent Intervent Community; 2019; 47, 2 pp. 76-89. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10852352.2019.1582145]

Sillat, LH; Tammets, K; Laanpere, M. Digital competence assessment methods in higher education: a systematic literature review. Educ Scie; 2021; 11, 8 402. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080402]

Silva, MB; Borges, G; Fantin, M; Almeida, M; Aguaded, I. Media competence in children aged 9 to 12 in Brazilian settings. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Da Comunicação; 2021; 44, 1 pp. 21-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-5844202111] http://portcom.intercom.org.br/revistas/index.php/revistaintercom/article/view/3487/2499

Sosa Díaz, MJ; Palau Martín, RF. Flipped classroom para adquirir la competencia digital docente: una experiencia didáctica en la Educación Superior. Pixel-Bit Revista de Medios y Educación; 2018; 52, pp. 37-54. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2018.i52.03]

Spieler B, Grandl M, Ebner M, Slany W (2020) Bridging the gap: a computer science Pre-MOOC for first semester students making with kids view project. Electron J E-Learn. https://doi.org/10.34190/EJEL.20.18.3.004

Starkey, L. A review of research exploring teacher preparation for the digital age. Camb J Educ; 2020; 50, 1 pp. 37-56. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2019.1625867]

Suárez-Brito, P; López-Caudana, EO; Baena-Rojas, JJ; Ramírez-Montoya, MS. Eliciting complex thinking through open educational resource projects. J Soc Stud Educ Res; 2022; 13, 4 pp. 56-77. https://jsser.org/index.php/jsser/article/view/4472

Tang, CM; Chaw, LY. Digital literacy: A prerequisite for effective learning in a blended learning environment?. Electron J E-Learn; 2016; 14, 1 pp. 54-65.

Techataweewan, W; Prasertsin, U. Development of digital literacy indicators for Thai undergraduate students using mixed method research. Kasetsart J Soc Sci; 2018; 39, 2 pp. 215-221. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.07.001]

Tetep,; Suparman, A. Students’ digital media literacy: effects on social character. Int J Recent Technol Eng; 2019; 8, 2 Special Issue 9 pp. 394-399. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.B1091.0982S919]

Ting, Y-L. Tapping into students’ digital literacy and designing negotiated learning to promote learner autonomy. Internet High Educ; 2015; 26, pp. 25-32. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.004]

Tømte, C; Enochsson, A-B; Buskqvist, U; Kårstein, A. Educating online student teachers to master professional digital competence: The TPACK-framework goes online. Comput Educat; 2015; 84, pp. 26-35. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.01.005]

Torres-Coronas, T; Vidal-Blasco, M-A. Students and employers perception about the development of digital skills in higher education | Percepción de estudiantes y empleadores sobre el desarrollo de competencias digitales en la educación superior. Revista de Educacion; 2015; 367, pp. 63-89. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2015-367-283]

Torres-Gastelú, CA; Cordero-Guzmán, DM; Soto-Ortíz, JL; Mory-Alvarado, A. Influence of factors about the manifestation of digital citizenship. Prisma Soc; 2019; 26, pp. 27-49.

Tratkowska, K. Digital transformation: theoretical backgrounds of digital change. Manage Sci; 2020; 24, 4 pp. 32-37. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15611/ms.2019.4.05]

Tugtekin, EB; Koc, M. Understanding the relationship between new media literacy, communication skills, and democratic tendency: Model development and testing. New Media Soc; 2020; 22, 10 pp. 1922-1941. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444819887705]

UNESCO (2017) Working group on education: Digital skills for life and work. In: Broadband commission for sustainable development

Varga-Atkins, T. Beyond description: In search of disciplinary digital capabilities through signature pedagogies. Res Learn Technol; 2020; 28, pp. 1-19. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2467]

Vázquez-Parra JC, Cruz-Sandoval M, Carlos-Arroyo M (2022) Social entrepreneurship and complex thinking: a bibliometric study. Sustainability 14(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013187

Verhoef PC, Broekhuizen T, Bart Y, Bhattacharya A, Qi Dong J, Fabian N, Haenlein M (2019) Digital transformation: a multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. J Bus Res https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022

Vetter MA, Sarraf KS (2020) Assessing the Art + feminism Edit-a-thon for Wikipedia literacy, learning outcomes, and critical thinking. Interact Learn Environ https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1805772

Wang, HL; Almeida, S; Frino, B; Wijayawardena, K; Rauf, A; Hardie, G. Dialogue matters a lot: autoethnographic reflections of an Australian teaching team managing first-year undergraduate students. Int J Manage Educ; 2022; 20, 3 100699. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100699]

Williamson B, Hogan A (2020). Commercialisation and privatisation in / of education in the context of Covid-19. In: Educ Int Res (Issue July). Education International. https://codeactsineducation.wordpress.com/2020/07/14/evolution-global-education-industry-during-pandemic/

Xiao J (2020) Digital transformation in higher education: critiquing the five-year development plans (2016-2020) of 75 Chinese Universities. Dist Educ 40(4):515–533

Zhao, Y; Sánchez Gómez, MC; Pinto Llorente, AM; Zhao, L. Digital competence in higher education: students’ perception and personal factors. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 21 12184. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su132112184]