IEEE REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE TECNOLOGIAS DEL APRENDIZAJE, VOL. 15, NO.
4, NOVEMBER 2020
Educational Plans and Programs for Digital
Competence: A Geographical Analysis
From an Educational Equity Perspective
Almudena Alonso-Ferreiro , Fernando Fraga-Varela, and Paola Guimeráns
Abstract— This article discusses the plans that contribute to
the development of digital competence for students in Galicia
(Spain). From 1100 public schools, 18 programs were selected.
A concurrent triangulation mixed-methods design was applied.
The content analysis of the proposals has been combined with
impact statistics in schools and a Geographic Information System
(GIS). The results show prioritized digital competence dimensions
and a partial projection across the set of schools: 26% do not
incorporate any programs, whilst 5% implement five or more of
these initiatives. The findings question the principle of equity in
education that prevails in the public education system.
Index Terms— Education, educational programs, education
technology, geographic information system.
I. I NTRODUCTION
I N RECENT years, we have witnessed the debunking of
a myth: learning the necessary abilities to deal with the
available technologies was based on the simple fact of being a
digital native or not [1]. This debate worked as a smokescreen
during quite some time, hiding the need for an organised and
structured education at schools. Over the years, this vision
faded away: it became evident that specific learning processes
were needed, as they could not be guaranteed by the simple
fact of being born in a specific moment of time and being
contemporary to the time being [2]. It is no longer surprising
that, in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, teaching staff
in Galicia (Spain) affected by confinement, state that “there are
14-year old pupils who do not know how to attach a document
to an e-mail” [3].
But we are not facing a problem which is exclusive to
schools. The need emerges to target the level of inequality,
which is generated when the subjects do not have the minimum
cultural and competence capital to achieve full citizenship [4],
Manuscript received July 28, 2020; accepted September 8, 2020. Date of
publication October 22, 2020; date of current version November 16, 2020.
(Spanish version received May 15, 2020; revised June 15, 2020; accepted
June 15, 2020). (Corresponding author: Almudena Alonso-Ferreiro.)
Almudena Alonso-Ferreiro is with the School Didactics and Organization,
Research Methods, Universidade de Vigo, Campus Ourense, 32004 Vigo,
Spain (e-mail: almalonso@uvigo.es).
Fernando Fraga-Varela is with the Department of Pedagogy and Didactics,
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 15705 Santiago de Compostela,
Spain (e-mail: fernando.fraga@usc.es).
Paola Guimeráns is with the Department of Education,
Aula STEAM, 15701 Santiago de Compostela, Spain (e-mail:
pguimerans@gmail.com).
There exists a Spanish version of this article available at
http://rita.det.uvigo.es/VAEPRITA/V8N4/A19.pdf
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/RITA.2020.3033206
1932-8540 © 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
407
which implies situating ourselves fully in the field of edu-
cational equality. Do all students of the education system
have the same opportunities for an education that meets the
demands of current society? The needed competences nec-
essarily entail everything related to technological and digital
development, which offers us new possibilities to disseminate
and have access to information. Its evolution requires training
the subjects in abilities that imply multiple formats, supports
and new languages; new knowledge that is essential for a
full digital citizenship [5], [6], social advances that education
systems cannot afford to be left out of [7].
Faced with these requirements, international and European
education policies take on the challenge to include learning
which is related to digital media and technologies [8], [9].
The point of support for this change in Europe has been
the development of the competence framework. The proposal
has transcended to all of the education systems and has
been the common link between all countries involved in the
renewal, both of university education, with the adaptation to
the European Higher Education Area, and the non-university
education in the successive proposals to update education
systems. Although there are different ways to conceive Dig-
ital Competence (DC), the current vision established by the
DigComp Project is the vision assumed as a benchmark when
speaking about Digital Competence as “the set of knowledge,
skills, attitudes, strategies and awareness that are required
when using ICT and digital media to perform tasks” [10].
A way to understand this competence, which has been clearly
assumed by the education administration.
As a consequence, the competence framework is introduced
for the first time in Spain with the LOE [11], including DC as
a basic competence. And so it continues, under the umbrella of
the current Spanish education policy LOMCE [12], strengthen-
ing the role of the key competences, being projected explicitly,
at least in theory, in the daily work at school. However, recent
research within the context of our work has shown us that
the supposed learning is not the one expected in this field
and that several dimensions of DC have an almost anecdotal
development at schools [13]. This has highlighted serious
latent problems in this type of learnings from the educational
equity perspective.
In parallel to the promotion of the inclusion of DC in
the educational space, multiple programs and proposals were
raised in the Autonomous Community of Galicia, to com-
plement the work with elements related to this field and to
408 IEEE REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE TECNOLOGIAS DEL APRENDIZAJE, VOL. 15, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2020

boost the development of specific abilities. They have the TABLE I

particular feature that the centres do not necessarily have to DIGCOMP 2.0 [22]
join in. Schools are supposed to explicitly apply to be included.
This reality raises new questions: How are these programs
distributed according to the network of public centres? Is the
distribution generating any type of inequality? Do the centres
participate in an equitable way? Who is included in their
proposals? Is this process causing some type of exclusion?
To give a response to these questions, we first describe the
state of the art and theoretical references that make it possible
to understand the global situation and the context in Galicia,
in particular. Thereupon we explain the used methodology and
describe the most significant results to, eventually, formulate
the discussion and conclusions.

II. D IGITAL C OMPETENCE AND S CHOOL IN

THE 21 ST C ENTURY
The term Digital Competence is a multifaceted concept,
with different interpretations [14]. One of them proposes
making it equivalent to the level of an ability [15]. But this
simplification is not unique to Digital Competence: within
the educational area it is not uncommon to make a game
of equivalences between skill and competence. However, this
reduction implies a problem, as it does not explore all pos-
sibilities offered by this vision of learning. We are facing
an open debate from the initial proposals about work by
competences, and it is usually projected in time until our days.
The controversy oscillates between a general trend that adopts
a behavioural, reductionist conception of competence, and
an integrated conception that associates knowledge, abilities
and dispositions with the requested tasks or activities [16].
This latter vision is critical, because it allows giving way
to situated learning [17]: a basic pillar in competence work,
which locates learning in the same context in which it is
applied. If we consider this broad perspective of DC, we note
that it has implications with a certain magnitude, because it
goes beyond the equivalence with abilities, since “Advanced
digital competence does not automatically follow from the
ability to use ICT tools” [18].
A need arises: education systems should propose specific
and coherent actions for the development of DC. Shared
reference frameworks are needed, since it would, at least in
principle, make their development at school easier [19]. And
all actions which are in solidarity with this perspective would
reinforce even more the target to move towards educational
equity, which is frequently denied in the digital field [15], and
the generation of opportunities to provide for learning adapted
to the demands of the current world.
The first steps towards a more concise proposal arise. From
a holistic and broad perspective, an alphabetization for the
time being has features that focus on the fact of being digital,
multimodal and media related, from a practical, but also nec-
essarily critical, dimension [20]. The DigComp Project arises
during the efforts to unify the understanding even more [20].
This project has been the main working reference in recent
years. It is not a static model, there have been reviews and
it is currently in its version 2.1 [22]. Its aim is to establish
and detail the essential components of DC to build a common
European framework. As a result, it offers an exhaustive
definition of the term that includes 5 competence areas and
21 competences (Table I), thus becoming a reference for all
Member States when it comes to planning strategies around
DC. The latest version of the model goes one step beyond
the previous 2.0 model [23], as it complements this proposal
with 8 achievement levels and exemplifications applied to
learning scenarios and the use of the 21 competences.
However, even considering all of the support provided by
a materialization like the DigComp Project, we continue to
see many difficulties for the development of DC in class-
rooms. And this is despite the explicit reinforcement made in
LOMCE [12] for the competence proposal. Official curricula
do not include this learning in a concise and clear way,
as it happens with the areas of traditional knowledge [24].
On the other hand, teachers do notice differences in the set
of key competences to be worked on in the education system,
despite not being different as regards their significance: an
example is the fact that this competence is not taken into
account in the standard external assessment tests [25]. These
constraints, among other factors, are projected to reality in the
Autonomous Community of Galicia, as shown by the latest
research projects [13].
Given these conditions, several doubts arise about equity
as regards the access to and the use of educational technolo-
gies, and therefore it is essential to activate initiatives that
will standardise these resources, turning them into learning
proposals for students [26], without forgetting the teachers as
a key element for success [7].

Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ALONSO-FERREIRO et al.: EDUCATIONAL PLANS AND PROGRAMS FOR DC: A GEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
A. Educational Plans and Programs for DC in Galicia
The Autonomous Community of Galicia has decided to
integrate digital technologies into educational processes. The
proposals encouraged by the Education Administration address
initiatives that go from free-configuration subjects to specific
plans with the participation of the Agency for the Techno-
logical Modernization of Galicia (AMTEGA), supported by
the School Library Consultancy and programmes developed
by Plan Proxecta.
The projects proposed are enriching the work done in the
areas and subjects based on the official curricula in the school
context [27]. They imply a complementary reinforcement by
means of other types of learning strategies linked to several
DC dimensions, but they do also enrich several experiences
that improve the understanding in terms of how technologies
work and their funding principles, with the aim of turning
students into a creative agent of the digital world and not only
into digital consumers [28]. This new digital alphabetization
strives to promote a constructionist methodology which is
projected to aspects which are common to many of these
programmes: combined work in constructive environments
with new expressive media [29]. Thus it brings into light the
urgency of having a teaching and learning model focussed
on the student and raises the importance of developing the
acquisition of transversal competences. In this new orientation,
which is closely related to the maker culture [30], the aim is
to strengthen the STEM teaching, which stands for Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics [31]. Links to other
non-scientific areas such as Arts are searched for as well, this
methodological approach is called STEAM [32].
Galicia is not standing on the side line of these initiatives,
and since 2015, the Community boosts different educational
strategies, bundled up under the definition of STEM. These
initiatives, designed by the Administration or in collaboration
with different public and private bodies, are aimed at promot-
ing innovative teaching methods and are singled out as an
essential element for the construction of a set of provisions
for a sustainable lifestyle [33].
From that moment on, the Autonomous Community of Gali-
cia introduces among the elective, freely configurable subjects,
which are available for the whole Community [34], specific
subjects related to the development of some DC dimen-
sions and STEM abilities, such as Research and Informa-
tion Processing (EP-Primary Education- and ESO -Secondary
Education-), Robotics (EP and High School), Programming
(ESO and High School) and, more recently [35], Digital
Identity (ESO and High School).
Worth to be highlighted among the Plans of the Galician
Ministry of Education, in collaboration with AMTEGA, is the
Edudixital 2020 strategy, which promotes several initiatives
focussing on two aspects: the development of digital com-
petence and the STEM abilities of students. The first case
includes the projects Abalar and E-Dixgal, focussed on the
implementation of digital textbooks [see 36]. The second
case is the STEM strategy that focusses on the training of
non-university students in robotics and programming, and
includes initiatives such as the Science Club, Maker Spaces
and Educational Robotics in Primary Education.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
409
Worth mentioning is also the DigiTalent plan, focussed on
the development of digital economy along the life cycle, which
among the multiple initiatives offered, includes an educational
programme participated by the Galician Ministry of Education
and AMTEGA, in collaboration with Vodafone: DigiCraft at
School, which aims at developing the different DigiComp
dimensions of DC though play.
The School Library Consultancy does also contribute with
initiatives that promote the development of DC in a wide
sense and that are framed within the context of the Plan LIA
2016/2020, looking to give a response to School Libraries (SL)
of the 21st century and exploring the possibilities of evolution.
This strategy proposes a series of challenges which include
the development of plans that boost multiple alphabetizations.
PLAMBE (Plan for the Improvement of School Libraries)
considers the concept of a library as a creative learning centre.
Launched in 2005, it became part of this strategy in its
first phase -LIA 2010/2015-. More recently, two programs
have been launched that opt for integrating digital media and
emerging technologies into school libraries as learning axis
of the education centre: Creative Library (initially known as
Escornabots in school libraries), focussed on the creation of
creative spaces with maker logics, and Radio na Biblio, which
promotes the creation of school radio labs.
Last but not least, the initiative Plan Proxecta, in collabora-
tion with different entities, has the aim of promoting innova-
tion in educational centres through a series of plans in different
fields (nutrition, activity and health, the environment, heritage,
etc.). During the 2019/2020 call, 44 programs were offered,
nine of which are related to some of the DC dimensions. Two
of them are directly related to STEM knowledge: “Learning
by programming” and “Girls Entrepreneurs with ICT”. The
remaining seven programs approach the DC dimension which
refers to media education, dealing with audiovisual language,
consumption of digital content and ways of participation and
production.
III. M ETHODOLOGY F RAMEWORK
This article aims at analysing the initiatives, programmes
and strategies encouraged by the Galician Ministry of Edu-
cation, in order to promote the DC development of students,
explore its spreading among all of the education centres and
make a critical analysis of its possible implications.
As a response to this situation the decision was made to
use a concurrent triangulation mixed-method design [37]. The
qualitative aspect deals with the analysis of the content of the
calls of the 18 programs chosen, their implementation features
and the dimensions and DC competences on which they focus;
while the quantitative aspect deals with the creation of a
specific database, which is based on education institutions that
explicitly belong to the public network of centres in Galicia,
which have non-university teaching and report directly to the
Ministry of Education.
The autonomous Administration makes the data publicly
available in a portal called Centros Educativos [38]. This portal
has a specific search engine that offers information about
public centres that report to the Ministry, about other admin-
istrations, as well as information about the private centres and
410 IEEE REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE TECNOLOGIAS DEL APRENDIZAJE, VOL. 15, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2020
TABLE II
P UBLIC C ENTRES T HAT R EPORT TO THE G ALICIAN
M INISTRY OF E DUCATION
their potential relationship with education agreements. The
centres can be shown on a map, providing details about their
address, municipality, postal code, telephone, etc. It also offers
the chance to export the searches in CSV or XML format,
which include geolocation data of the centres. A new data set
was thus created, enriched by the programs that are the focus
of our research target, by means of new variables. Once the
process of linking each centre with the programs and projects
which are the object of the study has finished, the database
is imported to a statistical treatment programme. In particular,
we opted for a statistical data analysis with R [39]. This envi-
ronment and the programming language favours the projection
of the data through a geographic information system (GIS)
which takes the geolocation data of the educational centres as
a base. As regards the representation of georeferenced data,
that enable a clear view of the distribution of the plans and
initiatives and the analysis of their meaning, we used the rgdal
package of the R Software.
The value of presenting the information through maps is
that it allows linking in a single place and in a very clear way
both the social and spatial [40] relations in the distribution of
the different plans and programs, which are being developed
in the educational centres in Galicia.
Thus it is possible to gather in a single place the resolutions
of 18 plans that have been chosen because of their theoretical
contribution to the development of DC [41]: those boosted
with the collaboration of AMTEGA - Edudixital and Digicraft
initiative, those supported by the School Library Consultancy
and those of the Plan Proxecta which are related to the topic.
The final list of centres, a total of 1100, is shown in Table II.
Each of the centres has been considered as a case with
regard to the processing of the data, enriched with a series
of records which have to be taken into account for each one
of them, such as the code, identification, typology, address,
municipality, province and geolocation, in addition to their
inclusion or not into the different plans during the school year
2019-20. This database allowed us to observe the distribution
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TABLE III
C HARACTERISTICS OF THE P LANS IN C OLLABORATION W ITH AMTEGA
of these programs and their percentage load with regard to
the network of centres, with indicators both as regards the
participation and the exclusion. The statistical descriptions
offer a general overview of the projection of these initiatives,
providing for an understandable panorama perspective of the
repercussions implied in the introduction of initiatives that
discursively favour the development of digital competence in
the Galician context.
IV. R ESULTS
The plans and initiatives that boost actions for the develop-
ment of DC in the Galician education system emerge from
three axes: the collaboration with AMTEGA, the School
Library Consultancy and Plan Proxecta. Therefore, we start
detailing the qualitative analysis referred to the 18 analysed
programs, from the perspective of these axes. Then, we offer
statistical descriptions that show the representation situation
of the programs within the chosen group of centres. Last but
not least we show their representation in Galicia as a whole
through the GIS analysis.
A. Educational Plans and Programs for DC: Qualitative
Analysis
The 18 analysed initiatives show a diverse reality depending
on the approach and treatment of DC, as well as the group
of abilities they promote. As shown in Tables III, IV and V,
we find plans and programs with an instrumental approach
that give priority to technical questions (E-Dixgal/Abalar),
as opposed to strategies that tend to multiple alphabetiza-
tions (SL), i.e., that approach DC in a wider sense. The
first-mentioned strategies are characterised by a pedagogical
vacuum [7] in which teachers take on the whole responsibility
for pedagogical innovation with the tools provided by the
Administration.
Worth to be mentioned among the competences which are
worked on in the different programmes following the Dig-
Comp structure of Table I are 3.1 and 3.4, both of them framed
in the dimension of Content Creation; a result that corresponds
to the evidence about the work done in the schools in Galicia,
ALONSO-FERREIRO et al.: EDUCATIONAL PLANS AND PROGRAMS FOR DC: A GEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
TABLE IV
C HARACTERISTICS OF THE P LANS S UPPORTED BY SL
TABLE V
C HARACTERISTICS OF THE P ROGRAMS BY P LAN P ROXECTA
revealed by the research work [13]. The second, which can
be found in seven proposals, highlights the STEM boost as a
current trend [6]. As regards this approach, we would like to
underline that, in general terms, this boost does not opt for the
pedagogical STEAM [42] perspective, a fact that could lead to
more or less inclusive dynamics and accentuate the educational
and digital gap. It is worth pointing out that only two of
these 7 initiatives address the whole centre for a transversal
work during school time (Maker Spaces and Creative Library).
They show a certain interest in creating equitable learning
environments and promoting STEM equity [43]. The rest
are aimed at specific classes or groups during after-school
hours, which implies the inclusion of students with certain
characteristics that favour their participation [44]. Another
aspect to be highlighted is the scarce training offered by these
initiatives to train the teachers to be able to design and apply
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
411
TABLE VI
C HARACTERISTICS OF THE P LANS P ROMOTED IN
C OLLABORATION W ITH AMTEGA
innovative didactic proposals to ensure an inclusive approach
to STEM [45].
As regards the implementation characteristics, there are
outstanding differences between the different strategies. In this
sense, the bodies that boost these initiatives (AMTEGA, SL or
Proxecta) seem to mark the route of the proposals they are
made of. Some programs are aimed at specific classrooms and
groups of students (AMTEGA), while others target the centre
as the beneficiary (SL). This could be generating participation
gaps within the centres as such, beyond the gaps between
centres generated by the participation or non-participation in
these programs. Moreover, as regards the educational levels
which these plans are aimed at, attention should be given
to PLAMBE, which launches an initiative that gathers all
students in public centres, from Preschool to those institutions
that are aimed at adult students, such as EOI, CMUS or
EPAPU. This inclusion implies considering DC for the global
digital citizens, and not only compulsory education pupils (EP
and ESO).
Another interesting aspect that contributes to giving
response to those who will be given priority when introducing
initiatives for DC is the preference given to specific groups
and scenarios (Tables VI, VII and VIII). It is worth noting
that research suggests gender and cultural capital, as well as
socio-economic assets as critical elements for the progress of
DC [46], [47]. Boosting initiatives that have an impact on these
factors, closing the gaps as regards gender and derived from
412 IEEE REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE TECNOLOGIAS DEL APRENDIZAJE, VOL. 15, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2020
TABLE VII
C ONDITIONS OF THE I NITIATIVES S UPPORTED BY SL
TABLE VIII
C ONDITIONS OF THE P ROGRAMS BY P LAN P ROXECTA
less favoured contexts, such as the SL initiatives and some
Plan Proxecta programs, the role played by schools as regards
social justice is extremely important and revealing.
In opposition to this urge for social compensation, as it is
shown in Table VI, some of the analysed plans establish pre-
vious technical requirements for their access and implementa-
tion. This could be generating gaps between centres according
to the equipment possibilities of the centres, depending on
their autonomy and geographical location.
Another interesting issue as regards the conditions imposed
by the strategies that seek to boost the development of DC
among students in Galicia, is the demand to the centres in
terms of commitment to action. In this sense, as shown in
Tables VI and VII, we can see that the strategy Edudixi-
tal 2020 offers an automatic continuity (year after year) of
the centres that are integrated into each project. Meanwhile,
the SL initiatives insist on the positive assessment of the yearly
working plan in order to be able to continue in the project the
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
following year. This assessment demands constant proactive
update work, and forces a self-assessment and reflection about
the own practice, an action that implies learning [48], which
would benefit the progress of the strategy that contributes to
the development of DC.
Last but not least, it is worth mentioning the conditions
regarding the ways to license the products created within the
framework of the different programs. Copyright and copyleft
questions are a specific content of DC (3.3 competence -
DigComp) and therefore, working on it transversally in the
different projects will contribute to better training and aware-
ness about the issue. In this sense, it should be noted that
neither Plan Proxecta nor Digicraft offer any information in
this respect, giving rise to a certain risk, since no licensing
implies copyright by default. As regards the initiatives pro-
moted in collaboration with AMTEGA and those supported by
the SL Consultancy, they opted for Creative Commons (CC)
licenses, thus favouring the production of OER (Open Edu-
cational Resources). The SL strategies promote the use of
the widest possible CC licences that promote free culture,
while AMTEGA proposes CC licenses which are classified
as restrictive.
B. Educational Plans and Programs for DC: Quantitative
Analysis
The plans and initiatives boosted by the Ministry of Educa-
tion in order to favour DC integrate, to a certain extent, 74.4%
of the public education centres in Galicia. This means that one
of every four centres does not have any type of participation
in these proposals.
As regards the three established axes (AMTEGA, SL and
Plan Proxecta), the programs with a larger presence in the
education centres in general form part of the Plan by SL,
which makes up 61.5%. The initiatives of the Edudixital
strategy have a high penetration, reaching 55% of the cen-
tres. Last but not least, the programs by Plan Proxecta and
DigiCraft en tu cole, have a much smaller presence. The
Plan Proxecta programs can be found in 64 education centres
(5.8%), especially the programs Aprendo programando (12
centres) and Galicons.net (11 centres), while DigiCraft can
be found in a total of 39 public centres. The implementation
of the 18 programs and initiatives analysed has reached an
uneven number of centres, as shown in Figure 1. The program
with the largest penetration, i.e. to be found in more than 50%
of de education centres in Galicia is PLAMBE (by SL). The
projects Abalar and E-DixGal (Edudixital strategy, AMTEGA)
do also show a moderate implementation in the education
system, making up, together, 47% of the total.
The largest part of the centres participating in these plans
(58.7%) combine programs and initiatives of both strategies
(Edudixital and SL).
Having a look at the implementation of the plans and
programs by type of centre, as shown in Figure 2, the first
issue to be highlighted is the high implementation rate in
centres that impart EP and ESO, which represent 82.4% of the
centres reporting to the Ministry. Form among them, 93.8% of
CPI, 91.3% of CEP, 90.9% of IES and 80.7% of CEIP have
at least one of their classrooms participating in any of the DC
ALONSO-FERREIRO et al.: EDUCATIONAL PLANS AND PROGRAMS FOR DC: A GEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Fig. 1. Centres included in the DC education plans.
Fig. 2. Number of initiatives included by type of centre.
strategies. Looking at these typologies, 58 centres are involved
in five or more initiatives.
Of the 28 special education centres, 20 do not have any
representation at all. On the other hand, EOI and ES have a
high (5/11) and very high (1/1) level of inclusion.
As regards CEE and CRA, both types of centres with
specific features, the first in terms of type of students and
the second in terms of structure and organisation, more than
50% are included in the programs.
Last but not least EEI and EPAPU do hardly show any
representation in the analysed programs, with participations
of 13% as regards EEI and 1 centre out of 11 in the case of
EPAPU.
Thus, we can observe an uneven distribution of the programs
according to the type of centre.
C. Distribution by GIS of the DC Education Plans and
Programmes
The statistical analysis is completed with the distribution of
the plans and programs within the territory, taking into account
the four Galician provinces, as described by means of GIS.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
413
Fig. 3. Distribution of included initiatives in the total of public centres.
Fig. 4. Distribution of centres not included in any initiative.
Figure 3 shows a map including all of the georeferenced
education centres in Galicia, based on the selected sample
(1100). Each centre is considered as a case. The map shows
also the type of centre and the number of programmes in which
each of the 18 analysed centres participates. The map reflects
a high penetration and a balanced distribution of the programs
all along the territory, especially in the province of Pontevedra,
with around 80% of the centres.
On the other end, there is Ourense, where 69.7% of the
centres participate in some initiative.
Of the total number of education centres in Galicia, 282
do not include any program to stimulate DC. The map in
Figure 4 shows that these centres can be found everywhere
in the territory, especially CEIP (109) and EEI (80).
As regards the E-Dixgal (Edudixital) projects, shown in
Figure 5, the distribution shows areas which have not been
involved in the Abalar and Edixgal projects, and that only
specific types of centres have been integrated: CEIP, CEP, CIP
and IES. The map shows a moderate density of centres/cases
included in these programmes, representing a presence of less
than 50% of the centres, except in the province of Lugo
414 IEEE REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE TECNOLOGIAS DEL APRENDIZAJE, VOL. 15, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2020
Fig. 5. Distribution of centres participating in Abalar and E-Dixgal.
Fig. 6. Distribution of centres included in the STEM Strategy.
(55.8% of the centres Abalar and/or E-Dixgal). The STEM
strategy, which is still recent (Figure 6), shows an uneven
distribution among the provinces of A Coruña and Pontevedra
on the one hand (30% of the centres) and Lugo and Ourense
(19.5% and 23%) on the other.
The geographical representation of the plans and initiatives
boosted by the SL Consultancy, as shown in Figure 7, high-
lights the high presence of these strategies in the territory in
general and in the province of Pontevedra in particular, where
more than 70% of the centres have joined the PLAMBE. The
representation of PLAMBE is high in the remaining provinces
as well, with more than 50% joint centres (59.1% in A Coruña,
53.9% in Lugo and 50.8% in Ourense); a distribution that
highlights the larger participation of the provinces located on
the Atlantic side.
V. D ISCUSSION AND C ONCLUSION
We started our work giving an account of a reality: the
fact that being born in a historic moment, in which digital
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 7. Distribution of centres included in SL Initiatives.
technologies and their use are key, does not imply the acqui-
sition of skills and knowledge that are needed for the current
society in the shape of DC [26]. Given this fact, and after
choosing the 18 education plans and programs that develop
DC in parallel to the core curricula of the areas and subjects,
we asked ourselves, whether the disposition of these teaching
proposals is offering the same opportunities to all of the
students and whether the real distribution of these programs,
with regard to the public centre network is being balanced and
equitable, or whether there are inclusion mechanisms in place.
The data show a strong presence of these plans, structured
by the Galician Administration, which enrich the official
curriculum in a complementary way. However, these programs
show an unequal distribution compared to the network of
public centres.
We should not forget, that the education centres have to
apply for it, and the result of the whole set of calls and the
response of the institutions is that this reality is not enough to
guarantee for an equitable response for all of the students.
This fact is confirmed by the collected data, considering
that 282 centres of a total of 1100 analysed centres (25.6%,
i.e. one of every four) have not been included in any of these
programs in the academic year 2019-2020.
The complementary initiatives may seem to be unnecessary
for the development of DC, but the research work made in
the ordinary classroom environment has shown an unequal
development of the dimensions that make up DC, in addition
to a relation with the socio-economic level of the families [49].
This situation highlights the critical role of schools as regards
the standardisation of this learnings.
This situation is also revealed after the GIS analysis. A
representation with a certain rate, considering the population
density of the centres in the provinces and areas of the
territory, which may be supported by the efforts made (in 6
of the 18 initiatives) to include centres of different types and
with different types of students, and considering the inclusion
of the rural area as a priority, seeking to offer opportunities
and focussing on one of the critical elements for the improve-
ment of DC [46], [47]. The combination of qualitative and
quantitative data offers a complete view over the distribution
ALONSO-FERREIRO et al.: EDUCATIONAL PLANS AND PROGRAMS FOR DC: A GEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
of the plans and programs among the education centres. 93.8%
of the centres involved in any of the strategies of the Galician
Ministry refer to CEIP, CEP, CPI and IES. EPAU and EEI
stay out, since most of the programs exclude initial and adult
education phases, so that the youngest are hampered despite
the need to include DC at a young age [49], and so are adults
in alphabetisation process, something that is key for life in the
21st century. There is no initiative of the Edudixital or Dig-
icraft strategy, in collaboration with AMTEGA, that includes
this learning among their beneficiaries. The representation of
EEI, EPAPU and special education centres is favoured by the
SL initiatives. Plan Proxecta does also include these groups in
two of the nine analysed programs. On the other hand, CEE
and CRA, which are centres that were not considered by the
AMTEGA strategies [36] either at the beginning, and are out
of E-Dixgal, are included in the STEM strategy. Moreover,
they are included in programs of Plan Proxecta and especially
in SL initiatives, resulting in more than half of these centres
participating in some of the DC initiatives and programs
boosted by the Administration.
The analysis of this reality does also have limitations: the
study is based on the centres which have joined the selected
programs, crossed with the theoretical dimensions of DC.
However, we do not know the learning which is actually
performed in the education centres with these plans and which
DC dimensions are being worked on. Neither do we have a
holistic view of the centres in the game of areas and subjects
in combination with these programmes.
In any case, the situation shows the need to strengthen
these structures, not so much in terms of intensiveness, but
rather in terms of extension, with the aim of offering an
equitable response for all of the students, regardless of the
education centre.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors want to thank the Stellae Research Group
(GI-1439) for their support, which has been essential for their
research work and to conduct this study.
R EFERENCES
[1] M. Prensky, “Digital natives, digital immigrants,” On the Horizon, vol. 9,
no. 5, pp. 1–6, Oct. 2001.
[2] P. Sorrentino, “The mystery of the digital natives’ existence: Questioning
the validity of the prenskian metaphor,” First Monday, vol. 23, no. 19,
2018, doi: 10.5210/fm.v23i10.9434.
[3] M. Méndez. (2020). Así es la teledocencia en Galicia. La Voz de
Galicia. Apr. 20, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.lavozdegalicia.
es/noticia/galicia/2020/04/11/profesores-gallegosante-teledocenciahai-
familias-sen-internet-alumnos-da-non-saben-adxuntar-documentos/
00031586611701199455755.htm
[4] A. Bolívar, “Equidad educativa y teorías de la justicia,” REICE. Revista
Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, vol. 3,
no. 2, 2005, pp. 42–69.
[5] D. Buckingham and J. B. Martínez-Rodríguez, “Interactive youth: New
citizenship between social networks and school settings,” Comunicar,
vol. 20, no. 40, pp. 10–14, Mar. 2013, doi: 10.3916/c40-2013-02-00.
[6] D. Perez-Marin, R. Hijon-Neira, and M. Martin-Lope, “A methodology
proposal based on metaphors to teach programming to children,” IEEE
Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, vol. 13, no. 1,
pp. 46–53, Feb. 2018.
[7] A. Alonso-Ferreiro. (2016). Competencia Digital y Escuela. Estudio de
Caso Etnográfico en dos CEIP de Galicia [Universidade de Santiago de
Compostela]. Accessed: Apr. 15, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.
educacion.gob.es/teseo/mostrarRef.do?ref=1338717
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
415
[8] Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. PISA, OECD
Publishing, Paris, France, 2015, doi: 10.1787/9789264239555-en
[9] UNESCO. (2013). UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers.
UNESCO. Accessed: Apr. 20, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://unesdoc.
unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000265721
[10] A. Ferrari. (2012). Digital Competence in Practice: An Analy-
sis of Frameworks. Publications Office of the European Union.
Accessed: Apr. 20, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/
JRC68116.pdf
[11] Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de Mayo, de Educación, Jefatura del Estado,
BOE, 2006.
[12] Ley Orgánica 8/2013, de 9 de Diciembre, Para la Mejorar de la Calidad
Educativa, Jefatura del Estado, 2013.
[13] A. Gewerc and E. Martínez-Piñero, Eds., Competencia Digital y Preado-
lescencia: Los Desafíos de la e-Inclusión. Madrid, Spain: Síntesis, 2019.
[14] A. J. A. M. van Deursen and J. A. G. M. van Dijk, “Modeling
traditional literacy, Internet skills and Internet usage: An empirical
study,” Interacting with Comput., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 13–26, Jan. 2016.
[15] J. van Dijk, The Deepening Divide. London, U.K.: Sage, 2005.
[16] A. Bolívar, Competencias Básicas y Currículo. Síntesis, 2010.
[17] J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Par-
ticipation. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991.
[18] K. Ala-Mutka, Y. Punie, and C. Redecker, “Digital competence
for lifelong learning,” Institute for Prospective Technological Studies
(IPTS), European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy.
Tech. Note JRC, 48708, 2008, pp. 271–282.
[19] A. Alonso-Ferreiro and A. Gewerc, “Alfabetización mediática en la
escuela primaria. Estudio de caso en galicia,” Revista Complutense de
Educación, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 407–422, Apr. 2018.
[20] A. Gutiérrez and K. Tyner, “Educación para los medios, alfabetización
mediática y competencia digital,” Comunicar, vol. 19, no. 38, pp. 31–39,
2012, doi: 10.3916/C38-2012-02-03.
[21] A. Ferrari. (Apr. 20, 2020). DIGCOMP a Framework for Devel-
oping and Understanding Digital Competence in Europe. Publica-
tions Office of the European Union. [Online]. Available: http://ftp.jrc.
es/EURdoc/JRC83167.pdf
[22] S. Carretero, R. Vuorikari, and Y. Punie. (2017). The Digital Com-
petence Framework for Citizens. With Eight Proficiency Levels and
Examples of Use (EUR 28558 EN). Joint Research Centre. Accessed:
Apr. 20, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.
eu/repository/bitstream/JRC106281/web-digcomp2.1pdf_(online).pdf
[23] R. Vuorikari, C. S. Punie, and L. Van den Brande. (2016). DigComp 2.0:
The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Publications Office
of the European Union. Accessed: Apr. 20, 2020. [Online]. Available:
http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC83167.pdf
[24] S. K. Howard, A. Chan, and P. Caputi, “More than beliefs: Subject areas
and teachers’ integration of laptops in secondary teaching,” Brit. J. Educ.
Technol., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 360–369, 2015.
[25] I. P. Y. Blau and A. Nusan, “Technological, pedagogical and content
knowledge in one-to-one classroom: Teachers developing ‘digital wis-
dom,” Interact. Learn. Environ., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1215–1230, 2016.
[26] P. Resta and T. Laferrière, “Digital equity and intercultural education,”
Edu. Inf. Technol., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 743–756, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1007/
s10639-015-9419-z.
[27] Convocatorias Planes y Programas educativos de Galicia Para la CD
2019–2020. Figshare. Accessed: May 13, 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.12296186.v1
[28] D. Dougherty, “The maker movement,” Innov., Technol., Governance
Globalization, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 11–14, 2012.
[29] S. Papert and I. Harel, Constructionism: Research Reports and Essays.
Norwood, NJ, USA: Ablex Publishing, 1991, pp. 1985–1990.
[30] K. Peppler, Y. Kafai, and E. Halverson, Makeology in K-12, Higher, and
Informal Education. Abingdon, U.K.: Routeledge, 2016.
[31] M. Sanders, “STEM, STEM education, STEMmania,” Technol. Teacher,
vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 20–26, 2009.
[32] J. Maeda, “STEM to STEAM: Art in K-12 is Key to Economy,” in
Edutopia. What Works in Education, The George Lucas Educational
Fundation. New York, NY, USA: Edutopia, 2012.
[33] R. Opertti, 15 Claves de Análisis para Apuntalar la Agenda Educativa
2030. Paris, France: OIE-UNESCO, 2017.
[34] ORDEN de 15 de Julio de 2015 Por la Que Se Establece la Relación
de Materias de Libre Configuración Autonómica de Elección Para Los
Centros Docentes en las Etapas de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria
y Bachillerato, y se Regula su Currículo y Su Oferta. Consellería de
Cultura, Educación y Ordenación Universitaria, DOG, No. 136, Xunta
de Galicia, Galicia, Spain, 2015.
416 IEEE REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE TECNOLOGIAS DEL APRENDIZAJE, VOL. 15, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2020
[35] ORDEN de 3 de Agosto de 2017 Por la que se Amplía la Relación
de Materias de Libre Configuración Autonómica de Elección para los
Centros Docentes en la Etapa de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria,
y se Regula su Currículo y Su Oferta. Consellería de Cultura, Educación
y Ordenación Universitaria, DOG, No. 156, Xunta de Galicia, Galicia,
Spain, 2017.
[36] F. Fraga and A. Alonso-Ferreiro, “Presencia del libro de texto digital en
Galicia: Una mirada estadístico-geográfica del proyecto E-DIXGAL,”
Profesorado. Revista de currículum y Formación del Profesorado,
vol. 20, no. 1, p. 22, 2016.
[37] R. B. Johnson and A. J. Onwuegbuzie, “Mixed methods research: A
research paradigm whose time has come,” Educ. Researcher, vol. 33,
no. 7, pp. 14–26, Oct. 2004.
[38] Buscador Centros Educativos de Galicia. Accessed: May 13, 2020.
[Online]. Available: http://www.edu.xunta.es/centroseducativos
[39] R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical
computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria.
[Online]. Available: https://www.R-project.org/
[40] J. M. Verd and S. Porcel, “An application of qualitative geo-
graphic information systems (GIS) in the field of urban sociology
using ATLAS.Ti: Uses and reflections,” Forum Qualitative Sozial-
forschung/Forum, Qualitative Social Res., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1–20, 2012.
Accessed: Apr. 15, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://www.qualitative-
research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1847/3374
[41] Resoluciones Planes y Programas Educativos de Galicia Para la CD
2019–2020. Figshare. Accessed: May 13, 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.12296255.v1
[42] M. Resnick and E. Rosenbaum, “Designing for tinkerability,” in
Design, Make, Play: Growing the Next Generation of STEM Innovators,
E. M. Honey and D.E. Kanter, Eds. Evanston, IL, USA: Routledge,
2013.
[43] K. Peppler and K. Wohlwend, “Theorizing the nexus of STEAM
practice,” Arts Edu. Policy Rev., vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 88–99, Apr. 2018,
doi: 10.1080/10632913.2017.1316331.
[44] A. Gewerc, F. y Fraga-Varela, “Competencia digital e inclusión soial:
Cuando las condiciones socioculturales se imponen,” in Competencia
Digital y Preadolescencia, Los Desafíos de la e-Inclusión, E. A. Gewerc
F. y E. Martínez-Piñeiro, Eds. Madrid, Spain: Editorial Síntesis, 2019,
pp. 21–42.
[45] P. Guimerans Sanchez, “E-textiles para la formación de profesorado en
las áreas STEM,” in Proc. INNODOCT/18. Int. Conf. Innov., Document.
Edu., Nov. 2018, pp. 561–571.
[46] O. E. Hatlevik, I. Throndsen, M. Loi, and G. B. Gudmundsdottir,
“Students’ ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy:
Determinants and relationships,” Comput. Edu., vol. 118, pp. 107–119,
Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.011.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Consortium - Algeria (CERIST). Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 00:33:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[47] E. Martínez-Piñeiro, A. Gewerc, and A. Rodríguez-Groba, “Nivel de
competencia digital del alumnado de educación primaria en Galicia.
La influencia sociofamiliar,” Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED),
vol. 19, no. 61, pp. 1–25, Oct. 2019.
[48] D. A. Schön, Reflective Practitioner. New York, NY, USA: Basic Books,
1983.
[49] UNICEF. (2017). Estado Mundial de la Infancia 2017. Niños en un
Mundo Digital. UNICEF. Accessed: May 12, 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.unicef.org/media/48611/file
Almudena Alonso-Ferreiro received the Ph.D. degree in design and innova-
tion in education from the University of Santiago de Compostela. She teaches
in the area of didactics and school organization at the University of Vigo.
Her research interest includes educational technology, with a focus on digital
competence, the training of future teachers, and the potential of the new media
in educational processes. She is a member of the Stellae Group (GI-1439) and
the CIES-Uvigo Group.
Fernando Fraga-Varela received the Ph.D. degree in pedagogy. He is
currently a Primary School Teacher. He has been teaching for the past 15 years
in the area of didactics and school organization at the University of Santiago de
Compostela. He is a member of the Stellae Group (GI-1439), led by Adriana
Gewerc. His research is mainly focused on educational technology and its
integration in education centers, as well as university and non-university
institutions. He actively participates in research and development activities,
which results in different publications like articles in science magazines and
book chapters and collaborations in national and international congresses.
Paola Guimeráns received the master’s degree in design and technology
from the Parsons School, New York, NY, USA, and the Ph.D. degree from
the Complutense University of Madrid with a thesis focused on e-textiles and
education. She is a specialist in STEAM teaching and an expert in intelligent
textiles. She has been working for more than a decade as a Consultant in
educational innovation, developing projects for institutions and companies
like Inditex, Fundación Barrié, the Ministry of Education of Madrid, and the
Xunta de Galicia (Government of Galicia). She has worked as a Teacher at
universities like the Parsons School of Art and Design, the Istituto Europeo
di Design, and the American University of Sharjah. Among other projects,
she is the author of the technological resource platform PrototipadoLAB and
the driving force behind the educational initiative Aula STEAM. She has
conducted workshops and conferences in Spain and other countries.