RESUMO
Being digitally competent is an imperative requirement for the 21st century university teacher, a fact recognized by both the literature and policymakers. Although this topic has been addressed in different reviews and critical studies recently, none of them have systematically and explicitly addressed the factors that explain, or are explained by, the digital competencies of university teachers. Examples of these factors include, among others, demographic, professional and psychological aspects of university teachers, as well as very specific digital competencies. The present study seeks to close this gap through a systematic mapping of the literature published until 2021 in journals indexed by Scopus and Web of Science (WOS). Based on the selection of 53 primary studies, we characterized the literature and summarized the main results reported so far. The analysis allowed us to conclude the following: 1) there is a growing number of contributions aimed at understanding the acquisition of digital competencies, especially from external factors; 2) European, and more specifically Spanish, university teachers from multiple disciplines are the most studied population; 3) most studies adopted quantitative approaches to explain but not prove causality; 4) there is a great heterogeneity of relationships and results that explain the digital competencies of university professors. The implications of these results are discussed with a view to identifying the gaps that provide scope for future research.
RESUMO
In this study, we report on a Systematic Mapping Study (SMS) on how the quality of the quantitative instruments used to measure digital competencies in higher education is assured. 73 primary studies were selected from the published literature in the last 10 years in order to 1) characterize the literature, 2) evaluate the reporting practice of quality assessments, and 3) analyze which variables explain such reporting practices. The results indicate that most of the studies focused on medium to large samples of European university students, who attended social science programs. Ad hoc, self-reported questionnaires measuring various digital competence areas were the most commonly used method for data collection. The studies were mostly published in low tier journals. 36% of the studies did not report any quality assessment, while less than 50% covered both groups of reliability and validity assessments at the same time. In general, the studies had a moderate to high depth of evidence on the assessments performed. We found that studies in which several areas of digital competence were measured were more likely to report quality assessments. In addition, we estimate that the probability of finding studies with acceptable or good reporting practices increases over time.