Digital Education: Lithuania among Other European Union States

Q4 Social Sciences
Julija Moskvina
{"title":"Digital Education: Lithuania among Other European Union States","authors":"Julija Moskvina","doi":"10.15388/actpaed.2021.47.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":" Digital learning has become an everyday experience for a significant part of the population during a pandemic, regardless of their technical and psychological readiness. Both the more and less technologically advanced countries have faced the inevitable need for large-scale deployment of digital learning. This paper presents an assessment of the development of digital learning in Lithuania and the EU countries in 2019, i.e., before the pandemic began. The evaluation is carried out using the Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning, developed by the Center for European Policy Studies (CEPS) using official indicators and expert evaluation.Despite the growing number of studies aimed at assessing the digital divide in modern society and in education in particular, there is still a lack of empirical material to shed light on the link between the extent of digitalization, its determinants (such as national governance in promoting digitalization), and changes in learning outcomes caused by digitalization. The findings from the CEPS study presented in the paper are the first attempt to move beyond the assessment of the prevalence of learning digitalization in different European countries, taking a holistic view of digitalisation-induced changes in learning outcomes and participation with a special focus on digital learning policy as an important component of digitalisation development.The aim of this article is to assess the digital learning situation in Lithuania using the Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning, which was developed before the pandemic in 2019. The progress of European Union countries in developing digital learning is reviewed in the paper, based on the results of CEPS (2019) research. The Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning and the results of Lithuania’s assessment using the methodology developed by CEPS are presented here. The description of the situation in Lithuania is based on the second component of the Index titled “Institutions and policies for digital learning”.In order to qualitatively assess the country’s strategic provisions for digital learning, the method of analysis of the country’s strategic documents was applied. Public expert opinions were included into the analysis of the situation in Lithuania. An interpretation of the comparative analysis of the obtained index values is presented.Standard indicators from the Eurostat, Eurobarometer, OECD, Bertelsmann Stiftung, World Bank, and expert surveys were used to create the combined Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning. The index is constructed as a weighted average of indicators divided into three categories: learning participation and outcomes, institutions and policies for digital learning, and availability of digital learning. The assessment of the situation in the EU countries, carried out according to the developed methodology, allowed to calculate the value of the Index for each country. Lithuania ranks 11th in the overall EU-27 ranking with an Index value of 0.623.A more detailed analysis allowed us to see that the countries’ ratings can differ significantly according to the different categories of the Index. The Scandinavian countries lead in terms of learning participation and outcomes and, together with the Netherlands and Austria, in terms of availability of digital learning. Southern European countries received relatively high ratings in the Index category “institutions and policies for digital learning”, which reflects their determination to strengthen their position in the digital world. Estonia and the Netherlands also found themselves among the leaders in this category. Lithuania’s relatively high position in the list is also based on positive evaluations of the indicators of the second component of the Index (i.e., policies and institutions), while participation and learning outcomes were assessed modestly. Using the example of Lithuania, the article provides arguments in favor of why the second component of the Index should not be given.","PeriodicalId":36797,"journal":{"name":"Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/actpaed.2021.47.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

 Digital learning has become an everyday experience for a significant part of the population during a pandemic, regardless of their technical and psychological readiness. Both the more and less technologically advanced countries have faced the inevitable need for large-scale deployment of digital learning. This paper presents an assessment of the development of digital learning in Lithuania and the EU countries in 2019, i.e., before the pandemic began. The evaluation is carried out using the Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning, developed by the Center for European Policy Studies (CEPS) using official indicators and expert evaluation.Despite the growing number of studies aimed at assessing the digital divide in modern society and in education in particular, there is still a lack of empirical material to shed light on the link between the extent of digitalization, its determinants (such as national governance in promoting digitalization), and changes in learning outcomes caused by digitalization. The findings from the CEPS study presented in the paper are the first attempt to move beyond the assessment of the prevalence of learning digitalization in different European countries, taking a holistic view of digitalisation-induced changes in learning outcomes and participation with a special focus on digital learning policy as an important component of digitalisation development.The aim of this article is to assess the digital learning situation in Lithuania using the Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning, which was developed before the pandemic in 2019. The progress of European Union countries in developing digital learning is reviewed in the paper, based on the results of CEPS (2019) research. The Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning and the results of Lithuania’s assessment using the methodology developed by CEPS are presented here. The description of the situation in Lithuania is based on the second component of the Index titled “Institutions and policies for digital learning”.In order to qualitatively assess the country’s strategic provisions for digital learning, the method of analysis of the country’s strategic documents was applied. Public expert opinions were included into the analysis of the situation in Lithuania. An interpretation of the comparative analysis of the obtained index values is presented.Standard indicators from the Eurostat, Eurobarometer, OECD, Bertelsmann Stiftung, World Bank, and expert surveys were used to create the combined Index of Readiness for Digital Lifelong Learning. The index is constructed as a weighted average of indicators divided into three categories: learning participation and outcomes, institutions and policies for digital learning, and availability of digital learning. The assessment of the situation in the EU countries, carried out according to the developed methodology, allowed to calculate the value of the Index for each country. Lithuania ranks 11th in the overall EU-27 ranking with an Index value of 0.623.A more detailed analysis allowed us to see that the countries’ ratings can differ significantly according to the different categories of the Index. The Scandinavian countries lead in terms of learning participation and outcomes and, together with the Netherlands and Austria, in terms of availability of digital learning. Southern European countries received relatively high ratings in the Index category “institutions and policies for digital learning”, which reflects their determination to strengthen their position in the digital world. Estonia and the Netherlands also found themselves among the leaders in this category. Lithuania’s relatively high position in the list is also based on positive evaluations of the indicators of the second component of the Index (i.e., policies and institutions), while participation and learning outcomes were assessed modestly. Using the example of Lithuania, the article provides arguments in favor of why the second component of the Index should not be given.
数字教育:立陶宛与其他欧盟国家
在疫情期间,数字学习已经成为相当一部分人的日常体验,无论他们的技术和心理准备如何。无论是技术先进程度较高还是较低的国家,都不可避免地需要大规模部署数字学习。本文对2019年,即疫情开始前,立陶宛和欧盟国家的数字学习发展进行了评估。评估使用欧洲政策研究中心(CEPS)使用官方指标和专家评估制定的数字终身学习准备指数进行。尽管越来越多的研究旨在评估现代社会,特别是教育中的数字鸿沟,但仍然缺乏实证材料来阐明数字化的程度、其决定因素(如促进数字化的国家治理)和数字化导致的学习成果变化之间的联系。论文中提出的CEPS研究结果首次尝试超越对不同欧洲国家学习数字化流行率的评估,全面看待数字化引发的学习成果和参与的变化,特别关注作为数字化发展重要组成部分的数字学习政策。本文的目的是使用2019年疫情前制定的数字终身学习准备指数来评估立陶宛的数字学习情况。本文根据CEPS(2019)的研究结果,回顾了欧盟国家在发展数字学习方面的进展。这里介绍了数字终身学习准备指数和立陶宛使用CEPS开发的方法进行评估的结果。立陶宛的情况描述基于题为“数字学习的机构和政策”的指数的第二个组成部分。为了对该国的数字学习战略规定进行定性评估,采用了对该国战略文件的分析方法。公众专家意见被纳入对立陶宛局势的分析。对所获得的指标值的比较分析进行了解释。欧盟统计局、欧洲晴雨表、经合组织、贝塔斯曼基金会、世界银行和专家调查的标准指标被用于创建数字终身学习准备度综合指数。该指数是由三类指标的加权平均值构成的:学习参与和结果、数字学习的机构和政策以及数字学习的可用性。根据制定的方法对欧盟国家的情况进行评估,可以计算每个国家的指数值。立陶宛在欧盟27国的总体排名中排名第11,指数值为0.623。更详细的分析使我们看到,根据指数的不同类别,各国的评级可能存在显著差异。斯堪的纳维亚国家在学习参与度和成果方面处于领先地位,与荷兰和奥地利一起,在数字学习的可用性方面也处于领先地位。南欧国家在“数字学习机构和政策”这一指数类别中获得了相对较高的评级,这反映出它们决心加强自己在数字世界中的地位。爱沙尼亚和荷兰也属于这一类的领导者。立陶宛在榜单中的相对较高地位也是基于对指数第二部分指标(即政策和机构)的积极评价,而对参与度和学习成果的评价则不高。文章以立陶宛为例,提出了支持为什么不应该给出指数的第二个组成部分的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia
Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信