Digital Competence in University Lecturers: A Meta-Analysis of Teaching Challenges
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Background
2.1. Perception, Attitudes and Level of ICT Competence in Education
2.2. Incorporation of ICT in University Teaching Activities
2.3. The Role of Socio-Demographic Variables
3. Materials and Methods
- Publications were sought from the last 6 years (2015 to 2021), according to the indications of Borenstein et al. [38], so as to obtain a realistic sample in accordance with the latest technological changes;
- Articles whose methodology is experimental and quantitative;
- Articles wherein the study population is university professors of any age;
- Publications that are open and available for consultation, according to the quality criteria of Moreau and Gamble [39];
- Journals of recognized prestige published in databases with the greatest scientific impact in the social sciences [40]—Web Of Science (JCR), Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) and Dialnet have been selected. Likewise, all the selected studies underwent a double blind assessment for publication. It should be noted that the Dialnet database has been included to attend to the research published in Spanish-speaking developing countries.
- Those studies that evaluated non-university stages;
- Studies without quantitative data, theoretical studies or reviews, following the indications of Friese and Frankenbach [41];
- Publications with restricted access.
- The first search was carried out by means of the rounded search actions of: <<competence OR attitude OR training AND digital OR tic OR technology AND university>>. All the articles obtained were manually screened by reading their title and abstract (Figure 1).
- The second search was completed by entering other types of keywords, such as: <<competence OR behavior AND digital OR tic OR technology AND university>>.
4. Results
4.1. Sample Description
4.2. Statistic Analysis
4.3. Moderating Variables and Meta-Regression Analysis
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
- -
- Educational policies must be established that favor specific and continuous training, guaranteeing access to technological resources;
- -
- Lecturers need specific digital skills;
- -
- The greatest need is for the pedagogical application of ICT and classroom management in teaching.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Klimova, B.; Pikhart, M.; Polakova, P.; Cerna, M.; Yayilgan, S.Y.; Shaikh, S. A Systematic Review on the Use of Emerging Technologies in Teaching English as an Applied Language at the University Level. Systems 2023, 11, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruiz-Cabezas, A.; Medina, M.C.; Pérez, E.; Medina, A. University lecturers’ training: The Digital Competence. Pixel-Bit. Rev. Medios Educ. 2020, 58, 181215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De los Santos, M.; Martínez, F. Las Competencias Informacionales Observadas y Autopercibidas en el Profeso-rado Iberoamericano. Rev. Interuniv. Form. Profr. 2021, 96, 163–184. [Google Scholar]
- Foreman-Brown, G.; Fitzpatrick, E.; Twyford, K. Reimagining lecturer identity in the post-COVID-19 university: Becoming digitally savvy, reflective in practice, collaborative, and relational. Educ. Dev. Psychol. 2023, 40, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saytiyev, O.A. The methodology and strategies of teaching information communication technology. Eur. Int. J. Multidiscip. Res. Manag. Stud. 2023, 3, 61–65. [Google Scholar]
- Mirete, A.B. El profesorado Universitario y las TIC. Análisis de su Competencia Digital. Ensayos Rev. Fac. Educ. Albacete 2016, 31, 133–147. Available online: http://www.revista.uclm.es/index.php/ensayos (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Li, Z.; Zuo, T.; Wei, X.; Ding, N. ICT Self-efficacy scale: The correlations with the age of first access to the internet, the age at first ownership of a personal computer (PC), and a smartphone. Med. Educ. Online 2023, 28, 2151068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Michele, P.D.E.; Gómez, A.H.; Herrera, R.A.; Pulido, F.G. Appreciation of ICT Tools in Higher Education in Times of Pandemic. In Perspectives and Trends in Education and Technology: Selected Papers from ICITED 2022; Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore, 2023; pp. 533–541. [Google Scholar]
- Antonietti, C.; Schmitz, M.L.; Consoli, T.; Cattaneo, A.; Gonon, P.; Petko, D. Development and validation of the ICAP Technology Scale to measure how lecturers integrate technology into learning activities. Comput. Educ. 2023, 192, 104648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabero, J.; Roig, R.; Mengual, S. Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge of Future Lecturers according to the TPACK Model. Dig. Edu. Rev. 2017, 32, 85–96. Available online: https://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/16981/pdf (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Alghamdi, A.; Karpinski, A.C.; Lepp, A.; Barkley, J. Online and face-to-face classroom multitasking and aca-demic performance: Moderated mediation with self-efficacy for self-regulated learning and gender. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 102, 214–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calderón-Garrido, D.; Gustems-Carnicer, J. Adaptations of music education in primary and secondary school due to COVID-19: The experience in Spain. Music. Educ. Res. 2021, 23, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosario Noguera, H.; Vásquez Melo, L.F. Formación del docente universitario en el uso de TIC. Caso Univer-sidades Públicas y Privadas de Carabobo y Metropolitana. Píxel-Bit. Rev. Medios Educ. 2012, 41, 163–171. [Google Scholar]
- Venegas-Ramos, L.; Luzardo Martínez, H.; Pereira Santana, A. Conocimiento, formación y uso de herramientas TIC aplicadas a la Educación Superior por el profesorado de la Universidad Miguel de Cervantes. Edutec Rev. Electrónica Tecnol. Educ. 2020, 71, 35–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marín-Díaz, V.; Riquelme, I.; Cabero-Almenara, J. Uses of ICT tools from the perspective of chilean university lecturers. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kapici, H.O.; Akcay, H. Improving student lecturers’ TPACK self-efficacy through lesson planning practice in the virtual platform. Educ. Stud. 2023, 49, 76–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero-Hall, E.; Jaramillo Cherrez, N. Teaching in times of disruption: Faculty digital literacy in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2023, 60, 152–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siddiq, F.; Scherer, R. Is there a gender gap? A meta-analysis of the gender differences in students’ ICT literacy. Educ. Res. Rev. 2019, 27, 205–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abarca Amador, Y. El uso de las TIC en la educación universitaria: Motivación que incide en su uso y frecuencia. Rev. Leng. Mod. 2015, 22, 335–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Torgerson, C.J.; Elbourne, D. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of information and communication technology (ICT) on the teaching of spelling. J. Res. Read. 2002, 25, 129–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Espinosa, M.P.P.; Gutiérrez Porlán, I.; Martínez Sánchez, F. Competencia digital: Una necesidad del pro-fesorado universitario en el siglo XXI. RED. Rev. Educ. A Distancia 2018, 18. Available online: https://revistas.um.es/red/article/view/321591 (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- NMC—New Media Consortium. NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Available online: http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2017-nmc-horizonreport-he-EN.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Takamatsu, K.; Noda, I.; Bannaka, K.; Murakami, K.; Kozaki, Y.; Kishida, A.; Kabutoya, H.; Mitsunari, K.; Adachi, R.; Omori, M.; et al. Sustainability of Digital Transformation (DX), Institutional Research (IR), and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Higher Education Based on Eduinformatics. In Intelligent Sustainable Systems: Selected Papers of WorldS4 2022; Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore, 2023; Volume 1, pp. 565–572. [Google Scholar]
- Atay, D. ICT Transformation in Education: Its Impact on Language Lecturers’ Professional Identities. Iran. J. Lang. Teach. Res. 2023, 11, 141–156. [Google Scholar]
- Sewell, K.M.; Mishna, F.; Sanders, J.E.; Bogo, M.; Milne, B.; Greenblatt, A. Supervision of Information Commu-nication Technologies in Social Work Practice: A Mixed Methods Study. Br. J. Soc. Work. 2023, 53, 490–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonneville, L.; Riddell, D. Smartphones in the university classroom: Less problematic than we tend to think? Inf. Commun. Soc. 2023, 26, 1008–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alyoussef, I.Y. Acceptance of e-learning in higher education: The role of task-technology fit with the information systems success model. Heliyon 2023, 9, e13751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kirschner, P.A.; De Bruyckere, P. The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teach. Lect. Educ. 2017, 67, 135–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sumuer, E. Factors related to college students’ self-directed learning with technology. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2018, 34, 3142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabero-Almenara, J.; Barroso-Osuna, J.; Llorente-Cejudo, C.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A. Validación del marco eu-ropeo de competencia digital docente mediante ecuaciones estructurales. Rev. Mex. Investig. Educ. 2022, 27, 185–208. [Google Scholar]
- Gil-Flores, J.; Rodríguez-Santero, J.; Torres-Gordillo, J. Factors that explain the use of ICT in second-ary-education classrooms: The role of lecturer characteristics and school infrastructure. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 68, 441–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guillén-Gámez, D.; Mayorga-Fernández, M.J. Quantitative-comparative research on digital competence in students, graduates and professors of faculty education: An analysis with ANOVA. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 25, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- PRISMA-Statement Website. 2020. PRISMA Translations Policy. Available online: http://www.prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/ (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Higgins, J.P.T.; Green, S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration. Version 5.1.0. 2011. Available online: www.cochrane-handbook.org (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Rott, K.W.; Bronfort, G.; Chu, H.; Huling, J.D.; Leininger, B.; Murad, M.H.; Wang, Z.; Hodges, J.S. Causally-interpretable meta-analysis: Clearly-defined causal effects and two case studies. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2302.07840. [Google Scholar]
- Borenstein, M. Common Mistakes in Meta-Analysis and How to Avoid Them; Biostat Inc.: Frederick, MD, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Moreau, D.; Gamble, B. Conducting a meta-analysis in the age of open science: Tools, tips, and practical recommendations. Psychol. Methods 2020, 7, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hernández, V.; Reverter, J.; Jové, M.C.; Mayolas, M.C. Hábitos de publicación de profesores de los departa-mentos de didáctica de la expresión corporal y educación física de las universidades públicas españolas. Eur. J. Hum. Mov. 2013, 30, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Friese, M.; Frankenbach, J. p-Hacking and publication bias interact to distort meta-analytic effect size estimates. Psychol. Methods 2020, 25, 456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Martin-Andr’es, A.; del Castillo, J.L. Bioestadística Para las Ciencias de la Salud; Ediciones Nor-ma-Capitel: Las Rozas, Spain, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, J. Set correlation and contingency tables. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 1988, 12, 425–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- DerSimonian, R.; Laird, N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited. Contemp. Clin. Trials 2015, 45, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Bonett, D.G.; Price, R.M., Jr. Varying coefficient meta-analysis methods for odds ratios and risk ratios. Psychol. Methods 2015, 20, 394–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Egger, M.; Smith, G.D.; Schneider, M.; Minder, C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997, 315, 629–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Cheung, M.W.L. Comparison of methods for constructing confidence intervals of standardized indirect effects. Behav. Res. Methods 2009, 41, 425–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Cheung, M.W.L.; Jak, S. Challenges of big data analyses and applications in psychology. Z. Für Psy-Chologie 2019, 226, 209–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Álvarez-Guerrero, G.; De Aguileta, A.L.; Racionero-Plaza, S.; Flores-Moncada, L.G. Beyond the school walls: Keeping interactive learning environments alive in confinement for students in special education. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 662646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.; Chen, S. Modeling dichotomous technology use among university EFL lecturers in China: The roles of TPACK, affective and evaluative attitudes towards technology. Cogent Educ. 2022, 9, 2013396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heitinka, M.; Voogtb, J.; Van Braakc, J.; Fisserd, P. Lecturers’ professional reasoning about their pedagogical use of technology. Comput. Educ. 2016, 101, 70–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, P.H.; Molina, J.; Lin, M.C.; Liu, H.H.; Chang, C.Y. A New TPACK Training Model for Tackling the Ongoing Challenges of COVID-19. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2022, 5, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Kotzebue, L. Two is better than one—Examining biology-specific TPACK and its T-dimensions from two angles. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2022, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carpenter, J.P.; Krutka, D.G. Engagement through microblogging: Educator professional development via Twitter. Prof. Dev. Educ. 2015, 41, 707–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drossel, K.; Eickelmann, B.; Gerick, J. Predictors of lecturers’ use of ICT in school-the relevance of school charac-teristics, lecturers’ attitudes and lecturer collaboration. Edu. Inf. Technol. 2017, 22, 551–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lukychova, N.S.; Osypova, N.V.; Yuzbasheva, G.S. ICT and Current Trends as a Path to STEM Education: Implementation and Prospects. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings; 2022; pp. 39–55. Available online: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3085/paper16.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Gómez, G.M.; Andrés Uzín, P.G.J. Effects of COVID-19 on education and schools’ reopening in Latin America. In COVID-19 and International Development; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 119–135. [Google Scholar]
- Elboj-Saso, C.; Cortés-Pascual, A.; Íñiguez-Berrozpe, T.; Lozano-Blasco, R.; Quílez-Robres, A. Emotional and educational accompaniment through dialogic literary gatherings: A volunteer project for families who suffer digital ex-clusion in the context of COVID-19. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Longoria, I.A.I.; Bustamante-Bello, R.; Ramírez-Montoya, M.S.; Molina, A. Systematic Mapping of Digital Gap and Gender, Age, Ethnicity, or Disability. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Razkane, H.; Sayeh, A.Y.; Yeou, M. University Lecturers’ Attitudes Towards Distance Learning During COVID-19 Pandemic: Hurdles, Challenges, and Take-away Lessons. Eur. J. Interact. Multimed. Educ. 2022, 3, e02201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, A.Y.C.; Lu, I.; Grace, J.; Hill, C. What Has Been the Impact of COVID-19 on Driving Digitalization, Innovation and Crisis Management of Higher Education and Quality Assurance? A Taiwan Case Study in Alignment with the INQAAHE Virtual Review. High. Educ. Policy 2022, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.C. Understanding the energy consumption of information and communications equipment: A case study of schools in Taiwan. Energy 2022, 249, 123701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hatlevik, O.E.; Bjarnø, V. Examining the relationship between resilience to digital distractions, ICT self-efficacy, motivation, approaches to studying, and time spent on individual studies. Teach. Lect. Educ. 2021, 102, 103326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rohatgi, A.; Bundsgaard, J.; Hatlevik, O.E. Digital inclusion in Norwegian and Danish schools—Analysing variation in lecturers’ collaboration, attitudes, ICT use and students’ ICT literacy. In Equity, Equality, and Diversity in the Nordic Model of Education; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 139–172. [Google Scholar]
- Fransson, G.; Holmberg, J.; Lindberg, J.; Olofsson, A.D. Digitalise and capitalise? Teachers’ self-understanding in 21st-century teaching contexts. Oxf. Rev. Educ. 2019, 45, 102–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Instefjord, E.J.; Munthe, E. Educating digitally competent teachers: A study of integration of professional digital competence in teacher education. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2017, 67, 35–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Year | Author | Sample | Males | Females | Medium Age | Country | Area of Knowledge | Geographic Area |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2021 | Calderon y Carrera a * | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | Calderon y Carrera b | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | Calderon y Carrera c | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | Calderon y Carrera d | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | Calderon y Carrera e | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | Calderon y Carrera f | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | Calderon y Carrera g | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | Calderon y Carrera h | 112 | 62 | 50 | 47.5 | Spain | music | Europe |
2021 | De los Santos y Martínez a * | 235 | 120 | 115 | 45.5 | Latin America | general | Latin America |
2021 | De los Santos y Martínez b | 235 | 120 | 115 | 45.5 | Latin America | general | Latin America |
2021 | De los Santos y Martínez c | 235 | 120 | 115 | 45.5 | Latin America | general | Latin America |
2021 | De los Santos y Martínez d | 235 | 120 | 115 | 45.5 | Latin America | general | Latin America |
2021 | De los Santos y Martínez e | 235 | 120 | 115 | 45.5 | Latin America | general | Latin America |
2020 | Marin Díaz, Riquelme y Cabero a * | 1113 | 767 | 345 | 45.5 | Mexico | Pedagogy | Latin America |
2020 | Marin Díaz, Riquelme y Cabero b | 1113 | 767 | 345 | 45.5 | Mexico | Pedagogy | Latin America |
2020 | Marin Díaz, Riquelme y Cabero c | 1113 | 767 | 345 | 45.5 | Mexico | Pedagogy | Latin America |
2020 | Marin Díaz, Riquelme y Cabero c | 1113 | 767 | 345 | 45.5 | Mexico | Pedagogy | Latin America |
2016 | Mirete Ruiz | 50 | 27 | 22 | 37 | Spain | Pedagogy | Europe |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira a * | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Spain | Pedagogy | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira b | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira c | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira d | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira e | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira f | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira g | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira h | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira i | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira j | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira k | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira l | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
2020 | Venegas, Luzardo y Pereira m | 69 | 26 | 43 | 48.25 | Chile | general | Latin America |
Model | Fixed | Random | |
---|---|---|---|
Effect size and 95% interval | Point estimate | −0.27 | −0.21 |
Lower limit | −0.29 | −0.39 | |
Upper limit | −0.25 | −0.02 | |
Test of null (2-Tailed) | Z-value | −24.19 | −2.46 |
p-value | <0.00 | 0.0013 | |
Heterogeneity | Q-value | 1284.15 | |
Df(Q) | 31 | ||
p-value | <0.000 | ||
I-squared | 97.58 | ||
Tau-squared | Tau squared | 0.18 | |
Standard Error | 0.08 | ||
Variance | 0.006 | ||
Tau | 0.43 |
Intercept | 0.87 |
---|---|
Standard error | 2.16 |
95% lower limit (2-tailed) | −3.54 |
95% upper limit (2-tailed) | 5.28 |
T-value | 0.40 |
DF | 30 |
p-value (1 tailed) | 0.34 |
p-value (2 tailed) | 0.69 |
Confident Interval | 99% |
Model Name | Tau2 | R2 | Q | df | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1 simply | 0.18 | 0 | 1284.15 | 31 | 0.00 |
Model 2 age | 0.19 | 0.02 | 1284.15 | 31 | 0.13 |
Model 3 male | 0.19 | 0.03 | 1284.15 | 31 | 0.55 |
Model 4 female | 0.18 | 0.05 | 1284.15 | 31 | 0.26 |
Model 5 Country | 0.09 | 0.49 | 1284.15 | 31 | 0.013 |
Model 6 Subject discipline | 0.16 | 0.09 | 1284.15 | 31 | 0.04 |
Model 7 Years of experience | 0.19 | 0.02 | 1284.15 | 31 | 0.59 |
Covariate | Coefficient | Standard Error | 95% Lower | 95% Upper | Z-Value | 2-Sided p-Value | Q | df | p |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Intercept | 0.06 | 0.09 | −0.12 | 0.24 | 0.66 | 0.51 | 37.45 | 3 | 0.013 |
Spain | −0.19 | 0.13 | −0.46 | 0.08 | −1.37 | 0.17 | |||
Latinoamérica | −1.02 | 0.16 | −1.35 | −0.69 | −6.05 | <0.00 | |||
México | −0.24 | 0.18 | −0.60 | 0.10 | −1.35 | 0.17 | |||
Note: Chile it was excluded |
Covariate | Coefficient | Standard Error | 95% Lower | 95% Upper | Z-Value | 2-Sided p-Value | Q | df | p |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
intercept | 0.60 | 0.30 | −0.00 | 1.20 | 1.95 | 0.05 | 7.27 | 3 | 0.04 |
General | −0.83 | 0.32 | −1.47 | −0.20 | −2.58 | 0.009 | |||
Music | −0.89 | 0.34 | −1.56 | −0.22 | −2.61 | 0.009 | |||
Educational Sciences | −0.78 | 0.37 | −1.51 | −2.12 | −2.12 | 0.03 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liesa-Orus, M.; Lozano Blasco, R.; Arce-Romeral, L. Digital Competence in University Lecturers: A Meta-Analysis of Teaching Challenges. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 508. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050508
Liesa-Orus M, Lozano Blasco R, Arce-Romeral L. Digital Competence in University Lecturers: A Meta-Analysis of Teaching Challenges. Education Sciences. 2023; 13(5):508. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050508
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiesa-Orus, Marta, Raquel Lozano Blasco, and Lorena Arce-Romeral. 2023. "Digital Competence in University Lecturers: A Meta-Analysis of Teaching Challenges" Education Sciences 13, no. 5: 508. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050508
APA StyleLiesa-Orus, M., Lozano Blasco, R., & Arce-Romeral, L. (2023). Digital Competence in University Lecturers: A Meta-Analysis of Teaching Challenges. Education Sciences, 13(5), 508. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050508