Competences for Educators, Administrators, and Students in a Digital Society: A Role-Based Framework for Capability Development

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36690/2733-2039-2025-4-31-39

Keywords:

digital competence, educator competence, administrative competence, student competence, DigComp, DigCompEdu, digital leadership, data governance, digital citizenship, self regulated learning, AI literacy, competence assessment

Abstract

Digital transformation has redefined what it means to teach, govern, and learn, because educational practice now depends on data intensive platforms, hybrid learning models, and digitally mediated communication. This article develops a role based competence model that differentiates competences for educators, administrators, and students while retaining a shared core of digital competence domains applicable across educational systems. A structured narrative review with thematic synthesis was conducted across education, learning sciences, and educational technology governance scholarship, complemented by analysis of widely used competence frameworks. The synthesis shows that educator competences are most robust when defined as pedagogical design and assessment capability rather than tool operation, consistent with TPACK and educator specific competence frameworks. Administrative competences emerge as governance capacity that includes strategy, procurement, privacy and security, data governance, and accountability for equity impacts. Student competences extend beyond functional digital skills to critical digital literacy, self regulated learning, digital citizenship, and emerging AI literacy, aligned with citizen competence frameworks and contemporary literacy research. Competence development is most effective when treated as institutional capability building with role specific pathways, practice based assessment, and governance routines that protect inclusion and safety. Future studies should validate role specific indicators, test causal links between competence growth and learning outcomes, and develop assessment designs that capture judgement, ethics, and equity effects in AI enabled learning environments.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Inga Lysiak, Pomorska Szkoła Wyższa w Starogardzie Gdańskim

Ph.D. (Technical Science), Eng., Institute of Management, Economics and Logistics, Pomeranian University in Starogard Gdanski, Starogard Gdanski

References

Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. L. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04269517

Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices (pp. 17-32). Peter Lang. https://www.peterlang.com/document/1104560

Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: Children’s learning in the age of digital culture. Polity. https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=beyond-technology-childrens-learning-in-the-age-of-digital-culture--9780745638805

CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 2.2. CAST. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/more/downloads/

Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, M., & Kantosalo, A. (2016). Digital competence: An emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Education and Information Technologies, 21(3), 655-679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9346-4

Jisc. (2015). Code of practice for learning analytics. Jisc. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/code-of-practice-for-learning-analytics

Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-16). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x

OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2018/06/the-future-of-education-and-skills_5424dd26/54ac7020-en.pdf

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2018/06/the-future-of-education-and-skills_5424dd26/54ac7020-en.pdf

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence. OECD. https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/oecd-legal-0449

Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu (JRC Science for Policy Report). Publications Office of the European Union. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC107466/pdf_digcomedu_a4_final.pdf

Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC107466/pdf_digcomedu_a4_final.pdf

Ribble, M. (2015). Digital citizenship in schools: Nine elements all students should know (3rd ed.). International Society for Technology in Education. https://books.google.com/books/about/Digital_Citizenship_in_Schools.html?id=pPB0jgEACAAJ

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Selwyn, N. (2022). The future of AI and education: Some cautionary notes. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 620-631. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12532

Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1509-1528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479366

UNESCO. (2018). UNESCO ICT competency framework for teachers (Version 3). https://teachertaskforce.org/sites/default/files/2020-07/ict_framework.pdf

UNESCO. (2018). UNESCO ICT competency framework for teachers (Version 3). UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000265721

Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens, with new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes (JRC Science for Policy Report). Publications Office of the European Union. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC128415/JRC128415_01.pdf

Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens, with new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Publications Office of the European Union. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC128415/JRC128415_01.pdf

Williamson, B. (2017). Big data in education: The digital future of learning, policy and practice. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529714920

Downloads

Published

2025-12-31

How to Cite

Lysiak, I. (2025). Competences for Educators, Administrators, and Students in a Digital Society: A Role-Based Framework for Capability Development. Pedagogy and Education Management Review, (4(22), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.36690/2733-2039-2025-4-31-39

Issue

Section

INNOVATIONS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS