The State of ICT Implementation in Ukrainian General Secondary
Education Institutions in 2019 and 2020
Tetiana A. Vakaliuk
1,2,3 a
, Dmytro S. Antoniuk
1 b
and Olga O. Kalinichenko
3 c
1
Zhytomyr Polytechnic State University, 103 Chudnivsyka Str., Zhytomyr, 10005, Ukraine
2
Institute for Digitalisation of Education of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine, 9 M. Berlynskoho
Str., Kyiv, 04060, Ukraine
3
Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University, 54 Gagarin Ave., Kryvyi Rih, 50086, Ukraine
Keywords:
Information and Communication Technologies, Cloud Technologies, Cloud Services, Game Simulators,
Simulators, Massive Open Online Courses, General Secondary Education Institutions.
Abstract:
The use of digital technology in various fields of education today is one of the most important trends in
the educational process in the world. The article presents the results of the analysis of the current state of
implementation of ICT in the educational process of institutions of general secondary education in Ukraine.
For this purpose, a survey was conducted among students of the first year of the Zhytomyr Polytechnic State
University of 2019 and 2020 years of admission, within which 17 questions were asked to students related
to the use of information and communication technologies in the educational process. As a result of the
research, the introduction of the discipline “Educational technologies and digital education” into the training
of future information technology specialists was substantiated, as well as the certification educational program
“Information systems and cloud technologies in the educational process”, designed for general education
teachers, educators for higher education institutions, experts in the field of additional educational services, and
other professionals. Besides, the course “Application Packages” for specialties 121 “Software Engineering”,
122 “Computer Science”, 123 “Computer Engineering”, 125 “Cybersecurity” and 126 “Information Systems
and Technologies” at the Zhytomyr Polytechnic State University has been expanded for study some cloud
services that can serve as an alternative to the usual MS Office. In conclusion, we can conclude that the positive
dynamics in the use of various ICT tools in education is present (in comparison with school graduates in 2019
and 2020). This means that teachers are increasingly turning to such tools when teaching their subjects.
1 INTRODUCTION
The Law of Ukraine “On Education” states that the
formation of information and communication compe-
tence in students is mandatory (Verkhovna Rada of
Ukraine, 2017) because digital competence is recog-
nized by European Union as one of the key competen-
cies (Moiseienko et al., 2020). As a result, as stated
in the conceptual framework of the digitalization of
Ukraine, target audiences in the implementation of
the state program on digital literacy are an elemen-
tary school, secondary school, vocational school, and
higher education institutions (HEI) (HiTECH-office,
2016).
The use of digital technology in various fields of
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6825-4697
b
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7496-3553
c
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7057-2675
education today is one of the most important trends
in the educational process in the world (Hlushak
et al., 2020; Leshchenko et al., 2020; Ovcharuk et al.,
2020; Pinchuk et al., 2019). Such technologies al-
low making the learning process more qualitative and
interesting because using the media and interactive
tools the teacher can introducing the different meth-
ods of working in the classroom: project method,
research and development work, educational games,
etc. (Demirbilek and Koc¸, 2019; HiTECH-office,
2016; Tokarieva et al., 2019).
Also, the latest situation with the pandemic spread
of COVID-19 and corresponding measures that cause
disruptions in the educational process around the
world one more time emphasizes the importance of
ICT in Education.
The issues of computerization and informatiza-
tion of the educational process are widely consid-
Vakaliuk, T., Antoniuk, D. and Kalinichenko, O.
The State of ICT Implementation in Ukrainian General Secondary Education Institutions in 2019 and 2020.
DOI: 10.5220/0010929300003364
In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology (AET 2020) - Volume 2, pages 115-125
ISBN: 978-989-758-558-6
Copyright
c
 2022 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
115

ered in (Bondarenko et al., 2020; Bykov et al., 2001,
1994; Chorna et al., 2019; Fedorenko et al., 2019; Iat-
syshyn et al., 2020; Lavrentieva et al., 2020; Mintii
and Soloviev, 2018; Nechypurenko et al., 2020;
Popel et al., 2017; Rakov et al., 2009; Rashevska
and Soloviev, 2018; Seidametova, 2020; Spivakovsky
et al., 2019; Striuk et al., 2018; Talyzina, 1974; Trius
et al., 2004; Zhaldak and Franchuk, 2021).
Also, the issue of the introduction of various ICT
in the educational process of educational institutions
is considered by foreign scientists.
In particular, Shakeabubakor et al. (Shake-
abubakor et al., 2014) considering cloud computing
services and applications to improve the productivity
of university researchers.
Almerich et al. (Almerich et al., 2016), Kuzmin-
ska et al. (Kuzminska et al., 2019) analyzed teachers’
information and communication technology compe-
tences. The use of cloud computing in higher edu-
cation is considered in (Bansal et al., 2012; Biswas,
2011; Britto, 2012; Dineva and Nedeva, 2012; Ercan,
2010).
Dzikite et al. (Dzikite et al., 2017) investigated
lecturers’ competencies in ICT for effective imple-
mentation of ICT-integrated teaching and learning
in textiles and clothing degree programs. Hanson-
Baldauf and Hughes (Hanson-Baldauf and Hughes,
2009) reveal issues in the information and communi-
cation technology competencies of students enrolled
in school library media certification programs. Ka-
plan and Haenlein (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2016) ana-
lyze the problem of higher education and the digital
revolution.
The purpose of this article is to establish the cur-
rent state of implementation of ICT in the educational
process of institutions of general secondary education
in Ukraine in 2019 and 2020 years.
2 RESEARCH METHODS
To find out the current state of implementation of var-
ious ICT in the educational process of institutions of
general secondary education, as well as to form a
group of selective disciplines, a survey of students of
the first year of the Zhytomyr Polytechnic State Uni-
versity was conducted. In total, 167 respondents par-
ticipated in the survey in the 2019 year, and 214 re-
spondents in the 2020 year.
Students were asked to answer the following ques-
tions (Vakaliuk, 2019):
1. Do you know what application packages are?
2. Did you study application packages at
school/college?
3. What kind of application packages have you stud-
ied/reviewed?
4. From which package did you study office applica-
tion packages (text editors; spreadsheets; database
management systems; demo tools)?
5. Do you know what “cloud services” is?
6. Which of the following programs and services is
cloud-based?
7. Do you know what massive open online courses
are?
8. Do you use these courses at school/college?
9. If the answer to the previous question is “Yes”,
which one?
10. Have you used massive open online courses for
self-study?
11. Did teachers use any other tools when studying
programming in Computer Science?
12. If the answer to the previous question is “Yes”,
what are the tools?
13. Did any information and communication tech-
nology tools (curricula, multimedia, simulators,
games, virtual laboratories, etc.) be used in the
school/college by non-CS teachers?
14. If the answer to the previous question is “Yes”, in
what lessons did the teachers use such tools?
15. Which one did you enjoy the most and why (also
indicate the item on which it was used)?
16. Was the teaching of this subject more interesting
using a variety of tools than without using them?
17. What additional services would you like to con-
sider and explore how to use them?
3 RESULTS
Let us analyze the answers to each question. First
question “Do you know what application packages
are?” the purpose was to establish whether the first-
year students have basic concepts of the school course
in Computer Science (CS). The results of the survey
indicate that 91% of students have basic concepts, 9%
do not in the 2019 year, and 2020 year – 87,4% of stu-
dents have basic concepts, 12,6% do not (figure 1).
Regarding the second question, “Did you study
application packages at school/college?”, in the 2019
year 18% said no and 82% said yes, and in the 2020
year 21% said no and 79% said yes (figure 2). This
indicates that either the teacher did not adhere to the
standard of general education, or the first-year stu-
dents do not understand the basic concepts of CS.
AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology
116

Figure 1: Percentage of answers to question # 1 “Do you know what application packages are?” (comparison of 2019 and
2020).
Figure 2: Percentage of answers to question # 2 “Did you study application packages at school/college?” (comparison of
2019 and 2020).
The answer to what exactly served as this distri-
bution of answers to the previous question is to an-
alyze the answers to the following. In response to
the question “What kind of application packages have
you studied/reviewed?”, all 167 respondents in the
2019 year and in the 2020 year – all 214 chose least
one of the suggested options, which means that as a
student they studied everything they needed, they just
did not have the necessary terminology. In this case,
in the 2019 year, 88% of respondents noted that they
studied text editors, 77,8% – spreadsheets, 65,3% –
tools for creating demonstration material, 38,3% –
database management systems, 32,3% – graphic ed-
itors, 22,2% – educational programs, 16,8% – multi-
media systems and computer games (figure 3). And in
the 2020 year, 93,9% of respondents noted that they
studied text editors, 84,6% – spreadsheets, 74,3% –
tools for creating demonstration material, 38,3% –
database management systems, 51,4% – graphic ed-
itors, 23,4% – educational programs, 27,1% – multi-
media systems and computer games (figure 3).
During the informatization of society, new ICT are
constantly appearing, which are replacing the usual
applications. One of such ICT is cloud technology
– a service that allows remote use of data processing
and storage tools.
The next question was to find out whether schools
use the standard MS Office suite, or whether some
teachers use cloud services. Results of the answers to
the question “From which package did you study of-
The State of ICT Implementation in Ukrainian General Secondary Education Institutions in 2019 and 2020
117

Figure 3: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 3 “What kind of application packages have you studied/reviewed?”
(comparison of 2019 and 2020).
fice application packages (text editors; spreadsheets;
database management systems; demo tools)?” in the
2019 year are: 80,2% of those surveyed had stud-
ied MS Office, 22,2% had studied Office 365, and
24% had studied Google services, and in the 2020
year: 79,4% of those surveyed had studied MS Office,
28% had studied Office 365, and 31,3% had studied
Google services (figure 4). In particular, 59,3% (99
people) in the 2019 year and 51,9% (111 people) in
the 2020 year of the proposed list chose MS Office
only. It is worth noting that in 2020 there were iso-
lated cases of choosing the WPS Office.
That is why the next question was “Do you know
what “cloud services” is?”, to which 84,3% answered
“yes” and the other 15,7% answered “no” in 2019,
and in the 2020 year 88,3% answered “yes” and the
other 11,7% answered “no” (figure 5). Although the
study of cloud services is also included in the CS cur-
riculum, not all school teachers adhere to the relevant
document.
Answers to the following question “Which of the
following programs and services is cloud-based?” are
quite interesting as in the 2019 year 13,4% of respon-
dents said that MS Office is a cloud service, and in
the 2020 year – 7,5% gave the same answer. Also
in 2019, 12,7% said Office 365 was cloud-based,
82,6% noted Google services, and 7,6% noted Prezi,
and in the 2020 year 20,4% noted that Office 365
was cloud-based, 86,1% chose Google services, and
16,9% selected Prezi (figure 6). It’s worth noting that
Office 365, Google, and Prezi are among the cloud
ones listed. The positive dynamics in the correct an-
swers indicate that since 2020, graduates have met in
the school curriculum with cloud services more often
than graduates of 2019.
As Zhytomyr Polytechnic State University ac-
tively introduces massive open online courses, the fol-
lowing question “Do you know what massive open
online courses are?”. The survey results in the 2019
year indicate that 74,3% know what it is, the other
25,7% do not, and in the 2020 year – 78% know what
it is, the other 22% do not (figure 7).
In doing so, in response to the question “Do you
use these courses at school/college?” in the 2019 year
88,6% of students (percent of those who answered
“yes” to the previous question) answered, “yes”, and
in the 2020 year – 92,5% (figure 8).
To find out what kind of open online courses are
used in the educational process of general secondary
education institutions, the following question was an-
alyzed: “If the answer to the previous question is
“Yes”, which one?”. The analysis of the results shows
that in most cases 50% in the 2019 year are Cisco
Academy courses, but in the 2020 year, this indicator
is 23,8%. In some cases (13,6% in the 2019 year and
28,6% in the 2020 year) are Prometheus, and all oth-
ers are isolated cases of other courses. It should be
noted that Zhytomyr Polytechnic is closely cooperat-
ing with Cisco Academy, as a result of cooperation
in the institution of higher education actively used
courses of the said academy in the educational pro-
cess (when studying courses “Computer Networks”,
“Python Programming”, “Cybersecurity”).
Also, to facilitate the use of massive open online
courses (MOOC) in students’ independent work, the
following question “Have you used massive open on-
AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology
118

Figure 4: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 4 “From which package did you study office application packages
(text editors; spreadsheets; database management systems; demo tools)?” (comparison of 2019 and 2020).
Figure 5: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 5 “Do you know what “cloud services” is?” (comparison of 2019
and 2020).
Figure 6: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 6 “Which of the following programs and services is cloud-based?”
(comparison of 2019 and 2020).
line courses for self-study?”. The results of the survey
(in the 2019 year – 67,1% – yes, 32,9% – no, in the
2020 year – 74,1% – yes, 25,9% – no, see figure 9) in-
dicate that not all students used MOOC for indepen-
The State of ICT Implementation in Ukrainian General Secondary Education Institutions in 2019 and 2020
119

Figure 7: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 7 “Do you know what massive open online courses are?” (com-
parison of 2019 and 2020).
Figure 8: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 8 “Do you use these courses at school/college?” (comparison of
2019 and 2020).
dent work, and therefore, before using these courses,
it is worth conducting coaching for students who do
not know how to use such MOOC.
Also, an important question was, “Did teachers
use any other tools when studying programming in
Computer Science?”, in which 49,1% said “yes, they
used”, 50,9% – no in the 2019 year, and 51,9% said
“yes, they used”, 48,1% – no in the 2020 year (fig-
ure 10).
To find out what kind of tools were still used in
CS lessons, the following question was asked: “If the
answer to the previous question is “Yes”, what are the
tools?”. The results (figure 11) indicate that in the
2019 year 32,2% of the respondents worked with on-
line compilers, and in the 2020 year, this indicator is
21,6%, 33,3% in 2019, and 34,5% in the 2020 year
with automated programming tasks, 50,6% in 2019
and 58,6% in the 2002 year – with simulators, 52,9%
in 2019 and 53,4% in 2020 – with training games. Ac-
cording to previous research (Vakaliuk et al., 2020), it
is with online compilers and automated systems for
checking programming tasks that computer teachers
want to work on in the educational process, but for
some reason, they are not used yet. However, as can
be seen from the studies of 2019 and 2020, teachers
are beginning to use simulators more often in their
work.
As ICTs can be used not only in CS lessons, the
next question was “Did any information and commu-
nication technology tools (curricula, multimedia, sim-
ulators, games, virtual laboratories, etc.) be used in
the school/college by non-CS teachers?”.
Survey results indicate that in 48,5% in the 2019
year and 50,9% in the 2020 year of cases ICT was
used in other lessons, in 51,5% in the 2019 year and
49,1% in the 2020 year it was not (figure 12). This
shows that even the conditions created for non-CS
teachers through quarantine do not contribute to the
development of their competence in the use of ICT.
Among those who answered “yes” to the follow-
ing question “If the answer to the previous question
is “Yes”, in what lessons did the teachers use such
tools?” were distributed as follows (figure 13): 50%
in 2019 and 49,1% in 2020 – ICT used in language
AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology
120

Figure 9: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 10 “Have you used massive open online courses for self-study?”
(comparison of 2019 and 2020).
Figure 10: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 11 “Did teachers use any other tools when studying programming
in Computer Science?” (comparison of 2019 and 2020).
Figure 11: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 12 “If the answer to the previous question is “Yes”, what are the
tools?” (comparison of 2019 and 2020).
and literature lessons; 48,8% in 2019 and 48,2% in
2020 – in mathematics lessons; 43,8% in 2019 and
57,3% in 2020 – physics; 38,8% in 2019 and 27,3%
in 2020 – history; 33,8% in 2019 and 39,1% in 2020 –
The State of ICT Implementation in Ukrainian General Secondary Education Institutions in 2019 and 2020
121

Figure 12: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 13 “Did any information and communication technology tools
(curricula, multimedia, simulators, games, virtual laboratories, etc.) be used in the school/college by non-CS teachers?”
(comparison of 2019 and 2020).
Figure 13: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 14 “If the answer to the previous question is “Yes”, in what
lessons did the teachers use such tools?” (comparison of 2019 and 2020).
chemistry; 30% in 2019 and 36,4% in 2020 – biology;
20% in 2019 and 34,5% in 2020 – geography, etc.
This indicates that most teachers still do not use
different ICTs in their activities, although there are
currently many tools that can be used in the educa-
tional process of a general secondary education insti-
tution.
The next question is, “Which one did you enjoy
the most and why (also indicate the item on which
it was used)?” made it possible for teachers to use
the following ICT tools in their activities: multime-
dia, presentations, games, documentary, online quiz,
educational films, simulators, and automated verifica-
tion systems.
Analysis of the distribution of answers to the ques-
tion “Was the teaching of this subject more interest-
ing using a variety of tools than without using them?”
(figure 14) indicate that it is still more interesting for
students to use ICT in the educational process than
not use in both cases.
To determine what other services could be consid-
ered with students, the answers to the question “What
additional services would you like to consider and ex-
plore how to use them?” were analyzed. The results
show that students want to study game simulators in
detail – 62,3% (2019) and 57,5% (2020), cloud ser-
vices for collaboration on documents – 59,9% (2019)
and 65% (2020), educational games – 45,5% (2019)
and 41,6% (2020), tools for learning programming –
43,7% (2019) and 60,3% (2020), simulators – 41,3%
(2019) and 80% (2020), computer network modeling
tools – 35,3% (2019) and 53,7% (2020), virtual labs –
34,7% (2019) and 37,9% (2020), massive open online
courses – 29,9% (2019) and 33,6% (2020), statisti-
cal data processing tools – 25,7% (2019) and 34,1%
(2020), cloud services to build distance courses –
24,6% (2019) and 35,5% (2020), collaboration tools
for project activity – 23,4% (2019) and 41,6% (2020),
mathematical services – 22,8% (2019) and 30,8%
(2020), mind maps – 19,8% (2019) and 24,8% (2020)
(figure 15). This indicates that computer science
teachers are increasingly using different ICT tools in
AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology
122

Figure 14: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 16 “Was the teaching of this subject more interesting using a
variety of tools than without using them?” (comparison of 2019 and 2020).
Figure 15: Percentage of respondents’ answers to question # 17 “What additional services would you like to consider and
explore how to use them?” (comparison of 2019 and 2020).
the learning process.
4 DISCUSSION
Besides, the course “Application Packages” for spe-
cialties 121 “Software Engineering”, 122 “Computer
Science”, 123 “Computer Engineering”, 125 “Cyber-
security” and 126 “Information Systems and Tech-
nologies” at the Zhytomyr Polytechnic State Univer-
sity has been expanded for study some cloud services
that can serve as an alternative to the usual MS Office.
As a result of the research, the introduction of the
discipline “Educational technologies and digital edu-
cation” into the training of future information tech-
nology specialists was substantiated (Vakaliuk et al.,
2019a), and the certification program “Information
systems and cloud technologies in the educational
process” was developed (Vakaliuk et al., 2019b),
which is aimed at teachers of general schools, teach-
ers of HEI, specialists in the field of additional educa-
tional services, and other specialists.
Certified educational program “Information Sys-
tems and Cloud Technologies in the Educational Pro-
cess” aims at forming knowledge about the peculiari-
ties of using information systems and cloud technolo-
gies in the educational process of educational insti-
tutions, forming the ability to plan, develop courses
at the methodological and information-technical lev-
els using modern information systems and cloud tech-
nologies, to organize various forms of higher edu-
cation by applying modern information systems and
cloud technologies.
As a result, the “Cloud Technologies in Distance
Learning in Quarantine” course was launched in sev-
eral waves during 2020, aimed at raising teachers
awareness of various IT and learning tools.
The State of ICT Implementation in Ukrainian General Secondary Education Institutions in 2019 and 2020
123

5 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, we can conclude that the positive dy-
namics of the use of various ICT tools in the educa-
tional process are present (compared to school gradu-
ates in 2019 and 2020).
In this case, the positive dynamics mean that com-
pared to the previous year, more and more teachers
are increasingly turning to various ICT and relevant
services, tools, teaching their subjects. This, in turn,
promotes students’ interest in studying a subject.
REFERENCES
Almerich, G., Orellana, N., Su
´
arez-Rodr
´
ıguez, J., and D
´
ıaz-
Garc
´
ıa, I. (2016). Teachers’ information and com-
munication technology competences: A structural ap-
proach. Computers & Education, 100(C):110–125.
Bansal, S., Singh, S., and Kumar, A. (2012). Use of
cloud computing in academic institutions. Interna-
tional Journal of Computer Science & Technology,
III(I):427–429.
Biswas, S. (2011). How can technology help in edu-
cation? http://www.cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/how-
can-cloud-computing-help-in-education.
Bondarenko, O. V., Pakhomova, O. V., and Lewoniewski,
W. (2020). The didactic potential of virtual infor-
mation educational environment as a tool of geogra-
phy students training. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,
2547:13–23.
Britto, M. (2012). Cloud computing in higher ed-
ucation. Library Student Journal. http:
//www.librarystudentjournal.org/index.php/lsj/
article/view/289/321.
Bykov, V., Dovgiallo, A., and Kommers, P. (2001). Theoret-
ical backgrounds of educational and training technol-
ogy. International Journal of Continuing Engineering
Education and Life-Long Learning, 11(4–6):412–441.
Bykov, V., Gurzhiy, A., and Kozlakova, G. (1994). De-
velopment of computer education in ukrainian higher
technical schools. IFIP Transactions A: Computer
Science and Technology, A-52:678–681.
Chorna, O. V., Hamaniuk, V. A., and Uchitel, A. D. (2019).
Use of YouTube on lessons of practical course of Ger-
man language as the first and second language at the
pedagogical university. CEUR Workshop Proceed-
ings, 2433:294–307.
Demirbilek, M. and Koc¸, D. (2019). Using computer
simulations and games in engineering education:
Views from the field. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,
2393:944–951.
Dineva, S. and Nedeva, V. (2012). Cloud computing and
high education. In The 7th International Conference
on Virtual Learning ICVL, pages 171–176.
Dzikite, C., Nsubuga, Y., and Nkonki, V. (2017). Lec-
turers’ competencies in information and communica-
tion technology (ICT) for effective implementation of
ICT-integrated teaching and learning in textiles and
clothing degree programmes. International Journal
of Educational Sciences, 17(1–3):61–68.
Ercan, T. (2010). Effective use of cloud computing in ed-
ucational institutions. Procedia – Social and Behav-
ioral Sciences, 2(2):938–942.
Fedorenko, E. H., Velychko, V. Y., Stopkin, A. V., Chorna,
A. V., and Soloviev, V. N. (2019). Informatization of
education as a pledge of the existence and develop-
ment of a modern higher education. CEUR Workshop
Proceedings, 2433:20–32.
Hanson-Baldauf, D. and Hughes, H. S. (2009). The infor-
mation and communication technology competencies
of students enrolled in school library media certifica-
tion programs. Library & Information Science Re-
search, 31(1):3–11.
HiTECH-office (2016). Digital agenda of Ukraine –
2020 project (Digital agenda – 2020). Conceptual
principles (version 1.0). Priority areas, initiatives,
projects of “digitalization” of Ukraine until 2020.
https://ucci.org.ua/uploads/files/58e78ee3c3922.pdf.
Hlushak, O. M., Semenyaka, S. O., Proshkin, V. V., Sapozh-
nykov, S. V., and Lytvyn, O. S. (2020). The usage
of digital technologies in the university training of
future bachelors (having been based on the data of
mathematical subjects). CEUR Workshop Proceed-
ings, 2643:210–224.
Iatsyshyn, A. V., Kovach, V. O., Romanenko, Y. O.,
Deinega, I. I., Iatsyshyn, A. V., Popov, O. O., Kutsan,
Y. G., Artemchuk, V. O., Burov, O. Y., and Lytvynova,
S. H. (2020). Application of augmented reality tech-
nologies for preparation of specialists of new techno-
logical era. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2547:181–
200.
Kaplan, A. M. and Haenlein, M. (2016). Higher education
and the digital revolution: About MOOCs, SPOCs,
social media, and the Cookie Monster. Business Hori-
zons, 59(4):441–450.
Kuzminska, O., Mazorchuk, M., Morze, N., Pavlenko, V.,
and Prokhorov, A. (2019). Study of digital compe-
tence of the students and teachers in ukraine. Com-
munications in Computer and Information Science,
1007:148–169.
Lavrentieva, O., Pererva, V., Krupskyi, O., Britchenko, I.,
and Shabanov, S. (2020). Issues of shaping the stu-
dents’ professional and terminological competence in
science area of expertise in the sustainable develop-
ment era. E3S Web of Conferences, 166:10031.
Leshchenko, M., Hrynko, V., and Kosheliev, O. (2020).
Methods of designing digital learning technologies
for developing primary school pre-service teachers’
21st century skills. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,
2732:1044–1057.
Mintii, I. S. and Soloviev, V. N. (2018). Augmented real-
ity: Ukrainian present business and future education.
CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2257:227–231.
Moiseienko, M. V., Moiseienko, N. V., Kohut, I. V., and
Kiv, A. E. (2020). Digital competence of pedagogical
university student: Definition, structure and didactical
conditions of formation. CEUR Workshop Proceed-
ings, 2643:60–70.
AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology
124

Nechypurenko, P. P., Stoliarenko, V. G., Starova, T. V., Se-
livanova, T. V., Markova, O. M., Modlo, Y. O., and
Shmeltser, E. O. (2020). Development and implemen-
tation of educational resources in chemistry with el-
ements of augmented reality. CEUR Workshop Pro-
ceedings, 2547:156–167.
Ovcharuk, O., Ivaniuk, I., Soroko, N., Gritsenchuk, O., and
Kravchyna, O. (2020). The use of digital learning
tools in the teachers’ professional activities to ensure
sustainable development and democratization of edu-
cation in european countries. E3S Web of Conferences,
166:10019.
Pinchuk, O. P., Sokolyuk, O. M., Burov, O. Y., and Shyshk-
ina, M. P. (2019). Digital transformation of learning
environment: Aspect of cognitive activity of students.
CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2433:90–101.
Popel, M., Shokalyuk, S., and Shyshkina, M. (2017). The
learning technique of the SageMathCloud use for stu-
dents collaboration support. CEUR Workshop Pro-
ceedings, 1844:327–339.
Rakov, S., Gorokh, V., and Osenkov, K. (2009). Mathemat-
ics, computer mathematical systems, creativity, art,
pages 253–279. Handbook of Research on Compu-
tational Arts and Creative Informatics.
Rashevska, N. V. and Soloviev, V. N. (2018). Augmented
reality and the prospects for applying its in the training
of future engineers. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,
2257:192–197.
Seidametova, Z. (2020). Combining programming and
mathematics through computer simulation problems.
CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2732:869–880.
Shakeabubakor, A. A., Sundararajan, E., and Ham-
dan, A. R. (2014). Cloud computing services
and applications to improve productivity of
university researchers. In 3rd International
Conference on Electronics Engineering and In-
formatics (ICEEI 2014), pages 33–37. https:
//www.researchgate.net/publication/311574468
Cloud Computing Services and Applications to
Improve Productivity of University Researchers.
Spivakovsky, A., Petukhova, L., Kotkova, V., and Yurchuk,
Y. (2019). Historical approach to modern learn-
ing environment. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,
2393:1011–1024.
Striuk, A., Rassovytska, M., and Shokaliuk, S. (2018). Us-
ing Blippar augmented reality browser in the practical
training of mechanical engineers. CEUR Workshop
Proceedings, 2104:412–419.
Talyzina, N. F. (1974). Cybernetics and pedagogy. Soviet
Education, 16(5):69–77.
Tokarieva, A. V., Volkova, N. P., Harkusha, I. V., and
Soloviev, V. N. (2019). Educational digital games:
Models and implementation. CEUR Workshop Pro-
ceedings, 2433:74–89.
Trius, Y. V., Solov’ev, V. N., Serdyuk, O. A., and Piskun,
O. V. (2004). Regional educational portal as the main
information resource for supporting continuous edu-
cation and open learning. Upravlyayushchie Sistemy i
Mashiny, 4:74–81.
Vakaliuk, T. (2019). First year student survey.
https://forms.gle/M6eVpZqRBD7Medra8.
Vakaliuk, T., Morozov, A., Yefimenko, A., and Antoniuk,
D. (2019a). The expediency of introducing “edu-
cation technologies and learning in the digital age”
course into educational plan of the future profession-
als of information technologies. Naukovi zapysky
Berdianskoho derzhavnoho pedahohichnoho univer-
sytetu. Seriia: Pedahohika, 2:160–169.
Vakaliuk, T. A., Antoniuk, D. S., and Soloviev, V. N. (2020).
The state of ICT implementation in institutions of gen-
eral secondary education: A case of Ukraine. CEUR
Workshop Proceedings, 2643:119–133.
Vakaliuk, T. A., Morozov, A. V., Lobanchykova, N. M.,
and Antoniuk, D. S. (2019b). Certificate program
’information systems and cloud technologies in the
educational process’. https://drive.google.com/file/d/
141yQaDYzZScfzZQ1gBMjOpVHboPKwNvr/view.
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (2017).
Law of Ukraine ’On education’.
http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2145-19.
Zhaldak, M. I. and Franchuk, N. P. (2021). Some applica-
tions of the GRAN1 to analyze two-dimensional con-
tinuous probability distributions. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1946(1):012002.
The State of ICT Implementation in Ukrainian General Secondary Education Institutions in 2019 and 2020
125