Didactic Terms of Shaping Pedagogical Universities Students’ Digital

Competence in the Process of Teaching Informatics Courses

Olena O. Lavrentieva

1,2 a

, Mykhailo V. Moiseienko

2 b

and Natalia V. Moiseienko

2 c

Alfred Nobel University, 18 Sicheslavska Naberezhna Str., Dnipro, 49000, Ukraine

Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University, 54 Gagarin Ave., Kryvyi Rih, 50086, Ukraine

Keywords:

Didactic Terms, Information Competence, Digital Competence, Students of Pedagogical Universities,

Informative Disciplines, Structural-Functional Model.

Abstract:

In this study the results of the conducted theoretical and experimental research on determining, grounding

and testing of didactic terms of shaping pedagogical universities students’ digital competence in the process

of teaching informatics courses have been presented. The object of the research is the process of shaping

digital competency of pedagogical universities students. The subject of the research is the didactic terms

that contribute to the shaping of digital competence of pedagogical universities students in the process of

teaching informatics courses. The article provides insight into the essence of the conducted pedagogical

experiment on the assesses of the effectiveness of didactic terms of shaping pedagogical universities students’

digital competence in the process of teaching informatics courses. The conducted quantitative, qualitative and

statistical analyses have identiﬁed a positive and statistically signiﬁcant dynamic in the levels of formation of

the competence in question in accordance with the deﬁned criteria; in the degree of the system acquisition of

this phenomenon; in general levels of the formation of digital competence of students from the experimental

group.

1 INTRODUCTION

The current pace and vector of the evolution of the

post-industrial world community necessitate a re-

thinking of the structure of professional competencies

of the students of pedagogical specialities, the inclu-

sion in their list of the ability and readiness to func-

tion effectively in a digital society, the development

and improvement of skills to competently and appro-

priately use models, methods and tools of informatics,

the latest information technologies in professional ac-

tivities and social practice.

The Strategy for the Development of the Infor-

mation Society in Ukraine (Cabinet of Ministers of

Ukraine, 2013) set a course for creating an educa-

tion system focused on the use of the latest ICTs in

forming a well-rounded personality and ensuring the

continuity of education. The Concept of the New

Ukrainian School (Elkin et al., 2017) calls the in-

formation and digital competencies key and essential

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0609-5894

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4401-0297

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0789-0272

competence for living in modern society. The Regula-

tion on the National Educational Electronic Platform

(Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, 2018)

emphasizes the need to develop them for participants

in the educational process. The concept of the Dig-

ital Agenda of Ukraine (Adz, 2016) recognized the

digitalization of society, which includes future teach-

ers, as an object of attention and integrated public ad-

ministration. In the quarantine restrictions context,

it is digitalization that has become the primary tool

for distance and blended learning, and digital compe-

tence has been the guarantee of effectiveness.

The researches which are the basis for the study of

the problem are the works examining the theoretical

and methodological foundations of teachers’ profes-

sional preparation as agents of social change (Hon-

charenko, 2012; Chernilevskyi et al., 2010; Sultanova

et al., 2021; Hrynevych et al., 2022; Semychenko,

2004; Slastenin et al., 1997; Falfushynska et al., 2021;

Rybalko et al., 2020; Ziaziun, 1989; Madzigon and

Vachevskyi, 2011; Havrilova and Topolnik, 2017;

Kuts and Lavrentieva, 2022), ways of modernizing of

higher pedagogical education and updating its content

and organizational forms (Aleksiuk, 1993; Bespalko,

Lavrentieva, O., Moiseienko, M. and Moiseienko, N.

Didactic Terms of Shaping Pedagogical Universities Studentsâ

Z Digital Competence in the Process of Teaching Informatics Courses.

DOI: 10.5220/0012074900003431

In Proceedings of the 2nd Myroslav I. Zhaldak Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology (AET 2021), pages 869-880

ISBN: 978-989-758-662-0

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

869

1960; Kodliuk et al., 2021; Lozova, 2003; Ogneviuk

et al., 2020), the source developing the competence

approach and reveal the essence of the teacher’s pro-

fessional competence (Khutorskaya and Korol, 2008;

Raven, 2020; Zimnyaya, 2021; Ovcharuk, 2020;

Pometun, 2003; Dakhin, 2012; Morze et al., 2022).

A lot of theoretical and experimental works of

domestic and foreign scientists are devoted to the

problems of implementation and effective use of ICT

in education, in particular (Bespalko, 2018; Burov

et al., 2020; Gershunsky and Pullin, 1990; Hon-

charenko, 2000; Gurevych et al., 2020; Kademiya

and Kobysia, 2017; Hurevych et al., 2012; Robert

et al., 2016; Sysoieva, 1998; Zhaldak, 2012). The

issues of digitalization of the educational space are

thoroughly considered by foreign scholars in their

publications (Manovich, 2001; Polat, 2004; Stom-

mel, 2014; Vuorikari et al., 2016) and Ukrainian

researchers (Balyk et al., 2019; Kukharenko et al.,

2022; Bilousova et al., 2022; Spivakovsky et al., 2013;

Rakov, 2005; Teplytskyi et al., 2019; Trius and Sotu-

lenko, 2017; Zhaldak et al., 2012).

The analysis of the current state and directions of

reforming science education (STEM education) has

led to the conclusion that its digitalization requires

the modernization of computer science training and

the cross-cutting integrated systematic design of ad-

vanced content for teaching computer science to stu-

dents of pedagogical universities based on a com-

petence approach. These problems are comprehen-

sively addressed in the works of Hrynevych et al.

(Hrynevych et al., 2021), Ramsky and Rezina (Ram-

sky and Rezina, 2005), Semerikov et al. (Semerikov

et al., 2022).

Meanwhile, the analysis of primary sources re-

vealed a terminological inconsistency in the use of the

term “digital competence”. The scientiﬁc researches

which comprehensively studies the categorical and

terminological ﬁeld of informatics, information and

communication competencies in line with our study

are valuable in this context (Ovcharuk and Ivaniuk,

2021; Ovcharuk et al., 2022; Spivakovsky et al., 2022;

Soroko, 2021; Vakaliuk et al., 2021a; Martyniuk et al.,

2021; Bondarchuk et al., 2022; Vakaliuk et al., 2021b;

Prokhorov et al., 2022; Pinchuk and Prokopenko,

2021; Riezina et al., 2022; Moiseienko, 2020; Moi-

seienko et al., 2020a,b).

It has been established that the Digital Compe-

tence Framework for Citizens (Carretero et al., 2017)

and the Digital Competence Framework for Educa-

tors (European Commission et al., 2017) developed

within the European Research Center of the European

Commission have become reference models, clearly

deﬁned guidelines for creating conditions for the de-

velopment of educational space, forming the digital

competence of participants in the educational pro-

cess, and they also laid the foundations for building

an educational institution’s digital learning environ-

ment. However, despite the signiﬁcant achievements

in the ﬁeld of research, there are still contradictions

such as:

• between the socially determined and state-

regulated need for a high level of digitalization of

all spheres of society and the insufﬁcient level of

digital competence of the key actors of the infor-

mation society – students of pedagogical special-

ities;

• between the need for students to acquire critical

thinking skills, lifelong learning, and mobility to

changing technologies as the basis for their sus-

tainable professional and personal growth and tra-

ditional approaches to teaching computer science

at pedagogical universities;

• between the didactic ﬁndings, forms, methods and

techniques accumulated in science and practice

and the degree of substantiation and experimental

veriﬁcation of the didactic terms for the formation

of students’ digital competence in teaching com-

puter science disciplines.

The aim of the study is to identify, theoretically

substantiate didactic terms, develop and experimen-

tally test a model that promotes the formation of dig-

ital competence of pedagogical universities students

during the study of computer science disciplines.

2 THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF

SHAPING PEDAGOGICAL

UNIVERSITIES STUDENTS’

DIGITAL COMPETENCE

Taking into account the results of the analysis of the

procedural and content aspects of the competence ap-

proach as a leading educational paradigm of higher

pedagogical education, the role, place and signiﬁ-

cance of digital competence have been clariﬁed which

are a key and essential component of the teachers’

professional competence in a modern globalized so-

ciety. It has been found that such competence al-

lows them to creatively introduce ICT innovations

into professional and pedagogical activities, to pro-

mote the development of relevant ICT competencies

in students.

It has been established that in its essence, digital

competence is a personality’s dynamic characteristic

AET 2021 - Myroslav I. Zhaldak Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

870

determining the ability to secure information interac-

tion, communication and collaboration, design digital

educational resources and solve complex professional

problems with the use of ICT and tools. From this

point of view, it performs motivational and incentive,

gnostic and transformative, activity and methodologi-

cal, evaluative and reﬂective, and communicative and

procedural functions in the professional activity and

social practice of pedagogical institutions’ students.

Given the peculiarities of informatics as a com-

plex scientiﬁc and engineering discipline, the ob-

ject of which is information processes of any nature,

the subject – new information technologies, and the

methodology – computational experiment, we deﬁne

digital competence as a separate phenomenon that is

directly related with the information competence, as

well as computer, information and technological, and

informatics competencies of pedagogical universities’

students.

The analysis of the key and related concepts made

it possible to formulate the author’s vision of this

multi-dimensional category. Digital competence is

determined as the subject’s ability and capacity to

purposefully use ICT to create, search, process, and

exchange information in the virtual space, to demon-

strate information and media literacy, to comply with

Internet security and cybersecurity rules, to under-

stand and consciously adhere to ethics in working

with information.

It has been found, that by its structure, digital

competence is a complex and multidimensional per-

sonal formation, a professionally and personally sig-

niﬁcant integrative quality covering a set of compe-

tencies necessary for orientation and activity in the

information space. These include functional literacy

in information and data, communication and collab-

oration competence, digital content competence, dig-

ital security competence, and problem-solving com-

petence (ﬁgure 1). It has been established the digital

competence of pedagogical universities students can

function at two qualitative levels. One is the basic

level making it possible to solve educational problems

by means of general-purpose computer technologies,

and yet another is subject-oriented allowing the in-

troduction of specialized digital technologies and re-

sources into educational activities.

It has been ﬁxed that the digital competence con-

tent reﬂects the structure of activities for consistent,

literate and multidimensional work with information

and is determined by the relevant following structural

and criterion components (ﬁgure 2):

• motivational-value component contains the goals,

motives, interests, value orientations, special abil-

ities, focus on self-realization in professional and

pedagogical activities and self-realization in the

information space;

• cognitive-informational one as a set of knowledge

and experience that ensures information process-

ing and work with information objects on the cy-

bersecurity and ethical behaviour foundation;

• operational-activity one – a set of skills and abil-

ities for the active usage of information technol-

ogy and computer equipment in professional ac-

tivities as tools of learning and development, self-

improvement and creativity;

• personal-reﬂexive one – features and qualities de-

termining the student’s personal reﬂective attitude

towards themselves as a subject of activity in the

information space, as well as their self-awareness,

self-control, self-assessment of actions and re-

sponsibility for their results.

The article proposes to assess the formation of

digital competence of pedagogical university students

by the degree of manifestation of relevant indicators at

four levels – elementary, intermediate, sufﬁcient and

advanced ones.

3 DIDACTIC SUPPORT FOR THE

SHAPING OF STUDENTS’

DIGITAL COMPETENCE

The analysis of scientiﬁc sources and the results of

practical activities made it possible to clarify the es-

sential characteristics of the educational process in

pedagogical universities, to identify key disciplines

and to determine didactic means (forms, methods,

techniques, technologies) for the formation of compo-

nents of students’ digital competence in the process of

studying computer science disciplines. According to

the results of the analysis of educational programs, the

content of teaching informatics disciplines has been

presented in three content areas:

• algorithmization and programming (Fundamen-

tals of algorithmization and data structure,

Object-oriented and event-driven programming,

Web programming);

• software of computer systems (Fundamentals of

ofﬁce technologies, Numerical methods and mod-

elling, Multimedia);

• computer technologies in the professional activity

of a teacher (School course of informatics, Meth-

ods of teaching informatics, Olympiad in infor-

matics, Modern lesson of informatics).

Didactic Terms of Shaping Pedagogical Universities Studentsâ

Z Digital Competence in the Process of Teaching Informatics Courses

871

Fig. 1. Components of the digital competence

Fig. 2. Structural and criterion components of the digital competence

Pedagogical

universities

students’ digital

competence

Digital content

competence

Problem-solving

competence

Communication

and collaboration

competence

Digital security

competenceі

Functional literacy

in information and

data

Components

Motivational-

value

Cognitive-

informational

Operational-

activity

Personal-

reflexive

Figure 1: Components of the digital competence.

Fig. 1. Components of the digital competence

Fig. 2. Structural and criterion components of the digital competence

Pedagogical

universities

students’ digital

competence

Digital content

competence

Problem-solving

competence

Communication

and collaboration

competence

Digital security

competenceі

Functional literacy

in information and

data

Components

Motivational-

value

Cognitive-

informational

Operational-

activity

Personal-

reflexive

Figure 2: Structural and criterion components of the digital competence.

It has been recorded that in order to improve the

students’ digital competence and its separate compo-

nents, the practice of pedagogical universities widely

uses the possibilities of a variable block of computer

science disciplines (Fundamentals of Media Literacy,

Educational Smart Technologies, Network Commu-

nities, etc.), as well as the LMS of HEIs, MOOCs and

open educational resources.

It has been substantiated that increasing the efﬁ-

ciency of the process of shaping the digital compe-

tence of pedagogical universities students is ensured

by the creation of certain didactic terms that are ed-

ucational procedures specially modelled as a result

of the systematic selection, design and implementa-

tion of elements of content, as well as methods, tech-

niques and organizational forms of computer science

disciplines. The complex of didactic terms includes:

the motivational conditionality of interaction of sub-

jects’ educational process in the information and dig-

ital learning environment; structuring of educational

information in the form of problematic, heuristic and

integrative models of learning and its translation into

the project activities mode; ensuring the systemic

complicating nature of students’ study activities, di-

agnosis and timely correction of its products on the

basis of modern ICT.

In the authors’ opinion, the development of a

structural and functional model contributes to the

identiﬁcation, theoretical substantiation and imple-

mentation of the didactic terms. In the model, each

structural component (target, theoretical and method-

ological, content and procedural, criterion and diag-

nostic, and resulting blocks) has a speciﬁc function:

orientation, analytical, formative and corrective ones

serving to optimize the organization of activities for

the shaping of students’ digital competence during the

study of computer science disciplines (ﬁgure 3).

The target of the modelling is to build a system of

pedagogical work on the shaping digital competence

of pedagogical university students during the study

of informatics courses. The didactic model is based

on the principles of comprehensive information sup-

port, optimality and pedagogical expediency, interac-

tivity, comprehensive differentiation, controllability,

effectiveness, proceduralism, diagnostics, gamiﬁca-

tion, adaptability, and ergonomics. The target block

of the didactic model reﬂects the sequence of steps in

deﬁning goals and objectives, so it performs an ori-

entation function in the formation of students’ dig-

ital competence at each segment of the educational

material. The theoretical and methodological block

describes the content of the information and digi-

AET 2021 - Myroslav I. Zhaldak Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

872

TEACHING INFORMATICS COURSES

STAGES OF SHAPING

UNITS

Goal-motivational Cognitive-operational Control-resultant

DIGITAL COMPETENCE: functional literacy in information and data, communication and

collaboration competence, digital content competence, digital security competence, problem-

solving competence

INFORMATION-DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

technical  methodological  advisory subject  program  communication

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES:

systemic, competence-based, personality-activity,

information, technological, task-focused, modular, reflexive

PRINCIPLES:

comprehensive information support, optimality and pedagogical feasibility,

interactivity, comprehensive differentiation, controllability, effectiveness, procedural, diagnostic,

gamification, adaptability, ergonomics

DIDACTIC TERMS

Modernization of the higher education

Digitalization of society and education

OBJECTIVE: shaping pedagogical universities students’ digital competence in the

process of teaching informatics courses

TARGET BLOCK

THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL BLOCK

ORIENTATION

FORMATIVE

CORRECTIVE

TEACHING INFORMATICS COURSES

IN PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITIES

FUNCTIONS

CONTENT AND PROCEDURAL BLOCK

RESULT: The advantage of sufficient and advanced levels of students’ digital

competence

CRITERIONS: motivational-value, cognitive-informational, operational-activity, personal-reflexive

LEVELS: elementary, intermediate, sufficient and advanced

DIAGNOSTIC TOOLS

General: testing, questionnaires, interviews, verification works

Special: competency matrices, expert cards, cases, training projects, blog

FORMS

– classroom,

extracurricular,

distance learning;

– independent and

scientific work;

– individual, pair,

cooperative

METHODS

– active;

– organizational;

– interactive

– project;

– search;

– creative and

development

ensuring the systemic

complicating nature of

students’ study activities,

diagnosis and timely

correction of its products on

the basis of modern ICT

structuring of educational

information in the form of

problematic, heuristic and

integrative models of learning

and its translation into the

project activities mode

the motivational

conditionality of

interaction of subjects'

educational process in the

information and digital

learning environment

CRITERION AND DIAGNOSTIC BLOCK

CONTENT: content informatics courses, elective special course «Digital technologies in education»

TECHNOLOGIES

distance, blended,

mobile, problem-

based,

developmental

learning, rating

control

MEANS

– ICT; – ICMT;

– Smart-systems;

– electronic learning book;

– didactic instructional

materials and forms

ANALITICAL

Figure 3: Didactic model of digital competence development of pedagogical university students.

Didactic Terms of Shaping Pedagogical Universities Studentsâ

Z Digital Competence in the Process of Teaching Informatics Courses

873

tal learning environment, methodological approaches,

principles and didactic terms that are the subject of

analysis when designing the research process. The

content and procedural block reﬂects the complex of

didactic support (selected forms, methods, technolo-

gies, tools), as well as the logic and stages of form-

ing students’ digital competence and its components.

The criterion and diagnostic block perform a correc-

tive function, so far as shows the criteria, levels, and

diagnostic tools for determining the level of students’

digital competence during the study of computer sci-

ence disciplines. The result of the model implementa-

tion is the achievement of the advantage of sufﬁcient

and high levels of digital competence at each stage of

mastering computer science disciplines.

4 ORGANIZATION AND

METHODOLOGY OF

EXPERIMENTAL WORK

The investigation of the state and analysis of the prob-

lem in the practice of pedagogical universities made it

possible to diagnose the goals and content of teaching

computer science disciplines at the bachelor’s level.

First of all, it has been found that mastering the ba-

sics of algorithmization and programming, software

of computer systems is provided only for the main

or additional speciality “Informatics” (15% of the to-

tal curriculum). For the rest students, elective and

integrated courses are offered covering the issues of

computer technology in the professional activities of

a subject teacher. Evidently, it does not contribute to

the full and purposeful digital competence formation

as one of the key competencies for a teacher. At the

same time, other contradictions and a number of ob-

jectives, conceptual and procedural difﬁculties have

been identiﬁed, and the superiority of the primary and

secondary levels of digital competence in more than

52% of students has been stated both by separate cri-

teria and in general.

Experimental testing of the effectiveness of the

identiﬁed didactic terms was carried out in stages.

At the organizational stage, on the basis of sys-

temic, competence, personal activity, information,

technological, task-focused, modular, and reﬂective

approaches, the empirical research program was de-

veloped, the content was clariﬁed and the electronic

educational content of computer science disciplines

(“Event-driven programming” and “3D modelling”)

was updated, the author’s electronic special course

“Digital Technologies in Education” (3 ECTS cred-

its) was prepared, didactic support for teaching com-

puter science disciplines (lectures, multimedia pre-

sentations, electronic textbooks, instructional materi-

als and forms, tests, a system of educational tasks for

the formation of digital competence and its compo-

nents) was selected.

The components of the information and digital

learning environment – methodological, consulting,

subject, programmatic, and communication were de-

veloped and ﬁlled with content in accordance with the

components of the didactic model of students’ digital

competence formation. The guideline was the pre-

pared structural and logical scheme of teaching com-

puter science disciplines with a system of classroom

work and independent and self-educational activities

of students with the support of the LMS of HEIs, open

educational resources, specialized departmental web-

sites and teachers’ personal websites (blogs, pages,

etc.), and digital communication tools.

The testing of such didactic term as the motiva-

tional conditionality of interaction of subjects’ edu-

cational process in the information and digital learn-

ing environment carried out at the formative stage of

the experimental work provided for the use of the ad-

vantages of such an environment to organize effective

cooperation and co-creation in the system “teacher-

student-class” during the study of computer science

disciplines. The development of students’ learning

motivation in mastering digital competence was fa-

cilitated by the use of problem-based and develop-

mental learning technologies, the creation of suc-

cess situations, the introduction of emotional stimu-

lation, and rating control with elements of gamiﬁca-

tion. The projects implemented (individual or group)

were aimed at developing motivation, forming cog-

nitive readiness for digital activities, practising lead-

ing digital activities, and integrating computer science

knowledge.

Students’ progression from motives in mastering

digital activities to knowledge, skills, abilities, and

evaluative judgments to digital competence was en-

sured by creating a didactic term such as structuring

of educational information in the form of problematic,

heuristic and integrative models of learning and its

translation into the project activities mode. Based on

the logic and stages of the studied activity, a techno-

logical scheme for the formation of students’ digital

competence was developed, namely:

entrance and introductory diagnostics → goal-

motivational module (formation to students of a sys-

tem of motives and an approximate basis for activities

in the virtual space) → cognitive-operational module

(solving a system of educational tasks to develop com-

ponents of digital competence, forming of constituent

elements of digital competencies, inputting them into

AET 2021 - Myroslav I. Zhaldak Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

874

Table 1: Comparative results of experimental work.

Criteria and indicators Experimental group Control group

Motivational-value criterion +25.26% +10.75%

Formation coefﬁcient / χ

– Pearson’s criterion +0.09 / 79.28 +0.04 / 7.43

Cognitive-informational criterion +35.79% +13.98%

Formation coefﬁcient / χ

– Pearson’s criterion +0.11 / 143.48 +0.04 / 9.54

Operational-activity criterion +23.16% +7.53%

Functional literacy in information and data +0.11% +0.04%

Effective communication and cooperation competence +0.11% +0.02%

Creation of digital content competence +0.07% +0.01%

Security competence +0.08% +0.03%

Problem-solving competence +0.07% +0.02%

Formation coefﬁcient / χ

– Pearson’s criterion +0.09 / 63.58 +0.03 / 3.21

Personal-reﬂexive criterion +17.89% +13.98%

Formation coefﬁcient / χ

– Pearson’s criterion +0.06 / 31.73 +0.04 / 9.95

The level of digital competence +26.32% +10.75%

Elementary –17.89% –9.68%

Intermediate –8.42% –1.08%

Sufﬁcient +16.84% +8.6%

Advanced +9.47% +2.15%

Formation coefﬁcient / χ

– Pearson’s criterion +0.09 / 113.95 +0.04 / 9.74

the metastructure of digital competence during the

creation, search, processing, exchange of informa-

tion) → control and result module (control, evalua-

tion, self-assessment, correction of the formed con-

structs via information and digital learning environ-

ments).

This work was supported by a system of study

tasks, contextual, game and problem situations, and

web quests created by, which in their content covered

motivational and value, cognitive and informational,

operational and activity, and personal and reﬂective

aspects of students’ activities in the virtual space. The

content of the tasks was aimed at both understand-

ing, comprehension, and memorization, structuring

the learned tools in the student’s memory, actualiza-

tion and reﬂection on their own activities.

Ensuring the systematic complication of students’

study activities, diagnostics and timely correction of

its products based on modern ICTs, as the next di-

dactic term, involved the introduction of virtual space

tools that together optimized and intensiﬁed the learn-

ing of students of computer science disciplines. These

include new ways of organizing classes, technolog-

ical models of mobile, distance, and blended learn-

ing, game design, video and teleconferencing, web

forums, and workshops in synchronous and asyn-

chronous modes.

The corrective stage involved monitoring and cor-

recting the results of students’ learning activities us-

ing both general (testing, questionnaires, interviews,

tests) and speciﬁc methods (competency matrices, ex-

pert cards, cases, learning projects, blog).

According to the results of quantitative, qualita-

tive and statistical analysis of the experimental work

results, a tendency towards positive changes in the

levels of students’ digital competence formation both

by separate criteria and in general has been estab-

lished (table 1).

The comparative analysis revealed a positive dy-

namic of achievements of pedagogical university

students of both groups, which, however, is more

pronounced and statistically signiﬁcant for students

of the experimental group. According to the re-

search results, the cognitive-informational (+35.79%)

and motivational-value (+25.26%) structural-criterion

components have turned out the most developed.

Changes in the control group’s indicators are due to

the inﬂuence of the educational process and the over-

all development of students. The non-randomness

of the obtained changes was proved with the use the

mathematical statistics methods.

5 CONCLUSIONS

1. The study analyses the procedural and substan-

tive aspects of the competence approach as a leading

paradigm of higher pedagogical education, clariﬁes

the role and importance of informatization and digi-

talization in the development of the educational space,

highlights the need for digitalization of science educa-

tion (STEM education) and the urgency of end-to-end

Didactic Terms of Shaping Pedagogical Universities Studentsâ

Z Digital Competence in the Process of Teaching Informatics Courses

875

integrated systematic design of advanced content of

teaching computer science disciplines to students of

pedagogical universities. On this basis, the place of

digital competence in the structure of the professional

competence of future teachers is determined as a key

and essential component in performing motivational

and incentive, gnostic and transformative, activity-

methodological, evaluative and reﬂective, and com-

municative and procedural functions in their profes-

sional activities and social practice. At the same time,

it is established that the problems in the formation

of students’ digital competence during the study of

computer science disciplines in traditional approaches

are associated with the prevalence of a knowledge-

oriented paradigm in the organization of the informa-

tion and digital learning environment, the focus on

the one-sided mastery of the basics of algorithmiza-

tion and programming and software of computer sys-

tems. Yet another reason is the insufﬁcient level of

educational innovations introduced in the teaching of

computer science disciplines.

2. It has been found that the digital competence

of pedagogical university students is inherently a dy-

namic characteristic of a personality determining the

ability and capacity to purposefully use ICT to cre-

ate, search, process, and exchange information in the

digital space, to demonstrate information and media

literacy, to comply with Internet security and cyber-

security rules, to understand and consciously adhere

to ethics in working with information, to creatively

introduce ICT innovations in professional and peda-

gogical activities, to promote the development of rel-

evant their students’ digital competence.

Digital competence is an integrative quality that

encompasses a set of competencies necessary to nav-

igate and operate in the information space in order

to fulﬁl personal and social needs and carry out pro-

fessional activities. These include functional literacy

in information and data, communication and collabo-

ration competence, digital content competence, digi-

tal security competence, and problem-solving compe-

tence.

The structural and criterion components of digi-

tal competence are motivational-value (indicators: in-

terest in mastering information in the subject area;

motivation to use ICT to search for information),

cognitive-informational (indicators: knowledge of in-

formation sources, methods of working with informa-

tion, methods of presenting information, knowledge

of security and cybersecurity), operational-activity

(mastery of methods of obtaining, storing, process-

ing and transmitting information, ability to use in-

formation technology in working with sources), and

personal-reﬂexive (indicators: a reﬂection of infor-

mation activities, the ability to evaluate information

differently and critically select it). It allows monitor-

ing of their formation during the study of informatics

disciplines according to the signs of elementary, in-

termediate, sufﬁcient and advanced levels.

3. The didactic support of shaping pedagogical

university students’ digital competence in the process

of teaching informatics courses has been developed.

By analyzing educational programs, the content basis

for the formation of the studied phenomenon is repre-

sented by three areas in the study of computer science

disciplines (algorithmization and programming, com-

puter system software, and computer technologies in

the teacher’s professional activity), as well as the pos-

sibilities of a variable block of the curriculum, in par-

ticular, using the LMS of HEIs, MOOCs and open

educational resources.

The set of didactic terms for shaping pedagogical

university students’ digital competence in the process

of teaching informatics courses has been determined

and justiﬁed. Among them are the following ones:

1) motivational conditionality of interaction of sub-

jects’ educational process in the information and digi-

tal learning environment; 2) structuring of educational

information in the form of problematic, heuristic and

integrative models of learning and its translation into

the project activities mode; 3) ensuring the systemic

complicating nature of students’ study activities, di-

agnosis and timely correction of its products on the

basis of modern ICT.

4. The effectiveness of creating the system of di-

dactic terms is ensured by the substantiation and ex-

perimental veriﬁcation of the didactic model, which

schematically reﬂects the system of work on the for-

mation of the digital competence characterizing the

hierarchy, sequence, components, stages, blocks and

applied tools, connections between them and per-

forms orientation, analytical, formative and corrective

functions in the organization of teaching students of

computer science disciplines.

The implemented didactic modelling led to the

content, speciﬁcation and correction of the educa-

tional goals of the components of teaching the ped-

agogical universities students (target, theoretical and

methodological, content and processual and crite-

rion and diagnostic blocks), structuring of educational

material into functional modules (goal-motivational,

cognitive-operational and control-resultant ones);

made possible the logic and gradual introduction of

didactic terms for the formation of digital competence

in the educational process, in the classroom and stu-

dents’ independent study work.

The motivational conditionality of the interaction

of the subjects of the educational process in the infor-

AET 2021 - Myroslav I. Zhaldak Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

876

mation and digital learning environment contributed

to a shift in emphasis from the mentoring model of

communication between teachers and students to the

partnership model.

Structuring educational information in the form

of problem-based, heuristic, and integrative learning

models and transferring it to the project activity mode

made it possible to transform students’ reproductive

activities into creative ones, which contributed to the

skills development to navigate the information space,

generalize and integrate knowledge, and choose ef-

fective ways and methods of solving problems.

Ensuring the systematic complication of students’

study activities, diagnostics and timely correction of

its products based on modern ICTs made it possible

to gradually increase the complexity of the learning

tasks performed, contributed to students’ conﬁdence

in their abilities and building-up motivation and inter-

est in learning.

Apart from traditional study means additional aca-

demic modules were created including special and

elective courses in Digital Technologies and 3D Mod-

elling.

According to the results of the empirical research

in the experimental groups, there is a statistically sig-

niﬁcant dynamics in the levels of students’ digital

competence, namely a 17.89% decrease in the num-

ber of students with an elementary level, an 8.42%

reduction in the number of students with an interme-

diate level, 16.84% increase in the number of students

with a sufﬁcient level, 9.47% – with a high level.

The cognitive-informational, operational-activity and

structural-criterion components of digital competence

have developed the most.

The paper does not exhaust all aspects of this

problem. Further research is reasonable to update

the content of educational programs of pedagogical

universities in accordance with the needs of the in-

formation society and the goals of STEM education;

modernization of computer modelling training based

on the use of modern tools and software, factors of

improving the content and mechanisms for organiz-

ing students’ activities in the information and digital

learning environment, ways to develop and apply ed-

ucational SMART systems.

REFERENCES

(2016). Project “Digital Agenda of Ukraine” – 2020. Con-

ceptual Background (version 1.0). https://ucci.org.ua/

uploads/ﬁles/58e78ee3c3922.pdf.

Aleksiuk, A. M. (1993). Pedahohika vyshchoi shkoly. Kurs

lektsii: modulne navchannia. Kyiv. derzh. un-t, Kyiv.

Balyk, N., Vasylenko, Y., Shmyger, G., Oleksiuk, V., and

Skaskiv, A. (2019). Design of Approaches to the De-

velopment of Teacher’s Digital Competencies in the

Process of Their Lifelong Learning. In Ermolayev,

V., Mallet, F., Yakovyna, V., Kharchenko, V. S., Ko-

bets, V., Kornilowicz, A., Kravtsov, H., Nikitchenko,

M. S., Semerikov, S., and Spivakovsky, A., editors,

Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on

ICT in Education, Research and Industrial Appli-

cations. Integration, Harmonization and Knowledge

Transfer. Volume II: Workshops, Kherson, Ukraine,

June 12-15, 2019, volume 2393 of CEUR Workshop

Proceedings, pages 204–219. CEUR-WS.org. http:

//ceur-ws.org/Vol-2393/paper 237.pdf.

Bespalko, V. P. (1960). Requirements of educational

ﬁlms for professional and technical education. So-

viet Education, 2(3):17–19. https://doi.org/10.2753/

RES1060-9393020317.

Bespalko, V. P. (2018). Kyberpedahohyka. Peda-

hohycheskye osnovy upravliaemoho kompiuterom

obuchenyia (E-Learning) (Cyberpedagogy pedagog-

ical basics of computer assisted education (E-

Learning)). Narodnoe obrazovanie, Moskva.

Bilousova, L. I., Gryzun, L. E., Lytvynova, S. H., and

Pikalova, V. V. (2022). Modelling in GeoGebra in

the Context of Holistic Approach Realization in Math-

ematical Training of Pre-service Specialists. In Se-

merikov, S., Osadchyi, V., and Kuzminska, O., edi-

tors, Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Advances

in Educational Technology - Volume 1: AET, pages

499–510. INSTICC, SciTePress. https://doi.org/10.

5220/0010925700003364.

Bondarchuk, O., Balakhtar, V., Gorova, O., Lytvynenko, N.,

Pinchuk, N., Shmanko, O., Kiv, A., and Oleksiuk, V.

(2022). Features of responsibility of future specialists

of the socionomic professions as an indicator of their

digital competence. Educational Technology Quar-

terly, 2022(1):35–55. https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.12.

Burov, O., Bykov, V., and Lytvynova, S. (2020). ICT Evolu-

tion: from Single Computational Tasks to Modeling of

Life. In Sokolov, O., Zholtkevych, G., Yakovyna, V.,

Tarasich, Y., Kharchenko, V., Kobets, V., Burov, O.,

Semerikov, S., and Kravtsov, H., editors, Proceedings

of the 16th International Conference on ICT in Ed-

ucation, Research and Industrial Applications. Inte-

gration, Harmonization and Knowledge Transfer. Vol-

ume II: Workshops, Kharkiv, Ukraine, October 06-10,

2020, volume 2732 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings,

pages 583–590. CEUR-WS.org. http://ceur-ws.org/

Vol-2732/20200583.pdf.

Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (2013). Strategy

for the Development of the Information Society

in Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/

386-2013-%D1%80#Text.

Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., and Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp

2.1: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens

with eight proﬁciency levels and examples of use. Pub-

lications Ofﬁce of the European Union, Luxembourg.

https://doi.org/10.2760/38842.

Chernilevskyi, D. V., Antonova, O. Y., Baranovska, L. V.,

Vozniuk, O. V., and Dubaseniuk, O. A. (2010).

Didactic Terms of Shaping Pedagogical Universities Studentsâ

Z Digital Competence in the Process of Teaching Informatics Courses

877

Metodolohiia naukovoi diialnosti. Vydavnytstvo AM-

SKP, Vinnytsia.

Dakhin, A. (2012). Modelirovanie kompetentnosti uchast-

nikov otkryitogo obschego obrazovaniya.

Elkin, O., Hrynevych, L., kalashnikova, S., Khobzey,

P., Kobernyk, I., Kovtunets, V., Makarenko, O.,

Malakhova, O., Nanayeva, T., Shiyan, R., and

Usatenko, H. (2017). The New Ukrainian School:

conceptual principles of secondry school reform.

https://mon.gov.ua/storage/app/media/zagalna%

20serednya/Book-ENG.pdf.

European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Redecker,

C., and Punie, Y. (2017). European Framework for

the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu.

Publications Ofﬁce of the European Union, Luxem-

bourg. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770.

Falfushynska, H. I., Buyak, B. B., Tereshchuk, H. V.,

Torbin, G. M., and Kasianchuk, M. M. (2021).

Strengthening of e-learning at the leading Ukrainian

pedagogical universities in the time of COVID-19

pandemic. CTE Workshop Proceedings, 8:261–273.

https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.237.

Gershunsky, B. S. and Pullin, R. T. (1990). Current Dilem-

mas for Soviet Secondary Education: an Anglo-Soviet

Analysis. Comparative Education, 26(2-3):307–318.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006900260212.

Gurevych, R. S., Klochko, O. V., Klochko, V. I., Kovto-

niuk, M. M., and Opushko, N. R. (2020). Computer

science teachers’ readiness to develop and use com-

puter didactic games in educational process. Informa-

tion technologies and learning tools, 75(1):122–137.

https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v75i1.3394.

Havrilova, L. H. and Topolnik, Y. V. (2017). Digital culture,

digital literacy, digital competence as the modern ed-

ucational phenomena. Information Technologies and

Learning Tools, 61(5):1–14. https://doi.org/10.33407/

itlt.v61i5.1744.

Honcharenko, S. U., editor (2000). Vocational education:

vocabulary. Vyshcha shkola, Kyiv.

Honcharenko, S. U. (2012). Naukovi shkoly v pedaho-

hitsi [Scientiﬁc schools in pedagogy]. In Kremen,

V. and Levovitsky, T., editors, Stanovlennia i rozvy-

tok naukovo-pedahohichnykh shkil: problemy, dosvid,

perspektyvy [Formation and development of scientiﬁc

and pedagogical schools: problems, experience, per-

spectives], pages 27–43. Vyd-vo ZhDU imeni Ivana

Franka, Zhytomyr. http://eprints.zu.edu.ua/id/eprint/

8552.

Hrynevych, L., Morze, N., Vember, V., and Boiko, M.

(2021). Use of digital tools as a component of STEM

education ecosystem. Educational Technology Quar-

terly, 2021(1):118–139. https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.

24.

Hrynevych, L. M., Khoruzha, L. L., and Proshkin, V. V.

(2022). Improving the quality of mathematical ed-

ucation of pupils: diagnostics and analytics. Jour-

nal of Physics: Conference Series, 2288(1):012022.

https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2288/1/012022.

Hurevych, R. S., Kademiia, M. I., and Koziar, M. M.

(2012). Informatsiino-komunikatsiini tekhnolohii v

profesiinii osviti maibutnikh fakhivtsiv [Information

and communication technologies in the professional

education of future specialists]. LDU BZhD, Lviv.

Kademiya, M. Y. and Kobysia, V. M. (2017). Imple-

mentation SMART-learning tools of modern network

technologies. CTE Workshop Proceedings, 4:36–40.

https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.322.

Khutorskaya, A. V. and Korol, A. D. (2008). Dialogue

as a problem of modern education (philosophical and

methodological aspect) [Dialogichnost’ kak problema

sovremennogo obrazovaniia (ﬁlosofskometodologich-

eskii aspekt)]. Voprosy Filosoﬁi, (4):109 – 115.

Kodliuk, Y., Bibik, N., Kodliuk, I., Kodliuk, L., and

Radchenko, O. (2021). School textbook as an ob-

ject of pedagogical research. SHS Web of Confer-

ences, 104:02009. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/

202110402009.

Kukharenko, V., Shunevych, B., and Kravtsov, H. (2022).

Distance course examination. Educational Tech-

nology Quarterly, 2022(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.

55056/etq.4.

Kuts, M. and Lavrentieva, O. (2022). Ergonomic aspects

of computer-oriented pedagogical technologies imple-

mentation in teaching foreign languages to students of

higher education institutions. Educational Technology

Quarterly, 2022(1):88–104. https://doi.org/10.55056/

etq.9.

Lozova, V. I. (2003). Stratehichni pytannia suchasnoi dy-

daktyky. Shliakh osvity, (2(28)):11–16.

Madzigon, V. M. and Vachevskyi, M. V. (2011). Quality

of education system as a factor for high level of pro-

fessional competences of marketing managers. Actual

Problems of Economics, 115(1):69 – 76.

Manovich, L. (2001). The Language of New Media. The

MIT Press. https://dss-edit.com/plu/Manovich-Lev

The Language of the New Media.pdf.

Martyniuk, O. O., Martyniuk, O. S., and Muzyka, I. O.

(2021). Formation of informational and digital

competence of secondary school students in labora-

tory work in physics. CTE Workshop Proceedings,

8:366–383. https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.294.

Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine (2018).

Polozhennia pro Natsionalnu osvitniu elektronnu

platformu [Regulation on the National Educational

Electronic Platform]. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/

show/z0702-18#Text.

Moiseienko, M. (2020). Didactic model of formation peda-

gogical universities students’ digital competence. Ed-

ucational Dimension, 3:347–357. https://doi.org/10.

31812/educdim.v55i0.4379.

Moiseienko, M. V., Moiseienko, N. V., and Kiv, A. E.

(2020a). Didactic conditions for the formation of

digital competence of students of pedagogical univer-

sities. Educational Dimension, 2:165–178. https:

//doi.org/10.31812/educdim.v54i2.3866.

Moiseienko, M. V., Moiseienko, N. V., Kohut, I. V., and Kiv,

A. E. (2020b). Digital competence of pedagogical

university student: deﬁnition, structure and didactical

conditions of formation. CTE Workshop Proceedings,

7:60–70. https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.310.

AET 2021 - Myroslav I. Zhaldak Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

878

Morze, N., Buinytska, O., Varchenko-Trotsenko, L.,

Vasylenko, S., Nastas, D., Tiutiunnyk, A., and

Lytvynova, S. (2022). System for digital profes-

sional development of university teachers. Educa-

tional Technology Quarterly, 2022(2):152–168. https:

//doi.org/10.55056/etq.6.

Ogneviuk, V., Morze, N., Buinytska, O., and Varchenko-

Trotsenko, L. (2020). I am in the digital environment

of the university, chapter 5, pages 117–174. I am a

student. Borys Grinchenko Kyiv University, Kyiv, 9t

edition.

Ovcharuk, O. (2020). European strategy for determining

the level of competence in the ﬁeld of digital technolo-

gies: a framework for digital competence for citizens.

Educational Dimension, 3:25–36. https://doi.org/10.

31812/educdim.v55i0.4381.

Ovcharuk, O. and Ivaniuk, I. (2021). A self-assessment tool

of the level of digital competence of ukrainian teach-

ers in the context of lifelong learning: the results of an

online survey 2021. Educational Dimension, 5:75–88.

https://doi.org/10.31812/educdim.4719.

Ovcharuk, O. V., Gurzhii, A. M., Ivaniuk, I. V., Kar-

tashova, L. A., Hrytsenchuk, O. O., Vakaliuk, T. A.,

and Shyshkina, M. P. (2022). The use of digital tools

by secondary school teachers for the implementation

of distance learning in the context of digital trans-

formation in Ukraine. CTE Workshop Proceedings,

9:16–27. https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.96.

Pinchuk, O. and Prokopenko, A. (2021). Actual areas of

development of digital competence of ofﬁcers of the

Armed Forces of Ukraine. Educational Dimension,

5:89–108. https://doi.org/10.31812/educdim.4720.

Polat, E. S. (2004). Pedagogical technologies for dis-

tance learning. Upravlyayushchie Sistemy i Mashiny,

(4):62–69.

Pometun, O. I. (2003). The youth choses to act – a new

approach to youth education. In Metod proektiv: tra-

ditsiyi, perspektivi, zhittyevi rezultati, pages 327–333.

Prokhorov, O. V., Lisovichenko, V. O., Mazorchuk, M. S.,

and Kuzminska, O. H. (2022). Implementation of

digital technology for student involvement based on

a 3d quest game for career guidance and assessing

students’ digital competences. Educational Technol-

ogy Quarterly, 2022(4):366–387. https://doi.org/10.

55056/etq.430.

Rakov, S. A. (2005). Mathematical education: a compe-

tence approach using ICT. Kharkiv.

Ramsky, Y. and Rezina, O. (2005). Study of informa-

tion search systems of the internet. In Mittermeir,

R. T., editor, From Computer Literacy to Informat-

ics Fundamentals, International Conference on Infor-

matics in Secondary Schools - Evolution and Perspec-

tives, ISSEP 2005, Klagenfurt, Austria, March 30 -

April 1, 2005, Proceedings, volume 3422 of Lecture

Notes in Computer Science, pages 84–91. Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31958-0 11.

Raven, J. (2020). The Outstanding Properties

of the Standard Progressive Matrices Plus

test. http://eyeonsociety.co.uk/resources/

Outstanding-properties-of-SPM-PLUS.pdf.

Riezina, O. V., Puzikova, A. V., and Kotyak, V. V. (2022).

The experience of thesis writing in terms of the

methodological students’ digital competence devel-

opment. Educational Dimension, 7:242–260. https:

//doi.org/10.31812/educdim.4715.

Robert, I., Martirosyan, L., Gerova, N., Kastornova, V.,

Mukhametzyanov, I., and Dimova, A. (2016). Imple-

mentation of the Internet for Educational Purposes. In

Uskov, V. L., Howlett, R. J., and Jain, L. C., editors,

Smart Education and e-Learning 2016, volume 59 of

Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, pages

573–583, Cham. Springer International Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39690-3 51.

Rybalko, L., Topuzov, O., and Velychko, L. (2020). Nat-

ural science education concept for sustainable devel-

opment. E3S Web of Conferences, 166:10030. https:

//doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016610030.

Semerikov, S., Teplytskyi, I., Yechkalo, Y., Markova, O.,

Soloviev, V., and Kiv, A. (2022). Using spread-

sheets as learning tools for neural network simulation.

Ukrainian Journal of Educational Studies and Infor-

mation Technology, 10(3):42–68. https://doi.org/10.

32919/uesit.2022.03.04.

Semychenko, V. A. (2004). Problems of motivation of

human behavior and activity. Modular psychology

course. Module “Orientation” (Lectures, practical ex-

ercises, assignments for independent work) (Prob-

lemy motivatsii povedeniya i deyatel’nosti cheloveka.

Modul’nyy kurs psikhologii. Modul’ “Napravlen-

nost” (Lektsii, prakticheskiye zanyatiya, zadaniya

dlya samostoyatel’noy raboty)). Milenium, Kyiv.

Slastenin, V. A., Isaev, I. F., Mishhenko, A. I., and Shijanov,

E. N. (1997). Pedagogika [Pedagogy]. Shkola-Press,

Moscow.

Soroko, N. (2021). The augmented reality functions

to support the STEAM education at general ed-

ucation institutions. Physical and Mathematical

Education, 29(3):24–30. https://doi.org/10.31110/

2413-1571-2021-029-3-004.

Spivakovsky, A. V., Petukhova, L. Y., Omelchuk, S. A.,

Spivakovska, Y. A., Kotkova, V. V., and Yurchuk,

Y. Y. (2022). The Evolution of the Information and

Educational Environment in the Context of the The-

ory of Generational Development. In Semerikov,

S., Osadchyi, V., and Kuzminska, O., editors, Pro-

ceedings of the 1st Symposium on Advances in Ed-

ucational Technology - Volume 1: AET, pages 287–

299. INSTICC, SciTePress. https://doi.org/10.5220/

0010923800003364.

Spivakovsky, O. V., Lvov, M. S., and Kravtsov, H. M.

(2013). Innovatsiini metody upravlinnia informatsi-

inymy aktyvamy vyshchoho navchalnoho zakladu (In-

novative methods of management of information as-

sets of the university. Kompiuter u shkoli ta simi, 3:3–

Stommel, J. (2014). Critical Digital Pedagogy:

a Deﬁnition. https://hybridpedagogy.org/

critical-digital-pedagogy-deﬁnition/.

Sultanova, L., Khomych, L., Tsiuniak, O., and Romaniuk,

O. (2021). Structural and functional model of de-

veloping pedagogical skills of teachers of economics

Didactic Terms of Shaping Pedagogical Universities Studentsâ

Z Digital Competence in the Process of Teaching Informatics Courses

879

in Master’s degree programmes. SHS Web of Con-

ferences, 104:02013. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/

202110402013.

Sysoieva, S. O. (1998). Pedahohichna tvorchist. Karavela.

Teplytskyi, O., Teplytskyi, I., Semerikov, S., and Soloviev,

V. (2019). Training future teachers in natural sciences

and mathematics by means of computer simulation: a

social constructivist approach. arXiv. https://doi.org/

10.48550/arxiv.1907.09726.

Trius, Y. and Sotulenko, O. (2017). Creating a dis-

tance learning support system for health profession-

als based on Moodle. In Automation and computer-

integrated technologies in production and education:

state, achievements, development prospects: materi-

als All-Ukrainian scientiﬁc-practical Internet confer-

ence (AKIT-2017), page 259–261, Cherkasy. ChNU B.

Khmelnytsky.

Vakaliuk, T., Spirin, O., and Kontsedailo, V. (2021a). Crite-

ria for selecting open web-oriented technologies for

teaching the basics of programming to future soft-

ware engineers. Educational Technology Quarterly,

2021(1):3. https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.16.

Vakaliuk, T., Spirin, O., and Kontsedailo, V. (2021b). For-

mation of digital competence of CS bachelors in the

use of cloud-based learning environments. Educa-

tional Technology Quarterly, 2021(3):388–401. https:

//doi.org/10.55056/etq.26.

Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., Carretero, S., and Van den Brande,

L. (2016). DigComp 2.0: The Digital Competence

Framework for Citizens. Update Phase 1: The Con-

ceptual Reference Model. Publication Ofﬁce of the

European Union, Luxembourg. https://doi.org/10.

2791/11517.

Zhaldak, M. I., editor (2012). Otsinyuvannya yakosti

prohramnykh zasobiv navchalnoho pryznachennya

dlya zahalnoosvitnikh navchalnykh zakladiv [Evalua-

tion of the quality of educational software for general

educational institutions]. Pedahohichna dumka, Kyiv.

https://lib.iitta.gov.ua/619/.

Zhaldak, M. I., Goroshko, Y. V., Vinnychenko, E. F., and

Tsybko, G. Y. (2012). Mathematics with a computer:

The teacher’s guide. National Dragomanov Pedagog-

ical University, Kyiv, 3 edition. http://erpub.chnpu.

edu.ua:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/1523.

Ziaziun, I. A. (1989). A teacher for all seasons. So-

viet Education, 31(8):38–54. https://doi.org/10.2753/

RES1060-9393310838.

Zimnyaya, I. (2021). A psychological analysis of transla-

tion as a type of speech activity, volume 3.

AET 2021 - Myroslav I. Zhaldak Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

880