In the tweny-firth century, social networks are a favorable environment to make an interactive, intercultural and ubiquitous society a reality, in which barriers like participation and learning cease to exist for future citizens. In order for citizens to develop in the Knowledge and Information Society (Castells, 2012) there is a need for not only formal education but also, non-formal and informal educational setting too. As well as, offering equal access to digital technologies as a channel for education that enablesyoung people to be functional, education, responsible and critical citizens. In this way, the training of young people in digital culture should be understood as something more complex than the mere learning of the use of tools or the Web (Area, Borrás & San Nicolás Santos, 2015) i.e. being digitally competent and socially aware. 

On the one hand, Vuorikari, Punie, Carretero and Van den Brane (2016) with the revision and improvement of the DIGCOMP.1.0 tool. (Ferrari, 2013), presents a revised theoretical framework in which they establish the dimensions: 1) Information and data literacy, 2) Communication and collaboration, 3) Creation of digital content, 4) Digital Security and 5) Problem Solving. On the other hand, Puig and Morales (2015) offer a list of the knowledge, skills, attitudes, values ​​and behaviours that comprise the elements of social and civic competence to which a person must adhere in a modern-day democratic-promoting society. After analysing the existing tools and their evolution, the dimensions information and communication are extremely important and appear frequently in most instruments related to the development of digital competence. These dimensions are revealed as fundamental axes of literacy in the digital age. Among the most recent tools, we can observe the appearance of dimensions related to more emotional and axiological elements (Area, Borrás San Nicolás Santos, 2015, UNESCO, 2011) that show interest in critical, ethical and democratic thinking to encourage participation and act as social catalyst for digital citizenship (Larraz, 2012). 

Taking this into account, there is a need for instruments that measure the level of acquisition of both, digital and socio-civic skills. In the era of the media boom, Martin & Grudziecki (2006), proposed to evaluate how digital tools contribute to the personal growth of a citizen. For these reasons, it is considered that there are no instruments that jointly measure the digital and socio-civic competence in a citizen participation framework.

 The objective of this study is to design and evaluate an instrument that measures the levels of digital and socio-civic skills. Responding to theory, the dimensiones are: 

 1. Information (Unión Europea, 2009; Vuorikari, Punie, Carretero and Van der Brane, 2016; UNESCO, 2011) which aims to retrieve data on a persons capacity to use, manage, recover, apply, evaluate... information and data.

  2. Communication and collaboration (Vuorikari, Punie, Carretero y Van der Brane, 2016) which aims to measure the communicative and colaborative skills of young people, including aspects on media literacy and communicative evaluation 

 3) Creation of digital content, which aims to collect data on a person’s actions to create and disseminate digital content (Lee, 2010; Ferrari, 2013; Vuorikari, Punie, Carretero y Van der Brane, 2016). 

 4) ICT Security, which aims to measure an person’s capacity to protect themselves and evaluate their safety and wellbeing when using digital technologies or when in a digital environment. (Vuorikari, Punie, Carretero y Van der Brane, 2016)

 5) Thinking critical, aims to mesure the skill a person has when thinking critically and assessing information related to a topic (Cheung Kong, 2014)

 6) socio-civic, which aims to measure the socia and civic knowledge, skills, attitudes, values and behaviours of the participant. (Unión Europea, 2006; Puig y Morales, 2015). 

The objective of the questionnaire is to measure the acquisition levels of digital and socio-civic competence for citizen participation. The instrument has been divided into seven dimensions that refer to socio-demographic data and then, six other dimensions: 1) Information, 2) Communication and Collaboration, 3) Creation of digital content, 4) ICT Security, 5) Thinking critical and 6) socio-civic. The process of construction and validation of the instrument was carried out in the following phases: a) Theoretical revision b) Elaboration of dimensions and specification of the items c) Validation of content and structure via the review of six experts related to the area of ​​knowledge belonging to several Spanish and Portuguese universities. d) Statistical analysis of the pilot test: The instrument is currently being piloted to a sample group of young people, in order to obtain the opinion of people whose characteristics corresponded to the final sample of the study. Once completed, the researchers will analyze data, doubts and comments from the participants, which could imply modifications to the final test application. The following steps also include: e) The general application of the instrument: f) Factor Analysis. g) Final Analysis of Reliability was performed by means of Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient

The results and comments from the group of experts details how the questionnaire is developing and some comments and ideas have given fuel to the following qualitative part of the study. The data collected for the group of experts relates to the structure and content validty. In regards to structure the experts scored the dimensions on a scale of 1 to 5 denoting the adequacy and pertinence respectively. The results are: Information (4,67 and 4,83), Communication and collaboration (4,83 and 4,67) Creation of digital content (4,33 and 4,50) Digital security (4,50 and 4,50), Critical thinking (4,83 and 4,83) and Socio-civic (4.50 and 4,33). The average scores of the questionnaire in regards to structure are: adequacy (4,62) and pertinence (4,64). In regards to content validity, the average value for relevance, coherence and clarity on a 1 to 5 scale were: Information (4,62, 4,63 and 4,19) Communication and collaboration (4,47, 4,51 and 4,29) Creation of digital content (4,63, 4,60 and 4,44) Digital security (4,43, 4,33 and 4,04), Critical thinking (4,52, 4,45 and 4,26) and Socio-civic (4.41, 4,39 and 4,22). The average score for the questionnaire in regards to relevance (4,49) coherence (4,44) and clarity (4.23) The future data collection and factoral analyis will provide some statistical insight in order to adjust the questionnaire and will set the scene for the focus groups that form part of the wider investigation.

Area, M., Borrás, J.F. y San Nicolás Santos, M.B. (2015). Educar a la generación de los Millennials como ciudadanos cultos del ciberespacio. Revista de Estudios de Juventud, 109 (1), 13-32. Castells, M. (2012) redes de indignación y esperanza: los movimeintos sociales en la era de Internet. Madrid: Alianza. European Parliament and the Council. (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, L394/310. Ferrari, A. (2013). DIGCOMP: a framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe. (Y. Punie & B. N. Brecko, Eds.). Luxemburgo: Publications Office of the European Union. Hernández-Martín, A. & Iglesias Rodríguez, A. (2017). La importancia de las competencias digitales e informacionales para el desarrollo de una escuela intercultural. Interacçóes. 44 (1). Pp. 205-232 Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160-173. Larraz, V. (2012). La competència digital a la Universitat. Tesis: Universitat d’Andorra. Recuperado de : https://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/113431 Lee, A.Y.L. & So, C.Y.K. (2013). Alfabetización mediática y alfabetización informacional: similitudes y diferencias. Comunicar. 21 (42). Pp. 137-146 Martin, A., & Grudziecki, J. (2006). DigEuLit: Concepts and tools for digital literacydevelopment. ITALICS, Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and ComputerSciences , 5 (4), 249–267. Puig Gutiérrez, M., Morales Lozano, J.A. (2015). La formación de ciudadanos: conceptualización y desarrollo de la competencia social y cívica. Educación XX1, 18 (1). Pp. 259-282 UNESCO (2011). Alfabetización mediática e informacional. Curriculum para Profesores. (Coord) Carolyn Wilson, Alton Grizzle, Ramón Tuzaon, Kwame Akyempong y Chi-Kim Cheung. Publicación UNESCO: Francia. Pp. 13-45. Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., Carretero Gomez S., Van den Brande, G. (2016). DigComp 2.0: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Update Phase 1: The Conceptual Reference Model. Luxembourg Publication Office of the European Union. EUR 27948 EN. doi:10.2791/11517