The research aims to analyze original studies to identify measures and programs used in the professional training of future teachers to develop their digital pedagogical competence.
The selection of the target group, consisting of students preparing for a teaching career, is appropriate for illustrating models, practices, strategies, and methods that stimulate the development of this competence (Redecker & Punie, 2017). Also, to extend the perspective on the subject, an analyzed aspect is that of contextual factors, such as organizational infrastructure and digital leadership, as significant contributors to the development of digital competence in future teachers (Pettersson, 2017).
The research will address the following questions: Who are the main authors that can be consulted for future research on the subject?, What are the methodological characteristics of studies on developing digital competence in future teachers?, Which frameworks have the most significant influence on designing training proposals for future teachers?, What is the current international status of digital competence development in initial teacher education?
To guide the research process, I employed a theoretical model that integrates key elements from the following well-established frameworks, to serve as the foundation for analyzing and synthesizing the data, offering a structured approach to understanding the complex relationships and dimensions inherent to the topic.
The DigComp Framework (Vuorikari & Kluzer, 2022) identifies six core areas of digital competence: information and digital literacy, communication and collaboration, digital content creation, safety in the digital environment, and problem-solving with technology. These competencies are applicable across general contexts, emphasizing responsible technology use and digital security.
The DQ Framework (Ramon, 2019) expands on digital competence by introducing the concept of "Digital Quotient" (DQ) as an alternative measure of digital intelligence. It classifies digital intelligence into three domains: digital citizenship, creativity, and competitiveness and highlights the intersection of digital skills, ethics, and emotional intelligence.
The UNESCO Global Framework (2018) adopts DigComp as its baseline and refines it based on practices from 47 countries, offering a standardized methodology for evaluating digital literacy skills globally, ensuring alignment across diverse educational systems.
Teaching-specific digital competence is conceptualized as a combination of educators' pedagogical skills and digital abilities, enabling them to effectively integrate technology into teaching while addressing students' needs.
The DigCompEdu Framework (Redecker & Punie, 2017) addresses teacher-specific digital competence through three dimensions: Professional Competence, Pedagogical Competence, Learner Competence.
To connect digital competence with pedagogical practice, integrative frameworks have been developed,as TPACK Framework (Mishra & Koehler, 2006), which combines technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge to provide a holistic understanding of how technology can be integrated into teaching. TPACK emphasizes adapting teaching strategies to subject-specific content while considering students' needs and the teaching context, or SAMR Model (Puentedura, 2006), which describes four levels of technology integration (substitution, augmentation, modification, redefinition)
Despite the availability of robust frameworks, the conceptualization of digital competence remains ambiguous and operationally unclear (Janssen et al., 2013). This lack of clarity complicates the selection of appropriate tools and methods for developing digital skills, particularly in the context of rapidly evolving digital environments (Ilomäki et al., 2016).
Furthermore, the diverse perspectives in existing frameworks highlight the complexity of digital competence as a multi-dimensional construct. Rather than a single, unified concept, digital competence intersects with areas such as information literacy, technical skills, critical thinking, and digital ethics (Van Laar et al., 2017). This complexity underscores the need for adaptive and flexible approaches to digital competence development, tailored to the specific needs of educators and learners.

To address the proposed research questions, we conducted a systematic review using the following terms to identify studies: Digital Competency ("Digital Competence," "Digital Skills," "Computer Literacy," "Digital Literacy"), Teacher Development ("Teacher Training," "Teacher Education," "Preservice Teachers"), and Curriculum (Program, Initiative). To identify and evaluate relevant articles on this topic, we employed the PRISMA methodology (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) (Page MJ et al., 2020). This process included identifying keywords, filtering articles, applying exclusion criteria, and conducting an in-depth analysis. For the identification of studies, we utilized the following databases: Web of Science (Clarivate), Scopus (Elsevier), and ERIC (U.S. Department of Education). The review included original studies investigating various aspects of future teachers’ training in the context of digital competence development, such as its assessment, participants’ perceptions, or the use of specific strategies and technological tools. To identify correlations between the keywords, an automated network analysis (Knoke, D., & Yang, S., 2008) was conducted using the VOSviewer application, in order to gain several insights using a visualization of keywords with a certain frequency. The investigation of the methodologies employed in the selected articles was conducted through the lens of Creswell’s typology of research designs, which provides a comprehensive classification into qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods approaches (Creswell, 2014). This typology facilitates a systematic analysis of the design, data collection methods, and analytical strategies utilized in the reviewed studies, allowing for a structured comparison of their strengths, limitations, and contributions to the field. By applying Creswell’s framework, the study ensures methodological rigor and consistency in categorizing the research approaches, highlighting how these align with the overarching goals of exploring and developing digital competence in teacher education. Finally, to evaluate the impact of the programs or interventions described in the selected articles, Kirkpatrick’s model of training evaluation was employed as the guiding methodology (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) to assess the effectiveness of training initiatives across four levels: reaction, learning, skills, behavior and results.

The need for teacher training has become a complex and ongoing process, which extends beyond initial training, evolving into a continuous development requirement throughout teachers' careers. Simple technological skills are no longer sufficient; teachers must be able to adapt quickly and effectively to emerging technologies and address the challenges they present as these innovations are widely adopted. Although the need to enhance the digital competencies of future teachers is evident, teacher training programs remain inconsistent, lacking practical relevance, and significantly varying between educational systems (Madsen et al., 2023). However, developing effective programs for digital competence training does not necessarily require major curricular reforms. Instead, it involves the widespread inclusion of practical modules where students learn specific methods for integrating technology into their teaching practices (Marais, E., 2023). In conclusion, current teacher training programs largely provide future educators with opportunities to develop instrumental digital skills and become familiar with existing digital teaching tools. However, these programs remain underdeveloped in terms of content areas such as digital safety, computational thinking, or problem-solving through technology, or in equipping teachers with the methodological tools needed to integrate technology effectively into classroom practices.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. European Commission: Joint Research Centre, Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators : DigCompEdu, (Y.Punie,edito) Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/159770 Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, M., & Kantosalo, A. (2016). Digital competence – an emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Education and Information Technologies, 21(3), 655–679. Janssen, J., Stoyanov, S., Ferrari, A., Punie, Y., Pannekeet, K., & Sloep, P. (2013). Experts' views on digital competence: Commonalities and differences. Computers & Education, 68, 473-481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.008 Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation. Association for Talent Development. Knoke, D., & Yang, S. (2008). Social network analysis. SAGE Publications, Inc., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985864 Madsen, S. S., O’Connor, J., Janeš, A., Klančar, A., Brito, R., Demeshkant, N., Konca, A. S., Krasin, S., Saure, H. I., Gjesdal, B., Ludgate, S., Jwaifell, M., Almuhtadi, R., & Thorvaldsen, S. (2023). International Perspectives on the Dynamics of Pre-Service Early Childhood Teachers’ Digital Competences. Education Sciences, 13(7), 633. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070633 Marais, E. (2023). The development of digital competencies in pre-service teachers. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 8(3), 134-154. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.2023.28 Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71 Pettersson, F. (2017). On the issues of digital competence in educational contexts – a review of literature. Education and Information Technologies, 23(3), 1005–1021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9649-3 Ramon, E. (2019). The Digital Intelligence (DQ) Framework: The 21st century skills for the digital age. DQ Institute. Retrieved from https://www.dqinstitute.org Ruben R. Puentedura. (2009, February 4). As we may Teach: Educational Technology, From theory into practice. Ruben R. Puentedura's Weblog. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/000025.html Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 577–588. Vuorikari, R., & Kluzer, S. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens - With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. JRC Publications Repository. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376