Bridging the Digital Divide in Schools: Policies for the Digital Transformation of School Education (OECD 2025)

Aug 01 2025 By Figen Sekin Ecology 0 Comments

Education systems face a growing pressure to adapt to new digital technologies. From infrastructure deficits to teacher preparedness, the transformation of school education to digital education hinges not just on tools but especially on a coherent, strategic policy. The OECD’s 2025 working paper, based on the Policy Survey on School Education in the Digital Age, delivers a comparative snapshot of how 37 education systems are handling this transition.

Luka Boeskens and Katharina Meyer are the lead authors of this OECD education working paper. Both acknowledge that progress is being made, but they also indicate that while progress is evident, fragmentation, unequal implementation, and lack of accountability mechanisms hinder a systemic digital reform. Luckily, they offer plenty of data in the 99-page report to support this thesis.

The survey was conducted in the following 37 jurisdictions:

OECD Member Countries:

1. Austria
2. Chile
3. Colombia
4. Denmark
5. Estonia
6. Finland
7. France
8. Germany
9. Greece
10. Iceland
11. Israel
12. Ireland
13. Italy
14. Japan
15. Korea
16. Lithuania
17. Luxembourg
18. Netherlands
19. New Zealand
20. Norway
21. Poland
22. Portugal
23. Slovak Republic
24. Slovenia
25. Spain
26. Sweden

Sub-national Entities:

27. New South Wales (Australia)
28. Flemish Community (Belgium)
29. French Community (Belgium)
30. England (UK)
31. Northern Ireland (UK)
32. Scotland (UK)
33. Wales (UK)

Non-member Economies:

34. Bulgaria
35. Croatia
36. Romania
37. Singapore

These jurisdictions provided data on their central-level policies as of January 2025, covering infrastructure, regulation, teacher capacity, curriculum, and more.

Let’s take a closer look into the findings of both authors.

Central-Level Strategies for Digital Education

A coherent national or regional strategy is often the foundation for meaningful digital transformation in education. Governments are formalizing their ambitions via strategic planning, which are supported by action plans, funding, and evaluation mechanisms.

In the report we read that 33 out of 37 education systems (jurisdictions) now address digital education through central policy frameworks. Of those, 62% have already dedicated digital education strategies, while the rest integrates them into broader education reforms.

These strategies tend to focus on infrastructure development (e.g., access to devices, broadband), teacher digital competence, and curricular updates. However, only 8 of 32 strategies (25%) include AI-specific initiatives, and just 6 (19%) contain measurable, time-bound AI goals.

Mechanisms for accountability are also uneven:

• 84% assign clear implementation responsibilities.
• 77% define time-bound goals.
• Only 55% use formal evaluation frameworks.

School-Level Strategies for Digital Education

Schools are increasingly expected to take own initiatives in digital integration, but their autonomy is not always matched by capacity. Luka Boeskens and Katharina Meyer examined what’s required of schools, how much flexibility they have, and whether their digital strategies are systematically supported.

Most jurisdictions (60%) require schools to develop digital strategies, either standalone (19%) or within broader plans (41%). But this hybrid responsibility raises concerns: schools are expected to adapt digital tools, often without structured support or funding alignment. Strategic autonomy exists on paper, but execution frequently lacks the professional development or procurement infrastructure to succeed.

Curriculum and Pedagogy for Digital Education

Updating curricula is one of the clearest ways to institutionalize digital skills and competencies. But embedding digital content is only the first step. What matters is how it’s delivered, supported, and assessed.

All surveyed systems include digital skills in their curricula, often embedded across subjects. However, the way these skills are delivered and assessed varies widely as the data below shows

Curriculum Digitalisation (Lower Secondary)	Jurisdictions
Digital device use guidelines	23
Links to digital content	15
Interactive online curricula	10

Many countries do provide platforms for digital teaching materials:

• 86% host national repositories.
• 68% support peer-to-peer teacher content sharing.
• Only 46% have initiatives specifically addressing the use of AI in teaching.

Assessment is where digital skill development loses traction the data shows:

International benchmarks like ICILS are more commonly used than home-grown metrics, revealing a gap in national assessment infrastructure.

Assessment Type	Jurisdictions
Formative classroom assessment	14
Summative classroom tests	12
Central exams covering digital skills	2

Governance and Regulation for Digital Education

Digital transformation is not only a technical process but also a regulatory one. The authors looked at how central governments are forming the legal and ethical frameworks for digital education. This includes areas like cybersecurity, privacy, and emerging technologies such as AI.

The data shows that jurisdictions prefer guidelines over binding regulations. Most (78%) provide non-binding guidance for cybersecurity, digital well-being, and use of AI. Binding regulation remains very rare.

Data protection is the only universal area with legal backing:

• 100% of systems have privacy regulations.
• But only 43% actively monitor compliance.
• 51% mandate a designated data protection officer in schools.

When it comes to digital resources, learning software (46%) surpassed assistive tech (32%).

Regulatory Domain	Guidelines	Binding Regulations
Cybersecurity	29	13
Digital well-being	29	8
AI in classroom	18	0
Algorithmic bias monitoring	2	0

Funding and Procurement for Digital Education

Implementing digital education strategies depends heavily on the ability to purchase, deploy, and maintain technology of course. However, procurement systems are complex and funding flows across different governance levels.

Only 43% provide guidance for device purchases and only 57% offer software purchasing support. And only a few systems define procurement standards:

• Security: 32%
• Sustainability: 22%
• Interoperability: 16%

Procurement Responsibility	Devices (%)	Software (%)
Schools	70	75
Sub-central authorities	62	58
Central authorities	41	42

Infrastructure Access for Digital Education

Access to devices is fundamental for digital inclusion. But not all jurisdictions take the same approach. Device access strategies vary significantly with one-to-one (1:1) schemes are more common in secondary schools.

25% of systems lack any central plan for disadvantaged students. Voucher schemes, leasing support, or school-provided devices are inconsistently available.

Strategy	Primary (%)	Secondary (%)
Central 1:1 program (school only)	19	14
Central 1:1 program (school + home)	14	24
Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)	3	14
No central strategy	23	25

EdTech Innovation for Digital Education

Public policy can catalyze the development of educational technologies. But although 69% of jurisdictions support EdTech development, few actually engage deeply in innovation policy.

As a result only a few countries link EdTech policy to classroom use cases, quality metrics, or teacher-driven innovation.

Innovation Support Type	Jurisdictions
Public agency-led development	13
Competitive grants	13
Commissioned development	16
Startup investment	7
Tax credits	4

Teachers and school leaders are clearly the engines of transformation, However, it’s doubtful that they are prepared for the digital age. The data shows that ITE integration of digital pedagogy remains optional in nearly half of jurisdictions:

Only 15% of the educational systems require in-service digital training. Meanwhile, 77% offer free courses, but certification remains rare. Add to this that parental inclusion is basically lacking. Just 11% of jurisdictions run digital mentoring schemes.

And even when digital tools spread across classrooms, many HR policies and evaluation systems remain completely unchanged.

The data shows that Although 72% reference digital skills in teaching standards, only 52% reflect this in appraisal frameworks. As a result evaluation mechanisms miss opportunities to reward innovation or measure real impact.

What Can Policymakers Do to Support Effective Digital Education?

The rapid integration of digital tools in education presents both opportunities and risks. While many technologies now permeate classrooms, their impact depends heavily on how systems are governed, teachers are supported, and curricula are adapted.

So what can policymakers do to ensure digital resources are used effectively and to make sure that digital education is not just a concept? We found 7 suggestions in the document.

1. Develop and Fund Strategic Frameworks

• Create dedicated national digital education strategies with clear time-bound goals and implementation budgets.
• Align these strategies with broader education objectives and ensure accountability through evaluation indicators.

2. Provide Regulatory Clarity and Support

• Issue clear guidelines on the ethical and pedagogical use of AI and digital tools.
• Strengthen enforcement mechanisms for data protection and cybersecurity in schools.

3. Equip Teachers and Leaders

• Mandate and fund initial and ongoing training in digital pedagogy.
• Include digital competencies in teacher standards and appraisal systems.
• Invest in school leadership development focused on digital transformation.

4. Address Inequities in Access

• Ensure disadvantaged students receive devices or subsidies through centrally coordinated programs.
• Move toward universal 1:1 device policies where feasible.

5. Modernize Curriculum and Assessment

• Embed digital skills across subjects with interactive, accessible curricula.
• Expand assessment of digital competencies beyond international surveys—develop national formative and summative evaluation tools.

6. Foster Innovation Responsibly

• Fund EdTech R&D through competitive grants and public-private partnerships.
• Certify learning software and content to ensure quality and safety.

7. Monitor Impact

• Include digital education outcomes in school self-evaluations and external reviews.
• Expand monitoring beyond digital skills to include effects on well-being, engagement, and equity.

Together, these provide a foundation for evidence-informed policymaking.

Beyond Infrastructure

The digital transformation of school education is definitely underway, but policy coherence lags behind the technological potential. Infrastructure and teacher training receive attention, yet evaluation, regulation, and equity remain inconsistent.

The merit of the 2025 OECD Policy Survey is also that it reveals that while digital education has been widely adopted across school systems, its integration remains uneven. Most jurisdictions have implemented central strategies, invested in infrastructure, and taken steps to support teacher capacity.

However, critical gaps persist:

• Few systems evaluate the actual impact of digital education on learning outcomes, well-being, or equity.
• Assessment of students’ digital skills remains limited, and certification of teacher competencies is still rare.
• School-level autonomy is often unmatched by support, particularly in procurement and pedagogical guidance.
• Regulation lags behind innovation, especially in areas like artificial intelligence and algorithmic transparency.

To close these gaps, education systems must align strategy, capacity building, governance, and evaluation within a coherent digital transformation agenda.

---

About The Authors Of “Policy Survey on School Education in the Digital Age”

Luka Boeskens is a policy analyst at the OECD Directorate for Education and Skills. He is part of the School Resources Review team and contributes to the OECD’s work on the Future-Readiness of Teachers project. Boeskens joined the OECD in 2015 as a Carlo Schmid Fellow. His research focuses on the funding of private education, the organization of school facilities, and the policy frameworks shaping school networks, particularly across EU member states. He has co-authored several OECD reports, notably on teachers’ working time and the efficient management of educational resources.

Katharina Meyer from her side is co-author of the OECD working paper Policies for the Digital Transformation of School Education and worked alongside Boeskens on the 2025 Policy Survey on School Education in the Digital Age. While less visible in public-facing academic profiles, Meyer plays a key analytical role in OECD’s education policy work and is primarily cited through her contributions to OECD publications.