Digital education is firmly established in European policies and curricula, but schools still face uneven access, gaps in teacher preparation and limited evaluation of outcomes. The new Eurydice report examines these challenges and the conditions needed for inclusive and pedagogically meaningful digital learning.
Published on 22 September 2026, Digital education at school in Europe 2026: Bridging gaps in access, teaching and learning provides a comparative analysis of 38 European education systems. Focusing principally on lower-secondary education, it examines five connected areas: governance and infrastructure, digital equity and inclusion, school planning and quality assurance, curricula and assessment, and the integration of technology into teaching.
The report combines policy information for the 2024/2025 school year with evidence from the International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS) 2023 covering 24 European systems, with 22 included in the teacher analysis. It also draws on TALIS 2024 findings in its discussion of teacher preparedness. These sources describe different periods and dimensions of digital education; they should not be read as a direct test of the effects of current policies.
Infrastructure policies need reliable classroom provision
Most European education systems have policy frameworks addressing connectivity, hardware, software and technical support. Yet the report identifies considerable variation in the resources available to schools and in the reliability of their use. Shared computer facilities remain important, while access to devices in ordinary classrooms is more limited in many systems.
ICILS 2023 illustrates this difference. Across the participating systems, the median share of students attending schools with laptops or tablets available in computer labs is around 91%. In half of the systems, fewer than 30% of students attend schools where these devices are available in most classrooms, defined as at least 80% of classrooms in a school. Availability therefore does not necessarily mean that technology can be integrated readily into everyday lessons.
Connectivity and maintenance also matter. In half of the participating systems, at least approximately 38% of students attend schools where insufficient internet bandwidth hinders teaching and learning to some extent. These are school conditions reported by ICT coordinators, rather than students’ individual connectivity problems. The findings underline the need to consider access, reliability and technical support together when planning investment.
Digital equity extends beyond access to equipment
The report finds that students in schools with a more disadvantaged socioeconomic composition generally achieve lower digital literacy results than peers in more affluent schools. However, differences in school infrastructure are less widespread and do not follow a uniform pattern across countries. Access to equipment alone cannot explain the observed literacy gap.
Opportunities outside school also differ. Students from less advantaged backgrounds are more likely to encounter difficulties with internet quality or access to devices for schoolwork at home. Students report learning some digital skills, including managing privacy settings, more often outside school than at school. When schools do not teach these skills explicitly, students with fewer informal learning opportunities risk missing essential aspects of digital competence.
Many systems respond through device loans, support for home connectivity or measures targeting disadvantaged learners and schools. The broader implication is that inclusion requires attention to how technology is used for learning, alongside its provision. Teaching needs to account for differences in prior experience and ensure that all learners can participate in meaningful digital activities.
School digital planning needs stronger evaluation
Ten of the 38 education systems require all schools to have a digital strategy or plan, while 21 recommend it. Seven report no specific top-level requirement or recommendation. Digital objectives may be set out in a dedicated plan or integrated into wider school development planning. ICILS 2023 indicates that around two thirds of students attend schools with an ICT plan.
The existence of a plan does not consistently lead to systematic monitoring or evaluation. Eurydice identifies a continuing gap between planning, implementation and quality assurance, with digital education not yet fully integrated into school evaluation frameworks in many systems. This limits the evidence available to judge whether policies and investments improve teaching and learning.
For school leaders, the findings suggest a practical priority: connect digital objectives with curriculum needs, teacher support and evidence of student learning. Reviewing a plan should include examining whether the intended classroom practices are feasible and what students gain from them.
Digital competence is widespread in curricula but assessment remains uneven
Almost all systems analysed include digital competence in lower-secondary curricula, often combining cross-curricular provision with dedicated subjects. A separate subject focused on digital competences exists in 29 of the 38 education systems; 25 make such a subject compulsory for all students. In nearly all systems where authorities specify the starting point for compulsory digital education, it begins in primary education.
Most systems require or recommend assessment of students’ digital competences, but national or standardised tests remain uncommon. Assessment is therefore largely organised within the learning process, with implementation often determined by schools or teachers. This creates a need for clear learning expectations and suitable evidence of achievement, while limiting opportunities to compare outcomes nationally.
Teacher preparation remains a central challenge
According to ICILS, teachers more often develop their digital competences through continuing professional development than through initial teacher education. Training on subject-specific digital resources and integrating technology into teaching is relatively widespread. Participation is more limited in areas such as helping learners evaluate online information, managing social problems arising from digital communication and using visual coding platforms. Teachers also report development needs in these areas.
Time constraints and gaps in expertise can hinder lesson preparation even when digital content is available. More than two thirds of education systems support teacher development through dedicated networks and communities of practice, and a similar number offer self-assessment tools. Individualised support, mentoring and personalised learning pathways are less widespread. The report consequently draws attention to the conditions that enable teachers to use their professional learning in practice.
AI policy and teacher preparation are unevenly developed
Nearly two thirds of education systems address AI and emerging technologies in top-level policy documents, while around one third include AI-related competences in lower-secondary curricula. Teacher preparation is less consistently covered: only seven systems explicitly include safe and ethical AI use in digital competence frameworks for initial teacher education, compared with 16 in frameworks for continuing professional development.
The report describes a growing body of guidance on responsible AI use, but also highlights limited AI-specific training and teachers’ reservations about its educational benefits. This points to the need for coherent support that connects curriculum expectations with practical preparation, critical evaluation and responsible use.
A classroom perspective from DIGITAL FIRST
Several findings of the Eurydice report align with those emerging from DIGITAL FIRST, particularly the need for stronger teacher preparation, pedagogical support and closer connections between curricula and classroom practice. The project addresses these challenges through its functional approach to informatics, research, stakeholder dialogue and teacher development. The report provides a broader European context for this work, highlighting the importance of purposeful, inclusive digital education supported by evidence of learning.
The full report is available here.
