Good Practices 2022 and 2016

Good Practices 2022 and 2016

ELINET’s Collection of European Good Practice Examples 2022

“Enhancing Digital Literacy Skills of Children in Early and Primary Years’ Education”

The current Good and Promising Examples 2022

As we did not receive extended project descriptions from a number of projects, we finally reviewed 27 examples from 9 countries, of which 9 examples have not been approved and 18 examples have been approved as good or promising practices.
These examples will be presented here in a short overview and an extended description as a pdf-file. We sorted these examples by age group and by country. You can find the 2022 examples here


The ELINET Association decided in 2019 to focus its work on relevant cross-cutting topics to which the members of all Thematic Working Groups (TWGs) could contribute. The General Assembly 2019 in Copenhagen decided to focus our work on the topic “Enhancing Digital Literacy Skills of Children (age group 0 – 12 years).” More information about the concept of this project under the link:

The main outcomes of this project will be a “European Framework of good practice in enhancing digital literacy skills in early and primary years’ education” and a European policy paper as a short summary of the Framework (similar to ELINET’s European Literacy Declaration), both addressing policymakers, multipliers, practitioners and other stakeholders in this field. Both papers shall contain research-based recommendations for educating pre-school and primary school children to become digitally literate citizens.

Parallel to this conceptual work we have been looking for good practice examples (see the call on our website:, which we wanted to review and analyse and in case of approval publish on our website. Furthermore, we want to integrate the main findings of this practice research into our framework according to ELINET’s top-down and bottom-up approach of exchanging research and practice.

Review Criteria

By now, we received 58 examples from 11 countries, most of them related to the age groups 3-6 and 6-10 years. In several Board Meetings and ZOOM Member Meetings in 2021 we discussed and decided about the review criteria and the review procedure.

We came to the following conclusions regarding the 8 criteria for good or promising practice (No 1 – 5 are essential / exclusive, No 6 – 8 are additional desirable, non-exclusive criteria):

  1. A clear focus on digital literacy[1]
  2. A clear and sound conceptual basis which is grounded in scientific research and / or practical experience
  3. A clear definition of objectives and target groups
  4. Transparent documentation concerning the implementation of the program (infos about activities, participants, stakeholders and target groups, funding etc.)
  5. Information about the practical impact of the program and its effects on the target group (this may not be available as ‘hard data’, but can be reported in different ways: publications / positive feedback of participants etc. may represent the impact of the programme)
  6. Transparent documentation of the evaluation of the project and its effects on the target group (if available)
  7. Transferability : the practice or project may be applied to parallel or similar situations in the same or different regions
  8. The program materials and outcomes (flyers, manuals, apps etc.) should be available in print or – preferably – on the internet.

For starting the review process, we created a Reviewer Sheet incorporating the eight criteria and leading to three options: Approval as good practice, approval as promising practice or non-approval. Good practice is based on a research-based programme theory and has been scientifically evaluated, promising practice is based on a programme theory proven practicability; but without scientific evaluation and evidence-based data about the effects on the target group.

The Reviewer Sheet was piloted with three examples in a Zoom Meeting among all reviewers in order to ensure that the criteria will be applied in a coherent way by everybody.

Review Procedure and Reviewer Teams

Regarding the review procedure, the ELINET Board decided to carry out the following steps:

  • A preliminary review carried out by two board members for each (randomly assigned) example in order to check the general match with our Call and the given information about the project. This pre-review resulted in three options: (1) No match with our Call – example will not further be considered; (2) Example seems to meet our Call, but more information is needed; (3) Example meets our Call and contains sufficient information for the full review.
  • After completing this first step, we got back to the submitters of the examples and informed them about the results. In 11 cases, we found no match with our Call and decided (together with all Board members) not further to consider those examples. In most of the cases, we asked the submitters for more information in order to carry out the full review. For this purpose we created a new template “Extended Project Description” which was sent out to the submitters together with the feedback letter.
  • Parallel, we re-opened our Call for Good Practices without any deadline, which you can find on our website together with an online form in 8 languages:
  • After the summer break 2021 we set up the reviewer tandems, each being composed of two experts from our network who volunteer for this task. Together, 21 ELINET experts are involved into this task, and we formed 10 tandems – each composed by one Board member and one regular member – plus one general consultant who was asked to join the teams in cases of doubt. We decided that the review tandems will be composed by colleagues from different countries and with different expertise profiles and that they will only review examples which come not from their own countries.
  • Please find here the list of our reviewers and more information about their expert profiles here:
  • In the second half of 2021 and early 2022, our review tandems carried out the full review of the submitted examples, based on the information in the electronic template and the additional information from the “Extended Project Description”.

[1] Based on the working definition of digital literacy given in our Call: “The ultimate goal of digital literacy is for children to locate, comprehend, integrate, create and use information from multiple sources (online texts, videos, audio, images, interactive graphics …) as well as to communicate and express effectively in various modalities at home and at school (oral, paper, visual, digital).”


Raising literacy levels in Europe by helping improve literacy policies – this is our objective at ELINET. If we want to inspire change in literacy policies, we need to build on the dedicated work concepts already put in place by literacy professionals in schools, libraries, or volunteer organizations.

Up to now, we have gathered more than 100 examples of good practice in the domains proposed by the EU High Level Group Report of Experts on Literacy :

  • Creating a literate environment
  • Improving the quality of teaching
  • Increasing participation, inclusion and equity.

If you are interested in sharing a sample of your work with a European audience, the ELINET website will be a prominent place to promote your good practice on a Europe-wide scale.
We are actively looking for projects, programmes or policies across all age-groups: children (0- 10 or 12 year-olds), adolescents (10/12-18 year-olds) and adults (16-65 year-olds). ELINET is particularly concerned with disadvantaged and struggling readers and writers.

European Framework of Good Practice 2016

The European Framework of Good Practice is the result of collaboration among more than 100 literacy experts, researchers, and practitioners. We hope that it will inspire the development and improvement of European literacy policies. View and download the ELINET Framework of Good Practices 2016

Examples of Good Practice 2016

Thanks to a thorough peer-review process, we are happy to present to you a selection of Good Practice examples with the aim of increasing access for all European citizens to literacy provision. (Link to the 2016 Examples in the make) Use the filters Country, Age Group and Policy Area to narrow down your search. In case you are looking for a specific project title, please use the general search function on top of the page

Share with