Investigating Students’ Digital Literacy Levels during Online Education Due to COVID-19 Pandemic
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- (1)
- What are the self-reported digital literacy levels of students of different school degrees?
- (2)
- Is there a statistically significant relationship between students’ self-reported digital literacy levels and
- their gender?
- their age?
- their school degree?
- (3)
- What are the major technology-related challenges learners experience related to online learning during COVID-19 pandemic?
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. The Context of the Study
2.2. The Method and Participants
2.3. The Procedure
2.4. The Instrument
3. Results
- Kruskal–Wallis Test
- Grouping variable: gender.
- Kruskal–Wallis test.
- Grouping variable: degree
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Adnan, M.; Anwar, K. Online Learning amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Students’ Perspectives. J. Pedagog. Soc. Psychol. 2020, 2, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tasci, G. The impact of Covid-19 on higher education: Rethinking internationalization behind the iceberg. Int. J. Curric. Instr. 2021, 13, 522–536. [Google Scholar]
- Micks, J.; McIlwaine, J. Keeping the World’s Children Learning through COVID-19. UNICEF Article. 2020. Available online: https://www.unicef.org/coronavirus/keeping-worlds-children-learning-through-covid-19. (accessed on 5 May 2021).
- Wang, M.; Sierra, C.; Folger, T. Building an online learning community among adult learners. Educ. Media Int. 2003, 40, 49–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, Y.; Choi, J. A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2011, 59, 593–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yukselturk, E.; Ozekes, S.; Turel, Y. Predicting dropout student: An application of data mining methods in an online education program. EURODL 2014, 17, 118–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gregori, P.; Martinez, V.; Moyano-Fernandez, J.J. Basic actions to reduce dropout rates in distance learning. Eval. Program. Plann. 2018, 66, 48–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adedoyin, O.B.; Soykan, E. Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2020, 2020, 1813180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moore, M.G.; Kearsley, G. Distance Education: A Systems View; Thomson Wadsworth: Belmont, CA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Ferro, E.; Helbig, N.C.; Gil-Garcia, J.R. The role of IT literacy in defining digital divide policy needs. Gov. Inf. Q. 2011, 28, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ozden, M. Digital literacy perceptions of the students in the department of computer technologies teaching and Turkish language teaching. Int. J. Progress. Educ. (IJPE) 2018, 14, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilster, P. Digital Literacy; Wiley Computer Publications: New York, NY, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Gourlay, L.; Hamilton, M.; Lea, R. Textual practices in the new media digital landscape: Messing with digital literacies. Res. Learn. Technol. 2013, 21, 21438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hall, M.; Nix, I.; Baker, K. Student experiences and perceptions of digital literacy skills development: Engaging learners by design? Electron. J. e-Learn. 2013, 11, 207–223. Available online: http://www.ejel.org/issue/download.html?idArticle=258 (accessed on 4 June 2021).
- Bayrakci, S. Dijital Yetkinlikler Bütünü olarak Dijital Okuryazarlık: Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Marmara Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul, Turkiye, 2020. Available online: https://avesis.marmara.edu.tr/dosya?id=2a9ee347-793e-4989-b431-58893f6b4602 (accessed on 2 May 2021).
- Bawden, D. Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In Digital Literacies: Concepts, Policies and Practices; Lankshear, C., Knobel, M., Eds.; Peter Lang: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 17–32. [Google Scholar]
- Koltay, T. The media and the literacies: Media literacy, information literacy, digital literacy. Media Cult. Soc. 2011, 33, 211–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, K.-Y.; Reichert, F.; Cagansan, L.P., Jr.; De la Torre, J.; Law, N. Measuring digital literacy across three age cohorts: Exploring test dimensionality and performance differences. Comput. Educ. 2020, 157, 103968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamutoglu, N.B.; Gungoren, O.C.; Uyanik, G.K.; Erdogan, D.G. Dijital okuryazarlık ölçeği: Türkçeye uyarlama çalışması. Ege Egit. Derg. 2017, 18, 408–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ocak, G.; Karakus, G. Pre-service teachers’ digital literacy self-efficacy scale development. Kastamonu Eğit. Derg. 2018, 26, 1427–1436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udeogalanya, V. Aligning digital literacy and student academic success: Lessons learned from Covid-19 pandemic. Bus. Manag. Rev. 2021, 12, 274–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DiMaria-Ghalili, R.A.; Ostrow, L.; Rodney, K. Webcasting: A new instructional technology in distance graduate nursing education. J. Nurs. Educ. 2005, 44, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Knutsson, O.; Blasjö, M.; Hallsten, Z.; Karlström, P. Identifying different registers of digital literacy in virtual learning environments. Internet. High. Educ. 2012, 15, 237–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prensky, M. Digital natives, digital immigrants. Horizon 2001, 9, 6. Available online: http://educ116eff11.pbworks.com/f/prensky_digital%20natives (accessed on 2 May 2021).
- Zhang, J.; Li, F.; Duan, C.; Wu, G. Research on Self-efficacy of Distance Learning and Its Influence on Learners’ Attainments. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE)/SchoolNet, Incheon, Korea, 1–4 November 2001; Lee, C.H., Ed.; Incheon National University of Education: Incheon, Korea, 2001; pp. 1510–1517. [Google Scholar]
- Chyung, S.Y. Systematic and systemic approaches to reducing attrition rates in online higher education. Am. J. Distance Educ. 2001, 15, 36–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Payton, S.; Hague, C. Digital Literacy across the Curriculum. In A Futurelab Handbook; Becta, 2010; Available online: https://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/futl06/futl06 (accessed on 5 June 2021).
- Nasah, A.; DaCosta, B.; Kinsell, C.; Seok, S. The digital literacy debate: An investigation of digital propensity and information and communication technology. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2010, 55, 531–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero, M.; Gutiert, M.; Sangra, A.; Bullen, M. Do UOC students fit in the Net Generation Profile? An approach to their habits in ICT use. Int. Rev. Res. Open Dis. Learn. 2013, 14, 158–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eshet-Alkalai, Y.; Chajut, E. You can teach old dogs new tricks: The factors that affect changes over time in digital literacy. J. Inf. Techol. Educ. 2010, 9, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.S.; Kil, H.J.; Shin, A. An analysis of variables affecting the ICT level of Korean elementary school students. Comput. Educ. 2014, 77, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aesaert, K.; Van Braak, J. Gender and socioeconomic related differences in performance-based ICT competences. Comput. Educ. 2015, 84, 8–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hatlevik, O.E.; Sherer, R.; Christophersen, K.-A. Moving beyond the study of gender differences: An analysis of measurement invariance and differential item functioning of an ICT literacy scale. Comput. Educ. 2017, 113, 280–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhong, Z.J. From access to usage: The divide of self-reported digital skills among adolescents. Comput. Educ. 2011, 56, 736–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hatlevik, O.E.; Christophersen, K.-A. Digital competence at the beginning of upper secondary school: Identifying factors explaining digital inclusion. Comput. Educ. 2013, 63, 240–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siddiq, F.; Gochyyev, P.; Wilson, M. Learning in digital networks-ICT literacy: A novel assessment of students’ 21st century skills. Comput. Educ. 2017, 109, 11–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jan, S. Gender, school and class wise differences in the level of digital literacy among secondary school students in Pakistan. Iss. Trends Educ. Technol. 2018, 6, 15–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.S.; Ahn, S.H.; Kim, C.M. A new ICT literacy test for elementary and middle school students in the Republic of Korea. Asia-Pac. Educ. Res. 2019, 28, 203–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tosun, N. Distance education practices at universities in Turkey: A case study during Covid-19 pandemic. Int. J. Curric. Instr. 2021, 13, 313–333. [Google Scholar]
- Saricam, I.; Ozdogan, U.; Topcuoglu-Unal, F. Uzaktan eğitim bünyesindeki Türkçe dersinin uygulamasına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri. Turkish Stud. Educ. Sci. 2020, 15, 2943–2959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 4th ed.; Pearson Education Limited: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Miles, M.B.; Huberman, A.M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed.; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Coffey, A.; Atkinson, P. Making Sense of Qualitative Data; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, UK, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Mason, J. Qualitative Researching, 2nd ed.; SAGE Publications: London, UK, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Mackey, A.; Gass, S. Second Language Research: Methodology and Design; Routledge: London, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Horrigan, J.B. Digital Readiness Gaps; Pew Research Center: Washington, DC, USA, 2016; Available online: http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/09/20/2016/Digital-Readiness-Gaps/ (accessed on 7 June 2021).
- Marsh, J.; Hannon, P.; Lewis, M.; Ritchie, L. Young children’s initiation into family literacy practices in the digital age. J. Ear. Child. Res. 2017, 15, 47–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ertas, H.; Kirac, R.; Demir, R. Dijital Okuryazarlıkve E-Sağlık Okuryazarlığı Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi. In 3. Uluslararası 13. Ulusal Sağlık ve Hastane İdaresi Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı; Sakarya Üniversitesi: Sakarya, Turkey, 2019; pp. 557–570. [Google Scholar]
- Kiyici, M. Öğretmen Adaylarının Sayısal Okuryazarlık Düzeylerinin Belirlenmesi. Yayınlanmış Doktora Tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eskisehir, Turkey, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Acar, C. Anne ve Babaların İlkokul Ortaokul ve Lise Öğrencisi Çocukları ile Kendilerinin Dijital Okuryazarlıklarına İlişkin Görüşleri. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Turkey, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Schonard, M. The Underlying Causes of the Digital Gender Gap and Possible Solutions for Enhanced Digital Inclusion of Women and Girls; European Parliament, Policy Department for Citizen’s Rights and Constitutional Affairs: Brussels, Belgium, 2018; pp. 16–19.
- Almahasees, Z.; Mohsen, K.; Amin, M.O. Faculty and student perceptions of online learning during Covid-19. Front. Educ. 2021, 6, 638470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khalil, R.; Mansour, A.E.; Fadda, W.A.; Almisnid, K.; Aldamegh, M.; Al-Nafeesah, A.; Al-Wutayd, O. The sudden transition to synchronized online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia: A qualitative study exploring medical students’ perspectives. BMC Med. Educ. 2020, 20, 285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Gender | Age | Degree | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Female | Male | 16–18 | 19–21 | 22–25 | 26+ | High School | Undergraduate | Master | PhD | |
F | 360 | 150 | 90 | 82 | 164 | 174 | 149 | 163 | 142 | 56 |
% | 70.6 | 29.4 | 17.6 | 16.1 | 32.2 | 34.1 | 29.2 | 32 | 27.8 | 11 |
DL Scale Score Range | Level |
---|---|
1.62–3.07 | Low/Very Poor |
3.08–3.62 | Below moderate/Poor |
3.63–4.17 | Moderate |
4.18–4.72 | Above moderate |
N of Items | Cronbach’s Alpha | Mean | Median | Std. Deviation | Variance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
29 | 0.900 | 3.940 | 4 | 0.56075 | 0.474 |
Dimensions | Mean | Median | Std. Deviation |
---|---|---|---|
Ethics and Responsibility | 4.44 | 5 | 0.91461 |
General Knowledge | 3.68 | 4 | 1.16414 |
Daily use | 4.38 | 5 | 0.98805 |
Professional Production | 2.15 | 2 | 1.21982 |
Secrecy and Security | 4.32 | 5 | 0.930045 |
Social Dimension | 3.08 | 3 | 1.18193 |
Dimensions of the Scale | Groups | N | Mean Rank | x2 | df | p |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ethics and responsibility | Female | 360 | 258.04 | 0.369 | 1 | 0.544 |
Male | 150 | 249.40 | ||||
General knowledge | Female | 360 | 224.53 | 54.262 | 1 | 0.000 |
Male | 150 | 329.84 | ||||
Daily use | Female | 360 | 251.68 | 0.833 | 1 | 0.362 |
Male | 150 | 264.67 | ||||
Professional production | Female | 360 | 254.45 | 0.064 | 1 | 0.800 |
Male | 150 | 258.01 | ||||
Secrecy and Security | Female | 360 | 252.41 | 0.562 | 1 | 0.453 |
Male | 150 | 262.91 | ||||
Social dimension | Female | 360 | 255.83 | 0.006 | 1 | 0.937 |
Male | 150 | 254.71 |
Dimensions of the Scale | Groups | N | Mean Rank | x2 | df | p |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ethics and Responsibility | High School | 149 | 248.52 | 5.286 | 3 | 0.152 |
Undergraduate | 163 | 264.55 | ||||
Graduate/Master | 142 | 239.77 | ||||
Graduate/PhD | 56 | 287.62 | ||||
General Knowledge | High School | 149 | 230.99 | 18.656 | 3 | 0.000 |
Undergraduate | 163 | 262.17 | ||||
Graduate/Master | 142 | 245.11 | ||||
Graduate/PhD | 56 | 327.66 | ||||
Daily Use | High School | 149 | 186.08 | 55.688 | 3 | 0.000 |
Undergraduate | 163 | 284.56 | ||||
Graduate/Master | 142 | 264.89 | ||||
Graduate/PhD | 56 | 331.81 | ||||
Professional Production | High School | 149 | 242.17 | 18.933 | 3 | 0.000 |
Undergraduate | 163 | 229.06 | ||||
Graduate/Master | 142 | 297.18 | ||||
Graduate/PhD | 56 | 255.38 | ||||
Security and Safety | High School | 149 | 252.23 | 4.985 | 3 | 0.173 |
Undergraduate | 163 | 258.70 | ||||
Graduate/Master | 142 | 241.19 | ||||
Graduate/PhD | 56 | 291.15 | ||||
Social dimension | High School | 149 | 240.67 | 3.536 | 3 | 0.316 |
Undergraduate | 163 | 262.68 | ||||
Graduate/Master | 142 | 253.10 | ||||
Graduate/PhD | 56 | 280.16 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Inan Karagul, B.; Seker, M.; Aykut, C. Investigating Students’ Digital Literacy Levels during Online Education Due to COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11878. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111878
Inan Karagul B, Seker M, Aykut C. Investigating Students’ Digital Literacy Levels during Online Education Due to COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability. 2021; 13(21):11878. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111878
Chicago/Turabian StyleInan Karagul, Banu, Meral Seker, and Cansu Aykut. 2021. "Investigating Students’ Digital Literacy Levels during Online Education Due to COVID-19 Pandemic" Sustainability 13, no. 21: 11878. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111878
APA StyleInan Karagul, B., Seker, M., & Aykut, C. (2021). Investigating Students’ Digital Literacy Levels during Online Education Due to COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability, 13(21), 11878. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111878