Advertisement

A New ICT Literacy Test for Elementary and Middle School Students in Republic of Korea

  • Han Sung Kim
  • Sung Hun Ahn
  • Chong Min KimEmail author
Regular Article

Abstract

The purposes of our study were to develop and validate a test for measuring Korean elementary and middle school students’ information and communications technology (ICT) literacy and to make suggestions for improving ICT literacy across Republic of Korea. To those ends, we conducted a literature review, consulted expert opinions, administered a pilot test to 1086 students, and ultimately developed and validated an ICT literacy test by measuring and analyzing the ICT literacy of approximately 15,000 students in Korea. Results indicated that the ICT literacy of elementary school students was low (i.e., an average of 19 out of 35 possible points) and that students in lower grades had lower average scores. Regarding abilities within ICT literacy, problem-solving and information analysis and evaluation were relatively high among elementary school students, whereas information organization and creation, computational thinking, information searches, and information communication were relatively low. Among middle school students, ICT literacy was also low (i.e., an average of 18 out of 35 possible points), and eighth-grade students demonstrated lower literacy than seventh- and ninth-grade students. Although the difference among those grades was minor, the gap in ICT literacy did become greater as students get older. Regarding abilities within ICT literacy, information utilization and management was high among middle school students, whereas all others were low, particularly computational thinking. Drawing from those findings, we recommend a few methods of improving the ICT literacy of elementary and middle school students in Korea.

Keywords

Information and communications technology literacy Computational thinking Elementary and middle school students 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Korea Education and Research Information Service (RR 2016-8).

Supplementary material

40299_2018_428_MOESM1_ESM.docx (21 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 21 kb)

References

  1. Ahn, S. H., Kim, S. S., Nam, C. W., Kim, C. M., Kim, H. W., & Che, K. H. (2015). Research on ICT literacy level measurement for elementary and junior high school students in 2015. Daegu: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  2. Ahn, T. S., You, J. H., Goo, C. D., Kim, T. H., & Park, S. R. (2016). Research and analysis on the actual status of educational informatization in elementary and secondary schools in 2015. Daegu: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  3. Ainley, J., Fraillon, J., & Freeman, C. (2007). National assessment program: ICT literacy years 6 & 10 report 2005. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  4. Annette, V. (2013). Understanding computer programming as a literacy. Literacy in Composition Studies, 1(2), 42–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bae, Y. K., Shin, S. K., Seo, J. W., & You, Y. J. (2017). Analysis of trends in overseas software education policy. Daegu: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  6. Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning & Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23.Google Scholar
  7. Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Vancouver: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  8. Cha, S. E., Jun, S. J., Kwon, D. Y., Kim, H. S., Kim, S. B., Kim, J. M., et al. (2011). Measuring achievement of ICT competency for students in Korea. Computers & Education, 56(4), 990–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choi, H. S. (2014). Developing lessons and rubrics to promote computational thinking. Journal of the Korean Association of Information Education, 18(1), 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) & Association for Computing Machinery, (2016). Revised 2016 CSTA K-12 Computer Science Standards. Retrieved August 22, 2017 from https://www.csteachers.org/page/Standards.
  11. Department for Education (2013). National curriculum in England: computing programmes of study, Published 11 September 2013. Retrieved August 22, 2017 from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study.
  12. Easterbrook, S. (2014). From computational thinking to systems thinking: A conceptual toolkit for sustainability computing. Proceedings of the 2nd international conference ICT for Sustainability, pp. 235–244.Google Scholar
  13. Educational Testing Service. (2002). Digital transformation: A framework for ICT literacy. A report of international information and communication literacy panel. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  14. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA) (2016). The IEA’s International computer and information literacy study (ICILS) 2018: What’s next for IEA’s ICILS 2018. Retrieved August 22, 2017 from http://www.iea.nl/sites/default/files/studies/IEA%20ICILS%202018%20Computational%20Thinking%20Leaflet.pdf.
  16. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) & Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for k-12 education. Retrieved August 22, 2017 from http://www.iste.org/docs/ct-documents/computational-thinking-operational-definition-flyer.pdf.
  17. Jeong, Y. S., Kim, K. S., Jeong, I. K., Kim, H. B., Kim, C., Yu, J. S., et al. (2015). A development of the software education curriculum model for elementary students. Journal of the Korean Association of Information Education, 19(4), 467–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jun, S., Han, S., Kim, H., & Lee, W. (2014). Assessing the computational literacy of elementary students on a national level in Korea. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(4), 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jung, G. H., Kang, S. K., Goo, C. D., Kim, S. Y., Kim, H. S., & Suh, S. M. (2017). Research and analysis on the actual status of educational informatization in elementary and secondary schools in 2016. Daegu: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  20. Kim, H. S. (2016). A study of the direction for developing software education operating Guide. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 16(8), 529–548.Google Scholar
  21. Kim, S. H., Han, S. G., & Kim, H. C. (2009). How can we teach computational literacy to all levels of students? 2009 Fifth International Joint Conference on INC, IMS and IDC, pp. 1395–1400.Google Scholar
  22. Kim, H. S., & Jun, S. J. (2017). Elementary teacher perceptions of evaluation methods about suitability and usefulness in software education. Journal of the Korean Association of Information Education, 21(3), 267–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim, H. S., Kil, H. J., & Shin, A. N. (2014). An analysis of variables affecting the ICT literacy level of Korean elementary school students. Computers & Education, 77, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim, Y. E., Kim, G. S., Kim, J. H., Kim, H., Yang, J. M., Lee, S. J., et al. (2015). Development of software education operation guideline. Daegu: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  25. Kim, H. S., Kim, J. S., Kim, H. S., & Shin, A. N. (2017a). Korea’s educational informatization level through OECD PISA 2015 implications. Daegu: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  26. Kim, C. M., Lee, M. S., Ahn, S. H., Lim, H., & Kim, H. S. (2017b). In-depth analysis of ICT literacy level of elementary and junior high school students: 2007–2016. Daegu: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  27. Kim, H. S., & Park, H. J. (2008). Korea’s educational informatization level through OECD PISA 2006 implications. Seoul: Korea Education and Research Information Service.Google Scholar
  28. Lewis, D. M., Green, D. R., Mitzel, H. C., Baum, K., & Patz, R. J. (1998). The Bookmark procedure: Methodology and recent implementations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  29. Lonsdale, M., & McCurry, D. (2004). Literacy in new millennium. Leabrook: National Centre for Vocational Education Research.Google Scholar
  30. Ministry of Education (2014). 2014 basic education support project plan. Ministry of Education, Korea.Google Scholar
  31. Ministry of Education (2015a). 2015 revised curriculum of Korea: Informatics curriculum. Ministry of Education, Korea.Google Scholar
  32. Ministry of Education (2015b). 2015 revised curriculum of Korea: Practical Course and Technology Home Economics Curriculum. Korea. Ministry of Education, Korea.Google Scholar
  33. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2016). Improvement of guidelines for teaching and necessary measures of kindergarten, elementary school, junior high school, high school and special support in Japan. Retrieved August 22, 2017 from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo0/toushin/1380731.htm.
  34. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development(2003). Feasibility study for the PISA ICT literacy assessment: Report to network A. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  35. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and equity in education. Retrieved August 22, 2017 from http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/education/pisa-2015-results-volume-i_9789264266490-en.WW8JCxXyiUkpage253.
  36. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  37. Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms (Second Edition): Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  38. Shin, S. B., Kim, C., Park, N. J., Kim, K. S., Sung, Y. H., & Jeong, Y. S. (2016). Convergence organization strategies of the computational thinking in informatics curriculums. Journal of the Korean Association of Information Education, 20(6), 607–616.Google Scholar
  39. Tedre, M., & Denning, P. J. (2016). The long quest for computational thinking. Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling Conference on Computing Education Research, pp. 120–129.Google Scholar
  40. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 49(3), 33–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 366(1881), 3717–3725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© De La Salle University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Korea Education and Research Information ServiceDaeguRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Computer EducationGyeongin National University of EducationIncheonRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Department of EducationGyeongin National University of EducationIncheonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations