Advertisement

Research on ‘Diteracy’ Measurement as a Smart Literacy Element

  • Seyeoung ChunEmail author
  • Jeonghun Oh
  • Seongeun Lee
Conference paper
  • 51 Downloads
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 188)

Abstract

This preliminary study focuses on investigating whether digital literacy, which is termed ‘diteracy,’ can be measured and how it relates to the conventional concepts and terms of literacy and numeracy by proxies of math and language achievement. First, the results of this study indicated relatively higher diteracy scores of the sixth-grade elementary students and the third-grade secondary ones. While no significant relations were found in terms of smart device using experiences of elementary students, the diteracy scores of the secondary ones indicated higher level of diteracy in some sub-components. Second, math scores are found to have more relations with diteracy than language scores.

Keywords

3Rs Conventional literacy Smart literacy Digital literacy Diteracy Literacy Numeracy New literacy 

References

  1. 1.
    Chun, S.: Birth and major strategies of smart education initiative in South Korea and challenges. In: Uskov, V.L., et al. (eds.). Smart Education and e-Learning 2017, Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, 75 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59451-4_44
  2. 2.
    Park Young Sook: 2020 Future Education report. Trend media, Seoul (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development: Definition and Selection of Key Competencies: Executive Summary, OECD, Paris, viewed 04 Feb 2020 (2005), http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf
  4. 4.
    Griffin, P., et al.: Summarized in ‘Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills’. Springer, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gardiner, J.M.: Functional aspects of recollective experience. Memory Cognition 16, 309–313 (1988).  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    ETS (Educational Testing Service): Digital Transformation: A Framework for ICT Literacy. A Report of the International ICT Literacy Panel (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) & Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (Australia) (MCEETYA), John Ainley, Julian Fraillon, Chris Freeman (2007). National Assessment Program: ICT Literacy: Years 6 and 10 Report 2005Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chun, S., et al.: Study on the Indicator Development for Smart Education Policy Evaluation. KERIS (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationChungnam National UniversityDaejeonSouth Korea
  2. 2.Modong Middle SchoolBusanSouth Korea
  3. 3.Korean Council for University EducationSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations