Undergraduate fluency with information and communication technology: perceptions and reality

ABSTRACT

Students must be fluent with information and communication technology (ICT) to participate fully and confidently in the 21st century. However, there is growing concern that despite having grown up with computers and the Internet, today's undergraduates may not be sufficiently fluent with ICT. There is also evidence that suggests a discrepancy between perceptions and reality regarding students' ICT fluency.

This paper reports student's perceptions regarding their own ICT fluency and compares their perceptions with actual ICT assessment results. Approximately 200 undergraduate students enrolled in a computer information science (CIS) general education course were surveyed and asked to rate their proficiency performing tasks requiring the use of ICT. These students also completed an online scenario based ICT assessment in which they were required to actually perform tasks associated with accessing, evaluating, integrating and communicating information. The majority of students did not perform at their own perceived level. Results of the study have implications for information literacy, ICT education and assessment.

References

1. ACT. (2007). The ACT technical manual. Retrieved June 15, 2007 from http://www.act.org/aap/pdf/ACT_Technical_Manual.pdf
2. The Association of College and Research Libraries. (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Retrieved April 20, 2007 from http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.htm
3. Braddlee & Matthews-DeNatale, G. (2006). Fluency in information technology (FIT): Setting expectations and understanding students' learning needs. Retrieved on June 15, 2007 from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/Abstract/FluencyinInformationTechn/42229
4. Bruce, C. (2002). Information literacy as a catalyst for educational change: A background paper. White Paper prepared for UNESCO, the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, and the National Forum on Information Literacy, for use at the Information Literacy Meeting of Experts, Prague, The Czech Republic. Retrieved 10 January 2003 from http://www.nclis.gov/libinter/infolitconf&meet/papers/bruce-fullpaper.pdf
5. Ewing, M., Huff, K., Andrews, M. & King, K. (2005). Assessing the reliability of skills measured by the SAT®®. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from http://www.collegeboard.com/research/pdf/RN-24.pdf
6. ETS. (2006a). ICT literacy assessment. Retrieved January 15, 2006 from http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.435c0b5cc7bd0ae7015d9510c3921509/?vgnextoid=b8a246f1674f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD
7. ETS. (2006b). College students fall short in demonstrating the ICT literacy skills necessary for success in college and the workplace. Retrieved April 21, 2007 from http://www.ets.org/Media/Products/ICT_Literacy/pdf/2006_Preliminary_Findings.pdf
8. ETS. (2006c). College students fall short in demonstrating the ICT literacy skills necessary for success in college and the workplace. Retrieved April 21, 2007 from http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.c988ba0e5dd572bada20bc47c3921509/?vgnextoid=340051e5122ee010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD&vgnextchannel=d89d1eed91059010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD
9. Harvard Law School, The Berkman Center for Internet & Society. (2007). Glossary of terms: Information age. Retrieved April 30, 2007 from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/readinessguide/glossary.html#I
10. Hoffman, D. & Novak, T. (1998). Bridging the racial divide on the Internet. Science, 280(5362). Retrieved March 20, 2007 from Academic Search Premier.
11. Hoffman, D., Novak, T. & Venkatesh, A. (2004 July). Has the internet become indispensable? Communications of the ACM, 47(7). Retrieved March 18, 2007 from ACM Digital Library.
12. Jones, S. (2002). The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today's technology. Retrieved March 27, 2007 from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_College_Report.pdf
13. Katz, I. (2005). Beyond technical competence: Literacy in information and communication technology. Educational Technology, 45(6), 44--47.
14. Madigan, E., Goodfellow, M. & Stone A. (2007). Gender, perceptions and reality: Technological literacy among first-year students. Proceedings of the 38th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '07 Volume 38 Issue 1. Retrieved June 7, 2008 from ACM Digital Library.
15. McEuen, S. (2001). How fluent with information technology are our students. Educause Quarterly, 4, 8--17. Retrieved April 12, 2007 from www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0140.pdf .
16. National Academy of Engineering, Committee on Technological Literacy. (2002). Technically speaking: Why all Americans need to know more about technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
17. National Research Council, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board. (1999). Being fluent with information technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
18. Qureshi, S. (2006). Why is the information society important to us? The world summit on the information society in Tunis. Information Technology Development, 12(1), 1--5. Retrieved March 20, 2007 from Business Source Premier.
19. Stone, J., Hoffman, E., Madigan, E. & Vance, R. (2006). Technology skills of incoming freshman: Are first-year students prepared? Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 21(6), 117--121. Retrieved April 5, 2007 from ACM Digital Library.
20. Stone, J. & Madigan, E. (2007). Inconsistencies and disconnects: The gap between the perception and the reality of the technology skills of first-year college students raises questions about the role of stat curriculum standards. Communications of the ACM,,50(4), 76--79. Retrieved April 17, 2007 from ACM Digital Library.

Index Terms

• Social and professional topics

  • Professional topics

    • Computing education

      • Computing literacy