The effect of individual differences in the inner and outer states of ICT on engagement in online reading activities and PISA 2009 reading literacy: Exploring the relationship between the old and new reading literacy

Learning and Individual Differences

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 336-342

  Lee, Yuan Hsuan ^a   Wu, Jiun Yu ^a  

^a NATIONAL CHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Availability of ICT; Computer attitude; Computer confidence; Reading literacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862794320     PISSN: 10416080     EISSN: 18733425     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2012.01.007     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Adelman N., Donnelly M.B., Dove T., Tiffany-Morales J., Wayne A., Zucker A. The integrated studies of educational technology: Professional development and teachers' use of technology 2002, SRI International, Arlington, VA.
2. Attewell P. Comment: The first and second digital divides. Sociology of Education 2001, 74(3):252-259.
3. Bilal D. Children's use of the yahooligans! Web search engine: Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 2000, 51:646-665.
4. Burbules N.C., Callister T.A. Watch IT: The risks and promises of information technologies for education 2000, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
5. Chiu M.M., McBride-Chang C. Gender, context, and reading: A comparison of students in 43 countries. Scientific Studies of Reading 2006, 10(4):331-362. 10.1207/s1532799xssr1004_1.
6. Coiro J. Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. The Reading Teacher 2003, 56:458-464.
7. Coiro J., Dobler E. Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly 2007, 42(2):214-257.
8. Collins K.M.T., Onwuegbuzie A.J., Jiao Q.G. Reading ability and computer-related attitudes among African American graduate students. Cyberpsychology & Behavior 2008, 11(3):347-350. 10.1089/cpb.2007.0074.
9. Dehler C., Porras-Hernandez L.H. Using computer mediated communication (CMC) to promote experiential learning in graduate studies. Educational Technology 1998, 38(3):52-55.
10. Doherty C., Mayer D. E-mail as a "contact zone" for teacher-student relationships. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 2011, 46(7):592-600.
11. Dooley K.E., Wickersham L.E. Distraction, domination, and disconnection in whole-class, online discussions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education 2007, 8(1):1-8.
12. Dresang E.T., McClelland K. Radical change: Digital age literature and learning. Theory into Practice 1999, 38(3):160-167.
13. Garrison D.R., Anderson T., Archer W. Critical thinking and computer conferencing: A model and tool to assess cognitive presence. American Journal of Distance Education 2001, 15(1):7-23.
14. Grimshaw S., Dungworth N., McKnight C., Morris A. Electronic books: Children's reading and comprehension. British Journal of Educational Technology 2007, 38(4):583-599.
15. Grüsser S.M., Thalemann R., Griffiths M.D. Excessive computer game playing: Evidence for addiction and aggression?. Cyberpsychology & Behavior 2006, 10(2):290-292.
16. Guiso L., Monte F., Sapienza P., Zingales L. Culture, gender, and math. Science 2008, 320:1164-1165. 10.1126/science.1154094.
17. Henry, L. A. (2006). SEARCHing for an answer: The critical role of new literacies while reading on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 614-627.
18. Hohlfeld T.N., Ritzhaupt A.D., Barron A.E., Kemker K. Examining the digital divide in k-12 public schools: Four-year trends for supporting ICT literacy in Florida. Computers in Education 2008, 51(4):1648-1663.
19. Hu L., Bentler P.M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods 1998, 3:424-453.
20. Khine M.S., Yeap L.L., Lok A.T.C. The quality of message ideas. Thinking and interaction in an asynchronous CMC environment. Educational Media International 2003, 40:115-126. 10.1080/0952398032000092161.
21. Kim M.C., Kim J.K. Digital divide: Conceptual discussions and prospect. The Human Society and the Internet Internet-Related Socio-Economic Issues 2001, 78-91.
22. Krull J.L., MacKinnon D.P. Multilevel mediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. Evaluation Review 1999, 23(4):418.
23. Krull J.L., MacKinnon D.P. Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2001, 36(2):249. 10.1207/S15327906MBR3602_06.
24. Leu D.J., Coiro J., Castek J., Hartman D.K., Henry L.A., Reinking D. Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices 2008, 321-346. Guilford Press, New York, NY. C.C. Block, S. Parris, P. Afflerbach (Eds.).
25. Leu J., Kinzer C. The convergence of literacy instruction with networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly 2000, 35(1):108-127.
26. Leu D.J., Kinzer C.K., Coiro J., Cammack D.W. Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. Theoretical models and processes of reading 2004, 1570-1613. International Reading Association, Newark, DE. 5th ed. R.B. Ruddell, N.J. Unrau (Eds.).
27. Leu, D. J., McVerry, J. G., O'Byrne, W. I., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., & Hartman, D. K. (2009). The new literacies of online reading comprehension and the irony of No Child Left Behind: Students who require our assistance the most, actually receive it the least. In L. M. Morrow, R. Rueda, & D. Lapp (Eds). Handbook of research on literacy and diversity. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
28. Leu D.J., Zawilinski L., Castek J., Banerjee M., Housand B., Liu Y., et al. What is new about the new literacies of online reading comprehension. Secondary school literacy: What research reveals for classroom practices 2007, 37-68. National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, IL. L. Rush, J. Eakle, A. Berger (Eds.).
29. Liu T.C., Lin P.H. What comes with technological convenience? Exploring the behaviors and performances of learning with computer-mediated dictionaries. Computers in Human Behavior 2011, 27(1):373-383.
30. Luu K., Freeman J.G. An analysis of the relationship between information and communication technology (ICT) and scientific literacy in Canada and Australia. Computers in Education 2011, 56(4):1072-1082.
31. MacKinnon D.P. Introduction to statistical mediation analysis 2008, Erlbaum Psych Press, New York, NY.
32. Mahfouz S.M. A study of Jordanian university students' perceptions of using email exchanges with native English keypals for improving their writing competency. CALLICO Journal 2010, 27(2):393-408.
33. Muthén L.K., Muthén B.O. Mplus user's guide 2010, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA. Sixth Edition.
34. OECD PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key competencies in reading, mathematics and science 2009, OECD publications, Paris, France.
35. OECD PISA data analysis manual SAS® 2009, OECD publications, Paris, France. Second edition.
36. OECD PISA 2009 results: What makes a school successful? - Resources, policies and practices (Volume IV) 2010, Retrieved from. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264091559-en.
37. Parsad B., Jones J., Greene B. Internet access in US public schools and classrooms: 1994-2003 2005, (NCES 2005-015), US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC.
38. Prinsen F., Volman M.L., Terwel J. The influence of learner characteristics on degree and type of participation in a CSCL environment. British Journal of Educational Technology 2007, 38(6):1037-1055.
39. Reinking D. Me and my hypertext: A multiple digression analysis of technology and literacy (sic). The Reading Teacher 1997, 50(8):626-643.
40. Robertson S.L. Re-imagining and rescripting the future of education: Global knowledge economy discourses and the challenge to education systems. Comparative Education 2005, 41(2):151-170.
41. Snyder I. Hypertext: The electronic labyrinth 1997, New York University Press, New York, NY.
42. Sobel M.E. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology 1982, 13:290-312.
43. Steiger J.H. A note on multiple sample extensions of the RMSEA fit index. Structural Equation Modeling 1998, 5:411-419.
44. Sweller J. Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review 2010, 22(2):123-138. 10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5.
45. Sweller J., Van Merrienboer J.J., Paas F.G.W. Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 1998, 10(3):251-296.
46. Tomte C., Hatlevik O.E. Gender-differences in self-efficacy ICT related to various ICT-user profiles in Finland and Norway. How do self-efficacy, gender and ICT-user profiles relate to findings from PISA 2006. Computers in Education 2011, 57(1):1416-1424.
47. Vinagre M. Fostering language learning via email: An English-Spanish exchange. Computer Assisted Language Learning 2005, 18(5):369-388. 10.1080/09588220500442749.
48. Wan C.S., Chiou W.B. Psychological motives and online games addiction: A test of flow theory and humanistic needs theory for Taiwanese adolescents. Cyberpsychology & Behavior 2006, 9(3):317-324.
49. Warschauer M. Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal 1997, 81(4):470-481.
50. Wayne A.J., Zucker A.A., Powell T. So what about the "digital divide" in K-12 schools 2002, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA.
51. Willson T. Human information behavior. Informing Science 2000, 3(2):49-55.
52. Wolak J., Finkelhor D., Mitchell K.J., Ybarra M.L. Online "predators" and their victims: Myths, realities, and implications for prevention and treatment. American Psychologist 2008, 63(2):111.
53. Wolak J., Mitchell K., Finkelhor D. Unwanted and wanted exposure to online pornography in a national sample of youth Internet users. Pediatrics 2007, 119(2):247.
54. Wu J.-Y., Kwok O.-M. Using structural equation modeling to analyze complex survey data: A comparison between design-based single-level and model-based multi-level approaches. Structural Equation Modeling-A Multidisciplinary Journal 2012, 19(1):16-35. 10.1080/10705511.2012.634703.
55. Yang X., Li Y., Tan C.H., Teo H.H. Students' participation intention in an online discussion forum: Why is computer-mediated interaction attractive?. Information Management 2007, 44(5):456-466.
56. Yu F.Y., Yu H.J. Incorporating e-mail into the learning process: Its impact on student academic achievement and attitudes. Computers in Education 2002, 38(1-3):117-126.