Abstract
To find out if information and communication technology (ICT) could narrow the achievement gaps among students caused by variations in their socioeconomic status, this study examines the mediating mechanism of ICT use between students’ socioeconomic status (SES) and achievement. Data from the 2012 East Asia Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) were used for the structural equation modeling estimations, drawing on the work of 31,161 students. The results showed that using ICT for information retrieval and social interaction could widen the achievement gaps caused by variations in SES. This study also found that gender could significantly moderate the positive relationship between students’ SES and ICT usage for learning, as well as for social interaction.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aerschot, L. V., & Rodousakis, N. (2008). The link between socio-economic background and Internet use: Barriers faced by low socio-economic status groups and possible solutions. Innovation, 21(4), 317–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610802576927.
Aesaert, K., & Van Braak, J. (2015). Gender and socioeconomic related differences in performance based ICT competences. Computers and Education, 84, 8–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.017.
Areepattamannil, S., & Kaur, B. (2013). Factors predicting science achievement of immigrant and non-immigrant students: A multilevel analysis. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 11(5), 1183–1207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9369-5.
Aypay, A. (2010). Information and communication technology (ICT) usage and achievement of Turkish students in PISA 2006. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology—TOJET, 9(2), 116–124.
Biagi, F., & Loi, M. (2013). Measuring ICT use and learning outcomes: Evidence from recent econometric studies. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 28–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12016.
Blignaut, P. (2009). A bilateral perspective on the digital divide in South Africa. Perspectives on Global Development & Technology, 8(4), 581–601. https://doi.org/10.1163/156915009X12583611836091.
Brozo, W. G., Sulkunen, S., Shiel, G., Garbe, C., Pandian, A., & Valtin, R. (2014). Reading, gender, and engagement: Lessons from five PISA countries. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(7), 584–593. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.291.
Buccheri, G., Gurber, N. A., & Bruhwiler, C. (2011). The impact of gender on interest in science topics and the choice of scientific and technical vocations. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518643.
Byker, E. J. (2014). ICT oriented toward nyaya: Community computing in India’s slums. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 10(2), 19–28.
Cheema, J. R., & Bo, Z. (2013). Quantity and quality of computer use and academic achievement: Evidence from a large-scale international test program. International Journal of Education & Development using Information & Communication Technology, 9(2), 95–106.
Cheema, J. R., & Galluzzo, G. (2013). Analyzing the gender gap in math achievement: Evidence from a large-scale US sample. Research in Education, 90, 98–112. https://doi.org/10.7227/rie.90.1.7.
Cheung, K.-C., Mak, S.-K., & Sit, P.-S. (2013). Online reading activities and ICT use as mediating variables in explaining the gender difference in digital reading literacy: Comparing Hong Kong and Korea. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 709–720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0077-x.
Claro, M., Cabello, T., San Martín, E., & Nussbaum, M. (2015). Comparing marginal effects of Chilean students’ economic, social and cultural status on digital versus reading and mathematics performance. Computers & Education, 82, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.018.
Cox, M. J., Niederhauser, D. S., Castillo, N., McDougall, A. B., Sakamoto, T., & Roesvik, S. (2013). Researching IT in education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 474–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12035.
Delen, E., & Bulut, O. (2011). The relationship between students’ exposure to technology and their achievement in science and math. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology—TOJET, 10(3), 311–317.
Ding, Z., Ng, F., & Li, J. (2014). A parallel multiple mediator model of knowledge sharing in architectural design project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.04.004.
Edwards, J. R., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures. Psychological Methods, 5(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.5.2.155.
Erdogdu, F., & Erdogdu, E. (2015). The impact of access to ICT, student background and school/home environment on academic success of students in turkey: An international comparative analysis. Computers & Education, 82, 26–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.023.
Fariña, P., San Martín, E., Preiss, D. D., Claro, M., & Jara, I. (2015). Measuring the relation between computer use and reading literacy in the presence of endogeneity. Computers & Education, 80, 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.010.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 18(1), 39–50.
Gannon, S. (2008). ‘Twenty-four seven on the computers’: Girls ICTs and risk. Gender and Education, 20(4), 361–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250802190198.
Guzeller, C. O., & Akin, A. (2014). Relationship between ICT variables and mathematics achievement based on PISA 2006 database: International evidence. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1), 184–192.
Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). London: Pearson Education.
Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360.
Heemskerk, I., Brink, A., Volman, M., & ten Dam, G. (2005). Inclusiveness and ICT in education: A focus on gender, ethnicity and social class. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00106.x.
Hohlfeld, T. N., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Barron, A. E. (2010). Connecting schools, community, and family with ICT: Four-year trends related to school level and SES of public schools in Florida. Computers & Education, 55(1), 391–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.004.
Hohlfeld, T. N., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Barron, A. E., & Kemker, K. (2008). Examining the digital divide in K-12 public schools: Four-year trends for supporting ICT literacy in Florida. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1648–1663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.04.002.
Hollingworth, S., Mansaray, A., Allen, K., & Rose, A. (2011). Parents’ perspectives on technology and children’s learning in the home: Social class and the role of the habitus. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(4), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00431.x.
Howell, R. D., Breivik, E., & Wilcox, J. B. (2007). Reconsidering formative measurement. Psychological Methods, 12(2), 205–218.
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.
Ieong, M. K., Cheung, K. C., Sit, P. S., Soh, K. C., & Mak, S. K. (2016). Effects of economic, social and cultural status on mathematics performance: A multilevel mediation analysis of self-regulated learning processes. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 24(4), 109–143.
Kim, D. H., & Law, H. (2012). Gender gap in maths test scores in South Korea and Hong Kong: Role of family background and single-sex schooling. International Journal of Educational Development, 32(1), 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.02.009.
Kubiatko, M., & Vlckova, K. (2010). The relationship between ICT use and science knowledge for Czech students: A secondary analysis of PISA 2006. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 523–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9195-6.
Lee, Y.-H., & Wu, J.-Y. (2012). 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, 22(3), 336–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.01.007.
Lee, Y.-H., & Wu, J.-Y. (2013). The indirect effects of online social entertainment and information seeking activities on reading literacy. Computers & Education, 67, 168–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.03.001.
Li, Y., & Ranieri, M. (2013). Educational and social correlates of the digital divide for rural and urban children: A study on primary school students in a provincial city of china. Computers & Education, 60(1), 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.001.
Lu, J., Li, D., Stevens, C., & Ye, R. (2016). How do students evaluate computer use for learning? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(6), 793–815. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116636771.
Luu, K., & Freeman, J. G. (2011). An analysis of the relationship between information and communication technology (ICT) and scientific literacy in Canada and Australia. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1072–1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.008.
Macho, S., & Ledermann, T. (2011). Estimating, testing, and comparing specific effects in structural equation models: The phantom model approach. Psychological Methods, 16(1), 34–43.
MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007a). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58(1), 593–614. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542.
MacKinnon, D. P., Fritz, M. S., Williams, J., & Lockwood, C. M. (2007b). Distribution of the product confidence limits for the indirect effect: Program prodclin. Behavior Research Methods, 39(3), 384–389.
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99–128.
McConney, A., & Perry, L. B. (2010). Science and mathematics achievement in Australia: The role of school socioeconomic composition in educational equity and effectiveness. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9197-4.
Mertens, S., & D’Haenens, L. (2010). The digital divide among young people in Brussels: Social and cultural influences on ownership and use of digital technologies. Communications. The European Journal of Communication Research, 35(2), 187–207. https://doi.org/10.1515/COMM.2010.010.
Micheli, M. (2016). Social networking sites and low-income teenagers: Between opportunity and inequality. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1139614.
OECD (2009). PISA data analysis manual: SPSS (2nd ed.). https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264056275-en
OECD. (2010). Are the new millennium learners making their grade? Technology Use and Educational Performance in PISA. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264076044-en.
OECD (2014a). lPISA 2012 results: What students know and can do (vol. 1, Revised edn., Feb 2014): OECD Publishing.
OECD (2014b). PISA 2012 technical report. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/PISA-2012-technical-report-final.pdf
OECD (2015). Students, computers and learning: OECD Publishing.
Ortiz, R. W., Green, T., & Lim, H. (2011). Families and home computer use: Exploring parent perceptions of the importance of current technology. Urban Education, 46(2), 202–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085910377433.
Petko, D., Cantieni, A., & Prasse, D. (2017). Perceived quality of educational technology matters. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(8), 1070–1091. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116649373.
Pierce, T. (2009). Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus technological communication among teens. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(6), 1367–1372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.06.003.
Polidano, C., Hanel, B., & Buddelmeyer, H. (2013). Explaining the socio-economic status school completion gap. Education Economics, 21(3), 230–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2013.789482.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816.
Richards, C. (2005). The design of effective ICT-supported learning activities: Exemplary models, changing requirements, and new possibilities. Language Learning & Technology, 9(1), 60–79.
Schulz, W. (2005) Measuring the socio-economic background of students and its effect on achievement on PISA 2000 and PISA 2003. In Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April: Online Submission
Shank, D. B., & Cotten, S. R. (2014). Does technology empower urban youth? The relationship of technology use to self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 70, 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.018.
Shera, P., & Mitre, T. (2012). How does socio-economic status influence educational achievement: A multilevel analysis. International Journal of Science, Innovation & New Technology, 1–9.
Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453.
Skryabin, M., Zhang, J., Liu, L., & Zhang, D. (2015). How the ICT development level and usage influence student achievement in reading, mathematics, and science. Computers & Education, 85, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.02.004.
Song, H.-D., & Kang, T. (2012). Evaluating the impacts of ICT use: A multi-level analysis with hierarchical linear modeling. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4), 132–140.
Stevenson, O. (2011). From public policy to family practices: Researching the everyday realities of families’ technology use at home. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(4), 336–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00430.x.
Sung, Y.-T., Tseng, F.-L., Kuo, N.-P., Chang, T.-Y., & Chiou, J.-M. (2014). Evaluating the effects of programs for reducing achievement gaps: A case study in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Education Review, 15(1), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-013-9304-7.
Tofighi, D., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2011). Rmediation: An R package for mediation analysis confidence intervals. Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 692–700. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0076-x.
Tsai, S.-L., Smith, M. L., & Hauser, R. M. (2017). Families, schools, and student achievement inequality. Sociology of Education, 90(1), 64–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040716683779.
Tucker-Drob, E. M., Cheung, A. K., & Briley, D. A. (2014). Gross domestic product, science interest, and science achievement: A person × nation interaction. Psychological Science, 25(11), 2047–2057. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614548726.
van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2014). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487959.
van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4/5), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004.
Vigdor, J. L., Ladd, H. F., & Martinez, E. (2014). Scaling the digital divide: Home computer technology and student achievement. Economic Inquiry, 52(3), 1103–1119. https://doi.org/10.3386/w16078.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed). (Vol. Methodology in the social sciences). New York: Guilford Press.
Yuen, A. H. K., Lau, W. W. F., Park, J. H., Lau, G. K. K., & Chan, A. K. M. (2016). Digital equity and students’ home computing: A Hong Kong study. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(4), 509–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-016-0276-3.
Zhang, Z., Zyphur, M. J., & Preacher, K. J. (2009). Testing multilevel mediation using hierarchical linear models: Problems and solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 695–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428108327450.
Zhong, Z.-J. (2011). From access to usage: The divide of self-reported digital skills among adolescents. Computers & Education, 56(3), 736–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.016.
Zhou, Y., & Wang, D. (2015). The family socioeconomic effect on extra lessons in greater China: A comparison between Shanghai, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macao. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(2), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-014-0187-0.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chiao, C., Chiu, CH. The Mediating Effect of ICT Usage on the Relationship Between Students’ Socioeconomic Status and Achievement. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 27, 109–121 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0370-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0370-9