Advertisement

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ICT USE AND SCIENCE KNOWLEDGE FOR CZECH STUDENTS: A SECONDARY ANALYSIS OF PISA 2006

  • Milan KubiatkoEmail author
  • Katerina Vlckova
Article

ABSTRACT

The 2006 Programme for International Student Assessment focussed on students’ scientific competencies, measured their knowledge and provided questionnaires focussed on different aspects of life. One aspect was students’ experience with information and communication technology (ICT). A secondary analysis of variance of the Czech Republic data (N = 5,932 students) was conducted using the science knowledge test score and ICT familiarity items. The science knowledge items explored different thematic areas, such as evolution, mousepox, genetics and acid rain. The main result was that students who were connected in some way with ICT achieved better scores on the science knowledge test in comparison with students who were not. Furthermore, students whose ICT activity was connected with the educational process achieved a higher score in comparison with students whose ICT activity was not connected with the educational process.

KEY WORDS

Czech Republic ICT information and communication technology large-scale data PISA science knowledge students 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Ainley, J., Banks, D., & Fleming, M. (2002). The influence of IT: Perspectives from five Australian schools. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(4), 395–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. O., Lin, H.-S., Treagust, D. F., Ross, S. P., & Yore, L. D. (2007). Using large-scale assessment datasets for research in science and mathematics education: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(4), 591–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baggott la Velle, L. M., Watson, K. E., & Nichol, J. D. (2001). OtherScope—the virtual microscope—can the real learning experiences in practical science be simulated? International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management, 2(5/6), 539–556.Google Scholar
  4. Baggott la Velle, L. M., McFarlane, A., & Brawn, R. (2003). Knowledge transformation through ICT in science education: A case study in teacher-driven curriculum development. Case study 1. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 183–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barak, M. (2007). Transition from traditional to ICT-enhanced learning environments in undergraduate chemistry courses. Computers & Education, 48(1), 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baylor, A. L., & Ritchie, D. (2002). What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers & Education, 39(4), 395–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beauchamp, G., & Parkinson, J. (2005). Beyond the ‘wow’ factor: Developing interactivity with the interactive whiteboard. School Science Review, 86(316), 97–103.Google Scholar
  8. Brewer, C. (2003). Computer in the classroom: How information technology can improve conservation education. Conservation Biology, 17(3), 657–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Castillo, N. (2006). The implementation of information and communication technology (ICT): An investigation into the level of use and integration of ICT by secondary school teachers in Chile. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, King’s College London, University of London, England.Google Scholar
  10. Chambers, A., & Davies, G. (2001). ICT and language learning. A European perspective. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  11. Charness, N., Kelley, C. L., Bosman, E. A., & Mottram, M. (2001). Word processing training and retraining: Effects of adult age, experience, and interface. Psychology and Aging, 16(1), 110–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cox, M. J. (2000). Information and communication technologies: Their role and value for science education. In M. Monk & J. Osborne (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching—what research has to say (pp. 142–158). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cox, M. J., & Abbott, C. (2004). ICT and attainment: A review of the research literature. London: British Educational Communications & Technology Agency, Department for Education & Skills.Google Scholar
  14. Cox, M. J., & Marshall, G. (2007). Effects of ICT: Do we know what we should know? Education and Information Technologies Journal, 12(1), 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dede, C., & Palombo, M. (2004). Virtual worlds for learning. Threshold (Summer), 16–20.Google Scholar
  16. Demiraslan, Y., & Usluel, Y. K. (2008). ICT integration processes in Turkish schools: Using activity theory to study issues and contradictions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 458–474.Google Scholar
  17. Dondlinger, M. J. (2007). Educational video game design: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Educational Technology, 4(1), 21–31.Google Scholar
  18. Feinsinger, P. (2001). Designing field studies for biodiversity conservation. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  19. Finlayson, H., & Rogers, L. (2003). Does ICT in science really work in the classroom? Part 1: The individual teacher experience. School Science Review, 84(309), 105–111.Google Scholar
  20. Hand, B., Prain, V., & Yore, L. D. (2001). Sequential writing tasks’ influence on science learning. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 105–129). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  21. Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hitch, M. (2000). Another dimension: Introducing ICT into science lessons is easy, time-saving and enjoyable. Times Educational Supplement Curriculum Special, Spring, pp.18–19.Google Scholar
  23. Jedeskog, G., & Nissen, J. (2004). ICT in the classroom: Is doing more important than knowing? Education and Information Technologies, 9(1), 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. John, P. (2005). The sacred and the profane: Subject sub-culture, pedagogical practice and teachers’ perceptions of the classroom uses of ICT. Educational Review, 57(4), 471–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kennewell, S., & Morgan, A. (2006). Factors influencing learning through play in ICT settings. Computers & Education, 46(3), 265–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Korte, W. B., & Hüsing, T. (2007). Benchmarking access and use of ICT in European schools 2006: Results from head teacher and a classroom teacher surveys in 27 European countries. eLearning Papers, 2(1). Available from http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media11563.pdf.
  27. Lim, P. C., & Tay, L. Z. (2003). Information and communication technologies (ICT) in an elementary school: Students’ engagement in higher order thinking. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(4), 425–451.Google Scholar
  28. Lin, J. M. C., Lee, G. C., & Chen, H. Y. (2004). Exploring potential uses of ICT in Chinese language arts instruction: Eight teachers’ perspectives. Computers & Education, 42(2), 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Munro, R. (2002). Curriculum focused ICT—the critical resource. In D. M. Watson & J. Andersen (Eds.), Networking the learner. Computers in education (pp. 179–188). Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  30. O’Neil, H. F., Wainess, R., & Baker, E. L. (2005). Classification of learning outcomes: Evidence from the computer games literature. The Curriculum Journal, 16(5), 455–474.Google Scholar
  31. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2007). PISA 2006 science competencies for tomorrow’s world (vol. 1: Analysis). Paris: Author.Google Scholar
  32. Osborne, J., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Literature review in science education and the role of ICT: Promise, problems and future directions. Futurelab Report No. 6. Available from http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Secondary_Science_Review.pdf.
  33. Preston, C. J. (2008). Braided learning: An emerging process observed in e-communities of practice. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 4(2), 220–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reece, G. J. (2005). Critical thinking and cognitive transfer: Implications for the development of online information literacy tutorials. Research Strategies, 20(4), 482–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reynolds, D., Treharne, D., & Tripp, H. (2003). ICT—the hopes and the reality. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 151–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Robertson, S. L. (2005). Re-imagining and rescripting the future of education: Global knowledge economy discourses and the challenge to education systems. Comparative Education, 41(2), 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ruthven, K., Hennessy, S., & Brindley, S. (2004). Teacher representations of the successful use of computer-based tools and resources in teaching and learning secondary English, Mathematics and Science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 259–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shachaf, P. (2008). Cultural diversity and information and communication technology impacts on global virtual teams: An exploratory study. Information & Management, 45(2), 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Smeets, E. (2005). Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education? Computers & Education, 44(3), 343–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sohail, M. S., & Daud, S. (2009). Knowledge sharing in higher education institutions: Perspectives from Malaysia. VINE, 39(2), 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Speier, C., Vessey, I., & Valacich, J. S. (2003). The effects of interruptions, task complexity, and information presentation on computer-supported decision-making performance. Decision Sciences, 34(4), 771–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stephenson, J. (Ed.). (2001). Learner-managed learning—an emerging pedagogy for online learning. Teaching and learning online: Pedagogies for new technologies. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  43. Vogel, D., & Klassen, J. (2001). Technology-supported learning: Status, issues and trends. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(1), 104–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Volman, M., & Van Eck, E. (2001). Gender equity and information technology in education: The second decade. Review of Educational Research, 71(4), 613–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Volman, M., Van Eck, E., Heemsker, I., & Kuiper, E. (2004). New technologies, new differences. Gender and ethnic differences in pupils’ use of ICT in primary and secondary education. Computers & Education, 45(1), 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang, T. J. (2008). Using ICT to enhance academic learning: Pedagogy and practice. Educational Research and Review, 3(4), 101–106.Google Scholar
  47. Wentling, T. L., Park, J., & Peiper, C. (2006). Learning gains associated with annotation and communication software designed for large undergraduate classes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 36–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wood, D. (2009). Comments on “Learning with ICT: New perspectives on help seeking and information searching.” Computers & Education, 53(4), 1048–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yore, L. D., Pimm, D., & Tuan, H.-L. (2007). The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(4), 559–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Educational Research Centre, Faculty of EducationMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations