The relationship between students’ use of ICT for social communication and their computer and information literacy

Meral Alkan; Sabine Meinck

doi:10.1186/s40536-016-0029-z

Large-scale Assessments in Education

An IEA-ETS Research Institute Journal

Table 2 Regression coefficients

From: The relationship between students’ use of ICT for social communication and their computer and information literacy

Country	Variable		Model 1		Model 2		Model 3
Australia	Constant		509.9		501.4		512.2
	E-communication		40.8	*	38.0	*	29.1	*
	Gender				21.2	*	18.3	*
	SES						28.2	*
Chile	Constant		449.1		441.7		452.9
	E-communication		54.4	*	51.8	*	38.3	*
	Gender				18.4	*	18.9	*
	SES						31.6	*
Croatia	Constant		478.5		472.9		483.4
	E-communication		40.5	*	39.4	*	29.3	*
	Gender				13.2	*	14.0	*
	SES						22.5	*
Czech Republic	Constant		533.9		530.9		535.3
	E-communication		23.1	*	21.2	*	18.0	*
	Gender				9.2	*	8.2	*
	SES						19.6
Germany^a	Constant		497.7		492.1		502.0
	E-communication		36.2	*	34.8	*	25.6	*
	Gender				13.9	*	15.0	*
	SES						24.8	*
Republic of Korea	Constant		519.2		504.4		507.2
	E-communication		41.1	*	37.1	*	34.9	*
	Gender				33.6	*	33.6	*
	SES						17.4	*
Lithuania	Constant		443.1		439.4		460.1
	E-communication		61.6	*	59.9	*	42.6	*
	Gender				10.7	*	8.9	*
	SES						24.6	*
Norway (Grade 9)	Constant		495.9		487.3		497.8
	E-communication		46.8	*	44.5	*	34.8	*
	Gender				21.2	*	22.0	*
	SES						19.4	*
Poland	Constant		508.9		505.8		511.8
	E-communication		32.5	*	30.6	*	25.1	*
	Gender				10.0	*	8.4	*
	SES						28.0	*
Russian Federation^b	Constant		468.5		466.2		477.8
	E-communication		57.0	*	55.5	*	44.4	*
	Gender				7.2	*	6.1	*
	SES						20.2	*
Slovak Republic	Constant		454.0		450.5		467.6
	E-communication		74.6	*	73.5	*	59.2	*
	Gender				8.8	*	10.0	*
	SES						29.3	*
Slovenia	Constant		496.2		485.5		488.0
	E-Communication		20.6	*	17.4	*	15.2	*
	Gender				26.8	*	27.8	*
	SES						18.5	*
Thailand^b	Constant		342.7		340.9		350.3
	E-communication		65.5	*	65.2	*	45.4	*
	Gender				3.9		7.2
	SES						34.5	*
Turkey	Constant		331.6		329.6		344.2
	E-communication		58.0	*	58.2	*	44.0	*
	Gender				3.9		3.7
	SES						27.2	*
Ontario, Canada	Constant		523.5		515.4		524.8
	E-communication		31.8	*	28.2	*	20.8	*
	Gender				22.6	*	21.2	*
	SES						19.2	*
Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada	Constant		501.9		490.4		496.3
	E-communication		35.4	*	28.9	*	27.1	*
	Gender				30.4	*	27.8	*
	SES						22.0	*
Countries not meeting sample requirements
Denmark	Constant	525.9			520.3		528.1
	E-communication	19.5		*	17.9	*	13.1
	Gender				14.7	*	13.9	*
	SES						19.2	*
Hong Kong, SAR	Constant	480.3			472.5		499.3
	E-communication	50.9		*	48.9	*	34.6	*
	Gender				18.9	*	12.8	*
	SES						11.1	*
Netherlands	Constant	496.1			488.8		Not included^c
	E-communication	49.5		*	48.0	*
	Gender				17.7	*
	SES
Switzerland	Constant	511.9			508.7		508.1
	E-communication	18.7		*	18.4	*	20.1	*
	Gender				7.1		8.8
	SES						17.0	*
City of Buenos Aires, Argentina	Constant	416.8			416.8		427.9
	E-communication	56.4		*	56.4	*	48.0	*
	Gender				0.1		−0.2
	SES						37.2	*
Cross-national average	Constant	475.5			469.6		478.8
	E-communication	43.6		*	41.6	*	32.5	*
	Gender				14.9	*	14.3	*
	SES						23.6	*

* Statistically significant (p < 0.05) coefficients
^aMet guidelines for sampling participation rates only after replacement schools were included
^bCountry surveyed the same cohort of students but at the beginning of the next school year
^cDue to missing occupation codes no SES variable was derived, hence Model 3 was not applicable

Back to article page