Predicting Secondary School Students’ 21st-Century Skills Through Their Digital Literacy and Problem-Solving Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research aims to determine whether secondary school students’ digital literacy and problem-solving skills predict 21st-century skills. It is a correlational survey study. The population of the research is the students studying in secondary schools in formal education institutions in Elazig. The sample of the research is 490 secondary school students determined by the disproportionate cluster sampling method. Data collection tools in the research are demographic information form, digital literacy scale, problem-solving inventory for primary school children, and 21st-century skill scale. The research makes use of parametric tests for the analysis of the data as the data fulfill the normal distribution condition. The results show that while the digital literacy and 21st-century skill levels of secondary school students are not very high, their problem-solving skills are high. The results also show that the problem-solving and 21st-century skill levels of secondary school students differ significantly by gender, and mother and father’s education level while there is no significant difference between secondary school students’ digital literacy levels by their father’s education level. The results of the research also show that there is a positive and moderately significant relationship between the problem-solving skills of secondary school students and their digital literacy levels. The results also indicate that there is a significant relationship between the communication sub-dimension of secondary school students’ 21st-century skills and digital literacy levels, and between the “confidence in problem-solving skills” and “avoidance” sub-dimensions of problem-solving skills. While the significant relationships identified are negative in the avoidance sub-dimension, they are positive in other dimensions. The results show that digital literacy and problem-solving skills do not significantly predict secondary school students’ 21st-century skill levels. However, secondary school students’ 21st-century skill and problem-solving skill levels significantly predict their digital literacy level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".