MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407985270 · doi:10.5539/hes.v15n1p316

The Development of a Digital Literacy Assessment Tool for Thai Grade 10-12 Students

2025· article· en· W4407985270 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nattapon Yotha

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital literacy in education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationLiteracyTechnological literacyPsychologyDigital literacyMedical educationEducational technologyComputer sciencePedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study aimed to create and validate a digital literacy assessment tool's quality for students in Grades 10-12 within the Thai educational context, and 2) to develop T-score norms derived from the results of the digital literacy assessment tool for students in Grades 10-12 in this context. The study followed a research and development (R&D) approach, including content validation, pilot testing, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for construct validation. The participants consisted of 1,590 Grade 10-12 students from schools under the Phetchabun Secondary Educational Service Area Office, Thailand. Content validity was assessed using the Index of Congruence (IOC), and construct validity was verified using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Item difficulty, discrimination indices, and reliability (KR-20) were also analyzed. The results showed that the assessment tool demonstrated strong content validity (IOC = 0.60-1.00), acceptable difficulty levels (0.20-0.80), and discrimination indices (0.22-0.74). CFA confirmed the six-component model with excellent fit indices. The tool’s overall reliability was 0.94, with component reliability ranging from 0.70 to 0.83. T-score norms were developed to interpret student performance. This study provides a systematically validated digital literacy assessment tool tailored to the Thai educational context, supporting effective measurement and development of students' digital competencies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.387 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicDigital literacy in educationFrench-language works237,207