A study of factors influencing digital ethical literacy among elementary and secondary pre-service teachers: a structural equation modeling analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the application and development of generative AI technologies such as ChatGPT in the field of education and teaching, higher requirements have been put forward to improve the digital ethical literacy of pre-service teachers.However, there are still impediments to the current development of digital ethical literacy among pre-service teachers.Therefore, based on the social cognitive theory, this study aims to discuss the individual-level, behavioral-level, environmental-level, and social-level factors and their relationships that affect pre-service teachers' digital ethics literacy.A total of 524 preservice teachers in China were used as the study population.The study found that the factors influencing pre-service teachers' digital ethics literacy include seven dimensions: personal values and digital ethics awareness at the individual level, digital ethics education competence and digital technology use skills at the behavioral level, resources and environment of the school and related educational policies at the environmental level, and social recognition at the social level.Among them, there are some interactions between the individual and behavioral dimensions, the environment and individual dimensions, the environment and behavioral dimensions, the individual, behavioral and environmental dimensions, and the social and individual behavioral dimensions two by two, and they play a positive influence on improving the digital ethical literacy of the pre-service teachers, but the interactions between the social and environmental dimensions are not significant.On this basis, the improvement of digital ethical literacy of pre-service teachers is discussed to provide some references for the related research on improving digital ethical literacy of pre-service teachers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".