READING INITIAL

Theoretical frame work

1. Needed to read about International Student Assessment define about digital literact in which they
define them as the students’ ability to
“ evaluate information from several sources, assessing the credibility and utlitliy of what is written
using self-established criteria as well as the ability to solve tasks that require the reader to locate
information or assessing the credibility and utility of what is written using self-established crtieria as
well as the ability to solve taks that require the reader to locate the information, related to unfamilar
context, in the presence of ambiguity and without explicit directions ( OECD, 2015, p. 50)


In 2006, The European Union launched an initiatiave emphaszing digital competence, based
on OECD’s identified competence areas . the defintion emerged as the Dig comp 2.0
( European commission, 2017_ has developed, from a defintion of digital that mainly
focused on the operation and technical “ know-how” towards one that included more
knolwedge-ortiented cognitive, critical and socially responsible perspective. Many si liar
defintion abound

 Bucking ham , 2010

 Fraillon, Ainley, Schultz, Friedman & Gebhardt, 2014
 Hobbs & Coiro, 2019
 Spante, Hashemi, Lundin, & Algers, 2018

Defining digital literacy throughout the framework

A variety of frameworks defining digital literacy and associated constructs

- information literacy

- Internet and communications technology literacy

- Multimedia literacy
- 21st century skills populate the literature
1. Alexander
2. The discipline reading and learning research 2012
3. Bawden 2008
4. Spante et al, 2018
5. Stordy, 2015

Ng 2012 Suggest that digital

literacy ,arises at the
intersection of students’
technical, cognitive, and socio-
emotional competencies.
 1. The technical dimension of
digital literacy includes the
students technical and
operation skills to use ICT for
learning and in every-day
activities
2. The cognitive dimentions
encompassess the skills
students requires to search
for,evaluate, and create digital
information as well as their
abilities to critically analyze
the information.
3. The Final part is socio-
emotionaldimension of digital
literacy requires that students
to be able to use ICTs for
responsible communication,
collaboration, and other social
goals related to learning
Eshet- Alkalai ( 2004 ) in 1. Photo-visual literacy: refers Ki nang xu ly hinh anh
amore expansive work, to students’ skills in reading or techinically the ability to read
consider students ‘ digital comprehending the graphic from visuals ( use vision to
literacy to include a set of five and other multimedia think)
information that characterizes ( which involving reading and
content on the Internet. undersyanding messaeage,
2. reproduction literacy or such as icons and symbols that
synthesis : refer to students’ are displated visual-
skills in combining disparate graphically)
pieces of information to create Ky nang tai tao ( the creative
a novel product. duplication, which involves
3. Branching literacy : refer to the use of digital tools that
students’ skills in navigating have capabilities to edit and
the range of information combine/ recombine new and
available online and is pre-existing materials for
particulary engaged when example in adding text or
learners try to tranverse hyoer delete text so that it can be
textes , characterized by their used in a completely different
hierarchical or later thinking to context)
one –another Avoid plagiarism with new
4. Information literacy - meaning is created for
information literacy - different contexts without
associated with critical coping
thinking and the ability to Ky nang tong hop
search, locate, and asses (Multidimensional thinking
Web-based information skills-specific skills will
effectively ( very common) imrpove the navigation
An information literate person process on the internet
also needs skills in analyzing because you can remember
and evaluating information to when you found important
use it effectively. information and how to get
Though abundant information that information. It is more
exists, one needs to be able to complicated that concereat
determine whether or not and linear searching skills of
sources of information are books, as the mordern
valid, reliable, accurate, and multimedia allows us to have
of good quality. It is also adegree of freedom in
necessary that one navigating through knolwedge
understands the guidelines domains but also confronts us
and legalities involved when with the problem that involves
using sources of information in need to utlizie non linear
( Analyzing and evaluating the and branching ( phan nhanh)
information, determine the information seeking startegies
abudant information , simply it helps to not get lost
available out there- which in the big domain on the
one should be used and Internet
valuable or not) this could act 4. Ky nang danh gia va phan
like a filter-identify false, tich thong tin, quyet dinh xem
irrelevant, or biased thong tin nao la dung va quan
information and avoids its trong, no se co vai tro nhu la
penetration into the mot cai filter giup cho luong
learnern’s cognition thong tin khong lien quan, sai
5. Socioemotional literacy : lech hoac biased se duoc
associated with the emotional tranh
and social aspects on online 5. ky nag su dung sociological
socializing, collaborating and and emotional skills in order
undertaking day-to-day to understand unwritten rules
chores: banking and in mass communication of
purchasing online for example. cyberspace – annotate as the
it requires the ability to be most complex skills
highly critical and analytical, to 6. This is the missing one in
avoid online traps………. the og model making it a
( practical and can be applied holistic updated model for
in real life) ( use sociological digital literacy
and emotional skills in order to
understand unwritten rules in
mass communication of
cyberspace)
6. Real- time digital skills : a lot
of stimulation ranging from
the multimedia such as
sounds, texts, voice so it is
very important to quickly and
effectively synchronize the
chaotic multimedia stimuli into
one coherent body of
knowledge. More important in
the digital era, as the central
role of fast computers,
multimedia environments - a
real time thinking is not new -
ever since human trying to
 understand and in order to
synchronize information
simultaneously in order to
create new knowledge.

Krumsvik ( 2008, 2014) Calling as the Digital 1. ky nang ICT co ban, ve co

introduced a framework for Competence Model, ban la ky nang su dung ict
the professional digital developed in a Scandinavian 2. ky nang didactic ict hay con
competence that teachers context Krumsvik (2008, 2014) goi la ki nang su dung chien
need to meaningfully use suggest that teachers’ luoc su pham de co the dat
technology in their professional digital dioc nhung muc tieu ve tri
classrooms and recognize its competence includes fcour thuc, lien quan toi ki nang xay
role in students’ lives and in componentns dung kien thuc cua hoc sinh.
society ( krumsvik. 2008, 1. Basic ICT skillls – which refer 3. Ky nang hoc tap yeu cau
2014) to teachers’ hand on giao vien tu xem lai qua trinh
technology uses , including ho hoc ve cong nghe de co the
adoption. Adaption, tu kiem tra qua trinh ho hoc
appropriation, and innovation ve cong nghe and lam cach
2. Didactic ICT competence – nao de process nay co the
refers to teachers’ pedagogical duoc translate toi hoc sinh
technology use or the use of 4. hieu ve the gioi mang noi
technology to accomplish chung
epostemic aims, related to
students; knowledge building.
3. Learning strategies requires In this study, they focus on the
teachers to examine their own first component of Krumsbik
process for learning about (2008 ) indenftied,s pre-
technology and to consider service teachers’ basic ICT
how such processess many skills. Morever in recognition
translate to their students. of their fundamental nature,
4. Digital building is a meta- they focus specifically on what
awarness that connects pre-service teacher
teacher’s technological conceptulaize these ICT
competence to an competenciesn ( or how they
understanding of the greater termed digital literacy or
digitalization of society as a dgital competence ) as
whole, including

The Present study what needed to be tapped into

- What are the inservice teachers of ESL conception of digital literacy in Vietnam ?
- What skills do ESL teachers consider to be the most necessary skills for digital literacy ?

Needed to work on the sample past

The students in which what they learn acorss the country include

The context The in service teacher preparation

 The program focus English teacher, and a placement at schools
The guilding standard
The smapling method
The time point
The survey languaged
The questions
Recently, there has been a push to teach students’ sdigital literacy,or to develop syudents’
21st century literacy skills. How do you define digital literacy ? What skills do you consider to
be necessary for digital literacy ?
Before we list different skills that have been associated with digital literacy. Please select the
five skills you consider to be most critical for digital literacy ?

About the Vietnamese part

- The question is if the instruction in digital literacy is well-represented in teacher education
program or not
- is MOET list them as the standards for teacher prepration porgrams that teachers to be able to “
model and apply technology standards as they design, implement and assess learning experiences
to engage students and improve learning ?” Nevertheless, being able to use technology as a part of
instruction : DOES this ensure that teachers develop well-formed conceptions of digital literacy
and understand how it may be developed in the assessed in their students ? ( Needed to read
about that in SIMARD & KARESENTI, 2016)

Noted about the sample : NEEDED TO ASK about which part of their teaching and schooling that
they wanted to do, and why?, data collected when? However are unqiely presented in this student
group ?

Using open-eneded and selected response questions

All questions were asked in an electronic survey with participants typing their repsonse, to the open-
ended questions and selecting their reponse from a list for the selected0reponse question.

Coding process

Measures and their open-ended questions of digital literacy were placed into one of the four
categories, considered to be progression into the model of sophistication
spefically, participants’ open-ended defintions were coded at as

- Digital reading
- Goal-directed
- Critical use-based conceptions of digital literacy
- Technology backup

The categories were created to be mutally exclusive, such that reponses were placed into one and
only one category of digital literacy conceptions

After defining digital literacy in an open-ended fashion. The response of preservice teachers were
placed into 4 categories and only one categories of digital literacy concept. The categories were
created to be exhaustive, with as many responses as possible to be classifified into these four
categories
And these categories were mutally exclusive, meaning that such responses were placed into one and
only one category of digital literacy conceptions. Additionally, these categories were created to be
exhaustive , with an many reponses as possible classified into these four categories.

Coding categories and sample responses are presented

For the us sample. The cohen’s kappa inter-rater agreement wasbased on……. Responses
the ….. sample and exact agreement…..

With the cohen’s kappa inter-rater agreement equal …… indicating strong agreement , remember
when it could be placed into one category, the more sophisticated digital reading category was
selected.

THE CODING SCHEME

1. Scenario : Either or : with the question of defining the concept of digital literacy

For digital literacy, some one needs to be competent in regular literact and be able to have
knowledge about technologies, could be placed either into the digital reading category or into the
technology – focused category because its insistence that digital literacy requires “ knowledge about
technology. However, always opt for more of a sophisticated digital reading category was
selected.

2. Not a framework

At times, students identified skills not explicity mapping onto our digital framework in which one
student defined digital literacy as “ the skills necessary for digital literacy are being capable of using
technology and being proficent in its use. Also being able to communicated through technology ,
with communicating through technology which are not exclusively mapped into any of the framwork
and the conceptions of digital literact that they defined. However, it could be facilitiated into the
communication part as the technology focused were manifesting in the role of technology in the
facilitating communication.

3. Selected response question regarding to the part

Pre-service teachers were asked to select the skills that they considered to be essential for digital
literacy, from a list provided/ Please select the skills you consider to be most critcal for digital
literacy.

SO How can they generated the list

1. First the generated the literature to identify the key components of digital literacy with those
namely part

- Technological
- Cognitive
- Socio-emotional aspects of digital literacy accroding to the model of Ng (2012)
Basically It could be identified as below following the map of

- Ocassionally
- Habitually
- Internalized
This is the framework with a strong sense of progression and the endoresment of the
selected reponse items by country

Technology focused :understanding of digital For example, The skills considered to be

literacy that is technology - driven and based on necessary would be typing, using a computer like
mastering specific technological tools ( for programs such as Google, and Microsoft Word,
examaple : computers, Internet use) and being able to use Iphone correctly.

A technology focused conception of digital 1. Both Eshet- Alkalai ( 2004) and Ng ( 2012)
literacy was consistent with the construct of recognize the comptence with techology to be a
digital propensity common in the literature on necessary, yet insufficient, componnent of digital
ICT literacy ( Nasha, DaCosta, Kinssell, & Seok, literacy
2010) ( Which could be viewed the same in Vietnam)
It is same with the other previous asseessment There may chance that the participants
in which technology used is often assess via commonly define digital literacy only as
students report use of their technology synonymus with fluent technology use, as
This could be read from the Margaryna, reflected in technology focused conceptions of
Litterjohn & Vojt, 2011) Thomposin , 2013 digital literacy,

Digital reading : is focused on the translation of Reading and inromation available only, as you
traditional print literacy to digital contexts and can not only grant acess to one piece of
all that entails. infromation but multiple sources at one. So it is
Digital reading , less emphasized in literature the skills of using and navagting a computer.
based defintion of digital literacy, has been Reading skills and stay focused
examined in work comparing students ‘ reading 2. Eshet-Alkalai (2004) introduces the notions of
and strategy use when presented with texts branching literacy ( skills in navigating ) and
digitally or in print, ( Brown,2001; Mangen, photo-visual literacy ( skills in coveying images
Walgermo, 7 Bronnick, 2013; Peterson & and icon, symbols) , seemingly reflected in pre-
Alexdaner 2020, Singer & Alexander, 2017s, 2017 service teacher digitial reading –aligned
b) conceptions of digital literacy. Both of these
characteristics include the hyperlinked or
interconnected nature of infromation online
( branching liteacy ) and its stimulation
presentation via a variety of modalities ( photo-
visual literacy).

Goal-directed : an understanding of digital Figuring out ideas and concepts that you need to
literacy that is focused on using digital tools to through a more digital use and reading what you
accomplish specific tasks. need in order to complete that
Goal-directed conceptions of digital literacy are 1. Searching for and selecting relevant
well-represented in the literature. Indeed, a information
number of process models have been introduced However
( Brand- Gruwel, Wopereis, & Walraven, 2009; = the ability of statisfy tak demands, consistent
Rouet & Brit, 2011). Viewing digital literacy as with the goal-directed category of digital literacy
reflective of the process of information problem conceptions, is absent from many frameworks of
solving or of resolving task goals via technology digital literacy ( Bawden, 2008; Eshet- Alkalai
and information use on the Internet ( Mills, 2004, Ng, 2012)
2016)
= Instead they just define the tasks goals that
students need to master in order to be able to
accomplish task goals. Nevertheless, the
prevalance of goal-directed conceptions of
digital literacy acorss require the needs for a
better exisiting framework.
Critical use : an understanding of digital literact Digital literacy as the ability to have an
that see its as the reflective and evaluative understanding and the ability be digital savvy,
process of using technology and reading knowing which technilogical resources to use
digitally, to accomplish task goals. and when or understanding the implications of
. Finally, conceptions of digital literay as the digital age. I consider the open minded and
requiring critical use of those most commonly maturity necessary to be necessary for digital
represented in the research litearurue as well as literacy.
in polict documents setting out standards for 3. Eshet- alkalai ( 2004) intrdouced the notion of
digital literacy ( Bawden, 2008; Coiro, 2003; information literacy, which is the notion of
Koltay, 2011; OECD, 2015) infromation literacy as including students’
abilities to analyze and critically evlaute
information on the Internet. Such analysis and
evaluation –focoused conceptions of digital
literat are reflected in the ciritcal use of category
identified in pre-service teacher’s opne ended
responses

The influence in the use of technology is easier

to recognize and assess than is engagement in
critical reasoning, In other words, for example,
the process of making a video clip as
technologicalfacet of digital literacy can be
discussed with ease more than the critical
evaluation of information that has taken place.
The digital literacy may be expected to represent
not only a skillset but also a collection of
disposition or critical attitudes toward
information

THE PROGRESSION OF THE PROFILES

This could actually be conceptualized as distinct from one another and as progressing in
sophistication. In particular, we may expect pre-service teachers becoming more sophsitcated in
their concepts of digital literacy to move from focusing on technology focued as necessary for digital
literacy to recognizing that critical use of technology is essential as well
Krumsvik (2008, 2011) define the teacher;s professional digital competence introduces a Model of
Digital Competence for Teachers and Teacher Educators. Within the framework, Krumsvik suggests
that as teachers grow in their professional competence, they ehance their basic ICT skills and
didactic ICT competence, come to understand their strategies for technological learning, and
develop digital bildung( Combination of their own digital competence and societal digitalization) .

It is important to mark that the teachers who have their open-ended response were placed into the
crirical use category, considered the most sophisticated of the four defintions of digital literacy ,
were expected to conceptualize digital literacy in terms of its less sophisticated. This was
exemplified in reponses such as : digital literacy would be the process of finding and understanding
digital literature to obtain factual knowledge or evidence about a topic. To be digitally literate
requires proper search skills , rather than as discrete skills able to indentified and isolated.

Prevalance in digital literacy profiles across settings of 2 countries

Open-ended profiles across the national settings
Most of the teachers in the research were most commonly represented in the technology+focused
profile of conceptualzing digital literacy, while being under- represented in the ciritcal use profile.
Again, this pattern is consistent with an account of these four digitalliteracy profiles as progressing in
sophistication. There is no direct comparisoon to the previous worj, yet what they identify are largly
in line with several trends in prior research.
1. For example, the increased prevalance of digital reading and writing in academic settings )
Mangen et al., 2013; Salemron, Stromse, krammer and stadtler, 2018 ; Trakham, Alexander, &
Silverman, 2018).

2. The emphasis on critical analysis and evaluation manifest intodayäs Internet age ( Brassch, braten,
Stromso, Anmarkrdu, 7 Ferguson, 2013, Britt, Route, Blaum, 7 Millis, 2019)

Very important differences emerge is to across the two national setting was the concepts of
teacher’s defintion of digital literacy as reflecting digital reading.

Interesting to observe that in the United States that logically conceptualized digital literacy as
reading and writing with technology, consistent with the digital reading profile. As a contrast, the
term digital competency used in the Swedish survey did not similarly emphasized traditional aspects
of reading and witing with the digital profile. The term used may havec called to mind for the
teachers as the traditional aspects of reading and writing.
Selected response clusters across the national settings
1. Comparing the culster solutions geenrated acorss the United States and Sweden,
differed across the national settings

Sweden The USA

while in the pre-service teachers endosing the endose a single item reflecting technology-
item corrspedoning to critcal use were placed focused, digital reaing, goal 0directed or critical
into two different culsteres one where only the use based conceptions of digital literact,
ciritxal use item was selected and the other equally chose a single item from each
where selection of the ciritcal use item was also
accompnaied by selection of technology-focused

Explanation could be the fact that Swedish

curriculum emphasizes critical thinking to a
greater extent than does the curriculum in the
United States.
Consistent with the polict initiatives pushing for Us on the other hans, often get criticised for
the greater recognition of critial thinking as a their neglect recognition of crital thinking as a
part of digital literacy. Consisten with policy part of digital literacy, substantially, and more
intiatives puhshing for the greater cogntion of pre- service teachers in Sweden placed into the
critical thinking, a deficity that was intended to critical use cluster (35.53%). Than the
be ameliorated through new policolies technology-focused cluster ( 17.36%), In contrast
to Swdenm curricular in The United States have
often been critiqued for their negelct of cirical
thinking.
So it is the difference between the curricular a deficit that was itneted to be ameliorated
along with the policy that inate the differences in through new policies intiativesm such as the
Sweden and then the USA Common Core standards ( Ennish 1989, Wgner,
2008)
At the same time, considering digital literact to That is the reason wheraes 35.54 of pre-service
require critcal thinking is not the same things as teachers in Swden were classfied into critical use
actually thinking critically while completing profile, only
technology- related taks. Indeed, just like At the same time, considering digital literacy to
undergraduatestudents in the United Staes , the require critical thinking is not the same thing as
Sweden students have been founded to actually thinking critically while completing
demonstrate superficial , rather than deep-level technologu-related
source evaluation and Swedish teachers have
noticed the deficits in critial thinking as key
goal in curricula and having students and
teacher recognize it as such, to be an important
firststep to further intergrating critical thinking,
particulary about digital literacy, into school
instruction.

Examined the undergraduates’ attitudes towards and beliefs about digital lityeracy ( Gracia- MARTIN
& Gracia – Sanchez,2017, Maragunic & Granic, 2015). We contribute to the literature by asking more
fundamental questions
How do they the pre-service teacher could conceptualize the competence in digital literacy that they
are expected to develop. In doing so, they identify four the distinct and discernible profiles of
digital literacy conceptions.

The framework is able to inform both service and pre-service teacher preparation and assessment in
the area of digital literacy and potentially teacher’s own conceptions of activities related to digital
literacy. Moreover, we both validate there whereby unique national educational policy settings may
eb associated with pre-service teachers’ conceptions, as reflected in the emphasis on critcal
evaluation found among Swedish participants. As such, this study is unique in connecting individual
pre-service teachers’ psycholigcal conceptions of digital literacy with broader national and
educational trends.

Aims was to extend prior work investigating pre-service teachers’ understandings of digital literacy
- Brunett, 2011

- Martinovic & Zhang, 2012

Hargittai, 2009 or Piror, Maznov, Meacheam, Heaslip and Hanson, 20016 ( the approach of
stand in the surbey and self-report measure that tried to get at pre-service teachers’
 conceptions of digital literacy indirectly, for instance by asking them to self-report their ICT-
activities that they use in the classroom ( Hargittai, 2009)
- The methodology will not asked the participants to define how the conceptions of digital
literacy will be employed in the classroom settings.
- Should follow throughput their degree program or even how their practicum placements in
the classroom.
Implications
single cluster analysis, select a subset of items for inclusion.
For instance, Gracia- Martin and Gracia- Sanchez, ( 2017) examined pre-service teachers;
use and perceptions of various technology paltforms across four years , similar corss-
sectional and longitudinal work can be used to examine the development of pre-service
teachers’conceptions of digital literacy, if valid and reliable measures were developed.
- Many teachers constitutes a relatively improverished understanding of dgiital literacy and
does not include an appreciation of the need to teach,

Pre-service teachers conception Policy and Policy and curriculum of Vietnamese

curriculum of teachers about digital literacy
Vietnamese teacher
about digital
literacy in teaching
English
Digital literacy Digital literacy Digital literacy and pre-service
1.Borwn ( 2001) framework teacher
Beyond print: Reading digitally 1/ Eshet- Alkalai, y 1.Brunett C ( 2011) : Pre-service
2. Buckingham, D : The future of (2004), Digital teacher;s digital literacy practices :
media literacy in the digital age : literacy, a Exploring contegenties identity and
Same challenges for policy and conceptual digital literacy in and out of
practice ftamwork for educational contexts.
3. Media Education Journal, 47. 3-10 survical skills in the 2.Digital competence framework for
4. Cai, J gut D Literacy and Digital digital era citizens ( Digi comp2.1)
problem-solving skills in the 21st 2. Eshet-Alkalai, Y 3.Fives, H.Buehl, M.M ( 2012) spring
century : What PIAAC says about (2012) Diigtal cleaning for the messy construct of
educators in the United Staes, literacy Thinking in teachers’ beliefs
Canadam Finland, and Japan , the digital ear : A
Teaching Education revise model for 4. Conole, G., De Laat, M., Dillon, T.,
Chetty, K., Qigui, L., Gcora, N., Josie, digital literacy. & Darby, J. (2008). Disruptive
J., Wenwei, L., & Fang, C. (2018). 3.Eshet- Alkalai,Y, technologies, pedagogical innovation:
5. Bridging the digital divide: Amichai- what’s new? Findings from an in-
Measuring digital literacy. Economics: Hambuerger, Y depth study of students’ use
The open-access. OpenAssessment E- (2004) Experiments and perception of technology.
Journal, 12(2018–23), 1–20. in digital literacy. Computers & Education, 50(2), 511–
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/177899. European 524.
6. Coiro, J. (2003). Exploring literacy Commission https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2
on the internet: Reading 4. rumsvik, R. J. 007.09.009
comprehension on the internet: (2008). Situated 5. Conole, G., De Laat, M., Dillon, T.,
Expanding our understanding of learning and & Darby, J. (2008). Disruptive
reading comprehension to teachers’ digital technologies, pedagogical innovation:
encompass new literacies. The competence. what’s new? Findings from an in-
Reading Teacher, 56(5), 458–464. Education and depth study of students’ use
https://www.jstor.org/stable/202052 Information and perception of technology.
24 Technologies, Computers & Education, 50(2), 511–
7. Critical thinking and subject 13(4), 279–290. 524.
specifcity : Clarification and needed https://doi.org/10.1 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2
research. Educational researcher 007/s10639- 007.09.009.
8. Hargittai, E (2009) AN update on 008-9069-5. 6. Ertmer, p.a ( 2005) Teacher
survey measures of web-oriented 5. Krumsvik, R. J. pedagogical beliefs, The final frontier
digital literacy, Social Science (2011). Digital in out quest for technology
Computer Review competence in the intergration ?
9. Nasah, A., DaCosta, B., Kinsell, C., & Norwegian teacher 7. Ertmer, Pa. Sadik O Teacher beliefs
Seok, S. (2010). The digital literacy education and and technology integrarion practices :
debate: An investigation of digital schools. Hogre € A critical relationship.
propensity and information and Utbildning, 1(1), 8. Fraillon, J, Ainley, J schulz,
communication 39–51. preparing for life in a digital age : the
technology. Educational Technology 6. Krumsvik, R. J. IEA international comoyter anf
Research and Development, 58(5), (2014). Teacher information literacy study
531–555. educators’ digital inyernational report
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010- competence. 9. Franckle, H, Sundin, O (2012)
9151-8. Scandinavian Negotiating the role of sources :
10. Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach Journal of Educators’ conceptions of credibility
digital natives digital literacy? Educational in participatory media. Library &
Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065– Research, 58(3), Information Science Rsearcg, 34 (3)-
1078. 269–280 169-175
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2 6. Lai, P. C. (2017). 10. Gracia- Martin, J& Gracia-
012.04.016. The literature Schanez, J.N(2017). Pre-service
11. Noh, Y. (2019). A comparative review of teachers’ perceptions of the
study of public libraries’ contribution technology competence dimension of digital
to digital inclusion in Korea and the adoption models literacy and of psychological and
United States. Journal of Librarianship and theories for the educational measures.
and Information novelty technology. 11. Gunes, E and Bahcivan E (2018). A
Science, 51(1), 59–77. JISTEM-Journal of mixed research-based model for pre-
https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000616 Information service science teachers’ digital
668571 Systems and literacy : Responses to which beliefs
12. Prior, D. D., Mazanov, J., Technology and how and why they interact
Meacheam, D., Heaslip, G., & Hanson, Management, questions.
J. (2016). Attitude, digital literacy and 14(1), 21–38. 12. Hatlevik, O.E.Guomundottir. G.B
self efficacy: Flow-on effects for https://doi.org/10.4 & Loi m ( 2015) Digital diversity
online learning behavior. The 301/s1807- among upper diversity among upper
Internet and Higher Education, 29, 1775201700010000 secondary students : A multilevel
91–97. 2. analysis of the relationship between
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.201 7. Mangen, A., cultural capaital, self-efficacy ,
6.01.001. Walgermo, B. R., & strategic use of information and
Brønnick, K. (2013). digital competence. Computers and
13. Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Reading linear texts Education
Relevance processes in multiple on paper versus 13. Hatelvik, O.E and L. Loi. M (2018)
document comprehension. In M. T. computer screen: Students’ ICT self-efficacy and
McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Effects on reading computer and information literacy :
Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance comprehension. Determinants and relationships
and learning from text (pp. 19–52). International between cultural capital, self-efficacy,
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Journal of strategic use of infromation and
Publishing, Inc. Educational digital competence,
14. Salmeron, � L., Strømsø, H. I., Research, 58, 61– 14. Hobbs, R & Coior, Design features
Kammerer, Y., Stadtler, M., & van den 68. of a professonal development
Broek, P. (2018). Comprehension https://doi.org/10.1 program in digital literacy, Media,
processes in digital reading. Learning 016/j.ijer.2012.12.0 Culture and Society
to read in a digital world (pp. 02 1.5 Fcacto influencing preservice
91–120). John Benjamins Publishing 8. Maranguni�c, teacher;s intention to use technology
Company. N., & Grani�c, A. : TPACK, teacher self efficacy, and
15. Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2015). Technology technology accpetnace.
(2017a). Reading across mediums: acceptance model: 16. Lee, C., Yeung, A. S., & Cheung, K.
Effects of reading digital and print A literature review W. (2019). Learner perceptions
texts on comprehension and from 1986 to 2013. versus technology usage: A study of
calibration. The Journal of Universal Access in adolescent English learners in Hong
Experimental Education, 85(1), 155– the Information Kong secondary schools.
172. Society, 14(1), 81– Computers & Education, 133, 13–26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.20 95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2
16.1143794. https://doi.org/ 019.01.005.
16. Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. 10.1007/s10209- 17. List, A. (2019). Defining digital
(2017b). Reading on paper and 014-0348-1 literacy development: An
digitally: What the past decades of examination of pre-service teachers’
empirical research reveal. Review of beliefs. Computers & Education, 138,
Educational Research, 87(6), 146–158.
1007–1041. 18. List, A., Alexander, P. A., &
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317 Stephens, L. A. (2017). Trust but
72296 verify: Examining the association
17. ofkova Hashemi, S., & Cederlund, between students’ sourcing
K. (2017). Making room for the behaviors and ratings of text
transformation of literacyInstruction trustworthiness. Discourse Processes,
in the digital classroom. Journal of 54(2), 83–104.
Early Childhood Literacy, 17 19. List, A., Peterson, E. G.,
(2), 221–253. Alexander, P. A., & Loyens, S. M.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798416 (2018). The role of educational
630779 context in beliefs about knowledge,
18. Spante, M., Sofkova Hashemi, S., information, and truth: an
Lundin, M., & Algers, A. (2018). Digital exploratory
competence and digital literacy in study. European Journal of
higher education research: Psychology of Education, 33(4), 685–
Systematic review of concept 705
use. Cogent Education. 20.. Ma, W. W. K., Andersson, R., &
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.20 Streith, K. O. (2005). Examining user
18.1519143. acceptance of computer technology:
19. Stordy, P. (2015). Taxonomy of An empirical study of student
literacies. Journal of Documentation, teachers. Journal of Computer
71(3), 456–476. Assisted Learning, 21(6), 387–395.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2013- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
0128. 2729.2005.00145.x
21. Maggioni, L., Riconscente, M. M.,
20. Thompson, P. (2013). The digital & Alexander, P. A. (2006).
natives as learners: technology use Perceptions of knowledge and beliefs
patterns and approaches to learning. among undergraduate students in
Computers & Education, 65, 12–33. Italy and in the United States.
https://doi.org/10.1016/ Learning and Instruction, 16(5), 467–
j.compedu.2012.12.022 491.
21. Trakhman, L. M. S., Alexander, P. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstru
A., & Silverman, A. B. (2018). Profiling c.2006.09.006
reading in print and digital mediums. 22. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., &
Learning and Instruction, 57, 5–17. Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a
https://doi.org/ myth or reality? University students’
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.001. use of digital technologies.
22. Computers & Education, 56(2),
Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2009). One 429–440.
Europe, digitally divided. In A. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2
Chadwick, & P. N. Howard (Eds.), 010.09.004.
Routledge Handbook of Internet 23. Martinovic, D., & Zhang, Z. (2012).
politics (pp. 288–305). New York, Situating ICT in the teacher education
NY: Routledge. program: Overcoming challenges,
23. Visser, M. (2013). Digital literacy fulfilling expectations. Teaching and
and public policy through the library Teacher Education: An
lens. Maine Policy Review, 22(1), International Journal of Research and
104–113. Studies, 28(3), 461–469.
https://digitalcommons.library.umain https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.1
e.edu/mpr/ 2.001.
vol22/iss1/27. 24. Mills, S. (2006). Using the internet
for active teaching and learning! New
24. Wagner, T. (2008). Even our Jersey: Pearson Publishing.
“best” schools are failing to prepare Muis, K. R., & Sinatra, G. M. (2008).
students for 21st-century careers and University cultures and epistemic
citizenship. Educational Leadership, beliefs: Examining differences
66(2), 20–24 between two academic
environments. In M. S. Khine (Ed.),
Knowing, knowledge and beliefs (pp.
137–150). Dordrecht: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-
6596-5_6
25. Porat, E., Blau, I., & Barak, A.
(2018). Measuring digital literacies:
Junior high-school students’
perceived competencies versus
actual performance. Computers &
Education, 126, 23–36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2
018.06.030.
26. Scherer, R., Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F.,
& Baran, E. (2018). The importance of
attitudes toward technology for pre-
service teachers’ technological,
pedagogical, and
content knowledge: Comparing
structural equation modeling
approaches. Computers in Human
Behavior, 80, 67–80.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.1
 1.003.
27. Schmid, R., & Petko, D. (2019).
Does the use of educational
technology in personalized learning
environments correlate with self-
reported digital skills and beliefs of
secondary-school students?
Computers & Education, 136, 75–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2
019.03.006
Simard, S., & Karsenti, T. (2016). A
quantitative and qualitative inquiry
into future teachers’ use of
information and communications
technology to develop students’
information literacy skills. Canadian
Journal of Learning and Technology,
42(5), 1–23
28. Stuart, C., & Thurlow, D. (2000).
Making it their own: Preservice
teachers’ experiences, beliefs, and
classroom practices. Journal of
Teacher Education, 51(2), 113–121.
https://doi.org/
10.1177/002248710005100205.
29. Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S.
(2008). Understanding pre-service
teachers’ computerattitudes:
Applying and extending the
technology acceptance model.
Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2),
128–143.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
2729.2007.0024

Vietnamese context Finnish context? Vietnamese teacher who teach ESL as

second language

Research
Creswell Desiging and conducting
mixed methods research
Noru�sis, M. J. (2011). IBM SPSS
statistics 19 guide to data analysis.
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall
Selwyn, N., & Pangrazio, L. (2018).
Doing data differently? Developing
personal data tactics and strategies
amongst young mobile media users.
Big Data & Society, 5
(1).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718
765021.