The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Differences in Student Information and Communication Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender: Evidence of a Digital Divide in Florida Schools
Abstract
This research examines student information and communication technology (ICT) literacy and its relationships to a student’s socio-economic status (SES), gender, and ethnicity of middle school students. We recruited 5,990 students from 13 school districts across the state of Florida. Student participants completed the Student Tool for Technology Literacy (ST2L), a performance-based assessment of ICT literacy skills based on the 2008 National Educational Technology Standards for Students (NETS.S). Results show a digital divide between low and high SES, white and non-white, and female and male students on all measures of the ST2L. Specifically, high-SES, white, and female students outperformed their counterparts. The results provide compelling evidence of a digital divide within Florida schools. The article discusses the implications of the findings for practice and future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Race, Gender, and Information Technology Use: The New Digital Divide
Jackson, L. A., Zhao, Y., Kolenic, A., Fitzgerald, H. E., Harold, R., & Von Eye, A. (2008) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0157 · Cited by 396
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Adelman, N., Donnelly, M. B., Dove, T., Tiffany-Morales, J., Wayne, A., & Zucker, A. (2002). The integrated studies of educational technology: Professional development and teachers’ use of technology. Arlington, VA: SRI International. Retrieved from http://www.sri.com/policy/cep/mst/techtask.html
- 10.2307/2673277 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/019722499128628 · DOI · Paper page
- British Educational Communications and Technology Agency. (2006). The Becta review 2006: Evidence on the progress of ICT in education. Coventry: British Educational Communications and Technology Agency. Retrieved from http://www.publications.becta.org.uk/
- DeBell, M., & Chapman, C. (2006). Computer and Internet use by students in 2003 (NCES 2006-065). Washington, DC: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
- 10.1177/0894439305275911 · DOI · Paper page
- Hesseldahl, A. (2008, December 31). Bringing broadband to the urban poor. Bloomberg BusinessWeek. Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2008/tc20081230_015542.htm
- 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.04.002 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/15391523.2010.10782556 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.004 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2006.05.007 · DOI · Paper page
- Kim, M. C., & Kim, J. K. (2001). Digital divide: Conceptual discussions and prospect. Proceedings of Human Society and the Internet (LNCS 2105), 78–91.
- 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.004 · DOI · Paper page
- Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). (2012). Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/
- 10.22230/ijepl.2008v3n8a146 · DOI
- Van Dijk, J. (2006). Digital divide research: Achievement and shortcomings. Poetic, 34(4,5), 221–235. · DOI · Paper page
- Wayne, A. J., Zucker, A. A., & Powell, T. (2002). So what about the “digital divide” in K-12 schools? Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from http://www.tprc.org/papers/2002/55/TPRC_paper_SRI.pdf
- Wenglinsky, H. (2005). Using technology wisely: The keys to success in schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
- 10.1080/17439884.2011.567991 · doi:10.1080/17439884.2011.567991
- 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.016 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
The Digital Divide Is a Human Rights Issue: Advancing Social Inclusion Through Social Work Advocacy
Sanders, C. K., & Scanlon, E. (2021) · Journal of Human Rights and Social Work · doi:10.1007/s41134-020-00147-9 · Cited by 394
Siddiq, F., Hatlevik, O. E., Olsen, R. V., Throndsen, I., & Scherer, R. (2016) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2016.05.002 · Cited by 269
Schmid, R., & Petko, D. (2019) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.006 · Cited by 144
Educational Technology Conditions to Support the Development of Digital Age Skills
Olszewski, B., & Crompton, H. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103849 · Cited by 93
Huggins, A. C., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Dawson, K. (2014) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.005 · Cited by 52
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ritzhaupt, A. D., Liu, F., Dawson, K., & Barron, A. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Research on Technology in Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2013-06
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 291-307
- ISSN
- 1539-1523 (ISSN-L)
- 1945-0818
- OpenAlex
- W1969728144
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 27.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Differences in Student Information and Communication Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender: Evidence of a Digital Divide in Florida Schools. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/15391523.2013.10782607
- The paper
- Ritzhaupt, A. D., Liu, F., Dawson, K., & Barron, A. E. (2013). Differences in Student Information and Communication Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender: Evidence of a Digital Divide in Florida Schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2013.10782607
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
