《NCES：2023年國際計算機和信息素養國際比較研究（ICILS）-美國測評結果網絡報告（英文版）（46頁）.pdf》由會員分享，可在線閱讀，更多相關《NCES：2023年國際計算機和信息素養國際比較研究（ICILS）-美國測評結果網絡報告（英文版）（46頁）.pdf（46頁珍藏版）》請在三個皮匠報告上搜索。

1、ICILS 2023 U.S.Results ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Explore international achievement in computer and information literacy and computational thinking The 2023 International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS)is the third cycle of a computer-based international assessment sponsored by the Intern

2、ational Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA).ICILS is designed to measure 8th-grade students capacities to use information and communication technology(ICT)productively for a variety of different purposes beyond basic use of digital technology and consists of two tests,one

3、required,computer and information literacy,1 and one optional,computational thinking.2 Thirty-five education systems,including the United States,assessed computer and information literacy in 2023,and 24 education systems,including the United States,assessed computational thinking.However,two educati

4、on systems,the Netherlands and Chile,are not included in the report due to issues with the main survey data collection.1 Computer and information literacy(CIL)refers to an individuals ability to use computers to investigate,create,and communicate in order to participate effectively at home,at school

5、,in the workplace,and in society.2 Computational thinking(CT)refers to an individuals ability to recognize aspects of real-world problems that are appropriate for computational formulation and to evaluate and develop algorithmic solutions to those problems so that the solutions could be operationali

6、zed with a computer.The study also offers contextual data from students,teachers,principals,and ICT coordinators to provide information on experiences that may influence computer and information literacy and computational thinking success.The findings from this study provide relevant information for

7、 the U.S.Department of Educations 2024 National Education Technology Plan which highlights the potential of technology to be“a powerful tool to help transform learning.”3 3 U.S.Department of Education,Office of Educational Technology.(2024).National Educational Technology Plan.Washington,DC.Availabl

8、e at:https:/tech.ed.gov/netp/.As the 2023 ICILS results show,the average score for U.S.8th-grade students was not measurably different from the average of students across other education systems(the ICILS average4)in computer and information literacy and was 22 points below the ICILS average in comp

9、utational thinking.The U.S.average score was 482 for computer and information literacy and 461 for computational thinking.The scores on both scales were lower in 2023 compared to U.S.performance in 2018.U.S.female 8th-grade students outperformed their male peers in computer and information literacy,

10、but female and male scores in computational thinking were not measurably different.Among U.S.8th-grade students,while 76 percent agreed that using ICT at school makes learning more fun,54 percent hoped that using ICT would be an important part of their future job.A smaller percentage(37 percent)hope

11、d that their future job would involve programming.4 The ICILS international average is the average of all non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.U.S.results are not included in the ICILS international average because t

12、he U.S.response rates were below the international requirement for a participation rate of 85 percent.Suggested Citation:U.S.Department of Education,National Center for Education Statistics.(2024).U.S.Results From the 2023 International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS)Web Report(NCES 2

13、024-181).Washington,DC.Retrieved date from https:/nces.ed.gov/surveys/icils/icils2023/.Page 1 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results More than half of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported using word-processor software(58 percent)and presentation software(57 percent)in most,almost every,or every lesson(higher perce

14、ntages than the ICILS averages).Higher percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers also rated their ability to produce presentations(91 percent),create computer-based assessments(87 percent),use a spreadsheet program(83 percent),use a learning management system(80 percent),and edit video content(66 percen

15、t)moderately or very well than the ICILS averages.Finally,52 percent of U.S.students attended schools where principals reported that teachers willingness to use ICT in their teaching substantially increased because of COVID-19 experiences.The technical notes for the 2023 ICILS,additional information

16、,the questionnaires,FAQs,and the full international report,An International Perspective on Digital Literacy,are also available.5 5 For the Accessible version of all tables in this report,please see the corresponding data tables(Download Excel File).International ICILS Achievement How do U.S.8th-grad

17、e students perform in computer and information literacy(CIL)and computational thinking(CT)compared with students in other education systems?All education systems that participated in the 2023 cycle of ICILS were required to assess computer and information literacy(CIL),but the computational thinking

18、(CT)component was optional.This report provides data for 33 education systems,including the United States,on the CIL scale,and 23 education systems,including the United States,on the CT scale.Computer and Information Literacy CIL measures students understanding of computer use,information gathering

19、and use,and digital communication.U.S.8th-graders average score for CIL was 482,which was not measurably different from the ICILS 2023 average of 476.Students in 16 education systems demonstrated higher average CIL scores than students in the United States.Average CIL scores were lower for students

20、in 10 education systems compared to students in the United States.Six education systems had average CIL scores not measurably different from that of the United States:Luxembourg,Italy,Croatia,North Rhine-Westphalia(Germany),Slovenia,and Malta.Page 2 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 1.Average scor

21、es of 8th-grade students on the CIL scale,by education system:2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.average score.Met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.Did n

22、ot meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.National defined population covers 61 percent of the national target population.Data collected at the first half of the school year and not included in the international average.NOTE:CI

23、L=Computer and information literacy.The CIL ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2013,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievemen

24、t data to this metric so that CIL scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of the 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Education systems are ordered by their a

25、verage CIL scores,from largest to smallest.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 3 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Computational Thin

26、king CT measures students ability to understand and develop computer-based solutions to real-world problems through the use of programming and algorithms.U.S.8th-graders average CT score of 461 was lower than the ICILS 2023 average of 483.Average CT scores were higher for students in 14 education sy

27、stems,or over half of the systems,compared to students in the United States.Average CT scores were lower for students in four education systems(Malta,Croatia,Serbia,and Uruguay)compared to students in the United States.Four education systems had average CT scores that were not measurably different f

28、rom scores in the United States:Austria,Luxembourg,North Rhine-Westphalia(Germany),and Slovenia.See figure on the next page.Page 4 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 2.Average scores of 8th-grade students on the CT scale,by education system:2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.average scor

29、e.Met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.Did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.NOTE:

30、CT=Computational thinking.The CT ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2018,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to t

31、his metric so that CT scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of the 21 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Education systems are ordered by their average CT sc

32、ores,from largest to smallest.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 5 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results What percentage of 8th-grade st

33、udents in each education system perform at each ICILS proficiency level?ICILS uses proficiency levels to help education systems understand their performance through a central point of reference.The various proficiency levels describe skills or tasks students are able to demonstrate at each level.Ind

34、ividual ICILS items are also mapped to specific proficiency levels.In 2023,the four CIL proficiency levels6 were Level 1(above 407 scale score points to 492 scale score points),Level 2(above 492 scale score points to 576 scale score points),Level 3(above 576 scale score points to 661 scale score poi

35、nts),and Level 4(above 661 scale score points).Students who reach the highest CIL proficiency level(Level 4)typically demonstrate the following skills:select the most relevant information to use for communicative purposes;evaluate its usefulness,credibility,and reliability;and create information pro

36、ducts adapted from digital resources in ways that make the information more accessible to the target audience.The four CT proficiency levels7 were Level 1(above 330 scale score points to 440 scale score points),Level 2(above 440 scale score points to 550 scale score points),Level 3(above 550 scale s

37、core points to 660 scale score points),and Level 4(above 660 scale score points).Students who reach the highest CT proficiency level(Level 4)typically demonstrate the following skills:recognize and analyze problems involving a broad variety of computational concepts and operations;decompose complex

38、problems;and apply relevant algorithms to solve problems.6 Students working at CIL Level 1 demonstrate basic operational skills with computers and an understanding of computers as tools for completing simple tasks.Students working at CIL Level 2 use computers to complete basic and explicit informati

39、on gathering and management tasks and to create simple information products that reflect standard design and layout conventions.Students working at CIL Level 3 demonstrate the capacity to work independently with computers for information gathering and management tasks,and they show an understanding

40、of basic information design conventions by formatting and arranging content in order to support comprehension of their information products.Students working at CIL Level 4 select the most relevant information to use for communicative purposes,evaluate its usefulness,credibility,and reliability,and c

41、reate information products adapted from digital resources in ways that make the information more accessible to the target audience.7 Students working at CT Level 1 can recognize the logic associated with fundamental computational concepts as they may apply to problems with constrained,explicit param

42、eters.Students working at CT Level 2 demonstrate the ability to engage with a range of structured computational problems.Students working at CT Level 3 engage with problems that include a variety of computational concepts such as simulation,conditional logic,and data interpretation.They can interpre

43、t problem scenarios and explain the application of fundamental elements of problem-solving.Students working at CT Level 4 recognize and analyze problems involving a broad variety of computational concepts and operations.They can decompose complex problems into smaller,manageable components and apply

44、 relevant algorithms to solve these sub-problems to contribute to the overarching problem solution.Student scores below Level 1 indicate CIL or CT proficiency below the lowest level targeted by the assessment.Page 6 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Computer and Information Literacy Three percent of U.S.

45、8th-grade students performed at the highest CIL proficiency level(Level 4),which was higher than the ICILS 2023 average(1 percent).Among the 33 education systems,only the Republic of Korea(6 percent)had a higher percentage of students performing at the CIL proficiency Level 4 than in the United Stat

46、es(3 percent).Eighteen percent of 8th-grade students in the United States performed at the CIL proficiency Level 3,which was not measurably different from the ICILS 2023 average(14 percent).Twenty-six and 29 percent of U.S.students performed at the CIL proficiency Levels 1 and 2,respectively.About o

47、ne-quarter(25 percent)of 8th-grade students in the United States did not reach the lowest CIL proficiency level(Level 1),which was higher than the percentages of students not reaching the lowest proficiency level in 19 education systems.See figure on the next page.Page 7 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results

48、 Figure 3.Percentage distribution of 8th-grade students across the CIL proficiency levels,by education system:2023#Rounds to zero.!Interpret data with caution.Estimate is unstable because the standard error is between 30 and 50 percent of the estimate.!Interpret data with caution.Estimate is unstabl

49、e because the standard error is more than 50 percent of the estimate.*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage at the same benchmark level.Met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of nati

50、onal target population.Did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.National defined population covers 61 percent of the national target population.Data collected at the first half of the school year and not included in the i

51、nternational average.NOTE:CIL=Computer and information literacy.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of the 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.The CIL proficiency levels were established in 2013 after considera

52、tion of the content and difficulty of the test items.The item content and relative difficulty were analyzed to identify themes of content and process that could be used to characterize the different ranges,or levels,on the CIL achievement scale.This process was performed iteratively until each level

53、 showed distinctive characteristics,and the progression from low to high achievement across the levels was clear.The four CIL proficiency levels are Level 1(above 407 to 492 scale score points),Level 2(above 492 to 576 scale score points),Level 3(above 576 to 661 scale score points),and Level 4(abov

54、e 661 scale score points).Student scores at or below 407 scale points indicate CIL proficiency below the lowest level targeted by the assessment instrument(Below Level 1).The CIL proficiency levels did not change from 2013 to 2023.The levels of the CIL scale should not be directly compared to the le

55、vels of the CT scale.Education systems are ordered by their percentages of students reaching proficiency level 3,from largest to smallest.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educa

56、tional Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 8 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Computational Thinking Five percent of U.S.8th-graders reached Level 4,the highest CT proficiency level,which was not measurably different from the ICILS 2023 average(6 perce

57、nt).In 6(Republic of Korea,Chinese Taipei,Finland,Czech Republic,Sweden,and Denmark)of the 23 education systems,higher percentages of students reached Level 4(the highest CT proficiency level)compared to the United States.Thirty-five percent of students in the United States performed at the CT profi

58、ciency Level 2,which was not measurably different from the ICILS 2023 average(37 percent).A higher percentage of students in the United States performed at the CT proficiency Level 1(27 percent)compared to the ICILS 2023 average(24 percent).See figure on the next page.Page 9 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Res

59、ults Figure 4.Percentage distribution of 8th-grade students across the CT proficiency levels,by education system:2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage at the same benchmark level.National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.Met guidelines for s

60、ample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.Did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.NOTE:CT=Computational thinking.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of the 21 non-benchmarking education sys

61、tems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.The four CT proficiency levels are Level 1(above 330 to 440 scale score points),Level 2(above 440 to 550 scale score points),Level 3(above 550 to 660 scale score points),and Level 4(above 660 scale score point

62、s).Student scores at or below 330 scale points indicate CT proficiency below the lowest level targeted by the assessment instrument(Below Level 1).The levels of the CT scale should not be directly compared to the levels of the CIL scale.Education systems are ordered by their percentages of students

63、reaching proficiency Level 3,from largest to smallest.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS)

64、,2023.Page 10 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results How has 8th-grade students performance on CIL and CT changed from 2018 to 2023 across education systems?ICILS 2023 offers the first opportunity to examine changes in U.S.8th-graders CIL and CT performance over time.In addition to the United States,11 educat

65、ion systems participated in the CIL assessment,and 8 education systems participated in the CT assessment in both 2018 and 2023.Computer and Information Literacy U.S.8th-graders average CIL score was 37 points lower in 2023 compared to 2018,with an average score of 482 in 2023 and 519 in 2018.Among t

66、he 12 education systems with data in 2018 and 2023,average CIL scores in 2023 were lower in five education systems(the United States,Denmark,North Rhine-Westphalia Germany,Finland,and Germany)compared to average CIL scores in 2018.Average CIL scores were higher in 2023 compared to 2018 in only two e

67、ducation systems(Italy and Luxembourg).There was no measurable change in CIL scores in the five remaining education systems.See figure on the next page.Page 11 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 5.Average scores and changes in average scores of 8th-grade students on the CIL scale,by education syste

68、m:2018 and 2023*2018 average score is significantly different(.05)than the 2023 average score.In 2023,met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.In 2023,national defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.In 2023,did not m

69、eet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.NOTE:CIL=Computer and information literacy.The CIL ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2013,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the stand

70、ard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CIL scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.Education systems are ordered by 2023 average score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Differences were computed using

71、unrounded numbers.In 2018,selected education systems had coverage,sampling,or reliability issues.Denmark met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.Denmark,Kazakhstan,and Portugal had a national defined population that covered 90 to 95 percent of the n

72、ational target population.Portugal nearly met guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent after replacement schools were included.Italy collected data at the beginning of the year.The United States did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.SOURCE:Internat

73、ional Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2018 and 2023.Page 12 of 46 Figure 5.Average scores and changes in average scores of 8th-grade students on the CIL scale,by education system:2018 and 2023 ICILS 2023 U.S.

74、Results 2023 average score is not measurably different from the 2018 average score.!Interpret data with caution.Estimate is unstable because the standard error is between 30 and 50 percent of the estimate.In 2023,met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were inclu

75、ded.In 2023,national defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.In 2023,did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.NOTE:CIL=Computer and information literacy.The CIL ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2013,setting the mean of n

76、ational average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CIL scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.Education systems are orde

77、red by 2023 average score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Differences were computed using unrounded numbers.In 2018,selected education systems had coverage,sampling,or reliability issues.Denmark met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were in

78、cluded.Denmark,Kazakhstan,and Portugal had a national defined population that covered 90 to 95 percent of the national target population.Portugal nearly met guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent after replacement schools were included.Italy collected data at the beginning of the y

79、ear.The United States did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2018 and 2023.Page 13 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Computat

80、ional Thinking U.S.8th-graders average CT score was 37 points lower in 2023 compared to U.S.performance in 2018,with an average score of 498 in 2023 and 461 in 2018.Average CT scores were lower in 2023 compared to 2018 in three of nine education systemsthe United States,North Rhine-Westphalia(German

81、y),and Denmark.Average CT scores were higher in only one education system(Luxembourg)in 2023 compared to 2018.There was no measurable change in CT scores in the five remaining education systems.Figure 6.Average scores and changes in average scores of 8th-grade students on the CT scale,by education s

82、ystem:2018 and 2023*2018 average score is significantly different(.05)than the 2023 average score.In 2023,met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.In 2023,national defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.In 2023,did n

83、ot meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.NOTE:CT=Computational thinking.The CT ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2018,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard devia

84、tion to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CT scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.Education systems are ordered by 2023 average score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Differences were computed using unrounded

85、numbers.In 2018,selected education systems had coverage,sampling,or reliability issues.Denmark met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.Denmark and Portugal had a national defined population that covered 90 to 95 percent of the national target popula

86、tion.Portugal nearly met guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent after replacement schools were included.The United States did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),In

87、ternational Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2018 and 2023.Page 14 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 6.Average scores and changes in average scores of 8th-grade students on the CT scale,by education system:2018 and 2023 2023 average score is not measurably different from the 2018 ave

88、rage score.In 2023,met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.In 2023,national defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.In 2023,did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.NOTE:CT=Computatio

89、nal thinking.The CT ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2018,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so

90、 that CT scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.Education systems are ordered by 2023 average score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Differences were computed using unrounded numbers.In 2018,selected education systems had coverage,sampling,or reliability issues.

91、Denmark met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.Denmark and Portugal had a national defined population that covered 90 to 95 percent of the national target population.Portugal nearly met guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent after

92、 replacement schools were included.The United States did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2018 and 2023.Page 15 of 46

93、ICILS 2023 U.S.Results How do 8th-grade female and male students perform in CIL and CT across education systems?Computer and Informational Literacy U.S.8th-grade female students average CIL score(493)was higher than the score of their male counterparts(468)in 2023.Of the 33 education systems,female

94、students outperformed male students in CIL in 29 education systems,including the United States.In the remaining four education systems(Czech Republic,North Rhine-Westphalia Germany,Uruguay,and Hungary),the average female student scores in CIL were not measurably different from the average male stude

95、nt scores.See figure on the next page.Page 16 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 7.Average CIL scores of 8th-grade female and male students and differences in average CIL scores of females and males,by education system:2023*Difference in average scores of male and female students is significantly d

96、ifferent(.05).National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.Did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.Met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were in

97、cluded.National defined population covers 61 percent of the national target population.Data collected at the first half of the school year and not included in the international average.NOTE:CIL=Computer and information literacy.The CIL ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2013,setting the

98、mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CIL scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.The ICILS 2023 av

99、erage is the average of the 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Education systems are ordered by females highest score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Differences were computed using unrounde

100、d numbers.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 17 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 7.Average CIL scores of 8th-grade female and male students and differences in average CIL scores

101、 of females and males,by education system:2023 Difference in average scores of male and female students is not measurably different.!Interpret data with caution.Estimate is unstable because the standard error is between 30 and 50 percent of the estimate.*Difference in average scores of male and fema

102、le students is significantly different(.05).National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.Did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.Met guidelines for sample participation rates only aft

103、er replacement schools were included.National defined population covers 61 percent of the national target population.Data collected at the first half of the school year and not included in the international average.NOTE:CIL=Computer and information literacy.The CIL ICILS reporting scale was establis

104、hed in ICILS 2013,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CIL scale scores across ICILS cycles are directl

105、y comparable.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of the 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Education systems are ordered by females highest score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Difference

106、s were computed using unrounded numbers.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 18 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Computational Thinking U.S.8th-grade female students average CT score(459

107、)was not measurably different from the score of their male counterparts(462)in 2023.Of the 23 education systems,there were no measurable differences between the average CT scores of male and female students in 17 education systems,including the United States.In the remaining 6 education systems(Belg

108、ium Flemish,Czech Republic,Uruguay,Austria,Sweden,and Portugal),male students outperformed female students on CT.See figure on the next page.Page 19 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 8.Average CT scores of 8th-grade female and male students and differences in average CT scores of females and males

109、,by education system:2023*Difference in average scores of male and female students is significantly different(.05).Met guidelines for sample participation rates only after replacement schools were included.National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.Did not meet

110、 the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.NOTE:CT=Computational thinking.The CT ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2018,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling req

111、uirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CT scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of the 21 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international tec

112、hnical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Education systems are ordered by females highest score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with italics.Differences were computed using unrounded numbers.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IE

113、A),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 20 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 8.Average CT scores of 8th-grade female and male students and differences in average CT scores of females and males,by education system:2023 Difference in average scores of male and femal

114、e students is not measurably different.!Interpret data with caution.Estimate is unstable because the standard error is between 30 and 50 percent of the estimate.*Difference in average scores of male and female students is significantly different(.05).Met guidelines for sample participation rates onl

115、y after replacement schools were included.National defined population covers 90 to 95 percent of national target population.Did not meet the guidelines for a sample participation rate of 85 percent and not included in the international average.NOTE:CT=Computational thinking.The CT ICILS reporting sc

116、ale was established in ICILS 2018,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CT scale scores across ICILS cyc

117、les are directly comparable.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of the 21 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Education systems are ordered by females highest score.Benchmarking participants are indicated with ita

118、lics.Differences were computed using unrounded numbers.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 21 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results U.S.Student Achievement by Demographics The U.S.administra

119、tion of ICILS 2023 includes additional data collected through questions not included in the international questionnaires.The results in this section refer to data available only for the United States.Findings consider U.S.8th-graders performance by students race/ethnicity as well as school-level rep

120、orts of eligibility for free or reduced-price lunch(FRPL).8 For data on how U.S.performance on ICILS 2023 varies by gender in the international context,see the section,International ICILS Achievement.8 The percentage of students eligible for free and reduced-price lunch(FRPL)through the National Sch

121、ool Lunch Program is used to approximate levels of economic disadvantage at the school.The schools students attend are divided into four categories based on FRPL eligibility at the school.Schools with 25.0 percent or fewer students eligible may have populations that experience less economic disadvan

122、tage.Middle levels of economic disadvantage are schools with 25.1 to 50.0 percent of students eligible or 50.1 to 75.0 percent of students eligible for FRPL.Schools with more than 75.0 percent of students eligible for FRPL may experience higher levels of economic disadvantage.FRPL eligibility is not

123、 a direct measure of child poverty at the school.These data are only available for public school students.How does 8th-grade students performance in computer and information literacy(CIL)and computational thinking(CT)vary by free or reduced-price lunch(FRPL)status in the United States?Computer and I

124、nformation Literacy U.S.students in public schools with 75 percent or more of students eligible for FRPL had an average CIL score of 440;this was 42 points lower than the U.S.average of 482.U.S.students in public schools with less than 25 percent of students eligible for FRPL had average CIL scores

125、of 524,which was 42 points higher than the U.S.average CIL score.The average CIL scores for students in schools with between 25 and 49.9 percent of students eligible for FRPL(495)and between 50 and 74.9 percent of students eligible for FRPL(476)were not measurably different from the U.S.average.See

126、figure on the next page.Page 22 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 9.Average scores of 8th-grade public school students on the CIL scale,by the percentage of students in the school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch(FRPL):2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.average score.NOTE:CIL=Co

127、mputer and information literacy.The CIL ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2013,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement da

128、ta to this metric so that CIL scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.The National School Lunch Program(NSLP)provides eligible students with free or reduced-price lunch(FRPL).Students in households with incomes under 185 percent of the poverty threshold are eligible for FRPL under t

129、he NSLP.Data on free or reduced-price lunch are for public schools only.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023;and U.S.Department of Education,National Center for Education Statistics,Commo

130、n Core of Data(CCD),“Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,”202223.Page 23 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Computational Thinking U.S.students in public schools with 75 percent or more of students eligible for FRPL had an average CT score of 417,which was 44 points lower than the U.S.avera

131、ge of 461.U.S.students in public schools with less than 25 percent of students eligible for FRPL had an average CT score of 509,which was 47 points higher than the U.S.average CT score.The average CT scores for students in schools with between 25 and 49.9 percent of students eligible for FRPL(484)an

132、d between 50 and 74.9 percent of students eligible for FRPL(455)were not measurably different from the U.S.average.Figure 10.Average scores of 8th-grade public school students on the CT scale,by the percentage of students in the school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch(FRPL):2023*Significantl

133、y different(.05)from the U.S.average score.NOTE:CT=Computational thinking.The CT ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2018,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICI

134、LS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CT scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.The National School Lunch Program(NSLP)provides eligible students with free or reduced-price lunch(FRPL).Students in households with incomes under 185 percent of the poverty

135、 threshold are eligible for FRPL under the NSLP.Data on free or reduced-price lunch are for public schools only.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023;and U.S.Department of Education,Nation

136、al Center for Education Statistics,Common Core of Data(CCD),“Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,”202223.Page 24 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results How has 8th-grade students performance in CIL and CT by race/ethnicity changed in the United States between 2018 and 2023?Computer and Informat

137、ion Literacy Average CIL scores of Hispanic,Black,and White students were 40,35,and 28 points lower,respectively,in 2023 compared to 2018.Average CIL scores of Asian students and of students of Two or more races in 2023 were not measurably different from their scores in 2018.Asian(555)and White(513)

138、students and students of Two or more races(503)scored above the U.S.CIL average in 2023.Black(440)and Hispanic(462)students had average CIL scores below the U.S.2023 average of 482.Figure 11.Average scores of 8th-grade students on the CIL scale,by race/ethnicity:2018 and 2023*2018 average score is s

139、ignificantly different(.05)than the 2023 average score for the same racial/ethnic group.NOTE:CIL=Computer and information literacy.The CIL ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2013,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requiremen

140、ts to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to this metric so that CIL scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.Black includes African American and Hispanic includes Latino.Students who identified themselves as being of Hispan

141、ic origin were classified as Hispanic,regardless of their race.Reporting standards were not met for American Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.Although data for some race/ethnicities were not shown separately because the reporting standards were not met,they are included in t

142、he U.S.totals.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2018 and 2023.Page 25 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Computational Thinking Average CT scores of Hispanic and White students were 43 and 31 poi

143、nts lower,respectively,in 2023 compared to 2018.Average CT scores of Asian students,Black students,and students of Two or more races in 2023 were not measurably different from their scores in 2018.In the United States,Asian(533)and White(495)students had CT scores higher than the U.S.average(461)in

144、2023.Black(407)and Hispanic(433)students had lower average CT scores than the U.S.average.Figure 12.Average scores of 8th-grade students on the CT scale,by race/ethnicity:2018 and 2023*2018 average score is significantly different(.05)than the 2023 average score for the same racial/ethnic group.NOTE

145、:CT=Computational thinking.The CT ICILS reporting scale was established in ICILS 2018,setting the mean of national average scores for equally weighted ICILS countries that met sampling requirements to 500 and the standard deviation to 100.Subsequent ICILS assessments transformed achievement data to

146、this metric so that CT scale scores across ICILS cycles are directly comparable.Black includes African American and Hispanic includes Latino.Students who identified themselves as being of Hispanic origin were classified as Hispanic,regardless of their race.Reporting standards were not met for Americ

147、an Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.Although data for some race/ethnicities were not shown separately because the reporting standards were not met,they are included in the U.S.totals.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),Internat

148、ional Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2018 and 2023.Page 26 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Student Technology Use What are 8th-grade students opinions about the use of information and communication technology(ICT)?The ICILS 2023 student questionnaire asked students how much they agreed

149、or disagreed with a series of 10 statements about the use of ICT.9 A majority of U.S.8th-grade students viewed ICT positively.For nine out of ten questions about ICT and school,at least 50 percent of students agreed or strongly agreed with the positive statements about ICT.9 Students were asked,“How

150、 much do you agree or disagree with the following statements about ICT and school?”(1)I learn better when I use ICT in my lessons at school than when I do not use ICT in my lessons.(2)Using ICT at school makes learning more fun.(3)I would like to study subjects related to ICT after high school.(4)I

151、hope that using ICT is a very important part of my future job.(5)I hope that my future job involves programming.(6)Learning how to use ICT applications will help me to do the work I am interested in.(7)It is important for students to learn how to use ICT at school.(8)Learning how to use ICT well wil

152、l help me get a well-paid job.(9)It is important for students to learn programming at school.(10)It is important for students to keep up to date with changes in ICT.Answer options included“strongly agree,”“agree,”“disagree,”and“strongly disagree.”Compared to the ICILS averages,lower percentages of U

153、.S.students agreed or strongly agreed with five statements about ICT and school(it is important for students to keep up to date with changes in ICT,using ICT at school makes learning more fun,it is important for students to learn programming at school,I hope that using ICT is a very important part o

154、f my future job,and I hope that my future job involves programming),with no measurable differences between the United States and the ICILS averages for the other five statements.Over one-third of students in the United States(37 percent)agreed or strongly agreed with the statement,“I hope that my fu

155、ture job involves programming,”which was lower than the ICILS average of 43 percent.See figure on the next page.Page 27 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 13.Percentage of 8th-grade students in the United States and across ICILS education systems who“agreed”or“strongly agreed”with statements about

156、information and communication technology(ICT)and school,by statement:2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage.NOTE:Students were asked in question 27b of the student questionnaire,How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements about ICT and school?Answer options incl

157、uded strongly agree,agree,disagree,and strongly disagree.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.The United States did not meet sampling requirements for the student sample an

158、d is not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the year and is not included in the ICILS average.Statements are ordered by U.S.percentages.Data are available for at least 70 percent but less than 85 percent

159、of students.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 28 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results To what extent do 8th-grade students learn about finding reliable information and protecting privacy

160、on the internet at school and outside of school?The ICILS 2023 student questionnaire asked students the extent to which they learned six internet-related tasks10 at school and outside of school.The tables below include comparisons between average percentages of tasks learned to a large or moderate e

161、xtent at school or outside of school among U.S.8th-graders.The figures below compare U.S.8th-graders with the ICILS international average.10 Students were asked,To what extent have you learned how to do the following internet-related tasks at school and outside of school?(1)Use the internet to find

162、information(e.g.,by using websites,databases,archives,digital libraries,search engines).(2)Refine internet searches,so the results better match what you are looking for.(3)Evaluate the reliability(trustworthiness)of information on the internet.(4)Include accurate references to internet sources.(5)Ju

163、dge whether a message from someone is a scam(e.g.,a message that tricks you into downloading a virus).(6)Manage privacy settings for internet accounts and ICT devices(e.g.,control who can contact you and what information about you is shared with advertising companies).Answer options included to a la

164、rge extent,a moderate extent,a small extent,and not at all.Learned internet-related tasks at school Compared to the ICILS averages,higher percentages of U.S.8th-graders reported learning four internet-related tasks to a large or moderate extent at school:using the internet to find information,includ

165、ing accurate references,refining internet searches,and evaluating the reliability of information.Among U.S.8th-graders,higher percentages of students reported learning the following tasks at school than outside of school to a large or moderate extent:use the internet to find information(83 vs.71 per

166、cent),include accurate references(76 vs.59 percent),refine internet searches(72 vs.65 percent),and evaluate the reliability of information(71 vs.61 percent).See figure on the next page.Page 29 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Table 14a.Percentage of 8th-grade students in the United States and across ICI

167、LS education systems who reported learning various internet-related tasks to a“large”or“moderate”extent at school or outside of school,by task:2023 U.S.percentage outside of school is higher(.05)than the U.S.percentage at school.U.S.percentage outside of school is lower(.05)than the U.S.percentage a

168、t school.*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage.NOTE:Students were asked in question 22a,To what extent have you learned how to do the following internet-related tasks at school and outside of school?with two columns for responding to prompts for at school and for outside of school sep

169、arately.Answer options included to a large extent,a moderate extent,a small extent,and not at all.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.The United States did not meet sampli

170、ng requirements for the student sample and is not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the year and is not included in the ICILS average.Statements are ordered by U.S.percentages of internet-related tasks a

171、t school.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 30 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 14a.Percentage of 8th-grade students in the United States and across ICILS education systems who

172、reported learning various internet-related tasks to a“large”or“moderate”extent at school,by task:2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage.NOTE:Students were asked in question 22a,To what extent have you learned how to do the following internet-related tasks at school and outside of s

173、chool?with two columns for responding to prompts for at school and for outside of school separately.Answer options included to a large extent,a moderate extent,a small extent,and not at all.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical

174、 standards,with each education system weighted equally.The United States did not meet sampling requirements for the student sample and is not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the year and is not include

175、d in the ICILS average.Statements are ordered by U.S.percentages of internet-related tasks at school.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 31 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Learned inte

176、rnet-related tasks outside of school Compared to the ICILS averages,lower percentages of U.S.8th-graders reported learning four internet-related tasks to a large or moderate extent outside of school:using the internet to find information,including accurate references,refining internet searches,and e

177、valuating the reliability of information.Among U.S.8th-graders,higher percentages of students reported learning to judge whether messages are a scam and manage privacy settings to a large or moderate extent outside of school(78 and 73 percent,respectively),compared to at school(59 and 55 percent,res

178、pectively).Table 14b.Percentage of 8th-grade students in the United States and across ICILS education systems who reported learning various internet-related tasks to a“large”or“moderate”extent at school or outside of school,by task:2023 U.S.percentage outside of school is higher(.05)than the U.S.per

179、centage at school.U.S.percentage outside of school is lower(.05)than the U.S.percentage at school.*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage.NOTE:Students were asked in question 22a,To what extent have you learned how to do the following internet-related tasks at school and outside of scho

180、ol?with two columns for responding to prompts for at school and for outside of school separately.Answer options included to a large extent,a moderate extent,a small extent,and not at all.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical st

181、andards,with each education system weighted equally.The United States did not meet sampling requirements for the student sample and is not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the year and is not included i

182、n the ICILS average.Statements are ordered by U.S.percentages of internet-related tasks at school.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 32 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results How did the fre

183、quency of 8th-grade students usage of ICT during lessons change from 2018 to 2023?The ICILS 2023 student questionnaire asked students the extent to which they use ICT during lessons in nine subject areas.11 11 Students were asked,At school,how often do you use ICT during lessons in the following sub

184、jects or subject areas?(1)English Language Arts;(2)Spanish or other foreign language;(3)Mathematics;(4)Sciences(general science and/or physics,chemistry,biology,geology,earth sciences);(5)Human sciences/Humanities/Social studies(history,geography,civics,law,economics,etc.);(6)Creative arts(visual ar

185、ts,music,dance,drama,etc.);(7)Information technology,computer studies or similar;(8)Practical or vocational;(9)Other(e.g.,moral/ethics,physical education,personal and social development);Answer options included I do not study this subject/these subjects,never,in some lessons,in most lessons,and in e

186、very or almost every lesson.Students who did not study the subject(s)were not included in the analysis.In 2023,higher percentages of U.S.8th-grade students reported using ICT during most,almost every,or every lesson than in 2018 in English language arts(55 vs.44 percent),sciences(58 vs.48 percent),s

187、ocial studies(53 vs.45 percent),foreign language arts(38 vs.32 percent),and mathematics(46 vs.41 percent).A lower percentage of U.S.8th-grade students reported using ICT during most,almost every,or every information technology lesson in 2023(56 percent)compared to 2018(61 percent).In 2023,U.S.8th-gr

188、ade students reporting of the use of ICT in most,almost every,or every lesson was higher than the ICILS averages across all subjects except for information technology,where there was no measurable difference.See figure on the next page.Page 33 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 15.Percentage of 8th

189、-grade students in the United States who reported using information and communication technology(ICT)“in most lessons”or“in every or almost every lesson,”by subject:2018 and 2023*2018 percentage is significantly different(.05)from the 2023 percentage.Data are available for at least 70 percent but le

190、ss than 85 percent of students.In the subject list,examples of Other include moral/ethics,physical education,and personal and social development.In 2023,some 27 percent of U.S.8th-graders reported that courses in the Other category did not apply to them.In 2018,some 45 percent of U.S.8th-graders rep

191、orted that courses in the Other category did not apply to them.NOTE:Language arts also refers to English Language Arts in the United States.Foreign language arts refers to Spanish and other foreign language instruction in the United States.Students were asked in question 24 of the student questionna

192、ire,At school,how often do you use ICT during lessons in the following subjects or subject areas?Answer options included,I do not study this subject,never,in some lessons,in most lessons,and in every or almost every lesson.The responses that indicate I do not study this subject were excluded from ca

193、lculations.Subjects are ordered by 2023 percentages.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 34 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Teacher Technology Use The ICILS survey included a context qu

194、estionnaire for 8th-grade teachers.The results highlighted in this section focus on teachers use of ICT tools,efficacy with ICT,and interest in additional professional learning around ICT.The questionnaire included additional topics to understand the use of ICT in teaching and learning environments,

195、such as experience with ICT,integration of ICT in teaching and learning at the school,and the ICT resources and infrastructure available within schools.Note that the response rate for sampled teachers in the United States was below 50 percent.As a result,the U.S.teacher data are not included in the

196、international average or presented in the main tables of the ICILS 2023 international report,but rather in the appendix of the international report.How did the frequency of 8th-grade teachers usage of ICT tools change from 2018 to 2023?The ICILS 2023 and 2018 teacher questionnaire asked teachers the

197、 extent to which they use 13 ICT tools12 in their lessons.12 Teachers were asked,How often did you use the following tools in your teaching of the reference class this school year?(1)Practice programs or apps where you ask students questions(e.g.,Quizlet,Kahoot);(2)Digital learning games;(3)Word-pro

198、cessor software(e.g.,Microsoft Word,Apple Pages,Google Docs);(4)Presentation software(e.g.,Microsoft PowerPoint,Apple Keynote,Google Slides);(5)Spreadsheets(e.g.,Microsoft Excel,Apple Numbers,Google Sheets);(6)Video and photo software for capture and editing(e.g.,Windows Movie Maker,iMovie,Adobe Pho

199、toshop);(7)Concept mapping software(e.g.,Inspiration,Webspiration);(8)Simulations and modelling software(e.g.,NetLogo);(9)Computer-based information resources(e.g.,websites,wikis,encyclopedia);(10)Graphing or drawing software;(11)e-portfolios;(12)Digital content linked with paper-based textbooks;(13

200、)Social media(e.g.,Instagram,Snapchat,Twitter,TikTok);Answer options included never,in some lessons,in most lessons,and in every or almost every lesson.In 2023,higher percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported using word-processor software,presentation software,and practice programs or apps in m

201、ost,almost every,or every lesson compared to 2018.During the same period,lower percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported using concept mapping software or social media in most,almost every,or every lesson.In 2023,higher percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported using word-processing(58 per

202、cent)or presentation(57 percent)software in most,almost every,or every lesson compared to any other ICT tool.In 2023,higher percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported using word-processor software,presentations,practice programs or apps where they ask students questions,digital learning games,an

203、d spreadsheets in most,almost every,or every lesson than the ICILS averages for those tools.In 2023,lower percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported using social media or digital content linked with paper-based textbooks in most,almost every,or every lesson than the ICILS averages.Page 35 of 46

204、ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 16.Percentage of 8th-grade teachers in the United States who reported using information and communication technology(ICT)tools“in most lessons”or“in every or almost every lesson,”by ICT tool:2018 and 2023*2018 percentage is significantly different(.05)from the 2023 perc

205、entage.NOTE:Teachers were asked in question 19 of the teacher questionnaire,How often did you use the following tools in your teaching of the reference class this school year?with answer choices of never,in some lessons,in most lessons,and in every or almost every lesson.Only items that were asked i

206、n both 2018 and 2023 are included in the table results.ICT tools are ordered by 2023 percentages.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2018 and 2023.Page 36 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results To what

207、 extent do 8th-grade teachers report effectively completing selected tasks using ICT?The ICILS 2023 teacher questionnaire included topics addressing teachers self-efficacy across a variety of ICT-related tasks.The questionnaire asked teachers how well they could perform each item in a list of 14 ICT

208、-related tasks,13 nine of which are presented in the figure below.13 Teachers were asked,How well can you do these tasks using ICT?(1)Find useful teaching resources on the internet.(2)Evaluate the quality of teaching resources on the internet.(3)Contribute to a discussion forum/user group on the int

209、ernet(e.g.,a wiki or blog).(4)Produce presentations(e.g.,Microsoft PowerPoint,Apple Keynote,Google Slides,or a similar program)with simple animation functions.(5)Use the internet for online purchases and payments.(6)Prepare lessons that involve the use of ICT by students.(7)Use a spreadsheet program

210、(e.g.,Microsoft Excel,Apple Numbers,Google Sheets)for keeping records.(8)Use a spreadsheet program(e.g.,Microsoft Excel,Apple Numbers,Google Sheets)for analyzing data.(9)Assess student learning.(10)Collaborate with others using shared resources such as Google Workspace,Office 365,Microsoft Teams,Zoh

211、o.(11)Use a learning management system(e.g.,Canvas,Moodle,Blackboard,Edmodo).(12)Identify internet scams.(13)Edit video content for use in teaching.(14)Create computer-based assessments that record students responses to questions(e.g.,Kahoot,Google Forms,Microsoft Forms).Answer options included I ca

212、n do this very well,I can do this moderately well,I have not done this,but I could find out how,and I do not think I could do this.Compared to the ICILS averages,in 2023,higher percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported being able to produce presentations,create computer-based assessments,use a

213、spreadsheet program,use a learning management system,and edit video content moderately or very well.Approximately 93 percent of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported being able to find useful teaching resources on the internet moderately or very well.This was lower than the ICILS average,where 97 percent

214、of teachers reported being able to find useful teaching resources on the internet moderately or very well.A lower percentage of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported being able to edit video content for use in teaching moderately or very well(66 percent)compared to any other ICT task.See figure on the nex

215、t page.Page 37 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 17.Percentage of 8th-grade teachers in the United States and across ICILS education systems who reported performing selected tasks using information and communication technology(ICT)“moderately well”or“very well,”by task:2023*Significantly different

216、(.05)from the U.S.percentage.NOTE:Teachers were asked in question 8 of the teacher questionnaire,How well can you do these tasks using ICT?with answer options of I can do this very well,I can do this moderately well,I have not done this,but I could find out how,and I do not think I could do this.The

217、 ICILS 2023 average is the average of 16 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Austria,Belgium(Flemish),Bosnia-Herzegovina,Cyprus,Denmark,France,Germany,Kosovo,Luxembourg,Malta,Oman,Slovak Republic,Sweden,the United S

218、tates,and Uruguay did not meet sampling requirements for the teacher sample and are not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the year and is not included in the ICILS average.Tasks are ordered by U.S.percen

219、tages.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 38 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results What percentage of 8th-grade teachers report needing more professional learning related to selected ICT con

220、tent?The ICILS 2023 teacher questionnaire asked whether teachers felt they would benefit from additional professional development in nine ICT content areas.14 14 Teachers were asked,Do you need to do more professional learning activities dealing with the following content areas in the future?(1)The

221、use of productivity applications(e.g.,word processor,presentation software,internet use,spreadsheets).(2)The use of subject-specific digital teaching and learning resources.(3)The use of ICT for students with special needs or specific learning difficulties.(4)How to use ICT to support students perso

222、nalized learning.(5)Managing social problems that students experience when using ICT to communicate with others(e.g.,cyberbullying).(6)Supporting students capabilities to evaluate the reliability of internet-based information sources.(7)Supporting students capabilities to identify deceptive internet

223、 practices(e.g.,scams,fake news,fake images,fake reviews,bots).(8)The use of visual coding platforms(e.g.,Alice,GameMaker,Kodu,Lego Mindstorms,MIT App Inventor,Scratch)for teaching and learning.(9)Integrating ICT into teaching and learning.Answer options included I need to do more professional learn

224、ing related to this content and I do not need to do more professional learning related to this content.Compared to the ICILS averages in 2023,lower percentages of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported needing professional learning related to ICT content in every content area except personalized learning,w

225、here there was no measurable difference.Sixty-two percent of U.S.8th-grade teachers reported needing more professional learning related to using ICT for students with special needs or specific learning difficulties and using visual coding platforms for teaching and learning.A lower percentage of U.S

226、.8th-grade teachers reported needing professional learning for using productivity applications(31 percent)compared to any other ICT content area.See figure on the next page.Page 39 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 18.Percentage of 8th-grade teachers in the United States and across ICILS education

227、 systems who reported needing professional learning related to selected topics,by information and communication technology(ICT)content area:2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage.Data are available for at least 70 percent but less than 85 percent of teachers.NOTE:Teachers were aske

228、d in question 10 of the teacher questionnaire,Do you need to do more professional learning activities dealing with the following content areas in the future?with answer choices of I need to do more professional learning related to this content,and I do not need to do more professional learning relat

229、ed to this content.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 16 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.Austria,Belgium(Flemish),Bosnia-Herzegovina,Cyprus,Denmark,France,Germany,Kosovo,Luxembourg,Malta,Oman,Slovak Republ

230、ic,Sweden,the United States,and Uruguay did not meet sampling requirements for the teacher sample and are not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the year and is not included in the ICILS average.ICT conte

231、nt areas are ordered by U.S.percentages.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 40 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Technology Use in the School How important do principals rate ICT-related

232、 educational outcomes?The ICILS 2023 principal questionnaire asked principals to rate the importance of 10 ICT-related education outcomes,15 six of which are presented in the figure below.15 Principals were asked,How important is each of the following outcomes of education in your school?(1)The deve

233、lopment of students basic computer skills(e.g.,internet use,email,word processing,presentation software).(2)The development of students skills in using ICT for collaboration.(3)The use of ICT for facilitating students responsibility for their own learning.(4)The use of ICT to augment and improve stu

234、dents learning.(5)The development of students understanding and skills relating to safe and appropriate use of ICT.(6)The development of students proficiency in accessing and using information with ICT.(7)The development of students capacity to use ICT to produce multimedia and digital content to co

235、mmunicate effectively with an audience.(8)The development of students ability to write or create apps or programs.(9)The development of students proficiency in protecting themselves from deceptive internet practices(e.g.,scams,fake news,fake images,fake reviews,bots).(10)The development of students

236、proficiency in computational thinking.Answer options included very important,quite important,somewhat important,and not important.Principals rated the importance of six ICT-related outcomes highly.In 2023,the percentages of U.S.8th-grade students attending schools where their principals rated indivi

237、dual ICT-related outcomes as being very important or quite important ranged from 84 to 91 percent,and there were no measurable differences between the percentages for each ICT-related outcome.Compared to the ICILS averages,lower percentages of U.S.8th-grade students attended schools where their prin

238、cipal reported that developing students basic computer skills(90 percent vs.97 percent internationally)and skills in using ICT for collaboration(87 percent vs.93 percent internationally)were very important or quite important.See figure on the next page.Page 41 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 19.

239、Percentage of 8th-grade students in the United States and across ICILS education systems in schools with principals who reported selected ICT-related education outcomes as“very important”or“quite important,”by education outcome:2023*Significantly different(.05)from the U.S.percentage.NOTE:School pri

240、ncipals were asked in question 11 of the school questionnaire,How important is each of the following outcomes of education in your school?with answer options of very important,quite important,somewhat important,and not important.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 30 non-benchmarking education

241、systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.The United States did not meet sampling requirements for the student sample and is not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the sec

242、ond half of the year and is not included in the ICILS average.Education outcomes are ordered by U.S.percentages.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 42 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results W

243、hich ways of facilitating ICT use in teaching and learning are a priority in schools?The ICILS 2023 principal questionnaire asked principals the extent to which priority is given to twelve ways of facilitating the use of ICT,16 eight of which are presented in the figure below.16 Principals were aske

244、d,At your school,what priority is given to the following ways of facilitating the use of ICT in teaching and learning?(1)Increasing the numbers of computers per student in the school.(2)Improving the speed and reliability of internet connectivity.(3)Increasing the variety of digital learning resourc

245、es available for teaching and learning.(4)Establishing or enhancing an online learning support platform.(5)Supporting participation in professional development on the use of ICT in teaching and learning.(6)Increasing the availability of qualified technical personnel to support the use of ICT.(7)Prov

246、iding teachers with incentives to integrate ICT use in their teaching.(8)Providing more time for teachers to prepare lessons in which ICT is used.(9)Increasing the professional learning resources for teachers in the use of ICT.(10)Fostering collaboration between teachers within the school to support

247、 the integration of ICT use in their teaching.(11)Fostering collaboration between teachers in this school and with teachers in other schools(e.g.,teacher networks)to support the integration of ICT use in their teaching.(12)Developing a shared vision for using ICT to support teaching and learning.Ans

248、wer options included the school has no influence over this way of facilitating the use of ICT in teaching and learning,high priority,medium priority,low priority,and not a priority.In 2023,sixty-seven percent of U.S.8th-graders attended schools where the principal reported increasing the number of c

249、omputers per student to facilitate ICT use to be a high priority.Fifty-two percent of U.S.8th-graders attended schools where the principal reported establishing or enhancing an online learning support platform as a high priority.Compared to the ICILS averages,five ways of facilitating ICT use were r

250、ated by principals of U.S.8th-graders less frequently as high priority.For example,the percentage of U.S.8th-graders attending schools where the principal rated increasing the availability of qualified technical personnel to support ICT as a high priority was 24 percentage points below the internati

251、onal average.In the United States,34 percent of students attended schools where this was a high priority compared to 58 percent of 8th-graders internationally.See figure on the next page.Page 43 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 20.Percentage of 8th-grade students in the United States and across I

252、CILS education systems in schools with principals who reported selected ways of facilitating ICT use as“high priority,”by ways of facilitating ICT use:2023*Significantly different(p .05)from the U.S.percentage.NOTE:School principals were asked in question 20 of the school questionnaire,At your schoo

253、l,what priority is given to the following ways of facilitating the use of ICT in teaching and learning?with answer options of the school has no influence over this way of facilitating the use of ICT in teaching and learning,high priority,medium priority,low priority,and not a priority.The responses

254、that indicate the school has no influence over this way of facilitating the use of ICT in teaching and learning were excluded.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.The Unite

255、d States did not meet sampling requirements for the student sample and is not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the year and is not included in the ICILS average.Ways of facilitating ICT use are ordered

256、by U.S.percentages.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.Page 44 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results How were aspects of teaching and learning in ICT affected by the COVID-19 pandemic?The ICILS 2

257、023 principal questionnaire asked principals the extent to which experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic affected six aspects of teaching and learning at their school,17 three of which are presented in the figure below.17 Principals were asked,How has the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic affected th

258、e following aspects of teaching and learning at your school?(1)Teachers willingness to use ICT in their teaching;(2)The effectiveness of teachers use of ICT in their teaching;(3)Students learning progress in language arts:English;(4)Students learning progress in mathematics;(5)Students learning prog

259、ress across all subjects;(6)Students digital literacy skills;Answer options included substantially increased,increased to some degree,did not change,decreased to some degree,and substantially decreased.In 2023,twenty-seven percent of U.S.8th-grade students attended schools where the principal report

260、ed that students digital literacy skills substantially increased because of COVID-19 pandemic experiences.Fifty-two percent of U.S.8th-grade students attended schools where the principals reported that teachers willingness to use ICT in their teaching substantially increased because of COVID-19 pand

261、emic experiences.U.S.percentages for all three aspects were not measurably different from the ICILS average percentages.See figure on the next page.Page 45 of 46 ICILS 2023 U.S.Results Figure 21.Percentage of 8th-grade students in the United States and across ICILS education systems in schools with

262、principals who reported aspects of teaching and learning in ICT substantially increased because of COVID-19 pandemic experiences,by aspects of teaching and learning:2023 NOTE:School principals were asked in question 8 of the school questionnaire,How has the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic affect

263、ed the following aspects of teaching and learning at your school?Answer options were as follows:substantially increased,increased to some degree,did not change,decreased to some degree,and substantially decreased.The ICILS 2023 average is the average of 30 non-benchmarking education systems meeting

264、international technical standards,with each education system weighted equally.The United States did not meet sampling requirements for the student sample and is not included in the ICILS average.Romania surveyed the target grade in the first half of the school year instead of the second half of the

265、year and is not included in the ICILS average.Aspects of teaching and learning are ordered by U.S.percentages.SOURCE:International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA),International Computer and Information Literacy Study(ICILS),2023.For More Information For the Accessible version of all tables in this report,please see the corresponding data tables(Download Excel File)See Technical Notes Visit the IEA website Read the International ICILS 2023 Report and Assessment Framework Page 46 of 46