MAY/JUNE 2008 170278-6648/08/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE

Today’s students are generally considered tech-savvy, armed with iPhones, laptop computers, andTiVos at the ready. It is also a generation that hastransformed the trademarked name of the mostpopular online search engine into a

verb—googling. Looking for backgroundinformation on that circuits paper?Google it. Hankering for localThai takeout? Google it. Thegoogling response is nearly asrobotic as a classic 1980sDevo tune: “If a problemcomes along, you mustGoogle it. When some-thing’s going wrong, youmust Google it.”

However, if you Googlethe term “information andcommunication technology(ICT) literacy,” you are apt tofind that students are signifi-cantly lacking in thatexact skill set.A c c o r d i n g

to preliminary research findings by Princeton, New Jersey-based Educational Testing Service (ETS), only 52% of studentsthat took its iSkills assessment could correctly judge the objec-tivity of a Web site and only 65% could properly judge thesite’s authoritativeness. When focusing on a Web search task,only 40% entered multiple search terms to narrow the results

and when selecting a research statement for a classassignment, only 44% identified a statement that cap-

tured the demands of the assignment.The iSkills assessment was created by ETS with

the input of a consortium of librarians, profes-sors, and administrators from college and uni-versity systems to measure a student’s ability touse critical thinking to define, access, manage,integrate, evaluate, create, and communicateinformation in a technological environment.Information was gathered from more than6,300 test takers at 63 four-year colleges and

universities, community colleges, and highschools (seniors), who took the inaugural

iSkills assessment in 2006. Institutionsselected the students that would take theassessment, with some electing to teststudents enrolled in a particular courseand others using a random samplingprocess or issuing an open invitation

and offering gift certificates as incentives. “We’re defining ICT literacy uniquely,”

explains Irvin R. Katz, senior research sci-entist at ETS. “We’re not focusing onspecific business applications or know-ing how a computer works, whichare things that people think that stu-dents are very good at. Instead,we’re focusing on the skillful use ofinformation in the context of tech-nology. That includes how wellstudents can deal with the over-whelming information on theInternet and other computer appli-cations, how they navigate the infor-mation landscape and find good

information—all those skills that havebeen around for a while but are not

pure technology skills.”While students may know their

way around the latest technology gad-gets, the same acumen has yet to be

translated to the use of information that isapplied to that technology. The iSkills assess-

ment found that across several tasks, only a fewtest takers could accurately adapt material for a

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPOT.2008.921819© DYNAMIC GRAPHICS

CRAIGCAUSER

Googlyeyes: Students sluggish with ICT literacy

L O O K I N G T O T H E F U T U R E

18 IEEE POTENTIALS

new audience. Students were asked toconduct a Web search task, and only40% entered multiple search terms tonarrow the results. When they wereinstructed to organize a large amountof information efficiently, more thanhalf the students failed to sort theinformation to clarify the related mater-ial. Database searches scored evenlower—only 50% of test takers utilizeda strategy minimizing irrelevant resultswhen searching a large database.

On average, students earned approx-imately half the points that they couldhave earned on the test. Gender wasnot a factor since both male and femaletest takers earned similar scores.

“ICT literacy skills for students most-ly hang together,” Katz says. “There’snot one thing that people were bad at.If a student was bad, they were gener-ally bad at everything. If they weregood, they scored well on everything.”

Facebook versus library books

Librarians, faculty, and ICT literacyexperts have been saying for some timethat students need to hone their abilityto recognize good information sourcesand conduct solid research, which iswhy Katz is not shocked by the assess-ment’s results. Many students simplycannot communicate well outside oftheir online social networks, Katz adds,which can lead to a snowball effectwhen it comes to their education. Forexample, if a student has trouble navi-gating information sources and has diffi-culty thinking up keywords and modify-ing search strategies, they are not likelyto be good at picking out good reliablesources of information or organizinginformation and coming to a conclusionbased on the research that they conduct.

“Kids don’t generally pick up theseskills on their own,” Katz explains.

“They generally need to be instructed,and the library community, for manyyears, has been at the forefront ofteaching these skills. It also comes fromother areas including courses such ashistory and journalism. What’s happen-ing now is that these skills havebecome more central to a wider varietyof disciplines in the workplace andeveryday life. So it takes time for theseskills to percolate across the entire cur-riculum. There are efforts in the K–12area to teach these types of skills but itwill take time.”

Online research will continue, withthe search engines serving as the gate-way for much of that information. Katzsays that students should be mindful intheir research since search engines “givethe feeling that you’re making progress.”You can type in a phrase and get 8 mil-lion hits but the problem is evaluatingthe quality of the information that isreturned. If people are not good at hon-ing their search strategies into a precisesearch, they could end up with a lot ofineffective information. Anyone cangather a large quantity of informationbut Katz advises to ask, “Is it usefulinformation?”

Some universities have undertakena campus-wide approach to boostingICT literacy. Since 1995, CaliforniaState University has focused on aninformation competency initiativewhere librarians and faculty through-out the university work together to cre-ate assignments for students wherethey must use library resources toaccomplish goals. The humanitiesdepartment at the New Jersey Instituteof Technology focuses on a variety ofinformation literacy and research skills,while the University of Central Floridahas a quality enhancement plan whereinformation literacy is a key compo-nent. Since these types of programsare not in place at every university, thefirst step a student can take is to visitthe campus library. Katz also suggestsexploring other options such as jour-nalism or business writing courses.

“In the five years we’ve been work-ing on this we’ve seen a change in thediscussion about ICT skills in both theeducational arena and the workforce,”Katz adds. “Now there’s more focus onproblem solving and critical thinking.This is wonderful because people arebeginning to realize the importance ofinformation skills, which will onlyenhance the use of technology.”

—Craig Causer is the managingeditor of IEEE Potentials.

ICT, easy as 1, 2, 3According to the ETS, how students perform on each of the seven ICT literacy pro-

ficiencies aids in identifying where further curriculum development is needed to help

students improve their ICT skills. Those seven proficiency categories and corresponding

skills are the following:

1) DefineKnow how to articulate a need for and determine where to locate information.

Create a research topic to fit a particular information need or complete a

concept map.

2) AccessSearch and collect information from the Internet and databases.

Read and refine a search to locate resources.

3) EvaluateAssess the relevancy, veracity, and completeness of information for a specific

purpose.

Select the best database to use and determine the sufficiency of information

on a Web site for a particular need.

4) ManageDevelop and use a comprehensive organizational scheme.

Document relationships using an organizational chart and sort e-mails into

appropriate folders.

5) IntegrateSynthesize, summarize, compare, and draw conclusions from information

from multiple sources.

Compare and contrast information from Web pages or a spreadsheet, and

synthesize information from instant messages into a word processing document.

6) CreateGenerate information by adapting and critically analyzing current data.

Create a graph that supports a point of view. Select text and graphics to

communicate the point of view.

7) CommunicateConvey information persuasively to various audiences using the right medium.

Develop the ability to adapt presentation slides and revise e-mail.