CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Trends of Computer Use and Ownership

A study of the trends in computer use and ownership may help to

understand the basic computer literacy skills of potential students. The United

States Census Bureau has collected computer use data in October of 1984,

1989, 1993 and 1997 as part of the Current Population Survey. The most recent

report, compiled from the 1997 data, was issued in 1999 by Eric Newburger. The

results of this survey as compared to previous surveys show many longitudinal

trends. Three significant trends show the increasing use of computers. In 1984,

only 8.2 percent of households had computers. The percentage steadily

increased to 36.6 so that slightly over one-third of households had computers in

1997. The percentage of adults that use computers at home, school or work

steadily increased from 18.3 in 1984 to 47.1 in 1997. The number of children that

use computers at home or at school has also increased from 30.2 percent in

1984 to 74.4 percent in 1997 (Newburger 1999). An extrapolation of these trends

to the year 2001 would have about 52 percent of households with computers, 58

percent of adults using computers at home, work or school and 90 percent of

children using computers at home or at school. The combined message of the

trends shows the increasing availability of computing technology shared by

everyone.

5
 Conversely, there is still a large portion of the population that has yet to

embrace computers, namely about 42 percent of the adults and 10 percent of

children. A majority of the adults that graduated high school in the 1980’s or

before had little if any computer use in high school before graduation. As the

presence of computers increases in the home, at school and at work, adults are

in need of gaining and maintaining computing skills. Unfortunately, according to

the demographic data collected, some groups of people have not had access to

computers in order to achieve necessary basic computer skills.

Disparities in Computer Ownership and Usage

When the characteristics of the households with computers are examined, such

as gender, race, age, educational attainment and family income, disparities of

computer ownership are identified. Almost 76 percent of households with a yearly

family income over $75,000 had a computer while only 15.6 percent of

households with incomes below $25,000 had one. The disparity related to

educational attainment is similar as 63.2 percent of householders with a

bachelor’s degree or more have computers compared with 9.1 percent of

householders with less than a high school diploma. Householders in the age

range of 35 to 54 have the highest percentage of computer ownership at 48.6

percent. Householders in the age range of 18 to 34 years have computers at

37.3 percent. The age group with the lowest computer ownership percentage,

21.0 percent, is 55 years and over. The percentage of householders with

6
computers that are non-Hispanic white are more than double the percentage of

other races. Lastly, the percentage of householders that are female, 28.7

percent, is about two-thirds that of the percentage for males, 42.1 percent

(Newburger 1999). The disparity relating to gender is not only for computer

ownership but it applies to computer usage as well. Weinman and Cain (1999)

view the use of computer technology as the new “gender gap” where female

students are being shortchanged. Simply having access to computers is not

enough to rectify the problem. Currently male students will use computers to

program and problem solve while females use them more for word processing

(Weinman & Cain, 1999). This trend continues with females in higher education

as seen with only 13 percent pursuing technical disciplines in science and

engineering programs while they make up 51 percent of the schoolage

population (Cetron, 1997). Even though this gap exists, most adults are capable

to learn basic computer knowledge and skills regardless of gender, age, race or

previous educational experience (Clarke, 1998). One consideration, which needs

to be made about those that either own or have access to computers, is that

computer availability and use does not equal overall computer proficiency or

having basic computer literacy skills (Monroy, 2000). One may be able to operate

a particular software with great proficiency but yet be unable to perform other

basic tasks. For example, 63 percent of computer owners are connected to the

internet (Monroy, 2000), many of whom may be proficient in sending and

receiving email but may have no understanding of email attachments.

7
Studies of Computer Literacy

Many studies have examined computer literacy skills that people have

attained. Several of this type of study will be looked at in this review to see what

types of questions were asked and in what format. A study of computer skill

expectations of employers will be looked at too because of its close parallel to

this study of computer literacy expectations of instructors at WITC. The study of

computer skills expected by employers was carried out by William Perry (1998).

The study targeted employers looking to fill computer related vacancies. A Likert

Scale was used to rate the various computer usage skills on a scale from “1-

useless” to “5-very essential.” The computer skills examined were in the

categories: operating system, graphical user interface, word processing,

spreadsheet and database. The category of internet skills was not included in the

study. The results of the study revealed that employers rated each group of skills

as being between “4-essential” and “5-very essential” with only seventeen-

hundredths (0.17) of a point separating the lowest mean from the highest. One of

the recommendations from the study was to further examine postsecondary

curricula for evidence of an appropriate level of emphasis being put on attaining

practical computer productivity software skills. Another recommendation

suggested measuring the perceptions of postsecondary institutions with regard to

computer productivity skills as to compare the attitudes with the results of

employers. The intent of Perry’s study, to find the computer skills wanted by

employers in their new employees, parallels the intent of this study -- to 17

8
determine the basic computer skills desired by instructors in entry-level

postsecondary students. A comparison of the results between the studies would

need to be made with the understanding that the perceptions are being formed

with a different target population in mind. The employers are looking at program

graduates as potential employees in Perry’s study where, in this study, students

entering programs are targeted. A comprehensive study was conducted to

determine the desired computer skills for graduates of the University of

Wisconsin-Stout (UW-Stout TQM Team Report, 1994). The team surveyed

students at UW-Stout to identify their current computer skills while, at the same

time, surveyed program directors, alumni, and employers to find their

expectations of computer skills for students and graduates of UW-Stout. The

computer competencies of the study were grouped into six categories: basic

computer skills, word processing skills, spreadsheet skills, database skills,

graphics/multimedia skills, and information retrieval/telecommunications. The

survey instruments were distributed to the students in the classroom and sent by

either campus mail or the U. S. Postal Service to the other research groups. The

survey listed 43 competencies in the six skill categories and requested

responses of “yes,” “no,” or “unsure” as to either having or expecting the

corresponding skill. The mean percent of “yes” responses for each competency

were reported for each group. The “no” and “unsure” responses were not

differentiated in the results of this study; only “yes” responses were reported. The

study of student computer competencies has been continued at UW-Stout

through another study. 18 A similar study of UW-Stout student computer

9
competencies was conducted five years after the first study (Sedlak, 1999). Most

interesting in the subsequent study were the additional questions, additional

areas questioned and delivery of the questionnaire. The areas of basic computer

skills, word processing skills, spreadsheet skills, and database skills had the

same questions but the graphics/multimedia skills, renamed presentation skills,

and information retrieval/telecommunications areas were updated to include

advances in those areas. Web page development/creation and peripheral use

were two new areas included in the study. An important note about the

subsequent study is how much the questionnaire changed within five years to

reflect the current state of expected computer competencies. The delivery

method of the subsequent study is also noteworthy. The survey was distributed

to all enrolled UW-Stout students via email with all responses returned over the

web (Sedlak, 1999). The use of this method assumes that all students have

enough basic computer literacy skills to receive and respond to the survey

otherwise a portion of the sample group would not be included.

On the basis of a general concept of literacy, in this article, computer

literacy is defined as the ability to use computers at an adequate level for

creation, communication and collaboration in a literate society. In language

teacher education, it involves the development of knowledge and skills for using

general computer applications, language-specific software programs and Internet

tools confidently and competently. It comprises a number of aspects, including

technological awareness, technical vocabulary, components of a computer,

concepts of data and programs, ways of computing, working on files, documents

10
and pictures, working with multimedia, evaluating resources and communicating

with others(Sons, 2004).

Integration of Computing Technology into the Classroom

In order to be fully effective at integrating computing technology into the

classroom, instructors must have training with the new technology and have a

willingness to incorporate it into the curriculum (Halpin, 1999; McKenzie, 2000;

Hirschbuhl & Faseyitan 1994). Hirschbuhl & Faseyitan (1994) suggest those

faculties are in need of appropriate training to overcome their fears of using

computers and increase their technological literacy. Once instructors increase

their technological literacy, they will be able to incorporate and use computers for

meaningful learning applications (McKenzie, 2000). Training is necessary for

instructors at all levels of teaching experience because of the rapid changes in

computing technology. The next generation of teachers, by 2005, will be those

that have grown up with computers and have used them throughout their

schooling (Cetron, 1997). A study by Halpin (1999) was made to see what is the

best way to train pre-service teachers in learning computer technology. Halpin’s

study concluded that teachers that had computer instruction that was integrated

with the teaching methods courses were more likely to incorporate the use of

computer skills into the classroom. The results of Halpin’s study could be

generalized for all students learning computer technology in that computer skills

are more easily remembered and used by the student when it is taught in

11
conjunction with other materials. The generalization is not contrary to the

purpose of this study since this study is identifying basic computer literacy skills

and not advocating the instruction of these skills in isolation. As instructors

incorporate computing technology into their classes, a paradigm shift must be

made from teacher-centered instruction to a learnercentered format (Sullivan,

1997; Lever- Duffy, 1993). A new educational trend is one of offering programs

that are time-, pace- and place-free in order to meet the needs of adult students

in higher education (Sullivan, 1997). The learner-centered instructional model

includes three formats: the traditional format, the on-campus facilitated format,

and the off-campus distance learning format (Lever- Duffy, 1993). Each of the

three delivery formats may make use of computer technology which, in turn,

requires students to have the necessary computer skills for success in the

course. Many older adults that are either staying in the workforce or continuing

their education are in need of learning computer skills (Imel, 1997). The older

adults are able to learn computer skills but may require specialized training that

includes learning at a slower pace (Filipczak, 1998). Teaching methodologies

that are non-threatening and self-paced and make use of peer tutors are

recommended for older adult students learning to use computer technology

(Imel, 1998).

12
Computer Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is a social cognitive construct popularized in the 1970s. It

was later formally defined by Bandura as “people’s judgments of their capabilities

to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of

performances” (Bandura, 1986, p. 39). Bandura also said that beliefs about

efficacy may influence a person’s choice of activities, the level of effort a person

is willing to expend, their persistence in the presence of difficulties, and their

overall performance (1986). Hasan and Jafar (2004) defined self-efficacy as an

individual’s judgment of their own capabilities to organize and execute courses of

action to attain designated performance. Kinzie, Delcourt, and Powers (1994)

described self-efficacy as an individual’s confidence in his or her ability, which

may impact the performance of tasks. Computer self-efficacy (CSE) is derived

from self-efficacy in general (Bandura, 1997) and is defined as "a judgment of

one's ability to use a computer" (Compeau & Higgins, 1995, p. 192). CSE refers

to an individual’s judgments of their capabilities to use computers in diverse

situations (Marakas, Yi, & Johnson, 1998). Hasan (2003) described CSE as a

judgment of success or skill in performing a well-defined computing task using a

particular application, such as word processing, spreadsheet, or database

programs. Marakas, Yi, and Johnson separated task-specific measures of CSE

from general computer self-efficacy and defined these task-specific measures as

"an individual's perception of efficacy in performing specific computer-related

tasks within the domain of general computing" (Marakas, Yi, & Johnson, 1998, p.

13
128). CSE has been found to be a determinant of computer-related ability and

the use of computers (Hasan, 2003). Divaris, Polychronopoulou, and Mattheos

(2007) stated that an accurate assessment of the computer skills of students is a

prerequisite for success in other areas, including online learning. CSE has been

studied in depth by a number of researchers, including Agarwal, Sambamurthy,

and Stair (2000), Marakas, Johnson, and Clay (2007), and Marakas, Yi, and

Johnson (1998). Qutami and Abu-Jaber (1997) examined gender and the user’s

cognitive learning styles to self-efficacy in computer skills. Computer use and

personal interest had a direct and significant effect on CSE (Hsu & Huang, 2006).

Goh, Ogan, Ahuja, Herring, and Robinson (2007) looked at the relationship

between CSE and mentoring as well as the gender of students and their

mentors. Busch’s initial study (1995) examined gender differences in CSE and

attitudes toward computers while his follow-up study looked at group composition

and cooperation (1996). Stephens said that users with low CSE will avoid

interacting with computer technology when given a choice (2005). Heinrichs and

Lim (2010) examined users’ perceived functional skills and competency in word

processing and presentation tools. Cassidy and Eachus (2002) created a

computer user self-efficacy scale, in part because CSE has been identified as a

success factor for the completion of computing tasks. They noted that a

significant positive correlation between CSE and computer experience could be

established, and familiarity with computer software was a significant predictor of

CSE while computer ownership and training increased efficacy. Those users with

a high CSE tend to participate in computer-related activities and expect success

14
in these activities; they also persist and use effective coping mechanisms when

they encounter problems, and exhibit higher levels of performance than

individuals with lower CSE (Compeau, Higgins, & Huff, 1999). CSE captures the

competence and confidence that management information systems professors

hope to provide to their students (Karsen & Roth 1998). Users gain CSE from

several different sources: their personal successes and failures, observing the

successes and failures of peers, and encouragement (Bandura, 1997). CSE is

dynamic and changes as users gain new information and computer-related

experiences (Gist & Mitchell, 1992). Students’ CSE typically is influenced by both

prior coursework and personal experiences. However, Karsten and Roth (1998)

stated that not just the experience changes a user’s CSE but it is the kind of

experience. CSE has been shown to influence an individual’s choice to engage in

a technology task and the effort expended to accomplish it (Hanson, Kilcoyne,

Perez-Mira, Hanson, & Champion, 2011). A student’s CSE in relation to their first

computer course has been extensively studied. In a study of CSE among high

school students no statistically significant differences based on gender were

detected in either pre-tests or post-tests (Mayall, 2008). Shiue (2003) looked at

the effect of cognitive learning styles and prior computer experience on students’

CSE among those who were enrolled in basic computer literacy courses. Using

pre-tests and post-tests Albion (2001) stated that a students’ CSE could be

affected by whether or not they owned their own computer. Introductory

information systems course-related factors were also studied as indicators of

CSE (Karsen & Roth, 1998), while Houle (1996) looked at student differences

15
and demographics. First-semester college student’s CSE of computer application

skills were also examined and revealed that students self-reported stronger than

moderate skills in word processing, file management, presentation applications,

and spreadsheet applications (DuFrene, Clipson, & Wilson, 2010). While some

educators concluded that students are becoming progressively more computer

literate, many researchers have found a significant discrepancy between their

perception of computer skill levels and the reality of lower competence (Hanson,

Kilcoyne, Perez-Mira, Hanson, & Champion, 2011). Students believe they are

computer literate (Wilkinson, 2006). Grant, Malloy, & Murphy compared students’

CSE ratings with their actual performance on an author-developed computer

skills test. Their study demonstrated a gap between what students perceived as

their computing skills and their actual assessed skills (Grant, Malloy, & Murphy,

2009). Kilcoyne et al looked at student confidence in the mastery of technology to

determine if a student’s general confidence in their mastery is representative of

their knowledge. When students averaged only 42 percent on the test

administered the researchers concluded that students greatly overestimated their

mastery of technology (Kilcoyne, et al., 2009). Another study examined the

discrepancies between students’ perceptions of their digital skills compared to

their actual performance on business computer software applications. These two

factors were compared to their identified learning styles (Hanson, Kilcoyne,

Perez-Mira, Hanson, & Champion, 2011). 1.2 Computer Knowledge In addition to

CSE the computer knowledge of students has also been widely studied. Davis

and Davis surveyed students in technology teacher education and training to

16
determine their self-perception of their competency in five constructs composed

of 43 elements related to personal computer knowledge. Their study revealed

that although gender was not a factor there was a significant difference between

the students’ perceived competencies based on age range: students whose age

was 35 old or younger perceived a higher level of competence when compared

to older students (Davis & Davis, 2007). Another study attempted to determine

the attitudes of students concerning the importance of protecting information

assets and their knowledge of general behavioral, computer-based, and wireless

security actions that can be taken to help protect computers and information

assets (Oswalt, Lisenby, & Johnson, 2009). Divaris, Polychronopoulou, and

Mattheos (2007) studied the computer knowledge of post-graduate students and

found that competence scores were normally distributed but that gender and e-

mail usage were significant predictors of computer literacy. Wilkinson found

significant differences between the computer knowledge of Caucasian students

and ethnic minorities (2006). Another study compared self-assessment to results

on objective tests and found that students significantly over-estimated their level

of computer competence. However, the researchers concluded that students’

home and high school computer use did not affect the results (Ballantine, Larres,

& Oyelere, 2007). Webster examined the relationship between computer literacy

scores and computer use confidence both before an introduction to computers

course began and at the end of the course in order to assess gains in computer

literacy and usage confidence. The research revealed that prior computer

classes and computer usage positively influenced literacy scores and confidence,

17
and that using the computer for e-mail also influenced confidence scores

(Webster, 2004). Messineo and DeOllos (2005) discovered differences by gender

and race/ethnicity. Some studies found that males reported higher results than

females (Cassidy & Eachus, 2002). Many studies that examined a student’s

computer knowledge used an objective assessment instrument to determine

what the students know. These instruments may be divided into two categories.

The first category was instruments that are specifically designed to measure

computer skills. In one study computer knowledge of students was measured by

scores on the exam portion of the Computer Experiences and Knowledge

Inventory or CEKI (Smith, Villareal, Akers, & Haygood, 2004). The second

category used scores from instruments such as mathematical and verbal scores

from the SAT college admission exam or Turkey’s National Student Selection

Examination or SSE (Varank I. , 2007). However, results from these studies of

computer knowledge based on standardized tests seem inconclusive. One study

indicated that the SAT was an important factor in reliably predicting major GPA in

computer science programs (Shoemaker, 1986) while another study stated that

SAT math scores could be used to predict potential successful computer science

students (Campbell & McCabe, 1984). Sorge and Wark (1984) said that these

scores also impacted a student’s decisions to continue their education in

computer science programs. However, research by Fan and Li (2002) indicated

that the college entrance exam math score negatively correlated to performance

of students’ introductory computer science classes and overall class work for the

computer science programs.

18
 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study lies within the self-efficacy theory.

It is defined by Bandura (1986) as peoples’ beliefs about their capabilities to

exercise control over the events that affect their lives and their beliefs in their

capabilities to mobilize the motivation, cognition resources, and courses action

needed to exercise action control over task demands. Bandura listed four

sources of information on which efficacy expectations are based upon; namely,

performance accomplishments; vicarious (observational) experiences; verbal

persuasions and emotional arousal (psychological and psychological states).

Compeau and Higgins (1995) extended Banduras’ self-efficacy theory to the use

of computers. They call this as computer self-efficacy theory. It was defined as “a

judgment of one’s capability to use a computer” (p. 192). Situating Banduras’

self-efficacy theory (1997) and Compeau and Higgins’ (1995) computer self-

efficacy theory in this study, performance accomplishments refer to the authentic

ICT experiences of students. It may include experiences using the computer to

prepare a lesson, monitoring and recording students’ performance, using online

resources and the like. Vicarious (observational) experiences refer to

observations of other teachers and peers using ICT in teaching. The

demonstration of a colleague on how to use the internet to search online

resources or observing a peer delivering a lesson using an interactive whiteboard

and other technologies are examples of vicarious experiences. Verbal

persuasions refer to the feedback a teacher receives from peers, principal,

19
parents and students with regards to his/her use of ICT technologies in teaching.

Physiological and psychological states refer to the physical (health condition) and

emotional sates (fear, anxiety, openness to learn ICT, and etc.) of the teacher.

It is also anchored to the Social Cognitive Theory which states that

watching others performing behavior, in this case interacting with a computer

system, influences the observers’ perceptions of their own ability to perform the

behavior, or self-efficacy, and the expected outcomes that they perceive, as well

as providing strategies for effective performance.

20
 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study shows the relationship of the

variables, the independent and the dependent. The dependent variables

considered in the study is the Computer Self-Efficacy of the respondents. The

independent variables of the study is the computer literacy of the respondents.

This study highlighted that the computer literacy of the respondents is

related to the computer self-efficient of the respondents.

Independent Variables Dependent Variable

Computer Computer
Literacy Self-Efficacy

Figure 1. The diagram shows the relationship of dependent and independent

variable.

Hypotheses of the Study

Ho: There is no significant relationship between the computer literacy and

computer self-efficacy of the respondents

Ha: There is significant relationship between the computer literacy and

computer self-efficacy of the respondents

21