...---- c C1 3111103011 11119111 1111311 K ĐH kg KĐT KĐT kg LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1: Prioritizing the nine elements of digital citizenship Figure 2: DigComp 2.1 framework Figure 3: S.A.F
Significance of the SUYy -ó- tk HH TH TH TT TH TH TT Hàn Trà 8 4, Literature on
The article presents definitions and models that have been previously investigated and determined to be appropriate for the social context, society, and people of today It does this by starting with the current state of social reality and orienting itself in line with the worldwide education system This model has served as the basis for research on the subject, yielding findings that demonstrate the degree of efficacy when using it to teach digital citizenship in Vietnamese universities, including VNU-IS.
This study offers significant theoretical contributions by synthesizing prior research to present an overview of digital citizenship (DC) and its prevalent models It clarifies the responsibilities of both students and lecturers in promoting DC education By leveraging existing DC definitions and models, the study establishes a framework to assess students' DC proficiency and instructors' perceived experiences This provides a foundation for future research on DC, enabling a deeper investigation of its multifaceted aspects.
In terms of practical contribution, the research article provides the most realistic and accurate view of the current state of awareness of students and lecturers in Vietnam in general and
9 VNU - IS in particular about DC From there, the Study helps readers understand the current status of research and teaching on DC in the educational environment in Vietnam At the same time, the study affirms the importance of DC education in today's era of increasing technologicalization, modernization, and integration From there, the research paper provides solutions and proposals to support educators, and school administrators, based at VNU-IS in building and developing appropriate DC teaching curricula for students.
Furthermore, the article also provides education managers, policymakers, and stakeholders with insights into the current state of digital citizenship education awareness in VNU-IS This research might help inform the development of educational policies and methods by policymakers, educational administrators, and stakeholders Therefore, these efforts can contribute to effectively raising awareness and practicing responsible digital citizenship in Vietnam.
The article is divided into five main chapters, the first one focuses on the purpose of the research, the research question, the methodology, and the scope of the research In the next chapter, it aims to clarify previous definitions, and models to conclude the definitions and models that will be used in this research Besides, it also mentions the past study of digital citizenship in Vietnam.
The third chapter focuses on the context of the study, the results of participants, the methods that will be used to analyze it, the sampling data, and the procedure to encode, and analyze the data After collecting the data, the fourth section brings readers the results of the data after analysis and will analyze and discuss those results in more depth This is the premise for the conclusions on this topic to be made and presented.
After a process of developing a topic, researching previous research topics, learning about the social context as well and collecting and analyzing data, the final part will reflect on the limitations of the article as well as points that need improvement in the process of collecting and analyzing results.
Definitions of digital citizenship ececeeceeceesceeceeceeceeseeseceeeeeeceeaeeaeteeeereeeeeateaees 9 4.2 Models of digital c1t1zenShIp .- - c3 22121131121 121 2151111511111 111 1e re 11 4.3 Teachers, students and the main agents of digital citizenship education
Digital citizenship (DC) was first mentioned in the late 1990s (Mancini, 1999) By the mid-2000s, it started to gain more attention Initially, Ribble et al (2004) viewed it as the
10 cultural, social, and ethical understanding of concerns related to technology use A few years later, it was defined as “the ability to participate in society online,” with digital citizens being individuals who frequently used technology, especially for political information and economic gain (Mossberger et al., 2007, p 1) Others expanded this term to not only encompass participation in virtual society but also the responsible, ethical, and safe use of internet and communication technologies (Ribble, 2011) Over time, the definitions of DC have continued to evolve.
These days, DC is seen as the ability to understand, navigate, interact with, and transform one's self, community, society, and the wider world through one's ideas, actions, and Internet use (Choi, 2016) According to Jerring et al (2020), their DC’s definition is elucidated as a normative methodology, wherein digital citizenship is comprehended as the exemplary manner to conduct oneself on the internet and can be employed to deliberate ethical and moral deliberations in connection with online involvement In a report published in January 2019, the European Council defined DC as the ability to use digital technology responsibly and actively, participate in communities at all levels, pursue lifelong learning, and consistently uphold human dignity This definition was based on the 20 competencies of the Council of Europe for democratic culture (CDCs), and the concept of digital citizenship was divided into
10 digital domains These domains were further categorized into three groups: “Being online”,
“Well-being online”, and “Rights online” (Council of Europe, 2019).
Albeit the term “digital citizenship” has gained widespread adoption, there is no single, universally accepted definition to which it is committed Terms like digital literacy, digital etiquette, digital wellness, and digital citizenship have been used interchangeably in the literature without adequate substantiation (Chen et al., 2021) Recent research believes that
DC should be understood as a multidimensional and intricate concept (Isin & Ruppert, 2015; Vivienne et al, 2016; Schou, 2018; as cited in Jeger, 2021), intrinsically linked to offline civic lives in a non-linear manner (Choi, 2016) In summary, the concept of digital citizenship is relatively new, and researchers are continually studying it, which explains the ongoing variation, expansion, and diversity in its definition.
To align with the research purposes and adapt it to Vietnam in today's society, where the continuous development of the Internet and the importance of using it appropriately are prioritized, the definition of DC provided by Ribble (2011) will be used throughout this report.
Digital citizenship, encompassing online rights, responsibilities, and behaviors, requires citizens to possess essential skills for digital participation, such as Internet accessibility, information evaluation, communication, and collaboration across diverse backgrounds Access alone is insufficient; individuals need technical proficiency and educational competencies to bridge the digital divide (Van Dijk, 2005) The competence perspective views digital citizenship as a composite of various components, including Digital Literacy, Interaction, Communication, Safety, Ethics, Rights, Law, Commerce, and Health (Ribble & Bailey, 2007).
Prioritizing the nine elements of digital citizenship
Digital Digital Digital Digital Digital
Access Commerce Communication Literacy Etiquette ow $ iol pod full electronic electronic buying and electronic exchange of teacl nd learning aboưi electroni dards of participation in society selling of goods information tec nd its use conduct or procedure
Note The image was created to represent the nine elements of digital citizenship by Damianne R President,
2015, from https://www.journeywithtechnology/prioritizing-the-nine-elements-of-digital-citizenship/
Research by Ribble (Digital Citizenship in Schools, n.d.) highlights the significance of the nine-element model in implementing digital citizenship (DC) in the classroom This model, due to its popularity and comprehensive nature, provides a valuable framework for educators seeking to enhance students' digital literacy and responsible online behavior.
Digital citizenship frameworks guide individuals' responsible and effective online behavior The 12-domain framework addresses respect, education, and protection in digital environments The DigComp 2.1 model, widely used in Europe, emphasizes five areas: information literacy, communication, content creation, safety, and problem-solving These frameworks provide valuable guidance for navigating the digital landscape and fostering digital citizenship.
Note The image was created to represent five elements of digital citizenship by Europe Council, 2019 From https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/digcomp_en
This report introduced a digital citizenship scale for adolescents, as perceived by teachers, as documented by Kim and Choi (2018) Their scale highlights four main aspects: ethics in the digital environment, proficiency in navigating the digital landscape, active and rational engagement, and establishing one's self-identity in the online world (p 169) This model
13 underscores the significance of ethical conduct, proficiency in utilizing digital tools, engaging in thoughtful and proactive activities, and cultivating a sense of identity in the digital domain
SAFE framework for digital citizenship scale of youth
* Upholding basic and equal digital rights
+ Appropriate decisions making + Political, economic, cultural engagement
+ Balancing Digital Usage cultivate and
* Achieving Digital Security manage their digital + Maintaining Healthy & Safe
+ Limiting physical and identity and Relationships psychological health risks 32m
Digital Law Responsibilities + Digital awareness
* Digital Access demonstrate an + Digital Etiquette
* Digital Literac - knowledge and understanding of
$ Tai pid Literacy skills of ( c Treating others with respect digital environment a + Nocyber-bullying.
: + No stealing or damaging others’
+ Digital responsibility + Practicing Ethical Digital Usage
* Using digital tools to learn and keep up with changing technologies
Note The image was created to represent four elements of digital citizenship by Kim & Choi, 2018 From https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Development-of- Youth-Digital-Citizenship-Scale-and-Kim-Choi /cd877a32270fe94 | bba0cfdbd3d04858f4e3d050
Furthermore, the research of the Council of Europe (Council of Europe, 2019) competencies for democratic culture (CDCs), below, provides a simplified overview of the competencies which citizens need to acquire if they are to participate effectively in a culture of democracy. These are not acquired automatically but instead need to be learned and practiced In this, the role of education is key The 20 competencies for democratic culture, frequently referred to as the CDC “butterfly”, cover four key areas: values, attitudes, skills and knowledge and critical understanding of citizenship These are divided into three areas, which correspond to the three sections of this publication: Being Online, Well-being Online and Rights Online.
Digital citizenship encompasses various dimensions, including ethics, Media and Information Literacy (MIL), Participation/Engagement (P/E), and Critical Resistance (CR) Ethics emphasizes responsible online behavior, while MIL empowers individuals to access, use, and communicate online effectively P/E encourages active participation, while CR promotes critical evaluation and resistance to potentially harmful online content and practices Understanding these dimensions enhances digital citizenship by fostering ethical behavior, developing digital literacy, encouraging engagement, and promoting critical thinking in the digital realm.
14 different forms of online engagement, such as political, socio-economic, and cultural participation Lastly, digital citizenship as CR encompasses more progressive and radical perspectives compared to P/E (Figure 4) However, it is important to note that the line between P/E and CR can sometimes be blurry since both involve active and purposeful participation in virtual communities (Choi, 2016).
Four categories of digital citizenship
*Ethical use of technology + Digital access + Digital awareness ôTechnical skills
+ Digital responsibilities & +*Psychological capability rights
Note The image was created to represent four elements of digital citizenship From https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1118672
However, researchers have made attempts to develop a digital citizenship scale based on the components of digital citizenship mentioned above Choi et al (2017) In the most recent study, researchers created a digital citizenship scale for adults by examining graduate students and university students This scale consists of five elements: Internet Political Activism,
Results and Discussion 0n - 5
The perceptions and levels of digital citizenship among VNU-IS students
6.1.1 Exploring perceptions of digital citizenship among VNU-IS students
Students’ frequency of encountering the term Students’ level of understanding of digital
When it comes to the frequency of encountering the term “digital citizenship” (DC), a varied level of familiarity emerged among the 349 students surveyed While 17.8% (61 students) reported hearing the term many times, over half (53.5%, or 187 students) had heard about DC a few times Conversely, 17.5% (61 students) rarely encountered the concept, and a
29 concerning 11.2% (39 students) had never heard of DC before This data suggests a need for increased awareness of DC (Figure 6).
In terms of the level of understanding of the definition of digital citizenship, students were asked to choose the correct answer that defines the word “digital citizenship” among the definitions of digital literacy, digital competence and digital citizenship Though digital citizenship is a relatively new concept, it is still surprising how the results turned out as demonstrated in Figure 7 Specifically, over 257 students (73.7%) did not get the correct answer and mistook the definition of digital literacy or digital competence for that of digital citizenship 27 students (7.7%) were skeptical about the definitions and thereby could not choose any of those options Last but not least, only a minority of participants (65, 18.6%) chose the accurate answer.
Considering the frequency of encountering the term “digital citizenship,” most interviewed students attributed their exposure to DC to social media, followed by news and newspapers. Notably, only a few students encountered the term through workshops or presentations, and none mentioned encountering it within an educational institution, particularly VNU-IS Two potential explanations exist for this situation First, the curriculum at VNU-IS might not emphasize DC Students themselves mentioned, “VNU-IS has not yet taught much, or even nothing, about DC.” While they said the focus seemed to be on technical skills, a limited number of workshops or social-related lectures do touch on some aspects of DC, such as online safety skills and communication etiquette These workshops include the Young Digital Leader Incubator in Education (YDLI-Edu) Alternatively, a lack of emphasis on DC in general throughout the students’ prior education could also be a contributing factor.
There could be some reasons leading to a lack of understanding of the definition of Digital citizenship among students in VNU-IS Firstly, this can be explained by intercultural misunderstanding According to Adler et al (2013) and Klopf (1998), the “denotative meaning” (the literal or dictionary definition of a word) is typically stable It remains the same, regardless of the context in which the word is used since the denotative meaning is fixed However, in reality, transferring denotative meanings from one's native language intoEnglish, particularly for non-native speakers, can contribute to confusion and misunderstandings across languages This is due to the fact that many individuals who are not native English speakers often translate the denotative meaning of a word or concept from their first language into English (Hinner, 2017) Moreover, according to Hinner (2017), other factors such as cultural backgrounds, personal identities, individual perceptions, and other
30 contextual influences could also make different people from different places perceive the exact same word differently These factors shape how individuals interpret and understand language, leading to potential misunderstandings when communicating across cultural or linguistic boundaries The case in our study is also no exception The differences between the original word “Digital citizenship” and its Vietnamese translation “Công dân số” can potentially create confusion It might contribute to misunderstandings about the definition of digital citizenship among students at VNU-IS This idea is further reinforced by what students said during the interview session When students were asked about their first impressions of
“digital citizenship”, also known as “Công dan số,” they provided keywords or images that came to mind Notably, the information mentioned repeatedly the most was “technology”,
“internet”, or “intelligence” and the word “cybersecurity” was mentioned only once while other crucial keywords related to DC such as “Safety”, “Responsibility”, “Rights”, “Ethics”, etc were absent.
The concept of digital citizenship (DC) has gained attention over the past 24 years (Mancini, 1999), evolving alongside rapid technological advancements (Jeeger, 2021) Its multidimensionality and complexity were highlighted by researchers (Isin & Ruppert, 2015; Vivienne et al, 2016; Schou, 2018) Terms related to DC, such as digital literacy and etiquette, are often used interchangeably in the literature without clear differentiation (Chen et al., 2021) This lack of clarity further contributes to the complexity of the concept.
Intercultural misunderstandings surrounding the term "digital citizenship" can lead to confusion and ambiguity To resolve this, collaborative efforts involving translators, linguists, and experts are crucial to establish a clear, concise, and universally accepted definition This will ensure that the concept is understood and applied consistently across different cultural contexts.
Though digital citizenship is a crucial aspect of technology that aligns with the vision and statement of VNU-IS, the data indicates that DC education might not be paid enough attention Despite striving to become a center of training, research, and knowledge transfer with high integration and international accreditation standards, the current educational framework may not adequately prioritize the development of digital citizenship awareness among students Without a strong emphasis on the importance of digital citizenship within the curriculum and educational programs, students may not receive sufficient guidance and
31 education on this topic, leading to students not being adequately equipped with information or education about the concept of digital citizenship.
It's difficult to assess these results as good or bad without a benchmark for comparison. However, since digital citizenship is a relatively new concept, these numbers and findings can be considered to have room for potential growth in the future.
Figure 8: The necessity of digital citizenship Figure 9: The feasibility of teaching digital education: Students’ perspective citizenship: Students’ perspective e Very unnecessary * Unnecessary s Neutral e Very unfeasible e Unfeasible e Neutral e Necessary © Very necessary e Feasible e Very feasible
When the students were asked to rate the necessity of DC education on a 5-point Likert scale, with | being “very unnecessary” and 5 being “very necessary”, it turned out that most students (n = 273, 78.2%) found DC education important The group includes those who chose “Very necessary” (30.9%) and “Necessary” (47.3%) This demonstrated the huge need for learning and teaching DC Less than a quarter of the participants (n = 64, 18.3%) were neutral, suggesting they might be unsure about the necessity of DC education or they see it as somewhat necessary but not a top priority Besides, only 12 students (3.4%) considered DC education unnecessary or very unnecessary (Figure 8).
In terms of the feasibility of teaching DC to university students, the students were also asked to rate the feasibility of teaching DC on a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 being “very unfeasible” and 5 being “very feasible” Figure 9 showed that 61.6% of the participants believed that it was feasible and very feasible to teach DC at the university 119 students (34.1%) feel neutral, in other words, they did not know whether executing DC education is possible or not Finally,
15 participants (4.3%) did not find it possible to teach DC to university students.
The necessity and feasibility of digital citizenship education: Mean and Standard deviation
The necessity of DC education 4.04 0.855
The feasibility of teaching DC to university students 3.73 0.871
It could be gleaned from Table 5 that the mean for the necessity of digital citizenship (DC) education is 4.04 (SD = 0.855) This indicates that, on average, students rate the necessity of
DC education between “necessary” and “very necessary” on the Likert scale, suggesting they generally recognize the importance of DC education The mean for the feasibility of teaching
DC to university students is slightly lower at 3.73 (SD = 0.871) which falls between “neutral” and “feasible” on the Likert scale This suggests that while students see the importance of DC education, they are somewhat less certain about how feasible it is to implement this education at the university level.
These findings demonstrate that there is a strong recognition of the importance of DC education among students This aligns with the interview findings, where students recognize the growing importance of technology in their lives and view DC as a way to navigate the digital world responsibly They also acknowledge the potential dangers present online, such as viruses or fraud, and believe DC education can equip them with the skills to stay safe As one stated, "As technology develops, and students are the ones who use the Internet and digital tools the most, digital citizenship becomes more and more important." Furthermore, they express a desire to be responsible digital citizens, valuing the ethical use of technology and its positive impact Overall, students see DC as a valuable tool offering a range of benefits, including improved critical thinking, communication skills, and online safety awareness.
Considering the potential feasibility of DC education, a similar pattern could also be observed throughout the interview sessions, where students agree that teaching digital citizenship (DC) to university students is feasible for several reasons Firstly, VNU-IS often invests in modern technological infrastructure and equipment, supporting effective DC teaching and learning. Therefore, participants believe VNU-IS students are accustomed to using technology in their studies, including online tools and platforms This facilitates the access and assimilation of
DC knowledge Secondly, students have confidence in the teachers' ability to effectively convey DC knowledge and skills Finally, they recognize the importance and benefits of DC