See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328410149

The Relationship between Jordanian Students' 21 st Century Skills (Cs21) and

Academic Achievement in Science

Article  in  Journal of Turkish Science Education · June 2018

DOI: 10.12973/tused.10232a)

CITATIONS READS

0 11

1 author:

Ashraf Fouad Kan'an

Zarqa University
7 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

21st century skills View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ashraf Fouad Kan'an on 20 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

82 Journal of Turkish Science Education. 15(2),82-94

TÜRK FEN EĞİTİMİ DERGİSİ Journal of

Yıl 15, Sayı 2, Haziran 2018 TURKISH SCIENCE EDUCATION
Volume 15, Issue 2, June 2018

http://www.tused.org

The Relationship between Jordanian Students’ 21st Century Skills

(Cs21) and Academic Achievement in Science
Ashraf KAN’AN 

1
Assistant. Prof. Dr., Zarqa University, Zarqa-JORDAN

Received: 01.11.2016 Revised: 12.08.2017 Accepted: 26.10.2017

The original language of article is English (v.15, n.2, June 2018, pp.82-94, doi: 10.12973/tused.10232a)

ABSTRACT
The present research aimed to determine the relationship between Jordanian students’ 21 st century skills
(Cs21) and academic achievement in science. The sample of the research consisted of a total of 96 eighth-
grade students drawn from four rural and four urban schools in Irbid Qasaba in the governorate of Irbid.
Randomly cluster sampling was used to select the sample of the study. To collect data, a Cs21 survey was
adapted from the Malaysian Cs21 Instrument (M-21CSI), which was itself based on the enGauge Cs21
framework by Metiri Group and NCREL. The adapted survey was used to measure students’ Cs21 and
academic achievement in science in the 2015–2016 academic year. The data were analyzed by using
descriptive (mean and standard deviation) and inferential statistics (simple linear regression and
independent samples t-test). The findings showed that the Cs21 was a significant predictor of the
students’ academic achievement in science (R = .353, p = .000). The analysis also showed that urban and
female students were better in acquiring the Cs21 than rural and male students. However, their parents’
job types had no significant difference in the students’ mean scores of Cs21. Therefore, it is
recommended that the Cs21 should be integrated into all curricula to improve students’ academic
achievement and to train future citizens, who are ready for the challenges of the 21 st century.

Keywords: Academic Achievement, Science Education, 21st Century Skills.

INTRODUCTION

a) 21st Century Skills (Cs21)

Advances in information technology (IT) have significant impacts on the politics,

economy, and society of countries in the world. So, students need to be equipped with suitable
skills, which effectively deal with future life complexities and today’s competitive world
(Alhabahba, 2016; Lemke, Coughlin, Thadani, & Martin, 2003; Poropat, 2009; Soh, Arsad, &
Osman, 2010; Turiman, Omar, Daud, & Osman, 2012). Therefore, educational systems
should keep up with these rapid changes to prepare students for new life challenges (Lemke et
al., 2003; Soh, Arsad & Osman, 2010). The 21st century skills (Cs21) prepare young people

 Corresponding author e-mail: akanan@zu.edu.jo © ISSN:1304-6020

 Kan’an, A. (2018). The Relationship between Jordanian Students’ 21st Century Skills... 83

for effective workers and citizens in the modern knowledge society in future (Ananiadou &
Claro, 2009).
The Cs21 enable the current generation to face future challenges, which could
encompass changes in industry, economy, society, technology, and information (Lemke et al.,
2003). These skills get students to acquire critical thinking, problem solving, decision making
and innovation (Hirsch, 2009; Silva, 2009). The Cs21 include digital literacy, inventive
thinking, effective communication and high productivity. They also include skills in learning,
innovation, media, technology, information, and core subjects as well as life and career skills
(Lemke et al., 2003).
Even though the assessment of the Cs21 is one of the most important educational issues,
how to measure the Cs21 has still been unexplored (Finegold & Notabartolo, 2010; Geisinger,
2016). Also, although the definition of the Cs21 has still been argued, the Cs21 are the skills,
that make a person active, productive, and adaptable in the new [21st] century (Autor, Levy, &
Murnane; 2003; Kyllonen, 2012; Levy & Murnane, 2004). Several organizations have
attempted to develop frameworks of the Cs21 (Dede, 2010). For instance, NCREL and Metiri
Group (Lemke et al., 2003) developed four main Cs21 domains: (1) digital-age literacy
including multicultural literacy, information literacy, technological literacy, visual literacy,
and scientific literacy (2) inventive thinking containing higher-order thinking and informal
reasoning, self-direction, managing complexity, adaptability, curiosity, creativity, and risk
taking (3) effective communication incorporating interactive communication, interpersonal
skills, personal responsibility, civic responsibility, social responsibility, collaboration, and
teaming (4) high productivity involving in using real-life tools, producing relevant and high-
quality products, and results, prioritizing, planning, and managing.

b) The CS21 and Science Education

The general objective of science teaching is to enable students to understand all

technological types, so that they can use them in their daily lives (Ministry of Education,
2016). Moreover, science education aims at developing students’ problem solving skills so
that they can solve their daily problems. Although the acquisition of basic science skills is
essential for students, these skills are not enough to become creative problem solvers, transfer
their knowledge to real-world situations, use various sources to generate innovative ideas, and
to face the challenges of modern life (Soh, Arsad, & Osman, 2010). Science education plays a
critical role in preparing the 21st century workforce (Bybee & Fuchs, 2006).
In this scope, teaching the Cs21 can contribute to improve science education, and
science pedagogy as well as standardizing curriculum to constantly changes in new
technology and globalized society (Hirsch, 2009; McFarlane, 2013). Also, educating students
with the Cs21 will make a contribution to society in the 21st century and make them more
productive (Volkmann, et al., 2009). Recognizing the importance of the Cs21 has led to its
integration into the educational system, as enGauge Framework by Metiri Group and NCREL.
They have purposed to integrate the teaching of the Cs21 into curricula, so that students can
participate fully in modern life (Dede, 2010).

c) The CS21 and Academic Achievement

Academic achievement, which is the goal of the entire educational system, is the main
indicator for assessing student progress in an educational system (Tabbodi, Rahgozar, &
Abadi, 2015). Knowledge, which is essential for success in the 21st century, yields successful
learning and achievement in any time (Mishra & Kereluik, 2011). In such traditional
academic domains as science, the Cs21 skills, frequently cited as an essential for success,
84 Journal of Turkish Science Education. 15(2),82-94

embrace core content knowledge and high academic achievement. In other words, excellence
in any traditional academic domain is considered to be the basis for developing other Cs21
(Gardner, 2008). Many empirical studies over years have found that academic achievement is
closely connected with cognitive skills (Mishra & Kereluik, 2011). Lemke et al. (2003)
suggested improving students’ academic achievement and the Cs21 skills, which are pre-
requests for the qualified workforces. In addition, it is argued that the use of educational
technology improves students’ achievement (Cuban, 2001; Dede, 1998; Harter & Harter,
2004; Oppenheimer, 2003; Safari & Taheri, 2015). In addition to digital-age literacy, high
productivity and effective communications, inventive thinking has been identified as an
important skill for academic achievement (North Central Regional Educational Laboratory
and Metiri, 2003).

d) CS21 and Jordan

There is an urgent need to assess the Cs21 in Jordan, so that deficiencies in curricula,
especially science curriculum, can be revealed and addressed to properly prepare students for
their current and future life skills (Bybee & Fuchs, 2006; Kyllonen, 2012). Due to rapid
advances in IT and knowledge-based economy, the concept of the ‘k economy’ has arisen to
address the gap between various curricula offered by different educational systems and the
needs of the world community in the 21st century (Turiman, Omar, Daud, & Osman, 2012).
Jordan, as a part of this community, started to implement technology-enriched educational
reforms under the title “Education Reform for the Knowledge Economy” (ERfKE) in 2003
(Chisholm & Steiner-Khamsi, 2015; Lightfoot, 2014). Hence, such Cs21 as collaboration,
communication, critical thinking, problem solving, and information and communication
technology (ICT) literacy were integrated into the curriculum (Kozma, 2010). The aim of the
Curriculum and Assessment Department of the Jordanian Ministry of Education is to foster
sustainable economic development through well-skilled workforces and to educate population
with lifelong learning experiences via their recent and upcoming requirements (Kozma,
2010).
Nonetheless, Jordan was ranked 57th among 65 countries in the Programme for
International Student Assessment (PISA) assessing curricula Cs21 (PISA, 2012). In 2011, the
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) showed that Jordanian
eighth-grade students had the lowest results among the participant countries (Mullis, Martin,
Foy, & Arora, 2012). Therefore, there is an urgent need to improve the factors that affect
students’ academic achievement and to integrate the Cs21 into science curriculum meeting the
needs for the modern world. Also, little research has been conducted on the effect of digital
literacy on student achievement (Brown, 2009).

To date, there has been no published research on the relationship between the Cs21
and academic achievement in science, but many researchers have examined the relationship
between students’ digital literacy and academic achievement (Brown, 2009; Pagani et al.,
2016; Prensky, 2005). These studies have revealed that the use of technology improves
students’ academic achievement. On the other hand, some studies showed a positive
relationship between thinking skills (e.g., creative thinking and critical thinking) and
academic achievement (Anwar, et al., 2012; Bowles-Terry, 2012; Naderi et al., 2010; Zirak
& Ahmadian, 2015). This research will explore the relationship between Jordanian students’
Cs21 skills and academic achievement in science or elicit variations in the Cs21 for Jordanian
students.
 Kan’an, A. (2018). The Relationship between Jordanian Students’ 21st Century Skills... 85

CONCEPTUAL DEFINITION

a) Digital-Age Literacy

The digital-age literacy is the most predominant skills needed to negotiate the
complexities of digital lifestyle (Belshaw, 2012). Digital-age literacy is defined as the “ability
to use digital technology, communications tools and/or networks to access, manage, integrate,
evaluate, and create information in order to function in a knowledge society” (Educational
Testing Service, 2002, p.2). For this research, digital-age literacy is defined as the needed
skills and capabilities to effectively deal with the complexities of life. This effectiveness
facilitates scientific literacy, technological literacy, visual and information literacy,
multicultural literacy, global awareness, using technology in interpersonal, collaborate
communication, and productivity of an individual’s ability to use and manage technology.

b) Inventive Thinking

Inventive thinking is defined as “an ability to effectively solve non-typical (creative)

problems in various domains avoiding a large number of trials and errors” (Sokol, et al., 2008,
p.36). In this research, inventive thinking, which involves in curiosity, self-direction,
creativity, risk taking, adaptability, sound reasoning and higher-order thinking, is defined as
being able to creatively deal with complex learning.

c) Moral Values

Moral values are defined as an exceptional fundamental spiritual development of a

person (Aramavičiūtė & Martišauskienė, 2014; Covey, 2007). In this research, moral values
reflect the Jordanian society’s basic values and norms (named Jordanian identity) while using
technology.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The primary aim of this research is to identify the relationship between Jordanian
students’ academic achievement in science and Cs21. The secondary aim of this research is to
determine these students’ demographic differences in terms of the Cs21.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This research attempts to answer the following research questions:

1. Is there any relationship between the Jordanian students’ Cs21 and academic
achievement in science?
2. Is there any significant difference between male and female students’ Cs21 skills?
3. Do students from rural and urban school locations impact the students’ Cs21 skills?
4. Do students’ parents’ jobs (educational and non-educational) influence their Cs21
skills?
This research is expected to integrate the Cs21 into the Jordanian government’s
curricula in general and serve for science curriculum at the primary school level purposing to
equip students with these skills. Also this research will play a crucial role in training students
86 Journal of Turkish Science Education. 15(2),82-94

with the expertise, knowledge, and skills that they need to be productive citizens and workers
and to face the challenges of globalization. Moreover, the results will give Jordanian
educational leaders valuable feedback that can be used to inform educational policy on such
areas as professional development for teachers, curriculum development, accountability, and
assessment. In addition, this research will pave the way for other researchers to further
improve the integration of the Cs21 into science curricula and to improve science pedagogies
and related assessment tools. Also, relevant educational leaders may find this beneficial for
further actions.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

a) Research design

Within survey research design, this research explored the relationship(s) between the
Cs21 and academic achievement in science. That is, this study viewed the Cs21 as a predictor
variable and academic achievement in science as the criterion. Hence, the current study
employed a survey to generalize the data from the sample of the study to a large-size
population.

b) Research sample

The target population of this prediction study consisted of public primary schools in
Irbid governorate in Jordan during the 2015–2016 academic year. The accessible population
was 96 government primary schools in Irbid Qasaba. A random cluster sampling technique
was used for selecting the sample. Firstly, 480 primary school students from eight
government schools (four each from rural and urban areas) were randomly drawn from the
schools in the Irbid Education Directorate. Then, 48 students from each school were randomly
selected for this research. Finally, given Krejcie and Morgan’s (1970) criteria in determining
a proper sample size, 384 primary school students participated in the current study. The
demographic features of the sample are shown in Table 1. It was deemed that the sample of
the study would represent eighth-grade students in public primary schools in the Qasaba
district in the Irbid governorate.

Table 1. The sample of the Study

Number of Students Percentages
Rural 171 45
School Location
Urban 213 55
Male 194 51
Gender
Female 190 49

c) Instrument and procedures

One of the most used measurements in educational research is the self-rating or self-
assessment. The instrument used for this research was adapted from the ‘Malaysian 21st
Century Skills’ Instrument (M-21CSI) (Osman, Soh, & Arsad, 2010), which was, in turn,
based on the enGauge Cs21 framework (Lemke et al., 2003). The M-21CSI included 106
items within five factors. This instrument was translated from English into Arabic. Then, it
was pilot-studied with thirty students to take their feedbacks. The pilot-study showed that the
students had a problem in responding the instrument in scheduled time due to its length.
Further, they were bored with the items and mentioned that “the meaning of every item
overlapped other ones”. Due to these problems, the instrument was revised by selecting more
 Kan’an, A. (2018). The Relationship between Jordanian Students’ 21st Century Skills... 87

related items to the factors. Afterwards, the instrument items consisted of 49 items at five
factors; 13 items in digital-age literacy, 19 items in inventive thinking, 5 items in effective
communication, 5 items in high productivity and 7 items in spiritual values.
Then, the instrument was sent to a group of experts (two science educators and two
education technologists) for content validation. They suggested to insert items at the
“effective communication and high productivity” factors to the digital-age literacy factor as
well as adding more 7 items to the ‘spiritual values’ factor and renaming it to moral values.
The instrument was improved based on their suggestions (see Table 2). A three-point Likert
scale (Disagree--1 point-- to Agree--3 point) was employed to collect data.

Table 2. Factors of the Instrument

Subscale No. Factors
1 Digital-Age Literacy
2 Inventive Thinking
3 Moral values

A group of four experts examined this instrument to check content validity (Osman et al.,
2010). Later, the instrument was exposed to a factor analysis. The results of factor analysis emerged
three factors, explaining 30.74 percent of the overall variance (see Table 3).

Table 3. Factors and percentages of variance

Factors % of variance Cumulative %
Digital-Age Literacy 20.542 20.542
Inventive Thinking 10.201 30.743
Moral values 9.712 40.455

The reliability of each factor was calculated by Cronbach’s alpha co-efficient. In

addition, a pilot study was conducted to obtain the reliability index of the instrument. As seen
in Table 4, the reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) values ranged from 0.78–0.83 for three factors,
while that for the entire instrument was found to be 0.81. This means a high level of internal
consistency for the scale. In the case of the original M-21CSI, reliability (Cronbach’s alpha)
values ranged from 0.74–0.92 for five factors (Osman, Soh, & Arsad, 2010).

Table 4. Cronbach’s alpha (α) values of the factors and entire scale
Factors Cronbach’s alpha values
Digital-Age Literacy .81
Inventive Thinking .78
Moral values .83
Total .81

d) Data analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to obtain the mean scores and standard deviations.
Simple linear regression was used to determine whether the Cs21 scores have any influence
on the scores of academic achievement in science. Finally, an independent samples t-test was
used to compare between two groups’ Cs21 skills at .05 of significance level for all tests.

FINDINGS

The findings showed that mean scores of academic achievement in science and
Cs21were 83.96 (±13.96) and 132.84 (±12.78).
88 Journal of Turkish Science Education. 15(2),82-94

As observed in Table 5, the results of a simple linear regression analysis of the Cs21
scores acted as a predictor of academic achievement in science. The Cs21 scores significantly
predicted academic achievement in science (r = .353, F = 54.29, p = .00 < 0.05). An increase
in a total of the Cs21 scores revealed that academic achievement in science is expected to
increase by .385 times.

Table 5. The results of the Simple Linear Regression Analysis for Productiveness of the Cs21
Scores
Variable B Standard Error(B) Beta t P
Cs21 Score .385 .052 .353 7.363 .000

As can be seen from Table 6, mean score of rural students’ Cs21 was 128.60 (±13.47),
while that for urban students was 136.24 (±13.47). Also, mean score of male students’
Cs21was 128.75 (±14.66) whilst that for female students was 137.02 (±13.07). On the other
hand, mean score of father jobs’ Cs21 was 134.51 (±16.05) for educated ones while that for
was 132.43 (±13.41) for non-educated ones. Finally, mean score of mother jobs’ Cs21 was
132.30 (±14.06) for educated ones whereas that was 132.98 (±13.98) for non-educated ones.

Table 6. The Students’ Cs21 Scores of School Location, Gender, Father’s Job, and Mother’s
Job
Mean score Std. Deviation t df P
Rural 128.60 13.47
School Location -5.22 382 .000
Urban 136.24 13.47
Male 128.75 14.66
Gender -6.06 382 .000
Female 137.02 13.07
Educated 134.51 16.05
Father’s Job 1.167 382 .244
Other 132.43 13.41
Educated 132.30 14.06
Mother’s Job -.393 382 .695
Other 132.98 13.98

The independent samples t-test of the Cs21 scores showed that mean score of the Cs21
of students at urban areas was statistically higher than that for rural areas (t = -5.22, p =
.000). Also, there was a statistically significant difference between female and male students’
mean scores of the Cs21 (t = -6.06, p = .000). However, there was no statistical difference
between mean scores of educated and non-educated fathers’ jobs ones (t = 1.167, p = .244).
Likewise, there was no significant difference between mean scores of educated and non-
educated mothers’ jobs (t = -.393, p =.695).

DISCUSSION

To predict the effect of the Cs21 scores on the eighth-grade students’ academic
achievement in science, a simple linear regression was carried out. .
The results demonstrated that the students’ Cs21 scores were significant predictors of
their academic achievements in science. These findings are in line with previous ones
(Anwar, et al., 2012; Bowles-Terry, 2012; Brown, 2009; Naderi et al., 2010; Pagani et al.,
2016; Prensky, 2005; Zirak & Ahmadian, 2015), reporting that academic achievement is
positively related to digital literacy, critical thinking, and creative thinking. Also, Turiman et
al. (2012) argued that students’ mastery of the Cs21 would improve their academic
performances.
This may stem from students’ abilities of the Cs21. That is, they might understand
scientific concepts, acquire knowledge of scientific processes, share information effectively
 Kan’an, A. (2018). The Relationship between Jordanian Students’ 21st Century Skills... 89

by using various types of media, solve their real-life problems, and manage their time and
make decisions. Moreover, they might learn science material individually or collaboratively
by analyzing, evaluating, and collecting information from new resources (Lemke et al., 2003).
Innovate and creative students are also able to apply a wide range of knowledge and
skills to effectively produce, evaluate, present, and clarify new ideas (Mishra & Kereluik,
2011). Students, who have acquired critical thinking, problem solving, communication, and
ethical awareness, have the ability to discuss information and make creative decisions. They
can also solve problems in achieving their desired aims effectively, communicating verbally
and writing and using various forms of technology and social media. Moreover, they should
be able to adapt to live in different cultures and societies and share their feelings with others
by acquiring the necessary knowledge and skills (Mishra & Kereluik, 2011).
The results of this research supported the idea “integrating the Cs21 into students’
science curricula will have a positive effect on developing their academic achievement in
science.” The students’ Cs21 scores may act as predictors of their potential academic levels.
So, it could inform school principals and teachers impressions about their new students’
science knowledge, skills, and attitudes, which need to be taken into consideration at the
beginning of any new academic year.
A significant difference between mean scores of the Cs21 of the students from rural
and urban depicts that the students from villages have difficulties in using technology (Lu &
Overbaugh, 2009). Moreover, education service, e.g., teachers’ qualifications, buildings,
instruments, educational supervision, managers etc, are also better at anywhere closer to the
city center. A significant difference between the female and male students’ means scores of
the Cs21 means that females are better at acquiring the Cs21 than males. These results do not
indicate any different academic capacities regarding gender, but give some information on the
effects of societal gender stereotyping (Albadi, 2014; Nwosu & Ibe, 2014). In Jordan, females
have few opportunities to spend time outdoors because of cultural restrictions, so they have
more time to spend on schoolwork and use media to share information. This cultural
background may explain the significant difference in the effect of the Cs21 on gender.
In addition, no significant difference between mean scores of the students’ Cs21 of
educated and non-educated parent jobs reveals that whatever their parent jobs are well-
educated; these do not affect their children’s Cs21 scores. It has been argued that students’
self-directed learning skills are associated with their ages (Morris, 1995). So, since eighth-
grade students are more self-reliant in their academic learning activities than younger ones,
parental roles are restricted to create a good learning environment for core learning activities.
Therefore, the parent jobs and their own academic experiences may not have an effect on their
children’s acquisitions of the Cs21.
This research made a contribution not only to research on the prediction of academic
performance in science, but also to practice the applicability of this instrument. Hence,
teachers will be able to get valuable feedbacks of their students’ deficiencies and progresses
in acquiring the Cs21. Thereby, adjustments will be made to improve their achievement levels
throughout the academic year. In other words, the Cs21 survey instrument can be used as a
diagnostic test.

CONCLUSION

Because this research adapted a valid and reliable Cs21 instrument into the Arabic, it
can be easily used to measure the Jordanian students’ Cs21 levels. Since it also examined the
relationship between the Jordanian eighth-grade students’ Cs21 and academic achievement in
science, a significant relationship between the Cs21 and academic achievement in science was
found. Namely, the Cs21 significantly predicted academic achievement in science. Also,
90 Journal of Turkish Science Education. 15(2),82-94

gender and school location significantly influenced the Cs21 scores, whereas there was no
significant difference for the effect of the educated and non-educated parent jobs on the Cs21
scores. Therefore, the current research suggests that the Cs21 is one of the factors contributing
to higher academic achievement in science. Therefore, it is recommended that the Jordanian
Ministry of Education integrate the Cs21 into its curricula, which play an important role in
students’ academic achievements and their progresses in all subjects, help them to keep up
with this complicated century.
Finally, because this research had some limitations of characteristics and skills of the
sample, future studies should be conducted with a large- sample size from different
governorates and grades. However, even though the sample was selected from one
governorate, no significant difference between mean scores of the students from urban and
rural areas appeared. To identify further differences, further researches should focus on how
family incomes impact their Cs21 scores and academic achievement levels. Further studies
could also examine the effects of the Cs21 on other types of academic achievement.

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by the Deanship of Research in Zarqa University/Jordan.

REFERENCES
Albadi, N. (2014). Girl’s school for the 21st century in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished Master
Thesis). Savannah College of Art and Design, Georgia.
Alhabahba, M., Pandian, A., Mahfoodh, O. & Gritter, K. (2016). English language education in
Jordan: Some recent trends and challenges. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1156809.
Ananiadou, K. & Claro, M. (2009). 21st Century skills and competences for new millennium
learners in OECD countries. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. EDU
Working paper no. 41, Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529649.pdf.
Anwar, M., Aness, M., Khizar, A., Naseer, M. & Muhammad, G. (2012). Relationship of
creative thinking with the academic achievements of secondary school students. International
Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 1(3), 44-47.
Aramavičiūtė, V. & Martišauskienė, E. (2014). Paauglių vertybių konfigūracija kaip dvasingumo
paradigmos išraiška: teorinis ir empirinis aspektai. Acta paedagogica Vilnensia, 32, 21–34
Autor, D.H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R.J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change:
An empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1279–1333.
Belshaw, D. A. (2012). What is 'digital literacy'? A Pragmatic investigation (Unpublished Phd
Thesis). England: Durham University.
Bowles-Terry, M. (2012). Library instruction and academic success: A mixed-methods
assessment of a library instruction program. Evidence Based Library & Information Practice,
7(1), 82-95.
 Kan’an, A. (2018). The Relationship between Jordanian Students’ 21st Century Skills... 91

Brown, B.C. (2009). An examination of the relationship between digital literacy and student
achievement in Texas preparatory schools. Oklahoma: The University of Oklahoma.
Bybee, R.W. & Fuchs, B. (2006). Preparing the 21st century workforce: A new reform in science
and technology education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 349-352.
Chisholm, L. & Steiner-Khamsi G. (2015). South-south cooperation in education and
development. New York: Teachers College Press.
Covey, S.R. (2007). 8-asis įprotis. Tobulybės link. Vilnius: Alma littera.
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Reforming schools through technology, 1980-2000.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Dede, C. (1998). Association for supervision and curriculum development 1998 yearbook:
Learning with technology. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. 21st Century Skills: Rethinking
How Students Learn, 20, 51-76.
Educational Testing Service. (2002). Digital transformation: a framework for ICT literacy. A
report of international information and communication literacy panel. Princeton, NJ:
Educational Testing Service, p2. Retrieved 2 October, 2005 from
http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Communication_Technology_Literacy/ictr
eport.pdf
Finegold, D. & Notabartolo, A. (2010). 21st century competencies and their impact: An
interdisciplinary literature review. Research on 21st Century Competencies, National
Research Council, pp. 1–50, 2010. Retrieved from
http://www.hewlett.org/uploads/21st_Century_Competencies_Impact.pdf
Gardner, H. (2008). 5 Minds for the future. Boston. MA: Harvard Business Press.
Geisinger, K.F. (2016). 21st century skills: What are they and how do we assess them?. Applied
Measurement in Education, 29(4), 245-249.
Harter, C.L., & Harter, J.F. (2004). Teaching with technology: Does access to computer
technology increase student achievement?. Eastern Economic Journal, 30(4), 507-514.
Hirsch, E.D. (2009). The 21st century skills movement. Retrieved from
https://greatminds.org/history.
Kozma, R., Vota, W. & Bsaiso, R. (2010). ICT policy and strategy, operational plan, monitoring
and evaluation plan: For 2011-2015 and moving towards 2025. Amman, Jordan: Ministry of
Education.
Krejcie, R.V. & Morgan, D.W. (1970). Table for determining sample size from a given
population. Educational and Psychological Measurement,30(3), 607-610.
92 Journal of Turkish Science Education. 15(2),82-94

Kyllonen, P.C. (2012). Measurement of 21st century skills within the common core state
standards. Paper presented at the K-12 Center at ETS invitational research
symposium on technology enhanced assessments. Retrieved from
https://cerpp.usc.edu/files/2013/11/Kyllonen_21st_Cent_Skills_and_CCSS.pdf
Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., Thadani, V. & Martin, C. (2003). EnGauge 21st century skills—literacy
in the digital age. Los Angeles, CA: Metiri Group.
Levy, F. & Murnane, R. (2004). The new division of labor: How computers are creating the next
job market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lightfoot, M.D. (2014). Education reform for the knowledge economy in the Middle East: A
study of education policy making and enactment in the Kingdom of Bahrain (Unpublished
Phd Thesis). Bahrain: UCL Institute of Education.
Lu, R. & Overbaugh, R. (2009). School environment and technology implementation in K-12
classrooms. Computers in the Schools, 26, 89–106.
McFarlane, D.A. (2013). Understanding the challenges of science education in the 21st century:
New opportunities for scientific literacy. International Letters of Social and Humanistic
Sciences, 4, 35-44.
Ministry of Education (2016). The philosophy and objectives of education.
http://moe.gov.jo/en/MenuDetails.aspx?MenuID=32.
Mishra, P. & Kereluik, K. (2011). What 21st century learning? A review and a synthesis. In M.
Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher
Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 3301–3312). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Morris, S.S. (1995). The relationship between self-directed learning readiness and academic
performance in a non-traditional higher education program (Unpublished Phd Thesis).
Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.
Mullis, I.V., Martin, M.O., Foy, P. & Arora, A. (2012). Trends in International Mathematics and
Science Study (TIMSS) 2011 international results in mathematics. Boston, MA: International
Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
Naderi, H., Abdullah, R., Aizan, H.T., Sharir, J. & Kumar, V. (2010). Relationship between
creativity and academic achievement: A study of gender differences. Journal of American
Science, 6, 181-190.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory & Metiri Group. (2003). enGauge 21st Century
Skills for 21st Century Learners. Naperville, IL: NCREL.
 Kan’an, A. (2018). The Relationship between Jordanian Students’ 21st Century Skills... 93

Nwosu, A. & Ibe, E. (2014). Gender and scientific literacy levels: Implications for sustainable
Science and Technology Education (STE) for the 21st century Jobs. Journal of Education and
Practice, 5, 113-118.
Oppenheimer, T. (2003). The flickering mind: The false promise of technology in the classroom
and how learning can be saved. New York: Random House.
Osman, K. & Marimuthu, N. (2010). Setting new learning targets for the 21st century science
education in Malaysia. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2(2010): 3737-3741.
Osman, K., Soh, T.M. , & Arsad, N. (2010). Development and validation of the Malaysian 21st
Century Skills Instrument (M-21CSI) for science students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 9, 599-603.
Pagani, L., Argentin, G., Gui, M. & Stanca, L. (2016). The impact of digital skills on educational
outcomes: Evidence from performance tests. Educational Studies, 42(2), 137-162.
PISA. (2012). Results in focus what 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they
know. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-
2012-results-overview.pdf
Poropat, A.E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic
performance. Psychological Bulletin 135(2): 322-338.
Prensky, M. (2005). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8-13.
Safari, N. & Taheri, Z. (2015). Relationship between applying educational technology and
academic achievement of university students. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 6(22), 85-103.
Silva, E. (2009). Measuring skills for 21st century learning. The Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9), 630-
634.
Soh, T., Arsad, N. & Osman, K. (2010). The relationship of 21st century skills on students’
attitude and perception towards physics. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7, 546-
554.
Sokol, A., Oget, D., Sonntag, M. & Khomenko. N. (2008). The development of inventive
thinking skills in the upper secondary language classroom. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3,
34–46. Retrieved from. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2008.03.001
Tabbodi, M., Rahgozar, H. & Abadi, M. (2015). The relationship between happiness and
academic achievements. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 4(1),
1805-3602.
Turiman, P., Omar, J., Daud, A. & Osman, K. (2012). Fostering the 21st century skills through
scientific literacy and science process skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59,
110-116.
94 Journal of Turkish Science Education. 15(2),82-94

Volkmann, C., Wilson, K., Marlotti, S., Rabuzzi, D., Vyakarnam, S. & Sepulveda, A. (2009).
Educating the next wave of entrepreneurs-unlocking entrepreneurial capabilities to meet the
global challenges of the 21st Century. A report of the Global Foundation Initiative, World
Economic Forum, pp. 1-184.
Zirak, M. & Ahmadian, E. (2015). Relationship between emotional intelligence & academic
achievement emphasizing on creative thinking. Mediterranean Journal of Social
Sciences, 6(5), 561-570.

View publication stats