The Relationship Between Digital Skills and Socioeconomic Status in Higher Education: A Case Study at Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University

Öz

In today’s digital era, the importance of digital skills is steadily increasing. These skills play a vital role not only in accessing information but also in enhancing individuals’ employability. However, the acquisition and utilization of digital skills are significantly influenced by socioeconomic factors. Numerous international reports emphasize that socioeconomic disparities are a key determinant of digital competence, contributing to substantial digital inequalities in both access and skill levels. This study aims to evaluate the digital skill levels of undergraduate students at Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University and to investigate the relationship between these skills and students’ socioeconomic backgrounds. A quantitative research design was employed, with data collected through a structured survey. A total of 396 students participated in the study. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0 software. The findings indicate that students generally demonstrate digital skills at an above-average level. Analysis of the sub-dimensions revealed that students scored highest in digital communication skills, while the lowest scores were observed in digital content creation. Additionally, statistically significant differences were found between students’ digital skill levels and several variables, including faculty of study, father’s educational attainment, type of internet access, and data quota availability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digital skills
• socioeconomic status
• higher education
• digital inequality
• quantitative research

Yükseköğretimde Dijital Beceriler ile Sosyoekonomik Durum Arasındaki İlişki: Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesinde Bir Araştırma

Öz

Günümüzde dijital becerilerin önemi giderek artmakta; bu beceriler, bilgiye erişim süreçlerinde olduğu kadar, bireylerin istihdam edilebilirliği açısından da belirleyici bir rol oynamaktadır. Bununla birlikte, dijital becerilerin edinimi ve kullanımında sosyoekonomik faktörlerin etkisi dikkat çekici bir şekilde öne çıkmaktadır. Nitekim, uluslararası düzeyde yayımlanan çeşitli raporlarda, sosyoekonomik farklılıkların dijital beceriler üzerinde belirleyici olduğu ve bu durumun dijital erişim ve beceriler açısından ciddi dijital eşitsizlikler yarattığı vurgulanmaktadır. Bu çalışma, Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesi’nde öğrenim gören lisans öğrencilerinin sahip oldukları dijital beceri düzeylerini belirlemeyi ve bu beceriler ile öğrencilerin sosyoekonomik durumları arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmada nicel araştırma yöntemi benimsenmiş ve veri toplama aracı olarak anket tekniği kullanılmıştır. Çalışmaya toplam 396 öğrenci katılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler SPSS 26.0 programı aracılığıyla analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma bulguları, öğrencilerin dijital beceri düzeylerinin genel olarak orta düzeyin üzerinde bir yeterlilikte olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Alt faktörler açısından incelendiğinde, öğrencilerin en yüksek ortalama puanı dijital iletişim becerilerinde aldığı, en düşük ortalama puanın ise dijital içerik üretimi boyutunda görüldüğü tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, öğrencilerin öğrenim gördükleri fakülte, babalarının eğitim düzeyi, internet erişim biçimleri ve internet kotaları gibi değişkenler ile dijital beceri düzeyleri arasında istatistiksel açıdan anlamlı farklar olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijital beceriler
• sosyoekonomik durum
• yükseköğretim
• dijital eşitsizlik
• nicel araştırma

Etik Beyan

Etik Kurul Onayı Alınmıştır

Kaynakça

1. Alpar, R. (2003). Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemlere giriş 1. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
2. Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesi. (2025). 2024 yılı idare faaliyet raporu. [https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=d541be15-09d5-4aaa-adaa-32f8a64f2188.pdf](https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=d541be15-09d5-4aaa-adaa-32f8a64f2188.pdf)
3. Arslan, A. (2023). Determining the effect of university students’ technology usage levels on digital reading self-efficacy. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 12(1), 73–84. [https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.993603](https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.993603)
4. Avrupa Birliği. (2020). Yeşil dijital dönüşüm yönetiminde beceri ihtiyaçlarının tanımlanması: Araştırma raporu. [https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/project-result-content/26e2797e-0a64-4652-ab01-ee9dc94f83e7/Ye_il_Dijital_D_n___mde_Beceri_Analizi_Raporu_TR.pdf](https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/project-result-content/26e2797e-0a64-4652-ab01-ee9dc94f83e7/Ye_il_Dijital_D_n___mde_Beceri_Analizi_Raporu_TR.pdf)
5. Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos, V., Matarranz, M., Casado-Aranda, L.-A., & Otto, A. (2022). Teachers’ digital competencies in higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 1–16. [https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00312-8](https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00312-8)
6. Bayrakçı, S., & Narmanlıoğlu, H. (2021). Türkiye’deki lisans öğrencilerinin ve mezunlarının dijital okuryazarlılık düzeylerinin incelenmesi. AJIT-E: Academic Journal of Information Technology, 12(46), 46–67. [https://doi.org/10.5824/ajite.2021.03.003.x](https://doi.org/10.5824/ajite.2021.03.003.x)
7. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2017). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (23. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
8. Cabero-Almenara, J., Guillén-Gámez, F. D., Ruiz-Palmero, J., & Palacios-Rodríguez, A. (2021). Digital competence of higher education professors according to DigCompEdu: Statistical research methods with ANOVA. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 4691–4708. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10476-5](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10476-5)

9. Cao, J., Bhuvaneswari, G., Arumugam, T., & Aravind, B. R. (2023). The digital edge: Examining the relationship between digital competency and language learning outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1187909. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1187909](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1187909)
10. Cao, S., & Li, H. (2023). A scoping review of digital well-being in early childhood: Definitions, measurements, contributors, and interventions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20, 3510. [https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043510](https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043510)
11. Charles, L., Xia, S., & Coutts, A. P. (2022). Digitalization and employment: A review. International Labour Organization. [https://webapps.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/ed_emp/documents/publication/wcms_854353.pdf](https://webapps.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/ed_emp/documents/publication/wcms_854353.pdf)
12. Dzikite, C., Nsubuga, Y., & Nkonki, V. (2017). Lecturers’ competencies in information and communication technology for effective implementation of ICT-integrated teaching and learning in textiles and clothing degree programmes. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 17, 61–68. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2017.1305756](https://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2017.1305756)
13. Ferrari, A., Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2012). Understanding digital competence in the 21st century: An analysis of current frameworks. In A. Ravenscroft, S. Lindstaedt, C. D. Kloos, & D. Hernández-Leo (Eds.), 21st century learning for 21st century skills (pp. 79–92). Springer.
14. Göldağ, B. (2021). Üniversite öğrencilerinin dijital okuryazarlık düzeyleri ile dijital veri güvenliği farkındalık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. E-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12(3), 82–100. [https://doi.org/10.19160/e-ijer.950635](https://doi.org/10.19160/e-ijer.950635)
15. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.
16. Howard, S. K., & Tondeur, J. (2023). Higher education teachers’ digital competencies for a blended future. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(1), 1–6. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10211-6](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10211-6)
17. Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler (15. baskı). Nobel Yayıncılık.
18. Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel irade algı çerçevesi ile bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Nobel.
19. Kardefelt-Winther, D. (2017). How does the time children spend using digital technology impact their mental well-being, social relationships and physical activity? UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti.
20. Köklü, N., Büyüköztürk, Ş., & Çokluk, Ö. (2024). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik (28. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
21. Kuluşaklı, E. (2024). Distance learners’ basic digital competence in higher education. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 14(2), 358–365. [https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1455479](https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1455479)
22. Lucas, M., Bem-Haja, P., Santos, S., Figueiredo, H., Ferreira Dias, M., & Amorim, M. (2022). Digital proficiency: Sorting real gaps from myths among higher education students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6), 1885–1914. [https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13220](https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13220)
23. Matamala, C., Hinostroza, J. E., & Preiss, D. D. (2024). Exploring students’ digital competencies in two Chilean universities. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 1099–1118. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12311-5](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12311-5)
24. Micheli, M. (2015). What is new in the digital divide? Understanding Internet use by teenagers from different social backgrounds. Studies in Media and Communications, 10, 55–87. [https://doi.org/10.1108/S2050-206020150000010003](https://doi.org/10.1108/S2050-206020150000010003)
25. Morgan, A., Sibson, R., & Jackson, D. (2022). Digital demand and digital deficit: Conceptualising digital literacy and gauging proficiency among higher education students. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 44(3), 258–275. [https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2022.2030275](https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2022.2030275)
26. OECD. (2019). PISA 2021 ICT framework. OECD Publishing. [https://www.oecd.org/pisa/sitedocument/PISA-2021-ICT-Framework.pdf](https://www.oecd.org/pisa/sitedocument/PISA-2021-ICT-Framework.pdf)
27. OECD. (2022). Education at a glance 2022: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. [https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en](https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en)
28. Özkan, S. (2023). Dijital eşitsizliği anlamak: Erken tespit ve eylem için bibliyometrik analiz. İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15(4), 547–571.
29. Ryhtä, I., Elonen, I., Saaranen, T., Sormunen, M., Mikkonen, K., Kääriäinen, M., Koskinen, C., Koskinen, M., Koivula, M., Koskimäki, M., Lähteenmäki, M.-L., Wallin, O., Sjögren, T., & Salminen, L. (2020). Social and health care educators’ perceptions of competence in digital pedagogy: A qualitative descriptive study. Nurse Education Today, 92, 104521. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104521](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104521)
30. Shala, A., & Grajcevci, A. (2018). Digital competencies among student populations in Kosovo: The impact of inclusion, socioeconomic status, ethnicity and type of residence. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 1203–1218.
31. Silva-Quiroz, J., & Morales-Morgado, E. M. (2022). Assessing digital competence and its relationship with the socioeconomic level of Chilean university students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19, 46. [https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00346-6](https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00346-6)
32. Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., Curtis, R., Akcaoglu, M., & Bernstein, M. (2020). Digital divide among higher education faculty. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 21. [https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00191-5](https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00191-5)
33. Tondeur, J., Howard, S., Van Zanten, M., Gorissen, P., Van der Neut, I., Uerz, D., & Kral, M. (2023). The HeDiCom framework: Higher education teachers’ digital competencies for the future. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(1), 33–53. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10193-5](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10193-5)
34. Van de Werfhorst, H. G., Kessenich, E., & Geven, S. (2022). The digital divide in online education: Inequality in digital readiness of students and schools. Computers and Education Open, 3, 100100.
35. Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 577–588.
36. Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2019). Twenty-first century digital skills for the creative industries workforce: Perspectives from industry experts. First Monday, 24(1–7). [https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v24i1.9471](https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v24i1.9471)
37. Vishnu, S., Sathyan, A. R., Sam, A. S., Radhakrishnan, A., Ragavan, S. O., Kandathil, J. V., & Funk, C. (2022). Digital competence of higher education learners in the context of COVID-19 triggered online learning. Social Sciences and Humanities Open, 6(1), 100320.
38. Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321.
39. Wang, X., Zhang, R., Wang, Z., & Li, T. (2021). How does digital competence preserve university students’ psychological well-being during the pandemic? An investigation from self-determined theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 652594. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652594](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652594)
40. Weber, M., & Becker, B. (2019). Browsing the web for school: Social inequality in adolescents’ school-related use of the internet. SAGE Open, 9(2). [https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019859955](https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019859955)
41. World Economic Forum. (2023). Future of jobs report. [https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs_2023.pdf](https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs_2023.pdf)
42. Zhao, Y., Pinto Llorente, A. M., & Sanchez Gomez, M. C. (2021). Digital competence in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 168, 104212. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104212](https://www.google.com/search?q=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.1016%2Fj.compedu.2021.104212)