Promoting Digital Literacy Through University Social Responsibility: A Case Study of an International Scratch Workshop

Programming and multimedia tools have become essential to education as they offer opportunities to foster creativity, computational thinking, and problem-solving skills. Scratch is a block-based visual programming language which has been widely adopted to introduce coding concepts in an engaging and accessible manner. However, students with limited programming experience often face challenges in adopting such technologies due to low digital literacy, limited confidence, and anxiety toward unfamiliar tools. The objectives of the study were to assess the change in participants' familiarity, interest, and confidence in using Scratch for interactive multimedia development before and after the workshop, to examine participants' acceptance of Scratch for interactive multimedia development post-workshop, specifically applying the constructs of the Technology Acceptance Model, and to determine the relationships among perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude towards use, motivation, and preference for using Scratch following the workshop. The study employed a quantitaive method by using a questionnaire as the instrument for data collection. The sample consisted of 37 undergraduate students from Heilongjiang University of Finance and Economics, Harbin, China. The students were exposed to Scratch through a university social responsibility workshop which was conducted at the university. The findings demonstrated that there was a positive change in participants' familiarity, interest, and confidence in using Scratch for interactive multimedia development after the workshop. They also perceived Scratch as user-friendly and beneficial for developing interactive multimedia projects, and they expressed positive attitudes toward continued use and recommendation to peers. The correlation analysis demonstrated strong positive relationships between PEU, PU, and ATU with motivation and preference, underscoring the importance of these constructs in technology adoption. The study highlights the effectiveness of structured interventions in enhancing digital literacy and fostering sustained engagement with educational technologies.

Scratch, Technology Acceptance Model, acceptance, motivation

1. Agbo, F. J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., & Adewumi, S. (2019, November). A systematic review of computational thinking approach for programming education in higher education institutions. In Proceedings of the 19th Koli calling international conference on computing education research (pp. 1-10). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ahmad, J., & Awang, D. N. (2025, July). University Social Responsibility in Malaysian Higher Education: A Qualitative Study of Implementation. In Competitiveness and Sustainability in the Digitization Era: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Competitiveness and Stability in the Knowledge Base Society (iCOnEc), Romania, October 25—26, 2024 (p. 185). Springer Nature. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alsrehan, H. (2025). The Social Responsibility of Universities and Its Impact on Sustainable Development Towards a Future Vision. Sustainable Development. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Alston, A. J., & Miller, W. W. (2002). Analyzing the barriers and benefits toward instructional technology infusion in North Carolina and Virginia secondary agricultural education curricula. Journal of Agricultural Education. 43(1): 1, 43(1–12). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED459996 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Basheer, N., Ahmed, V., Bahroun, Z., & Anane, C. (2025). Sustainability assessment in higher education institutions: exploring indicators, stakeholder perceptions, and implementation challenges. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), 1-25. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Castro, A. J., Zanello, L., Lizcano, J., & Daza, A. (2022). USR as a tool for meeting the SDGs: a systematic review. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 17(1), 48-55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chaker, R. (2020). Digital skills are predictors of professional social capital through workplace and social recognition. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Choudhary, H., & Bansal, N. (2022). Addressing digital divide through digital literacy training programs: A systematic literature review. Digital Education Review, (41), 224-248. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Davis, D. F. (1993). User acceptance of information systems : the technology acceptance model ( TAM ). International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475–487. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., Warshaw, P. R. (1889). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: a Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. https://home.business.utah.edu/actme/7410/DavisBagozzi.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Falcinelli, F., & Moscetti, C. (2021). Teaching digital skills to future teachers: a distance workshop experience. Research on Education and Media, 13(2), 11-17. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Granić, A. (2025). Emerging Drivers of Adoption of Generative AI Technology in Education: A Review. Applied Sciences, 15(13), 6968. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Granić, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572-2593. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hamdan, A. A. D. Singh, J. Kovilpillai, I. F. Kamsin, C. Suriyarangsun, W. Brahmawong, P. Phanphai, and S. Aggarwal. 2024. “Empowering Neet Girls Through Digital Skills: The Digitally Intelligent Girls (Di-Girls) Initiative’s Potential, Pitfalls and Prospects.” International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v13-i1/19396 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hsiao, C. H., & Tang, K. Y. (2025). Beyond acceptance: an empirical investigation of technological, ethical, social, and individual determinants of GenAI-supported learning in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 30(8), 10725-10750. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Jones, E., Leask, B., Brandenburg, U., & De Wit, H. (2021). Global social responsibility and the internationalisation of higher education for society. Journal of Studies in International Education, 25(4), 330-347. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Latif, K. F. (2018). The development and validation of stakeholder-based scale for measuring university social responsibility (USR). Social indicators research, 140(2), 511-547. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Marikyan, D., Papagiannidis, S., & Stewart, G. (2023). Technology acceptance research: Meta-analysis. Journal of Information Science, 01655515231191177. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Moghadam, M. R. S., Govindan, K., Dahooie, J. H., Mahvelati, S., & Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I. (2021). Designing a model to estimate the level of university social responsibility based on rough sets. Journal of Cleaner Production, 324, 129178. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Menon, D., Sowmya, B. P., Romero, M., & Viéville, T. (2020). Going beyond digital literacy to develop computational thinking in K-12 education. In Epistemological Approaches to Digital Learning in Educational Contexts (pp. 17-34). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Montiel, H., & Gomez-Zermeño, M. G. (2021). Educational challenges for computational thinking in k–12 education: A systematic literature review of “scratch” as an innovative programming tool. Computers, 10(6), 69. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Roméro, M., Lepage, A., & Lille, B. (2017). Computational thinking development through creative programming in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Saaida, M. (2023). Global catalysts: Empowering universities for social change in developing countries. Edukasiana: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan, 2(4), 318-341. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Teo, T., & Noyes, J. M. (2010). Explaining the intention to use technology among educational users: A multi-group analysis of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Interactive Learning Environments, 37(4), 379-389. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Wang, C. (2025). Exploring China-Malaysia Educational Cooperation within the Context of BRI. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 10(34), 85-90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Zhai, X., Razali, A. B., Luo, S., Zhang, S., & Mai, H. (2023). Perceptions from Scholars in Education on Sino-Malaysian Higher Education Cooperation Under the Background of One Belt and One Road Initiative: A Case Study. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study