The Influence of Digital Readiness and Learning Styles on Self-Directed Learning and Student Learning Outcomes in Technology-Based Learning

Metta Mariam; Ida Rosnidah

doi:10.58421/gehu.v5i3.1727

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58421/gehu.v5i3.1727

Authors

Metta Mariam Institut Prima Bangsa, Cirebon https://orcid.org/0009-0009-7814-4032
Ida Rosnidah Universitas Swadaya Gunung Djati, Cirebon

Keywords:

Digital Readiness, Learning Styles, Self-Directed Learning, Learning Outcomes, Flipped Classroom

Abstract

Technology-enhanced learning and flipped classroom approaches have become increasingly important in higher education. However, limited research has examined the integrated relationships among digital readiness, learning styles, self-directed learning, and learning outcomes within a single analytical model. This study aims to analyze the relationships among digital readiness, learning styles based on Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory, self-directed learning, and student learning outcomes in a flipped classroom learning environment. A quantitative approach with an explanatory correlational design was employed. The sample consisted of 90 fifth-semester students in the Informatics Engineering Education program selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected using a five-point Likert-scale questionnaire and academic achievement records and analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS 4. The results showed that digital readiness significantly influenced self-directed learning (β = 0.45, p < 0.001), while learning styles also positively affected self-directed learning (β = 0.32, p < 0.001). Self-directed learning emerged as the strongest predictor of learning outcomes (β = 0.51, p < 0.001) and significantly mediated the relationships between digital readiness and learning outcomes (β = 0.278, p < 0.001) and between learning styles and learning outcomes (β = 0.164, p = 0.003). The model demonstrated substantial explanatory power (R² = 0.620 for self-directed learning; R² = 0.680 for learning outcomes). The findings suggest that technology integration is most effective when accompanied by strong self-directed learning skills. This study contributes to constructivist learning theory and provides practical implications for technology-enhanced and flipped classroom learning in higher education.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

UNESCO, “Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms?,” 2023, GEM Report UNESCO. doi: 10.54676/uzqv8501.

OECD, OECD Competition Trends 2021. OECD, 2021. doi: 10.1787/308565fd-en.

M. Bond, K. Buntins, S. Bedenlier, O. Zawacki-Richter, and M. Kerres, “Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 17, no. 1, p. 2, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8.

C. Hodges, S. Moore, B. Lockee, T. Trust, and A. Bond, “The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning,” Educ. Rev., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2020.

Kemendikbudristek, “Statistik Pendidikan Tinggi Indonesia 2022,” Jakarta, 2022.

W. Hidayat and R. Sariningsih, “Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Dan Adversity Quotient Siswa Smp Melalui Pembelajaran Open Ended,” J. JNPM (Jurnal Nas. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 2, no. 1, p. 109, 2018.

R. K. Rini Rini, Arif Mustofa, “Transformation of Arabic learning from classical model to digital model,” J. Arab. Elearning, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 892–902, 2022.

C. K. Lo and K. F. Hew, “A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: possible solutions and recommendations for future research,” Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 4, 2017, doi: 10.1186/s41039-016-0044-2.

J. O’Flaherty and C. Phillips, “The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review,” Internet High. Educ., vol. 25, pp. 85–95, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002.

G. Akçayır and M. Akçayır, “The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges,” Comput. & Educ., vol. 126, pp. 334–345, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021.

J. L. Bishop and M. A. Verleger, “The flipped classroom: A survey of the research,” 2013, ASEE Conferences. doi: 10.18260/1-2--22585.

D. C. D. van Alten, C. Phielix, J. Janssen, and L. Kester, “Effects of self-regulated learning prompts in a flipped history classroom,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 108, p. 106318, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106318.

L. S. Vygotsky, “Biographical Note on,” 1980, Harvard University Press. doi: 10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4.5.

Z. Zainuddin, H. Habiburrahim, S. Muluk, and C. M. Keumala, “How do students become self-directed learners in the EFL flipped-class pedagogy? A study in higher education,” Indones. J. Appl. Linguist., vol. 8, no. 3, p. 678, 2019, doi: 10.17509/ijal.v8i3.15270.

M.-R. A. Chen and G.-J. Hwang, “Effects of a concept mapping-based flipped learning approach on EFL students’ English speaking performance, critical thinking awareness and speaking anxiety,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 817–834, May 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12887.

Õ. Uus, K. Mettis, T. Väljataga, and T. Ley, “Differences in Self-Directed Learning: Middle-School Students’ Autonomous Outdoor Studying,” Front. Educ., vol. Volume 6-2021, 2021, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.718295.

Y. M. Tang et al., “Comparative analysis of Student’s live online learning readiness during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in the higher education sector,” Comput. & Educ., vol. 168, p. 104211, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104211.

H. J. Kim, A. J. Hong, and H.-D. Song, “The roles of academic engagement and digital readiness in students’ achievements in university e-learning environments,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 21, 2019, doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0152-3.

M. J. Kintu, C. Zhu, and E. Kagambe, “Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 14, no. 1, 2017, doi: 10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4.

P. M. Park JH, “Smartphone use patterns and problematic smartphone use among preschool children,” PLoS One, vol. 16, no. 3, 2021.

D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984.

M. Limniou, I. Schermbrucker, and M. Lyons, “Traditional and flipped classroom approaches delivered by two different teachers: the student perspective,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 797–817, 2018.

M. B. Gilboy, S. Heinerichs, and G. Pazzaglia, “Enhancing Student Engagement Using the Flipped Classroom,” J. Nutr. Educ. Behav., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 109–114, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2014.08.008.

I. P. E. Sutrisna, “Mobile-Assisted Language Learning ( MALL ) in EFL Classroom : Examining Its Contribution to Students ’ Foreign Language Acquisition Process,” vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 443–454, 2025.

A. M. Al‐Zahrani, “From passive to active: The impact of the flipped classroom through social learning platforms on higher education students’ creative thinking,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1133–1148, 2015, doi: 10.1111/bjet.12353.

D. R. Garrison, “Self-Directed Learning : Toward a Comprehensive Model,” no. November 1997, 1997, doi: 10.1177/074171369704800103.

B. J. Zimmerman, “Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective.,” in Handbook of self-regulation., San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press, 2000, pp. 13–39. doi: 10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7.

J. Broadbent and W. L. Poon, “Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review,” Internet High. Educ., vol. 27, pp. 1–13, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007.

L. M. Benavides, J. A. Tamayo Arias, M. D. Arango Serna, J. W. Branch Bedoya, and D. Burgos, “Digital Transformation in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Literature Review,” 2020. doi: 10.3390/s20113291.

F. Martin and D. Bolliger, “Engagement Matters: Student Perceptions on the Importance of Engagement Strategies in the Online Learning Environment,” Online Learn., vol. 22, pp. 205–222, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092.

R. Rini, “The Effect of Self-Directed Learning on Students ’ Digital Literacy Levels in Online Learning,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 329–344, 2022.

U. Hidayat, “PERAN KECERDASAN INTELEKTUAL DAN SELF REGULATED LEARNING TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR MAHASISWA,” Psympathic J. Ilm. Psikol., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 240–251, 2018, doi: 10.15575/psy.v4i1.2193.

R. A. Rasheed, A. Kamsin, and N. A. Abdullah, “Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review,” Comput. Educ., vol. 144, p. 103701, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701.

J. W. Creswell and J. D. Creswell, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications, 2017.

H. Arbale and D. N. Mutisya, “Book Review: ‘Research Methods for Business Students’ (Eighth Edition) by Mark N. K. Saunders, Philip Lewis, and Adrian Thornhill (Pearson Education, 2019),” African Q. Soc. Sci. Rev., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 8–21, 2024, doi: 10.51867/aqssr.1.2.2.

J. F. Hair, B. J. Babin, R. E. Anderson, and W. C. Black, Multivariate Data Analysis. England: Pearson Prentice, 2019.

A. Joshi, S. Kale, S. Chandel, and D. K. Pal, “Likert Scale : Explored and Explained,” vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 396–403, 2015, doi: 10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975.

M. Limniou, I. Schermbrucker, and M. Lyons, “Traditional and flipped classroom approaches delivered by two different teachers: the student perspective,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 797–817, 2017, doi: 10.1007/s10639-017-9636-8.

N. Dabbagh and Bannan-Ritland, “Online Learning: Concepts, Strategies, and Application,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 667–669, 2005, doi: 10.1007/s11423-007-9071-4.

I. Etikan, S. A. Musa, and R. S. Alkassim, “Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling,” Am. J. Theor. Appl. Stat., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–4, 2016.

J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and R. R. Sinkovics, “The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing,” 2009.

M. J. Barclay and C. W. Smith Jr, “The maturity structure of corporate debt,” J. Finance, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 609–631, 1995.

J. Henseler, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Variance-based Structural Equation Modeling,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 43, pp. 115–135, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.

D. F. Fornell, C., & Larcker, “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,” vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39–50, 2016.

J. C. Nunnally and I. H. Bernstein, Psychometric Theory, no. 972. in McGraw-Hill series in psychology. McGraw-Hill Companies,Incorporated, 1994. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=r0fuAAAAMAAJ

T. Aberdeen, “Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.,” Can. J. Action Res., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 69–71, 2013, doi: 10.33524/cjar.v14i1.73.

M. Sarstedt, J. F. Hair Jr, C. Nitzl, C. M. Ringle, and M. C. Howard, “Beyond a tandem analysis of SEM and PROCESS: use of PLS-SEM for mediation analyses!,” Int. J. Mark. Res., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 288–299, 2020.

M. Hair, J. F., Hult, T. G. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc., 2021.

E. J. Cassell, “Diagnosing Suffering: A Perspective,” Ann. Intern. Med., vol. 131, no. 7, pp. 531–534, 1999, doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-131-7-199910050-00009.

J. Behnke, “Felix Brosius: SPSS-Programmierung. Effizientes Datenmanagement und Automatisierung mit SPSS-Syntax; Andy Field: Discovering Statistics Using SPSS,” Polit. Vierteljahresschr., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 751–753, 2006, doi: 10.1007/s11615-006-0382-6.

J. Bowen, “Teaching Naked: How Moving Technology Out of Your College Classroom will Improve Student Learning,” Innov. Teach. & Learn. Conf. Proc., vol. 6, 2014, doi: 10.13021/g8sp5j.

M. Stone, “Cross‐validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions,” J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 111–133, 1974.

S. Geisser, “A Predictive Approach to the Random Effect Model,” Biometrika, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 101–107, Jun. 1974, doi: 10.2307/2334290.

The Influence of Digital Readiness and Learning Styles on Self-Directed Learning and Student Learning Outcomes in Technology-Based Learning

DOI:

Authors

Keywords:

Abstract

Downloads

References

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

How to Cite

Issue

Section

License

sidebar

Contact Us

Visitor Statistics