7

International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE)
Volume 9, Issue 1, January 2022, PP 88-100

ISSN 2349-0373 (Print) & ISSN 2349-0381 (Online)
https://doi.org/10.20431/2349-0381.0901007
www.arcjournals.org
Influence of Digital Literacy and Self-Directed Learning in the

Online Learning Success of STEM College Students
MARK JOHN T. PEPITO, MICHELLE Y. ACLEDAN, EdD
Faculty, College of Teacher Education, University of Mindanao, Davao City, Philippines
Faculty, Professional Schools, University of Mindanao, Davao City, Philippines
*Corresponding Author: MARK JOHN T. PEPITO, Faculty, College of Teacher Education, University
of Mindanao, Davao City, Philippines
Abstract: This study sought to determine the singular and combined influence of digital literacy and self-
directed learning in the online learning success of STEM college students. Thus, the study utilized a non-
experimental, quantitative descriptive correlation research design. The study participants were
undergraduate students enrolled in any STEM-related courses in Davao City. Three hundred (300)
respondents were selected through a stratified sampling technique. Adapted questionnaires converted into
google forms were utilized to collect data from the respondents. Statistical tools such as Mean, Pearson R,
and Multiple Regression were employed to characterize individual variables and identify the relationships
and influences among the study variables. The study’s findings revealed that there was a significant
relationship between digital literacy and online learning success and a significant relationship between self-
directed learning and online learning success. Multiple regression indicated a significant single and
combined influence of digital literacy and self-directed learning on online learning success. These findings
implied that students are likely to succeed in online education when they possess a high degree of digital
literacy and self-directed learning.
Keywords: COVID-19 pandemic, online education, digital literacy, self-directed learning, online learning
success, multiple regression, stem college students, Philippines
1. INTRODUCTION
Online learning has become a prompt response to combat the detrimental effects of the COVID-19
pandemic in education. Generally, education, particularly that of tertiary level, is greatly affected by
the consequences brought by the proliferation of the disease. Thus, to cater to the needs of the
students for non-stop and continuous learning, schools have instantaneously shifted from traditional
face-to-face education to contemporary online learning. For some students, it is convenient as it
provides an accessible environment for the current educational [1]. Still, for others, it is burdensome
and complex [2]. The most pressing problems faced by students in online education include
technological know-how and access [1], feeling of isolation [3]; [4], lack of support [5]; [3]; [4];
[6]and personal issues such as discipline and motivation [3]; [2]; [7]. Thus, failure to mend online
learning issues would lead to problems that affect the higher education student attrition or drop-out
rates. For years, students drop-out rates in online education have been substantially higher compared
to face-to-face education [8].
As online learning harnesses independent learning [9], understanding the factors that may affect the
students’ performance and drop-out rate in an online education learning environment is vital for
teachers and administrators to improve the quality of teaching. Thus, it is crucial to understand the
needs of the students in a physically distant and virtual environment to alleviate its adverse effects,
especially to those who are not used to this current set-up. To offer students a top-notch educational
experience, schools should emphasize factors like a high level of interaction between students in
online learning, adequate learner support, and the instructors’ teaching techniques [3]. Student-to-
student engagement and peer monitoring, on the other hand, have been found effective in learning
structured STEM discussions in an online science program [10]. Also, a combination of online
homework and online skill tests in problem-solving sessions as engagement practices showed
International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE) Page | 88

Influence of Digital Literacy and Self-Directed Learning in the Online Learning Success of STEM College
Students
significant success in calculus courses [11]. Generally, understanding the online education learning
environment helps teachers execute effective teaching and learning strategies to avoid the occurrence
of students’ negative learning attitudes and ensure online education effectiveness [7].
To become a successful online learner, an individual should possess a high level of digital literacy.
Digitally literate individuals can quickly learn and adapt in an e-learning environment using
technologies required for specific educational purposes while managing information effectively [12].
Such an idea is also supported by the study conducted by McGuinness and Fulton [13], that digitally
literate learners can function effectively in a technology-enabled environment such as online
education. Thus, online learning promotes independent learning. Students are expected to self-direct
their learning as minimal supervision is put in place. The importance of self-directed learning in the
success of online learning is grounded on the theory of Zimmerman, known as the Self-Regulation
Learning Theory. This theory stresses the need for students to supervise their learning. As opined by
Kohan N. et al [14], online learners need to have self-directedness in planning, analyzing,
implementing and evaluating their learning. Geng et al. [15] also agreed that self-directed students
could actively engage in learning and find effective learning strategies according to the learning
situation, such as in online education.
Online education has been established and mainstreamed in several economically developed countries
in the world, such as Australia [16], the USA [17], and Canada [18]. However, its full implementation
is not yet widely embraced in less-economically developed countries due to “individual, instructional,
and institutional-related challenges” [19]. In the Philippines, this is generally true as the traditional
face-to-face teaching model is predominant in higher education schools. However, with the
emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, schools are compelled to provide alternative ways for lesson
delivery to prevent viral proliferation through online or distance learning. Since the establishment of
the University of the Philippines Open University, the primary distance education institution in the
Philippines way back in 1995, which coined the term and promoted Open and Distance e-Learning
[20], there are only a few studies that published about online education. Recently, Alipio [21]
conducted a study about the students’ readiness for e-learning as influenced by the emergence of the
COVID-19 pandemic. For many years, online education is not yet widely studied in the Philippines,
resulting in data deficiency. As a result of a thorough literature analysis, no findings have yet been
published that discuss the integration and connectedness of the variables identified. Currently, there
are no studies published about the online learning success of STEM College students in the city based
on an intensive and thorough literature review. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out this study to
assess the condition of STEM College students' online learning success and provide ways to
understand these learners' needs in an online learning environment. As no previous studies were
carried out to assess and evaluate the online learning success of STEM College students, the findings
of this study would serve as baseline data for the city.
2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
This study aims to find out the role of students’ digital literacy and students’ self-directed learning on
students’ online learning success. Specifically, this sought to answer the following objectives:
1. To describe the level of students’ digital literacy in terms of their:
1.1 Technological Skill;
1.2 Personal security skill;
1.3 Critical skill;
1.4 Devices security skill;
1.5 Informational skill; and
1.6 Communication skill
2. To ascertain the level of students’ self-directedness to learning in terms of the following:
2.1 Awareness;
2.2 Learning strategies;
Students
2.3 Learning activities;

2.4 Evaluation; and
2.5 Interpersonal skills
3. To measure the level of students’ online learning success in terms of the following:
3.1 Computer skills;
3.2 Independent learning;
3.3 Dependent learning;
3.4 Need for online learning; and
3.5 Academic skills
4. To establish the significance of the relationship between:
4.1 Students’ digital literacy and students’ online learning success; and
4.2 Students’ self-directed learning and students’ online learning success.
5. To determine the singular and combined influence of Digital Literacy and Self-Directed Learning
on Online Learning Success.
Hypothesis
The following null hypotheses were treated at a 0.05 level of significance.
1. There is no significant relationship between:
1.1 Students’ digital literacy and students’ online learning success; and
1.2 Students’ self-directed learning and students’ online learning success.
2. There is no domain of students’ digital literacy and self-directedness that influence online learning
success.
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1. Research Design and Study Sample
This study is a non-experimental, quantitative research which aims to determine the influence and
relationship of the study variables from a significantly large population. This type of research focuses
on finding associations and linkages between different variables which cannot be manipulated by the
researcher [22]. A quantitative research design can afford to test larger samples and provide general
data from a representative population [23]; [24]. Additionally, the design mainly uses standardized
instruments for data collection and data analysis, thus, this promotes objectivity [25]. Additionally,
descriptive-correlational design was utilized to determine the correlation that exists among the study
variables. Descriptive-correlational design is employed when the researcher aims to describe
systematically the characteristics of a population and to understand the relationships that exist
between study variables to come up with answers that relate to an ongoing event [26]; [27]. As this
study intends to determine the singular and combined influence of digital literacy and self-directed
learning in the online learning success of STEM College students – descriptive-correlational design
was employed.
The respondents of this study were the STEM college students enrolled in the programs of
Architecture, BS-Biology, Computer Science, Engineering, Information Technology, Mathematics,
Medical Sciences, Pure Sciences, and Teacher Education Major in Sciences in Davao City,
Philippines. As the total population was relatively large, three hundred (300) respondents were chosen
from the programs mentioned above. A sample size of 300 would yield similar statistical findings that
were comparable to the true value in the chosen population [28]. This study employed a stratified
sampling technique as it allows the involvement of different subgroups of similar interest and is useful
if differences in a variable are observed among groups [29]. A simple random sample was then taken
from each of the identified strata together with its sampling fractions to calculate the specific number
needed in relation to the population size.
Students
3.2. Research Instruments

The adapted Digital Literacy Scale was developed in 2016 by Igartua, Gonzalez-Vasquez, and
Rodriguez de Dios. The scale comprises 47 close-ended questions measured in a 5-point Likert scale
and classified into six (6) distinct factors or indicators: technological skill, personal security skill,
critical skill, devices security skill, informational skill, and communication skill. It exhibits support
for a reliable internal consistency for most of the factors, with Cronbach Alpha ranging from .63 to
.75 [30].
Table1. Categories of responses for Digital Literacy
Range of Means Descriptive Equivalent Interpretation
4.20-5.00 Very High Digital Literacy is always manifested.
3.40-4.19 High Digital Literacy is often manifested.
2.60-3.39 Moderate Digital Literacy is sometimes manifested.
1.80-2.59 Low Digital Literacy is seldom manifested.
1.0-1.79 Very Low Digital Literacy is never manifested.
An adapted, panel-validated questionnaire for Self-Directed Learning was used in the conduct of the
study with a computed Cronbach Alpha value of .965, which means that the items have relatively high
internal consistency. Williamson developed the adapted Self-Directed Learning Scale in 2007. The
scale consists of 60 close-ended items, rated in a 5-point Likert Scale, grouped into five (5) distinct
factors or indicators: Awareness, Learning Strategies, Learning Activities, Evaluation, and
Interpersonal Skills. The scale has an internal consistency with Cronbach Alpha ranging from .70 to
.79, significantly considered acceptable and satisfactory [31].
Table2. Categories of responses for self-directed learning
4.20-5.00 Very High Self-directed learning is always manifested.
3.40-4.19 High Self-directed learning is often manifested.
2.60-3.39 Moderate Self-directed learning is sometimes manifested.
1.80-2.59 Low Self-directed learning is seldom manifested.
1.0-1.79 Very Low Self-directed learning is never manifested.
The Test of Online Learning Success scale used in this study was developed by Kerr, Rynearson, and
Kerr in 2003. It comprises 45 close-ended items measured in a 5-point Likert scale. The items are
grouped into six (6) distinct factors or indicators: Computer Skills, Independent Learning, Dependent
Learning, Need for Online Learning, and Academic Skills. The level of Cronbach Alpha for all the
factors is ranging from .63 to .84 which is considered to possess a high internal consistency reliability
[32].
Table3. Categories of responses for online learning success
4.20-5.00 Very High Online learning success is always manifested.
3.40-4.19 High Online learning success is often manifested.
2.60-3.39 Moderate Online learning success is sometimes manifested.
1.80-2.59 Low Online learning success is seldom manifested.
1.0-1.79 Very Low Online learning success is never manifested.
3.3. Data Collection Procedure
Initially, a set of adapted questionnaires validated by experts were converted into google forms and
used in the data collection. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, data collection was purely online. Then,
the deans of any STEM-related programs within Davao City received a letter to conduct the study.
Before the questionnaire administration, participants were oriented and instructed about the purpose
of the study. Also, the confidentiality of their responses was guaranteed. Next, the validated adapted
questionnaires were administered among the randomly selected three hundred (300) STEM
undergraduate students in Davao City chosen through a stratified sampling technique. After that, the
survey questionnaires were retrieved immediately after the respondents accomplished answering the
questionnaires. Then, the data were organized and treated using Mean, Pearson r, and Multiple
regression to characterize each variable and determine the significant relationship and influence
among the study variables.
Students
Lastly, the data garnered from the tests were interpreted and discussed thoroughly. The
characterization of each of the study variables was identified and interpreted accordingly. Then, the
significant relationship and influence among the study variables were identified and analyzed to see
their relevance in the study and come up with a sound conclusion.
3.4. Statistical Tools
The data were treated using the following statistical tools:
Mean. To characterize the digital literacy, self-directed learning, and online learning success of
STEM College Students.
Pearson Moment Product Correlation Coefficient. To determine the significance of the
relationship between digital literacy and online learning success, self-directed learning, and online
learning success.
Multiple Regression. To determine the significant influence of digital literacy and self-directed
learning on online learning success.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Level of the Digital Literacy of STEM College Students
Table 4 shows the level of digital literacy of students in terms of technological skill, personal security
skill, critical skill, devices security skill, informational skill, and communication skill which is the first
objective of the study. As shown, the overall mean score of students' digital literacy level is 4.43 with
a computed standard deviation of 0.44, which is described as very high and indicates that the
respondents manifest digital literacy. In particular, the indicator with the highest mean score is the
technological skill (4.77) with a "very high" descriptive level. It is then followed by personal security
skill (4.68), critical skill (4.55), communication skill (4.34), and information skill (4.27) which also
have "very high" descriptive levels. The indicator with the lowest mean score is the devices security
skill (3.96), which is high. The very high levels of most of the indicators imply that students are
digitally literate, which means that they can easily navigate different technologies, effectively
communicate through various digital media, and critically evaluate online information. However, the
lowest mean garnered by the devices' security skills (3.96) further denotes that students put a lesser
emphasis on protecting their devices from any potential threats such as viruses among all the
indicators mentioned above.
Table4. Level of STEM college students’ digital literacy
Indicator SD Mean Descriptive Level
Technological Skill 0.39 4.77 Very High
Personal Security Skill 0.45 4.68 Very High
Critical Skill 0.50 4.55 Very High
Devices Security Skill 0.89 3.96 High
Information Skill 0.61 4.27 Very High
Communication Skill 0.55 4.34 Very High
Overall 0.44 4.43 Very High
The findings are in parallel to the results published by Tang and Chaw [33], Bernacki [34], and
Baterna, Mina, and Rogayan [35] as they all emphasized the very high levels of digital literacy among
their respective students. Furthermore, the cohesion in the findings of the studies suggests that
students have increasingly prepared themselves with the digital literacies required to thrive in an
online environment with the advancement of technology. Indeed, students who can effectively use and
access various digital technologies have an edge in educational success [36], mainly undergraduate
students engaged in digital learning [37].
4.2. Level of Self-Directed Learning of STEM College Students
Table 5 shows the level of self-directed learning of students in terms of awareness, learning
strategies, learning activities, evaluation, and interpersonal skills. The overall mean score of the
students’ self-directed learning level is 4.24, with a standard deviation of 0.53, described as very high.
Thus, this implies that self-directed learning manifested among the respondents. The indicator with
Students
the highest mean score is awareness (4.33) and followed by evaluation (4.30), which both gained
“very high” descriptive levels. On the other hand, learning strategies, learning activities, and
interpersonal skills shared a mean score of 4.19, with “high” descriptive levels. The very high level of
self-directed learning among the respondents further implies that they understand the different factors
crucial for self-directedness and monitor the other learning activities they are engaged in.
Furthermore, they also possess different learning strategies necessary for self-directed learning; they
identify various learning activities where they should be involved and know how to build social
relationships.
Table5. Level of STEM college students’ self-directed learning
Awareness 0.56 4.33 Very High
Learning Strategies 0.68 4.19 High
Learning Activities 0.56 4.19 High
Evaluation 0.59 4.30 Very High
Interpersonal Skill 0.60 4.19 High
Overall 0.53 4.24 Very High
The very high and high descriptive levels obtained by all the indicators of self-directed learning based
on its mean scores imply that it is manifested among STEM college students. Also, the results further
suggest that STEM college students take control over their learning as they understand the factors
crucial for self-directedness. The abilities to control, monitor, and evaluate learning are highly
manifested among these students. The findings are congruent to the findings published by Swart [38],
Behar-Horenstein, Beck, and Su [39], and Tekkol [40], as they reported high levels of self-directed
learning among their study samples. Based on the cohesive results of the studies mentioned above,
teachers need to carefully balance the amount of scaffolding given to students as they gradually take
responsibility for their learning [41].
4.3. Level of Online Learning Success of STEM College Students
Table 6 presents the students' level of online learning success in terms of computer skills, independent
learning, dependent learning, need for online learning, and academic skills, which is the third
objective of this study. The overall mean score of students' online learning success is 3.88, with a
computed standard deviation of 0.59, described as high. Generally, this indicates that online learning
success manifested among the respondents. Specifically, the highest computed mean score indicator
is computer skills (4.55) with a "very high" descriptive level. It is then followed by independent
learning (3.97), dependent learning (3.94), and academic skills (3.91), which have "high" descriptive
levels. However, the indicator with the lowest mean score is the need for online learning with a mean
score of 3.03, which is described as moderate.
Table6. Level of STEM college students’ online learning success
Computer Skills 0.53 4.55 Very High
Independent Learning 0.78 3.97 High
Dependent Learning 0.62 3.94 High
Need for Online Learning 1.25 3.03 Moderate
Academic Skills 0.66 3.91 High
Overall 0.59 3.88 High
The very high level of computer skills as the determinant for online learning success entails that these
students can access, use, and navigate different computer functions. The high ranks for independent
learning, dependent learning, and academic skills indicate that these determinants for online learning
success are manifested all the time. However, the moderate descriptive level based on its mean score
and standard deviation gained by "a need for online learning" further suggests that students do not
prefer online learning. Thus, the existing circumstances appeared to compel them to engage in it as
they have no other options to continue their studies.
As the literature suggested, there are still opposing views about the effectiveness of online learning
compared to face-to-face education. The differences among studies further imply that online learning
Students
success is highly influenced by demographics and students’ conditions [43]. The study conducted by
Lin, Tseng, and Chiang [44] noted that the online learning experience positively affected students’
online learning outcomes in mathematics. Congruently, Mensah, White, Yankey, and Brown [45] also
reported similar results as they investigated the effects of online learning on public health students in
Georgia, USA. Their study found out that students have a good set of computer skills that propelled
them to learn in an online environment conveniently. They also stated that online learning allows
students to communicate with their friends and instructors on their own time, making them effective
online learners.
On the other hand, the study published by Coman et al. [46] reported that in Romania, higher
education institutions were not prepared for online learning as an exclusive mode of lesson delivery.
This conclusion reflects students’ poor online learning performance as technical issues are prevalent
to both the learners and the teachers. Contributory to the problem is also the lack of communication
between students and instructors and even among students. In general, the effectiveness of online
learning in comparison to face-to-face learning is different among the reviewed literature, as
mentioned above. In the earlier studies conducted by Glazier [47], Hart [48], and Hart et al. [49], the
ineffectiveness of online learning is reflective of the low students’ retention as compared to traditional
face-to-face learning. Contrarily, Nguyen [50] and Holmes [51] opined that online learning is equally
effective as conventional learning.
4.4. Significance of Relationship between Students’ Digital Literacy and Online Learning
Success
Table 7 shows the results derived from the analysis on the significance of the relationship between
digital literacy and online learning success of STEM college students. As shown in the table, the r-
value for the overall correlation between digital literacy and online learning success is .547, which
implies a high positive correlation with a p-value of .000. Based on the data, it can be concluded that
there is a significant relationship between digital literacy and the online learning success of the STEM
College students who participated in this study. The Connectivism Theory further supports the result,
as it states that digital literacy is an important component of online learning success.
The significant relationship between digital literacy and online learning success further implies the
need for students to equip themselves with the necessary set of digital skills to survive in an online
learning environment. Hence, teachers should capitalize on the use of different social media platforms
and technological systems both for instruction and collaboration to provide students with an avenue to
hone their digital skills. Aside from that, teachers need to teach students how to manage digital
distractions since these elements negatively affect online learning.
Table7. Significance of the Relationship between digital literacy and online learning success
Online Learning Success
Need for
Digital Literacy Computer Independent Dependent Academic
Online Overall
Skills Learning Learning Skills
Learning
Technological .630** .154** .304** .055 .249** .296**
Skill .000 .008 .000 .344 .000 .000
Personal Security .715** .185** .364** .185** .386** .417**
Skill .000 .001 .000 .001 .000 .000
.561** .251** .410** .227** .524** .465**
Critical Skill
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Devices Security .537** .224** .306** .194** .271** .361**
Skill .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000
Informational .575** .331** .487** .323** .519** .543**
Skill .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Communication .330** .381** .334** .257** .505** .450**
Skill .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
.709** .334** .474** .279** .522** .547**
Overall
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Students
The findings of this study are consistent with the conclusions published by Li and Lee [1] as they
investigated the relationship that exists between computer (digital) literacy to online learning attitude
of Taiwanese students as a significant predictor for online learning success. According to the study's
findings, they found out that 204 out of 252 respondents preferred online learning as it helps them
enhance their confidence and offers a more flexible approach to learning. They also noted that digital
skills and knowledge create a good foundation for online learning. Thus, computer (digital) literacy
showed a strong positive relationship towards online learning success. Moreover, the discussions
published by Maphosa and Bhebhe [52] also coincide with the findings of this study as they studied
the role of digital literacy in open distance and e-learning students. They aimed to demonstrate the
link between digital literacy and online learning success in their study.
4.5. Significance of the Relationship Between Students’ Self-Directed Learning and Online
Learning Success
Table 8 presents the results derived from the analysis on the significance of the relationship between
self-directed learning and online learning success of STEM college students. The computed r-value
for the overall correlation between self-directed learning and online learning success is .808, which
indicates a very high, positive correlation with a p-value of .000. The computed p-value of .000
further implies that the null hypothesis is rejected. Generally, it can be stated that there is a significant
relationship that exists between self-directed learning and the online learning success of STEM
College students. Both Connectivism and Self-Regulated Learning Theory further support the result.
Both state that self-directed learning is an essential component of students’ online learning success.
The significant relationship between self-directed learning and online learning success suggests
students need to learn basic self-regulated skills to succeed in an online learning environment. As
facilitators of learning, teachers are expected to provide students with ways to acquire self-directed
learning skills. Hence, teachers should leverage meaningful activities that are self-guided in nature.
Teachers are also expected to design a learning framework that allows students to be more engaged
with the material and content than their instructors.
Table8. Significance of the relationship between self-directed learning and online learning success
Self-
Need for
Directedness to Computer Independent Dependent Academic
Online Overall
Learning Skills Learning Learning Skills
Learning
.503** .682** .605** .415** .612** .706**
Awareness
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Learning .336** .701** .639** .397** .519** .660**
Strategies .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Learning .413** .715** .644** .457** .683** .740**
Activities .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
.402** .744** .674** .513** .684** .776**
Evaluation
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Interpersonal .394** .703** .714** .388** .614** .704**
Skill .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
.460** .801** .741** .490** .699** .808**
Overall
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
The findings also show that self-directed learners are more likely to succeed in an online learning
environment because they can monitor and regulate their learning. Aside from that, they understand
what activities should be undertaken to foster meaningful learning. Most significantly, they know how
to assess various learning strategies and activities that would result in effective learning. The findings
of this study are in parallel with the results published by Cigdem and Ozturk [53], as they examined
the significant components of online learning readiness critical for online achievement in Turkish
students. In the study, among its three main features, to wit, internet self-efficacy, self-directed
learning, and motivation for learning, self-directed learning appeared to be the strongest predictor of
online learning success. Torun [54] also reported a similar finding, as he investigated the effect of e-
learning readiness as a predictor for online learning achievement. The predictors of e-learning
readiness include computer self-efficacy, internet self-efficacy, online self-efficacy, learner control,
Students
motivation toward e-learning, and self-directed learning. Lasfeto [55] also reported a similar result as
he investigated the relationship between self-directed learning and online learning performance
(online learning success) of Indonesian students. Based on the results, self-directed learning has a
strong positive correlation with the online learning success of Indonesian students. It was evident as
he noticed that students developed self-managerial skills as the study progressed.
Significance of the Influence of Digital Literacy and Self-Directed Learning in the Online
Learning Success of the STEM College Students
Table 9 shows the results derived from the singular and combined influence of digital literacy and
self-directed learning in the online learning success of STEM College students. Based on the multiple
regression analysis results, an R2 of .662 and an F of 291.306 with a p-value of .000 were obtained.
The p-value is lower than 0.05 rejects the null hypothesis, which further indicates that the variables
digital literacy and self-directed learning have a significant combined influence on the online learning
success of STEM college students. Furthermore, both the determinants have a significant singular
influence on online learning success as digital literacy has a p-value of .005, while self-directed
learning has a p-value of .000. Moreover, the indicator of IV1, information skill, had the highest beta
coefficient of .382 with a p-value of .000, indicative of its significant influence on the DV. It is also
worth noting that the indicators of the IV1, technological skill, personal security skill, critical skill,
and devices security skill, showed no significant influence on the online learning success of the
STEM College students. However, all the indicators of IV2 have a significant influence on the online
learning success of the STEM College students as each recorded a p-value less than 0.05. Altogether,
results show that both IV1 and IV2 influence online learning success by 66.2%. The remaining 33.8%
are regarded to be factors not covered by this study.
The significant singular and combined influence of digital literacy and self-directed learning on online
learning success suggest that students need to acquire digital and self-directed learning skills to
survive in an online learning environment. Teachers are at the forefront of providing students with
ways to capitalize on these skills as they engage themselves in online learning. As previously stated,
science teaching should focus on using digital learning platforms to allow students to explore
technology systems, making them digitally literate individuals. Furthermore, because self-directed
learning significantly influences online learning success, teachers must ensure that students are
equipped with skills they can rely on when learning independently.
Table9. Significance of the influence of digital literacy and self-directed learning in the online learning success
of STEM college students
(Variables) B β T Sig.
Constant -.351 -1.666 .097
Digital Literacy .160 .117 2.835 .005
Self-directed to .830 .740 17.865 .000
Learning
R .814
R2 .662
∆R .660
F 291.306
Ρ .000
Additionally, it implies that digital literacy and self-directed learning are crucial factors in online
learners' success. Students who know how to search, access, and evaluate online information using
different digital technologies are more likely to succeed in online learning. Other than that, success in
online learning is highly influenced by a good set of digital skills and a high degree of self-directed
skills. Self-directed learning enables an individual to control, monitor, and evaluate their learning. In
general, digital literacy and self-directed learning are necessary to be possessed by students engaged
in online learning to succeed.
The study findings are synchronically consistent with the results published by Geng, Law, and Niu
[56], as they examined the influence of self-directed learning and technology readiness, which
includes digital skills in blended and online learning success of engineering students in Australia. The
Students
study reported that self-directed learning and technology readiness (which provides for digital skills)
positively influenced online learning success. Students who possessed these skills understood online
courses better. A recent study by Wibowo et al [57] reported the significant influence of digital
literacy on online learning success. They examined the relationship of the two variables among the
Indonesian students. Durnali [58], on the other hand, concluded that self-directed learning has a
significant influence on the online learning success of Turkish students.
This study is anchored on the Connectivism Learning Theory of Siemens [59]. CLT capitalizes on the
idea that learners should prioritize the development of digital skills (becoming digitally literate), as
this is critical in obtaining necessary information across different networks of connection. Also, it
underscores the importance of autonomy (self-directed learning) since students are expected to
validate previous links and continue to establish information networks that are relevant to them. CLT
is regarded as the “learning theory for the digital age,” as learning online takes over traditional face-
to-face learning. The findings of the study showed a significant relationship both for digital literacy
(IV1) and online learning success (DV) and self-directed learning (IV2) and online learning success
(DV). Thus, it further indicates that the study results supported the premise of the Connectivism
Learning Theory.
5. CONCLUSIONS
With the considerations on the findings of the study, conclusions are drawn in this section. There is a
very high level of digital literacy among STEM College students. Similarly, these students manifest a
very high level of self-directed learning. They also demonstrate a high level of online learning
success. Additionally, there is a significant relationship between digital literacy and online learning
success. There is also a significant relationship between self-directed learning and online learning
success. Digital literacy and self-directed learning have a significant singular and combined influence
in the online learning success of STEM college students. Generally, the findings are supported by the
anchor theory – Connectivism Learning Theory by Siemens (2005). Thus, the findings were
interpreted as a general rejection of the hypothesis.
REFERENCES
[1] Li, L. Y., and Lee, L. Y., Computer Literacy and Online Learning Attitude toward GSOE Students in
Distance Education Programs, Higher Education Studies. 6(3), 147 (2016).
[2] Fojtik, R., Problems of Distance Education, Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(14), (2016).
[3] Markova, T., Glazkova, I., and Zaborova, E., Quality Issues of Online Distance Learning, Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences. 237, 685–691 (2017).
[4] Au, O. T. S., Li, K., and Wong, T., Student persistence in open and distance learning: success factors and
challenges, Asian Association of Open Universities Journal. 13(2), 191–202 (2018).
[5] Arasaratnam-Smith, L.andNorthcote, M., Community in Online Higher Education: Challenges and
Opportunities, The Electronic Journal of e-Learning.15(2),188-198 (2017).
[6] Mahlangu, V., The good, the bad and the ugly…perspectives, Policy and Practice in Higher Education.
18(2), 35–37 (2017).
[7] Bao, W., COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A Case Study of Peking University,
Humamn Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 2(2), 113-115 (2020).
[8] Grau-Valldosera, J., Minguillón, J., and Blasco-Moreno, A., Returning after taking a break in online
distance higher education: from intention to effective re-enrollment, Interactive Learning Environments.
27(3), 307-323 (2018).
[9] Beketova, E., Leontyeva, I., Zubanova, S., Gryaznukhin, A., and Movchun, V., Creating an optimal
environment for distance learning in higher education: discovering leadership issues, Palgrave
Communications. 6(1), (2020).
[10] Tibi, M., Computer science students’ attitudes towards the use of structured and unstructured discussion
forums in fully online courses, Online Learning. 22(1), (2018).
[11] Vajravelu, K., and Muhs, T., Integration of digital technology and innovative strategies for learning and
teaching large classes: A calculus case study, International Journal of Research In Education and Science
(IJRES). 2(2), 379–395 (2016).
[12] Mohammadyari, S. and Singh, H., “Understanding the Effect of E‐ Learning on Individual Performance:
The Role of Digital Literacy”, Computers & Education. 82,11‐ 25 (2015).
Students
[13] McGuinness, C., & Fulton, C., Digital Literacy in Higher Education: A Case Study of Student Engagement
with E-Tutorials Using Blended Learning, Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in
Practice. 18, 001–028 (2019).
[14] Kohan N, Soltani-Arabshahi K, Mojtahedzadeh R, Abbaszadeh A, Rakhshani T, and Emami A. (2017),
Self- directed learning barriers in a virtual environment: a qualitative study, J Adv Med Educ
Prof.5(3):116-123 (2017).
[15] Geng, S., Law, K. M. Y., and Niu, B., Investigating self-directed learning and technology readiness in
blending learning environment, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education.
16(1), (2019).
[16] Stone, C., Online learning in Australian higher education: Opportunities, challenges and transformations,
Student Success. 10(2), 1–11 (2019).
[17] Sun, A., and Chen, X., Online Education and Its Effective Practice: A Research Review, Journal of
Information Technology Education: Research. 15, 157–190 (2016).
[18] Bates, T., The 2017 national survey of online learning in Canadian post-secondary education:
methodology and results, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 15(1),
(2018).
[19] Musingafi, M., Mapuranga, B., Chiwanza, K., and Zebron, K., Challenges for Open and Distance learning
(ODL) Students: Experiences from Students of the Zimbabwe Open University, Journal of Education and
Practice. 6(18), (2015).
[20] Arinto, P. B., Issues and Challenges in Open and Distance e-Learning: Perspectives from the Philippines,
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 17(2), (2020).
[21] Alipio, M., Education during Covid-19 Era: Are Learners in a Less-Economically Developed Country
Ready for E-Learning, SSRN Electronic Journal. (2020).
[22] Reio, T. G., Nonexperimental research: strengths, weaknesses and issues of precision, European Journal of
Training and Development. 40(8/9), 676–690 (2016).
[23] Allen, M., The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, SAGE. (2017).
[24] Savela, T., The Advantages and Disadvantages Of Quantitative Methods In Schoolscape Research,
Linguistics and Education. 44, (2018).
[25] Quieros, A., Faria, D., and Almeida, F., Strengths and Limitations of Qualitative and Quantitative
Research Methods, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. (2017).
[26] Akinlua, S., Comparing and Contrasting Descriptive Designs: Observational Studies, Correlational
Research Developmental Design and Survey Research, Journal of Quantitative Studies. (2019).
[27] Cwiekala-Lewis, K., Descriptive Correlational Study to Examine Variables and Relationships Proposed in
Conceptual Framework of Virtual Transitioning Program Developed for Foreign Educated Nurses (FEN),
The University of Arizona. (2019).
[28] Bujang, M. A., and Baharum, N., Sample Size Guideline for Correlation Analysis, World Journal of Social
Science Research. 3(1), 37 (2015).
[29] Turner, D., Sampling Methods in Research Design, American Headache Society. (2019).
[30] Igartua, J. J., González Vázquez, A., and Rodríguez-de-Dios, I.,Development and Validation of a Digital
Literacy Scale for Teenagers, In F. J. García-Peñalvo (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fourth International
Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’16) (Salamanca, Spain,
November 2-4, 2016), 1067-1073 (2016).
[31] Williamson, S., Development of a self-rating scale of self-directed learning, Nurse Researcher. 14(2), 66-
83 (2007).
[32] Kerr, M. S., Rynearson, K., and Kerr, M. C., Student characteristics for online learning success, The
Internet and Higher Education. 9(2), 91–105 (2003).
[33] Tang, C. and Chaw, L., Digital Literacy: A Prerequisite for Effective Learning in a Blended Learning
Environment, The Electronic Journal of e‐ Learning. 14(1), 54‐ 65 (2016).
[34] Bernacki, M. L., Vosicka, L., Utz, J. C., and Warren, C. B., Effects of digital learning skill training on the
academic performance of undergraduates in science and mathematics, Journal of Educational Psychology.
(2020).
[35] Baterna, H. B., Mina, T. D. G., and Rogayan, D. V., Digital Literacy of STEM Senior High School
Students: Basis for Enhancement Program, International Journal of Technology in Education. 3(2), 105
(2020).

Students
[36] Creer, A., Introducing Everyday ‘Digital Literacy Practices’ into the Classroom: an Analysis of Multi-
layered Media, Modes and their Affordances, Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research. 7(2),
131–139 (2018).
[37] Techataweewan, W., & Prasertsin, U., Development of digital literacy indicators for Thai undergraduate
students using mixed method research, Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences. (2018).
[38] Swart, A.J.,Self-directed learning - fashionable among all first-year African engineering students?, Global
Journal of Engineering Education. 20(1), (2018).
[39] Behar-Horenstein, L. S., Beck, D. E., and Su, Y., An Initial Validation Study of the Self-Rating Scale of
Self-Directed Learning for Pharmacy Education, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 82(3),
6251 (2018).
[40] Tekkol, L. A., and Demirel, M., An Investigation of Self-Directed Learning Skills of Undergraduate
Students, Frontiers in Psychology. 9, (2018).
[41] Morris, T.H., Self-directed learning: A fundamental competence in a rapidly changing world, International
Review of Education. 65, 633-653, (2019).
[42] Chiang, P. J., Lin, Y. W., and Tseng, C. L., The Effect of Blended Learning in Mathematics Course,
EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(3), (2016).
[43] Rizvi, S., Rienties, B., and Khoja, S. A., The role of demographics in online learning; A decision tree-
based approach, Computers & Education. 137, 32–47 (2019).
[44] Lin, Y.W., Tseng, C.L.,and Chiang, P., The Effect of Blended Learning in Mathematics Course,
EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology. 13(3), 741-770 (2016).
[45] Mensah, E., Ramsey-White, K., Yankey, B., and Self-Brown, S., COVID-19 and Distance Learning:
Effects on Georgia State University School of Public Health Students, Frontiers in Public Health. 8,
(2020).
[46] Coman, C., ȚîRu, L. G., Meseșan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C., and Bularca, M. C., Online Teaching and
Learning in Higher Education during the Coronavirus Pandemic: Students’ Perspective, Sustainability.
12(24), 10367 (2020).
[47] Glazier, R., “Building rapport to improve retention and success in online classes.”, Journal of Political
Science Education. 12 (4):437–456 (2016).
[48] Hart, C., E. Friedmann, and Hill. M., Online course-taking and student outcomes in California community
colleges, Education Finance and Policy. 13(1): 42–71 (2018).
[49] Hart, C. M. D., Berger, D., Jacob, B., Loeb, S., and Hill, M., Online Learning, Offline Outcomes: Online
Course Taking and High School Student Performance, AERA Open. 5(1), (2019).
[50] Nguyen, T., The effectiveness of online learning: Beyond no significant difference and future horizons,
MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 11(2), 309–310 (2015).
[51] Holmes, C. M., and Reid, C., A Comparison Study of On-campus and Online Learning Outcomes for a
Research Methods Course, The Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision. Published, (2017).
[52] Maphosa, C., & Bhebhe, S., Digital Literacy: A Must for Open Distance and E-learning (ODEL) Students,
European Journal of Education Studies. Volume 5 (10), (2019).
[53] Cigdem, H., & Ozturk, M., Critical Components of Online Learning Readiness And Their Relationships
With Learner Achievement, Turkish Online Journal Of Distance Education. 0(0), (2016).
[54] Torun, E., Online Distance Learning in Higher Education: E-learning Readiness as a Predictor of
Academic Achievement, Open Praxis. 12(2), 191 (2020).
[55] Lasfeto, D.B., and Ulfa, S.,The relationship between selfdirected learning and students’ social interaction
in the online learning environment, Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society. 16(2), 34-41 (2020).
[56] Geng, S., Law, K. M. Y., and Niu, B., Investigating self-directed learning and technology readiness in
blending learning environment, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education.
16(1), (2019).
[57] Wibowo, D., Widyakusumastuti, M.A., and Angeline, M., The Role of Digital Literacy on Online
Opportunity and Online Risk in Indonesian Youth, Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research. 9(2), 142-
160 (2021).
[58] Durnali, M., The effect of Self-Directed Learning on the relationship between Self-Leadership and Online
Learning among university students in Turkey, Tuning Journal for Higher Education. 8(1), 29-165 (2020).
[59] Siemens, G., and Jan, A., Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age, International Journal of
Instructional Technology and Distance learning. 1(2), (2005).

Students
AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHY
MARK JOHN T. PEPITO, is a graduate of Bachelor of Secondary Education
major in Biological Science at the University of Mindanao, Matina Campus,
Davao City, Philippines. Currently, he is pursuing his master’s degree at the same
university under the Master of Arts in Education major in Teaching Science
program. He is also a full-time instructor under the College of Teacher Education
department of the University of Mindanao from 2017 to the present handling
science and professional education courses.
MICHELLE Y. ACLEDAN, is a graduate of Bachelor of Secondary Education
major in General Science at the University of Mindanao, Davao City, Philippines
in 1996. She completed her master’s degree under the program Master of Science
in Education at the Curtin University of Technology, Australia in 2007 and
finished her doctorate degree at the University of Mindanao as a Doctor of
education. She is now the director of the Human Resource and Development
Center (HRDC) of the University of Mindanao, Davao City, Philippines.
Citation: MARK JOHN T. PEPITO & MICHELLE Y. ACLEDAN. "Influence of Digital Literacy and Self-
Directed Learning in the Online Learning Success of STEM College Students” International Journal of
Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE), vol 9, no. 1, 2022, pp. 88-100. doi: https://doi.org/
10.20431/2349- 0381.090100.
Copyright: © 2022 Authors. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and source are credited.

7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE)

Volume 9, Issue 1, January 2022, PP 88-100

Influence of Digital Literacy and Self-Directed Learning in the

International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE) Page | 88

2.3 Learning activities;

3.2. Research Instruments

International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE) Page | 94

International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE) Page | 98

International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE) Page | 99

You might also like