Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)
Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

1.6519

Impact

GScholar

16

H-Index

Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

The Influence of Science Process Skills, Digital Literacy and Students' Critical Thinking Skills on Physics Learning: A Mixed Method Study

Darmaji Darmaji ORCID
Jambi University ROR
Indonesia
darmaji@unja.ac.id
Astalini Astalini ORCID
Jambi University ROR
Indonesia
Yusnidar Yusnidar ORCID
Jambi University ROR
Indonesia
Dwi Agus Kurniawan ORCID
Jambi University ROR
Indonesia
Sri Wina Oktavia ORCID
Jambi University ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aims to examine the effects of integrating digital literacy into optical instruments learning on students’ science process skills and critical thinking ability.

    Methodology: A mixed methods approach with an explanatory sequential design was employed. The quantitative phase involved 60  students in Senior High School Jambi, selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected using a digital literacy questionnaire, a science process skills observation sheet, and a critical thinking test, and analyzed using multiple linear regression. The qualitative phase was conducted through semi-structured interviews to support and explain the quantitative findings.

    Main Findings: The results indicate that digital literacy has a significant positive effect on science process skills and critical thinking ability in optical instruments learning. Qualitative findings reveal that digital simulations and digital-based inquiry activities enhance students’ engagement, analytical reasoning, and understanding of optical concepts.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study highlights the role of digital literacy as an integrative framework that supports scientific inquiry and higher-order thinking in physics education.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “The Influence of Science Process Skills, Digital Literacy and Students’ Critical Thinking Skills on Physics Learning: A Mixed Method Study”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 248–255, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.37251/jee.v7i1.1251.

    More Citation Formats

  • 395
    Abstract views
    128
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. H. Tushar and N. Sooraksa, “Heliyon Global employability skills in the 21st century workplace : A semi-systematic literature review,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 11, p. e21023, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21023
    2. L. Nahar, “The Effects of Standardized Tests on Incorporating 21st Century Skills in Science Classrooms,” Integr. Sci. Educ. J., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 36–42, 2023, doi: 10.37251/isej.v4i2.324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/isej.v4i2.324
    3. V. Serevina, D. A. Nugroho, and H. F. Lipikuni, “Improving the quality of education through effectiveness of e-module based on android for improving the critical thinking skills of students in pandemic era,” Malaysian Online J. Educ. Manag., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 2022.
    4. W. Pratama, Pardjono, W. Wibowo, N. Astriawati, H. D. Iryanti, and E. T. Arroyo, “Developing Cadets’ Soft Skills through Project-Based Learning in Moodle LMS,” J. Eng. Educ. Transform., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 128–139, 2023, doi: 10.16920/jeet/2023/v36i4/23123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2023/v36i4/23123
    5. M. Rodrigues and P. S. Carvalho, “Virtual experimental activities: a new approach,” Phys. Educ., vol. 57, no. 4, 2022, doi: 10.1088/1361-6552/ac5f77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ac5f77
    6. M. Baran, M. Baran, F. Karakoyun, and A. Maskan, “The influence of project-based STEM (PjbL-STEM) Applications on the development of 21st-Century skills,” J. Turkish Sci. Educ., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 798–815, 2021, doi: 10.36681/tused.2021.104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.104
    7. N. Aisyah, E. Susanti, Meryansumayeka, T. Y. E. Siswono, and S. M. Maat, “Proving geometry theorems: Student prospective teachers’ perseverance and mathematical reasoning,” Infin. J., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 377–392, 2023, doi: 10.22460/infinity.v12i2.p377-392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v12i2.p377-392
    8. A. Virtanen and P. Tynjälä, “Factors explaining the learning of generic skills: a study of university students’ experiences,” Teach. High. Educ., vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 880–894, 2019, doi: 10.1080/13562517.2018.1515195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1515195
    9. M. J. Phaeton and M. Stears, “Exploring the alignment of the intended and implemented curriculum through teachers’ interpretation: A case study of A-level Biology practical work,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 723–740, 2017, doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2017.00640a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00640a
    10. I. Aboutajedyne, M. S. Houssaini, A. Aboutajeddine, Y. S. Alj, and M. El Mohajir, “A design model for the development of non-traditional educational activities,” in Colloquium in Information Science and Technology, CIST, 2020, pp. 242–247. doi: 10.1109/CiSt49399.2021.9357317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CiSt49399.2021.9357317
    11. I. L. L. Ping, L. Halim, and K. Osman, “Explicit teaching of scientific argumentation as an approach in developing argumentation skills, science process skills and biology understanding,” J. Balt. Sci. Educ., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 276–288, 2020, doi: 10.33225/jbse/20.19.276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.276
    12. L. Bao and K. Koenig, “Physics education research for 21st century learning,” Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2019, doi: 10.1186/s43031-019-0007-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0007-8
    13. F. Mufit, Asrizal, S. A. Hanum, and A. Fadhilah, “Preliminary research in the development of physics teaching materials that integrate new literacy and disaster literacy,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1481, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1481/1/012041. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1481/1/012041
    14. T. Tanti, W. Utami, D. Deliza, and M. Jahanifar, “Investigation in vocation high school for attitude and motivation students in learning physics subject,” Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE), vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 479-490, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452
    15. D. R. Retnani, R. Royani, C. Beccles, and A. Afras, “Improving science learning outcomes on light and optical instruments through visual methods in junior high schools,” Schrödinger J. Phys. Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 32–38, 2024, doi: 10.37251/sjpe.v5i1.883. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/sjpe.v5i1.883
    16. C. Nuning Tiastiti, W. Fitria Ariyanti, M. M. Alquaimi, and W. L. Chiong, “Improving student learning outcomes in light and optical instruments using team teaching methods with crossword puzzle media,” Schrödinger J. Phys. Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 10–15, 2024, doi: 10.37251/sjpe.v5i1.881. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/sjpe.v5i1.881
    17. Y. R. Ho, B. Y. Chen, and C. M. Li, “Thinking more wisely: using the Socratic method to develop critical thinking skills amongst healthcare students,” BMC Med. Educ., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04134-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04134-2
    18. R. J. Robillos, “Impact of loiloonote digital mapping on university students’ oral presentation skills and critical thinking dispositions,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 501–518, 2022, doi: 10.29333/iji.2022.15228a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15228a
    19. A. Ollerenshaw, J. Corbett, and H. Thompson, “Increasing the digital literacy skills of regional SMEs through high-speed broadband access,” Small Enterp. Res., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 115–133, 2021, doi: 10.1080/13215906.2021.1919913. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13215906.2021.1919913
    20. B. Abima, B. Engotoit, G. M. Kituyi, R. Kyeyune, and M. Koyola, “Relevant local content, social influence, digital literacy, and attitude toward the use of digital technologies by women in Uganda,” Gend. Technol. Dev., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 87–111, 2021, doi: 10.1080/09718524.2020.1830337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2020.1830337
    21. M. A. S. Khasawneh, “Beyond digital platforms: Gamified skill development in real-world scenarios and environmental variables,” Int. J. Data Netw. Sci., vol. 8, pp. 213–220, 2024, doi: 10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.10.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.10.002
    22. A. Munsch, “Millennial and generation Z digital marketing communication and advertising effectiveness: A qualitative exploration,” J. Glob. Sch. Mark. Sci., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 10–29, 2021, doi: 10.1080/21639159.2020.1808812. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2020.1808812
    23. D. McGillivray and J. Mahon, “Distributed digital capital: digital literacies and everyday media practices,” Media Pract. Educ., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 196–210, 2021, doi: 10.1080/25741136.2021.1899628. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/25741136.2021.1899628
    24. I. P. Canlas and M. Karpudewan, “Blending the principles of participatory action research approach and elements of grounded theory in a disaster risk reduction education case study,” Int. J. Qual. Methods, vol. 19, pp. 1–13, 2020, doi: 10.1177/1609406920958964. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920958964
    25. A. K. Chumba, E. N. Omwenga, and G. Atemi, “Effects of using computer simulations on learners’ academic achievement in physics in secondary schools in ainamoi Sub-County, Kericho County,” Researchgate.Net, vol. 4, pp. 126–138, 2020.
    26. Lestari et al., “Hybrid learning on problem-solving abiities in physics learning: A literature review,” IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 1796, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1796/1/012021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1796/1/012021
    27. M. S. Kahar, R. Syahputra, R. Bin Arsyad, N. Nursetiawan, and M. Mujiarto, “Design of student worksheets oriented to higher order thinking skills (HOTS) in physics learning,” Eurasian J. Educ. Res., vol. 2021, no. 96, pp. 14–29, 2021, doi: 10.14689/ejer.2021.96.2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2021.96.2
    28. O. H. Gumara, A. S. Wahyuri, D. Damrah, and N. Ihsan, “Effectiveness of E-Modules for physical education, sports and health subjects in improving learning outcomes of junior high school students,” Edumaspul J. Pendidik., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1320–1327, 2023, doi: 10.33487/edumaspul.v7i1.6037. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33487/edumaspul.v7i1.6037
    29. A. N. Fauziyah, M. Ramadan, P. R. Gumede, and I. N. Udosen, “Development of digital book bilingual physics learning media using kvisoft flipbook for high school class x semester 1 subject of newton’s law,” J. Educ. Technol. Learn. Creat., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 7–15, 2023, doi: 10.37251/jetlc.v1i1.618. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jetlc.v1i1.618
    30. R. Y. Nooraie, J. E. M. Sale, A. Marin, and L. E. Ross, “Social network analysis: An example of fusion between quantitative and qualitative methods,” J. Mix. Methods Res., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 110–124, 2020, doi: 10.1177/1558689818804060. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689818804060
    31. Y. Yusnidar, F. Fuldiaratman, and E. P. Chaw, “A study of mixed-method: Science process skills, interests and learning outcomes of natural science in junior high school,” J. Ilm. Ilmu Terap. Univ. Jambi, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 76–89, 2024, doi: 10.22437/jiituj.v8i1.31977. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22437/jiituj.v8i1.31977
    32. K. Kamid, R. Rohati, H. Hobri, E. Triani, S. Rohana, and W. A. Pratama, “Process Skill and Student’s Interest for Mathematics Learning: Playing a Traditional Games,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 967–988, 2022, doi: 10.29333/iji.2022.15352a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15352a
    33. H. R. Ganesha and P. S. Aithal, “Deriving right sample size and choosing an appropriate sampling technique to select samples from the research population During Ph.D. Program in India,” Int. J. Appl. Eng. Manag. Lett., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 288–306, 2022, doi: 10.47992/ijaeml.2581.7000.0159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47992/IJAEML.2581.7000.0159
    34. C. Martinez, “Developing 21st century teaching skills: A case study of teaching and learning through project-based curriculum,” Cogent Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2021.2024936. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2024936
    35. R. Dearamae, R. Safkolam, and M. Yacob, “An investigation of pre-service teachers’ teaching active learning to be STEM Education,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1835, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012065. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012065
    36. A. A. Zamista, H. Rahmi, and Juni, “Development of physics module based on process oriented guided inquiry learning as a tool to increase student science process skills,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1233, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012067. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012067
    37. B. M. Suryonegoro, M. L. Wuryastuti, and N. R. Dewi, “Literature review : Inquiry social complexity-STEAM model based on math trail-virtual reality activity nuanced with javanese culture in improving critical thinking ability,” vol. 5, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jee.v5i2.863. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v5i2.863
    38. J. Maknun, “Implementation of guided inquiry learning model to improve understanding physics concepts and critical thinking skill of vocational high school students,” Int. Educ. Stud., vol. 13, no. 6, p. 117, 2020, doi: 10.5539/ies.v13n6p117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v13n6p117
    39. T. Phongphio, “Tracing cultural values in thai students’ dialogical argumentation,” Educ. Q. Rev., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 322–333, 2021, doi: 10.31014/aior.1993.04.03.341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1993.04.03.341
    40. A. Walker and T. Kettler, “Developing critical thinking skills in high ability adolescents: Effects of a debate and argument analysis curriculum,” Talent, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 21–39, 2020, doi: 10.46893/talent.758473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46893/talent.758473
    41. B. Pamungkas, I. S. Onah, N. Hamzah, and B. Aradi, “Analysis of critical thinking level of students in surrounding and area of circle based on elder and paul’ s critical thinking theory in view of students’ mathematical ability,” Interval Indones. J. Math. Educ., vol. 1, no. 1, 2023, doi: 10.37251/ijoma.v1i1.609. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/ijome.v1i1.609
    42. N. Mafarja, H. Zulnaidi, and H. Mohd. Fadzil, “Using reciprocal teaching strategy to improve physics students’ critical thinking ability,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2022, doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/11506. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11506
    43. C. Cynthia, K. Arafah, and P. Palloan, “Development of interactive physics e-module to improve critical thinking skills,” J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 3943–3952, 2023, doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v9i5.2302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i5.2302