





































  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

192 

 

DIGITAL LITERACY AND LEARNING INTERACTION IN 
INDONESIAN EFL CLASSROOMS: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC 

STUDY 
 

Adi F. Mahmud1*, Murni Mahmud2, Sukardi Weda3, Munir4 

 
1Postgraduate Students of English Language Education Department, Universitas Negeri Makassar, 

Indonesia/Universitas Muhammadiyah Maluku Utara, Ternate, Indonesia 

2, 3 & 4 English Language Education Department, Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia 

 
*adi.f.mahmud@student.unm.ac.id  

 

ABSTRACT  

This ethnographic study examines the relationships between digital literacy and learning 
interactions in Indonesian EFL classes. The study seeks to elucidate the role of digital tools 
in mediating educational practices and interactional dynamics between educators and 
learners. Data were collected over six months at SMA Negeri Ternate, Indonesia, using 
participant observation, semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and field notes, 
involving five teachers and ten students. The findings suggest a triadic interactional 
framework, comprising learner-content, learner-instructor, and learner-learner 
interactions, all of which are shaped by digital integration. Students utilized multimedia 
resources such as YouTube and ChatGPT, promoting independence and multimodal 
understanding. The conventional assumptions of teacher authority persisted, and digital 
disparities frequently limited peer participation. Three cultural elements emerged: 
technology-enhanced instruction, enduring teacher authority, and flexible peer solidarity. 
The study concludes that digital literacy alters classroom dynamics, but it must be grounded 
in local educational and cultural norms. It necessitates culturally responsive instructional 
design and fair access to improve engagement and maximize the educational potential of 
digital literacy. 

Keywords: Digital Literacy, EFL Classrooms, Ethnography, Indonesian, Learning Interaction 

INTRODUCTION 

The rapid adoption of digital technology has significantly altered educational 
environments globally, redefining the interactions between educators and learners, as well 
as their access to knowledge and engagement with the learning process (Djibran et al., 2024; 
Zou et al., 2025). In language instruction, digital technologies and platforms have created 
novel educational opportunities that surpass the limitations of conventional classrooms 
(Baldoví et al., 2023; Zhang, 2023). With the growing importance of digital literacy in the 
21st century, its incorporation into English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education is both 
unavoidable and crucial (Chan & Lo, 2024; Lin et al., 2024). Digital literacy, defined as the 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
mailto:adi.f.mahmud@student.unm.ac.id


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

193 

 

capability to access, assess, generate, and convey information through digital technology, 
constitutes a fundamental skill that enables individuals to navigate, engage in, and contribute 
to the global digital landscape. (Amin, 2023; Reddy et al., 2023). In Indonesian educational 
settings, especially in EFL classes, the integration of digital literacy is inconsistent and 
contingent upon context. Although national education strategies have begun to prioritise 
digital competency, their implementation often varies among schools, particularly between 
urban and rural regions. Numerous Indonesian EFL educators and learners continue to face 
challenges related to limited digital resources, inadequate training, and sociocultural 
barriers that hinder the implementation of digital literacy in everyday educational activities. 
(Fadilah et al., 2023; Sakkir et al., 2023) Moreover, classroom interaction—an essential 
element of language acquisition—has been markedly affected by the availability or lack of 
digital resources (Abella & Rosa, 2023; Zou et al., 2025). Learning interaction, which involves 
both verbal and non-verbal communication between educators and learners, has 
transcended traditional face-to-face discourse and is increasingly facilitated by digital 
platforms, gadgets, and communication conventions (Pozo et al., 2024; Yaseen et al., 2025). 
Moore (1989) delineates three key interactions within the teaching process. This idea serves 
as the basis for academics to investigate teacher-student interaction patterns in the EFL 
classroom using digital literacy-based instruction. Moore (1989) identified three distinct 
types of interaction: learner-content interaction, learner-instructor interaction, and learner-
learner interaction. 

Despite increasing research on digital literacy in education, little emphasis has been 
directed towards the manifestation of digital literacy practices within the sociocultural 
dynamics of EFL classroom interactions in Indonesia. The prevailing literature primarily 
employs a quantitative or technocentric methodology, focusing on students' digital 
competencies, technological access, or the efficacy of digital tools (Erwani et al., 2022; 
Valentina et al., 2022; Zahra et al., 2023). These studies frequently overlook the lived 
experiences, pedagogical struggles, and cultural significances that influence the 
incorporation of digital literacy into classroom interactions. Consequently, there exists a 
significant deficiency of ethnographic studies that explore the intricate ways in which digital 
literacy affects learning relationships between teachers and students in Indonesian EFL 
contexts.  

Furthermore, research examining the convergence of digital literacy and learning 
interaction rarely addresses how these dynamics manifest within diverse educational 
environments, particularly in marginalised areas such as rural Indonesian schools (Hidayat 
et al., 2022; Nasaruddin et al., 2023). There is limited understanding of how EFL teachers 
and students collaboratively develop digital literacy practices in their daily routines, the 
problems they encounter, and how digital technology is either embraced or resisted during 
interactions. There is a lack of comprehension regarding the intersection of digital literacy 
with language pedagogy, local values, and institutional limitations, which influences 
classroom involvement and communication.  Based on the various issues mention, this study 
focus on learning interaction in digital literacy instruction in EFL classrooms. It employs an 
ethnographic approach to investigate learning interaction in digital literacy instruction in 
Indonesian EFL classrooms. 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

194 

 

METHODS 

This research employs a qualitative methodology with an ethnographic approach to 
investigate the learning interactions within digital literacy training in Indonesian EFL 
classes. Ethnographic study provides comprehensive descriptions and analyses of cultural 
practices, highlighting the collective behaviors, language, and beliefs of a community within 
its natural context (Mills & Gay, 2016; Spradley, 2006). Ethnography offers a culturally 
informed perspective for analyzing the sociocultural aspects of teaching and learning 
(Denzin & Lincoln, 2018; Creswell, 2012). The research was conducted over six months (one 
semester) at SMA Negeri 10 Kota Ternate, North Maluku, an A-grade accredited institution 
recognized as a model for digital transformation. The choice of this location was based on its 
robust digital infrastructure, competent faculty, and alignment with principles of digital 
pedagogy. Research participants were selected through purposive sampling (Creswell & 
Creswell, 2023), comprising ten EFL students and five EFL teachers with established digital 
literacy skills. The criterion encompassed students' access to digital resources, previous 
digital learning experiences, academic performance, as well as teachers' educational degrees 
and teaching experience. 

Data were gathered using semi-structured interviews, participant observation, 
document analysis, and field notes, adhering to ethnographic standards (Fetterman, 2010; 
Spradley, 1979; Mills & Gay, 2016). The researchers served as the primary instrument, 
supplemented by additional tools, including interview protocols, observation sheets, and 
audiovisual recorders. Interviews utilized descriptive, structural, and contrast questions 
(Spradley, 2006), while participant observation allowed researchers to engage deeply in the 
learning environment. 

The data analysis employed Spradley's (2006) four-stage model, which includes 
domain analysis, taxonomic analysis, componential analysis, and cultural theme analysis. 
Domain analysis categorises various fields or specialised domains by examining both general 
and specific issues. An increase in the number of selected domains results in a corresponding 
increase in the time needed for investigation. In the taxonomy analysis, the researchers 
offered a more detailed description of the selected domains, emphasizing their internal 
structure through further investigation. It employs component analysis to discern unique 
characteristics of each internal structure through inter-element relationships. Analysing 
cultural themes involves examining the interrelationships among diverse domains and their 
impact on the broader cultural context. It categorises these links into cultural themes, taking 
into account the specific focus and sub-focus of the investigation. This approach enabled a 
systematic analysis of the interconnected elements of digital literacy practices and cultural 
trends within the EFL teaching environment. The amalgamation of multiple data sources 
enhanced the study's depth and contextual authenticity. The phases of data analysis are 
illustrated in the subsequent figure: 
  

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

195 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Figure 1. Spradley’s (2006) four-stage model of data analysis 

RESULTS 

The findings revealed that learning interaction consists of three fundamental 
dimensions: learner-content interaction, learner-instructor interaction, and learner-learner 
interaction. Subsequent data illustrate the interactions between teachers and students 
during the implementation of digital literacy teaching in the context of English language 
acquisition. 

Learner-Content Interaction 

The interaction between learners and content in the observed digital literacy-focused 
EFL classroom illustrates a dynamic incorporation of digital media into teaching. Students 
predominantly interact with content through multimedia resources, including YouTube 
videos, music, and interactive digital texts, often before or during classroom sessions. This 
engagement promotes autonomous and cooperative learning, highlighting understanding, 
analysis, and content production. Educators support these encounters by providing pre-class 
materials and guiding classroom conversations centered on them. Activities like video-based 
procedural text creation demonstrate how digital tools enhance creative interaction with the 
content. The engagement transcends passive consumption, transforming students into 
active participants who derive meaning from digital content. This method corresponds with 
digital literacy competences by cultivating abilities in sourcing, analyzing, and utilizing 
information from digital platforms. It also fosters critical thinking as students engage with 
knowledge through debates and evaluations. Here are the pieces of evidence on learner-
content interaction: 

Extract 1 

"Some classroom teachers provide learning materials in the form of links or videos, and 
students are expected to study the materials prior to attending class." (Field Note, 2025). 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

196 

 

Extract 2 

"I frequently present videos, audio clips, or images as instructional media. Afterwards, I 
pose questions related to the materials." "I once assigned students to create a procedural 
text video... by the lesson on procedural texts." (Interview with teacher SN, 2025). "I have 
also sent video links for students to study independently, which we later discussed in the 
following session." (Interview with teacher IN, 2025) 

Extract 3 

"I play videos that are already available through YouTube links... students are then 
expected to answer guiding questions as outlined in the teaching module." (Interview 
with teacher FS, 2025). "We assign tasks, and then discuss them in the following meeting. 
So, students engage in self-study at home beforehand." (Interview with teacher HR, 
2025) 

Extract 4 

"There is usually an interaction between students and the provided materials, followed 
by the teacher’s explanation of the content." (Interview with student ZHR, 2025). "The 
teacher typically presents the material through YouTube and concludes with a question-
and-answer session related to the video." (Interview with student RTH, 2025).  

Extract 5 

"Materials are distributed prior to the start of class, the teacher often uses a laptop and 
projector screen to display videos." (Interview with student NM, 2025). "The teacher 
asks students to open specific pages, watch videos, listen to songs, and then find out their 
meanings." (Interview with student PTR, 2025). "We search for and study particular 
conversations on YouTube, then complete assignments based on what we have learned." 
(Interview with student SHR, 2025) 

Extract 6 

"Student interaction with the material is evident when the teacher divides the class into 
groups, and students discuss the content through both individual and group-based 
activities." (Classroom Observation, 2025) 

Interaction between learners and content is also evident when the instructor assigns 
activities to be completed in the classroom during the instructional process. The data in the 
subsequent image demonstrates student engagement with instructional resources in the 
classroom. 
  

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

197 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Figure 2. Learner-content interaction in EFL classrooms 

The evidence illustrated in the preceding figure indicates that, in addition to the 
teacher supplying material links or video content prior to classroom instruction, student 
involvement with the learning materials also transpires during the lesson. The instructor 
disseminates student worksheets (LKS) with questions to be addressed collaboratively in 
pairs during class. The teacher projects instructional films from YouTube, which students 
access on their iPhones. This suggests that material-student interaction in digital literacy 
education can occur flexibly and dynamically throughout the learning process. This trend 
indicates that learner-content interaction in digitally enhanced contexts improves 
engagement, facilitates differentiated instruction, and promotes learner autonomy. Its 
effectiveness, however, depends on regular direction and organized reflection provided by 
instructors, ensuring that technology serves as a means to enhance understanding rather 
than a distraction. 

Learner-instructor interaction 

The interaction between learners and instructors in the context of digital literacy 
demonstrates a pedagogical fusion of conventional teaching methods and technology-
enhanced communication. Educators serve as pivotal agents, commencing instruction with 
inquiries to stimulate existing knowledge, delivering content, and then providing assessment 
and feedback. Despite the digital format, students exhibit a pronounced preference for direct, 
synchronous engagement with professors, indicating that interpersonal connection is a vital 
component of their educational experience. Educators intentionally utilise technology, 
including YouTube videos and AI tools, to enhance learning, often accompanied by direct 
discussion to foster comprehension. The subsequent evidence substantiates the findings: 

 Extract 7 

"Teacher-student interaction during learning is evident in the instructional stages 
outlined in the lesson plans (RPP).” (Document analysis) 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

198 

 

Extract 8 

"I provide them with instructions first, and then they begin working. Even when I 
share materials in the group for self-study, I always follow it up with a discussion." 
(Interview with teacher SRF, 2025). "I ask them about the previous material to help 
them recall and engage with me. I then introduce the topic of the day and ask whether 
anyone is already familiar with it." (Interview with teacher IN, 2025). "Typically, I 
present the material, and then the students respond or answer questions." (Interview 
with teacher SN, 2025) 

Extract 9 

"I read out a prompting question... they responded very quickly after watching the 
video. My interaction with the students was quite good." (Interview with teacher FS, 
2025). "Sometimes the teacher asks students to summarize the material first... but the 
teacher remains involved to assist them." (Interview with Teacher HR, 2025) 

Extract 10 

"The teacher usually explains the material again. We would prefer if the teacher 
used technology more frequently in the classroom." (Interview with student ZHR, 
2025). "I prefer methods that involve direct interaction with the teacher rather than 
independent learning." (Interview with student CTR, 2025). "The teacher often begins 
by explaining the material... followed by an evaluation session." (Interview with student 
PTR, 2025). "There is still direct guidance between teachers and students in the 
classroom. Digital materials or self-directed learning have not yet been implemented." 
(Interview with students IZZ & ST, 2025) 

Extract 11 

"The teacher begins the lesson by presenting material in the form of a YouTube 
video, which the students observe. Afterward, the teacher asks questions related to the 
content. Additionally, the teacher often guides students to use their smartphones to 
access supplementary materials through Google, Google Translate, and AI tools." 
(Classroom Observation, 2025) 

The subsequent data also demonstrates the interaction between the learner and 
teacher during the teaching process in the classroom. 
  

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

199 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3. Learner-instructor interaction in EFL classrooms 

The picture above illustrates that interaction between students and the teacher occurs 
through several means, including the introduction of the lesson topic at the beginning of 
class, delivering directions to students, and encouraging their engagement in learning 
activities. Furthermore, engagement transpires through question-and-answer interactions 
between the instructor and students regarding the topic matter under examination. These 
interactions illustrate a supportive scaffolding framework in which the teacher transitions 
from being the exclusive source of knowledge to a facilitator and guide. Furthermore, 
instructor engagement maintains student motivation, guarantees accountability in digital 
assignments, and meets the cognitive challenges of navigating online material. In classes 
where digital resources are not adequately utilised, both students and teachers recognise 
the potential for improvement. This interaction type is essential for fostering students' 
confidence in utilizing digital resources and acts as a conduit between independent content 
engagement and collaborative interpretation. The data highlight that significant teacher-
student engagement is not lost through digital tools, but rather improved when they are 
deliberately integrated with pedagogical intent. 

Learner-learner interaction 

Interaction among learners in digital literacy contexts, such as EFL classes, is primarily 
organized around collaborative projects, illustrating the social aspect of learning in digital 
environments. Group discussions, peer reviews, and collaborative presentations form the 
essence of these interactions, promoting academic engagement and social cohesion. 
Educators deliberately create tasks that necessitate interdependence, such as interpreting 
audiovisual material or collaboratively solving issues. These collaborative activities facilitate 
peer scaffolding, wherein more proficient students assist their peers, hence enhancing 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

200 

 

comprehension for both individuals. The use of digital information as a common reference 
point, such as videos and narrative assignments, significantly enhances engagement by 
providing a recognisable context for debate and interpretation. The following constitutes the 
evidence: 

Extract 12 

"Student-to-student interaction during learning is most frequently observed during group 
discussion sessions in the classroom. After presenting the material through instructional 
videos, the teacher typically divides the class into several groups for discussion." 
(Classroom Observation, 2025) 

Extract 13 

"Student-to-student interaction is also evident in the instructional stages designed by the 
teacher in the lesson plan." (Document Analysis) 

Extract 14 

"Interactions among students usually occur during group assignments. They collaborate 
within their groups to solve the problems or tasks given." (Interview with Teacher SRF, 
2025). "I usually facilitate student-to-student interaction through group discussions. 
Some students often engage in discussions outside their assigned groups... I continue to 
encourage them to collaborate." (Interview with Teacher IN, 2025) 

Extract 16 

"Students usually ask their peers when they do not understand something. This activity is 
already embedded in the teaching module... involving discussion or drawing conclusions 
together." (Interview with Teacher SN, 2025). "By working in groups, students can 
interact not only with me but also with their peers." (Interview with Teacher FS, 2025). 
"The most effective interaction is student-to-student interaction... especially among the 
more active students." (Interview with Teacher FS, 2025) 

Extract 17 

"There is usually more group discussion, followed by presentations of the results." 
(Interview with Student RT, 2025). "We are divided into groups for discussion. 
Afterwards, each group presents the outcomes of their discussion." (Interview with 
Student RFL, 2025). "There are presentation or storytelling assignments where students 
work in groups." (Interview with Student IZZ, 2025). "Most interactions occur among 
students. Group discussions are more frequent than discussions with the teacher." 
(Interview with Students CTR & RCH, 2025). "In groups, we learn to understand the 
material from our peers’ perspectives." (Interview with Student SHR, 2025). 

 This is evidence illustrating student-to-student interaction during classroom 
activities. 
  

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

201 

 

 

 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Figure 4. Learner-learner interaction in EFL classrooms 

The observations reveal varying levels of participation, with highly engaged students 
taking on leadership responsibilities, while others contribute less prominently. This 
underscores the necessity for pedagogical practices that guarantee equal engagement. 
Interaction among learners is crucial for enhancing comprehension, critical thinking, and 
communication skills, which are essential components of digital literacy. When correctly 
enabled, these interactions enhance content processing and promote learner autonomy. In 
summary, student collaboration, facilitated by digital technologies and organised group 
activities, fosters a dynamic learning environment that enhances and strengthens 
interactions among learners, with both learners and content, as well as between learners 
and instructors. 

This is a taxonomy of instructional interactions based on digital literacy in EFL classes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

Figure 5. A taxonomy of learning interactions 

Digital literacy-based interaction in EFL 
classrooms 

Learner-content Learner-instructor 
structure  

Learner-learner  

• Multimedia consumption  

• Independent study 

• Task-based engagement 

• Group content discussion  

• Guided interpretation 

• Instruction initiation  

• Feedback provision  

• Evaluation  

• Tech integration   

• Pre-Exploration 

• Group discussion  

• Collaborative problem solving  

• Peer feedback 

• Presentation/Storytelling  

• Information peer help 

 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

202 

 

The study's findings demonstrate that digital literacy-focused education in EFL 
classrooms cultivates a complex interactional ecosystem involving learner-content, learner-
instructor, and learner-learner interactions. Every mode of engagement serves a unique yet 
synergistic function in influencing students' digital learning experiences and skills. 

Learner-content interaction is significantly influenced by the integration of 
multimedia, including videos and audiovisual resources. Students are encouraged to engage 
in self-directed study prior to class, promoting autonomy, critical thinking, and a multimodal 
understanding. These connections are facilitated by activities that necessitate analysis, 
production, and collaborative conversations, indicating a transition from passive receiving 
to active involvement with content. Interaction between learners and instructors is 
fundamental to digital education, offering crucial advice, explanation, and feedback that 
solidify students' comprehension. Notwithstanding the availability of digital tools, students 
have a pronounced inclination towards real-time, instructor-led learning. The teacher's 
position evolves into that of a facilitator who connects digital technologies with educational 
objectives, thereby enhancing engagement and understanding of concepts. Interaction 
among learners flourishes in collaborative activities, including group discussions, peer 
evaluations, and joint presentations. These encounters enhance understanding through 
shared viewpoints and foster vital social and communicative abilities. They function as a 
medium for peer-assisted learning and critical analysis, particularly in managing digital 
content. 

Integrating digital literacy into the EFL classroom fosters a harmonious environment 
where technology enhances, rather than supplants, traditional pedagogical approaches. This 
taxonomy emphasizes the interrelation of interaction kinds and underscores the significance 
of instructional design that intentionally incorporates digital resources. When digital 
materials are integrally incorporated in interactive teaching methods, they can significantly 
enhance language acquisition, foster student independence, and cultivate 21st-century 
competencies essential for academic and practical success. 

CULTURE THEMES 

Three comprehensive and thematically coherent cultural themes arise from classroom 
interactions in a digitally mediated learning environment. These topics illustrate both the 

interactional patterns and the sociocultural processes influencing digital literacy-based instruction: 

Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Mediation as a Cultural Norm 

The topic involved illustrates the integration of digital technology, especially multimedia 
platforms (e.g., YouTube, Kahoot, ChatGPT), into the routine instructional culture of EFL classrooms. 
Educators do not simply employ digital technologies for instruction; they intentionally incorporate 
them to enhance comprehension, stimulate prior knowledge, and facilitate learning interactions. The 
consistent use of pre-class video materials, interactive conversations, and technology-enhanced 
activities indicates a transformation in pedagogical culture, wherein digital tools serve as cognitive 
and social mediators. This transition aligns with Vygotsky's sociocultural theory, emphasizing the 
crucial role of mediated technologies in meaning-making and instructional practices within a 
digitally literate classroom environment. 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

203 

 

Teacher Authority and Human Connection in a Digital Landscape 

Despite the growing influence of digital media, teacher-student contact remains 
culturally rooted in hierarchical yet dialogic structures. Educators are still regarded as 
authoritative sources of knowledge and emotional support, directing digital interaction. The 
societal expectation for teacher engagement—via feedback, scaffolding, and real-time 
interaction—illustrates a hybrid pedagogy that merges traditional reverence for teacher 
authority with digital innovation. This subject underscores the enduring nature of 
collectivist and teacher-centered educational norms, despite the integration of digital 
platforms. Culturally sensitive digital education must align with local relational norms and 
learner expectations around authority, direction, and interpersonal interaction. 

Peer Collaboration and Digital Solidarity amid Structural Constraints 

Interaction among learners in the digital classroom demonstrates a cultural inclination 
towards solidarity, peer support, and collaborative problem-solving, especially in group assignments 
and informal digital networks (e.g., WhatsApp). This solidarity frequently arises as a reaction to 
infrastructural and digital disparities, as students mitigate restricted access or understanding by 
depending on peer networks. Although peer connection promotes engagement, it is also limited by 
social dynamics, digital confidence, and disparities in involvement. This subject embodies a culture 
of adaptable collaboration influenced by collectivist principles and practical responses to technical 
constraints. It necessitates the deliberate organization of digital peer work to achieve a balance of 
inclusion, agency, and critical discourse. 

DISCUSSION  

The Research findings show the interaction is a core component of language 
acquisition and digital pedagogy. The results of the study in line with (Moore, 1989) who 
classified learning interaction into three interconnected domains: learner-content, learner-
instructor, and learner-learner interaction. It also illustrates how digital platforms mediate 
and alter interactions in EFL classes, highlighting advantages and limitations shaped by 
infrastructure, instructor expertise, student digital literacy, and the provide the lived 
experiences, pedagogical struggles, and cultural significances that influence the 
incorporation of digital literacy into classroom interactions.  

Interaction between the learner and the content 

The principal interaction observed in this study was between learners and digital 
content. Students frequently employed multimedia resources, including YouTube videos, 
Google Translate, Kahoot, and ChatGPT, to enhance their understanding, pronunciation, and 
vocabulary learning. This notable degree of learner-content interaction aligns with 
Anderson's (2003) interaction equivalency theorem, which posits that substantial learning 
can occur when at least one form of interaction, particularly learner-content, is enhanced 
through high-quality resources and learner autonomy. Digital tools enabled asynchronous 
learning, allowing students to examine knowledge at their convenience, thereby enhancing 
comprehension and autonomy. However, not all students exhibited the same level of ability 
in critically analyzing digital content. Many participants relied on passive consumption 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

204 

 

rather than actively engaging in knowledge construction, supporting previous concerns that 
digital exposure does not automatically result in successful participation (Garrison & Akyol, 
2013). This underscores the imperative of cultivating digital literacy skills that enable 
students to access, interpret, synthesize, and utilize information. 

Interaction between Learner and Instructor 

Digital platforms have transformed the traditional dynamics of learner-instructor 
interaction. Educators employed WhatsApp groups, Google Forms, and digital presentations 
to provide comments, distribute resources, and assess student understanding. These 
systems enhanced immediacy and response but also posed challenges. The asynchronous 
characteristics of specific tools often led to delayed feedback, reducing the dialogic quality of 
instruction. Nonetheless, the findings demonstrate that educators maintained a substantial 
instructional presence, as outlined by Garrison et al. (2000) within the Community of Inquiry 
framework. Their efforts to curate and contextualise digital content, combined with the use 
of assessment technology like Google Forms, helped preserve a cognitive and educational 
presence. However, deeper educational involvement, including personalized feedback, 
dialogic inquiry, or customized support, was occasionally obstructed by time constraints, 
technological proficiency, and inconsistent internet connectivity. 

Peer Interaction among Learners 

The interaction among learners was the least developed of the three categories. 
Although numerous collaborative activities took place over WhatsApp or during in-class 
digital tasks (e.g., team quizzes using Kahoot), these interactions were primarily logistical 
rather than academically or socially significant. This is concerning, as peer interaction is 
essential for meaning negotiation, language production, and the development of 
intercultural competences (Vygotsky, 1978; Smith & MacGregor, 1992). Barriers to peer 
contact included unequal digital access, reduced confidence in digital communication, and a 
school environment that prioritized teacher-led instruction over peer collaboration. 

Consequently, while digital technologies can enhance student dialogue and 
collaborative knowledge construction, their use requires deliberate teaching strategies and 
the formulation of cooperative assignments. This study demonstrates that student 
interactions in digital literacy-focused EFL training reveal significant changes in learning 
dynamics within technology-mediated contexts. The findings illustrate how digital platforms 
such as YouTube, Kahoot, WhatsApp, and ChatGPT have transformed traditional classroom 
interactions by introducing innovative methods of engagement, collaboration, and learner 
independence. This result supports Vygotsky's (1978) sociocultural theory, which 
emphasizes the importance of mediated tools in the joint construction of knowledge through 
social interaction. The students in the observed classrooms demonstrated increased 
motivation, which was attributed to the use of digital devices, enhancing their focus, 
engagement, and collaborative behaviours. Video content and game-based systems, such as 
Kahoot, cultivate a dynamic learning environment, augmenting competition and 
engagement. This aligns with the multidimensional engagement framework established by 
Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris (2004), which includes behavioral, emotional, and cognitive 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

205 

 

elements. The active participation of students in digital quizzes, their love for multimedia 
content, and their enthusiasm for exploring resources beyond the classroom illustrate all 
three dimensions of engagement. Nonetheless, while digital technologies improved students' 
surface interaction and task involvement, the degree of substantial academic engagement 
varied significantly among learners. 

Several students demonstrated critical engagement by independently acquiring 
supplementary knowledge through platforms like YouTube and ChatGPT, thereby 
exemplifying learner autonomy —a key attribute of 21st-century education (Redecker, 
2017). In contrast, several individuals utilize technology passively or solely for 
entertainment, illustrating what Ertmer and Newby (1993) define as low-level involvement 
that fails to foster higher-order cognitive skills. The significance of interaction in technology-
enhanced EFL lessons has also evolved. Students reported frequent use of WhatsApp and 
Instagram for exchanging materials and discussing assignments, indicating the formation of 
informal, student-led learning networks. These peer-driven interactions promote the 
principles of connectivism (Siemens, 2005), which posits that learning occurs through 
decentralized, technology-mediated networks. However, these conversations often lacked 
moderation, and the absence of instructor engagement on these informal forums may result 
in uneven academic discourse and variations in participation levels. 

Notwithstanding the apparent benefits, challenges persist. A multitude of students 
indicated challenges in focusing on academic content while using digital devices, often 
leading to multitasking or distractions. These findings align with Junco's (2012) research, 
which suggests that excessive social media usage may be associated with reduced academic 
engagement if not adequately regulated. Moreover, technological disparities, including 
limited access to devices and unreliable internet connectivity, hindered equal participation, 
particularly among students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Warschauer (2003) 
observed that the digital divide remains a considerable barrier to inclusive digital education. 
The research demonstrates that digital engagement is heterogeneous and significantly 
influenced by individual learning preferences, digital competencies, and classroom 
environment. Educators must create structured yet flexible learning settings to effectively 
leverage digital resources that promote focused engagement and independent exploration. 
This entails integrating collaborative efforts, peer evaluation systems, and explicit digital 
literacy instruction into the curriculum. 

Instruction based on digital literacy has revolutionized learning interactions in the EFL 
classroom, particularly enhancing learner-content engagement. To fully realize the 
educational potential of digital communication, there must be an enhanced emphasis on 
dialogic interactions between educators and learners, as well as the encouragement of peer 
collaboration through structured digital tasks. Digital resources have enhanced student 
engagement and interaction in EFL classes; yet, consistent pedagogical approaches are 
crucial to deepen learning, minimize digital distractions, and ensure equitable participation. 
Educators must adapt their roles to foster both technical and social engagement, thereby 
maximising the educational benefits of digital literacy. 

This study demonstrates that digital literacy practices in EFL classrooms are 
profoundly interconnected with sociocultural values and local pedagogical traditions, as 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

206 

 

evidenced by the identified culture themes: Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Mediation as 
a Cultural Norm, Teacher Authority and Human Connection in a Digital Landscape, and Peer 
Collaboration and Digital Solidarity Amid Structural Constraints. These elements align with 
Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory, which posits that tools and symbols, such as digital 
media, facilitate cognitive growth via social interaction. The utilization of platforms such as 
YouTube, Kahoot, and ChatGPT illustrates that digital tools serve not only as supplementary 
instructional resources but as essential mediators in the formation of knowledge, embodying 
what Wertsch (1991) describes as “mediated action. Moreover, the enduring nature of 
teacher authority in the context of technological integration corresponds with the collectivist 
cultural norms prevalent in Indonesian classrooms. According to Hofstede (2001), societies 
with considerable power distance often maintain hierarchical relationships within 
educational contexts. This is apparent in students' dependence on direct instructor 
instruction despite the presence of self-access digital resources. Li and Walsh (2011) 
reported similar findings, noting that teacher-led interaction continues to prevail in Asian 
EFL contexts, even in technologically advanced settings. 

Peer collaboration, driven by infrastructural constraints, aligns with the conclusions of 
Warschauer (2003) and Selwyn (2011) regarding the adaptive use of technology in 
resource-constrained environments. The camaraderie exhibited by students via WhatsApp 
talks and collaborative efforts illustrates the virtues and weaknesses of informal digital 
learning networks. This underscores the necessity for organized peer assignments that 
harmonize collaboration with critical involvement (Smith & MacGregor, 1992). In 
conclusion, these cultural themes suggest that digital literacy in EFL classrooms 
encompasses not only technical skills but also the negotiation of culture. Digital pedagogy 
must be locally anchored, harmonizing with local values while promoting critical, 
collaborative, and independent learning in digitally mediated settings. 

CONCLUSION 

This study highlights that digital literacy-focused instruction in Indonesian EFL 
classrooms promotes a complex ecology of interaction among learners, teachers, and digital 
content. The incorporation of digital tools—such as YouTube, Kahoot, WhatsApp, and 
ChatGPT—has revolutionized conventional classroom dynamics by improving student-
content interaction, promoting learner independence, and enabling multimodal 
understanding. Notwithstanding these advantages, the study reveals ongoing issues, 
including disparities in digital competency, infrastructural limitations, and the inadequacy 
of peer-to-peer collaboration. These findings emphasize that although digital technologies 
provide novel opportunities for engagement and instruction, their effectiveness depends on 
deliberate pedagogical integration and equal access. 

This study has two implications. It underscores the necessity for EFL educators to 
cultivate culturally attuned digital methodologies that harmonize autonomy, structure, and 
social engagement. Educators must evolve from mere content deliverers to learning 
facilitators capable of effectively scaffolding digital engagement. Curricular implications 
involve integrating explicit digital literacy training into language programs to enhance 
students' critical thinking, multimodal literacy, and collaborative abilities. Moreover, the 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

207 

 

results underscore the significance of institutional support in mitigating digital inequities 
and equipping educators with the skills to utilize digital tools effectively. 

Future research should expand the parameters of this study by investigating digital 
literacy-based interactions in a broader range of socio-educational contexts, including rural, 
disadvantaged, or marginalised groups. Longitudinal research could examine the evolution 
of digital participation over time and its enduring effects on language competency and 
learner identity. Moreover, participatory action research that includes instructors and 
students as co-researchers may provide profound insights into the mutual influence of 
technology utilization and classroom culture. Exploring the convergence of digital literacy 
with emotive dimensions—such as motivation, identity, and digital wellbeing—would 
enhance the comprehension of its significance in comprehensive EFL learning. Research 
must prioritize local perspectives and contextual realities in the development of inclusive, 
adaptive, and effective digital pedagogies. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

I am writing to convey my gratitude to the Indonesian Government's Lembaga 
Pengelola Dana Pendidikan Indonesia (LPDP) for granting me a scholarship to facilitate my 
doctoral studies and the publication of this essay. 

REFERENCES 

Abella, J. L., & Rosa, E. D. D. (2023). Digital Literacy and Digital Competence of Selected 
Filipino Teachers: Basis for a Post-Pandemic Pedagogy. IJORER International Journal 
of Recent Educational Research, 4(5), 548. https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v4i5.378 

Amin, M. Y. M. (2023). AI and Chat GPT in Language Teaching: Enhancing EFL Classroom 
Support and Transforming Assessment Techniques. International Journal of Higher 
Education Pedagogies, 4(4), 1. https://doi.org/10.33422/ijhep.v4i4.554 

Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. 
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 4(2), 1–14. 

Baldoví, M. I. P., Alonso, Á. S. M., & Chacón, J. P. (2023). The Smart Classroom: Learning 
Challenges in the Digital Ecosystem. Education Sciences, 13(7), 662. 
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070662 

Chan, S., & Lo, N. (2024). Enhancing EFL/ESL instruction through gamification: a 
comprehensive review of empirical evidence [Review of Enhancing EFL/ESL 
instruction through gamification: a comprehensive review of empirical evidence]. 
Frontiers in Education, 9. Frontiers Media. 
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1395155 

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. SAGE Publications. 

Creswell, W. J & Creswell, D. J. (2023). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods 
Approaches, 6th ed. SAGE Publications, Inc. 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v4i5.378
https://doi.org/10.33422/ijhep.v4i4.554
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070662
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1395155


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

208 

 

Denzin, K. N, & Lincoln, S. Y. (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 5th ed. SAGE 
Publications, Inc. 

Djibran, A. K. S., Subiyanto, P., Wakhudin, W., & Rahayu, N. S. (2024). Transforming Education 
in The Digital Age : How Technology Affects Teaching and Learning Methods. Journal 
of Pedagogy, 1(3), 141. https://doi.org/10.62872/ksq9jc13 

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical 
features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 
50–72. 

Erwani, P., Sofendi, & Mirizon, S. (2022). ONLINE LEARNING AMIDST COVID-19 PANDEMIC 
DISRUPTION: EFL LECTURERS AND STUDENTS' CLASSROOM INTERACTION. JEELS 
(Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 9(1), 229. 
https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v9i1.4527 

Fadilah, R., Ayudhia, H. Y., Pratama, V. M., & Harmawan, V. (2023). Teachers’ Teaching 
Reflection: English Teachers’ Challenges in Rural Areas of Indonesia. LET Linguistics 
Literature and English Teaching Journal, 13(1), 85. 
https://doi.org/10.18592/let.v13i1.8923 

Fetterman, M. D. (2010). Ethnography: step-by-step ed. SAGE Publications, Inc. 

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement: The Potential of the 
Concept and State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. 
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059. 

Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013). The community of inquiry theoretical framework. In M. G. Moore 
(Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 104–120). Routledge. 

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: 
Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–
105. 

Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers 
College Press. 

Hidayat, D. N., Lee, J. Y., Mason, J., & Khaerudin, T. (2022). Digital technology supporting 
English learning among Indonesian university students. Research and Practice in 
Technology Enhanced Learning, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-022-
00198-8 

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and 
organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. 

Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between the frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook 
activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58(1), 162–171. 

Li, L., & Walsh, S. (2011). Technology uptake in Chinese EFL classes. Language Teaching Research, 
15(1), 99–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383347 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
https://doi.org/10.62872/ksq9jc13
https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v9i1.4527
https://doi.org/10.18592/let.v13i1.8923
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-022-00198-8
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-022-00198-8
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383347


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

209 

 

Lin, Z., Ryskulova, B., Cheng, X., Ren, S., & Apaeva, S. (2024). Critical Thinking Development 
of Foreign Language Teachers Through Digital Literacy Training. Journal of 
Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 17(1), 222. 
https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.1701.13 

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 
3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659. 

Nasaruddin, A. H., Das, St. W. H., & Ladiqi, S. (2023). Digital-Based Islamic Religious Education 
(IRE) Learning Model at Senior High School. Indonesian Journal of Islamic Education 
Studies (IJIES), 6(1), 79. https://doi.org/10.33367/ijies.v6i1.3525 

Pozo, J. I., Cabellos, B., & Echeverría, M. del P. P. (2024). Has the educational use of digital 
technologies changed after the pandemic? A longitudinal study. PLoS ONE, 19(12). 
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0311695 

Reddy, P., Chaudhary, K., & Hussein, S. (2023). A digital literacy model to narrow the digital 
literacy skills gap. Heliyon, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14878 

Redecker, C. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. 
European Commission. 

Sakkir, G., Rukmana, N. S., Muslim, A. B., Andrew, M., & Muhayyang, M. (2023). The Challenges 
Faced by Students in Learning English (Post-Pandemic Era). Interference Journal of 
Language Literature and Linguistics, 4(1), 111. 
https://doi.org/10.26858/interference.v4i1.43966 

Selwyn, N. (2011). Education and technology: Key issues and debates. Bloomsbury Publishing. 

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of 
Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10. 

Smith, B. L., & MacGregor, J. T. (1992). What is collaborative learning? In A. S. Goodsell, M. R. Maher, 
V. Tinto, B. L. Smith, & J. MacGregor (Eds.), Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher 
education (pp. 10–30). National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and 
Assessment. 

Smith, B. L., & MacGregor, J. T. (1992). What is collaborative learning? In A. S. Goodsell et al. (Eds.), 
Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education (pp. 10–30). National Center on 
Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment. 

Spradley, J. P. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview. By Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc. 

Spradley, J. P. (2006). Metode Etnografi. Edisi kedua. Jogjakarta: Tiara Wacana.  

Valentina, T. F., Arifani, Y., & Anwar, K. (2022). Can digital literacy practices motivate 
international students to upgrade their English as a second language (L2)? An 
ethnographic case study. Academic Journal Perspective Education Language and 
Literature, 9(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.33603/perspective.v9i2.6085 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard 
University Press. 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.1701.13
https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
https://doi.org/10.33367/ijies.v6i1.3525
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0311695
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14878
https://doi.org/10.26858/interference.v4i1.43966
https://doi.org/10.33603/perspective.v9i2.6085


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 6, No. 3, July 2025 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 
p-ISSN: 2776-8880 

 

210 

 

Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press. 

Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard 
University Press. 

Yaseen, H., Mohammad, A. S., Ashal, N., Abusaimeh, H., Ali, A. A. A., & Sharabati, A. A. (2025). 
The Impact of Adaptive Learning Technologies, Personalized Feedback, and 
Interactive AI Tools on Student Engagement: The Moderating Role of Digital Literacy. 
Sustainability, 17(3), 1133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031133 

Zahra, I. N., Anggrarini, N., Wati, A., Prawiro, I. Y., & Larasaty, G. (2023). EFL Undergraduate 
Students’ Politeness Strategy in Online Classroom Interaction. International Journal 
of Science Education and Cultural Studies, 2(1), 16. 
https://doi.org/10.58291/ijsecs.v2i1.73 

Zhang, J. (2023). EFL teachers’ digital literacy: the role of contextual factors in their literacy 
development. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. 
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1153339 

Zou, Y. L., Kuek, F., Feng, W., & Cheng, X. (2025). Digital learning in the 21st century: trends, 
challenges, and innovations in technology integration. Frontiers in Education, 10. 
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1562391 

 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031133
https://doi.org/10.58291/ijsecs.v2i1.73
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1153339
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1562391

