*Corresponding Author P-ISSN: 1978-8118 E-ISSN: 2460-710X 223 Lingua Cultura, 15(2), December 2021, 223-236 DOI: 10.21512/lc.v15i2.7627 ENGLISH LECTURERS’ DIGITAL LITERACY AND THEIR SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION: SEEKING THE CORRELATION Veni Roza* English Education Study Program, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training, State Islamic Institute of Bukittinggi Jl. Gurun Aur, Kubang Puith Kab. Agam, West Sumatera 26181, Indonesia veniroz_501@yahoo.com Received: 04th August 2021/Revised: 17th October 2021/Accepted: 22nd October 2021 How to Cite: Roza, V. (2021). English lecturers’ digital literacy and their scientific publication: Seeking the correlation. Lingua Cultura, 15(2), 223-236. https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v15i2.7627 ABSTRACT The research aimed at seeking the correlation between English lecturers’ digital literacy and their productivity in publishing their research articles. It applied a quantitative research by correlating the variables between the online questionnaire result of English lecturers’ digital literacy and lecturers’ scientific publication data from their Google Scholar accounts and Science and Technology Index Portal or SINTA Portal of the Republic of Indonesia. The research population was all permanent English lecturers at State Islamic Higher Education in West Sumatera. There were 65 respondents in three institutions, but only 85% of participants gave feedback on the online questionnaire. The questionnaire was about the digital literacy of English lecturers in using and finding digital information and technology. The research also accounted online journal publication of each English lecturer in his/her account. To analyze the data, the research used the Pearson correlation formula. The finding reveals a positive correlation between English lecturers’ digital literacy and their research publication, as shown by the Pearson correlational coefficient, 0,48. The score lies between 0,40-0,59, which is under sufficient category. The result implies that English lecturers’ digital literacy has something to do with publication. The more digitally literate they are, the more productive they will be, even though there are other factors that influence someone to carry out the publication. Keywords: digital literacy, scientific publication, English lecturers INTRODUCTION Nowadays, literacy is believed as one essential skill (Jeffrey et al., 2017) in competing in the modern global era where everything is handled online. The more someone has competence in using digital literacy, the more successful he/she is in any respect of digital life. When learners know and understand much about information and communication technology, they can be motivated to learn, solve school problems and tasks, and triumph in society (Shopova, 2017). For teachers or lecturers, whenever they are digitally literate, many activities can be carried out professionally related to their obligation as educators. It is called the Tri Dharma of higher education, namely education and teaching, research, and social obedience and services (Zain et al., 2017). Their achievement in those aspects is well-known as world recognition. In the educational aspect, many researchers have investigated the concept of digital literacy. Durriyah and Zuhdi (2018) have examined student teacher perceptions about digital literacy in relation to technology integration in teaching and learning. They find several digital platforms used in teaching, namely Facebook, WhatsApp, Skype, and blogs. In line with that, Peled (2021) has found a high and positive perception of pre-service teachers about digital readiness and digital literacy in teaching. Moreover, there are previous researches that have investigated the digital literacy concept across fields or disciplines. Ata and Yıldırım (2019) have investigated pre-service teachers’ perception of digital literacy in terms of four predictors: attitude, technical, social, and cognitive. They find the high and positive perception of pre-service teachers in attitude, technical, social, and cognitive factors. In line with that, Dedebali (2020) 224 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 15 No. 2, December 2021, 223-236 in Rusydiyah, Purwati, and Prabowo (2020), and Liza and Andriyanti (2020) in Indonesia, has found high readiness and digital literate of the graduate student in integrating digital technologies in education. In Spain, Sánchez-Cruzado and Sánchez-Compaña (2021) have also found the readiness of teachers to be highly digital literate due to the pandemic impact. However, there are not many kinds of research about digital literacy for the sake of research and publication. Spante and Hashemi (2018) have sought the concept of digital literacy and digital competence of higher education research from three databases of Scopus, WoS, and ERIC. They find the concept of digital literacy is more frequently used than digital competence even though both definitions are used interchangeably. Zain et al. (2017) have found high motivation and very productive Malaysian lecturers in publishing their research qualifiedly. In community services, the researcher only finds studies of the traditional concept of digital literacy for social services like being literate in reading and writing. Based on those researches, professional educators struggle to fulfill the educational and teaching domain, research, and community services. As long as they have the desire and are supported by skill in processing digital information and technology, doing Tri Dharma becomes an exciting activity. In fact, among these three obligations, research productivity is left behind (Carleton, Parkerson, & Horswill, 2012), and they are busy with teaching and administration affairs. Doing research and publication is media that can be used by educators to promote learning and seek the new model that is from knowledge transfer to knowledge construct (Yazon et al., 2019). However, for some cases, to be productive in research through publication and citation is still difficult to carry out. There are individual factors like the perception of getting the benefit, lack of research cost, and institutional factor-like library facilities (Anamofa et al., 2019). Lecturers can use their knowledge and skill in the digital world to carry out research and publish it in scientific journals. Then, they can also cite many other resources and their colleagues. They can find many references digitally and read a lot. After that, they can do research and write it. Novelty innovation of learning models can be created from the result of their researches and disseminated through that publication (Liu et al., 2020). For some lecturers, doing publication is challenging and difficult to carry out, so they are stagnant at the same level of position or academic function for a long period in one institution (Anamofa & Nanuru, 2019). Based on the phenomena found in the field, not all English Lecturers at IAIN Bukittinggi are able to publish their scientific writing or article in the journal, even though they have English capability and are demanded to undertake research and publish the output in a scientific journal. This becomes one of the indicators of deciding someone to get allowances or not. The publication carried out by lecturers will impact not only the lecturers themselves but also the institution. The first rank campus is indicated by the highest rate of lecturers’ publication in reputed and accredited journals. In fact, many English lecturers are not able to publish their articles even though they have English competence and know digital information and technology around them. It is seen from the functional level, which is mostly at Lektor (Lecturer). Based on this, the research needs to investigate the correlation between English lecturers’ digital literacy and their research publication. METHODS The method applied in the research is a correlational design to see the correlation between English lecturers’ digital literacy based on their perceptions and their research publication. To collect data about the variables, the research uses an online questionnaire for digital literacy perceptions and numerical data for English lecturers publication in the last three years (2019-2021) from the SINTA Portal by the Ministry of higher education of Indonesia at http://sinta.ristekbrin.go.id/, and their Google scholar accounts. The research participants are all permanent English lecturers in state Islamic Higher Education Institution in West Sumatera IAIN Bukittinggi, IAIN Batusangkar, and UIN Imam Bonjol Padang. There are 65 English lecturers in three intuitions. However, only 85% of lecturers give feedback. The questionnaire is created in Google form and shared a link to their WhatsApp group of English Lecturers and emails. It consists of 35 items on the Guttmann scale with yes and no choices in order to get a firm answer (Sari & Roza, 2021). Yes answer gets a score of 1, and No is 0. The rubric of the questionnaire is adapted from Yazon et al. (2019), who have investigated the correlation between digital literacy, digital competence, and educators’ productivity in research. Table 1 shows the indicator of digital literacy. Table 1 Indicator of Digital Literacy No Indicator Item no. Amount 1. Digital literacy in terms of finding information 1-9 9 2. Digital literacy in terms of using information 10-16 7 3. Digital literacy in terms of creating information 17-24 8 4. Digital Literacy in terms of applying digital resources 25-27 3 5 Digital literacy in terms of understanding digital practices 28-35 8 Total 35 225English Lecturers’ Digital.... (Veni Roza) Meanwhile, the indicator of English lecturer publication based on the rubric of accreditation rubric (BAN PT, 2019) for research outcome can be seen in Table 2. Table 2 English Lecturer Publication in Last Three Years No Initial of English Lecturer Kind of Publication Amount 1. National journal Accredited national journal International journal Reputed international journal Local seminar National seminar International seminar National mass media International mass media Total To analyze data, the research uses SPSS 20 software by using the Pearson correlation. The correlation magnitude is checked by interpretation of table by Gay and Mills (2016). It can be seen in Table 3. Table 3 Magnitude of Correlation No Coefficient Magnitude of correlation 1. 0,80 – 1,00 Very strong 2. 0,60 – 0,79 Strong 3. 0,40 – 0,59 Sufficient 4. 0,20 – 0,39 Weak 5. 0 – 0,19 Very weak Based on Table 3, the magnitude of the correlation is divided into five, namely very weak for a score ranging between 0-0,19; weak for 0,2-0,39; sufficient 0,4-0,59; strong for 0,6-0,79, and very strong for 0,8-1,00. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The questionnaire results show the English lecturers’ perception of their digital literacy in five questions. They are digital literacy in finding information, digital literacy in using information, digital literacy in creating information, digital literacy in using digital resources, and digital literacy in understanding digital practices. These results of the questionnaire (yes/no answers) are beneficial to seek the correlation between digital literacy and publication. It can be seen in Table 4. Table 4 English Lecturers’ Perception of Digital Literacy No Indicator Mean score Percentage 1. Digital literacy in terms of finding information 13,7 25% 2. Digital literacy in terms of using information 18,4 33% 3. Digital literacy in terms of creating information 16,1 29% 4. Digital Literacy in terms of applying digital resources 17 30.67% 5 Digital literacy in terms of understanding digital practices 14,6 26,5% Based on Table 4, five indicators are asked related to English lecturers’ digital literacy. The highest mean score of digital literacy that the English lecturers positively perceived is in using information 33%, in applying digital resources is 30,67%, in creating information is 29%, in understanding digital practices is 26,5%, and in finding information is 25%. From this finding, it can be inferred that using digital information is mostly positively perceived by English lecturers. It is because the action of using is easy to carry out, and it is lower than the action of creating based on the Taxonomy (Covello, 2017). It can also be inferred that English lecturers are quite literate in digital information and technology, as mentioned in Redecker (2017) and Lankshear and Knobel (2008). They say that educators need to have digital literacy in order to be professional educators who will produce digitally literate learners and improve research productivity quality and quantity (Okiki & Iyabo, 2013). To make each indicator clearer, here is in detail each aspect in Table 5. Table 5 English Lecturers’ Perception about Digital Literacy in Finding Information No Statement Score % Digital literacy in terms of finding information 1 I know what information I can find on the web. 14 25% 2 I know what information I can find in an online library. 6 11% 3 I use advanced search options to limit and refine my search. 16 29% 4 I use keywords commonly used in my discipline to search for information online. 12 22% 5 I use social networks as a source of information. 15 27% 6 I know when to change my search strategy or stop searching. 12 22% 226 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 15 No. 2, December 2021, 223-236 No Statement Score % 7 I filter large numbers of search results quickly. 17 31% 8 I do scanning/skimming a web page to get to the key relevant information quickly. 16 29% 9 I keep up-to-date with information from authoritative people or organisations by subscribing to Really Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds. 16 29% MEAN 13,7 25% Based on Table 5, nine items are asked about English lecturers’ perception of their digital literacy in finding information. The highest score is filtering a large number of search results quickly 31%, after that in scanning/skimming a web page 29%, keeping updated with information from authoritative people 29%, and using advanced search options 29%. After that, they positively perceive that they use social networks as a source of information 27%, know what information that they can find on the web 25%, use keywords to search information online, and know when to change search strategy 22%. This means that English lecturers have some strategies in mind for getting prominent information through the social network they have, like Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp group, and others. The lowest score is in item 2 in knowing information from the online library. It is due to some reasons like the online library is not open access, so it is lower perceived by respondents. Table 6 English Lecturers’ Perception about Digital Literacy in Using Information No Statement Score % Digital literacy in terms of using information 10 I use information in different media, for example, podcasts or videos. 10 18% 11 I assess whether an online resource (e.g., web page, blog, wiki, video, podcast, academic journal article) or person is credible and trustworthy. 23 42% 12 I use other people’s work (found online) without committing plagiarism. 21 38% 13 I cite a reference to an online resource (e.g., in an assignment) using the correct format. 19 34% 14 I keep a record of the relevant details of information I find online. 25 46% No Statement Score % 15 I use social bookmarking to organise and share information. 11 20% 16 I share files legally with others. 20 36% MEAN 18,4 33% Based on Table 6, seven items are asked about using information. English lecturers positively perceive keeping a record of the relevant details of information 46%, in assessing whether an online resource is credible and trustworthy 42%. After that, they use other work without committing plagiarism 38%, share files legally with others 36%, cite a reference using correct format 34%, and use social bookmarking 20%. The lowest score is in using the information in different media like podcasts, 18%. It can be said that English lecturers keep a good ethic when using information. They do citations and use correct references because plagiarism in academic work is a crime. Khathayut and Walker-Gleaves (2021) have mentioned that higher education staff can avoid plagiarism by keeping writing honestly through paraphrasing. Table 7 English Lecturers’ Perception about Digital Literacy in Creating Information No Statement Score % Digital literacy in terms of creating information 17 I add comments to blogs, forums or web pages, observing netiquette and appropriate social conventions for online communications. 20 36% 18 I write online for different audiences, e.g., a web page or blog entry for private use, for reading by your fellow students, for reading by my tutor, or for reading by anyone in the world. 20 36% 19 I write in different media for people to read on-screen. 15 27% 20 I communicate with others online (forums, blogs, social networking sites, audio, video, etc.) 12 22% 21 I work with others online to create a shared document or presentation. 19 34% 22 I use media-capture devices, e.g., recording and editing a podcast or video. 8 14% 23 I know how to submit my writing online. 15 27% 24 I can use OJS for my article enrichment. 20 36% MEAN 16,1 29% Table 5 English Lecturers’ Perception about Digital Literacy in Finding Information (Continued) Table 6 English Lecturers’ Perception about Digital Literacy in Using Information (Continued) 227English Lecturers’ Digital.... (Veni Roza) Based on Table 7, eight items are asked to the English lecturers about creating information. 36% of respondents answer yes that they use OJS for their article, add comments in the forum, and write online for the audience. Working with others online is 34%, writing in different media and knowing how to submit writing online is 27%, communicating with others online is 22%. The lowest score is that they use media capture 14%. It is because mostly they are reluctant to record or take a picture for public consumption. Table 8 English Lecturers’ Perception about Digital Literacy in Terms of Digital Resources No Statement Score % Digital Literacy in terms of digital resources 25 I use different internet sites and search strategies to find and select a range of different digital resources. 16 29% 26 I create my own digital resources and modify existing ones to adapt them to my needs. 19 34% 27 I effectively protect sensitive content, e.g., exams, students' grades, personal data 16 29% MEAN 17 30.67% Based on Table 8, three items are asked to respondents related to digital resources. Respondents mostly perceive that they create their own digital resources 34%. They use different internet sites and protect their sensitive content 29%. It can be inferred that English lecturers perceive they are quite literate in creating their own digital resources and modifying them. It is proved by digital resources made by some English lecturers’ shared via WhatsApp group. The English lessons created on YouTube aim to share the English content via YouTube and Facebook. This link is shared for the sake of knowledge and the likes of the netters. Table 9 English Lecturers’ Perception about Digital Literacy in Understanding Digital Practices No Statement Score % Digital literacy in terms of understanding digital practices 28 I know what categories of users I can expect to find online. 14 25% 29 I explain what happens to information I put online: my digital footprint. 15 27% 30 I choose the right tool to find, use, or create information. 10 18% 31 I present myself online: my digital identity. 13 24% 32 I find a person online, for example an expert in my discipline, and establishing their contact details. 20 36% 33 I use online tools and websites to find and record information online. 12 22% 34 I establish who owns information and ideas I find online. 11 20% 35 I establish what online information I can legally re-use. 22 40% MEAN 14,6 26,5% Based on Table 9, eight items are asked in the questionnaire related to understanding digital practices. The English lecturers mostly perceive that they establish what online information they can legally reuse 40%. After that, they can find a person online 36%, explain what happens to the information they Table 10 English Lecturers’ Publication in the Last Three Years No Initial Publication No Initial Publication No Initial Publication No Initial Publication 1. VR 11 15. PU 12 29. MN 6 43. DF 15 2. MM 5 16. IL 14 30. FR 6 44. EW 18 3. AK 15 17. TY 18 31. WE 14 45. WE 14 4. LL 11 18. LH 14 32. QW 18 46. ZS 12 5. HPP 10 19. OP 10 33. AS 5 47. VB 14 6. MPD 12 20. SE 15 34. IU 7 48. ZA 14 7. WS 12 21. YU 15 35. HJ 18 49. KH 16 8. GS 14 22. OP 9 36. VB 15 50. HG 14 9. S 19 23. TG 14 37. FS 18 51. BN 15 10. E 4 24. ER 16 38. RW 17 52. FT 5 11. RF 17 25. FG 14 39. ZS 17 53. BF 11 12. LS 23 26. ES 18 40. GH 18 54. HY 18 13. AB 13 27. KL 12 41. CV 7 55. HT 4 14. SD 17 28. MK 21 42. TH 15 228 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 15 No. 2, December 2021, 223-236 put online 27%, know what categories of users they find online 25%, present themselves online 24%, use online tools to find online information 22%, and the lower score is in choosing the right tool in creating information 18%. It can be said that English lecturers’ perception of their digital literacy is positive. It is in line with Lankshear and Knobe (2008), and Bawden (2008) have said that digital literacy is the ability to understand information however it is presented (spoken or written) not only to read and to write. Besides presenting the data of English lecturers, the researcher also exhibits the data of English lecturer publications that have been obtained from Google Scholar in the last three years (2019-2021). The researcher counts all publications of English lecturers in national journals, accredited national journals, international journals, reputed international journals, local seminars, national seminars, international seminars, national mass media, and international mass media, which exist in their accounts. Table 10 shows the recapitulation data of English lecturers’ publication in the last three years (see Appendix for the full description). Table 10 is simplified since the researcher just needs the nominal number. Based on the appendix of English lecturers’ publications, English lecturers mostly publish their articles in accredited journals and international seminars in proceedings. They rarely publish in national and international mass media seen from their Google Scholar. It is due to some reason like they get low points when publishing writing to them. It is also very challenging for English lecturers to publish in reputed international journals indicated by a few numbers of English Professors in UIN Padang, IAIN Batusangkar, and IAIN Bukittinggi. The researcher uses the Pearson correlation formula to find the correlation between English lecturers’ perception of digital literacy and their productivity in publication. It is because both variables are symmetric, and the data used are numeric. Table 11 shows the result of data analysis (output of SPSS20). Based on Table 11, the Pearson Correlation is 0,408. The score ranges between 0,40–0,59, which is under the category of sufficient consulted to the interpretation of the table by Gay and Mills (2016). There is a positive and sufficient correlation between English lecturers’ perception of digital literacy and their research productivity in publication. This finding is in line with Covello (2017), Carleton, Parkerson, and Horswill (2012), and Yazon et al. (2019), who find digital literacy becomes the main key to be productive in publishing the research articles. The publication carried out by lecturers gives benefit to parties, lecturers, and institutions. Even though those researchers find strong correlations between digital literacy and productivity in research, the result remains positive. However, in the research, the magnitude is still sufficient, which means not strong nor weak. English lecturers still need to improve their research outcome, namely publication in terms of quantity and quality, as suggested by Okiki and Iyabo (2013). Furthermore, the English lecturers still need to improve their literacy in digital information and technology if they have lower publication rates, which is persistently carried out through learning autodidact, by peers or joining ICT training or workshop (Okiki & Iyabo, 2013; Bhukuvhani, Chiparausha, & Zuvalinyenga 2017). Table 11 Output of SPSS20 (Descriptive Statistics and Correlations) Descriptive Statistics N Mini- mum Maxi- mum Mean Std. De- viation X 55 6 34 16,55 5,477 Y 55 4 23 13,38 4,487 Valid N (listwise) 55 Correlations x y X Pearson Correlation 1 0,408** Sig. (2-tailed) 0,002 N 55 55 Y Pearson Correlation 0,408** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0,002 N 55 55 **. Correlation is significant at the 0,01 level (2-tailed). CONCLUSIONS From these findings, it can be concluded that there is a positive correlation between English lecturers’ digital literacy and their productivity in publication. The strength of the relationship is sufficient. It means that the more digitally literate someone in ICT (Information and Communication Technology) is, the more productive he/she is in publication. It also implies that the sufficient is not strong nor weak, indicating that other factors influence the publication like personal factor, time management, willingness to share knowledge, and benefit or lack of research cost. Institution factor also affects the lecturers’ productivity, like insufficient facilities in the library. The research is still conducted in the local area, so the result cannot be generalized to all English lecturers at Islamic Higher Education in Indonesia. Moreover, it is suggested to conduct further research in relation to digital information and technology and citation and society services. REFERENCES Anamofa, J., & Nanuru, R., Suhardi., Lekahena, V., Cahyono, T. D., …Latupapua, M. (2019). Factors influencing research productivity of private higher education institutions lecturers in Kopertis region XII. Proceedings of The 2nd International 229English Lecturers’ Digital.... (Veni Roza) Conference on Advance and Scientific Innovation, ICASI 2019. Banda Aceh, Indonesia. pp. 1-7. https:// doi.org/10.4108/eai.18-7-2019.2288513. Ata, R., & Yıldırım, K. (2019). Exploring Turkish pre- service teachers’ perceptions and views of digital literacy. Education Sciences, 9(1), 1-16. https://doi. org/10.3390/educsci9010040. BAN PT. (2019). Matrik penilaian laporan evaluasi diri dan laporan kinerja program studi. Retrieved from http://lpm.um-palembang.ac.id/matriks-penilaian- laporan-evaluasi-diri-dan-laporan-kinerja-program- studi/. Bawden D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In Digital Literacies: Concepts, Policies and Practices (pp. 18-32). Bhukuvhani, C., Chiparausha, B., & Zuvalinyenga, D. (2017). Effects of electronic information resources skills training for lecturers on pedagogical practices and research productivity. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1), 16-28. Carleton, R. N., Parkerson, H. A., & Horswill, S. C. (2012). Assessing the publication productivity of clinical psychology professors in Canadian psychological association-accredited Canadian psychology departments. Canadian Psychology, 53(3), 226-237. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027731. Covello, S. (2017). A review of digital literacy assessment instruments. In A review of Digital Literacy Assessment Intruments. Retrieved from http:// www.apescience.com/id/wp-content/uploads/ DigitalLiteracyAssessmentInstruments_Final.pdf. Dedebali, N. C. (2020). Analysis of digital literacy and metaphoric perceptions of teacher candidate. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(1), 135-145. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.6.1.135. Durriyah, T. L., & Zuhdi, M. (2018). Digital literacy with EFL student teachers: Exploring Indonesian student teachers’ initial perception about integrating digital technologies into a teaching unit. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 6(3), 53- 60. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.6n.3p.53. Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E. (2016). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (11th Ed.). London: Pearson. Jeffrey, L., Hegarty, B., Kelly, O., Penman, M., Coburn, D., & McDonald, J. (2017). Developing digital information literacy in higher education: Obstacles and supports. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 10(1), 383-413. https://doi. org/10.28945/1532. Khathayut, P., & Walker-Gleaves, C. (2021). Academic faculty conceptualisation and understanding of plagiarism – A Thai university exploratory study. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(4), 558-572. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2020.1795093. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2008). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. Bern: Peter Lang. Liu, Z., Tretyakova, N., Fedorov, V., & Kharakhordina, M. (2020). Digital literacy and digital didactics as the basis for new learning models development. IjET (International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning), 15(14), 4-18. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet. v15i14.14669. Liza, K., & Andriyanti, E. (2020). Digital literacy scale of English pre-service teachers and their perceived readiness toward the application of digital technologies. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 14(1), 74-79. https://doi.org/10.11591/ edulearn.v14i1.13925. Okiki, O. C., & Iyabo, M. (2013). Impact of information literacy skills on academic staff research productivity in Nigerian federal universities impact of information literacy skills on academic staff research productivity in Nigerian federal universities. Information and Knowledge Management, 3(2), 9-18. Peled, Y. (2021). Pre-service teacher’s self-perception of digital literacy: The case of Israel. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 2879-2896. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10387-x. Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators. Retrieved from https:// publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/ JRC107466. Rusydiyah, E. F., Purwati, E., & Prabowo, A. (2020). How to use digital literacy as a learning resource for teacher candidates in Indonesia. Cakrawala Pendidikan: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan, 39(2), 305-318. https:// doi.org/10.21831/cp.v39i2.30551. Sánchez-Cruzado, R., & Sánchez-Compaña. (2021). Teacher digital literacy: The indisputable challenge after covid-19. Sustainability, 13(4), 1-29. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su13041858. Sari, A. W., & Roza, V. (2021). Guttmann scale method for analyze emotional intelligence and speaking achievement between students’. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1779(1), 1-5. https://doi. org/10.1088/1742-6596/1779/1/012031. Shopova, T. (2017). Digital literacy of students and its improvement at the university. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 7(2), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2014.070201. Spante, M., & Hashemi, S. S. (2018). Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: Systematic review of concept use. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1-21. https://doi. org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1519143. Yazon, A. D., & Ang-Manaig., Buama, C. A. C., & Tesoro, J. F. B. (2019). Digital literacy, digital competence and research productivity of educators. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(8), 1734-1743. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070812. Zain, S. M., Ab-Rahman, M. S., Ihsan, A. K. A., Zahrim, A., Nor, M. J. M., Zain, M. F. M., …Ghopa, W. A. W. (2017). Motivation for research and publication: Experience as a researcher and an academic. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 18, 213- 219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.05.030. 230 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 15 No. 2, December 2021, 223-236 APPENDIX Table 10 Appendix of Lecturers’ Publication No Initial Kind of Publication Amount No Initial Kind of Publication Amount 1. VR National journal 4 5 HPP National journal Accredited national journal 1 Accredited national journal 3 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 6 International seminar 7 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 11 Total 10 2 MM National journal 6 MPD National journal Accredited national journal 1 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 4 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 5 Total 12 3. AK National journal 9 7 WS National journal Accredited national journal 0 Accredited national journal 2 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 6 International seminar 10 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 15 Total 12 4 LL National journal 0 8 GS National journal Accredited national journal 3 Accredited national journal 5 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 8 International seminar 9 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 11 Total 14 231English Lecturers’ Digital.... (Veni Roza) Table 10 Appendix of Lecturers’ Publication (Continued) No Initial Kind of Publication Amount No Initial Kind of Publication Amount 9 S National journal 6 13 AB National journal Accredited national journal 10 Accredited national journal 9 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 3 International seminar 4 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 19 Total 13 10 E National journal 14 SD National journal Accredited national journal 2 Accredited national journal 8 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 2 International seminar 9 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 4 Total 17 11 RF National journal 15 PU National journal Accredited national journal 5 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 12 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 17 Total 12 12 LS National journal 16 IL National journal Accredited national journal 15 Accredited national journal 5 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 8 International seminar 9 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 23 Total 14 232 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 15 No. 2, December 2021, 223-236 Table 10 Appendix of Lecturers’ Publication (Continued) No Initial Kind of Publication Amount No Initial Kind of Publication Amount 17 TY National journal 21 YU National journal Accredited national journal 7 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 11 International seminar 11 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 18 Total 15 18 LH National journal 2 22 OP National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 1 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 8 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 14 Total 9 19 OP National journal 23 TG National journal 2 Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 6 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 10 Total 14 20 SE National journal 24 ER National journal Accredited national journal 7 Accredited national journal 7 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 8 International seminar 9 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 15 Total 16 233English Lecturers’ Digital.... (Veni Roza) Table 10 Appendix of Lecturers’ Publication (Continued) No Initial Kind of Publication Amount No Initial Kind of Publication Amount 25 FG National journal 29 MN National journal Accredited national journal 6 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 8 International seminar 2 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 14 Total 6 26 ES National journal 30 FR National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 14 International seminar 2 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 18 Total 6 27 KL National journal 31 WE National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 8 International seminar 10 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 12 Total 14 28 MK National journal 32 QW National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 17 International seminar 14 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 21 Total 18 234 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 15 No. 2, December 2021, 223-236 Table 10 Appendix of Lecturers’ Publication (Continued) No Initial Kind of Publication Amount No Initial Kind of Publication Amount 33 AS National journal 37 FS National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 1 International seminar 14 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 5 Total 18 34 IU National journal 38 RW National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 8 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 3 International seminar 9 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 7 Total 17 35 HJ National journal 39 ZS National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 14 International seminar 9 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 18 Total 17 36 VB National journal 40 GH National journal Accredited national journal 1 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 14 International seminar 14 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 15 Total 18 235English Lecturers’ Digital.... (Veni Roza) Table 10 Appendix of Lecturers’ Publication (Continued) No Initial Kind of Publication Amount No Initial Kind of Publication Amount 41 CV National journal 45 WE National journal 2 Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 3 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 7 Total 14 42 TH National journal 46 ZS National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 11 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 15 Total 12 43 DF National journal 47 VB National journal 2 Accredited national journal 7 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 8 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 15 Total 14 44 EW National journal 48 ZA National journal 2 Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 14 International seminar 8 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 18 Total 14 236 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 15 No. 2, December 2021, 223-236 Table 10 Appendix of Lecturers’ Publication (Continued) No Initial Kind of Publication Amount No Initial Kind of Publication Amount 49 KH National journal 53 BF National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 2 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 12 International seminar 9 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 16 Total 11 50 HG National journal 54 HY National journal Accredited national journal 4 Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 10 International seminar 14 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 14 Total 18 51 BN National journal 55 HT National journal Accredited national journal 1 Accredited national journal 1 International journal 0 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 14 International seminar 3 National mass media 0 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 15 Total 4 52 FT National journal Accredited national journal 4 International journal 0 Reputed international journal 0 Local seminar 0 National seminar 0 International seminar 1 National mass media 0 International mass media 0 Total 5