The Influence of Digital Learning Environments on Critical Thinking Skills: The Mediating Role of Learning Strategies and the Moderating Effect of Teacher Support
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57125/FED.2026.09.13Keywords:
digital learning environments, critical thinking, learning strategies, teacher support, conditional process analysis, secondary education.Abstract
Digital learning environments are now the default setting for a large share of secondary schooling. However, the mechanism by which they affect critical thinking remains under-specified: most accounts assert a direct benefit without identifying what students actually do differently, or under what instructional conditions the benefit materialises. This study tests a conditional-process model in which learning strategies mediate the relationship between digital learning environments and critical thinking skills, and teacher support moderates the direct path. Data were collected from 384 students across eight secondary schools in a single Chinese municipality (population = 9,236) using a stratified procedure, and analysed with PLS-SEM and 5,000 bootstrap resamples. The four measures were adapted from published source instruments — the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire for learning strategies, the Teacher as Social Context measure for teacher support, the Community of Inquiry cognitive-presence formulation for critical thinking, and items on technology-mediated learning provision for digital learning environments — and, because they were adapted rather than reproduced, were submitted to expert content validation before administration (7 experts, 34 items, S-CVI/Ave = 0.958). Digital learning environments predicted critical thinking directly (β = 0.247, t = 5.58) and indirectly through learning strategies (β = 0.134, 95% CI [0.272, 0.453] × [0.289, 0.452]), giving a total effect of 0.381, of which 35.1% is carried by strategies — complementary partial mediation. Teacher support moderated the direct path positively (β = 0.150, t = 3.05). The model explained 30.6% of the variance in critical thinking. Social significance: the results locate the leverage of digital provision not in the technology itself, but in the strategic activity it affords and the instructional support that sustains it, which is where limited school budgets and teacher time can most defensibly be directed.
References
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102–1134. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326084
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
Aqadoh, H., & Trimasse, N. (2026). The relationship between reflective thinking and well-being among Moroccan doctoral students. Reflective Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2026.2701202
Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007
Chen, K. C., & Jang, S. J. (2010). Motivation in online learning: Testing a model of self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 741–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.011
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.100.3.363
Ericsson, K. A. (2008). Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: A general overview. Academic Emergency Medicine, 15(11), 988–994. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00227.x
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
Halpern, D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1999(80), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.8005
Kast, C., & Paran, A. (2026). Discourse as critical thinking: A focus on disposition. Thinking Skills and Creativity. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2026.102213
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08283.x
Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & Pekrun, R. (2011). Students’ emotions and academic engagement: Introduction to the special issue. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.11.004
Liu, Q., Wang, Y., & Chang, Y. (2025). Exploring the effects of scaffolded reflective learning on student teachers’ design performance and reflective thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101709
Liu, Y., Pásztor, A., & Molnár, G. (2026). A cross-national assessment on critical thinking disposition between Hungarian and Chinese undergraduate students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 60, 102121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2025.102121
Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self-regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.189
Muhali, Hunaepi, Verawati (2026). Higher-order thinking in STEM and science education: A systematic review of constructs, frameworks, and applications. Review Journal of Higher-Order Thinking and Metacognition. https://doi.org/10.36312/rjhotm.v1i1.5
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
Rahayu, ’Ulya, Dewanti (2025). Multiple regression analysis: Self-efficacy, self-regulated learning, math learning outcomes. JNPM (Jurnal Nasional Pendidikan Matematika). https://doi.org/10.33603/jnpm.v9i3.8883
Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28(2), 147–169. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:moem.0000032312.95499.6f
Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493-529. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311421793
Sharov, Prayogi, De Rosa (2026). Mapping creativity and higher-order thinking in STEM and higher education research (2014–2024). Review Journal of Higher-Order Thinking and Metacognition. https://doi.org/10.36312/rjhotm.v1i1.2
Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behaviour and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Wang, C. H., Shannon, D. M., & Ross, M. E. (2013). Students’ characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, and course outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 302–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835779
Yıldırım, E., & Ayvaz Tuncel, Z. (2025). Does curriculum autonomy support student autonomy? A R-based analysis. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 15(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.1661073
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82–91. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1016
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012109890-2/50031-7
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
