Digital Versus Print Literacy Interventions: A Comprehensive Analysis of Impact and Effectiveness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijggsd.V1.I1.28Keywords:
Academic Performance, Digital Literacy Interventions, Educational Technology, Printed Literacy Interventions, Quality Education, Reading Comprehension, Reading Fluency, Sustainable Development GoalsAbstract
This study examined the comparative effectiveness of printed and digital literacy interventions in improving reading comprehension and academic performance among Grade 11 students at Immaculada Concepcion College, Caloocan City, during the school year 2023–2024. Anchored in Transactional Theory and the Input-Process-Output conceptual framework, the study employed a descriptive quantitative research design involving 100 respondents selected through total population sampling. Data were collected using the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory, pretest and posttest assessments, and an adopted survey questionnaire administered through Google Forms. Weighted mean, independent samples t-test, and multiple regression analysis were employed. Findings revealed improvements in reading comprehension, accuracy, and fluency following both interventions. Digital literacy interventions produced significantly higher posttest scores in comprehension (6.00 versus 4.96, p = 0.001) and accuracy and fluency (1.98 versus 1.68, p < 0.001) compared with printed interventions. Digital instruction also enabled some students to attain independent reading proficiency, while printed instruction supported foundational reading development. Students generally demonstrated satisfactory to very satisfactory academic performance and valued printed materials for concentration and comprehension, although they spent more time reading digitally. Motivation toward digital reading assignments remained comparatively low. Neither intervention significantly predicted academic performance (p = 0.532), indicating limited explanatory power. The study recommended integrating printed and digital materials through differentiated instruction, teacher development, targeted support, and continuous assessment. It primarily supports Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education) and relates to SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) through educational technology integration, with potential relevance to SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) in instructional resource selection. Its sustainability contribution lies in strengthening institutional literacy practices, promoting accessible learning opportunities, and supporting evidence-based educational resource planning rather than demonstrating direct environmental benefits.
References
Abbas, S. G., Shaheen, F., & Mahjabeen, A. (2024). Investigating the impact of digital vs. traditional reading habits on comprehension and engagement among middle school students. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(6), 4664–4672. https://doi.org/10.67145/kuey.v30i6.7835 DOI: https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i6.7835
Abellanoza, B. V. G., Ilagan, S. U. X., Llanes, A. M. P., Amano, P. C., Castillo, K. U., Balantac, D. B. G., Ariola, M. J. R., Mangubat, A. K. M. C., Serafica, J. G., & Muria, N. M. (2025). Effects of digital and printed materials on reading comprehension among college students in Lipa City. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 34(8), 978–992. DOI: https://doi.org/10.70838/pemj.340807
Altamura, L., Stadtler, M., & Salmerón, L. (2026). Reading media and multitasking: Effects on comprehension and metacomprehension when reading multiple texts. Metacognition and Learning, 21, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-026-09466-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-026-09466-0
Altamura, L., Vargas, C., & Salmerón, L. (2025). Do new forms of reading pay off? A meta-analysis on the relationship between leisure digital reading habits and text comprehension. Review of Educational Research, 95(1), 53–88. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231216463 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231216463
Balangue, A. G. (2024). Performance in English of Grade 9 students: Basis for worksheets. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Studies, 4(7), 85–94.
Belhida, B., Mosqueda, A., Anoba, R., Camilo, R., Montanez, M., & Cutillas, A. (2025). Comparing the impact of printed versus digital reading materials on student performance in literature courses: A quantitative study. ICRRD Quality Index Research Journal, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.53272/icrrd.v6i3.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.53272/icrrd.v6i3.4
Corales, C. G. (2023). Leveraging digital learning resources to enhance reading comprehension of Grade 1 learners. International Journal of Future Multidisciplinary Research.
Fitriani, N. L., & Sunarti. (2024). Exploring the effectiveness of digital reading platforms in developing reading comprehension skills. ELT-Lectura, 11(2), 168–181. https://doi.org/10.31849/elt-lectura.v11i2.20840 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31849/elt-lectura.v11i2.20840
Hare, C., Johnson, B., Vlahiotis, M., Panda, E. J., Tekok-Kilic, A., & Curtin, S. (2024). Children’s reading outcomes in digital and print mediums: A systematic review. Journal of Research in Reading, 47(3), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12461 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12461
Li, Y., & Yan, L. (2024). Which reading comprehension is better? A meta-analysis of the effect of paper versus digital reading in recent 20 years. Telematics and Informatics Reports, 14, Article 100142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teler.2024.100142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teler.2024.100142
Mallillin, L. L. D. (2025). Reading skills of students towards curriculum development program. UKR Journal of Education and Literature.
Ofgang, E. (2023, October 30). Study: Students who read print learn more than those who read tablets. Tech & Learning. https://www.techlearning.com/news/study-students-who-read-print-learn-more-than-those-who-read-tablets
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I and II): Country notes—Philippines. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2022-results-volume-i-and-ii-country-notes_ed6fbcc5-en/philippines_a0882a2d-en.html
Richmond Solution. (2023). The important thing is to read: Advantages of digital reading. https://richmondsolution.com/en/ventajas-lectura-digital/
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Southern Illinois University Press.
Salmerón, L., Vargas, C., Delgado, P., & Baron, N. (2023). Relation between digital tool practices in the language arts classroom and reading comprehension scores. Reading and Writing, 36, 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10295-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10295-1
Sangilan, E. P., & Naparota, L. C. (2025). Writing proficiency and academic performance in English subject: Basis for intervention program. International Journal of Arts and Social Science, 8(7). https://www.ijassjournal.com/2025/V8I7/41466640415.pdf
Saputra, D. S., Yonanda, D. A., Yuliati, Y., & Haryanti, Y. D. (2024). The effectiveness of digital teaching materials to improve literary literacy skills in primary schools. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendas, 10(3), 671–679. https://doi.org/10.31949/jcp.v10i3.10384 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31949/jcp.v10i3.10384
Sudarsih, L. (2024). Relevansi dan keberlanjutan pembelajaran sastra Indonesia di era digital. ASMARALOKA: Jurnal Pendidikan, Linguistik dan Sastra Indonesia, 2(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.55210/asmaraloka.v2i1.385 DOI: https://doi.org/10.55210/asmaraloka.v2i1.385
Taylor Corporation. (2024). Are printed books better for learning?. https://www.taylor.com/blog/printed-books-are-proven-to-improve-reader-comprehension
UNESCO. (2024). What you need to know about literacy. https://www.unesco.org/en/literacy/need-know
Yang, J. (2023). Digital literacy and EFL reading: The impact of digital tools on students’ reading competence. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management, 5(10), 191–197.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Liberty G. Sumang (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License. This license permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the journal, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.
