Gaps Between Indonesia’s National Digital Literacy Policy Documents and the Reported Characteristics of Educational Content on YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok: A Qualitative Document Analysis

Herfika L; Masraria Masraria; Masnur Masnur; Harmita Sari; St. Rahmi Baddu

doi:10.51574/jrip.v6i3.5846

Authors

Herfika L Master of Pedagogy Program, Postgraduate School, Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia
Masraria Masraria Master of Pedagogy Program, Postgraduate School, Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia
Masnur Masnur Primary School Teacher Education (PGSD), Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Muhammadiyah Enrekang, Indonesia
Harmita Sari Master of Pedagogy Program, Postgraduate School, Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8863-5245
St. Rahmi Baddu Master of Pedagogy Program, Postgraduate School, Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia

Keywords:

Digital Literacy, Document Analysis, Education Policy, Social Media, Critical Thinking

Abstract

Indonesia’s national digital literacy policy is set out mainly in the Ministry of Education and Culture’s Digital Literacy Supporting Material (2017), the four-pillar curriculum framework of the Digital Literacy Roadmap 2021–2024 (Digital Skills, Digital Ethics, Digital Safety, and Digital Culture), and the national Digital Literacy Index reports. This study examined how far these documents address the platform-specific characteristics of educational content on YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok reported in published research. A qualitative document analysis was carried out on two corpora: four national policy documents, analyzed as primary data, and seven peer-reviewed studies published between 2016 and 2025, treated as secondary documentary evidence on educational content on the three platforms. Text segments were coded with a hybrid codebook covering platform affordances, policy provisions, and five critical-thinking indicators, and the two corpora were compared through a presence–absence matrix. The policy documents define digital literacy and its four pillars as generic competencies. None of the pillar definitions or the 30 index indicators names a platform, a content format, or algorithmic curation, and critical evaluation appears only as generic source comparison and website verification. The secondary studies, in contrast, report different content formats, curation dynamics, and community practices on each platform. Four themes emerged: platform-neutral articulation of critical evaluation in policy; platform-differentiated content characteristics in the research literature; the absence of algorithmic curation from policy provisions; and informal literacy communities outside the policy frame. Because students’ critical thinking was not measured, the gap identified here is a gap between documents, not between policy and learning outcomes. The findings suggest that future revisions of the framework consider platform-specific guidance for educators.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Almurashi, W. A. (2016). The effective use of YouTube videos for teaching English language in classrooms as supplementary material at Taibah University in Alula. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 4(3), 32–47.

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2018). The affordances of social media platforms. In J. Burgess, A. Marwick, & T. Poell (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social media (pp. 233–253). SAGE Publications.

Christie, E. A., Wibowo, K. A., & Fuady, I. (2024). #BookTokIndonesia: Analisis konten komunitas pembaca buku pada media sosial TikTok [#BookTokIndonesia: A content analysis of a book-reader community on TikTok]. Shaut Al-Maktabah: Jurnal Perpustakaan, Arsip dan Dokumentasi, 16(1).

Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership, 43(2), 44–48.

Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (The Delphi Report). California Academic Press.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.

Hasanah, N. U., & Ekawati, A. D. (2024). The use of Instagram for students’ writing skills. JPG: Jurnal Pendidikan Guru, 5(2), 171–177. https://doi.org/10.32832/jpg.v5i2.14942

Jerasa, S., & Boffone, T. (2021). BookTok 101: TikTok, digital literacies, and out-of-school reading practices. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 65(3), 219–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1199

Khan, A., Saeed, M., Anwar, M. N., & Kanwal, L. (2023). Unleashing the potential: A study of the effectiveness and impact of YouTube educational content on student learning outcomes. Journal of Mass Communication & Journalism, 13(5), Article 538. https://doi.org/10.37421/2165-7912.2023.13.538

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.

Low, B., Ehret, C., & Hagh, A. (2025). Algorithmic imaginings and critical digital literacy on #BookTok. New Media & Society, 27(4), 2336–2353. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231206466

Ministry of Communication and Informatics. (2021a). Peta jalan literasi digital 2021–2024 [Digital literacy roadmap 2021–2024]. Directorate General of Informatics Applications, Ministry of Communication and Informatics of the Republic of Indonesia.

Ministry of Communication and Informatics. (2021b, February). Siaran pers No. 33/HM/KOMINFO/02/2021 tentang fokus peta jalan Indonesia digital untuk 4 sektor strategis [Press release on the focus of the Indonesia Digital Roadmap on four strategic sectors]. https://kominfo.go.id/content/detail/32482/siaran-pers-no-33hmkominfo022021-tentang-fokus-peta-jalan-indonesia-digital-untuk-4-sektor-strategis/0/siaran_pers

Ministry of Communication and Informatics, & Katadata Insight Center. (2022). Status literasi digital di Indonesia 2021 [Status of digital literacy in Indonesia 2021]. Ministry of Communication and Informatics.

Ministry of Communication and Informatics, & Katadata Insight Center. (2023). Status literasi digital di Indonesia 2022 [Status of digital literacy in Indonesia 2022]. Ministry of Communication and Informatics.

Ministry of Education and Culture. (2017). Materi pendukung literasi digital [Digital literacy supporting material]. National Literacy Movement Team, Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia.

Nurisma, R. A., Rohmana, W. I. M., Widyaningsih, T. L., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2024). Implementing double-entry journal assisted with Instagram to foster engagement in EFL writing. Studies in English Language and Education, 11(1), 76–94. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v11i1.30425

Salam, Sari, H., & Firman. (2025). Writing literacy motivation and habits and their relations with learning technology among students in rural Indonesian schools. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 16(4), 1313–1324. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1604.25

Sari, H., Samsinar, S., & Rajiman, W. (2025a). Teacher communication strategies: Fostering critical thinking skills in the classroom. Jurnal Riset dan Inovasi Pembelajaran, 5(1), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.51574/jrip.v5i1.2579

Sari, H., Aco, D., Liu, M. C., Anshari, & Halim, A. (2025b). Motivation, mentorship, and peer role among Indonesian students in creative literature projects: An exploration of problem-solving abilities. OKARA: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra, 19(2), 181–205. https://doi.org/10.19105/ojbs.v19i2.17922

Sari, H., Lelelangan, H., Junaidi, J., & Yang, C. C. (2026). Examining the contribution of YouTube and TikTok to elementary students’ public speaking skills. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 12(1), 549–561. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v12i1.43753

Van Audenhove, L., Vermeire, L., Van den Broeck, W., & Demeulenaere, A. (2024). Data literacy in the new EU DigComp 2.2 framework: How DigComp defines competences on artificial intelligence, internet of things and data. Information and Learning Sciences, 125(5–6), 406–436. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-06-2023-0072

Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens: With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes (EUR 31006 EN). Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376