Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

Locus of Control and Self‐Directed Learning Readiness of Nursing Students During the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Cross‐Sectional Study from Saudi Arabia

Altmetrics

Downloads

293

Views

95

Comments

0

A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.

This version is not peer-reviewed

Preprints on COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2

Submitted:

14 November 2023

Posted:

14 November 2023

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
Background: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has caused one of the worst global pandemics in recent decades. It has disrupted education systems worldwide, leading to a forced shift from traditional face-to-face to blended or fully distanced learning, requiring a higher level of student readiness for self-directed learning (SDL) and a more internal locus of control (LOC). Objective: This study explored the relationship between locus of control and level of readiness for SDL among Saudi nursing students and whether the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted this relation-ship. Methods: a cross-sectional correlational descriptive study was conducted to survey 277 Saudi nursing students enrolled in the bachelor program at one of the reputable universities in Saudi Arabia. An E-questionnaire containing two scales, the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale for Nursing Education, and the Locus of Control Scale, was used to collect data in addition to the selected participants’ characteristics. Results: Nursing students had a moderate-to-low level of readiness for SDL (mean = 144.0), and the majority had an external LOC. There was a significant association between the locus of control and level of readiness for self-directed learning (r = 0.19*, p = 0.001), and the internal locus of control was more significantly associated with self-directed learning (r = 0.22*, p = 0.0001) than with external locus of control. Conclusion: The study findings indicate a propensity of respondents towards an external locus of control, whereas most of the respondents’ reported levels of readiness ranged between low and moderate across all dimensions of self-directed learning. This study was not registered.
Keywords: 
Subject: Public Health and Healthcare  -   Nursing

1. Introduction

As a result of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic around the world, education has undergone dramatic changes, including in Saudi Arabia. Following COVID-19, academic institutions were forced to shift their efforts to facilitate an abrupt and unexpected transition to online education and assessment. Due to these efforts, e-learning has grown significantly, and nursing education is also now available via digital platforms [2]. The abrupt closure of educational institutions negatively affected students' academic performance and achievement [3,4]. Additionally, it could have an adverse effect on university students' lives in all areas [5,6], including nursing students. Students' educational requirements have been affected by heightened stress and anxiety due to COVID-19 [3,7,8]. Saudi Arabian universities had to take immediate action to contain the Coronavirus spread after unscheduled closure, which began on 9th March 2020.
As have other universities around the world, the College of Nursing at the targeted Saudi university has been urged to develop online courses with reformatted content and innovative teaching methods within a relatively short timeframe in order to remain active during the COVID-19 pandemic while following preventative protocols and measures [6–9]. Nursing education has evolved from a traditional face-to-face model to one based on virtual learning modes [10]. Virtual education has necessitated the rapid conversion of in-person content into an online format, resulting in a lack of clinical practice opportunities for students, as is usual for traditional nursing programs [6]. Students had to adjust quickly to the challenges associated with virtual classes and assessments as a result of innovative approaches to assessment in this mode of education.
It is therefore necessary for students to consider new methodologies for organizing, preparing, and interacting with their studies in this context. As a result, students became more independent and self-directed when it came to completing course requirements. In online environments, self-directed learning is one of the best predictors of better learning outcomes and academic achievement [11]. A significant amount of research has shown that locus of control (LOC) and self-directed learning (SDL) have significant effects on students' performance and readiness for online learning [11–14].
The locus of control refers to how one believes he or she can control oneself [13], while the self-directed learning competency refers to the extent to which one accepts responsibility for learning. To be successful in the future, nursing students must develop their SDL to develop professionalism [15]. With distance learning, students manage a variety of circumstances to succeed academically while taking responsibility for their education [16]. Motivation to learn is derived from LOC [17]. Global pandemics can negatively affect LOC and affect academic performance [18,19]. A lifelong learning process requires the acquisition of SDL and LOC, which enables individuals to critically evaluate the knowledge they have acquired [20,21]. COVID-19 presents similar challenges [6]. It has been found that integrating lifelong learning strategies into nursing education results in a higher level of education and professional competence [22], which in turn fosters the development of professional values and improves nursing outcomes [21,23]. A significant correlation exists between Saudi Vision 2030 and such traits [23–25].
One of the major consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic has been psychological challenges [24]. Students of higher education have also been reported to experience stress and anxiety. During COVID-19, Saudi students were reported to experience moderate to extreme levels of anxiety, with stress levels perceived to be as high as 35% [25]. In addition, recent studies indicate that students' perceived stress is significantly correlated with their locus of control [26,27] and that the locus of control influences their learning outcomes [28,29]. Concomitantly, a high level of academic achievement depends on their internal locus of control [29–34].
Developing SDL skills is crucial in preparing college students for life after graduation [33,35,36]. The study, by Cheng et al., indicates that the learner formulates learning objectives, selects appropriate learning strategies, diagnoses learning needs, identifies resources, and evaluates learning outcomes, with or without external support [37]. SDL is utilized in a wide variety of contexts, including problem-solving, contract negotiations, distance learning, and clinical documentation [36]. As a result of SDL, nursing students develop independent learning skills [38]. Moreover, SDL enhances students' self-confidence and motivation, vital to their success both personally and professionally [39].
Furthermore, it fosters purposeful change, essential for effective personal and professional lives [22,40,41]. Lee et al. [22] found that SDL has an important direct impact on nursing students' professional values. Considering the proficiency of the new generation in using the Internet and other information sources, the findings of this study should encourage nursing educators to promote SDL among nursing students. Researchers have consistently observed a strong correlation between SDL use and positive educational outcomes in various countries, including Oman, Saudi Arabia, China, and Turkey [30,32,38,39,42].
Assessing nursing students' self-direction levels can be achieved through the measurement of their self-directed learning readiness (SDLR) [42]. A study conducted at Al-Jouf University in Saudi Arabia revealed that 77% of nursing students demonstrated high levels of SDLR [38], which positively correlated with academic performance in undergraduate nursing students [43]. Despite a study showing no significant gender-based differences in SDLR scores [44], Alsufyani et al. raised concerns about the involvement of factors such as gender, age, and clinical experience in SDLR scores [42].
The concept of LOC has been examined by Rotter in a psychological context [45], referring to individuals' beliefs about their ability to control causality, situations, and life experiences. Among educators, LOC refers to the way students interpret the factors contributing to their academic success. It has been classified by Rotter [45] as internal or external. Individuals with an external LOC attribute their behavior to external influences, while internally oriented individuals believe that their behavior is primarily shaped by their own decisions and efforts. Moreover, LOC plays a critical role in motivating learning [46,47]. It is linked significantly to academic achievement [18], a crucial aspect for students [46]. According to past research, students with high internal LOCs are more likely to persist in online education and achieve higher academic outcomes than students with low internal LOCs [48–50]. By contrast, Harrell and Bower found no significant relationship between LOC and student persistence in online learning [51]. Bahçekapılı and Karaman concluded that external LOC influences students' academic achievement negatively and insignificantly [52]. Even though students with high levels of internal LOC are better prepared for SDL in a traditional classroom setting than students with low levels of internal LOC, regardless of their year of study, Arkan et al. [15] analyzed the influence of internal LOC on nursing students.
Following numerous calls for exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic across all sectors, particularly health and education, extensive research has been conducted to determine students' readiness to embrace SDL [30–32,42–44]. While nursing students in Saudi Arabia experienced the COVID-19 pandemic, the literature is unclear whether the locus of control affects their SDL readiness level [33,34]. The current study fills this literature gap by exploring nursing students' readiness for SDL and their locus of control. With many nursing schools using online learning platforms to guide student learning today, this study's potential contribution is more valuable than ever. Our study is the first to link students' locus of control to their readiness to learn independently during COVID-19 outbreaks in Saudi Arabia. For nursing educators, academic leaders, educational psychologists, and policymakers, this study provides new insights into nursing students' learning. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between LOC and the readiness for SDL among nursing students during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic contingency. To fulfill this aim, the following research questions were addressed: 1) What is the nature of the nursing students’ locus of control? 2: What is the level of readiness for self-directed learning among nursing students? 3: Is there a relationship between locus of control and readiness for self-directed learning among nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

For this study, a cross-sectional descriptive cross-sectional correlational design was employed to examine relationships among the study variables, SDL and LOC. A cross-sectional study design involves the collection and analysis of data at the same time for a given phenomenon. As well as describing a concept's status and examining relationships and connections between variables, descriptive correlational studies do not infer causality [53].

2.2. Setting

During the academic year 2020-2021, this study was conducted at the Nursing College, at one of the reputable universities in Saudi Arabia. Currently, this Bachelor of Science in Nursing program has eight levels, including classroom as well as laboratory activities that are integrated with clinical experiences. The study was commenced during the first and the second academic semesters to include students who attended the classrooms, the nursing simulation labs, and/or practiced extracurricular activities.

2.3. Participants

Nursing students enrolled in a bachelor’s degree program at a Saudi Arabian university in the 2020-2021 academic year made up the study population (N=967, 497 females and 470 males). To obtain a sufficient sample size, a convenience sampling methodology was used to select participants. Nursing students registered at the third through the eighth academic levels of their bachelor's program, who were available to participate in the survey were at the time of data collection had been invited. The sample size was calculated using the Raosoft website’s sample calculator. To achieve a medium effect size (f2= 0.3), assuming a significance level (α) of 0.05, and a power of 0.95, a minimum sample size of 276 participants was required to detect the associations among the study variables. In order to account for attrition and/or withdrawals, an additional 5% of participants were invited, leaving 290 participants eligible to participate.
Study participants included nursing students (both males and females) enrolled at the third through eighth academic levels who were available during data collection and willing to participate in the study were eligible to participate in the study.

2.5. Data Source/Measurement:

Data collection was done using a structured self-report questionnaire, which consisted of three parts. The first part assessed participants' demographic characteristics, including their age, marital status, academic level, permanent residence, and years of experience. Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale for Nursing Education, developed by Fisher et al. [36] and revised and validated by Fisher and King [54], was used in the second part of the study. In the original version, this scale was created to help nursing educators diagnose nursing students' attitudes, abilities, and personality characteristics necessary for self-directed learning. There are 40 items on the scale, divided into three categories: self-management (13), learning desire (12), and self-control (15). To measure students' responses, a Likert scale of 1 to 5 was used. For statements that were negatively stated, reverse scoring was implemented (e.g., strongly agree to strongly disagree).
Overall scores ranged from 40 to 200, with higher scores reflecting stronger SDL readiness. Various nursing education studies [36,54–56] have tested the validity and reliability of the scale, finding Cronbach's alpha values between 0.70 and 0.85. The third part of the questionnaire used the Locus of Control Scale, developed by Dag [57], which was adapted from Rotter’s Internal-External Locus of Control Scale [45]. This scale aims to evaluate individuals whether believe that the consequences of their actions are influenced internally or externally. This scale includes 47 items, divided into five categories. They address a range of factors, namely personal control (18 items), belief in chance (11 items), meaninglessness of effort (10 items), fate (3 items), and an unjust world (5 items). The Likert scale was used to rank responses (1 = not at all suitable to 5 = fully suitable). Higher scores indicated a stronger belief in external LOC. Cronbach's alpha and Pearson's product-moment correlation test values of 0.88 and 0.92, respectively, were obtained for the original scale, indicating good internal consistency [57].
According to Beaton et al.’s guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures [58], the Locus of Control Scale was cross-culturally and linguistically adapted. Two bilingual nursing professionals independently translated the scale into English and conducted a blind back-translation into Turkish to determine construct validity. Three academics and two professionals proficient in both Turkish and English reviewed the scale, comparing the back-translations to the original. An online survey was conducted using Google Forms. Ten students participated in a pilot study to assess whether the scales were linguistically clear and culturally coherent in relation to Saudi Nursing Academic culture and nursing practices. Since the students reported no problems with the clarity or relevance of the questionnaire, the pilot test responses were included in the main study. Cronbach's coefficients for both scales produced a Cronbach's ratio of 0.91 for the locus of control survey and 0.86 for the self-directed learning survey. The CHERRIES Checklist for electronic surveys was followed [59].

2.6. Data Collection Procedure:

In accordance with COVID-19 restrictions and the university's epidemic prevention and control policies, and after obtaining approval from the Standing Committee for Scientific Research Ethics at the university, all students were approached online, as physical contact was not possible. Nursing students who consented to participate were emailed a link to the online questionnaire by the college’s scientific research unit. This was done in coordination with researchers and the college’s academic advising committee. Academic Coordinators were given e-survey links to share with students via their academic emails. Data collection took place over a 12-week period from January to March 2021.

2.7. Ethical Considerations:

Study approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board (bioethical committee of the researchers' university) (IRB log number #####). Furthermore, approval was obtained from the vice deanship for academic affairs, academic advisors, academic level coordinators, and faculty teaching nursing students. The authors have given permission to translate the LOC scale and adapt both LOC and RSDL. As part of the consent process, participants were asked to click "agree" to confirm that they understood the purpose, nature, benefits, and uses of the data as well as their voluntary acceptance of participation in the study. No names or personally identifiable information was collected in survey responses as a means of ensuring anonymity, indicating that the survey did not use the respondent's IP address, username, contact information (e.g., email address), or respondent tracking functionality, and anyone with access to the survey could not relate a response to a respondent [59].

2.8. Statistical Analysis:

A statistical analysis was performed with SPSS version 24 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). The Excel spreadsheet was screened for missing and incomplete responses using da-ta-cleaning techniques before being declared valid. Continuous quantitative variables were described after assessing their normal distributions, which were assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Means and standard deviations (SD) of normal distribution variables were calculated, while frequencies (f) and percentages (%) were used to describe nominal categorical variables.
A descriptive statistic was used to summarize participants' demographic characteristics and to assess their levels of RSDL and LOC in the first and the second research questions, including frequencies, percentages, means, standard deviations, minimums, and maximums. The Pearson product-moment correlation analysis was used to determine the relationship between students' LOC and their readiness for SDL in the third research question. The statistical significance threshold was set as (p < 0.05).

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive Analysis:

Out of the 290 student participants, 277 completed the electronic survey, yielding a response rate of 95.5%. Table 1 presents an overview of the demographic characteristics of participants. Female students constituted 57% of the participants, whereas 43% were male. The mean reported age was 20.5 (±1.6) with the majority (98.6%) being single. Regarding academic level, 29.2% were at Level 6, 23.5% were at Level 7, 16.2% at Level 4, 14% at Level 3, and 10.8% at Level 5. Most participants were residents of Riyadh City and resided in their family homes (92.4%).

Research Question (1): What is the nature of the nursing students’ locus of control?

Locus of control consists of five subscales: personal control, belief in chance, meaninglessness of effort, belief in fate, and belief in an unjust world. Table 2 shows that participants reported higher mean scores for external LOC (X = 86.2, SD = 19.7) than for internal LOC (X = 56.38, SD = 1.45), indicating that participants in this study believed that external factors or forces such as luck would determine their outcomes. The findings revealed that a higher mean score was reported for personal control (X = 56.38, SD = 1.45), followed by belief in chance (X = 32.21, SD = 7.97), belief in meaningless effort (X = 29.37, SD = 7.61), belief in an unjust world (X = 14.76, SD = 3.79), and belief in fate (X = 9.87, SD = 2.61).

Research Question (2): To what extent are nursing students ready for self-directed learning?

SDL was assessed using three subscales: self-management, desire for learning, and self-control. Results showed that almost 60% of participants reported a low level of readiness for SDL (144 ±0.49), while 40% reported a high level. For the subscales, the highest mean score was for self-control (X = 52.36, SD = 12.45), followed by desire for learning (X = 45.02, SD = 10.38), and self-management (X = 39.52, SD = 9.04) (Table 3).

3.2. Inferential Analysis:

Research Question (3): Is there a relationship between LOC and readiness for self-directed learning among nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic?
Correlation analysis demonstrated a significant association between the locus of control and level of readiness for SDL (r = 0.19*, p = 0.001), with the internal locus of control showing a more substantial association with SDL (r = 0.22*, p = 0.0001) than the external locus of control, which exhibited no statistically significant association (r = 0.10, p = 0.08). Moreover, the self-directed learning subscales displayed statistically significant correlations with all the locus of control subscales. Table 4 presents the results of correlation analyses.

4. Discussion

The study represents the first attempt to evaluate nursing students' LOC and RSDL in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 outbreak. As a critical component of problem-solving abilities, SDL contributes significantly to nursing students' clinical competence [60]. This study examined the nature of LOC and readiness for SDL among Saudi nursing students during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The association between LOC and SDL readiness was also explored. A major strength of this study is its pioneering use of Dag [57]'s English version of the Locus of Control Scale, which has been cross-culturally adapted and validated for Saudi culture within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic contingency, resulting in its robustness.
The findings indicated that the study variables had a notable association. According to the current study, the student population's internal locus of control decreased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas the external locus of control increased. In similar COVID-19 situations, previous studies found external locus of control was more prevalent among university students than the internal locus of control. Those findings are consistent with those of Misamer et al. [61], Wali et al. [62], and Hammoud [63], who observed that most of their studies’ participants displayed a higher external LOC than internal LOC, and the LOC shifted substantially from internal to external during the initial COVID-19 outbreak. It is likely that students experienced heightened stress as a result of the challenging nature of the pandemic and the rapid changes associated with it. Those with external LOC tend to react emotionally and withdraw from stressful situations (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) as compared to those with internal LOC, who are better able to cope with stress and utilize problem-solving strategies to cope with its consequences [62].
According to the current study, approximately 60% of nursing students were not prepared for SDL. This finding is consistent with Ballad et al. [30], Nazarianpirdosti et al. [64], and Dogham et al. [65]. In contrast, Samarasooriya and colleagues [66] and Alsufyani et al. [42] concluded that students who completed bridging programs or who were registered nurses (RN) were significantly more likely to be ready for SDLs if they had prior clinical experience and self-reliance. Nazarianpirdosti et al. [64] concluded in a previous systematic review that SDL was insufficient in this context. Further, nursing students reported that they were prepared for SDL to a moderate extent.
In comparison to self-management and the desire to learn, self-control was the most influential subscale on SDLR readiness. Kaur et al. [67], Aljohani & Fadila [68], and Ballad et al. [30] also found that the majority of participating Indian, Saudi, and Omani students demonstrated high levels of self-control. In other words, nursing students are fully aware of and accountable for their learning processes. According to the current findings, nursing students are capable of managing their own conduct in pursuit of their ideals and goals, as well as effectively handling their learning within the online educational platform (LMS-Bb) available during the pandemic [69]. In contrast, students demonstrated fewer abilities, attitudes, and personality traits related to SDL.
A significant relationship was found between LOC and SDL readiness levels among student participants, particularly in regard to the internal locus of control, according to the current findings. It was found that this internal LOC is significantly related to SDLR and all its dimensions, including self-control, self-management, and learning desire. Several studies have identified the association between internal LOC and academic self-regulation (self-control), including those by Sidola et al. [70], Syahputra & Affandi [71], Javidkar et al. [72] and Arkan et al. [15].
Based on this study, students with external LOCs were found to be low or moderately ready for SDL, and their achievements were largely determined by external circumstances. According to this association, students with an external LOC lack control over their behaviors, emotions, and thoughts in pursuit of long-term goals. In particular, they have difficulty managing their emotions, thoughts, behaviors, and energy in ways conducive to their academic achievement, well-being, and learning [70].
Referring to the findings of this study, the internal LOC was significantly positively associated with self-management and desire to learn subscales. According to Rafique et al. [73], students who were internally controlled had a greater desire to learn as compared to those with an external LOC in terms of readiness for SDL. Students with an internal LOC showed greater confidence in executing study plans, requesting timely assistance, managing their time, and setting learning goals, as well as having higher learning expectations. They also demonstrated effective self-management and a genuine interest in learning, as well as demonstrating more innovation, motivation, and sharing their ideas with colleagues and teachers. Externally controlled students, however, did not possess these characteristics and relied more on external support to attain their goals [73].

Limitations:

As the study was conducted at a single nursing college, convenience sampling was used, and the sample size was relatively small, the findings cannot be generalized. The data were collected using an e-questionnaire that measured independent and dependent variables simultaneously. Therefore, it cannot provide sound information regarding the causal relationships among the investigated variables. Also, this study focused on the relationship between LOC and SDLR and did not consider external variables that could affect students’ SDL, such as mood, health status, or gender. Therefore, further longitudinal studies are required. The findings also heavily depend on the COVID-19 crisis as the main precipitating factor and do not explore the causes of students' external control and lack of SDL readiness.

Recommendations:

The SDL process can be used to improve nursing students' learning processes [22]. Nursing education has been shown to benefit from SDL as it has been significantly associated with academic achievement [74], professional competence, communication self-efficacy, assertiveness, accountability [64,75], and clinical competency [76]. The importance of SDL in nursing education should motivate nursing educators to encourage students to use SDL effectively.
Additionally, since SDL is a crucial component of nursing student clinical competence, it is necessary to encourage this form of education. Prior to incorporating SDL skills into their curriculum, nursing professors should train their students and impart these skills. Through the adoption of problem-based and student-centered curricula, nursing education and teaching methods can be improved. Considering that nursing students aren't attaining the desired level of SDL; future studies should investigate factors influencing their readiness for SDL and evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions. To understand the factors that facilitate and inhibit SDL, qualitative studies are necessary.

Further Studies:

Future studies should replicate this study using different target settings and populations, including nursing and non-nursing health colleges. Although these findings are applicable at the target-setting (college) level, they can be replicated both nationally and internationally.

5. Conclusions

As indicated from the preceding findings, respondents had a tendency towards an external locus of control. Most respondents scored poorly across all dimensions of readiness for SDL readiness. Although the majority of respondents demonstrated low readiness levels for SDL, self-control is the most important dimension in comparison to self-management and desire to learn. According to this finding, nursing students can regulate their behavior and manage their learning effectively based on the available resources and their goals. Statistical analysis of the data indicated a significant positive correlation between internal locus of control and readiness for SDL. As a result, most student participants with an external LOC may benefit from educational administration and academic staff cultivating an environment where they feel confident that they will be able to execute their study plans, seek timely assistance, manage their time, set goals, and achieve higher learning expectations. They will be more innovative, motivated, inclined to share ideas with colleagues and teachers, skilled at self-management, and enthusiastic about learning.
Considering these findings, nursing students should be encouraged to develop a sense of self-direction so that they can become self-directed learners, a trait that is considered positive among nurses and known to enhance their ability to achieve their desired goals. In addition, the internal locus of control contributes significantly to the readiness of nursing students in terms of all three dimensions of SDL readiness. Nursing students' internal locus of control is crucial to developing lifelong learning strategies, becoming more competent in clinical situations, and succeeding in academic life.

Relevance To Clinical Practice:

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, education methods and learning experiences were abruptly changed, resulting in conflicts among students and educators. A more optimistic view of the COVID-19 contingency is that it created new opportunities for university education. Several factors were taken into consideration when these improvements were implemented, including nursing education. By enhancing students' SDL skills, nursing educators were able to foster students' creativity, interaction, and innovative learning as they transitioned from the traditional in-class learning method to self-directed learning. Moreover, curricula and academic policies should undergo annual review and development. This encourages students to augment their autonomy in learning by directing them to acquire knowledge in a relevant and meaningful manner. Further, students' awareness of their own SDL skills can be developed and enhanced through a variety of mechanisms, including employing learning contracts, promoting creative, innovative, critical thinking, and independent learning approaches, implementing contemporary teaching and assessment strategies that encourage SDL, and providing the necessary administrative and technical support systems.

Author Contributions

Hanan Alkorashy (HK) and Hanan Alotaibi (HO) contributed to the design and implementation of the study. HO collected the data and HK analyzed the data. Both researchers HK and HO wrote the final report and manuscript. Both the authors read and approved the version for submission. HK conceived and supervised the project.

Funding

This research project was funded by the Research Center of the College of Nursing, Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University. Please note that King Saud University does not provide funding to the authors until the study has been published. Therefore, no specific grant number was provided.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Bioethical Committee of the Institutional Review Board of the researchers’ university (IRB log number: KSU-HE-21-02). Additional approval was obtained from the vice deanship for academic affairs, academic advisors, academic-level coordinators, and faculty members instructing undergraduate nursing students at academic levels 3rd through 8th.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the academic staff and students for their time and authentic participation in this study. The authors are thankful to the Deanship of Scientific Research, College of Nursing Research Center at King Saud University for funding this research. Moreover, the authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University for the logistic support of this work through the Research Assistant Internship Program, Project number (RAIP-2-20-228). Moreover, the authors extend their acknowledgment to “Prince Naif Health Research Center, Investigator Support Unit” for the language editing service provided. The statistics of this research study were checked prior to submission by an expert statistician, Professor Hanem Mohamed (dr.hfm7@gmail.com). Both authors extend their gratitude to her and affirm that the methods used in the data analyses are suitably applied to their data within their study design and context, and the statistical findings have been implemented and interpreted correctly.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Public Involvement Statement: No public involvement in any aspect of this research.
Guidelines and Standards Statement: This manuscript was drafted against the (STROBE) for a cross-sectional study.

References

  1. Jack A, Smyth J. Coronavirus: universities face a harsh lesson. Financial Times. 2020; available from: https://www.ft.com/content/0ae1c300-7fee-11ea-82f6-150830b3b99a.
  2. Mustafa N. Impact of the 2019-20 Coronavirus pandemic on education. International Journal of Health Preferences Research. 2020;5(20):31-44. DOI: 10.1016/S14733099(09)70176-8.
  3. Onyema EM, Eucheria NC, Obafemi FA, Sen S, Atonye FG, Sharma A, et al. Impact of Coronavirus Pandemic on Education. Journal of Education and Practice. 2020 ;11(13):108–21. DOI: 10.7176/JEP/11-13-12.
  4. Tran T, Hoang AD, Nguyen YC, Nguyen LC, Ta NT, Pham QH, et al. Toward sustainable learning during school suspension: Socioeconomic, occupational aspirations, and learning behavior of vietnamese students during COVID-19. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2020;12(10): 4195. [CrossRef]
  5. Plakhotnik MS, Volkova N V., Jiang C, Yahiaoui D, Pheiffer G, McKay K, et al. The Perceived Impact of COVID-19 on Student Well-Being and the Mediating Role of the University Support: Evidence From France, Germany, Russia, and the UK. Front Psychol. 2021;12: 642689. [CrossRef]
  6. Agu CF, Stewart J, McFarlane-Stewart N, Rae T. COVID-19 pandemic effects on nursing education: looking through the lens of a developing country. Int Nurs Rev [Internet]. 2021, 68(2): 153-158. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/inr.12663. [CrossRef]
  7. Son C, Hegde S, Smith A, Wang X, Sasangohar F. Effects of COVID-19 on college students’ mental health in the United States: Interview survey study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2020; 22(9): e21279. [CrossRef]
  8. Gadi N, Saleh S, Johnson JA, Trinidade A. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lifestyle and behaviours, mental health and education of students studying healthcare-related courses at a British university. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1). 115. [CrossRef]
  9. Xinhua. XinhuaNet. Chinese universities to remain closed until effective control of epidemic. 2020. Available online: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-02/25/c_138814715.htm. (accessed 24/9/2023).
  10. Lade K, Gaglani H, Khare S, Muley S, Jha R. Perception of student’s towards online learning during COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2022; 6(S2): 473-480,. [CrossRef]
  11. Torun ED. Online Distance Learning in Higher Education: E-Learning Readiness as a Predictor of Academic Achievement. Open Praxis. 2019;12(2):191-208. DOI: 10.5944/openpraxis.12.2.1092.
  12. Martin F, Stamper B, Flowers C. Examining student perception of readiness for online learning: Importance and confidence. Online Learning Journal. 2020;24(2): 38-58. [CrossRef]
  13. Boddu VK, Rebello A, Chandrasekharan S V., Rudrabhatla PK, Chandran A, Ravi S, et al. How does “locus of control” affect persons with epilepsy? Epilepsy and Behavior. 2021;123. 108257. [CrossRef]
  14. Dwilestari S, Zamzam A, Susanti NWM, Syahrial E. The Students’ Self-Directed Learning in English Foreign Language Classes During The Covid-19 Pandemic. Jurnal Lisdaya. 2021;17(2): 38-46. [CrossRef]
  15. Arkan B, Ünsal Avdal E, Yildirim Sari H. Locus of Control and Self Directed Learning Relation on Nursing Students. International Journal of Caring Sciences. 2016;9(2): 514-519.
  16. Naseer N, Kanwal S, Habib Z. Exploration of Distance Learners’ Nature of Locus of Control: Qualitative Analysis. Global Educational Studies Review. 2020; V(IV): 20-31. [CrossRef]
  17. Sigurvinsdottir R, Thorisdottir IE, Gylfason HF. The impact of COVID-19 on mental health: The role of locus on control and internet use. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(19): 6985. [CrossRef]
  18. Alipio MM. Academic success as estimated by locus of control and motivation. EdArXiv Preprints [Internet]. 2020 Jan [cited 2023 Sep 19];1–9. Available from: https://edarxiv.org/smf84/.
  19. Hosseini SN, Mirzaei Alavijeh M, Matin BK, Hamzeh B, Ashtarian H, Jalilian F. Locus of control or self-esteem; Which one is the best predictor of academic achievement in Iranian college students. Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci. 2016;10(1): 2602. DOI: e2602. [CrossRef]
  20. Cadorin L, Ghezzi V, Camillo M, Palese A. The self-rating scale of self-directed learning tool: findings from a confirmatory factor analysis. J Nurs Educ Pract. 2016;7(2): 31-37. DOI:10.5430/jnep.v7n2p31.
  21. Qalehsari MQ, Khaghanizadeh M, Ebadi A. Lifelong learning strategies in nursing: A systematic review. Electron Physician. 2017;9(10): 5545-5550. [CrossRef]
  22. Lee S, Kim DH, Chae SM. Self-directed learning and professional values of nursing students. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020;42: 102647. [CrossRef]
  23. Mlambo M, Silén C, McGrath C. Lifelong learning and nurses’ continuing professional development, a metasynthesis of the literature. BMC Nurs. 2021;20(1): 62. [CrossRef]
  24. Hossain SFA, Nurunnabi M, Sundarasen S, Chinna K, Kamaludin K, Baloch GM, et al. Socio-psychological impact on bangladeshi students during COVID-19. J Public Health Res. 2020;9(S1): 1911. [CrossRef]
  25. Khoshaim HB, Al-Sukayt A, Chinna K, Nurunnabi M, Sundarasen S, Kamaludin K, et al. How students in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are coping with COVID-19 pandemic. J Public Health Res. 2020;9(S1): 1898. [CrossRef]
  26. Ganjoo M, Farhadi A, Baghbani R, Daneshi S, Nemati R. Association between health locus of control and perceived stress in college student during the COVID-19 outbreak: a cross-sectional study in Iran. BMC Psychiatry. 2021;21(1): 529. [CrossRef]
  27. Mori M, Seko T, Ogawa S. Association of Social Capital and Locus of Control with Perceived Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(15). 9415. [CrossRef]
  28. Al Mulhim EN. Flipped Learning, Self-Regulated Learning and Learning Retention of Students with Internal/External Locus of Control. International Journal of Instruction. 2020;14(1): 827-846. [CrossRef]
  29. Animba IE, Ezema EO, Chukwu PN, Nwobodo P. LOCUS OF CONTROL, SELF-EFFICACY ANDACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ENUGU STATE, NIGERIA. GPH-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Sep 18];5(9):45–52. Available from: http://www.gphjournal.org/index.php/er/article/view/707/471.
  30. Ballad CAC, Labrague LJ, Cayaban ARR, Turingan OM, Al Balushi SM. Self-directed learning readiness and learning styles among Omani nursing students: Implications for online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurs Forum (Auckl). 2022;57(1): 94–103. [CrossRef]
  31. Luu TMV. Readiness for Online Learning: Learners’ Comfort and Self-Directed Learning Ability. International Journal of TESOL & Education. 2022;2(1): 213-224. [CrossRef]
  32. Titiek Murniati C, Hartono H, Cahyo Nugroho A. Self-directed Learning, Self-efficacy, and Technology Readiness in E-learning Among University Students. KnE Social Sciences. 2022;7(14): 213-224. [CrossRef]
  33. Oktrivina A, Achmadi A, Hendryadi H. Ethical Perceptions Of Accounting Students: The Role Of The God Locus Of Control, Moral Disengagement, And Love Of Money. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi dan Keuangan. 2022;12(1): 144-158. [CrossRef]
  34. Uysal ŞK, Karadağ H, Tuncer B, Şahin F. Locus of control, need for achievement, and entrepreneurial intention: A moderated mediation model. International Journal of Management Education. 2022;20(2): 100560. [CrossRef]
  35. S. C. A. Attitude and Perceptions of Students Towards Self-directed Learning in Under-graduate Medical Education: A Mixed Method Study. Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research. 2022;16:23-23 1/2p. [Internet]. 2022 Jan 2 [cited 2023 Oct 2];16:23. Available from: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asx&AN=155608420&site=eds-live.
  36. Fisher M, King J, Tague G. Development of a self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2001;21(7): 516–525. [CrossRef]
  37. Cheng SF, Kuo CL, Lin KC, Lee-Hsieh J. Development and preliminary testing of a self-rating instrument to measure self-directed learning ability of nursing students. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(9): 1152–1158. [CrossRef]
  38. El-Gilany AH, Abusaad FES. Self-directed learning readiness and learning styles among Saudi undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2013;33(9): 1040–1044. [CrossRef]
  39. Morris TH. Self-directed learning: A fundamental competence in a rapidly changing world. International Review of Education. 2019;65: 633-653. [CrossRef]
  40. Deacon AK, Larson N, O’Neill TA, Brennan RW, Eggermont M, Rosehart W. THE SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING READINESS SCALE, CONSCIENTIOUSNESS, AND THE PREDICTION OF ENGINEERING STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (PCEEA) [Internet]. 2015 Aug. 7 [cited 2023 Oct. 2]; Available from: https://ojs.library.queensu.ca/index.php/PCEEA/article/view/5953.
  41. O’Shea E. Self-directed learning in nurse education: A review of the literature. Vol. 43, Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2003; 43(1): 62-70. [CrossRef]
  42. Alsufyani AM, Aboshaiqah A, Moussa ML, Baker OG, Aljuaid DA, Alshehri FA. Self-Directed Learning Readiness of Students in Bridging Nursing Programs in Saudi Arabia -A Descriptive Study. Midwifery Pract Nurs Stand. 2020;(1):16–23. [CrossRef]
  43. Alotaibi KN. The learning environment as a mediating variable between self-directed learning readiness and academic performance of a sample of saudi nursing and medical emergency students. Nurse Educ Today. 2016;36: 249–254. [CrossRef]
  44. Alharbi HA. Readiness for self-directed learning: How bridging and traditional nursing students differs? Nurse Educ Today. 2018;61:231– 234. [CrossRef]
  45. Rotter JB. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological monographs. 1966; 80(1): 1-28.
  46. Ozuome CC, Oguzie AE, Mokwelu OB, Anyamene A. Locus of Control as a Correlate of Secondary School Students’ Academic Achievement in Imo State, Nigeria. Journal of Guidance and Counselling Studies. 2020;4(2): 374–385. [CrossRef]
  47. Yang JC, Lin YL, Liu YC. Effects of locus of control on behavioral intention and learning performance of energy knowledge in game-based learning. Environ Educ Res. 2017;23(6): 886-899. [CrossRef]
  48. Esterhuysen S, Stanz KJ. Locus of control and online learning. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology. 2004;30(1): 63-71. DOI: 10.4102/sajip.v30i1.139.
  49. Lowes S, Lin P. Learning to learn online: Using locus of control to help students become successful online learners. Journal of Online Learning Research. 2015;1(1). 17-48. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved October 2, 2023 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/149845/.
  50. Brammer SE, Punyanunt-Carter NM. Getting the attention of online learners. Commun Educ. 2022;71(2): 155-157, DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2021.2022732.
  51. Harrell IL, Bower BL. Student characteristics that predict persistence in community college online courses. American Journal of Distance Education. 2011;25(3): 178-191, DOI: 10.1080/08923647.2011.590107.
  52. Bahçekapılı E, Karaman S. A path analysis of five-factor personality traits, self-efficacy, academic locus of control and academic achievement among online students. Knowledge Management and E-Learning. 2020;12(2): 191-208. [CrossRef]
  53. Polit, DF, Beck, CT. Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice, 11th ed; LWW: Philadelphia, US; 2021.
  54. Fisher MJ, King J. The self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education revisited: A confirmatory factor analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2010;30(1): 44–48. [CrossRef]
  55. Abdulghani H, Almndeel N, Almutawa A, Aldhahri R, Alzeheary M, Ahmad, et al. The validity of the self-directed learning readiness instrument with the academic achievement among the Saudi medical students. Int J Med Sci Public Health. 2019;9(1): 44-50. [CrossRef]
  56. Fooladvand M, Nadi M. Validation of revisited self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education among Iranian nursing and midwifery students. J Educ Health Promot. 2019;8(1): 266. [CrossRef]
  57. Dag I. Locus of Control Scale: Scale Development, Reliability and Validity Study. Turk Psikoloji Dergisi. 2002;17(49): 77-90.
  58. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25(24): 3186–3191. [CrossRef]
  59. Eysenbach G. Improving the Quality of Web Surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2004;6(3): e34. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34.
  60. Manuaba IBAP, No Y, Wu CC. The effectiveness of problem based learning in improving critical thinking, problem-solving and self-directed learning in first-year medical students: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2022;17(11): e0277339. [CrossRef]
  61. Misamer M, Signerski-Krieger J, Bartels C, Belz M. Internal Locus of Control and Sense of Coherence Decrease During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Students and Professionals in Social Work. Frontiers in Sociology. 2021;6: 705809. [CrossRef]
  62. Wali O, Vanka S, Vanka A, Alamoudi N. Locus of Control - A Dental Student Perspective. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2021;10(9): 573+. Available: https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A654627503/AONE?u=anon~7d130064&sid=googleScholar&xid=83e38e55 [accessed 02 Oct 2023].
  63. Hammoud S. Achievement Motivation and its Relationship to Locus of Control among Nursing Faculty Students in Tishreen University. Tishreen University Journal -Medical Sciences Series. 2021;43(2). Available from: https://journal.tishreen.edu.sy/index.php/hlthscnc/article/view/10558. [accessed 02 Oct 2023].
  64. Nazarianpirdosti M, Janatolmakan M, Andayeshgar B, Khatony A. Evaluation of Self-Directed Learning in Nursing Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Education Research International. 2021; 2112108. [CrossRef]
  65. Dogham RS, Elcokany NM, Ghaly AS, Dawood TMA, Aldakheel FM, Llaguno MBB, et al. Self-directed learning readiness and online learning self-efficacy among undergraduate nursing students. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2022;17: 100490. [CrossRef]
  66. Samarasooriya RC, Park J, Yoon SH, Oh J, Baek S. Self-directed learning among nurse learners in Sri Lanka. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2019;50(1):41-48. [CrossRef]
  67. Kaur A, Lakra P, Kumar R. Self-directed Learning Readiness and Learning Styles among Nursing Undergraduates. Nursing and Midwifery Research Journal. 2020; 16(1):45-50. [CrossRef]
  68. Aljohani KA, Fadila DES. Self-directed learning readiness and learning styles among Taibah nursing students. Saudi J Health Sci [Internet]. 2018;7(3), 153-8. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/sjhs/fulltext/2018/07030/self_directed_learning_readiness_and_learning.3.aspx. [CrossRef]
  69. Nwagu EN, Enebechi JC, Odo AN. Self-Control in Learning for Healthy Living Among Students in a Nigerian College of Education. Sage Open. 2018;8(3). [CrossRef]
  70. Sidola S, Saini S, Kang TK. Locus of control as correlate of self-regulation among college students. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 2020;9(1), 116-122.
  71. Syahputra IA, Affandi GR. The Relationship between Internal Locus of Control and Academic Self-Regulation in Class 11 Vocational High School Students in Sidoarjo. Psikologia : Jurnal Psikologi. 2021;6(2), 1-6. [CrossRef]
  72. Javidkar S, Hoda Divsar, Masoud Saeedi, Ali Hadavizadeh. A Path Analysis of Autonomy Supportive Teaching, EFL Learners’ Willingness to Communicate, Self-Regulation, Academic Engagement, and Perceived Locus of Control. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies. 2022;9(4):25–49.
  73. Rafique GM, Mahmood K, Warraich NF, Rehman SU. Readiness for Online Learning during COVID-19 pandemic: A survey of Pakistani LIS students. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2021;47(3),102346. [CrossRef]
  74. Avdal EÜ. The effect of self-directed learning abilities of student nurses on success in Turkey. Nurse Educ Today. 2013;33(8), 838–841. [CrossRef]
  75. Song Y, Yun SY, Kim SA, Ahn EK, Jung MS. Role of self-directed learning in communication competence and self-efficacy. Journal of Nursing Education. 2015; 54(10), 559–564. [CrossRef]
  76. Taylor TAH, Kemp K, Mi M, Lerchenfeldt S. Self-directed learning assessment practices in undergraduate health professions education: a systematic review. Medical Education Online. 2023, Vol. 28, 2189553. [CrossRef]
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Study Sample (n=277)
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Study Sample (n=277)
Item Number (%)
Gender
     Male
     Female
119 (43)
158 (57)
Age Mean 20.51 ± 1.6
Marital Status
    Single
    Married
273 (98.6)
4 (1.4)
Academic level
       Level 3
       Level 4
       Level 5
       Level 6
       Level 7
       Level 8
39 (14.1)
45(16.2)
30 (10.8)
81(29.2)
65 (23.5)
17 (6.1)
Residence
     Riyadh
     Outside Riyadh
255 (92.4)
20 (7.2)
Table 2. Results of Locus of Control Subscale Among the Study Sample.
Table 2. Results of Locus of Control Subscale Among the Study Sample.
Locus of control Subscales Minimum Maximum Mean (SD)
Personal control 18 90 56.38 (14.47)
Belief in chance 11 55 32.21 (7.97)
Meaningless of the effortfulness 10 50 29.37 (7.61)
Belief in fate 3 15 9.87 (2.61)
Belief in unjust world 5 25 14.76 (3.79)
Internal locus of control 18 90 56.37 (1.45)
External locus of control 29 235 86.2 (19.7)
Table 3. Self-Directed Learning Among the Study Participants (n = 277).
Table 3. Self-Directed Learning Among the Study Participants (n = 277).
SDL Subscales Minimum Maximum Mean (SD) Level # (%)
Self-management 13 65 39.52(9.04) Low   227(81.9)
High   50 (18.1)
Desire for learning 12 60 45.02 (10.38) Low   121(43.6)
High   156 (56.4)
Self-control 15 75 52.36 (12.45) Low   157 (56.7)
High   120 (43.3)
Total level of readiness for SDL 40 200 144.0 (0.49) Low   166 (59.9)
High   111 (40.1)
# High level of readiness > 150, Low level of readiness < 150.
Table 4. Correlation Analysis Among the LOC Subscales and SDL Readiness Subscales.
Table 4. Correlation Analysis Among the LOC Subscales and SDL Readiness Subscales.
SDL readiness subscales Locus of control subscales
Personal control Belief in chance Meaninglessness of the effortfulness Belief in fate Belief in unjust world Overall LoC
Self-management r = .38*
p = (.0001)		 r = .26*
p = (.0001)		 r = .25*
p = (.0001)		 r = .37*p = (.0001) r = .33*p = (.0001) X
Desire for learning r = .33*
p = (.0001)		 r = .20*
p = (.003)		 r = .21*
p = (.002)		 r = .36*p = (.0001) r = .24*p = (.001) X
Self-control r = .40*
p = (.0001)		 r = .24*
p = (.001)		 r = .22*
p = (.001)		 r = .39*p = (.0001) r = .26*p = (.0001) X
Overall Level of readiness for self-directed learning Internal LOC External LOC X
r =.22*
p = .0001		 r = .10
p = .08		 r = .19*
p = .001
*p ≤ 0.05.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated