SUSTAINING ENGAGEMENT IN A BLENDED LEARNING MODALITY
Main Article Content
Abstract
The use of blended and distance learning methodologies has been attractive to a growing number of higher education institutions due to its potential to enhance student enhancement. Study shows that this mode of learning delivery has the potential to increase student engagement. This study aimed to determine the key factors of the blended learning environment that sustain student engagement. A descriptive survey with qualitative support was conducted to 123 student teachers from a state university in Mindanao. These participants were enrolled in a course delivered in a blended learning environment for one semester through a Moodle platform. Through a survey questionnaire, the participants assessed their preferred and actual learning experiences in a blended learning environment context and reflected on the activities that fostered or hindered engagement. The findings indicate a close alignment between student teachers preferred and actual experiences within the blended learning environment. Three core factors - relevance, interactivity, and connectedness - emerged as pivotal in sustaining engagement within the blended learning framework.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Amineh, R.J., & Asl, H.D. (2015). Review of Constructivism and Social Constructivism. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/31113252/Review_of_Constructivism_and_Social_Constructivism
Baldwin, S.J., Ching, Y.-H., & Friesen, N. (2018). Online course design and development among college and university instructors: An analysis using grounded theory. Online Learning, 22(2), 157-171. doi:10.24059/olj.v22i2.1212
Barber, W., King, S. and Buchanan, S., 2015. Problem Based Learning and Authentic Assessment in Digital Pedagogy:
Bouilheres, F., Le, L.T.V.H., McDonald, S. et al. Defining student learning experience through blended learning. Educ Inf Technol 25, 3049–3069 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10100-y
Butt, A. (2014 ). Student views on the use of a flipped classroom approach: evidence from Australia. Business Education & Accreditation, 6(1), 33-43. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1446438932?accountid= 14691
Canoy, J., & Buan, A. (2016). Design and Implementation of Student-Centered Assessment in Blended Learning Classroom. Journal of Education Khon Kaen University. Retrieved from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/EDKKUJ/article/view/74759
Capone, R., Caterina, P., & Mazzà, G. (2017). Blended Learning, Flipped Classroom And Virtual Environment: Challenges And Opportunities For The 21st Century Students. DOI: 10.21125/edulearn.2017.0985
Castro, R. (2019). Blended learning in higher education: Trends and capabilities. Education and Information Technologies. doi:10.1007/s10639-019-09886-3
Chen, P. D., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1222-1232. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.008
Clarkson, B. & Luca, J. (2002). Promoting Student Learning through Peer Tutoring – A Case Study. In P. Barker & S. Rebelsky (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2002 (pp. 1176-1181).
Collaço, C. M. (2017). Increasing Student Engagement in Higher Education. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice; West Palm Beach, 17(4), 40–47.
David Carless & David Boud (2018) The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43:8, 1315-1325, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Embracing the Role of Collaborative Communities. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning , 13(2), pp. 59–64.
Gehringer, E. (2017). Self-Assessment to Improve Learning and Evaluation. 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. doi:10.18260/1-2--28816
Herrington, J. and Oliver, R. (1995) Critical characteristics of situated learning: Implications for the instructional design of multimedia. In: ASCILITE 1995 Conference, 3 - 7 December 1995, University of Melbourne, Melbourne pp. 253-262.
Hussin, H., Bunyarit, F., & Hussein, R. (2009). Instructional design and e‐learning Examining learners' perspective in Malaysian institutions of higher learning. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26(1), 4-19.
Jeffery, M., & Ahmad, A. (2018). A Conceptual Framework for Efficient Design of an Online Operations Management Course. Journal of Educators Online, 15.
Johnson, R. D., Hornik, S., & Salas, E. (2008). An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(5), 356-369.
Keefer, J. M. (2009). The Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ): From Research to Practice and Back Again. Adult Education Research Conference (pp. 177-182). Chicago, IL: Kansas State University Libraries, New Prairie Press.
Kintu, M.J., Zhu, C. & Kagambe, E. Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 14, 7 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4
Knapp, N. F. (2019). The Shape Activity: Social Constructivism in the Psychology Classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 46(1), 87–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628318816181
Kumar, S. (2009). Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of web 2.0 in higher education: Survey development. In D. Remenyi (Ed.) Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on e-Learning (pp.308–314). Italy.
Louvigné, S., Uto, M., Kato, Y., & Ishii, T. (2017). Social constructivist approach of motivation: Social media messages recommendation system. Behaviormetrika. doi:10.1007/s41237-017-0043-7
Mbati, L. (2012). Online learning for social constructivism: Creating a conducive environment. Huria: Journal of the Open University of Tanzania, 13, 197-210.
Mercader C., Ion G., & Díaz-Vicario A.(2020): Factors influencing students’ peer feedback uptake: instructional design matters, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2020.1726283
Miliszewska, I., & Horwood, J. (2004). Engagement Theory: a Framework for Supporting Cultural Differences in Transnational Education. DOI: 10.1145/1124706.1121392
Moore, M. (2016, November 30). Mastering the Blend: A Professional Development Program for K-12 Teachers. Retrieved July 26, 2020, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1151093
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social Constructivist Perspectives on Teaching and Learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 345-375. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.345
Parkes, M., Reading, C., & Stein, S. (2013). The competencies required for effective performance in a university e-learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(6). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.38
Rappel, L. (2017). Self-Direction in On-Line Language Learning. Retrieved July 27, 2020, from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Self-direction+in+on-line+language+learning
Scott Secore. Social Constructivism in “Online Learning: Andragogical Influence and the Effectual Educator e-mentor” 2017.nr 3(70), s. 4–9, http://dx.doi.org/10.15219/em70.1300.
Shand, K., & Farrelly, S.G. (2018). The Art of Blending: Benefits and Challenges of a Blended Course for Pre-Service Teachers. Journal of Educators Online, 15.
Swan, K., Garrison, D., & Richardson, J. C. (2009). A Constructivist Approach to Online Learning. Information Technology and Constructivism in Higher Education, 43-57. doi:10.4018/978-1-60566-654-9.ch004
Taylor, P. & Maor, D. (2000). Assessing the efficacy of online teaching with the Constructivist On-Line Learning Environment Survey.
World Leaders in Research-Based User Experience. (n.d.). The Critical Incident Technique in UX. Retrieved July 27, 2020, from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/critical-incident-technique/