Student Engagement and Factors Affecting Active Learning in English Language Teaching
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29408/veles.v5i2.3968Keywords:
Engagement, learning, flipped class, problem-based learning, factors.Abstract
Learning is the process of how students take information and relate it to their prior knowledge into something meaningful. Learning promotes continuous growth and change in students. Student engagement is considered one of the significant predictors of successful learning. In general, student engagement refers to the active participation in a series of academic and co-curricular or school-related activities and commitment to pursuing learning goals. Does student engagement associated with successful learning occur in any settings, offline or online programs? This paper presents some theoretical frameworks about student engagement. This paper concludes with some pedagogical implications for English language teaching techniques.
References
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 25(1), 297-308.
Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. (2008). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive, and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1). 3-4
Birch, S., & Ladd, G. (1997). The teacher-child relationship and children's early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 1, 61-79.
Burruss, J.D (1999). Problem-based learning. National Science Teachers Association. 22(1), 46-49
Carroll, J.M., & Rosson, M.B (2005). Toward even more authentic case-based learning. Educational Technology 45(6), 5-11.
Chen, K. C., & Jang, S. J. (2010). Motivation in online learning: Testing a model of self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (1), 741-752.
Chih-Yuan Sun, J., & Rueda, Y. (2005). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy, and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191-204.
Cho, M. H., & Tobias, S. (2016). Should instructors require discussion in online courses? Effects of online discussion on community of inquiry, learner time, satisfaction, and achievement. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(2), 123-140.
Collins, J., & Pascarella, E. T. (2003). Learning on-campus and learning at a distance: A randomized instructional experiment. Research in Higher Education, 44(3), 315-326.
Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. Gunnar, & L. Sroufe, Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology. University of Chicago Press.
Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. L. (1990). Linking language learning and simulation/gaming. In D. Crookall & R. L. Oxford (Eds.), Simulation, gaming, and language learning. (2-24). Boston: Henley
Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1988). The flow experience and its significance for human psychology. In M. Csikzentmihalyi, & I. S. Csikzentmihalyi, Optimal experience (pp. 15-35). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-13.
Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Voelkl, K. E. (1995). Disruptive and inattentive withdrawn behavior and achievement among fourth graders. Elementary School Journal, 95(1), 421-454.
Fisher, K. (2010). Online student engagement: CCSSE finds enrollment status and online experiences are key. Community College Week, 22(20), 7.
Fulton, K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your classroom to improve student learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(8), 12-17.
Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72.
Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. NCPEA International Journal of Education Leadership Preparation, 11(1), 1-20.
Harnett, M., St. George, A., & Dron, J. (2011). Examining motivation in online distance learning environments: Complex, multifaceted, and situation dependent. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(6), 20-37.
Hidi, S., & Ainley, M. (2012). Interest and self-regulation: Relationship between two variables that influence learning. In D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman, Motivation and Self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 77-109). New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Hoskins, B. J. (2012). Connections, engagement, and presence. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60(1), 51-53.
Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20-23.
Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2-10.
Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance. New York, NY: Springer.
Kember, D. (1995). Open learning courses for adults: A model of student progress. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Education Technology Publications.
Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change, 35(2), 24-32.
Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 141(1), 5-20.
Lundberg, C. A., & Seridan, D. (2015). Benefits of engagement with peers, faculty, and diversity for online learners. College Teaching, 63(1), 8-15.
Major, C. H. (2015). Teaching online: A guide to theory, research, and practice. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Milman, N. B., & Wessmiller, J. ((2016).). Motivating the online learner using Keller’s ARCS model. Distance Learning, 13(2), 67-71.
O’Brien, H. L., & Toms, E. G. (2008). What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 938-955.
Price, K., & Baker, S. N. (2012). Measuring students’ engagement on college campuses: Is the NSSE an appropriate measure of adult students’ engagement? The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60(1), 20-32.
Rabe-Hemp, C., Woollen, S., & Humiston, G. S. (2009). A comparative analysis of student engagement, learning, and satisfaction in the lecture hall and online learning settings. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(2), 207-218.
Reeve, J., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Jang, H. (2012). Understanding and promoting autonomous self-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. In D. Schunk, & B. Zimmerman, Motivation, and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and application (pp. 223-244). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101-109.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). Motivation and Self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Shillingford, S., & Karlin, N. J. (2013). The role of intrinsic motivation in the academic pursuits of non-traditional students. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 25(1), 91–102.
Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal’s effect of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1), 571-581.
Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wyatt, L. G. (2011). Non-traditional student engagement: increasing adult student success and retention. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(1), 10-20.
Yoo, S. J., & Huang, W. D. (2013). Engaging online adult learners in higher education: Motivational factors impacted by gender, age, and prior experiences. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 61(3), 151-164.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with the VELES Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
VELES Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
