The Engagement in Online Learning of Students: Case Study of Ramkhamheang University
Keywords:
Engagement in online learning, Online learning, Online learning in the universityAbstract
This is a quantitative research that aims to study the engagement in online learning and use multiple regressions coefficients for determine major variables influencing engagement in online learning of students. Questionnaire is an instrument used in collecting data from Ramkhamheang’ students who access in online learning during July to September 2021. The findings are as follows: The average age of students who accessed online learning was 29 years, with the majority of them being males. 73.5 percent of students were working during their time at the university, where most were working as employees of companies or workers at shops, with average income at 13,000 baht per month. More than half of the students (56.7 percent) used mobile phones for online learning. The research found the engagement in online learning of the students had moderate level. They read, followed data and news from online teaching in all subjects. They satisfied in participating in the activities of online classes. Students attended the online classes from the start to end of the sessions, completed homework assignments assigned by teachers and attended all classes of registered subjects. In the findings, the intention of student in online study, online access for learning, teaching method of teacher, and student-teacher relationship were significant variables which influenced the engagement in online learning at a statistically significant level. These variables had positive correlation and were explanatory of changes in the engagement in online learning at 45 percent. In comparing the variables influencing the engagement in online learning, the variable of online access for online learning influenced the engagement in online learning at the highest level. Next in descending order were the variables of the student-teacher relationship, teaching method of teacher, and intention of student in online study.
References
มหาวิทยาลัยเทคโนโลยีพระจอมเกล้าธนบุรี (KMUTT). (ม.ป.ป). วันที่ค้นข้อมูล 23 เมษายน 2563, เข้าถึงได้ จาก http://www.kmutt.ac.th/organization/Education/Technology/tech_ed/constructionism/ constructionism2. html
สุรศักดิ์ วานิชชัยวัฒกุล. (ม.ป.ป.) ทฤษฎีการเรียนรู้. วันที่ค้นข้อมูล 23 เมษายน 2563, เข้าถึงได้จาก http://www. novabizz.com/NovaAce/Learning.htm
Akyol, Z., Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). The impact of course duration on the Development of a community of inquiry. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(3), 231-246.
Cai, Q. (2017). Enhance student engagement through leadership strategies. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 9(3), 1-7.
Cochran, W. G. (1953). Sampling Techniques. Retrieved January 5, 2021, from http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/ clark.html
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavior Sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, United State of America.
Cronbach, L. J. (1970). Essentials of Psychological Test (5th ed.). New York: Harper Collins.
Dennis. (2021). 10 Proven Ways to Increase Audience Engagement on Your eCommerce. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Papert
Deschaine, M. E., & Whale, D. E. (2017). Increasing student engagement in online educational leadership courses. Journal of Educators Online, 14(1), 36-47.
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.
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The online student engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4), 143-157.
Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23.
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205-222.
Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6), 1-14.
Papert, S. (1928). Wikipedia Seymour Papert. Retrieved April 22, 2020 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Papert
Raitaluoto, T. (2022). How to increase your website engagement [Ultimate guide]. Retrieved April 1,2020 from https://www.coredna.com/blogs/increase-website-engagement.
Stephan, S. H. (2017). Embracing engagement through technology in online legal education. Distance Learning, 14(3), 37-41.
Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2008). Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry. E-mentor, 2(24), 1-12.
Vayre, E., & Vonthron, A. M. (2017). Psychological engagement of students in distance and online learning: Effects of self-efficacy and psychosocial processes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(2), 197-218.
Yamane, T. (1967). Taro Statistic: An Introductory Analysis. New York: Harper & Row.
Young, S., & Bruce, M. A. (2011). Classroom community and student engagement in online courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 219-230.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.