Unpacking the Relationship Between Online Student Engagement and Online Self-Regulation in Higher Education

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 4, 198 - 214, 07.07.2024

Egecan Berk Kaşikçi , Serkan İzmirli

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.24.56.11.4

Abstract

Online student engagement refers to the level of students’ involvement and effort in online learning activities. Individuals with self-regulation skills actively and constructively set their goals and strategies based on their own knowledge, independent of environmental influences. However, research exploring the relationship between self-regulation and student engagement in online learning environments is limited. This study aimed to examine this relationship within online learning environments. The research utilized survey, causal-comparative, and correlational research models to address its questions. Participants included 660 bachelor’s degree students, and data was collected using an online student engagement scale and an online self-regulation skills scale. The findings indicated that both online self-regulation skills and online student engagement were at moderate levels. The study found that online student engagement did not significantly differ by gender. However, university students aged 25 and over had significantly higher online engagement than other age groups. Additionally, fourth-year university students exhibited significantly higher online involvement than students in other grade levels, and students from numeric fields demonstrated significantly higher online engagement compared to those from other fields. In terms of online self-regulation, there were no significant differences by age and grade level. Nevertheless, female students exhibited significantly higher self-regulation skills than male students, and students from numeric fields had significantly higher self-regulation skills than those from other fields. Moreover, the study found a significantly positive moderate correlation between online student engagement and online self-regulation skills. The findings also revealed that online self-regulation skills could explain 40.4% of the variance in online student engagement.

Keywords

student engagement, self-regulation skills, online learning

Ethical Statement

For this study, approval was obtained from the Scientific Research Ethics Committee of School of Graduate Studies at Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University (Date: 02.10.2020, Protocol Number: 2020/90).

References

• Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In Anderson, T. (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.) (pp. 15-44). Athabasca University Press.
• Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a theory of online learning. In Anderson, T. (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.) (pp. 45-74). Athabasca University Press. https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781897425084.01
• Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J. S., & Pagani, L. S. (2009). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651-670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
• Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Khaneh, M. P. A. (2021). Gender differences in engagement and self-regulation in an online constructivist learning design and learning analytics environment. In S. Jackowicz & O. T. Ozturk (Eds.), Proceedings of ICSES 2021--International Conference on Studies in Education and Social Sciences (pp. 171-176). ISTES Organization.
• Barnard, L., Lan, W. Y., To, Y. M., Paton, V. O., & Lai, S.-L. (2009). Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.10.005
• Barnard, L., Paton, V.O., & Lan, W.Y. (2008). Online self-regulatory learning behaviors as a mediator in the relationship between online course perceptions with achievement. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(2), 1−11. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i2.516
• Barut Tuğtekin, E. (2022). Investigation of college students’ self-regulation levels in online learning environments. Journal of Educational Reflections, 6(1), 10-23. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/eduref/issue/69172/1064517
• Bates, A. W. (2022). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning (3rd ed.). Tony Bates Associates Ltd. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/teachinginadigitalagev3m/
• Bedir Erişti, S. D., Kuzu, A., Yurdakul, I. K., Akbulut, Y., & Kurt, A. A. (2013). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (1st ed.). Anadolu University.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2022). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods in education] (32nd ed.). Pegem Akademi.
• Carliner, S. (2004). An overview of online learning (2nd ed.). Human Resource Development Press.
• Cho, M. H., & Shen, D. (2013). Self-regulation in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 290-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835770
• Çiltaş, A. (2011). A study on the importance of self-regulation teaching in education. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 3(5), 1-11. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/makusobed/issue/19437/206700
• Doğan, U. (2014). Validity and reliability of student engagement scale. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(2), 390-403. https://doi.org/10.14686/BUEFAD.201428190
• Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C. J., Shin, C. H., & Woo, B.-D. (2021). Structural relationships among self-regulation, transactional distance, and learning engagement in a large university class using flipped learning. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 41(3), 609-625. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2020.1832020
• Ekşi, H., Türk, T., & Avcu, A. (2017). Adaption of Maryland safe and supportive schools climate survey into Turkish culture: Validity and reliability study. Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 17(4), 1882-1899. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2017.17.32772-363971
• Emrecik, V., & Ozan, Ö. (2019). The effects of nonverbal communication skills, which are used in video lectures, on student engagement. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Journal of Social Sciences, 20(Special Issue), 667-690. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.553853
• Ergün, E., & Usluel, Y. K. (2015). The Turkish adaptation of student’s engagements scale in online learning environment: A study of validity and reliability. The Journal of Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 5(1), 20-33. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.64661
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Sage.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
• Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
• Ghelichli, Y., Seyyedrezaei, S. H., & Seyyedrezaei, Z. S. (2023). On the relationship of Iranian EFL learners’ engagement and self-regulation with their learning outcomes. Journal of Language and Education, 9(2), 72-84. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.12741
• Gonzalez, D., & St.Louis, R. (2018). Online learning. In Nassaji, H. (Ed.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0423
• Günüç, S., & Kuzu, A. (2014). Factors influencing student engagement and the role of technology in student engagement in higher education: Campus-class-technology theory. Turkish Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 86-113. https://doi.org/10.17569/tojqi.44261
• Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
• Kearsley, G. (2002). Is online learning for everybody? Educational Technology, 42(1), 41-44. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428721
• Khoo, E., & Bonk, C. J. (2022). Motivating and supporting online learners. Commonwealth of Learning. https://doi.org/10.59668/699
• Kilis, S., & Yıldırım, Z. (2018). Online self-regulation questionnaire: validity and reliability study of turkish translation. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 47(1), 233-245. https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.298791
• Koç, A. (2019). Relationship between cognitive absorption and online self regulation of students in blended learning environment (Unpublished master thesis), Sakarya University, Türkiye.
• Koh, J.H.L., Daniel, B.K., & Greenman, A.C. (2023). Adaptiveness for online learning: Conceptualising ‘online learning dexterity’ from higher education students’ experiences. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 58(2), 379-397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-023-00287-2
• Kokoç, M. (2019). Modelling the relationship of distance education students’ engagements levels with their smartphone addiction, self-regulation and self-efficacy skills (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Atatürk University, Türkiye.
• Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the national survey of student engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380109601795
• Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604090
• Kuh, G. D. (2009a). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 141, 5-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.283
• Kuh, G. D. (2009b). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099
• Lan, W. Y., Bremer, R., Stevens, T., & Mullen, G. (2004). Self-regulated learning in the online environment. Paper presented at the 2004 annual meeting American Educational Research Association, April 7-8.
• 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. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
• Özarslan, M., Kubat, B., & Bay, Ö. F. (2007). Developing and producing a web-based content of integrated office course for distance education. IX. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı [Academic Informatics Conference] Proceedings Book (pp. 159.166). Internet Technologies Association.
• Park, S., & Kim, N.H. (2022). University students’ self-regulation, engagement and performance in flipped learning. European Journal of Training and Development, 46 (1/2), 22-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-08-2020-0129
• Pellas, N. (2014). The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of Second Life. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 157-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.048
• Pintrich, R. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
• Sel, F., & Şad, S. N. (2021). Analysis of online student connectedness levels of inonu university distance education students in terms of some variables. Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 22(2), 860-904. https://doi.org/10.29299/kefad.993458
• Soner, M. (2021). Investigation of the relationships between self-regulation skills and school engagement and academic achievement of university students in the scope of online education (Unpublished master thesis). Ufuk University, Türkiye.
• Sun, J. C.-Y., & Rueda, R. (2012). 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01157.x
• Tülübaş, T. (2022). The effect of self-regulated online learning skills on academic achievement. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 12(2), 389-416. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1021613
• Wolters, C., & Taylor, D. (2012). A self-regulated learning perspective on student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 635– 651). Springer.
• Wong, Z. Y., & Liem, G. A. D. (2022). Student engagement: Current state of the construct, conceptual refinement, and future research directions. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 107–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09628-3
• Yıldırım, Y., & Altınpulluk, H. (2022). Investigation of the relationship between 21st century learning skill levels of open and distance learners and their levels of engagement in open and distance learning environments. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences, 24(4), 1253-1273. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.946644
• Yurtçiçek Eren, S., Yıldırım, Ö., & Ataman Bor, N. (2022). Students’ commitment to the learning environment in online learning environments. International Anatolian Social Sciences Journal, 6(4), 1432-1445. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ulasbid/issue/72568/1178681
• Zhong, Q., Wang, Y., Lv, W., Xu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Self-regulation, teaching presence, and social presence: Predictors of students’ learning engagement and persistence in blended synchronous learning. Sustainability, 14(9), 5619. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095619
• Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329