From Onsite to Online: Perspectives on Preservice Teachers’ Instructional Engagement

Rivika Alda

Abstract


The abrupt transition from onsite to online learning modality has presented educational institutions with both challenges and opportunities. As institutions are slowly moving towards the now normal (post-pandemic), it is vital to reflect on effective online teaching and learning experiences, as these add to the new repertoire of practice, especially for teacher education institutions. The study employed a descriptive quantitative research design utilizing a validated survey questionnaire as the main data-gathering tool. The results of the study reveal that preservice teachers have high instructional engagement with technology and with course content, but the online modality has somehow limited their instructional engagement with instructors and classmates. Furthermore, the results reveal relevant insights on how teachers can maximize technological opportunities while maintaining human connections to enable more engaging online classroom experiences between teachers and students. Universities can therefore continue to actively provide relevant technical and educational training. This is important to accommodate in?person, online, and hybrid educational modalities.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.3.8


Keywords


face-to-face modality; instructional engagement; online modality; perspectives; preservice teachers

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alda, W. R., Elejorde, G. C., & Alda, R. C. (2022). Techmentoring program: A school-based ICT initiative for teachers. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education,12(2), 82–97. https://doi.org/10.37134/jrpptte.vol12.2.6.2022

Almendingen, K., Morseth, M. S., Gjølstad, E., Brevik, A., & Tørris, C. (2021). Student’s experiences with online teaching following COVID-19 lockdown: A mixed methods explorative study. PLoS ONE, 16(8). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378

Ansong, D., Okumu, M., Bowen, G., Walker, A., & Eisensmith, S. (2017). The role of parent, classmate, and teacher support in student engagement: Evidence from Ghana. International Journal of Educational Development, 54, 51–58, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2017.03.010

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, 651?670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007

Ayouni, S., Hajjej, F., Maddeh, M., & Alotaibi, S. (2021). Innovations of materials for student engagement in online environment: An ontology. Materials Today: Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.03.636

Bruce, S., & Young, M. A. (2011). Classroom community and student engagement in online courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 219–230. https://jolt.merlot.org/vol7no2/young_0611.pdf

Cavinato, A. G., Hunter, R. A., Ott, L. S., & Robinson, J. K. (2021). Promoting student interaction, engagement, and success in an online environment. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-021-03178-x

Ciric, M., & Jovanovic, D. (2016). Student engagement as a multidimensional concept [Congress session]. World LUMEN Congress. European Proceedings of Social & Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016

Clifton, R. A., Baldwin, W. G., & Wei, Y. (2012). Course structure, engagement, and the achievement of students in first-year chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(1), 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1039/C1RP90055B

Collie, R. J., Holliman, A. J., & Martin, A. J. (2017). Adaptability, engagement and academic achievement at university. Educational Psychology, 37(5), 632–647. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/01443410.2016.1231296

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–44. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240273279_Teacher_Quality_and_Student_Achievement_A_Review_of_State_Policy_Evidence

Dotterer, G., Hedges, A., & Parker, H. (2016). Fostering digital citizenship in the classroom. Education Digest, 82(3), 58.

Favale, T., Soro, F., Trevisan, M., Drago, I., & Mellia, M. (2020). Campus traffic and e learning during COVID-19 pandemic. Computer Networks, 176, 107290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2020.107290

Ferri, F., Grifoni, P., & Guzzo, T. (2020). Online learning and emergency remote teaching: Opportunities and challenges in emergency situations. Societies, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10040086

Francescucci, A., & Rohani, L. (2019). Exclusively synchronous online (VIRI) learning: The impact on student performance and engagement outcomes. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(1), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475318818864

Fredricks, J. A. (2011). Engagement in school and out-of-school contexts: A multidimensional view of engagement. Theory into Practice, 50(4), 327–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2011.607401

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. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3516061?

George, M. L. (2020). Effective teaching and examination strategies for undergraduate learning during COVID-19 school restrictions. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934017

Gordon, J., Ludlum, J., & Hoey, J. J. (2008). Validating NSSE against student outcomes: Are they related? Research in Higher Education, 49(1), 19–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11162-007-9061-8

Hooper, M., Mullis, I., & Martin, M. (2013). TIMSS 2015 context questionnaire framework. In I. V. S. Mullis, & M. O. Martin (Eds.), TIMSS 2015 assessment frameworks (Chapter 3). TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

Klieme, E., Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2009). The Pythagoras study: Investigating effects of teaching and learning in Swiss and German mathematics classrooms. In T. Janik, & T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 137–160). Waxmann Publishing Co.

Konstantinidou, E., & Kyriakides, L. (2022). Instructional engagement and student learning outcomes: Direct and indirect effects based on country-specific contingencies. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 73, 101144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101144

Korobova, N., & Starobin, S. S. (2015). A comparative study of student engagement, satisfaction, and academic success among international and American students. Journal of International Students, 5(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v5i1.444

Lam, S. F., Jimerson, S., Kikas, E., Cefai, C., Veiga, F. H., Nelson, B., & Zollneritsch, J. (2012). Do girls and boys perceive themselves as equally engaged in school? The results of an international study from 12 countries. Journal of School Psychology, 50(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.004

Lederman, D. (2020). Most teaching is going remote. Will that help or hurt online learning? Inside Higher Ed, 1–24. https://www.insidehighered.com/digitallearning/article/2020/03/18/most-teaching-going-remote-will-help-or-hurt-onlinelearning

Limperos, A., Buckner, M., Kaufmann, R., & Frisby, B. (2015). Online teaching and technological affordances: An experimental investigation into the impact of modality and clarity on perceived and actual learning. Computers & Education, 83, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.015

Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., Pauli, C., Drollinger-Vetter, B., Klieme, E., & Reusser, K. (2009). Quality of geometry instruction and its short-term impact on students’ understanding of the Pythagorean theorem. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 527?537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.11.001

Mananay, J., Alda, R., & Delos Santos, M. S. (2022). Glimpses of teaching in the new normal: Changes, challenges, and chances. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(4), 276?291. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.4.16

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00018-4

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153

McKellar, S. E., & Wang, M.-T. (2023). Adolescents’ daily sense of school connectedness and academic engagement: Intensive longitudinal mediation study of student differences by remote, hybrid, and in-person learning modality. Learning and Instruction, 83, 101659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101659

Oz, Y., & Boyaci, A. (2021). The role of student engagement in student outcomes in higher education: Implications from a developing country. International Journal of Educational Research, 110, 101880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101880

Panayiotou, A., Herbert, B., Sammons, P., & Kyriakides, L. (2021). Conceptualizing and exploring the quality of teaching using generic frameworks: A way forward. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101028

Reeve, J. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E. L. Deci, & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 183–203). University of Rochester Press.

Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 579–595. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032690

Scherer, R., & Gustafsson, J.-E. (2015). Student assessment of teaching as a source of information about aspects of teaching quality in multiple subject domains: An application of multilevel bifactor structural equation modeling. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1550. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01550

Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840

Thurmond, V., & Wambach, K. (2004). Understanding interactions in distance education: A review of literature. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning. http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_04/article02.htm

Truta, C., Parv, L., & Topala, I. (2018). Academic engagement and intention to drop out: Levers for sustainability in higher education. Sustainability, 10(12), 4637. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124637

Vai, M., & Sosulski, K. (2016). Essentials of online course design: A standards-based guide. Routledge.

Wang, M.-T., & Fredricks, J. A. (2014). The reciprocal links between school engagement, youth problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence. Child Development, 85, 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12138

Watson, C., Templet, T., Leigh, G., Broussard, L., & Gillis, L. (2023). Student and faculty perceptions of effectiveness of online teaching modalities. Nurse Education Today, 120, 105651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105651.

World Bank. (2022). The state of global learning poverty: 2022 update. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/publication/state-of-global-learning-poverty


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493