Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this research is to investigate student engagement in guided web‐based learning systems. It looks into students' engagement and their behavioral patterns in two types of guided learning systems (i.e. a fully‐ and a partially‐guided). The research also aims to demonstrate how the engagement evolves from the beginning towards the end of the interactions; which enables analysis to be performed on the quality of engagement.Design/methodology/approachAn experimental study was conducted on 41 students from a public university in Malaysia using two web‐based systems as the main learning tools. The students' engagement data were captured three times during the interactions and once at the end of the experimental study using student self‐report.FindingsThe main outcome of this study suggests that student engagement was changing over time either in positive or negative patterns. The directions of change in both types of guided learning were mainly influenced by the students' background of knowledge.Practical implicationsThis study demonstrates that student engagement is dynamic. Therefore, progressive assessment is a practical approach to obtain the engagement data which can be used to regulate and improve student engagement in web‐based systems. As a result, an adaptive and intelligent web‐based learning environment can be created.Originality/valueThis research proposes a new approach to improve students' engagement in web‐based instruction, that is, through a progressive assessment of their current experience.
Subject
Education,Computer Science (miscellaneous)
Reference39 articles.
1. Angelino, L.M., Williams, F.K. and Natvig, D. (2007), “Strategies to engage online students and reduce attrition rates”, Journal of Educators Online, Vol. 4, pp. 1‐14.
2. Baker, R.S.J.D., D'mello, S.K., Rodrigo, M.M.T. and Graesser, A.C. (2010), “Better to be frustrated than bored: the incidence, persistence, and impact of learners' cognitive‐affective states during interactions with three different computer‐based learning environments”, International Journal of Human‐Computer Studies, Vol. 68, pp. 223‐241.
3. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Henze, N. and Patti, V. (2002), “Setting up a framework for comparing adaptive educational hypermedia: first steps and application on curriculum sequencing”, ABIS Workshop on Personalization for the Mobile World, Hannover, Germany, pp. 43‐50.
4. Brusilovsky, P. (2003), “Adaptive navigation support in educational hypermedia: the role of student knowledge level and the case for meta‐adaptation”, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 34, pp. 487‐497.
5. Brusilovsky, P., Karagiannidis, C. and Sampson, D. (2004), “Layered evaluation of adaptive learning systems”, International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, Vol. 14, pp. 402‐421.