Abstracts
Abstract
This qualitative study examined the perspectives of educational professionals on integrating H5P technology to foster self-regulated learning (SRL) in blended learning environments at a post-secondary institution in Ontario, Canada. Using a phenomenological approach, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with five educators, five instructional designers, and five educational technologists, and analyzed thematically through the lens of Zimmerman’s SRL framework. The findings highlight key challenges in fostering learners' motivational processes (e.g., self-efficacy and autonomy), metacognitive processes (e.g., monitoring and planning), and behavioural processes (e.g., strategy execution) within blended contexts. The study evaluated the pedagogical applications, limitations, and potential of various H5P tools, such as interactive books, branching scenarios, and drag-and-drop activities, in supporting SRL. While advancements in H5P functionalities were noted, significant gaps were identified in aligning the technology with SRL best practices. These insights contribute to bridging gaps in literature and practice by offering actionable recommendations for optimizing H5P to enhance learners' SRL strategies. This research provides valuable implications for educators, instructional designers, and policymakers, laying the groundwork for future studies on leveraging educational technologies to support SRL in blended learning environments.
Keywords:
- self-regulated learning,
- H5P technology,
- motivational,
- metacognitive,
- behavioural,
- pedagogy,
- blended learning
Résumé
Cette étude qualitative a examiné les perspectives des professionnels de l’éducation concernant l’intégration de la technologie H5P pour favoriser l’apprentissage autorégulé (AAR) dans des environnements d’apprentissage hybride au sein d’un établissement postsecondaire en Ontario, Canada. En adoptant une approche phénoménologique, des données ont été recueillies à travers des entretiens semi-structurés auprès de cinq enseignants, cinq concepteurs pédagogiques et cinq technologues éducatifs, puis analysées thématiquement à travers le cadre de l’AAR de Zimmerman. Les résultats mettent en lumière des défis clés pour encourager les processus motivationnels des apprenants (par exemple, l’auto-efficacité et l’autonomie), les processus métacognitifs (par exemple, la planification et l’auto-observation) et les processus comportementaux (par exemple, l’exécution de stratégies) dans des contextes hybrides. L’étude a évalué les applications pédagogiques, les limites et le potentiel de divers outils H5P, tels que les livres interactifs, les scénarios à embranchements et les activités de glisser-déposer, pour soutenir l’AAR. Bien que des progrès aient été observés dans les fonctionnalités de H5P, des lacunes importantes ont été identifiées quant à l’alignement de la technologie avec les meilleures pratiques de l’AAR. Ces résultats contribuent à combler les lacunes dans la littérature et la pratique en offrant des recommandations concrètes pour optimiser H5P afin d’améliorer les stratégies d’AAR des apprenants. Cette recherche fournit des implications précieuses pour les enseignants, les concepteurs pédagogiques et les décideurs, en jetant les bases d’études futures sur l’utilisation des technologies éducatives pour soutenir l’AAR dans des environnements d’apprentissage hybride.
Mots-clés :
- Apprentissage autorégulé,
- technologie H5P,
- motivationnel,
- métacognitif,
- comportemental,
- pédagogie,
- apprentissage hybride
Appendices
Bibliography
- Bazen, A., Barg, F., & Takeshita, J. (2021). Research techniques made simple: an introduction to qualitative research. Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 141(2), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jid.2020.11.029
- Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2(14), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
- Carlisle-Johnston, E., & Fernlund, C. (2020). Students and educators join forces to brainstorm technology-enabled solutions for Ontario higher education. eCampus Ontario. https://www.ecampusontario.ca/students-and-educators-join-forces-to-brainstorm-technology-enabled-solutions-for-ontario-higher-education/
- Carstensen, T., Odegaard, N., & Bonsaken, T. (2018). Approaches to studying: associations with learning conceptions and preferences for teaching. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1480909
- Cheng, J. (2024). Creating active learning experiences using H5P. https://bccampus.ca/2024/03/05/creating-active-learning-experiences-using-h5p/
- Cilesiz, S. (2010). A phenomenological approach to experiences with technology: current state, promise, and future directions for research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(4), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9173-2
- Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
- Dolmans, D., Loyens, S., Marcq, H., & Gijbels, D. (2015). Deep and surface learning in problem-based learning: a review of the literature. Advances in Health Science Education, 21, 1087–1112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9645-6
- Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Journal of Educational Communication and Technology, 29, 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777
- Hammarlund, C. S., Nilsson, M. H., & Gummesson, C. (2015). External and internal factors influencing self-directed online learning of physiotherapy undergraduate students in Sweden: a qualitative study. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professionals, 12(33), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2015.12.33
- Homanova, Z., Havlásková, T., Tran, D., & Kostolanyova, K. (2019). Using H5P interactive teaching aids to solve problems. European Conference on eLearning, 214–223. http://dx.doi.org/10.34190/EEL.19.052
- Jacob, T., & Centofanti, S. (2023). Effectiveness of H5P in improving student learning outcomes in an online tertiary education setting. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 36, 469–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09361-6
- Johnson, N., & Seaman, J. (2021). Tracking the impacts of the pandemic on digital learning in Ontario. Canadian Digital Learning Research Association, 1–33. https://www.ecampusontario.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2021-CDLRA-Ontario-Report.pdf
- Kallio, H., Pietila, A. M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031
- Kemp, N., & Grieve, R. (2014). Face-to-face or face-to-screen? Undergraduates’ opinions and test performance in classroom vs. online learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(1278), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01278
- Khalid, M., Bashir, S., & Amin, H. (2020). Relationship between self-regulated learning and academic achievement of university students: a case of online distance learning and traditional universities. Bulletin of Education and Research, 42(2), 131–148. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1281053.pdf
- Khlaif, Z. N., Salha, S., & Kouraichi, B. (2021). Emergency remote learning during COVID-19 crisis: students’ engagement. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 7033–7055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10566-4
- Kohan, N., Arabshahi, K. S., Hedzabeh, R., Abbaszadeh, A., Rakhshani, T., & Emami, A. (2017). Self-regulated learning barriers in a virtual environment: A qualitative study. Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism, 5(3), 116–123. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5522903/pdf/JAMP-5-116.pdf
- Larsen, H. G., & Adu, P. (2021). The theoretical framework in phenomenological research: development and application. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003084259
- Liaw, S., & Huang, H. (2013). Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness, and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e-learning environments. Computers & Education, 60(1), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.015
- Liu, Q., Sweeney, J., & Evans, G. (2021). Exploring self-regulated learning among engineering undergraduates in the extensive online instruction environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Society for Engineering Education, 2(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--37145
- Mamun, M., Lawrie, G., & Wright, T. (2020). Instructional design of scaffolded online learning modules for self-regulated and inquiry-based learning environments. Computers & Education, 144, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103695
- Maphalala, M. C., Mkhasibe, R. G., & Mncube, D. W. (2021). Online learning as a catalyst for self-regulated learning in universities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 6(2), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.2021.25
- Moerer-Urdahl, T., & Creswell, J. (2004). Using transcendental phenomenology to explore the “ripple effect” in a leadership mentorship program. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(2), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300202
- Morris. (2019). Self-regulated learning: a fundamental competence in a rapidly changing world. International Review of Education, 65, 633–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-019-09793-2
- Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995658
- Nacional, R. (2024). Gamifying education: Enhancing student engagement and motivation. Puissant, 5, 716–729. ISSN online: 2719-0161
- Nasri, N. M., Nasri, N., & Abd Talib, M. A. (2021). The unsung role of assessment and feedback in self-regulated learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(2), 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1900552
- Olympus America Inc. (2018). Olympus DS-9000 digital voice recorder simplifies workflow and increases dictation efficiency. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/olympus-ds-9000-digital-voice-recorder-simplifies-workflow-and-increases-dictation-efficiency-300682483.html
- Onodipe, G., Keengwe, J., & Cottrell-Yongye, A. (2020). Using learning management system to promote self-regulated learning in a flipped classroom. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 9(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.14434/jotlt.v9i1.29375
- Perry, N. E. (2013). Understanding classroom processes that support children’s self-regulation of learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 10, 45–68. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsmono.2013.cat1370
- Robinson, J. D., & Persky, A. M. (2020). Developing self-regulated learners. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84(3), 292–296. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe847512
- Sergio-Ramon, R. L., Ma-Teresa, G. R., & Isacc-Shamir, R. R. (2021). Evaluation of the implementation of a learning object development with H5P technology. Vivat Academia (Alcala de Henares), 24 (154), 1–23. http://doi.org/10.15178/va.2021.154.e1224
- Seufert, T. (2020). Building bridges between self-regulation and cognitive load – an invitation for a broad and differentiated attempt. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 1151–1162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09574-6
- Shrivastav, H., & Hiltz, S. R. (2013). Information overload in technology-based education: a meta-analysis. Proceedings of the Nineteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287426762_Information_overload_in_technology-based_education_A_meta-analysis
- Singaram, V., Naidoo, K. L., & Singh, S. (2022). Self-regulated learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: Perspectives of South African final year health professions students. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 13, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S339840
- Singleton, R., & Charlton, A. (2019). Creating H5P content for active learning. Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 13–14. https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v2i1.32
- Van Alten, D. C. D., Phielix, C., Janssen, J., & Kester, L. (2020). Self-regulated learning support in flipped learning videos enhances learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104000
- Van-Wyk, M. M. (2019). Student support toward self-regulated learning in open and distributed environments. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9316-4
- Wandler, J., & Imbriale, W. (2017). Promoting college student self-regulation in online learning environments. Online Learning, 21(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i2.881
- Williamson, G. (2015). Self-regulated learning: an overview of metacognition, motivation, and behavior. Journal of Initial Teaching Inquiry, 1, 25–27.
- Yadav, D. (2022). Criteria for good qualitative research: a comprehensive review. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31, 679–689. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00619-0
- Yuce-Gun, O. (2020). Remote teaching: Why a front-loaded and fast-paced class fared well in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Medium. https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/remote-teaching-why-a-front-loaded-and-fast-paced-class-fared-well-in-the-wake-of-the-covid-19-cdcabb0a85fc
- Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning performance. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance, 49–64. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839010