ror.org/04sjchr03
Abstracts
Abstract
Blended course modalities combine synchronous activities (face-to-face or in virtual classrooms) with asynchronous online activities, and they represent a fertile ground for enhancing student engagement. However, studying student engagement in these environments requires the development of a measurement scale, which is the purpose of this paper. This new measurement scale for student engagement in blended course modalities (EMEECH) provides researchers and instructors with tools for assessing student engagement in blended course modalities (blended, blended online, or blended synchronous) from a multidimensional perspective. This article presents the scale development, along with validity evidence for its internal structure obtained through exploratory factor and internal consistency analyses, based on diversified data from three universities. A first sample (n1=234) allowed for identifying three dimensions of student engagement: emotional-cognitive, social, and behavioral. A second sample (n2=231) provided further evidence of the internal structure of the new scale by confirming its factorial structure and its superior internal consistency.
Keywords:
- higher education,
- blended course modalities,
- student engagement,
- development of a measurement scale,
- factor analysis
Résumé
Les modalités de cours hybrides, qui combinent des activités synchrones (en classe ou virtuelles) et en ligne asynchrones, représentent un terrain potentiel d’augmentation du niveau d’engagement des étudiants dans leurs cours. L’étude de l’engagement des étudiants dans ces modalités nécessite toutefois l’élaboration d’une échelle de mesure, soit l’objectif de cet article. La nouvelle Échelle multidimensionnelle d’engagement des étudiants dans des modalités de cours hybrides (EMEECH) vient outiller chercheurs et formateurs pour mesurer l’engagement des étudiants dans ces modalités selon une perspective multidimensionnelle. Nous présentons son élaboration ainsi que des preuves de validité pour sa structure interne obtenues par analyses factorielles exploratoires et de cohérence interne sur la base de données diversifiées provenant de trois institutions universitaires. Un premier échantillon (n1 = 234) a permis d’identifier trois dimensions de l’engagement des étudiants: émotionnelle-cognitive, sociale et comportementale. Un second échantillon (n2 = 231) a appuyé la structure interne de la nouvelle échelle en confirmant sa structure factorielle et en présentant une très bonne cohérence interne.
Mots-clés :
- enseignement supérieur,
- cours hybrides,
- engagement des étudiants,
- élaboration d’une échelle de mesure,
- analyses factorielles
Resumo
As modalidades de cursos híbridos, que combinam atividades síncronas (em sala de aula ou virtuais) e assíncronas online, representam um campo potencial para aumentar o nível de envolvimento dos estudantes nos seus cursos. O estudo do envolvimento dos estudantes nestas modalidades requer, em todo o caso, o desenvolvimento de uma escala de medição, que é o objetivo deste artigo. A nova Escala Multidimensional para o Envolvimento dos estudantes em modalidades de cursos híbridos (EMEECH) fornece um instrumento para investigadores e formadores medirem o envolvimento dos estudantes nestas modalidades a partir de uma perspetiva multidimensional. Apresentamos a sua elaboração, bem como as provas de validade da sua estrutura interna obtidas por análises fatoriais exploratórias e coerência interna, tendo por base diversos dados de três instituições universitárias. Uma primeira amostra (n1 = 234) identificou três dimensões do envolvimento dos estudantes: emocional-cognitiva, social e comportamental. Uma segunda amostra (n2 = 231) apoiou a estrutura interna da nova escala, confirmando a sua estrutura fatorial e apresentando uma coerência interna muito boa.
Palavras chaves:
- ensino superior,
- cursos híbridos,
- envolvimento dos estudantes,
- elaboração de uma escala de medição,
- análises fatoriais
Appendices
References
- Alvarez-Bell, R. M., Wirtz, D., & Bian, H. (2017). Identifying keys to success in innovative teaching: Student engagement and instructional practices as predictors of student learning in a course using a team-based learning approach. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 5(2), 128-146. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/TLI/article/view/57489/43250
- American Educational Research Association (AERA). (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. AERA.
- Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
- Berry, S. (2019). Teaching to connect: Community-building strategies for the virtual classroom. Online Learning, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1425
- Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
- Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22 (Supplément C), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001
- Boelens, R., Voet, M., & De Wever, B. (2018). The design of blended learning in response to student diversity in higher education: Instructors’ views and use of differentiated instruction in blended learning. Computers & Education, 120, 197-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.009
- Bond, M., & Bedenlier, S. (2019). Facilitating student engagement through educational technology: Towards a conceptual framework. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(11), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.528
- Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2012). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. John Wiley & Sons.
- Bourque, J., Poulin, N., & Cleaver, A. F. (2007). Évaluation de l’utilisation et de la présentation des résultats d’analyses factorielles et d’analyses en composantes principales en éducation. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 32(2), 325-344. https://doi.org/10.7202/014411ar
- Brault-Labbé, A., & Dubé, L. (2010). Engagement scolaire, bien-être personnel et autodétermination chez des étudiants à l’université. Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 42(2), 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017385
- Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer.
- Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309-319. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309
- Coates, H. (2007). A model of online and general campus-based student engagement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 121-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801878
- Conseil supérieur de l’éducation. (2015). Formation à distance dans les universités québécoises : un potentiel à optimiser. Gouvernement du Québec. https://www.cse.gouv.qc.ca/publications/formation-distance-universites-50-0486
- Conseil supérieur de l’éducation. (2020). Éduquer au numérique. Gouvernement du Québec. https://www.cse.gouv.qc.ca/publications/eduquer-au-numerique-50-0534
- Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Exploratory Factor Analysis, 10(7), 1-9. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1156&context=pare
- DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
- 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. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ890707.pdf
- Donovan, D. T. (2019). Tracking online and distance education in Canadian universities and colleges: 2018. Canadian Digital Learning Research Association.
- Drysdale, J. S., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., & Halverson, L. R. (2013). An analysis of research trends in dissertations and theses studying blended learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 90-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.003
- Dumford, A. D., & Miller, A. L. (2018). Online learning in higher education: Exploring advantages and disadvantages for engagement. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(3), 452-465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9179-z
- Fadde, P. J., & Vu, P. (2014). Blended online learning: Benefits, challenges, and misconceptions. In P. R. Lowenthal, C. S. York et J. C. Richardson (Eds.), Online learning: Common misconceptions, benefits and challenges (pp. 33-48). Nova Science Publishing.
- 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
- Fredricks, J. A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016). Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning and Instruction, 43, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.002
- Fredricks, J. A., Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2019). Conclusion: Status of student engagement interventions. In J. A. Fredricks, A. L. Reschly et S. L. Christenson (Eds.), Handbook of student engagement interventions (pp. 375-389). Elsevier.
- Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons.
- Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. Dans M. G. Moore (dir.), Handbook of distance education (3e éd., p. 333-350). Routledge.
- Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2019). Learner engagement in blended learning environments: A conceptual framework. Online Learning, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1481
- Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., Drysdale, J. S., & Henrie, C. R. (2014). A thematic analysis of the most highly cited scholarship in the first decade of blended learning research. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 20-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.09.004
- Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184-192. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192
- Heilporn, G. (2021). Stratégies favorisant l’engagement des étudiants dans des modalités de cours hybrides en enseignement supérieur [thèse de doctorat, Université de Sherbrooke]. Savoirs UdeS. https://savoirs.usherbrooke.ca/handle/11143/18359
- Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S., & Bélisle, M. (2021a). An examination of teachers’ strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00260-3
- Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S., & Bélisle, M. (2021b). Relationships, relevance, and course pace are key to student engagement in blended online courses in higher education [manuscript submitted for publication]. Département de pédagogie, Faculté d’éducation, Université de Sherbrooke.
- Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
- Hoi, V. N., & Le Hang, H. (2021). The structure of student engagement in online learning: A bi-factor exploratory structural equation modelling approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12551
- Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63, 564-569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5
- Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758-773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
- Krause, K., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493-505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701698892
- Lakhal, S., Bateman, D., & Bédard, J. (2017). Blended synchronous delivery mode in graduate programs: A literature review and its implementation in the master teacher program. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, 47-60. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1147188.pdf
- Lakhal, S., & Meyer, F. (2019). Blended learning. Dans A. Tatnall (dir.), Encyclopedia of education and information technologies (p. 1-9). Springer.
- Lakhal, S., Mukamurera, J., Bédard, M.-È., Heilporn, G., & Chauret, M. (2020). Features fostering academic and social integration in blended synchronous courses in graduate programs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(5). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0180-z
- Laveault, D., & Grégoire, J. (2014). Introduction aux théories de tests en psychologie et en sciences de l’éducation. De Boeck Supérieur.
- Lawson, M. A., & Lawson, H. A. (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 432-479. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313480891
- Maccallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., Hong, S., Maccallum, R. C., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84-99. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.536.6317&rep=rep1&type=pdf
- Mandernach, B. J. (2015). Assessment of student engagement in higher education: A synthesis of literature and assessment tools. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 12(2), 1-14. https://www.ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter/article/view/367
- Manwaring, K. C., Larsen, R., Graham, C. R., Henrie, C. R., & Halverson, L. R. (2017). Investigating student engagement in blended learning settings using experience sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher Education, 35(Supplement C), 21-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.06.002
- Maroco, J., Maroco, A. L., Campos, J. A. D. B., & Fredricks, J. A. (2016). University student’s engagement: Development of the University Student Engagement Inventory (USEI). Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 29(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-016-0042-8
- 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). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
- Mayer, D. (2019). Comparaison entre les étudiants de première et de seconde génération : engagement, rendement et persévérance. Nouvelles perspectives en sciences sociales, 14(2), 303-333. https://doi.org/10.7202/1062513ar
- Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
- Ouimet, J. A., & Smallwood, R. A. (2005). Assessment measures: CLASSE – The Class- Level Survey of Student Engagement. Assessment Update, 17(6), 13-15.
- Parent, S. (2017). Perception des étudiants et des enseignants quant à l’aspect novateur du numérique dans un cours d’introduction au collégial. Revue canadienne des jeunes chercheur(e)s en éducation, 8(2), 30-39. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cjnse/article/view/42917
- Pituch, K. A., & Stevens, J. (2016). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences: Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS (6th ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
- Power, M. (2008). The emergence of a blended online learning environment. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(4), 503-514.
- Raes, A., Detienne, L., Windey, I., & Depaepe, F. (2019). A systematic literature review on synchronous hybrid learning: Gaps identified. Learning Environments Research, 23, 269-290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09303-z
- Redmond, P., Abawi, L. A., Brown, A., Henderson, R. , &Heffernan, A. (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning, 22(1), 183-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175
- Schreiner, L. A., & Louis, M. (2011). The engaged learning index: Implications for faculty development. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 22(1), 5-28.
- Spring, K. J., Graham, C. R., & Hadlock, C. A. (2016). The current landscape of international blended learning. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 8(1), 84-102. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2016.075961
- Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (2015). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
- Sturgis, P., Roberts, C., & Smith, P. (2014). Middle alternatives revisited: How the neither/ nor response acts as a way of saying “I don’t know”? Sociological Methods & Research, 43(1), 15-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124112452527
- Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Pearson.
- Taylor, M., Vaughan, N., Ghani, S. K., Atas, S., & Fairbrother, M. (2018). Looking back and looking forward: A glimpse of blended learning in higher education from 2007- 2017. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 9(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAVET.2018010101
- Vaughan, N. (2014). Student engagement and blended learning: Making the assessment connection. Education Sciences, 4(4), 247-264. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci4040247
- Watts, L. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous communication in distance learning: A review of the literature. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 23-32. https://www.proquest.com/openview/f83c30d3f7e7d1cd69754d1fa52eaff5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=29705
- Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806-838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
- Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 9(2), 79-94. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.09.2.p079
- Zhoc, K. C., Webster, B. J., King, R. B., Li, J. C., & Chung, T. S. (2019). Higher Education Student Engagement Scale (HESES): Development and psychometric evidence. Research in Higher Education, 60(2), 219-244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-018-9510-6
10.7202/014411ar