Background of study
Scope of the terminologies
When it comes to e-learning, terminologies such as online learning and distance learning are often used interchangeably (Moore et al., 2011; Ally, 2004). Nevertheless, Anohina (2005) argued that online learning is also not suggested to be the perfect substitute to fully overlap e-learning in terms of their disparities in scope.
Context of the case
Looking at the importance of this issue, Almaiah et al. 2020) addressed the online digital systems that can provide realistic solutions to eliminate the negative effects that occurred on the students' learning due to the epidemic, including disrupted learning. It is therefore true that offering multiple and accessible ways of learning, especially e-learning, has become a necessary act to respond to this campaign (Almaiah et al., 2020).
Problem statement
According to the latest research, poor network connection, lack of digital devices, critical financial status, etc. will seriously threaten classroom interaction, leading to an overall decrease in student engagement in emergency e-learning during the pandemic of COVID-19. (Abou-Khalil et al., 2021). Indeed, the focus in this study will be on the period of E-learning implementation after the COVID-19 outbreak.
Research objectives
Since the current problem that gave rise to the need for this research stemmed from an abrupt and unavoidable mode of education during the COVID-19 period, meaning that e-learning, at least in Malaysia, is both the main and the only mode of education has become performing higher education (Selvanathan et al., 2020). In this case, it will be difficult to comprehensively assess traditional learning, like other researchers, because of such a condition, suggesting that the comparison with past face-to-face learning will not be addressed in this study.
Research questions
Significance of the study
In response to the aim of the study to investigate 1) the level of engagement in E-learning classes under the crisis and 2) how undergraduate students experience engagement in E-learning. In response to the first research question, 'What is the level of engagement in e-learning classes among undergraduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic', the results of the 23 scale items are generally consistent across the three types of interactions.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Social Constructivist Theories
What researchers therefore emphasize is that social interaction helps students acquire and shape knowledge in the mind (Vygotsky, 1978; Dixson, 2015; Bruner, 1986). Placing social constructivism in the context of e-learning, Dixson (2015) and Ally (2004) believe that some effects and outcomes may parallel similar situations achievable in traditional education: collaborative learning is encouraged and learners are allowed to structure their own structure. their understanding of what they were learning.
Community of Inquiry Model
Social presence is described as "the ability of individuals in COI to project their personal qualities into the community, portraying themselves as 'actual persons' to other participants" (Garrison et al., 1999). Compared to cognitive presence, teaching presence is less influential in relation to student learning (Akyol & Garrison, 2008).
Previous studies
- Defining student engagement
- Existing approaches
- Factors of online student engagement
Mucundanyi (2019) focused more on the mutual actions of the same three types of interactions to explore the incentives to promote student participation in the scope of online classroom communities. Research has shown that the presence of a teacher can be considered the main factor of student-instructor interaction in an online learning environment (Ma et al., 2015). It should be noted that all three factors were rated as "true", although the classification had some differences.
The last section of the survey questionnaire consists of two dependent variables, corresponding to the second research question, "How do undergraduate students perceive engagement in e-learning classes during the COVID-19 pandemic?". Apart from the issues of the participants, there are also limitations in the instrument design of the study.
METHODOLOGY
Participants and sampling method
As mentioned, the participants are selected from the same faculty at a particular institution in Malaysia, which is the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FAS) at the Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) Kampar campus. To ensure the diversity and representativeness of the results, simple sampling is used as the large sampling method, which means that the 100 participants have an equal chance of being. Sharma (2017) illustrated simple random sampling that it is a conspicuous technique to avoid bias and increase the representativeness of the study results, which is a crucial aspect of research conclusion.
Instrumentation
- Self-reporting survey
In section 3 (student-instructor interaction), 4 (student-student interaction) and 5 (student-content interaction), participants are instructed to complete 23 items presented as statements rated on a Likert scale, which provides 5 scale categories that range from Very True, True, Moderately True, Somewhat True, and. In the last part, there are only two questions, which are a multiple choice question and an open question. They are asked to give their reasons according to their answers as "Satisfied", "Somewhat satisfied" or "Dissatisfied".
Data collection
The process of collecting survey responses will last for a maximum of 2 weeks from the beginning of the October trimester of 2021 when the respondents have participated in the E-learning courses for more than 18 months. The non-respondents will be informed to complete the survey in the second week by receiving a maximum of two reminder emails. Neither the non-target population nor the non-responding samples are recorded in the final data.
Data analysis
Ethical considerations
As observed in Table 4, it can be discovered that the level of engagement in terms of factor 1 was generally at the level of 'True' (Mean=4.02, SD=0.790) among the undergraduate students in UTAR. As reported, item 2 of factor 3, "I visit the course website regularly", was identified at the highest level of engagement among the seven items below, indicated as 'True' (Mean=4.25, SD=0.809). In this part, summative content analysis, which provides substitutes for the responses, is applied to evaluate participants' satisfaction with their involvement in an E-learning environment (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).
As the results show, a large percentage of students believed they performed best when interacting with their classmates. Although a number of participants do not expect to receive a top grade, none of the items in the three factors showed a low level of involvement.
FINDINGS
Results
- RQ1: level of engagement Problem statement
- RQ2: Undergraduates’ perception
Positive responses to being satisfied with their experience of engaging in an e-learning environment. Negative responses to being dissatisfied with their experience of engaging in an e-learning environment. However, as discussed in the last question, students showed the lowest level of engagement in student-student interaction compared to other types of interactions.
Overall, this paper is designed to assess student engagement in e-learning classes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Going forward, UTAR students also indicated their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their experiences of engagement in e-learning environments during the COVID-19 pandemic.
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION
RQ1: What is the level of engagement in E-learning classes among
Regarding the question of the level of student engagement in e-learning classes during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study found that the selected sample generally engaged in e-learning classes in relation to three types of interactions. According to the results of this research, the interaction between the learner and the instructor was rated as the highest level of engagement; then the next is learner-content interaction followed by learner-learner interaction. Overall, the findings showed that there is a moderately high level of engagement among UTAR undergraduates.
Surprisingly, despite the result that almost two in five people do not expect to achieve a high level of grades, none of the items in the three factors indicated a low level of commitment. In this study, participants indicated their high level of engagement in two items, "I am committed to working with my classmates so that we can help each other learn" under student-student interaction and.
RQ2: How do undergraduates perceive engagement in E-learning classes during
However, another unexpected finding in this study is that the level of engagement revealed in the Likert scale items is almost "True", except for the item in student-student interaction that "I share personal concerns with others". It is completely surprising that the students' perception of the topic that "the interaction that you thought you did best in the e-learning classes" is completely contrary to the results obtained in the previous section. In other words, some important interpretations of the concept of "learner-learner interaction" that have been indicated in the Likert scale were ignored by the participants.
This may happen to some extent because when the participants in the Google survey were asked about "why you are satisfied or dissatisfied with your participation in the e-learning environment", I gave the relevant example "Teachers are responsive". In particular, the sample size was limited to the FAS of the UTAR Kampar campus due to time and resource constraints.
Conclusions
Essentially, the information and findings explored in this study could be made available to other researchers interested in similar topics. Therefore, more studies are needed to gain a deeper understanding of student engagement in such a situation. Most importantly, it is inspiring to assume that this study would encourage all stakeholders in the higher education system to think about how they can improve student engagement in an online learning context.
These stakeholders, including teachers, school managements, government officials and students themselves, are expected to gain some deep insights from this study.
Limitations of the study
Recommendations
Last but not least, in the current situation created by the COVID-19 pandemic, e-learning seems to be a reluctant choice but the best course of action for students in Malaysia. Engagement matters: Students' perceptions of the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Online Learning: Case of Higher Education Institution in Malaysia.
The impact of Covid-19 on learning: Exploring EFL learners' engagement in online courses in Saudi Arabia. Student perceptions of student-to-student interactions that undermine a sense of community in an online learning environment.
