Elsevier

Computers & Education

Volume 54, Issue 4, May 2010, Pages 1222-1232
Computers & Education

Engaging online learners: The impact of Web-based learning technology on college student engagement

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Widespread use of the Web and other Internet technologies in postsecondary education has exploded in the last 15 years. Using a set of items developed by the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), the researchers utilized the hierarchical linear model (HLM) and multiple regressions to investigate the impact of Web-based learning technology on student engagement and self-reported learning outcomes in face-to-face and online learning environments. The results show a general positive relationship between the use the learning technology and student engagement and learning outcomes. We also discuss the possible impact on minority and part-time students as they are more likely to enroll in online courses.

Introduction

The Internet and other digital technologies have become thoroughly integrated in the lives of today’s college student. A recent study by EDUCAUSE (Hawkins & Rudy, 2008) found that the vast majority of US students at baccalaureate degree-granting institutions own and use their own computers. Online learning management systems (LMS) such as Blackboard, D2L, or Sakai are nearly ubiquitous on American colleges and universities, and wireless Internet access permeates most college classrooms (Green, 2007, Hawkins and Rudy, 2008). Outside the classroom, Internet connections are available in virtually all on-campus residence halls (Hawkins & Rudy, 2008) and an estimated 79–95% of all American College students use Facebook and MySpace (Ellison, 2007).

Most first-year college students now arrive on campus with their own personal computer, digital music player, cell phone, and other digital devices (Salaway & Caruso, 2008). As technology becomes a part of modern life and fuel price remains high, more and more college students opt to take online or hybrid courses using readily-available computers and information technologies (Allen & Seaman, 2008). Moreover, many students expect instructors to integrate Internet technologies, such as online learning management systems and collaborative Internet technologies, into traditional face-to-face classes to enhance learning experience, believing those tools make the educational experience more convenient and educationally effective (Salaway & Caruso, 2008).

Since the early 2000s, Web-based applications have become the de facto standard platform for distance education courses and learning management systems (Parsad & Lewis, 2008). The widespread adaptation of digital technologies and online courses has caused many researchers (Bråten and Streømsø, 2006, Kuh and Hu, 2001, Robinson and Hullinger, 2008, Zhou and Zhang, 2008) to question the impact of the Internet and Web-based learning technology on student’s educational engagement and learning outcomes. The concept of student engagement is not new to educators. Years of research has shown that what students do during college counts more in terms of learning outcomes than who they are or even where they go to college (Austin, 1993, Kuh, 2004, Pace, 1980, Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005). In the Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education, Chickering and Gamson (1987) argued that good college education should promote student-faculty interaction, cooperation among students, active learning, prompt feedback, time on task, high expectations, and respect for diverse talents and ways of learning. In a follow-up article published in 1996, Chickering and Ehrmann (1996) stated that new communication and information technology alone will not lead to student success. Instead, educators must utilize technology as a lever to promote student engagement in order to maximize the power of computers and information technology as a catalyst for student success in college (Ehrmann, 2004).

Most studies on the topic of technology and student engagement have affirmed the utility of computers and information technology on promoting student engagement (Hu and Kuh, 2001, Nelson Laird and Kuh, 2005, Robinson and Hullinger, 2008). For example, Robinson and Hullinger found that asynchronous instructional technology allows learners more time to think critically and reflectively, which in turns stimulates higher order thinking such as analysis, synthesis, judgment, and application of knowledge. Duderstadt, Atkins, and Houweling (2002) stated, “When implemented through active, inquiry based learning pedagogies, online learning can stimulate students to use higher order skills such as problem solving, collaboration, and stimulation” (p. 75). Furthermore, students taking online courses are expected to work collaboratively, which is an important component of student engagement, plus that collaborative components have been integrated into most Web-based course designs (Thurmond & Wambach, 2004).

Other than promoting student engagement, research focused on the connection between technology and learning outcomes has been mixed. George Kuh and his associates have published several articles related to this issue using the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) data. In Kuh and Hu (2001), the authors suggested a positive relationship between a student’s use of computers and other information technologies and self-reported gains in science and technology, vocational preparation, and intellectual development. Hu and Kuh (2001) also found that students attending more “wired” institutions reported more frequently use computing and information technology and higher levels of engagement in good educational practices than their counterparts at less wired institutions. A similar study conducted by Kuh and Vesper (2001) concluded that increased familiarity with computers was positively related to developing other important skills and competencies, including social skills.

Studies conducted by other researchers, however, have mixed outcomes that have often not been as positive as those reported by George Kuh and his associates. A meta-analysis commissioned by the US Department of Education examined empirical evidence of the impact of online and hybrid courses on learning outcomes. The authors found that both online and hybrid courses have a significant positive impact on learning outcomes, with hybrid courses having a greater impact. However, the authors caution that the “positive effects associated with blended learning should not be attributed to the media, per se” (p. ix) (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2009). This reflects long-standing findings that, contrary to many naïve beliefs, media do not have a significant impact on learning outcomes (Clark, 2009). Other meta-analyses of distance education impacts on learning outcomes have supported these mixed findings (Bernard et al., 2004, Sitzmann et al., 2006).

While it is unclear if students learn more in online courses, it does seem clear that there is an increase in students’ information literacy. For example, Robinson and Hullinger (2008) found a correlation between taking online courses and the improvement of students’ computer skills. Though most online courses do not require students to have high level computer skills in order to complete the courses, they nevertheless require students to become familiar with essential information technological skills such as using e-mail, participating in online chatting, posting to a Web-based discussion board, and using word processing, presentation, and spreadsheet software.

Even though there are many educational benefits associated with using computer technologies, there are also downsides. Critics have argued that online learning and the use of information technology may put certain student populations in disadvantage. Echoing Jenkins’ “participation gap” idea (Jenkins, 2006), some researchers have suggested that characteristics such as socioeconomic status (Gladieux & Swail, 1999) and institutional resources (Hu & Kuh, 2001) play a significant role in students’ use of and the impact of computers and the Internet. In addition, some researchers asserted that the lack of face-to-face interactions in online learning may reduce instructional effectiveness for students of certain learning styles (Bullen, 1998, Terrell and Dringus, 2000, Ward and Newlands, 1998). Sanders (2006) argued that no communication technology can replace the physical presence and the serendipitous moments of learning such as the spontaneous discussion or the overheard remarks during class break that so often occurred in a face-to-face environment.

Although studies have found positive connections between the use of computers and information technology and student engagement and learning outcomes, most of them studied the general use of information technology instead of the specific use of instructional and learning management systems. This study investigates the nature of student engagement in the online learning environment to find out if student and institutional characteristics affect the use of the learning technologies and their impact on student engagement. Specifically, the following research questions were addressed:

  • 1.

    How often do college students in different types of courses use the Web and Internet technologies for course-related tasks?

  • 2.

    Do individual and institutional characteristics affect the likelihood of taking online courses?

  • 3.

    Does the relative amount of technology employed in a course have a relationship with student engagement, learning approaches, and student self-reported learning outcomes?

Section snippets

Instrument and data source

The data for this study come from the 2008 administration of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). NSSE is an annual survey created and administered by the Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. Since the inception of the NSSE in 2000, more than a million first-year students and seniors at more than 1300 baccalaureate degree-granting colleges and universities in the United States and Canada have reported the time and energy that they devote to the educationally

Descriptive statistics

The first three questions of the survey asked students how many courses they took in the current academic year, how many of those courses used the Web or Internet as the primary method to delivery course content, and how many of those courses were hybrid courses. Using those responses, we were able to classify course delivery methods into three categories: Web or Internet-only, face-to-face, and hybrid. As a result of this classification, students can take courses in seven different patterns:

Discussion

The first research question asked: How often do college students in different types of courses use the Web and Internet technologies for course-related tasks? First, it is important to note that the majority of students in this study had classes that were entirely or partially in the classroom. Very few were enrolled in all online courses and few were enrolled in hybrid-only or hybrid and online classes. Our finding is consistent with the perception that students who took online courses are

Conclusion

Overall, the results of this study point to a positive relationship between Web-based learning technology use and student engagement and desirable learning outcomes. Not only do students who utilize the Web and Internet technologies in their learning tend to score higher in the traditional student engagement measures (e.g. level of academic challenge, active and collaborative learning, student-faculty interaction, and supportive campus environment), they also are more likely to make use of deep

References (53)

  • I. Bråten et al.

    Epistemological beliefs, interest, and gender as predictors of Internet-based learning activities

    Computers in Human Behavior

    (2006)
  • M. Ward et al.

    Use of the Web in undergraduate teaching

    Computers and Education

    (1998)
  • I.E. Allen et al.

    Staying the course: Online education in the United States

    (2008)
  • A.W. Austin

    What matters in colleges: Four critical years revisited

    (1993)
  • J. Bersin

    The blended learning book: Best practices, proven methodologies, and lessons learned

    (2004)
  • R.M. Bernard et al.

    How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature

    Review of Educational Research

    (2004)
  • M. Bullen

    Participation and critical thinking in online university distance education

    Journal of Distance Education

    (1998)
  • R.M. Carini et al.

    Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages

    Research in Higher Education

    (2006)
  • Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2009). Basic classification....
  • Chen, P. D., Ted, I., & Davis, L. K. (2007). Engaging African American students: Compare student engagement and student...
  • A.W. Chickering et al.

    Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education

    AAHE Bulletin

    (1987)
  • A.W. Chickering et al.

    Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever

    AAHE Bulletin

    (1996)
  • Clark, R. E. (2009). Past and future research in online education. In Paper presented at the 2009 annual meeting of the...
  • Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning: Let’s get beyond the hype. Learning & training innovations newsline....
  • J. Duderstadt et al.

    Higher education in the digital age: Technology issues and strategies for American colleges and universities

    (2002)
  • S.C. Ehrmann

    Beyond computer literacy: Implications of technology for the content of a college education

    Liberal Education

    (2004)
  • Ellison, N. (2007). Facebook use on campus: A social capital perspective on social network sites. In Program presented...
  • L.E. Gladieux et al.

    The virtual university and educational opportunity: Issues of equity and access for the next generation

    (1999)
  • C.R. Graham

    Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions

  • Green, K. (2007). The 2007 campus computing survey....
  • Hawkins, B. L., & Rudy, J. A. (2008). EDUCAUSE core data service fiscal year 2007 summary report....
  • S. Hu et al.

    Computing experience and good practices in undergraduate education: Does the degree of campus “wiredness” matter?

    Education Policy Analysis Archives

    (2001)
  • Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research (2008a). Institutional report 2008. Indiana University Center for...
  • Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. (2008b). Promoting engagement for all students: The imperative to...
  • H. Jenkins

    Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide

    (2006)
  • Kuh, G. D. (2004). The National Survey Of Student Engagement: Conceptual framework and overview of psychometric...
  • Cited by (476)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text