ONLINE ENGAGEMENT REVISITED USING CONNECTIVISM THEORY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJEPC.1162073Abstract
Studies on online learning have gone beyond its benefits and drawbacks. This is because many higher institutions are using online learning as part of the learning mode. Many institutions are now using mixed mode (traditional face-to-face and online classes) to impart knowledge to their students. So, when it comes to online classes, the concern is -how are the students engaging in the lessons? This study combines the engagement theory and the theory of connectivism to explore their connections. The study used existing theories to test the model for connectedness in online learning. 100 respondents were conveniently chosen to participate in this study. The instrument used for data collection is the constructs of engagements by Redmond et al. (2018). Data was analyzed using SmartPLS to confirm relationships among variables and to form a model of connectedness. The result of this study reveals the proposed connectivism model for online learning. Findings revealed that there are significant relationships between connectivism and diversity, openness, connectedness, and autonomy. The findings showed there are larger effects of all variables tested. Further tests reveal the goodness of the predicted model. Results of this study bear an interesting theoretical, conceptual, and practical framework for connectedness in online classes.
Autonomy, Connectedness, Diversity, Online Engagement, Openness, PLS-SEM
Downloads
References
Bergdahl, N. (2022) Engagement and disengagement in online learning. Computers & Education, 188(2022) 104562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104561
Boomsma (1982) A. Robustness of LISREL against small sample sizes in factor analysis models. In: Joreskog KG, Wold H, editors. Systems under indirection observation: Causality, structure, prediction (Part I) Amsterdam, Netherlands: North Holland; 1982. pp. 149–173.
Brown, S.J. (2023) Online but Disconnected: Student Connectedness in Online Remote Learning in Higher Education in New Zealand. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 4(2). 10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.2.622
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Conklin, S., Ovarzun, B., Kim, S., & Dikkers, A.G. (2024). Exploring the Relationships of Learners and Instructors in Online Courses. Online Learning, 28 (4), (257-281). DOI: 10.24059/olj.v28i4.3934
Dulfer, N., Gowing, A., & Mitchell, J. (2025) Building belonging in online classroom: relationships at the core. Teaching in Higher Education, 30(4), 1024-1040. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2024.2349993
Fornell and Bookstein (1982) Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 440-452. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3151718
Getenet, S., Cantle, R., Redmond, P., & Albion, P. (2024) Students’ digital technology attitude, literacy and self-efficacy and their effect on online learning engagement. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, 3(2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00437-y
Goodman, S.N. (1999). Toward evidence-based medical statistics: 2. The Bayes factor. Clinical Trials, 6(3), 229–24 Bayes Factors, 233-240. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-12-199906150-00019
Hair, J. F., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107–123. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1504/ IJMDA. 2017.087624
Hauf, S., Rickter, N. F., Saretedt, M., Ringle.,C. M. (2024). The Importance and Performance in PLS-SEM. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 78(2024) (100723). https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/109073/1/1-s2.0-S0969698924000195-main.pdf
Hu J and Xiao W (2025) What are the influencing factors of online learning engagement? A systematic literature review. Front. Psychol. 16:1542652. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1542652
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.
https://doi.org/10.5465/256287
Leino, R.K., Kaqinari, T., Makarova, E., & Doring, A.K. (2024) Connectedness with Students as a key factor in online teaching self-efficacy. Computers and Education Open, 6(2024) 100192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100192
Limbu, Y. B. & McKinley, C. (2025). Factors associated with student engagement in online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Online Learning, 29(1),293–325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v29i1.4221
Kennedy,J. (2018) Towards a Model of Connectedness in Personal Learning Network. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 16(1), 21-40. . https://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/16.1.2.pdf
Mohammed, R., Odeniyi, O., & Kumassah, E. (2024) Exploring undergraduate students’ connectedness in online learning. (31) 1-25. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi31.1164
Ramayah, T., Cheah, J., Chuah, F., Ting, H., & Memon, M.A. (2018) Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 3.0. An Updated and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis. Malaysia: Pearson
Redmond, P., Heffernan, A., Abawi, L., Brown, A., & Henderson, R. (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning, 22(1), 183-204. doi:10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2024). SmartPLS 4. SmartPLS.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2, 3-10.
Vetter, T.R. (2017). Descriptive Statistics: Reporting the Answers to the 5 Basic Questions of Who, What, Why, When , Where, and a Sixth, So What? Anesth Analg, 12595), 1797-1802. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000002471
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zhong, Q. M. (2018). The evolution of learner autonomy in online environments: A case study in a New Zealand context. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 9(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.37237/090106
Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Casey A. E., Jennifer M. D., Meghan M. J., Thomas E. K, and Marna, C. (202) Impact of Demographic Survey Questions on Response Rate and Measurement: A Randomized Experiment. Survey Practice 14 (1), https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2021-0010.
