A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON HOW DIGITAL TOOL USE SHAPES STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJMOE.830030Keywords:
Digital Tool Use, Higher Education, Multidimensional Engagement, Student Engagement, Technology-Enhanced LearningAbstract
Student engagement is widely recognized as a critical determinant of academic success in higher education, influencing achievement, retention, and overall learning quality. Despite its importance, sustaining meaningful engagement remains a persistent challenge in increasingly technology-mediated learning environments. Digital educational technologies, including learning management systems, collaborative platforms, video conferencing tools, and online learning applications, are now widely integrated into higher education to support interaction, flexibility, and access to learning resources, yet empirical evidence on how they shape different dimensions of student engagement remains limited. Addressing this gap, this study examines how digital tool use predicts behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement from a multidimensional perspective. A quantitative cross-sectional design was employed, with data collected from 404 students at a Malaysian public university. Pearson correlation and multiple regression analyses were used to examine the predictive relationships between digital tool use and the three dimensions of student engagement. The findings show that digital tool use significantly and positively predicts all engagement dimensions, with the strongest influence on emotional engagement, followed by cognitive and behavioral engagement. These results suggest that while digital tools support active participation and deeper learning, their greatest contribution lies in strengthening students’ motivation, enthusiasm, and sense of connection in the learning process. This study provides empirical evidence that digital tool use functions as a meaningful enabler of student engagement and highlights the importance of strategically integrating technology to foster more engaging and effective learning environments in higher education.
Downloads
References
Adlington, R., O’Neill, K., Volpe, C. R., & Harrington, I. (2024). Promoting a sense of belonging in university online learning: How and why initial teacher education students experience an increased sense of belonging. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 40(5), 84–100. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.9487
Annamalai, N. (2021). Online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: Are Malaysian high school students ready? Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 29(3), 1571–1590. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.29.3.06
Bedenlier, S., Bond, M., Buntins, K., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Facilitating student engagement through educational technology in higher education: A systematic review in the field of arts and humanities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 126–150. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5477
Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V. I., & Händel, M. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in higher education: Mapping the first global online semester. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00282-x
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Deng, R., Benckendorff, P., & Gannaway, D. (2020). Learner engagement in MOOCs: Scale development and validation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12810
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Doo, M. Y., & Bonk, C. J. (2020). The effects of self-efficacy, self-regulation and social presence on learning engagement in a large university class using flipped learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(6), 997–1010. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12455
Fawaz, M., & Samaha, A. (2020). E-learning: Depression, anxiety, and stress symptomatology among Lebanese university students during COVID-19 quarantine. Nursing Forum, 56(1), 52–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12521
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., and 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., Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2021). Interventions for student engagement: Overview and state of the field. In J. A. Fredricks, A. L. Reschly, & S. L. Christenson (Eds.), Handbook of student engagement interventions: Working with disengaged students (2nd ed., pp. 1–11). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813413-9.00001-2
Hartnett, M. (2020). The importance of motivation in online learning. In M. J. Spector, D. Ifenthaler, D. Sampson, & P. Isaias (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology (pp. 1–28). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0700-2_2
Kahu, E. R., & Nelson, K. (2018). Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197
Kimmons, R. (2020). Current trends (and missing links) in educational technology research. TechTrends, 64(6), 803–815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00549-6
Korkmaz, G. & Toraman, Ç. (2020). Are we ready for the post-COVID-19 educational practice? An investigation into what educators think as to online learning. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 293-309.
Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009
Nguyen, T., Netto, C. L. I., Wilkins, J. F., Bröker, P., & Nguyen, T. T. (2021). Insights into students’ experiences and perceptions of remote learning methods: From the COVID-19 pandemic to best practice for the future. Frontiers in Education, 6, 647986. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.647986
Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.
Redmond, P., Heffernan, A., Abawi, L., Brown, A., & Henderson, R. (2020). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning, 24(1), 178–195. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175
Sayaf, A. M., Alamri, M. M., Alqahtani, M. A., & Alrahmi, W. M. (2022). Factors influencing university students’ adoption of digital learning technology in teaching and learning. Sustainability, 14(1), 493. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010493
Sugden, N., Brunton, R., MacDonald, J. B., Yeo, M., & Hicks, B. (2021). Evaluating student engagement and deep learning in interactive online psychology learning activities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6632
Teo, S. C., Anthonysamy, L., & Koo, A. C. (2023). Examining the effects of academic motivation and online learning on Malaysian tertiary students’ psychological well-being and perceived learning performance. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2186025. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2186025
Teo, T. (2011). Technology acceptance research in education. In T. Teo (Ed.), Technology acceptance in education: Research and issues (pp. 1–5). Brill.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Zhao, Y., & Watterston, J. (2021). The changes we need: Education post COVID-19. Journal of Educational Change, 22(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09417-3
