CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33Online and Blended LearningHigher Education Research StudiesOnline Learning and Analytics

Student Engagement in Open, Distance, and Digital Education

Open access
Bond, Melissa, Bergdahl, Nina·2022·Handbook of Open, Distance and Digital Education
DOI 10.1007/978-981-19-0351-9_79-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Engaging students in their learning, and within their learning community, is a key goal of educators. However, ongoing discussions about its nature, conceptualization, and measurement have led to a diffusion of the concept’s understanding, and ability to apply it within both research and practice. This chapter draws on theoretical and empirical primary and secondary ODDE research, and provides an overview of student engagement and disengagement, particularly as they relate to educational technology. The four dimensions of behavioral, affective/emotional, cognitive, and social (dis-)engagement are presented, alongside example indicators. In addition, a bioecological model of student engagement is explored with explicit links to digital learning. The chapter concludes by providing open questions and directions for future research, including further emphasis and exploration needed on the role of social engagement in ODDE contexts, as well as disengagement as a separate construct.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-981-19-0351-9_79-1

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Behaviourally engaged learners take actions that support learning and are directly influenced by teaching methods, technologies, and educational modes.

    “Engagement theory suggests that behaviourally engaged learners are those who take actions that support learning and are directly influenced by teaching methods, technologies, and educational modes (Bond & Bergdahl, 2022).”

    From Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: a systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as Bond & Bergdahl, 2022

    In “Indicators of Student Engagement in ODDE” (page unavailable), the chapter identifies homework completion as an observable indicator of behavioral engagement. “The Mesosystem Level” says educational modes and resources create conditions that affect engagement, and the chapter also discusses teachers’ learning designs. It does not establish that teaching methods, technologies, and educational modes each directly influence behavioral engagement specifically; its account of those influences is broader and more qualified. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Bergdahl, N. (2020). Upper secondary student engagement and disengagement in blended learning (Dissertation). Department of Computer and Systems Sciences. Stockholm University.
  2. Fredricks, J. A., Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2019). Handbook of student engagement interventions: Working with disengaged students (J. A. Fredricks, A. L. Reschly, & S. L. Christenson, Eds.). Elsevier.
  3. Krause, L. (2014). Examining stakeholder perceptions of accessibility and utilization of Computer and Internet Technology in the Selinsgrove Area School District (Dissertation).
  4. Reschly, A., & Christenson, S. L. (2006). Promoting school completion. In G. Bear & K. Minke (Eds.), Children's needs III: Understanding and addressing the developmental needs of chil- dren. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bond, M., & Bergdahl, N.
Affiliations
  • University of South Australia (AU)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
Corresponding author
Bond, Melissa
ORCID
Venue
Handbook of Open, Distance and Digital Education
Publisher
Springer Nature Singapore
Published
2022
Pages
1-16
DOI
10.1007/978-981-19-0351-9_79-1
OpenAlex
W4297837276
Cited by
33
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
FWCI
49.72
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Handbook of Open, Distance and Digital Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
Keywords
student engagement, student disengagement, open and distance learning, online learning, educational technology, social engagement, emotional engagement, cognitive engagement, bioecological model, engagement metrics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review