The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Digital support for student engagement in blended learning based on self-determination theory
Open accessAbstract
Student engagement in a blended learning environment is very different from that in a traditional classroom environment, and is fostered by satisfying three innate needs identified in self-determination theory (SDT): autonomy, relatedness, and competence. Related studies have emphasized teacher support to satisfy the three students’ need, but not digital support. The founders of SDT recently stated that SDT-based research should focus on problems associated with learning technologies. Accordingly, this study proposed digital support designs to fulfill the three abovementioned needs, examined their effectiveness, and investigated how the developed forms of digital support and teacher support contributed to student engagement. The study adopted a sequential explanatory mixed methods research design and involved 426 Grade 11 students. The findings were as follows. (i) Compared with teacher support, digital support better engaged students in blended learning by satisfying their needs. (ii) Teacher support was closely related to student engagement. (iii) The relationship between digital support and student engagement varied. Possible explanations are the benefits of offering multiple modalities, considering learning expertise, and applying emotional designs. The findings contribute to SDT by adding a new perspective, namely digital support, and thereby proposing a new framework for needs support in blended learning.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These could support the student's need for autonomy (Chiu, 2021(Chiu, , 2022)); that is, using the two GenAI applications in teaching and learning generally satisfies this need.”
From The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: a case of ChatGPT and Midjourney (2024) · cites this paper as Chiu, 2021(Chiu, , 2022)
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.
Citations
Cites
School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543074001059 · Cited by 12,581 · cited 3×
“Emotional engagement comprises students’ affective reactions to their classmates, teachers, learning activities, and school, especially discrete emotions such as happiness, excitement, boredom, and anxiety (Fredricks et al., 2004).”
BackgroundMayer, R. E. (2009) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511811678 · Cited by 7,800
Mayer, R. (2020) · doi:10.1017/9781316941355 · Cited by 7,777
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 · Cited by 6,037
Handbook of Research on Student Engagement
(2012) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7 · Cited by 3,050
Sense of relatedness as a factor in children's academic engagement and performance.
Furrer, C. J., & Skinner, E. A. (2003) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148 · Cited by 2,730
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654311421793 · Cited by 2,370
Structural Equation Modeling with Mplus: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming
Byrne, B. M. (2013) · doi:10.4324/9780203807644 · Cited by 2,063
Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic?
Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0012840 · Cited by 2,037
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chiu, T. K. F. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2253861 · Cited by 852
“These could support the student ’ s need for autonomy (Chiu, 2021, 2022); that is, using the two GenAI applications in teaching and learning generally satis fi es this need.”
Self-citationTeacher support and student motivation to learn with Artificial Intelligence (AI) based chatbot
Chiu, T. K. F., Moorhouse, B. L., Chai, C. S., & Ismailov, M. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2172044 · Cited by 707
Self-citationXia, Q., Chiu, T. K. F., Lee, M., Sanusi, I. T., Dai, Y., & Chai, C. S. (2022) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104582 · Cited by 469
Self-citationChiu, T. K. F. (2024) · Educational technology research and development · doi:10.1007/s11423-024-10366-w · Cited by 235
Self-citationXia, Q., Chiu, T. K. F., Chai, C. S., & Xie, K. (2023) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13305 · Cited by 203
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Chiu, T. K. F.
- Affiliations
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Corresponding author
- Chiu, Thomas K.F.
- ORCID
- Chiu, Thomas K.F.
- Venue
- Computers in Human Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-11
- Volume
- 124
- Pages
- 106909
- ISSN
- 0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3171536220
- Cited by
- 395
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 90 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 9
- FWCI
- 89.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- student engagement, blended learning, self-determination theory, digital support, teacher support, autonomy, relatedness, competence, emotional design, educational technology, high school students
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
