Measurement and analysis of student engagement in university classes where varying levels of PBL methods of instruction are in use
Abstract
Students participate more in a classroom and also report a better understanding of course concepts when steps are taken to actively engage them. The Student Engagement (SE) Survey was developed and used in this study for measuring student engagement at the class level and consisted of 14 questions adapted from the original National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) survey. The adapted survey examined levels of student engagement in 56 classes at an upper mid‐western university in the USA. Campus‐wide faculty members participated in a program for training them in innovative teaching methods including problem‐based learning (PBL). Results of this study typically showed a higher engagement in higher‐level classes and also those classes with fewer students. In addition, the level of engagement was typically higher in those classrooms with more PBL.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 higher the level of education at which the blended learning model is applied, the higher its effectiveness on mathematics achievement.
“It indicates that the higher the level of education where the blended learning model is applied, the higher the effectiveness on mathematics achievement.”
From A meta-analysis study of the effect of the blended learning model on students’ mathematics learning achievement (2023) · cites this paper as Ahlfeldt et al. (2005)
Cites
The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring
BLOOM, B. S. (1984) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x013006004 · Cited by 2,734 · cited 1× · see citing works
“It was found that IE methods had an average gain of 0.48 ±.0.14 SD, which was two standard deviations above the traditional course which received and average gain of 0.23 ±.0.04 SD. Bloom (1984, p. 4) states:”
Influential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Framing student engagement in higher education
Kahu, E. R. (2013) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.598505 · Cited by 2,103 · see citing works
Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernández-Ortega, B., & Sese, F. J. (2013) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.019 · Cited by 568 · see citing works
Beyond ‘doing time’: Investigating the concept of student engagement with feedback
Handley, K., Price, M., & Millar, J. (2011) · Oxford Review of Education · doi:10.1080/03054985.2011.604951 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
Samritin, S., Susanto, A., Manaf, A., & Hukom, J. (2023) · Jurnal Elemen · doi:10.29408/jel.v9i1.6141 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Gong, W., & Xu, C. (2024) · Sage Open · doi:10.1177/21582440241293327 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Manda, A. K. (2025) · Journal of Geoscience Education · doi:10.1080/10899995.2024.2419308 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ahlfeldt *, S., Mehta, S., & Sellnow, T.
- Affiliations
- North Dakota State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Mehta, Sudhir
- ORCID
- Sellnow, Timothy
- Venue
- Higher Education Research & Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-02
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-20
- ISSN
- 0729-4360 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8366
- OpenAlex
- W2112184730
- Cited by
- 337
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 25.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Higher Education Research & Development (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Keywords
- student engagement, problem-based learning, student engagement survey, National Survey of Student Engagement, active learning, innovative teaching methods, faculty training, class size, course level, university courses
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
