Cited by 41Online Learning and AnalyticsOnline and Blended LearningEvaluation of Teaching Practices

Revealing Impact Factors on Student Engagement: Learning Analytics Adoption in Online and Blended Courses in Higher Education

Open access
Fan, Si, Chen, Lihua, Nair, Manoj, Garg, Saurabh, Yeom, Soonja, Kregor, Gerry, Yang, Yu, Wang, Yanjun·2021·Education Sciences

Abstract

This study aimed to identify factors influencing student engagement in online and blended courses at one Australian regional university. It applied a data science approach to learning and teaching data gathered from the learning management system used at this university. Data were collected and analysed from 23 subjects, spanning over 5500 student enrolments and 406 lecturer and tutor roles, over a five-year period. Based on a theoretical framework adapted from Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework by Garrison et al. (2000), the data were segregated into three groups for analysis: Student Engagement, Course Content and Teacher Input. The data analysis revealed a positive correlation between Student Engagement and Teacher Input, and interestingly, a negative correlation between Student Engagement and Course Content when a certain threshold was exceeded. The findings of the study offer useful suggestions for future course design, and pedagogical approaches teachers can adopt to foster student engagement.

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 · 10.3390/educsci11100608

Cites

28 of 28 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

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

2 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Kember, D.; Ellis, R.A. Admission and Success for Low SES University Students: Report on a HEPPP 2018 National Priorities Pool Project; Department of Education, Skills and Employment: Canberra, ACT, Australia, (under review).
  2. Ellis, R.A.; Han, F.; Pardo, A. Improving learning analytics-Combining observational and self-report data on student learning. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2017, 20, 158-169.
  3. Timms, M. Big Data in Education: A guide for Educators; Centre for Strategic Education Occasional Paper: Melbourne, VIC, Australia, (No. 139); 2015; pp. 1-10.
  4. Fan, S.; Wu, Q.; Yang, Y. Learning analytics for prediction and measurement of student retention and performance in Higher Education in Australia and New Zealand: A systematic Review. In progress.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fan, S., Chen, L., Nair, M., Garg, S., Yeom, S., Kregor, G., Yang, Y., & Wang, Y.
Affiliations
  • University of Tasmania (AU)
  • Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
Corresponding author
Fan, Si
Venue
Education Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-10-02
Volume
11
Issue
10
Pages
608
ISSN
2227-7102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3202638380
Cited by
41
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 2
FWCI
5.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Education Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • UTAS Research Repository (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PolyU Institutional Research Archive (Hong Kong Polytechnic University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Tasmania (Research Enhancement Grant)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
Keywords
student engagement, online courses, blended learning, Community of Inquiry framework, teacher input, course content, learning management system data, course design, higher education

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