The relationship between learning engagement and learning outcomes in online learning in higher education: A meta-analysis study

References

*References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis.

• Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group. http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Alrashidi, O., Pahn, H. P., & Ngu, B. H. (2016). Academic engagement: An overview of its definitions, dimensions, and major conceptualisations. International Education Studies, 9(12), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n12p41
   Google Scholar
• *Alqahtani, K. M. (2021). The role of online student engagement on students’ academic outcomes [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Kansas.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete ed.). Longman.
   Google Scholar
• *Argyriou, P., Benamar, K., & Nikolajeva, M. (2022). What to blend? Exploring the relationship between student engagement and academic outcomes via a blended learning approach. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 21(2), 126–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257221091512
   Google Scholar
• Bergdahl, N. (2022). Engagement and disengagement in online learning. Computers & Education, 188, Article 104561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104561
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergdahl, N., Nouri, J., Fors, U., & Knutsson, O. (2020). Engagement, disengagement and performance when learning with technologies in upper secondary school. Computers & Education, 149, Article 103783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103783
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Book I: Cognitive domain. David McKay.
   Google Scholar
• Blumenstyk, G. (2018, November 11). Meet the new mega-university. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Meet-the-New-Mega-University/245049
   Google Scholar
• *Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2018). Online student perceptions of engagement, transactional distance, and outcomes. Distance Education, 39(3), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1476845
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470743386
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Mifflin and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, P. S. D., Gonyea, R., & Kuh, G. (2008). Learning at a distance: Engaged or not? Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4, Article 3. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol4/iss3/3
   Google Scholar
• Cho, M., & Cho, Y. (2014). Instructor scaffolding for interaction and students’ academic engagement. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 25–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• *Commissiong, M. A. (2020). Student engagement, self-regulation, satisfaction, and success in online learning environments [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Walden University.
   Google Scholar
• *Cortes, K. (2021). Students’ perceptions of engagement in online courses and its effect on academic performance and retention rates [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Arizona State University.
   Google Scholar
• Council of Europe (2022). Formal, non-formal and informal learning. https://www.coe.int/en/web/lang-migrants/formal-non-formal-and-informal-learning
   Google Scholar
• *Detwiler, R. R. (2011). Assessing factors influencing student academic success in law school [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Toledo.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, T. J., & Kennedy, M. (2019). Technology enhanced learning in higher education: Motivations, engagement and academic outcomes. Computers & Education, 137, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *El-Sayad, G., Md Saad, N. H., & Thurasamy, R. (2021). How higher education students in Egypt perceived online learning engagement and satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Computers in Education, 8(5-6), 527–550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00191-y
   Google Scholar
• Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Galikyan, I., & Admiraal, W. (2019). Students' engagement in asynchronous online discussion: The relationship between cognitive presence, learner prominence, and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 43, Article 100692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), 1–20. https://www.icpel.org/uploads/1/5/6/2/15622000/ijelp_volume_11_number_1__spring_2016_.pdf
   Google Scholar
• *Griffiths, B. R. (2020). Student engagement in an online graduate business program and academic outcomes [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Temple University.
   Google Scholar
• Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• *Hensley, A., Hampton, D., Wilson, J. L., Culp-Roche, A., & Wiggins, A. T. (2021). A multicenter study of student engagement and satisfaction in online programs. Journal of Nursing Education, 60(5), 259–264. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20210420-04
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heo, H., Bonk, C. J., & Doo, M. Y. (2022). Influences of depression, self-efficacy, and resource management on learning engagement in blended learning during COVID-19. The Internet and Higher Education, 54, Article 100856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100856
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S.G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2002). Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020114231387
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indiana University. (2022). NSSE 2022 overview. https://nsse.indiana.edu/nsse/reports-data/nsse-overview.html
   Google Scholar
• Jung, Y., & Lee. J. (2018). Learning engagement and persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCS). Computers & Education, 122, 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahan, T., Soffer, T., & Nachmias, R. (2017). Types of participant behavior in a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(6). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i6.3087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Karabıyık, C. (2019). The relationship between student engagement and tertiary level English language learners’ outcomes. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 6(2), 281–293. http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/590
   Google Scholar
• *Kim, D., Jo, I. H., Song, D., Zheng, H., Li, J., Zhu, J., & Xu, Z. (2021). Self-regulated learning strategies and student video engagement trajectory in a video-based asynchronous online course: A Bayesian latent growth modeling approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 22(2), 305–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09690-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kim, M. K., & Kim, S. M. (2020). Dynamic learner engagement in a wiki-enhanced writing course. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32(3), 582–606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09248-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Klautke, H. (2015). Online cooperative learning: Effects of descriptive norms and cooperative partner messages on engagement, motivation, and outcomes [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Michigan State University.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, R. B. (2004). Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10693-000
   Google Scholar
• *Kokoç, M. (2019). Flexibility in e-learning: Modelling its relation to behavioral engagement and academic performance. Themes in eLearning, 12(12), 1–16. http://earthlab.uoi.gr/tel/index.php/themeselearn/article/view/16
   Google Scholar
• Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., Poquet, O., Hennis, T., de Vries, P., Hatala, M., et al. (2019). Examining communities of inquiry in massive open online courses: The role of study strategies. The Internet and Higher Education, 40, 20–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook II: Affective domain. David McKay Company Incorporated.
   Google Scholar
• *Kucuk, S., & Richardson, J.C. (2019). A structural equation model of predictors of online learners’ engagement and satisfaction. Online Learning, 23(2), 196–216. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lan, M., & Hew, K. F. (2020). Examining learning engagement in MOOCs: A self-determination theoretical perspective using mixed method. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0179-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Lane, S., Hoang, J. G., Leighton, J. P., & Rissanen, A. (2021). Engagement and satisfaction: Mixed-method analysis of blended learning in the sciences. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 21, 100–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-021-00139-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Y., & Choi, J. (2011). A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research & Development, 59, 593–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9177-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lei, H., Cui, Y., & Zhou, W. (2018). Relationships between student engagement and academic outcomes: A meta-analysis. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46(3), 517–528. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Li, S., Yu, C., Hu, J., & Zhong, Y. (2016). Exploring the effect of behavioral engagement on learning outcomes in online learning environment: Learning analytics of non-degree online learning data. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Educational Innovation through Technology (pp. 246–250). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EITT.2016.56
   Google Scholar
• *Linna, K., Jourdan, Z., Corley, K., & Anderson, W. (2021). An analysis of student engagement versus performance in a business statistics course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 24(3), 1–10. https://ojdla.com/articles/an-analysis-of-student-engagement-versus-performance-in-a-business-statistics-course-during-the-covid-19-pandemic
   Google Scholar
• Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• *Lu, C., & Cutumisu, M. (2022). Online engagement and performance on formative assessments mediate the relationship between attendance and course performance. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(2), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00307-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ma, J., Han, X., Yang, J., & Cheng, J. (2015). Examining the necessary condition for engagement in an online learning environment based on learning analytics approach: The role of the instructor. The Internet and Higher Education, 24, 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madigan, D. J., & Curran, T. (2021). Does burnout affect academic outcomes? A meta-analysis of over 100,000 students. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 387–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09533-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mager, R. F. (1961). On the sequencing of instructional content. Psychological Reports, 9, 405–413. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1961.9.2.405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Mokhtarzadeh, M. (2021). Investigating the relationship between engagement and outcomes in Iranian online English classes in the COVID-19 era. International Journal of Research in English Education, 6(4), 75–90. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-611-en.html https://doi.org/10.52547/ijree.6.4.75
   Google Scholar
• Morris, L.V., Finnegan, C., &Wu, S. S. (2005). Tracking student behavior, persistence, and outcomes in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(3), 221–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.06.009
   Google Scholar
• *Muenks, K., Wigfield, A., Yang, J. S., & O'Neal, C. R. (2017). How true is grit? Assessing its relations to high school and college students’ personality characteristics, self-regulation, engagement, and outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(5), 599–620. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murtonen, M., Gruber, H., & Lehtinen, E. (2017). The return of behaviourist epistemology: A review of learning outcomes studies. Educational Research Review, 22, 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Pilotti, M., Anderson, S., Hardy, P., Murphy, P., & Vincent, P. (2017). Factors related to cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement in the online asynchronous classroom. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(1), 145–153. https://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE2503.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Rajabalee, B. Y., Santally, M. I., & Rennie, F. (2020). A study of the relationship between students’ engagement and their academic performances in an eLearning environment. E-Learning and Digital Media, 17(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753019882567
   Google Scholar
• Reeves, T. C. (2006). How do you know they are learning? The importance of alignment in higher education. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(4), 294–309. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2006.011336
   Google Scholar
• Schunk, D. H. (1991). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Shernoff, D. J., & Schmidt, J. A. (2008). Further evidence of an engagement–outcomes paradox among U.S. high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 564–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-007-9241-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Shoepe, T. C. (2013). Engaging undergraduate students in an online science course: The relationship between instructor prompt and student engagement in synchronous class sessions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Pepperdine University.
   Google Scholar
• *Soffer, T., & Cohen, A. (2019). Students’ engagement characteristics predict success and completion of online courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(3), 378–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105284955
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber, M. (2005). How undergraduate education became college lite – and a personal apology. In R. H. Hersh & J. Merrow (Eds.), Declining by degrees: Higher education at risk (pp. 131–143). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Sun, J. C. Y., & Rueda, R. (2012). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01157.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Vaughan, N. (2014). Student engagement and blended learning: Making the assessment connection. Education Sciences, 4(4), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci4040247
   Google Scholar
• Vayre, E., & Vonthron, A. M. (2017). Psychological engagement of students in distance and online learning: Effects of self-efficacy and psychosocial processes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(2), 197–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116656849
   Google Scholar
• *Vayre, E., & Vonthron, A. M. (2019). Relational and psychological factors affecting exam participation and student outcomes in online college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 43, Article 100671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Wang, F. H. (2017). An exploration of online behavior engagement and outcomes in flipped classroom supported by learning management system. Computers & Education, 114, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Wang, Y., Cao, Y., Gong, S., Wang, Z., Li, N., & Ai, L. (2022). Interaction and learning engagement in online learning: The mediating roles of online learning self-efficacy and academic emotions. Learning and Individual Differences, 94, Article 102128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Y. (2022). Effects of teaching presence on learning engagement in online courses. Distance Education, 43(1), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2022.2029350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wei, X., Saab, N., Admiraal, W. (2021). Assessment of cognitive, behavioral, and affective learning outcomes in massive open online courses: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 163, Article 104097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104097
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Xu, Y. (2010). Examining the effects of digital feedback on student engagement and outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(3), 275–291. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.3.a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Yousaf, H. Q., Rehman, S., Ahmed, M., & Munawar, S. (2022). Investigating students’ satisfaction in online learning: The role of students’ interaction and engagement in universities. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2061009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, Z. (2022). A meta-analysis and bibliographic review of the effect of nine factors on online learning outcomes across the world. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 2457–2482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10720-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Yun, H., Oh, S., Yoon, H., & Kim, S. (2021). Effects of university students' social and teaching presence on learning engagement and perceived learning outcomes in online courses. Educational Technology International, 22(2), 111–137. https://doi.org/10.23095/ETI.2021.22.2.111
   Google Scholar
• Zapata-Cuervo, N., Montes-Guerra, M. I., & Jeong, M. (2021). How do restaurants respond to the COVID-19 pandemic? Lessons from Colombian restauranteurs and their survival strategies. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 26(2), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2021.2006037
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, M., Bonk, C. J., & Doo, M. Y. (2020). Self-directed learning in MOOCs: Exploring the relationships among motivation, self-monitoring, and self-management. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(5), 2073–2093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09747-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar