IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i23p15691-d983933.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do K–12 Students’ Perceptions of Online Learning Environments Affect Their Online Learning Engagement? Evidence from China’s COVID-19 School Closure Period

Author

Listed:
  • Yunpeng Ma

    (Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Mingzhang Zuo

    (Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Yujie Yan

    (Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Kunyu Wang

    (Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Heng Luo

    (Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430074, China)

Abstract

A learning environment’s quality has crucial influence on a student’s engagement. In this study, we utilized a structural equation modeling approach to explore the structural relationships between students’ perceptions of an online learning environment and their online learning engagement during China’s COVID-19 school closure period by focusing on an online learning environment and the specific features that facilitate student engagement. The online learning environment was conceptualized as a multidimensional structure consisting of four elements: pedagogy, social interaction, technology, and the consideration of home learning conditions. Student engagement was conceptualized as a multifaceted construct comprising behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. The results showed that teaching presence significantly predicted deep behavioral engagement (β = 0.246), emotional engagement (β = 0.110), and cognitive engagement (β = 0.180). Social presence significantly positively predicted cognitive engagement (β = 0.298) and emotional engagement (β = 0.480), whereas its effect on behavioral engagement was not significant. The perceived ease of technology use significantly predicted only emotional engagement (β = 0.324), and the family learning presence significantly predicted only behavioral engagement (β = 0.108). The results also indicated that emotional and cognitive engagement had indirect effects on the predictive power of the online learning environment for behavioral engagement. These findings provide valuable guidelines and effective strategies for teachers and parents to design suitable online learning environments to enhance K–12 student engagement.

Suggested Citation

  • Yunpeng Ma & Mingzhang Zuo & Yujie Yan & Kunyu Wang & Heng Luo, 2022. "How Do K–12 Students’ Perceptions of Online Learning Environments Affect Their Online Learning Engagement? Evidence from China’s COVID-19 School Closure Period," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:15691-:d:983933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15691/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15691/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Segars, A. H., 1997. "Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: a paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 107-121, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chin-Shan Lu & Kuo-Chung Shang & Chi-Chang Lin, 2016. "Examining sustainability performance at ports: port managers’ perspectives on developing sustainable supply chains," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(8), pages 909-927, November.
    2. Nitin Walia & Mark Srite & Wendy Huddleston, 2016. "Eyeing the web interface: the influence of price, product, and personal involvement," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 297-333, September.
    3. Severin Oesterle & Arne Buchwald & Nils Urbach, 2022. "Investigating the co-creation of IT consulting service value: empirical findings of a matched pair analysis," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 571-597, June.
    4. Matanda, Margaret Jekanyika & Freeman, Susan, 2009. "Effect of perceived environmental uncertainty on exporter-importer inter-organisational relationships and export performance improvement," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 89-107, February.
    5. William Philip Wall & Bilal Khalid & Mariusz Urbański & Michal Kot, 2021. "Factors Influencing Consumer’s Adoption of Renewable Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Wei Daojiang & Li Huimin, 2014. "An Empirical Study on the Influencing Factors of Knowledge Sharing in Project Context," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 154-169, April.
    7. Ali Noudoostbeni & Kiran Kaur & Hashem Salarzadeh Jenatabadi, 2018. "A Comparison of Structural Equation Modeling Approaches with DeLone & McLean’s Model: A Case Study of Radio-Frequency Identification User Satisfaction in Malaysian University Libraries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    8. Hongping Yuan & Yu Yang & Xiaolong Xue, 2019. "Promoting Owners’ BIM Adoption Behaviors to Achieve Sustainable Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    9. Verhagen, Tibert & Meents, Selmar, 2007. "A Framework for Developing Semantic Differentials in IS research: Assessing the Meaning of Electronic Marketplace Quality (EMQ)," Serie Research Memoranda 0016, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    10. Chuang, Shu-Hui & Lin, Hong-Nan, 2013. "The roles of infrastructure capability and customer orientation in enhancing customer-information quality in CRM systems: Empirical evidence from Taiwan," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-281.
    11. Hee-sung Bae, 2021. "The Interaction Effect of Information Systems of Shipping and Logistics Firms and Managers’ Support for Blockchain Technology on Cooperation with Shippers for Sustainable Value Creation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-14, April.
    12. Rupak Rauniar & Greg Rawski & Donald Hudson, 2017. "Antecedents And Consequences Of Ippd Effectiveness," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(07), pages 1-38, October.
    13. Bougoure, Ursula Sigrid & Russell-Bennett, Rebekah & Fazal-E-Hasan, Syed & Mortimer, Gary, 2016. "The impact of service failure on brand credibility," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 62-71.
    14. One-Ki (Daniel) Lee & Vallabh Sambamurthy & Kai H. Lim & Kwok Kee Wei, 2015. "How Does IT Ambidexterity Impact Organizational Agility?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 398-417, June.
    15. Fuhai An & Linjin Xi & Jingyi Yu & Mohan Zhang, 2022. "Relationship between Technology Acceptance and Self-Directed Learning: Mediation Role of Positive Emotions and Technological Self-Efficacy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-13, August.
    16. Farouk Djermani & Arfan Shahzad & Adnan Ahmed Sheikh & Jamal Mohammed Esmail Alekam, 2016. "Factors Influencing The Intention To Use E-Government Services In Algeria: An Empirical Study," JOURNAL STUDIA UNIVERSITATIS BABES-BOLYAI NEGOTIA, Babes-Bolyai University, Faculty of Business.
    17. Riham Al Aina & Tarik Atan, 2020. "The Impact of Implementing Talent Management Practices on Sustainable Organizational Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-21, October.
    18. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & Ashutosh Patil, 2006. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1865-1883, December.
    19. See Kwong Goh & Nan Jiang & Muhamad Faiz Abdul Hak & Pei Leng Tee, 2016. "Determinants of Smartphone Repeat Purchase Intention among Malaysians: A Moderation Role of Social Influence and a Mediating Effect of Consumer Satisfaction," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 6(4), pages 993-1004.
    20. Che Wan Jasimah Bt Wan Mohamed Radzi & Hashem Salarzadeh Jenatabadi & Maisarah Binti Hasbullah, 2015. "Firm Sustainability Performance Index Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-17, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:15691-:d:983933. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.