Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map

Abstract

Digital technology has become a central aspect of higher education, inherently affecting all aspects of the student experience. It has also been linked to an increase in behavioural, affective and cognitive student engagement, the facilitation of which is a central concern of educators. In order to delineate the complex nexus of technology and student engagement, this article systematically maps research from 243 studies published between 2007 and 2016. Research within the corpus was predominantly undertaken within the United States and the United Kingdom, with only limited research undertaken in the Global South, and largely focused on the fields of Arts & Humanities, Education, and Natural Sciences, Mathematics & Statistics. Studies most often used quantitative methods, followed by mixed methods, with little qualitative research methods employed. Few studies provided a definition of student engagement, and less than half were guided by a theoretical framework. The courses investigated used blended learning and text-based tools (e.g. discussion forums) most often, with undergraduate students as the primary target group. Stemming from the use of educational technology, behavioural engagement was by far the most often identified dimension, followed by affective and cognitive engagement. This mapping article provides the grounds for further exploration into discipline-specific use of technology to foster student engagement.

Facilitating student engagement through educational technology in higher education: A systematic review in the field of arts and humanities

“…Similar to the overall sample (see Bond et al, 2020), document analysis was only used in 10 (24%) A&H studies. Peterson (2012), for example, captured the chat logs of ESL students in Second Life and conducted a discourse analysis, in order to explore how students interacted and whether use of the virtual world promoted increased target language use.…”

“…Given that the nexus between SE and technology use in higher education has not yet been comprehensively researched, a systematic review was conducted into this topic, comprising a total of 243 empirical studies (see Bond et al, 2020). A keyword-based search focused on "systematic review" OR "meta analysis" OR "literature review" AND "educational technology", conducted in April 2019, yielded a small number of studies that addressed the specific context of English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL), as a discipline within arts and humanities (A&H) (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics [UNESCO] Institute for Statistics, 2015).…”

Flipped learning and parent engagement in secondary schools: A South Australian case study

“…It is influenced by a range of sociocultural, structural and psychosocial influences (Bond et al ., Manuscript in preparation) and through considering the wider sociopolitical context that influences SE, a more holistic and clearer understanding of the concept can be gained, which allow educators more insight into how to further build engagement and ultimately improve outcomes for students (Appleton et al , ).…”

The generation of student engagement as a cognition-affect-behaviour process in a Twitter learning experience

“…In higher education, the use of Twitter avails educational benefits through interactive and collaborative learning (Tur, Marín, & Carpenter, 2017). Thus, teachers have incorporated social networking sites into their class activities as a way to motivate students, foster their learning performance, and increase their engagement (Bond, Buntins, Bedenlier, Zawacki-Richter, & Kerres, 2020;Bower, 2016;Busselli, Holdan & Rota, 2019;Hui, Li, Qian, & Kwok, 2019;Junco, Elavsky, & Heiberger, 2013;Schwartz & Caduri, 2016;Soffer & Yaron, 2017;Staines & Lauchs, 2013). However, few of these studies have considered how to create engagement in a learning project conducted through Twitter (Castellanos, Haya, & Urquiza-Fuentes, 2017;Luo, Shah, & Cromptom, 2019;Schwartz & Caduri, 2016).…”

“…Previous studies have considered engagement as a single variable, focusing only on its outcomes and disregarding its antecedents. Few have taken into account that engagement is part of a process made up of cognitive, affective, and behavioural dimensions (Bond & Bedenlier, 2019;Bond et al, 2020;Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004;Henrie, Halverson, & Graham, 2015;Kahu & Nelson, 2018;Xie, Heddy, & Greene, 2019). The articles on student engagement in the Twitter context are scarce and call for further research (Ertmer, Sadaf, & Ertmer, 2011;Henrie et al, 2015;Pallas, Eidenfalk, & Engel, 2019;Schindler, Burkholder, Morad, & Marsh, 2017;Tang & Hew, 2017).…”