The Effects of Online Teaching on Students’ Academic Progress in Stem

Abstract

Online teaching environment is a challenge for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in-service teachers who feel worried about their ability to succeed in what might be an unfamiliar learning environment. This research focused on testing the effects of perceived risks and concerns by in-service teachers during online-only classes due to the coronavirus outbreak on student academic progress requirements across the different STEM disciplines. The research hypotheses were tested on a sample of 1444 in-service teachers teaching exclusively in the online environment, in Romania. A structural equation model was used to explore the possible links among two external variables (pedagogical and technological perceived risks), one mediator variable (student engagement), one control variable (school settings), and one output variable (student academic progress requirements). The results revealed significant negative paths from challenges mediated by student engagement to student academic progress, as well as positive paths from them to mediator factor. The school setting categories were negatively correlated with both perceived risk dimensions. The moderator role of student engagement on the challenges-outcome link was supported. The online teaching effects on student’s academic progress varied across the different STEM disciplines. The relevant common features for all STEM disciplines were further then demonstrated. Keywords: online class, pandemic emergency, STEM, structural equation modelling, student academic progress, in-service teachers

Secondary teachers’ competencies and attitude: A mediated multigroup model based on usefulness and enjoyment to examine the differences between key dimensions of STEM teaching practice

“…In the last part, a partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) model [ 130 , 131 ] using SmartPLS version 4 software was conducted to determine whether the latent variables (Attitude, Usefulness, Competencies, and Enjoyment) adequately describe the data. The following fit index was used to assess the model fit: standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) [ 132 , 133 ].…”

Trends of the Implementation of Hybrid Teaching and Learning in Mathematics Education: A Systematic Literature Review

“…Wang, 2021;Wu et al, 2021), followed by 12 articles published in 2022 (Brunetto et al, 2022;Cavanaugh et al, 2022;DeCoito & Estaiteyeh, 2022;Durandt et al, 2022;Ní Fhloinn & Fitzmaurice, 2022;Gehrtz et al, 2022;Giberti et al, 2022;Kier & Johnson, 2022;Kurianski et al, 2022;Rocha et al, 2022;Segerby, 2022;P. Wang, 2022), 5 articles in 2020 (Bakar, Mohamad & Ismail, 2020;Jeong et al, 2020;Panisoara et al, 2020;Singh-Pillay & Naidoo, 2020;Van Nuland et al, 2020), 4 articles in 2018 (Chen & Huang, 2018;Golding & Bretscher, 2018;Lambert & Alony, 2018;Muirhead et al, 2018) and finally 2 articles have been published in 2019 (Musabirov et al, 2019;Trenholm et al, 2019). The year with the highest number of published articles was 2021.…”

“…In general, research approaches can be divided into two, namely quantitative and qualitative. Based on Figure 3 shows the research approach that can be analyzed from 41 articles in this study where the highest is using a qualitative research approach of 19 articles (Ashraf et al, 2021;Bakar et al, 2020;Batra et al, 2021;Bouck & Long, 2021;Brunetto et al, 2022;Church et al, 2021;Ní Fhloinn & Fitzmaurice, 2022;Gehrtz et al, 2022;Golding & Bretscher, 2018;Goulart et al, 2021;Kier & Johnson, 2022;Kurianski et al, 2022;Lambert & Alony, 2018;Muirhead et al, 2018;Pourdavood & Song, 2021;Singh-Pillay & Naidoo, 2020;Trenholm et al, 2019;Nuland et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2020), 16 articles use a quantitative research approach (Aristika et al, 2021;Cao et al, 2021;Cavanaugh et al, 2022;Chen & Huang, 2018;Durandt et al, 2022;Fujita et al, 2021;Giberti et al, 2022;Jeong et al, 2020;Musabirov et al, 2019;Nair & Nair, 2021;Panisoara et al, 2020;Pavlysh et al, 2021;Pócsová et al, 2021;Rasheed et al, 2021;P. Wang, 2022;Wu et al, 2021) and 6 articles using a mixed method research approach (DeCoito & Estaiteyeh, 2022;…”

“…Furthermore, six studies have been published on hybrid teaching and learning in China which is known to be a country that has been very affected by the Covid-19 pandemic (Ashraf et al, 2021;Cao et al, 2021;Cao et al, 2021;Wang, 2021;Wang, 2022;Wu et al, 2021), three studies focused on Canada (DeCoito & Estaiteyeh, 2022;Le Pichon et al, 2021;Muirhead et al, 2018), Malaysia (Bakar et al, 2020;Rasheed et al, 2021;Wang et al, 2020), two studies focused on South Africa (Durandt et al, 2022;Singh-Pillay & Naidoo, 2020), India (Batra et al al., 2021;Nair & Nair, 2021), Italy (Brunetto et al, 2022;Giberti et al, 2022), Australia (Lambert & Alony, 2018;Trenholm et al, 2019). Meanwhile, one study focused on Belarus (Pavlysh et al, 2021), Brazil (Goulart et al, 2021), Indonesia (Aristika et al, 2021), Ireland (Ní Fhloinn & Fitzmaurice, 2022, Japan (Ní Fhloinn & Fitzmaurice, 2022), England (Golding & Bretscher, 2018), Romania (Panisoara et al, 2020), Russia (Musabirov et al, 2019), Spain (Jeong et al, 2020), Slovakia (Pócsová et al, 2021, Sweden (Segerby, 2022) and United Kingdom (Shaw & Tranter, 2021). Based on the analysis that has been carried out, the United States and China recorded the publication of a high number of articles compared to other countries.…”

Exploring the Students’ Perceived Academic Value in an Exclusive Online Learning Environment

“…In this case, is the degree to which the online lectures are perceived as attractive, interesting, and enjoyable. Motivation to learn is an important issue in education that has a positive influence on learning outcomes (Lamanauskas & Makaraskaite-Petkevitciene, 2021;Pânisoară et al, 2020;Swan, 2003).…”