CHAPTER I

Introduction

Every school wants to provide high-quality services that meet both the

needs of society and the needs of its students. But how well some things

work, like how students are given learning materials and how the institution

handles and stores them, affects how well educational institutions do their

jobs. Virtual learning is a new method that many colleges and universities

have started using in the last few years to teach students well. A virtual

learning environmentvf strives for creative interactions, active learning

environments, and course planning. In an online learning setting, teachers

give their students the instructions they need to do well while still letting them

work on their own.

Saudi Arabia's higher education system has mostly depended on

conventional approaches to support pedagogy; hence, the adoption of online

learning has been gradual. As a result, the use of online learning to enhance

teaching and learning is still not as widespread as it might be (AlNajdi, 2014).

LMS, however, offers a number of advantages for pedagogy that might

1
incorporate both face-to-face and hybrid learning. The National Center for

e-Learning and Distance Learning (NCeL) was set up in 2013 to help

institutions set up online learning programs that meet the needs of each

student and to keep an eye on them.

According to the Philippines Remote Learning Study (2021), with

regard to remote learning, the Philippines and other nations worldwide

experienced during the 2020–2021 academic year as a result of providing

self-study learning resources, which is vital but insufficient to ensure learning

continuity during the COVID-19 epidemic. Learning activities must be carried

out. For there to be any real learning, it must be carried out with a particular

level of intensity, perseverance, and quality involvement.When learning at

home, it can be especially hard for young students who have never been to

school (like Grade 1 students) or who have been to school before and know

their school, classroom, relationships with their teachers, and expectations

(like Grade 3 students). Home learning partners (HLPs) can find it hard to give

younger students the structure, routines, and learning support they need to

stay focused on their schoolwork and make progress. Teachers and parents in

the Philippines have taken numerous measures to deal with unusual situations

and keep children interested in learning and learning at home.

2
 Higher education institutions in Davao del Sur may raise the quality of

online learning delivery in the COVID-19 pandemic's new normal environment.

Teachers should offer online learning resources that help students get involved

in online learning, since the switch from in-person to online learning is

happening so quickly. Teachers may set up course materials and use online

teaching methods to help students feel emotionally, intellectually, and socially

involved in the online learning process. Teachers may also improve their online

feedback and communication techniques. With the new way of teaching,

students may be given the right and necessary online resources and materials

to help them meet their online learning requirements and improve their

knowledge, skills, performance, and learning attitudes.

This study will be done to find out how interaction, engagement, and

satisfaction at the Aplaya Elementary School in Digos City are affected by

factors that act as mediators. The researcher also predicted that student

participation would act as a mediating factor. The results of this study should

be used to come up with ways to increase retention and improve online

teaching and learning.

3
 Objective of the study

This study aims to analyze the mediating role of student interaction and

engagement in online learning. Specifically, the following objectives are

sought:

1. To determine the connection between student interaction

and engagement to student satisfaction.

2. To determine the impact on student satisfaction in an

online learning environment.

3. To determine if student involvement had any mediating

effects on reported academic achievement and student

happiness,

Significance of the study

The study provided knowledge and information regarding the mediating

role of student engagement and interaction in multimedia-based instruction on

learning outcomes. This study may help advance and develop online learning's

instructional design and guiding concepts.

In particular, the study is important to the following:

4
 Teacher. The content analysis of multimedia would

improve the skills of teachers in making modules. This would

help teachers to deeply understand the different E-learning

and face to face classes.

Student. The content analysis of multimedia would help

the students’ satisfaction and improve their academic

performances through online learning and face to face.

School. to support and choose what is best for the

learning and environment of students.

Parents. The content analysis of Multimedia would help

the parents to guide their children and give motivation to

having willingness to study

Future researcher. This study could help as a

multimedia instructional material to promote academic

learning.

Public. Through teaching methods, the content analysis

media will assist the general public in developing their

academic learning.

5
 Scope and Limitation of the study

This study focuses on the relationship between student engagement

and interaction at Digos City's Aplaya Elementary School and student

satisfaction. A soft-copy survey questionnaire will be used for this study's

survey, along with references. Male and female Grade 6 students from Aplaya

Elementary School who are at least 11 years old will participate in the study.

This study will not cover the other problems that are not necessarily

connected to sixth grade students, such as the online learning environment,

which is outside the scope of this study. The respondents should be enrolled in

Aplaya Elementary School in Digos City for the 2022–2023 school year.

6
 Definitions of Terms

The following terms have been operationally and conceptually

defined for easier understanding of the issues presented in this paper:

Learner Interaction. Refers in student interaction is a crucial

component of all learning methods, and the dependent variable.

Online interaction can take many different forms, including interaction

with the instructor, interaction with peers, and interaction with the

course material.

Mediating factor. Refers in this study mediating factors in

between the stimulus and the response are internal mental processes

known as mediating cognitive variables. These are the elements in the

Social Learning Theory that influence how well learners copy models,

identify with them, and react to reinforcement.

Online class. Refers in the online learning environment puts the onus

on the students to take the initiative and be in charge of their own learning.

7
Many students appreciate the ease of online learning, yet some are

unprepared to begin the fundamentals.

Online participation. Refers to the amount of effort and psychological

investment the student puts out in acquiring knowledge, skills, and learning

via the internet.

Student engagement. Refers In this study student engagement is

the "dedication of both students' and teachers' time, energy, and other

necessary resources" by educational institutions aimed to improve the learning

environment and consequences of instruction, student growth, performance,

and the institution's reputation virtual education a program that gives pupils

online access to study or instruction Via an online platform, students can

"attend" the actual classroom.

Student satisfaction. Refers to the attitude that results from an

evaluation of students' educational experiences, services, and facilities offered

by the school is known as student satisfaction. aid in enhancing and

appropriately changing the higher education scene. Additionally, it makes the

institute feel good about providing top-notch instruction.

8
 CHAPTER II

Review of the Related Literature

This study uses prior study as a model to build upon and examine the

links between course structure, learner engagement (with each other and the

instructor), and teacher presence. Course structure, instructor feedback,

self-motivation, learning style, interaction, and instructor facilitation all had a

significant impact on student satisfaction, according to Eom et al. (2016) who

used structural equation modeling to investigate the "determinants of

students' satisfaction and their perceived learning outcomes". They came to

the conclusion that the only factors that substantially influenced perceived

learning results were teacher feedback and learning style. Additionally, they

found that a strong predictor of learning outcomes was student happiness.

Similar findings were reached by Richardson et al., (2013) who found that

students who had high overall perceptions of social presence also performed

well in terms of perceived learning and teacher satisfaction.

They advise putting emphasis on the interactions that occur between

students and educators. Thus, enhanced student learning and eventually

retention depend on active learning and student participation. According to

9
Swan (2013), factors that substantially increased students' happiness and

perceived learning were design clarity, engagement with instructors, and

active conversation among course participants. Kuh and his colleagues

documented student self-reported learning gains, increased social skills, and

higher participation in the learning process despite the fact that there have

been several studies concerning student involvement in online learning

settings (Hu et al., 2014).

Based on the questions on the National Survey of Student Engagement

(NSSE) instrument, Chen et al., (2015) further investigated the consequences

of student engagement (2018). Students' perceptions of their involvement in

their learning and participation in classes have grown as a result of the

increasing expectations for students to work more cooperatively with peers

(Duderstadt et al., 2014).

Student Satisfaction

Several studies have been done to gauge how satisfied students are

with their learning experiences, both in regular classrooms and online.

According to Dziuban et al., (2014), students were more likely to give courses

and professors satisfactory ratings if they thought they effectively

10
communicated with them, supported or encouraged their learning, efficiently

planned the course, showed an interest in their learning and progress, treated

them with respect, and accurately evaluated their work. In order to define

student views of satisfaction in terms of a variety of characteristics, including

organization, coverage, interaction, and evaluation, Marsh et al., (2017)

constructed a comprehensive model. According to a different survey, students

who took part in cohorts with their peers and engaged in comprehensive

feedback from faculty members expressed satisfaction with their educational

experiences (Shea et al., 2013).

The amount of time spent on tasks, active and engaged learning,

collaboration among classmates, and student and faculty engagement and

communication are the four criteria that Bangert (2016) identified as being

associated with student satisfaction in online courses. In another study,

asynchronous audio feedback in online courses was compared to students'

impressions of a feeling of community and instructor presence (Ice et al.,

2017). Based on pupils who received text-based input as opposed to auditory

feedback, they contrasted their findings. In both traditional and online

settings, students expressed greater satisfaction with incorporating

asynchronous audio feedback. According to Dziuba et al., (2014), students

were more likely to give courses and professors satisfactory ratings if they

11
thought they effectively communicated with them, supported or encouraged

their learning, efficiently planned the course, showed an interest in their

learning and progress, treated them with respect, and accurately evaluated

their work.

In order to define student views of satisfaction in terms of a variety of

characteristics, including organization, coverage, interaction, and evaluation,

Marsh et al., (2017) constructed a comprehensive model. According to findings

from another study, students who took part in cohorts with their peers and

engaged in thorough feedback exchanges with faculty members felt satisfied

with their academic experiences (Shea et al., 2013). Bangert (2016)

highlighted four elements that influence student satisfaction in online courses:

contact and communication between students and instructors; task completion

time; active and engaged learning; and peer collaboration.

In another study, asynchronous audio feedback in online courses was

compared to students' impressions of a feeling of community and instructor

presence. Based on pupils who received text-based input as opposed to

auditory feedback, they contrasted their findings. Compared to text-only

feedback, students expressed more satisfaction with integrated asynchronous

audio feedback. Due to the nuance of the communication being clearer, the

professors' apparent concern for the students, and the fact that they were

12
three times more likely to implement the content or proposed adjustments of

this sort of feedback, students believed that audio feedback was more

successful (Ice et al., 2017).

Student Engagement

"Students' willingness, need, desire, and compulsion to participate in,

and be successful in, the learning process" has been characterized as "student

engagement" (Bomia et al., 2013.) Online course delivery calls for pedagogical

approaches that will maximize learning and engagement opportunities.

Engagement focuses on people's dispositions or attitudes toward classroom

experiences and lifelong learning, looking beyond cognitive abilities acquired

or mastered (Mandernach et al., 2014).

According to Briggs, (2015) that student engagement can be seen in

how interested the students are, how they interact with other students, and

how much they want to learn about the subjects. influenced by a number of

emotional elements, such as attitude, personality, motivation, effort, and

self-assurance (Mandernach et al., 2014).

In the study of Jaggars and Xu (2016) discovered a favorable

correlation between student grades in online courses and the standard of

13
engagement inside the confines of the course. Instructors may more

successfully organize classes and activities that will inspire students to be

more active participants in their learning and coursework by analyzing the

amount of student engagement and taking these affective qualities into

consideration (Jennings et al., 2014). Students are more likely to be active in

their education when they are driven to succeed in their classes, invested in

their want to learn, and ready to put up the work required by their professors

(Mandernach et al., 2014).

Student mastery of course learning objectives, retention, and student

perceptions of satisfaction are all included in course engagement, which goes

beyond traditional methods of evaluating the effectiveness of instruction.

However, "consideration of the impact of instructional activities on student

engagement provides a more complete picture of the teaching-learning

dynamic". Students' enthusiasm, involvement, and attitude toward their

courses and educational goals can change over time, and measuring levels of

student engagement enables instructors to modify their teaching approaches

accordingly (Mandernach et al., 2014). There are several techniques available

for teachers in online learning settings to acquire unofficial information

regarding student involvement in the course. By Employing surveys,

reflections, conversations, and other formative tools, instructors can analyze

14
log-in statistics, the amount of time spent online, views of learning modules or

course content, and self-reported information from students (Gray et al,

2015).

It is crucial to evaluate each course's academic difficulty based on the

time and effort used, the possibilities for contact with instructors and other

students, the emphasis placed on active and collaborative learning, and the

rewarding educational experiences that students engage in (Langley, 2016). In

order to better the teaching methods used with future students, this can be

accomplished by conducting informal or formal surveys of the students. A

student engagement evaluation that examines four categories of

engagement—skills, emotions, participation/interaction, and

performance—was created by Handelsman et al., 2015.

Each of the four types of involvement has a corresponding item on the

Student Course Engagement Questionnaire (SCEQ), which offers self-reported

results that go beyond what can be seen in classroom interactions

(Handelsman et al., 2015). Faculty are better able to analyze students'

impressions of their participation and the success of their courses by analyzing

both informal and formal measures of student engagement. This helps to

"promote and maintain learning throughout courses, programs, and beyond

the college experience" (Mandernach et al., 2014).

15
 Learner Interaction

Students who learn online can experience a sense of estrangement

from their classmates and teacher. The learners become more invested in the

course discussions and assignments, as well as their fellow classmates, by

providing a variety of topics that are pertinent to current issues in the field and

allowing students to connect the practical, in this case, their professional

experience, to the theoretical, the course content (Shearer, 2013). Additionally,

teachers may engage with students by giving them constructive criticism that

highlights their strengths and outlines areas for development (Muirhead,

2014).

Giving pupils options or some freedom allows for a more individualized

learning experience for them (Collis, 2017). In conclusion, "teachers need the

knowledge to create a classroom environment that fosters individual learning

skills while promoting strong academic standards and social engagement".

According to Muirhead (2014), there are a number of ways to encourage

student interaction in online courses, including fostering critical thinking,

offering pertinent and interesting lessons, sharing biographies of instructors

and students, providing encouraging feedback on students' work,

16
incorporating stories into discussions, and allowing for flexibility in the course

structure or schedule.

In order for students to write more in-depth comments and thoughts in

online debates, it is crucial to demonstrate metacognitive abilities (Muirhead,

2014). The teacher should encourage students to challenge their views,

assumptions, and ideas by looking at a range of perspectives and

research-based materials (Collision et al.,2017). When critical reflection is

requested, learners should have enough time to think about the subjects being

discussed so they may refine their ideas and articulate them more effectively

(Garrison et al., 2013).

Students have greater opportunities for prolonged conversation with

peers when given this kind of thought and time (Garrison et al., 2013).

According to different research, "the amount of interpersonal connection in the

class was the most significant predictor of student grades; students in

low-interaction courses received roughly one letter grade less than students in

high-interaction courses" (Jaggars et al., 2013).

17
 Conceptual Framework of the Study

In this study, the dependent variable will be student engagement through

learner interaction. In this situation, students need to get ready to learn for

the rest of their lives in order to get the skills and knowledge needed for

today's knowledge society. Thoughts are the dependent variable, while student

satisfaction is the independent variable.

DependentVariable

Independent variable

18
Figure 1: is a schematic diagram showing the relationship between

the independent variable and the dependent variable of the

study.

Hypothesis

H1: There is a positive relationship between the student

engagement and interaction with the satisfaction of the

student.

H2: There is no significant relationship between student

engagement and interaction.

H3: There is a positive relationship between student

satisfaction and improving the online teacher and learning.

19
 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study incorporated Vygotsky's

constructivist model, which supports student-centered learning, as well as

Knowles' adult learning theory, self-regulated learning theory

(Zimmerman,2016), and (Ahn & Class., 2013). First, according to Knowles'

adult learning theory, adult learners have self-directed learning traits when

they are engaged in the learning process (Phillips, 2015).

The idea has also been applied to show the traits and strategies

utilized by adult learners in learning situations, such as preparedness and

self-motivation to learn (Allen & Zhang, 2016). The link between student

engagement, self-regulation techniques, and student happiness in the online

learning environment may be understood through the alignment of these

qualities to the learning process. Second, motivational, behavioral, and

metacognitive skills of students are central to self-regulation models

(Zimmerman, 2019).

20
 Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

The research methodology is covered in this chapter of the book, which

also covers the research design, research location, sample design and

technique, study participants, research instrument, data analysis, data

collection method, ethical consideration, and statistical analysis. In order to

facilitate further comprehension, it also offers a presentation of the

researcher's methodology and the data source from which the respondents

were drawn.

Research locale

This study was conducted at Aplaya Elementary School in Digos city,

Davao del sur, Philippines. The school has three sections for grade six; the first

section is Wisdom, with 16 boys and 22 girls; the second section is Justice,

with 16 boys and 18 girls; and lastly, the third section is Charity, with 16 boys

and 18 girls. The said school comprises (3) teachers and 106 officially enrolled

students in grade sixth.

21
 Research Design

This study used a quantitative research approach, more especially the

descriptive correlational method. The most appropriate research strategy for

this topic is a descriptive correlational one. The aforementioned design will be

helpful in identifying and resolving the major link that prevailed in how

mediatory elements influenced interaction, engagement, and satisfaction.

Without any direct or indirect interference, conclusions about the relationships

between variables may be drawn, and they can be seen as they were in their

natural context (Creswell, 2003).

Sampling, and Technique

In this study, the whole descriptive research question will be employed;

hence, all sixth-grade pupils at Aplaya Elementary School will be considered

respondents. To get a sufficient sample size that correctly represents the

population, the entire sixth grade must be surveyed. By putting all three

sections of the survey together at Aplaya Elementary School, the researcher

22
was able to use a Likert scale to better evaluate each respondent's answers

and get the sample size needed to accurately represent the population.

Respondents of the Study

The participants in the research will be sixth-grade students at Aplaya

Elementary School in the 2022-2023 school year. A comprehensive descriptive

research question will be used so that everyone has a chance to take part in

the study. The survey will be given to 106 sixth-grade students at the

institution mentioned above. The research will also be done during the third

quarter of the school year.

Research Instrument

The Student Learning and Satisfaction in Online Learning Environments

Instrument (SLS-OLE) was developed in response to a review of an existing

instrument and study (Eom et al., 2006), as well as a number of studies

pertaining to online learning environments, student engagement, satisfaction,

and learning, instructor presence, and learner interaction. In the fall of 2014, a

sample of students participated in the SLS-pilot. OLE's Several elements were

23
revised and new ones added to the instrument based on the findings of the

instrument's pilot testing. In an effort to extract data that did not contradict

the premise of normalcy and to increase response variability, a

positively-packed rating scale was adopted. The researchers also used Likert

Scale to measure the level of interaction, engagement, and satisfaction at the

Aplaya Elementary School in Digos City. Additionally, the parameter limits with

corresponding descriptive equivalent and descriptions are shown below:

1-Strongly Disagree (SD) 2- Disagree (D)

3-Agree (A) 4-Strongly Agree (SA)

24
Parameter Descriptive Description
Limits
Equivalent

3.51-4.00 Strongly Agree This includes that the items relating to

student interaction, engagement, and
satisfaction embodied in the item
manifested strongly agree.

2.51-3.50 Agree This includes that the items relating to

student interaction, engagement, and
satisfaction embodied in the item
manifested agree.

1.51-2.50 Disagree This includes that the items relating to

student interaction, engagement, and
satisfaction embodied in the item
manifested disagree.

1.00-1.50 Strongly This includes that the items relating to

disagree student interaction, engagement, and
satisfaction embodied in the manifest
strongly disagree.

25
 Data Gathering Procedure

In order to gather the information needed for the study, the following

steps must be taken:

Letter of permission. The researchers adhered to professional standards of

behavior and followed the recommendations offered. When requested by

school administration, we produced a legal school identification card.

Throughout the study, ethical factors such as anonymity, confidentiality, and

informed permission were considered.

Ethical Protocols. The approved letter was sent to the school principals to

conduct the study.

Conduct of Data Gathering. Upon approval of the conduct of the study, the

researcher personally administered the research questionnaires.

Analysis and interpretation of data. It guaranteed to the respondents that

their responses would remain confidential. All completed questionnaires were

swiftly obtained after the test administration for statistical analysis; the data

would be encoded and tallied.

26
 Statistical Tools

The data will be tallied, and recorded for statistical treatment, analysis,

and interpretation. The following tools were used in the analysis of data in this

study.

Mean. This is the average set of data. This is used to determine the level of

metacognition and to measure the mathematical problem solving skills.

Standard Deviation. This is used to measure how dispersed the data in

relation to the mean in terms of the level of student engagement and student

interaction.

Pearson-r. This is a statistical tool to determine if there is a significant

relationship between the student engagement and student interaction of grade

sixth pupils.

27
 LITERATURE CITED

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2016). Grade level: Tracking online education in the
United States.

AlNajdi, S. M. (2014). Students' perceptions toward using Jusur: A web-based

learning
management system for higher education in Saudi Arabia (Doctoral
dissertation).Indiana State University, Terre Haute A research report for Pearson
Education, http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradechange.pdf

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2013). Assessing
teaching presence in a computer conferencing environment. Journal
of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2).

Bangert, A. W. (2016, spring). Identifying factors underlying the quality of

online teaching effectiveness: An exploratory study. Journal of
Computing in Higher Education, 17(2), 79-99.

Bomia, L., Beluzo, L., Demeester, D., Elander, K., Johnson, M., & Sheldon, B.
(2013). The impact of teaching strategies on intrinsic motivation.
Retrieved from ERIC database (ED418825).

Briggs, A. (2015, Feb.). Ten ways to overcome barriers to student engagement

online. Online Learning Consortium, Retrieved from
http://onlinelearningconsortium.org/news_item/ten-
ways-overcome-barriers-student-engagement-online/

28
Chen P. S. D., Lambert A. D. & Guidry K. R. (2015) Engaging online learners:
the impact of web-based learning technology on college student
engagement. Computers & Education, 54, 1222-1232.

Collis, B. (2017). New didactics for university instruction: Why and how?
Computers and Education, 31(4), 373-393.

Diloreto,M.,& Gray, J. (2015), October). Student satisfaction and perceived

learning in online courses: The development of the SLS-OLE. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Online Learning Consortium,
Orlando, FL.

Duderstadt, J., Atkins, D., & Houweling, D. (2014). Higher education in the
digital age: Technology issues and strategies for American colleges and
universities. Wesport, CT: Praeger.

Dziuban, C. D., Wang, M. C,.& Cook, I. J. (2014). Dr. Fox rocks: Student
perceptions of excellent and poor college teaching. Unpublished
manuscript, University of Central Florida.

Eom, S.B., Ashill, N., & Wen, H.J. (2016). The determinants of students’
perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online
education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of
Innovative Education, 4(2), 215-235.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2013). Critical inquiry in a

text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education.
The internet and higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Gray, J., & DiLoreto, M. (2015, August). Student satisfaction and perceived
learning in online learning environments: The mediating effect of
student engagement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
National Council of Professors of Educational Leadership, Washington,
D.C.

29
Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W . L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2015). A
measure of college student engagement. Journal of Education
Research, 98, 184-191.

Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2014). Computing experience and good practices in
undergraduate education: Does the degree of campus “wiredness”
matter Education Policy Analysis Archives,9(49),
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v9n49.html

Ice, P ., Curtis, R., Philips, P., Wells, J. (2017). Using asynchronous Learning
Networks, 11(2), 3-25.

Jaggars, S. S., Edgecombe, N., & Stacey, G. W. (2013,April). Creating an

effective online instructor presence. Report completed for the
Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia
University , NY. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED542146.pdf

Jaggars, S. S., & Xu, Di (2016). How do online course design features
influence student performance? Computers and Education, 95, 270-284,
dou:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.014

Jennings, J. M., & Angelo, T. (Eds.) (2014). Student engagement: Measuring

and enhancing engagement with learning. Proceedings of the
Universities Academic Audit Unit, New Zealand.

Kuh, G. D., & Hu, S. (2014). The relationship between computer and
information technology use, student learning, and other college
experiences. Journal of College Student Development, 42, 217-232.

Kuh, G. D., & Vesper, N, (2014). Do computers enhance or detract from

student learning?Research in higher Education,42, 87-102.

30
Langley, D. (2016). The student engagement index: A proposed student rating
system based on the national benchmarks of effective educational
practice. University of Minnesota: Center for Teaching and Learning
Services.

Mandernach, B.J., Donnell-Sallee, E., & Dailey-Hebert, A. (2014). Assessing

course student engagement. In R. Miller, E. Amsel, B. M. Kowalewski,
B.B Beins, K. D. Keith, & B. F. Peden ( Eds.), Promoting student
Engagement: Techniques and Opportunities (pp. 277-281). Society for
the Teaching of Psychology, Division 2, American psychological
Association.

Marsh, H. W,. & Roche , L. A.(2017). Making students’ evaluation of teaching

effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility .
American Psychologist, 52(11): 1187-1197.

Muirhead, B, (2014). Encouraging interaction in online classes. International

Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 1(6), 45-50.

National Center for E-Learning and Distance Learning. (2013). List of rules of
distance learning and e-learning.
http://www.elc.edu.sa/portal/templates/lms_mohe2/download/DL_byla
ws.pdf

Richardson,J C., & Swan, K. (2013). Examining social presence in online

courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68-88.

Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., & Pelz, W. (2013), Student satisfaction
and reported learning in the SUNY Learning Network. In: T. Duffy and
J.Kirkley , Learner Centered Theory and Practice in Distance Education.
Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Erlabum.

31
Shea, P., Li, C. S., & Pickett, A. (2013). A study of teaching presence and
student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced
college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-1900.

Shearer, R.L. (2013). Interaction in distance education. Special Report 2(1).

Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.

Swan, K, (2013). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student

satisfaction and perceived learning in synchronous online courses.
Distance Education , 22(2), 306-331.

Zhang, S., Shi, R., Yun, L., Li, X., Wang, Y., He, H., & Miao, D.
(2016).Self-regulation and study-related health outcomes: A structural
equation model of regulatory mode orientations, academic burnout and
engagement among university students.Social Indicators Research,
123(2), 585–599. doi:10.1007/s11205-014-0742-3

Zimmerman, B. J. (2016). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic

learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3),
329–339.doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329

32