OJPR Home

2022 - Volume 6 - Number 1

Qualitative of College Student Engagement During Online Learning for Indonesian Students

Ersa Sanfriska * ersa.705180153@stu.untar.ac.id * ORCID: 0000-0001-5115-1050
Universitas Tarumanagara, Faculty of Psychology, Jakarta, INDONESIA

Rahmah Hastuti * rahmahh@fpsi.untar.ac.id * ORCID: 0000-0001-9164-8707
Universitas Tarumanagara, Faculty of Psychology, Jakarta, INDONESIA

Open Journal for Psychological Research, 2022, 6(1), 7-16 * https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojpr.0601.02007s
Received: 22 May 2022 ▪ Revised: 9 July 2022 ▪ Accepted: 20 July 2022

LICENCE: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

ARTICLE (Full Text - PDF)

ABSTRACT:
College student engagement is a sense of student engagement in carrying out their learning in terms of academics (expecting good learning outcomes), emotional (curiosity and a feeling of fun participating in class), cognitive (having good self-regulation skills, wanting challenges in learning), and behavior (full attendance and active involvement in class). As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, learning systems around the world have been affected until they suddenly change from face-to-face to online learning. This change in the learning system makes students need to adapt again. In this process, college student engagement becomes a challenge that must be faced. The purpose of this research is to provide an overview of college student engagement during the 2 years of online learning. The total participants in this study were 291 students who had filled out a survey containing open-ended questions. The data in this study were analyzed using MAXQDA 2020 to code and categorize responses. The result is that there is a change in academic engagement to be effective in collecting assignments and being flexible, the grades are also good but not accompanied by understanding the material. In behavioral engagement, attendance is more awake but there is no involvement or activity. In cognitive engagement, there is a new strategy in learning, namely recording and adaptation because it is the responsibility of the learner. Lastly, in emotional engagement, students feel bored, lazier and more stressed during online learning because they cannot meet directly with lecturers and friends.

KEY WORDS: college students, online learning, student engagement, Covid-19.

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:
Rahmah Hastuti, Universitas Tarumanagara, Faculty of Psychology, Jakarta, INDONESIA. E-mail: rahmahh@fpsi.untar.ac.id.

REFERENCES:

Ahshan, R. (2021). A framework of implementing strategies for active student engagement in remote/online teaching and learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(9), 483-507. https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/11/9/483.

Akyildiz, S. T. (2020). College students’ views on the pandemic distance education: A focus group discussion. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 322-334. https://ijtes.net/index.php/ijtes/article/view/150.

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427-445. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440506000379.

Donham, C., Pohan, C., Menke, E., & Kransfelder, P. (2022). Increasing student engagement through course attributes, community, and classroom technology: Lessons from the pandemic. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 23(1), 1-6. https://journals.asm.org/doi/full/10.1128/jmbe.00268-21.

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(1), 59-109. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/00346543074001059.

Fredericks, J. A., & McCloskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Chritenson (Ed.), Handbook of research on student engagement (p. 763-782). https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_37.

Frost, N. (2011). Qualitative research methods in psychology. McGraw Hill.

Muthuprasad, T., Aiswarya, S., Aditya, K. S., & Jha, G. K. (2021). Students’ perception and preference for online education in India during COVID -19 pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 3(1), 100-111. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590291120300905.

Nicola, M., Alsafi, Z., Sohrabi, C., Kerwan, A., Al-Jabir, A., Iosifidis, C., Agha, M., & Agha, R. (2020). The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19): A review. International Journal of Surgery, 78(2020), 185-193. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7162753/pdf/main.pdf.

Sayad, G. E., Saad, N. H. M., & 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(1), 527-550. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40692-021-00191-y.

Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement: Literature review. The Higher Education Academy.

Waldrop, D., Reschly, A. L., Fraysier, K., & Appleton, J. J. (2018). Measuring the engagement of college students: Administration format, structure, and validity of the student engagement instrument–college. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 52(2), 90-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756. 2018.1497429