Let’s CHAT About Online Student Engagement: Cultural-Historical Activity Theory as a Theoretical Lens
Keywords:
Engagement, Online learning, E-learning, Cultural-historical activity theory, K-12 schoolingAbstract
Student engagement has been linked to academic outcomes and school completion. During the COVID-19 pandemic, online instruction became a learning mode of necessity, resulting in an explosion of related research. This article will explore Engeström’s (1987/2019) cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) as a theoretical lens to understand online learning environments. Using third-generation activity theory, in-person learning environments will first be described through a model of two activity systems; one system relates to the teacher’s instruction, and the other relates to the student’s school participation or studying. This model will be extended for online settings to incorporate a third activity system, the homeschooling family. This extension may provide a promising approach to conceptualizing the unique dynamics of online student engagement.
References
Alrashidi, O., Phan, H. P., & Ngu, B. H. (2016). Academic engagement: An overview of its definitions, dimensions, and major conceptualisations. International Education Studies, 9(12), 41-52. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n12p41
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
Archambault, L., Diamond, D., Brown, R., Cavanaugh, C., Coffey, M., Foures-Aalbu, D., Richardson, J., Zygouris-Coe, V., Scribner, D., & Barbour, M. (2010). Research committee issues brief: An exploration of at-risk learners and online education (p. 1-24). International Association of K-12 Online Learning. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509620.pdf
Barbour, M. K., Labonte, R., & Nagle, J. (2021). State of the nation: K-12 e-learning in Canada. https://k12sotn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/StateNation21.pdf
Bienkowksi, M., Feng, M., & Means, B. (2012). Enhancing teaching and learning through educational data mining and learning analytics: An issue brief (pp. 1–77) [Issue Brief]. SRI International. http://tech.ed.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/edm-la-brief.pdf
Borup, J., Graham, C. R., & Davies, R. S. (2013). The nature of parental interactions in an online charter school. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(1), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2013.754271
Borup, J., Walters, S., & Call-Cummings, M. (2019). Examining the complexities of parental engagement at an online charter high school: A narrative analysis approach. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i1.3605
Chen, T., Wanberg, R. C., Gouioa, E. T., Brown, M. J. S., Chen, J. C.-Y., & Kurt Kraiger, J. J. (2019). Engaging parents' involvement in k–12 online learning settings: Are we meeting the needs of underserved students? Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 113–120. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1563
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.
Engeström, Y. (2016). From learning environments and implementation to activity systems and expansive learning. In Studies in expansive learning: Learning what is not yet there (1st ed., pp. 101–116). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316225363
Engeström, Y. (2019). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published in 1987)
Engeström, Y. (2022). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (3rd ed., pp. 134–155). Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2021). From mediated actions to heterogenous coalitions: Four generations of activity-theoretical studies of work and learning. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 28(1), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2020.1806328
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://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Friedhoff, J. R. (2022). Michigan’s k-12 virtual learning effectiveness report 2020-21. Michigan Virtual. https://michiganvirtual.org/research/publications/michigans-k-12-virtual-learning-effectiveness-report-2020-21/
Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
Leech, N. L., Gullett, S., Howland Cummings, M., & Haug, C. A. (2022). The challenges of remote k–12 education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Differences by grade level. Online Learning, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.2609
Lei, H., Cui, Y., & Zhou, W. (2018). Relationships between student engagement and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46(3), 517–528. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7054
Liu, B., Algina, C., & Dawson. (2010). The validation of one parental involvement measurement in virtual schooling. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2), 105–132. https://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/9.2.2.pdf
Martin, F., Bacak, J., Polly, D., & Dymes, L. (2021). A systematic review of research on K-12 online teaching and learning: Comparison of research from two decades 2000 to 2019. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1940396
Martin, F., Xie, K., & Bolliger, D. U. (2022). Engaging learners in the emergency transition to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(sup1), S1–S13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1991703
Openo, J. (2020). Education’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic reveals online education’s three enduring challenges. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 46(2). https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt27981
Renninger, K. A., & Järvelä, S. (2022). Designing for meaningful learning: Interest, motivation, and engagement. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (3rd ed., pp. 603–618). Cambridge University Press.
Roblyer, M. D., Davis, L., Mills, S. C., Marshall, J., & Pape, L. (2008). Toward practical procedures for predicting and promoting success in virtual school students. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640802039040
Smith, S. J., Harvey, S. P., Burdette, P. J., & Cheatham, G. A. (2016). Parental role and support for online learning of students with disabilities: A paradigm shift. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 29(2), 101–112.
Stevens, M., & Borup, J. (2015). Parental engagement in online learning environments: A review of the literature. In M. F. Rice (Ed.), Advances in Research on Teaching (Vol. 25, pp. 99–119). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-368720150000027005
Vaillancourt, T., Brittain, H., Krygsman, A., Farrell, A. H., Pepler, D., Landon, S., Saint-Georges, Z., & Vitoroulis, I. (2022). In-person versus online learning in relation to students’ perceptions of mattering during COVID-19: A brief report. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 40(1), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829211053668
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Jacqueline Yu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright of their papers, including publishing and commercial rights. Attribution should be given to EPIGREP when publishing a previously published article in another venue, including personal websites and blogs.
Copyright information for readers can be found here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
