The Interaction Between Teaching Competencies and Self-Efficacy in Fostering Engagement Amongst Distance Learners: A Path Analysis Approach

Norizan  Baba Rahim

doi:10.32890/mjli2022.19.1.2

Authors

Norizan Baba Rahim School of Distance Education, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2022.19.1.2

Keywords:

Online teaching competencies, self-efficacy, online student engagement

Abstract

Purpose - Distance learners are expected to actively participate in online learning settings to improve their cognitive level and promote more meaningful learning. However, without specific teaching skills and competencies from the instructors together with belief and capability of the distance learners themselves, their engagement in online learning would not be achieved. Limited studies have examined the extent of self-efficacy in encouraging student engagement in learning, especially within online learning settings. Thus, this study examined self-efficacy as a moderator to test its influence on the relationship between online teaching competencies and student engagement.

Methodology - This quantitative research was conducted using the purposive sampling technique. This study involved 321 distance learners from a Malaysian public university. The questionnaire was created using SurveyMonkey, and the measurement items were adopted from past research with acceptable reliability. This study utilised partial least squares (PLS) 3.0 to test the hypothesis via correlation and path analysis.

Findings - Contrary to expectations, the findings contributed to the literature that online teaching competencies and self-efficacy were not significantly related to student engagement. The association between online teaching competencies and student engagement was shown to be moderated by self-efficacy. This finding is aligned with Bandura’s (2001) social cognitive theory which states that personal factors such as self-regulation, self-efficacy, and interest are impacted in the distance education context.

Significance - The results of this study can benefit online course instructors in Malaysian distance educational institutions to develop courses that enhance online learners’ self-efficacy. Online teaching competencies employed by online distance learners can be the primary objective when developing faculty development programmes that aim to coach online instructors to be competent in online teaching. Moreover, institutions are encouraged to introduce other online learning platforms to facilitate training of its practitioners in order to accelerate successful online teaching and learning experiences.

References

Ahmed, U., Umrani, W. A., Qureshi, M. A., & Samad, A. (2018). Examining the links between teachers support, academic efficacy, academic resilience, and student engagement in Bahrain. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 5(9), 39–46.

Albrahim, F.A. (2020). Online teaching skills and competencies. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 9–20.

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.

Annamalai, N., Tan, K. E., & Abdullah, A. (2013). Exploring the effects of an online writing platform on students’ performances in narrative writing. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 1–18.

Artino Jr, A. R., & McCoach, D. B. (2008). Development and initial validation of the online learning value and self-efficacy scale. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(3), 279–303.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Banna, J., Lin, G. M. F., Stewart, M., & Fialkowski, M. K. (2015). Interaction matters: Strategies to promote engaged learning in an online introductory nutrition course. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 249.

Baran, E., Correia, A. P., & Thompson, A. (2013). Tracing successful online teaching in higher education: Voices of exemplary online teachers. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–41.

Bigatel, P. M., Ragan, L. C., Kennan, S., May, J., & Redmond, B. F. (2012). The identification of competencies for online teaching success. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(1), 59–77.

Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2018). Online student perceptions of engagement, transactional distance, and outcomes. Distance Education, 39(3), 299–316.

Bradley, R. L., Browne, B. L., & Kelley, H. M. (2017). Examining the influence of self-efficacy and self-regulation in online learning. College Student Journal, 51(4), 518–530.

Britt, M., Goon, D., & Timmerman, M. (2015). How to better engage online students with online strategies. College Student Journal, 49(3), 399–404.

Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13.

Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1–13.

Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4).

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388.

Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capability perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214.

Gurley, L. E. (2018). Educators’ preparation to teach, perceived teaching presence, and perceived teaching presence behaviors in blended and online learning environments. Online learning, 22(2), 197–220.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010), Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validityin variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.

Jusoh, Z., & Abdullah, L. (2015). Online Survey of Reading Strategies (OSORS): Students’ online reading in academic context. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 67–81.

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling 4th ed. New York: Guilford Press.

Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement? Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706.

Yu, C. K., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. K. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50.

Landrum, B. (2020). Examining students’ confidence to learn online, self-regulation skills and perceptions of satisfaction and usefulness of online classes. Online Learning, 24(3), 128–146.

Lasfeto, D. (2020). The relationship between self-directed learning and students’ social interaction in online learning environment. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 16(2), 34–41.

Lear, J. L., Ansorge, C., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Interactivity/ community process model for the online education environment. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 71–77.

Malhotra, N., Hall, J., Shaw, M., & Oppenheim, P. (2006). Marketing research: An applied orientation (3rd ed.). Pearson Education Australia, Frenchs Forest, N.S.W.

Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222.

Mat Zin, A. (2012). Adult students’ personalities and behaviours towards examinations: A study of Universiti Sains Malaysia’s (USM) distance education students. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 14(1), 59–75.

Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student Engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6). John Wiley & Sons.

Olson, J. D., & Appunn, F. D. (2017). The technology adoption process model and self-efficacy of distance education students. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(2), 57–102.

Ong, C. H., Lim, L. P., Tan, O. K., & Goh, C. F. (2019). Exploring lifelong learning outcomes among adult learners via goal orientation and information literacy self-efficacy. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 8(4), 616–623.

Prifti, R. (2020). Self–efficacy and student satisfaction in the context of blended learning courses. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 1–15.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online technologies self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of final grade and satisfaction in college-level online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 72–89.

Rahim, N. B. (2019). The effect of work-family conflict towards job satisfaction and emotional well-being:Problem-focused coping as mediator. Jurnal Pengurusan (UKM Journal of Management), 57.

Rahim, N. B. (2020). Improving student engagement and behavioural outcomes via persistence among distance learners (Meningkatkan penglibatan pelajar dan hasil tingkah laku melalui kegigihan dalam kalangan pelajar jarak jauh). Akademika, 90(2), 91–102.

Rajabalee, Y. B., & Santally, M. I. (2021). Learner satisfaction, engagement and performances in an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 2623–2656.

Teoh, G. B. S., Liau, A. W. L., & Belaja, K. (2013). Challenges faced by distance learners to learn the English Language at the School of Distance Education, Universiti Sains Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 43–53.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2010). Research methods for small business. A skill building approach (5th ed.). Haddington: John Wiley & Sons.

Schwarz, N., & Oyserman, D. (2001). Asking questions about behavior: Cognition, communication, and questionnaire construction. The American Journal of Evaluation, 22(2), 127–160.

Sökmen, Y. (2021). The role of self-efficacy in the relationship between the learning environment and student engagement. Educational Studies, 47(1), 19–37.

Tsai, C. L., Ku, H. Y., & Campbell, A. (2021). Impacts of course activities on student perceptions of engagement and learning online. Distance Education, 42(1), 106–125.

Thomas, J. E., & Graham, C. R. (2017). Common practices for evaluating post-secondary online instructors. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 20(4). https://www.learntechlib.org/p/188473/

Van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher e d u c a t i o n. E d u c a t i o n a l Research Review, 6(2), 95–108.

Wang, C. H., Shannon, D. M., & Ross, M. E. (2013). Students’ characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, and course outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 302–323.

Yavuzalp, N., & Bahcivan, E. (2020). The online learning self-efficacy scale: Its adaptation into Turkish and interpretation according to various variables. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 31–44.

Zaini, S. H., & Ayub, A. F. M. (2013). Exploring social presence in online forums among distance learners. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 35–50.

Zimmerman B. J. (1989). Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In: Zimmerman B. J., Schunk D. H. (Eds.) Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement. Springer Series in Cognitive Development (pp. 1-25). Springer, New York, NY.