Skip to Main Content

Student engagement in online learning is an essential component of course design. To ensure that students are engaged in the course, various strategies can help students interact with the content. This study focuses on determining gender differences in learner perspectives on how engaging learner-content interactions can be in an online learning environment. No significant differences between male and female learners in their perceptions of engagement were found. However, some aspects of learner-content interactions were engaging for all students, including narrated videos and critical thinking assignments.

Online education continues to rise. With the global pandemic outbreak, various institutions have opted to put their courses online so that faculty members, students, and staff members could be safe (Hodges et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2020). With the high number of online learners, instructors and course designers may need to establish ways of engaging their students in an online course. Numerous practices have been suggested for engaging learners in an online learning environment. These strategies proposed center around how learner-content interactions, learner-technology interactions, and learner-learner interactions can be improved to engage online students (Chakraborty &Nafukho, 2014). However, very few studies have investigated gender differences in student views of the role of learnercontent interactions on their engagement in an online course.

This study focuses on learner-content interaction and how it plays a role in learner engagement. The learners rated how the following aspects of course content impact their engagement in an online learning environment: personal interests in the subject matter, narrated lecture videos provided as a class resource, interactive assignments presented in the class, critical thinking assignments presented in the class, and problem-solving assignments presented in the class. Researchers examined if male and female perceptions of the role of learner-content interactions on their engagement in an online learning environment weredifferent.

York and Richardson (2012) stated: “Instructional interaction is meaningful communication that challenges learners' thinking, shapes the acquisition of knowledge in meaningful ways, and changes learners, moving them toward achieving their goals” (p. 84).

The literature in this area provides various ways to describe interaction in an online environment. One of the most prominent views is Moore (1989), who identified three types of interaction in an online learning environment; learner-learner, learner-instructor, and learnercontent interactions. Learner-learner and learner-instructor interaction can be described as discussions and conversations among learners or between learners and the instructor in online learning environments (Berge, 1995; Swan et al., 2009).

The challenge for course developers and instructors is determining how to promote this type of interaction in the learning environment. According to Xiao (2017),

Despite the fact that interaction with content is inextricably interwoven with learnerlearner and learner-instructor interactions in conventional face-to-face, campus-based educational settings, how to promote this type of interaction has always been top on the research agenda in the field of general education. (p. 124)

In the research on learner-content interaction, Mayer's (2009) theory of multimedia learning points out the importance of a learnercentered approach related to learner-content interaction. This principle recognizes the importance of allowing learners to control the information presented in choosing what content they want to view and the time they want to spend going over the content. This type of interaction can provide learners with the

opportunity to be more selective over the content viewed and the pace of content that has to be covered (Almunive, 2020).

Learner-content interaction is significant in education because “without it there cannot be education since it is the process of intellectually interacting with content that results in changes in the learner's understanding, the learner's perspective, or the cognitive structures of the learner's mind“ (Moore, 1989. p. 2).

According to Zimmerman (2012), “Interaction plays a critical role in the learning process. For online course participants, interaction with the course content (learner-content interaction) is especially important because it can contribute to successful learning outcomes and course completion” (p. 152).

In a study conducted to test “a regression model for student satisfaction involving student characteristics (three types of interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning) and class-level predictors (course category and academic program),” the authors found that, “Learner-instructor interaction and learner-content interaction were significant predictors of student satisfaction” (Kuo et al., 2014, p. 35). Accordingly, this study explored how learner-content interactions may impact student engagement in an online learning environment. This study categorized learner-content interaction in an online learning environment into; personal interests in the subject matter, narrated lecture videos provided as a class resource, interactive assignments, and critical thinking assignments.

Many studies have been conducted on gender differences in online learning environments, for example, Ma and Yuen (2011; Rovai and Baker (2005); Sullivan (2001); Wang et al. (2009); Yukselturk and Bulut (2009). However, only a few examined any gender differences in learner perspectives on the role of learner-content interactions in an online learning environment. According to Yukselturk and Bulut (2009),

In the literature, gender-based differences in education have been an important focus for research for a long time, especially since the increasing number of online female students. When reviewing gender-related studies, the effects of this variable are inconclusive on the student experience in distance education. (p. 13)

Some studies focused on the gender differences in online courses concerning learner perspectives on online courses in general. For example, according to Sullivan (2001), online courses were reported to be of great value to female adult learners with family responsibilities or with children. Other studies focused on gender differences in learner performance and interactions. For example, researchers found that

women studying online are confident, independent learners who may outperform their male counterparts in one study. They do not have reduced computer and Internet access compared with men, nor are they disinclined to enrol [enroll] on online courses. They attach greater value to the pastoral aspect of tutoring and have different interaction styles from men, which may have implications for online tutoring support. (Price, 2006, p. 349)

Regarding learner-learner interactions, some studies focused on how male and female students communicated in an online learning environment. For example, researchers in another study found “empirical support for the idea that men and women communicate at different levels, perceive community differently, and have differing views of perceived learning in an online educational environment” (Rovai & Baker, 2005, p. 42).

In a study conducted to determine if there were gender differences in the use of learning strategies and motivation, the authors found that “test anxiety explained a significant amount of variance in female students’ achievement and two variables (self-efficacy for learning and performance, and task value) explained a significant amount of variance in male students’ achievement” (Yukselturk & Bulut, 2009, p. 12).

A few studies focused on gender differences in learner perspectives of the role of learner-content interactions on their engagement in an online learning environment. On the other hand, this study will bridge this gap in the literature by focusing on gender differences in learner perspectives on the role of learner-content interactions on their engagement in an online learning environment.

Student engagement is one of the topics studied in the literature (Czerkawski & Lyman, 2016; Kahn et al., 2017; McBrien et al., 2009: Robinson & Hullinger, 2008). Student engagement is defined “as the interest and motivation students have in their learning of course content” (Young & Bruce, 2011, p. 220). This study adopts this definition of engagement.

One factor that influences engagement in an online learning environment is learner-learner interaction established in learning communities. According to Sharp and Huett (2006), learner-learner interaction occurs as “learners share information with their peers and receive feedback” (p. 4). As Young and Bruce (2011) pointed out, there is a close relationship between a classroom community and student engagement.

Learner-instructor interaction involves students and the instructor sharing knowledge and information within the process of learning (Kang & Im, 2013). The same authors also add, “learners who felt they had a higher degree of interaction with their instructors and other peer learners had higher satisfaction and higher perceived learning outcomes than learners who felt they experienced a lower degree of interaction” (p. 292). Further on this type of interaction, Sharp and Huett (2006) identify three major roles for the instructor which are: “stimulate interest and motivation; to organize application of student learning; and to counsel, support, and encourage each learner” (p. 4).

Another factor related to engagement in an online learning environment is the content. Nandi et al. (2015) describe student-content interaction as “the primary construct in predicting online satisfaction” (p. 28), which involves the student use of any information meant to teach them. Lou et al. (2006) place content interaction at the center of the process through which students acquire new knowledge, skills, and abilities that impact how they interpret information around them. This type of interaction “may include reading informational texts, using study guides, watching videos, interacting with computer-based multimedia, and completing assignments and projects” (Nandi et al., 2015, p. 28).

According to one study conducted to determine what students found engaging in an online learning environment, students reported that activities that involved applying concepts in problem-solving or case studies, research papers, and labs were engaging (Dixson, 2010).

Regarding gender differences in student engagement, women who were taking an online version of a course were found to be more engaged in the course than the male students in the same course (Price, 2006). According to the same authors, the women in the online course also liked to learn from other students and were more confident.

Few studies on engagement in online learning environments focused on gender differences in the role of learner-content interactions on student engagement. By linking engagement to learner-content interactions in an online learning environment, this study examined if male and female students perceived the role of learner-content interactions on their engagement in an online learning environment differently.

Participants in this study (N = 147) were undergraduate students from a land-grant university in the southeastern part of the United States. The students were enrolled in four online courses, and their ages ranged between 18-34 years; 72 were males and 75 females. The majority of the students were Caucasian (n = 115), and Asians were the second largest group (n = 12), and African Americans were the smallest group (n = 10).

Researchers conducted an initial study using the Student Perception of Engagement in an Online Course survey to measure student engagement in an online course. One of the questions centered on student views on the role of learner-content interactions on their engagement. The survey was adapted from surveys used by other researchers and based on the literature. The survey consisted of 12 questions, and the first questions gathered demographic information such as age and race.

Before conducting an analysis, the reports feature in Qualtrics was used to view the results. The results were sorted by gender, and a side-by-side comparison was made to observe differences between male and females’ views on the impact of the following learner-content interaction on their engagement,

  1. 1. Personal interests in the subject matter.

  2. 2. Narrated lecture videos are provided as a class resource.

  3. 3. Interactive assignments are presented in the class.

  4. 4. Critical thinking assignments are presented in the class.

  5. 5. Problem-solving assignments are presented in the class.

As shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3, more male students thought that critical thinking assignments were somewhat engaging (n = 26) than did the female students (n = 17). However, a high number of females (n = 33) thought that narrated lecture videos were highly engaging compared to their male counterparts (n = 19).

Table 1

Male Scores on Five Aspects of Learner-Content Interactions.

QuestionNot ApplicableNot at All EngagingSlightly EngagingSomewhat EngagingModerately EngagingHighly EngagingTotal
My personal interests in the subject matter. (2) 2.78%(4) 5.56%(10) 13.89%(19) 26.39%(19) 26.39%(18) 25.00%72
Narrated lecture videos are provided as a class resource. (1) 1.39%(3) 4.17%(9) 12.50%(17) 23.61%(23) 31.94%(19) 26.39%72
Interactive assignments are presented in the class. (2) 2.78%(4) 5.56%(14) 19.44%(19) 26.39%(20) 27.78%(13) 18.06%72
Critical-thinking assignments are presented in the class. (3) 4.17%(4) 5.56(10) 13.89%(26) 36.11%(23) 31.94%(6) 8.33%72
Problem-solving assignments are presented in the class. (4) 5.56%(6) 8.33%(12) 16.67%(21) 29.17%(21) 29.17%(8) 11.11%72
Table 2

Female Scores on Five Aspects of Learner-Content Interactions.

QuestionNot ApplicableNot at All EngagingSlightly EngagingSomewhat EngagingModerately EngagingHighly EngagingTotal
My personal interests in the subject matter.(2) 2.67%(4) 5.33%(10) 13.33%(18) 24.00%(22) 29.33%(19) 25.33%75
Narrated lecture videos are provided as a class resource. (0) 0.00%(3) 4.00%(7) 9.33%(17) 22.67%(15) 20.00%(33) 44.00%75
Interactive assignments are presented in the class. (1) 1.33%(4) 5.33%(14) 18.67%(22) 29.33%(18) 24.00%(16) 21.33%75
Critical-thinking assignments are presented in the class. (2) 2.67%(5) 6.67%(15) 20.00%(17) 22.67%(19) 25.33%(17) 22.67%75
Problem-solving assignments are presented in the class. (5) 6.67%(6) 8.00%(13) 17.33%(18) 24.00%(17) 22.67%(16) 21.33%75
Table 3

Group Statistics

QuestionsGenderNSDMean
My personal interest in subject matterMale721.3094.43
 Female751.2984.48
Narrated lecture videos are providedMale721.2064.60
 Female751.1874.91
Interactive assignments are provided in classMale721.2754.25
 Female751.2344.33
Critical thinking assignments are presented in the classMale721.1814.11
 Female751.3434.29
Problem-solving assignments are presented in the classMale721.3274.01
 Female751.4794.12

Independent samples t tests were conducted to determine if there were gender differences with regards to learner perspectives on the impact of the following learner-content interactions on their engagement:

  • personal interests in the subject matter;

  • narrated lecture videos are provided as a class resource;

  • interactive assignments are presented in the class;

  • critical thinking assignments are presented in the class; and

  • problem-solving assignments are presented in the class.

Independent samples t tests were conducted (as shown in Table 4) to evaluate the hypothesis that there were no significant differences between male and female students’ perspectives of the impact of the five elements of learner-content interaction on their engagement.

No significant differences were found on the impact of personal interests in the subject matter on student engagement between males and females, t (145) = -.230, p = 0.818. No significant differences were found between males and females on the impact of narrated lecture videos provided as a class resource on student engagement, t (145) = -1.567, p = .119. No significant differences were found on the impact of interactive assignments presented in the class on student engagement between males and females, t (145) = -.403, p = .688. No significant differences were found between males and females on the impact of critical thinking assignments presented in the class on student engagement, t (145) = -.872, p = .385. No significant differences were found on the impact of problem-solving assignments presented in the class on student engagement between males and females, t (145) = -.457, p = .648.

This study examined the differences between male and female students’ views on the impact of five aspects of learner-content interactions on their engagement in an onlinelearning environment. These aspects are

  • Personal interests in the subject matter.

  • Narrated lecture videos are provided as a class resource.

  • Interactive assignments are presented in the class.

  • Critical thinking assignments are presented in the class.

  • Problem-solving assignments are presented in the class.

Table 4

Independent Sample Test

Levene’s Test for Equality of Variancest Test for Equality of Means95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
FSig.tdfSig. (2-tailed)Mean DifferenceStd. ErrorLowerUpper
My personal interest in subject matterEqual variances assumed.007.932–.230145.818–.049.215–.475 – .376
 Equal variances not assumed  –.230144.648.819–.644.215–.475 – .376
Narrated lecture videos are providedEqual variances assumed.000.987–1.567145.119–.309.197–.700 – .81
 Equal variances not assumed  –1.567144.533.119–.309.198–.700 – .81
Interactive assignments are provided in classEqual variances assumed.024.878–.403145.688–.083.207–.492 – .326
 Equal variances not assumed  –.402144.207.688–.083.207–.493 – .326
Critical-thinking assignments are presented in the classEqual variances assumed4.103.045–.872145.385–.182.209–.595 – .231
 Equal variances not assumed  –.874143.913.383–.182.208–.594 – .230
Problem-solving assignments are presented in the classEqual variances assumed1.738.189–.457145.648–.106.232–.565 – .352
 Equal variances not assumed  –.458144.343.647–.106.232–.564 – .352

After an analysis, the results showed no significant differences between male and female students’ perspectives on the role of the five aspects of learner-content interaction on their engagement.

However, the results also show that some aspects of the learner-content interaction were engaging to most learners. For example, both males and females thought that narrated lecture videos were highly engaging. However, we recommend using shorter videos as per Guo et al.’s (2014) findings, who reported thatshorter videos were highly engaging to students.

Critical thinking assignments and personal interest in the subject were also moderately engaging for male and female students. Critical thinking may involve solving unstructured/ open-ended problems (Mastrian & McGoni- gle, 1999). Critical thinking “assumes an inquiry and hypothesis-based approach to ideas as well as thinking that is open to revision” (Çavdar & Doe, 2012, p. 298). Incorporating critical thinking assignments in the class could benefit learners.

The authors recommend the use of short narrated videos in online courses. The literature is not conclusive on the exact length of an educational video. Mukuni (2020) recommends that videos be between 3-20 minutes long and that long videos should be segmented. The videos used should be related to the topic.

The authors also recommend using critical thinking assignments in an online learning environment. The assignments could involve problem solving and be open ended (Mastrian & McGonigle, 1999). They could be designed in such a way that they enable learners to inquire and approach the problem in a hypothesis-based manner (Çavdar & Doe, 2012).

Even though this study found no significant differences between male and female views on the role of learner-content interactions on their engagement in an online course, further studies need to be done on this topic. The aim of identifying gender differences in online learning environments is to ensure that both male and female differences are accounted for in the course design. Given the current global crisis which has pushed K-12 to online learning, future studies may need to be done in the K-12 online learning to determine if there are gender differences between male and female students’ perspectives on engagement in an online learning environment.

Almunive
,
W. A.
(
2020
).
The design and development of Guidelines for interactive course organizers
(
Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech
). http://hdl.handle.net/10919/97828
Berge
,
Z.
(
1995
).
Facilitating computer conferencing: Recommendations from the field.
Educational Technology Archive
,
35
,
22
30
.
Çavdar
,
G.
,
Doe
,
S.
(
2012
).
Learning through writing: Teaching critical thinking skills in writing assignments.
PS: Political Science & Politics
,
45
(
2
),
298
306
.
Chakraborty
,
M.
,
Nafukho
,
F. M.
(
2014
).
Strengthening student engagement: What do students want in online courses?
European Journal of Training and Development
,
38
(
9
),
782
802
.
Czerkawski
,
B. C.
,
Lyman
,
E. W.
(
2016
).
An instructional design framework for fostering student engagement in online learning environments.
TechTrends
,
60
(
6
),
532
539
.
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
.
Guo
,
P. J.
,
Kim
,
J.
,
Rubin
,
R.
(
2014
,
March
).
How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos.
In M.Sahami (Ed.),
Proceedings of the first ACM conference on learning@ scale conference
(pp.
41
50
).
Association for Computing Machinery
Hodges
,
C.
,
Moore
,
S.
,
Lockee
,
B.
,
Trust
,
T.
, &
Bond
,
A.
(
2020
).
The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning.
EDUCAUSE Review
,
3
.
Kahn
,
P.
,
Everington
,
L.
,
Kelm
,
K.
,
Reid
,
I.
,&
Watkins
,
F.
(
2017
).
Understanding student engagement in online learning environments: The role of reflexivity.
Educational Technology Research and Development
,
65
(
1
),
203
218
.
Kang
,
M.
,&
Im
,
T.
(
2013
).
Factors of learner–instructor interaction which predict perceived learning outcomes in online learning environment.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
,
29
(
3
),
292
301
.
Kuo
,
Y. C.
,
Walker
,
A. E.
,
Schroder
,
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
.
Lou
,
Y.
,
Bernard
,
R. M.
, &
Abrami
,
P. C.
(
2006
).
Media and pedagogy in undergraduate distance education: A theory-based meta-analysis of empirical literature.
Educational Technology Research and Development
,
54
(
2
),
141
176
.
Ma
,
W. W. K.
, &
Yuen
,
A. H. K.
(
2011
,
August
).
Gender differences of knowledge sharing in online learning environment.
In International Conference on Hybrid Learning
, (pp.
116
128
).
Springer
.
Mastrian
,
K. G.
, &
McGonigle
,
D.
(
1999
).
Using technology-based assignments to promote critical thinking.
Nurse Educator
,
24
(
1
),
45
47
.
Mayer
,
R. E.
(
2009
).
Multimedia learning
(2nd ed.).
Cambridge University Press
.
McBrien
,
J. L.
,
Cheng
,
R.
, &
Jones
,
P.
(
2009
).
Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning.
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
,
10
(
3
).
Moore
,
M.
(
1989
).
Three types of interaction.
The American Journal of Distance Education
,
3
(
2
),
1
7
.
Mukuni
,
K. K.
(
2020
).
Developing guidelines for using video to teach procedural skills in an online learning environment based on Gagné’s nine events of instruction
(Doctoral dissertation,
Virginia Tech
) .
Nandi
,
D.
,
Hamilton
,
M.
, &
Harland
,
J.
(
2015
).
What factors impact student–content interaction in fully online courses.
International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science
,
7
(
7
),
28
35
.
Price
,
L.
(
2006
).
Gender differences and similarities in online courses: Challenging stereotypical views of women.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
,
22
(
5
),
349
359
.
Robinson
,
C. C.
,&
Hullinger
,
H.
(
2008
).
New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning.
Journal of Education for Business
,
84
(
2
),
101
109
.
Rovai
,
A. P.
, &
Baker
,
J. D.
(
2005
).
Gender differences in online learning: Sense of community, perceived learning, and interpersonal interactions.
Quarterly Review of Distance Education
,
6
(
1
),
31
.
Sharp
,
J. H.
, &
Huett
,
J. B.
(
2006
).
Importance of learner–learner interaction in distance education.
Information SystemsEducation Journal
,
4
(
46
),
1
10
.
Sullivan
,
P.
(
2001
).
Gender differences and the online classroom: Male and female college students evaluate their experiences.
Community College Journal of Research & Practice
,
25
(
10
),
805
818
.
Swan
,
K.
,
Garrison
,
D. R.
, &
Richardson
,
J. C.
(
2009
). A constructivist approach to online learning: The community of inquiry framework. In
C. R.
Payne
(Ed.),
Information technology and constructivism in higher education: Progressive learning frameworks
(pp.
43
57
).
IGI Global
.
Wang
,
Y. S.
,
Wu
,
M. C.
, &
Wang
,
H. Y.
(
2009
).
Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning.
British Journal of Educational Technology
,
40
(
1
),
92
118
.
Xiao
,
J.
(
2017
).
Learner–content interaction in distance education: The weakest link in interaction research.
Distance Education
,
38
(
1
),
123
135
.
York
,
C. S.
, &
Richardson
,
J. C.
(
2012
).
Interpersonal interaction in online learning: Experienced online instructors’ perceptions of influencing factors.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks
,
16
(
4
),
83
98
. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ982684.pdf
Young
,
S.
, &
Bruce
,
M. A.
(
2011
).
Classroom community and student engagement in online courses.
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching
,
7
(
2
),
219
230
.
Yukselturk
,
E.
, &
Bulut
,
S.
(
2009
).
Gender differences in self-regulated online learning environment.
Journal of Educational Technology & Society
,
12
(
3
),
12
22
.
Zhou
,
L.
,
Wu
,
S.
,
Zhou
,
M.
, &
Li
,
F.
(
2020
).
‘School’s out, but class’ on,’ the largest online education in the world today: Taking China’s practical exploration during the COVID-19 epidemic prevention and control as an example.
Best Evidence in Chinese Education
,
4
(
2
),
501
519
.
Zimmerman
,
T. D.
(
2012
).
Exploring learner to content interaction as a success factor in online courses.
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
,
13
(
4
),
152
165
.

Student Perception of Engagement in Online Courses.

Demographics

Age:_

Number of online classes taken (current institution or elsewhere, past or present):

Gender:

  • Male

  • Female

  • Other

Ethnicity:

  • African American/Black

  • Asian

  • Caucasian

  • Hispanic

  • Other_

Course Content

Based on your experience with all online classes, please rate the following statements based on your level of engagement:

Responses:

  • not applicable = 1

  • not at all engaging = 2

  • slightly engaging = 3

  • somewhat engaging = 4

  • moderately engaging = 5

  • highly engaging = 6

My personal interests in the subject matter.

Narrated lecture videos are provided as a class resource.

Interactive assignments are presented in the class.

Critical-thinking assignments are presented in the class.

Problem-solving assignments are presented in the class.

Licensed re-use rights only

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal