Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 27 no. 1 (2024)

The Perceived Influence of Interactive Teaching Method and The Technological Integration on Student Engagement of Junior High School in English Subject

Juliana Marie Tiamson | Jhea Cawayan | Mary Angelie Doctora | Rensh Pantinople | Normilah Mae Villanueva | Emmanuel Templa | Rufino Efondo Jr

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study examines the level of interactive teaching method and technological integration and their influence on student engagement in English education among junior high school students at St. Peter's College of Toril Inc. for the school year 2023-2024. It seeks to determine the correlation between teachers' interactive teaching method and student engagement, as well as the correlation between technological integration and student engagement. Finally, the study aims to identify which variable, interactive teaching method or technological integration, significantly influences student engagement. The study employed a quantitative research design, specifically a descriptive correlational design, and analysis methods such as mean score, standard deviation, Pearson's correlation, and regression analysis to determine if there is a significant correlation between teachers' interactive teaching methods and students' engagement levels, as well as investigate the influence of technological integration on student engagement. Findings revealed that interactive teaching methods and technology integration significantly enhance student engagement. Based on the study's findings, it is recommended that educators and schools focus on enhancing student participation and empowerment. High performance in promoting active participation was noted, while improvement is needed in encouraging group project participation. Schools should implement dynamic, collaborative activities and personalized learning experiences. Using the Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) can help future researchers evaluate and optimize technology use in teaching. School administrators should provide engaging technological tools and ongoing teacher training. Emphasizing timely task completion and fostering classroom connections can further enhance engagement. Correlation analysis shows a positive relationship between interactive teaching methods, technological integration, and student engagement, highlighting the importance. Schools should prioritize interactive teaching strategies and integrate technology, supported by professional development, to create engaging learning environments that boost student success.



References:

  1. Abuhassna, H., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Yahya, N., Zakaria, M. a. Z. M., Kosnin, A. B. M., & Darwish, M. (2020). Development of a new model for utilizing online learning platforms to improve students' academic achievements and satisfaction. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00216-z
  2. Abuhassna, H., & Yahaya, N. (2018). Students’ Utilization of Distance Learning through an Interventional Online Module Based on Moore Transactional Distance Theory. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 14(7). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/91606
  3. Ahmed (2019). Qualitative v/s. Quantitative Research- A Summarized Review. ResearchGate. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net
  4. Almagro, R. (2023). E-Learning Educational Atmosphere and Technology Integration as Predictors of Students’ Engagement: The Case of Agribusiness Program. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/gwfud
  5. Andrade, C. (2020). Understanding the Difference Between Standard Deviation and Standard Error of the Mean and Knowing When to Use Which. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 42(4), 409–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620933419
  6. Aslam, S., Riaz, S. N., & Aslam, M. (2023). Impact of Different Social Media Channels on Online Buying behavior: Comparative Case Study of UK with Reference to COVID-19. Global Social Sciences Review, VIII(IV), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2023(viii-iv).02
  7. AVID Center. (2022, February 24). Empower students through creativity and choice - AVID Open Access. AVID Open Access. https://avidopenaccess.org/resource/empower-students-through- creativity- and-choice
  8. Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
  9. Blasiman, R. N., Larabee, D., & Fabry, D. (2018). Distracted students: A comparison of multiple types of distractions on learning in online lectures. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 4(4), 222–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000122
  10. Cenita, J. A., Asuncion, P. R., & Victoriano, J. (2023). Performance Evaluation of Regression Models in Predicting the Cost of Medical Insurance. International Journal of Computing Sciences Research (Manila), 7, 2052–2065. https://doi.org/10.25147/ijcsr.2017.001.1.146
  11. Chen, D., & Anderson, C. J. (2023). Categorical data analysis. In Elsevier eBooks (pp. 575–582). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-818630-5.10070-3
  12. Chi, M. T. H., Wylie, R., & Freeman, L. (2018). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 53(2), 100-120. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1427423
  13. Dancsa, D., Štempeľová, I., Takáč, O., & Annuš, N. (2023). Digital tools in education. International Journal of Advanced Natural Sciences and Engineering Researches, 7(4), 289–294. https://doi.org/10.59287/ijanser.717
  14. De Lima, C., Bastos, R. C., & Varvakis, G. (2020). DIGITAL LEARNING PLATFORMS: AN INTEGRATIVE REVIEW TO SUPPORT INTERNATIONALIZATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION. Educação Em Revista, 36. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-4698232826
  15. Donohoe, K. (2020, April 8). Assessing technology enhanced assessment. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/assessing-technology-enhancedassessment-kathleen-donohoe
  16. Dublar, C. (2023). Title: Assessing the Impact of Emerging Technology Integration on knowledge and Skills acquisition of K-12. . . ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29073.30561
  17. Durff, L., & Carter, M. (2019). Overcoming Second-Order Barriers to Technology Integration in K–5 Schools. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.5590/jerap.2019.09.1.18
  18. Ethical Considerations ~ Types & Examples. (2024, April 3). https://www.bachelorprint.com/methodology/ethical-considerations/
  19. Eze, S. C., Chinedu-Eze, V. C. A., Okike, C. K., & Bello, A. O. (2020). Factors influencing the use of e-learning facilities by students in a private Higher Education Institution (HEI) in a developing economy. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00624-6
  20. Faig, N. E. Z. (2023). The EXPLORING THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION IN TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY EDUCATION. International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science, 4(40). https://doi.org/10.31435/rsglobal_ijitss/30122023/8089
  21. Fangfang, G., And, J. L., & Hoben, J. L. (2020). The Impact of student empowerment and Engagement on teaching in Higher Education: A comparative. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341763593
  22. Foster, S. (2023). Facilitating and assessing student engagement in the classroom. Center for Teaching & Learning. https://www.colorado.edu/center/teaching-learning/2023/01/23/facilitatingand-assessing-student-engagement- classroom
  23. Franklin, H., & Harrington, I. (2019, December 1). A Review into Effective Classroom Management and Strategies for Student Engagement: Teacher and Student Roles in Today’s Classrooms. Research UNE. https://rune.une.edu.au/web/handle/1959.11/27556?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR1BlZqLRcehtFpajIoxz2pZhKnepUob8HGbDFgFsmgfygmoBxl01RbCw8_aem_AUDXDCQmkOjWggrWAgkO7Jn4Wue3hyorvqRbvQ9X
  24. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2018). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(50), 12441-12446. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821936115
  25. Gray, K. (2021, August 16). Inquiry-based learning in English classrooms. Edutopia. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/inquiry-based-learning-english-classrooms
  26. Gurcan, F., Erdogdu, F., Cagiltay, N. E., & Cagiltay, K. (2023). Student engagement research trends of past 10 years: A machine learning-based analysis of 42,000 research articles. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 15067–15091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11803-8
  27. Hollister, B., Nair, P., Hill-Lindsay, S., & Chukoskie, L. (2022). Engagement in Online Learning: Student attitudes and behavior during COVID-19. Frontiers in education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.851019
  28. Hugar, J. G., & Kumar, D. (2024). Research Productivity of Alagappa University & Goa University Comparative Study. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378705240_Research_Productivity_of_Alagappa_University_Goa_University
  29. İşeri, E. T., & Tabak, B. Y. (n.d.). Investigation of Teachers’ Self-Assessment to create a Positive Classroom environment. Digital Commons@NLU. https://digitalcommons.nl.edu/ie/vol13/iss1/5/
  30. Kamran, F., Kanwal, A., Afzal, A., & Rafiq, S. (2023). Impact of Interactive Teaching Methods on Students Learning Outcomes at University level. ResearchGate.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372289203_Impact_of_Interactive_Teaching_Methods_on_Students
  31. Katyara, Priya & Hussain, Dr & Muhiyuddin, Ghulam & Shabroz, (2023). Impact Of Technology on Student's Engagement In Different Dimensions: Cognitive, Behavioral, Reflective and Social Engagement. 19. 3451-3464.
  32. Kaur, P. (2022). Digital Learning: Impact on higher education. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362906417_Digital_Learning_Im pact_on_Higher_Education
  33. Kishore, J. (2023, July 26). (6) What are the Interactive Teaching Methods to Engage Your    Students? LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/whatinteractive-teaching-methods-engage- your-students-jatoth-kishore/
  34. Küçük, T., & Kucuk, T. (2023). Technology Integrated teaching and its positive and negative impacts on education. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v10i1p46
  35. Kulshreshtha, M., Chinta, S., Saxena, T., & Baliga, D. (2023). The effects of Technology-Integrated Curriculum on student engagement and outcomes. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374117035_The_Effects_of_Tec hnology-Integrated_Curriculum_on_Student_Engagement_and_Outcomes%20/
  36. Liaw, S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers and Education/Computers & Education, 51(2), 864–873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.005
  37. Luthfiyyah, R., Aisyah, A., & Sulistyo, G. H. (2021). Technology-enhanced formative assessment in higher education: A voice from Indonesian EFL teachers. Edulite/Edulite: Journal of English Education, Literature, and Culture, 6(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.30659/e.6.1.42-54
  38. Ma, Y. (2023). A study of interactive teaching in high school English classrooms. Communications in Humanities Research, 7(1), 100–104. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7064/7/20230810
  39. Mohebi, L. (2022, January 13). Theoretical Models of Integration of Interactive Learning Technologies into Teaching: A Systematic Literature Review. Mohebi | International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research. http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter/article/view/4586/pdf
  40. Mu, K., Shi, Q., Ma, Y., & Tan, J. (2020). Exploration of Entrepreneurship Education by linear regression and psychological factor analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02045
  41. Munna, A. S., & Kalam, M. A. (2021). Teaching and learning process to enhance teaching effectiveness: literature review. IJHI (International Journal of Humanities and Innovation), 4(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.33750/ijhi.v4i1.102
  42. Nawaz, R. G. D. T. T., D. S. B., D. U. I., M. H. (2022, August 16). Effect of different classroom predicators on students’ behavioral engagement. https://www.journalppw.com/index.php/jpsp/article/view/10511
  43. Nickerson, C. (2024, February 2). Albert Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/social- cognitivetheory.html
  44. Noor, U., Younas, M., Aldayel, H. S., Menhas, R., & Qingyu, X. (2022). Learning behavior, digital platforms for learning and its impact on university student’s motivations and knowledge development. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933974
  45. Obenza-Tanudtanud, Dianne Mariz & Obenza, Brandon. (2023). EVALUATING TEACHER-STUDENT      INTERACTION           AND STUDENT LEARNING ENGAGEMENT IN THE NEW NORMAL: A CONVERGENT-PARALLEL DESIGN. 15. 1-12.
  46. Palarisan, N. J. B., & Domag, C. M. (2023). The socio-emotional classroom management and student engagement of tertiary teachers in Davao City. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 48(2), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2023/v48i21050
  47. Pittas,                    E.,        & Adeyemi, A. (2019). Technology     integration       in         education: Effectiveness, pedagogical use and competence. LUMAT, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.31129/lumat.7.1.396
  48. Pandita, A., & Kiran, R. (2023). The technology interface and student engagement are significant stimuli in sustainable student satisfaction. Sustainability, 15(10), 7923. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107923
  49. Patrick, S., Kennedy, K., & Powell, A. (2020). The 2020 state of personalized learning. International Association for K-12 Online Learning (INACOL)
  50. Qiu, F. (2022). Reviewing the role of positive classroom climate in improving English as a foreign language students’ social interaction in the online classroom.        Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1012524
  51. Ramaila, S., & Molwele, A. J. (2022). The role of technology integration in the development of 21st century skills and competencies in life sciences teaching and learning. International Journal of Higher Education, 11(5), 9. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v11n5p9
  52. Seeram, E. (2019, November 1). An overview of correlational research. PubMed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31685592/
  53. Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020b). Motivation and social cognitive  theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832
  54. Simkus, J. (2023, July 31). Stratified Random Sampling: Definition, Method & Examples.https://www.simplypsychology.org/stratified- randomsampling.html
  55. Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom-Based Practices. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.x
  56. Werang, B., & Leba, S. M. R. (2022). Factors Affecting Student Engagement in Online Teaching and Learning: A Qualitative Case Study. ˜the œQualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5165
  57. Widodo, A., & Astuti, B. (2024). Critical Analysis of Social Cognitive Learning Theory and Its Implementation in Elementary Schools. Mandalika, 2(1), 6–12. https://doi.org/10.56566/mandalika.v2i1.148
  58. Zhou, C., Wu, D., Li, Y., Yang, H. H., Man, S., & Chen, M. (2022). The role of student engagement in promoting teachers’ continuous learning of TPACK: based on a stimulus-organism-response framework and an integrative model of behavior prediction. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 2207–2227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11237-8

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic