Skip to main content

Exploring Associations Between Participant Online Content Engagement and Outcomes in an Online Professional Development Programme

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Re-imagining Diffusion and Adoption of Information Technology and Systems: A Continuing Conversation (TDIT 2020)

Abstract

Online Professional Development (PD) programmes for government school teachers provide benefits of low costs to the administration and flexible schedules for the participants. However, research on the use of technology in PD programmes has reported mixed results, thus warranting further investigation. Exploring the associations between the variation in engagement of and outcomes among the participants may provide insights for future research. The paper presents analysis of pageview logs and survey responses of 6933 participants of an online PD programme. First, four latent online engagement profiles were extracted using mixture modelling. Then, associations between participants’ latent profiles and reported change in self-efficacy beliefs were analyzed. Finally, limitations and implications of the work are presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Terwiesch, C., Ulrich, K.: Will Video Kill the Classroom Star? the Threat and Opportunity of Massively Open Online Courses for Full-Time Mba Programs (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dede, C., Jass Ketelhut, D., Whitehouse, P., Breit, L., McCloskey, E.M.: A research agenda for online teacher professional development. J. Teach. Educ. 60(1), 8–19 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Borko, H.: Professional development and teacher learning: mapping the terrain. Educ. Res. 33(8), 3–15 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Desimone, L.M.: Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educ. Res. 38(3), 181–199 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Desouza, J.M.S., Boone, W.J., Yilmaz, O.: A study of science teaching self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs of teachers in India. Sci. Educ. 88(6), 837–854 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dyer, C., et al.: Knowledge for teacher development in India: the importance of ‘local knowledge’ for in-service education. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 24(1), 39–52 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Singh, R., Sarkar, S.: Does teaching quality matter? Students learning outcome related to teaching quality in public and private primary schools in India. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 41, 153–163 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sehgal, P., Nambudiri, R., Mishra, S.K.: Teacher effectiveness through self-efficacy, collaboration and principal leadership. Int. J. Educ. Manage. 31(4), 505–517 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A.W.: Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teach. Teach. Educ. 17(7), 783–805 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Goddard, R.D., Hoy, W.K., Hoy, A.W.: Collective teacher efficacy : its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. Am. Educ. Res. J. 37(2), 479–507 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lumpe, A., Czerniak, C., Haney, J., Beltyukova, S.: Beliefs about teaching science: the relationship between elementary teachers’ participation in professional development and student achievement. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 34(2), 153–166 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gabriele, A.J., Joram, E.: Teachers’ reflections on their reform-based teaching in mathematics: implications for the development of teacher selfefficacy. Action Teach. Educ. 29, 60–74 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gibson, S., Dembo, M.H.: Teacher efficacy: a construct validation. J. Educ. Psychol. 76(4), 569–582 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gregoire, M.: Is it a challenge or a threat? a dual-process model of teachers’ cognition and appraisal processes during conceptual change. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 15(2), 147–179 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Levenson, E., Gal, H.: Insights from a teacher professional development course: Rona’s changing perspectives regarding mathematicaly-talented students. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. Dordrecht 11(5), 1087–1114 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Summers, J.J., Davis, H.A., Hoy, A.W.: The effects of teachers’ efficacy beliefs on students’ perceptions of teacher relationship quality. Learn. Individ. Differ. 53, 17–25 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hill, H.C., Beisiegel, M., Jacob, R.: Professional development research: consensus, crossroads, and challenges. Educ. Res. 42(9), 476–487 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pehmer, A.K., Gröschner, A., Seidel, T.: How teacher professional development regarding classroom dialogue affects students’ higher-order learning. Teach. Teach. Educ. 47, 108–119 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kennedy, M.J., Rodgers, W.J., Romig, J.E., Lloyd, J.W., Brownell, M.T.: Effects of a multimedia professional development package on inclusive science teachers’ vocabulary instruction. J. Teach. Educ. 68(2), 213–230 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Qian, Y., Hambrusch, S., Yadav, A., Gretter, S.: Who needs what: recommendations for designing effective online professional development for computer science teachers. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 50(2), 164–181 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rosaen, C.L., Carlisle, J.F., Mihocko, E., Melnick, A., Johnson, J.: Teachers learning from analysis of other teachers’ reading lessons. Teach. Teach. Educ. 35, 170–184 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Minor, E.C., Desimone, L.M., Lee, J.C., Hochberg, E.D.: Insights on how to shape teacher learning policy : the role of teacher content knowledge in explaining differential effects of professional development. Educ. Policy Anal. Arch. 24(61), 1–34 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Romero, C., Ventura, S.: Educational data science in massive open online courses. Wiley Interdisc. Rev. Data Min. Knowl. Discovery 7(1), 1–12 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tseng, S.-F., Tsao, Y.-W., Yu, L.-C., Chan, C.-L., Lai, K.R.: Who will pass? Analyzing learner behaviors in MOOCs. Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanced Learn. 11(1), 1–11 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-016-0033-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kizilcec, R.F., Piech, C., Schneider, E.: Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge - LAK 2013, p. 170 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ferguson, R., Clow, D.: Examining engagement: analysing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses (MOOCs). In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge - LAK 2015, pp. 51–58 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Coffrin, C., Corrin, L., de Barba, P., Kennedy, G.: Visualizing patterns of student engagement and performance in MOOCs. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge - LAK 2014, pp. 83–92, March 2014

    Google Scholar 

  28. Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A., Margaryan, A.: Patterns of engagement in connectivist MOOCs. MERLOT J. Online Learn. Teach. 9(2), 149–159 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ramesh, A., Goldwasser, D., Huang, B., Daum, H., Getoor, L.: Modeling learner engagement in MOOCs using probabilistic soft logic. In: NIPS Workshop on Data Driven Education, pp. 1–7 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kalakoski, V., Ratilainen, H., Drupsteen, L.: Enhancing learning at work . How to combine theoretical and data-driven approaches, and multiple levels of data ? In: Esann 2015, pp. 22–24, April 2015

    Google Scholar 

  31. Riggs, I.M., Enochs, L.G.: Toward the development of an elementary teacher’ s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Sci. Educ. 74(6), 625–637 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Enochs, L.G., Smith, P.L., Huinker, D.: Establishing factorial validity of the mathematics teaching efficacy beliefs instrument. Sch. Sci. Math. 100(4), 194–202 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. R-Core Team, R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  34. RStudio-Team, RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Muthén, L.K., Muthén, B.O.: MPlus User’s Guide, 8th edn. Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Muthén, B.O., Du Toit, S.H.C., Spisic, D.: Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equations in latent variable modeling with categorical and continuous outcomes. Psychometrika, p. 49 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M.: Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 6(1), 1–55 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Marsh, H.W., Hau, K.T., Wen, Z.: In search of golden rules: comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Struct. Equ. Model. 11(3), 320–341 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Magidson, J., Vermunt, J.K.: Latent class models for clustering: a comparison with K-means. Can. J. Market. Res. 20(1), 36–43 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Nylund, K.L., Asparouhov, T., Muthén, B.O.: Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: a Monte Carlo simulation study. Struct. Equ. Model. 14(4), 535–569 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Alessandri, G., Zuffianò, A., Perinelli, E.: Evaluating intervention programs with a pretest-posttest design: a structural equation modeling approach. Front. Psychol. 8, 223 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00223

Download references

Acknowledgements

The online professional development programme was developed as a collaboration between the Government of Gujarat and Ravi J Matthai Center for Educational Innovation, IIM Ahmedabad. We are thankful for the time and support provided by various professionals working at both these institutions. We also like to thank Mr. Avinash Bhandari, Ms. Megha Gajjar, Mr. Sanket Savaliya, Mr. Lekh Nakrani & Ms. Nishanshi Shukla in coordinating the development and implementation of the programme.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ketan S. Deshmukh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Deshmukh, K.S., Chand, V.S., Shukla, K.D., Laha, A.K. (2020). Exploring Associations Between Participant Online Content Engagement and Outcomes in an Online Professional Development Programme. In: Sharma, S.K., Dwivedi, Y.K., Metri, B., Rana, N.P. (eds) Re-imagining Diffusion and Adoption of Information Technology and Systems: A Continuing Conversation. TDIT 2020. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 617. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64849-7_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64849-7_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-64848-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-64849-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics