Student Engagement and Rapport in the Context of Blended Learning in Mathematics Education Courses: Challenges and Implications

  • Kevin LarkinEmail author


This chapter examines changes to the online component of core primary mathematics education courses offered in blended mode. It reports on the impact these changes had on students’ attitudes towards the course and their connection with the lecturer and each other. The focus here is on the use of online lectures and how modifications to these lectures were made to maximise pre-service teachers’ (PSTs’) connectedness. The dataset includes formal university student feedback; data from the learning management system (LMS) regarding engagement; and my personal reflections. The chapter contributes knowledge regarding the use of digital pedagogies with adult learners and highlights the need for lecturers to consider the various learning needs of PSTs, particularly in the building of rapport and engagement with the discipline and with each other.


Adult pedagogy Blended learning Student engagement Mathematics education Online education Rapport Teacher education 


  1. AAMT. (2006). Standards of excellence in teaching mathematics in Australian schools. Retrieved from
  2. Bos, N., Groeneveld, C., Bruggen, J. V., & Brand-Gruwel, S. (2015). The use of recorded lectures in education and the impact on lecture attendance and exam performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 1–12. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12300.
  3. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education (5thed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  4. Design Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Giannakos, M. N., Jaccheri, L., & Krogstie, J. (2015). Exploring the relationship between video lecture usage patterns and students’ attitudes. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12313.
  6. Gorissen, P. van Bruggen, J. & Jochems, W. (2012). Students and recorded lectures: Survey on current use and demands for Higher Education. Research in Learning Technology 20: 17299. Retrieved on September 16, 2016.
  7. Grootenboer, P., & Hemmings, B. (2007). Mathematics performance and the role played by affective and background factors. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 19(3), 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hibbert, M. (2014). What makes an online instructional video compelling? EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved from
  9. Kay, R. (2012). Exploring the use of video podcasts in education: A comprehensive review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 820–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kazlauskas, A., & Robinson, K. (2012). Podcasts are not for everyone. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 321–330. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01164.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37–50. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Larkin, K. (2016). Course Redesign to Improve Pre-service Teacher Engagement and Confidence to Teach Mathematics: A Case Study in Three Parts. International Journal of Mathematics Teaching and Learning (IJMTL). Retrieved on September 4, 2016 from
  13. Larkin, K., & Jamieson-Proctor, R. (2015). Using transactional distance theory to redesign an online mathematics education course for pre-service primary teachers. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 17(1), 44–61.Google Scholar
  14. Larkin, K., & Jorgensen, R. (2015). ‘I hate maths: Why do we need to do maths?’ Using iPad video diaries to investigate attitudes and emotions towards mathematics in Year 3 and Year 6 students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(5), 925–944. doi: 10.1007/s10763-015-9621-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Larkin, K., Jamieson-Proctor, R., & Finger, G. (2012). TPACK and pre-service teacher mathematics education: Defining a signature pedagogy for mathematics education using ICT and based on the metaphor “mathematics is a language”. Computers in the Schools, 29(1–2), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Larkin, K., Rowan, L., Garrick, B., & Beavis, C. (2016). Student perspectives on first year experience initiatives designed for pre-service teachers in their first weeks of university study. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 13(1), 7.Google Scholar
  17. Popova, A., Kirschner, P. A., & Joiner, R. (2014). Effects of primer podcasts on stimulating learning from lectures: How do students engage? British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 330–339. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. From On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ronchetti, M. (2010). Using video lectures to make teaching more interactive. iJET, 5(2), 45–48.Google Scholar
  20. Rowan, L. (2013). What price success? The impact of the quest for student satisfaction on university academics. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 8(2), 132–146.Google Scholar
  21. Rubinstein, H. (2009). A national strategy for mathematical sciences in Australia. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Griffith Institute of Educational ResearchGriffith UniversityQueenslandAustralia

Personalised recommendations