1. 21ST
CENTURY LEARNING:
APPLICATION OF LEARNING
THEORIES FOR STUDENT
ENGAGEMENT
Loh Khang Ling

2. Recently, researchers and educators start to feel the
importance of engaged learning. They even formed
strong consensus on the importance of engaged
learning in school and classrooms. With the
recognition of changing needs of the 21st
century, this
consensus has stimulated the development of specific
indicators of engaged learning. 1994, a group of
scholars, from the North Central Regional Education
Laboratory (Jones, Valdez, Nowakowski, and
Rasmussen) developed their own list of engaged
learning indicators. The indicators are:
 Vision of Engaged Learning
 Tasks for Engaged Learning
 Assessment of Engaged Learning
 Instructional Models & Strategies for Engaged
Learning
 Learning Context of Engaged Learning
 Grouping for Engaged Learning
 Teacher Roles for Engaged Learning and
 Student Roles for Engaged Learning

3. Educators start to groom student engagement as
student engagement becomes the indicator of
successful classroom instruction. Student engagement
is valued as an outcome of school improvement
activities. Engaged students are believed to have the
below attributes:
Engaged students are attracted to their work
Engaged students are happy in accomplishing their work
Engaged students are willing, need, desire and compulsion to participate
Engaged students persist despite challenges and obstacles

4.  Researchers believe that student engagement is
overlaps with level of motivation among students
but student engagement is more than motivation.
Student engagement is accompanied by positive
emotional (enthusiasm, optimism, curiosity and
interest).
 According to another study by Kenny G., Kenny
D. and Dumont R. (1995), there are five
indicators for student engagement in college:
 Level of academic challenge
 Active and collaborative learning
 Student-faculty interactions
 Enriching education experiences
 Supportive learning environment

5. RESEARCH 1
According to a South African survey of student
engagement with topic “Focusing the Student
Experience on Success through Student Engagement”
by J. F. Strydom and M. Mentz (2010), student
engagement is important for improving the quality
and outcomes of the student experience. This research
report showed the promising and disappointing
aspects of student learning experience. The report
also descript implications and applications of student
engagement by implementation of four-year
undergraduate degree; accessing the effectiveness of
higher education; improving the quality of teaching
and learning; and addressing social cohesion.

6. RESEARCH 2
There is another research by George D. Kuh, Ty M.
Cruce, Rick Shoup and Jillian Kinzie (2008) with title
“Unmasking the Effects of Student Engagement on
First-Year College Grades and Persistence”. This
study examines the relationships between student
engagement, college GPA, and persistence for 11,000
students attending 18 baccalaure ategranting
institutions. Two conclusions are made in this report.
First, student engagement in educationally
purposeful activities is positively related to academic
outcomes as represented by first-year student grades
and by persistence between the first and second year
of college. Second, engagement has a compensatory
effect on first-year grades and persistence to the
second year of college at the same institution.

7. RESEARCH 3
Report by Coates H. (2005), Coates argues for the
importance of factoring information about
student engagement when come to determine the
quality of University education. This report
discussed about the concept of student
engagement and critically review the approach
used in Australia. According to the report, there
are much value of measuring student
engagement by mentioning that student
engagement data can provides a picture of what
and how students are actually doing.

8. RESEARCH 4
In a research by Leah Taylor and Jim Parsons (2011),
curricular and pedagogical ideas are introduced to improve
student engagement in learning. According to Taylor and
Parsons, five aspects are suggested for successful student-
engaging classrooms:
 Relevant, real and interdisciplinary learning
 Learning environment rich with technology
 Open, challenging and open learning environment
 Respectful “peer-to-peer” collaboration relationship
between students and teachers
 Culture of learning where teachers are learning together
with students
This research also concluded that increased access to
technology in classroom increases aspects of student
engagement (Taylor & Parsons, 2011, p. 15).

9. RESEARCH 5

11. PROPOSAL 1
encourage students to use social network in order to
encourage students and teachers social interaction.
According to source from Browser Media,
Socialnomics and MacWorld (2012), 56% of the people
from all around the world use social networks.
Teachers may start and join a group within social
network that students are familiar with (Facebook,
Twitter etc.). By doing this, we encourage constant
communication between teachers and students. This
also create environment to support student to
continue learning outside of classroom. Through
social network, students are able to have discussion
among them. Involvement of teachers in the
discussion will definitely benefits students. Indirectly,
level of engagement in learning process will be
increase with more communication between students
and teachers. Here, we apply constructivism as our
learning theory.

12. PROPOSAL 2
Design the instruction that require students to look for
information using Web 2.0 tools. Class should include more
discussion that pre-informs students in order for them to
look for information. Teachers may suggest Web 2.0 tools
that students can use to search for discussion detail such
as Youtube, Wikis and search engines. We hope to increase
involvement of students in class by applying two learning
theories: constructivism and connectivism. Clarification
should be done before the discussion in order to pass the
message that participants of discussion should involve with
open-minded. It is important to create an open discussion
environment where students feel safe and confident to
discuss. This will encourage students’ interaction by
setting some base rules for discussion such as:
 Every student will need to elaborate her/ his findings
(what and from where)
 Every student will need to raise question for her/ his course
mate’s elaboration

13. PROPOSAL 3
Cognitivism emphasis on how an instruction can easily and effectively
learn by students’ brain. To apply cognitivism, lecture in class should
be as interesting as possible. Teachers should include some
multimedia in the lecture. One of the multimedia is lecture
presentation. Presentation shows should include lecture notes and
related graphics, charts or tables. There are some tools that can help
the teacher to prepare the presentation slides:
 Prezi.com
 Prezi.com allows us to create maps of texts, images, videos, PDFs,
drawings and allow the user to present in a nonlinear way. The
flow of data can be present beyond the slide
 Teachers can do presentation through prezi.com using web
browser without installing any software in the computer.
 Presentation created through prezi.com can be shared and
students are able to go through the presentation any time that
suite them for the purpose of revision
 Slideshare.net
 Slideshare.net can support majority of presentation format. For
example Microsoft Powerpoint and OpenOffice ODP
 Teacher can share with students her/ his presentation

14. PROPOSAL 4
Teacher may use movie clips to help them as part
of the lecture. Lecture with video clips stimulates
a love of learning and groom attitude of inquiry.
With a help from group discussion among the
students, lecture with video clips enhance
analytical thinking, mature student behavior and
positive school climates. The most important
point is, video clips are more interesting and able
to engage student in learning.

15. PROPOSAL 5
Tablet device or smart phones for the purpose to
improve students’ engagement in learning.
Learning using mobile device or M-learning is
more learner-centric as opposed to classroom
lecture-form learning which is teacher-centric.
Learner-centric learning will definitely help to
engage student in learning. The advantages of M-
learning are obvious as traditional forms of
learning requires students to be present in one
fixed location but M-learning students can be
anywhere as long as there is internet
connectivity. Mobility of learning is the result of
mobility of both the technology and learners (El-
Hussein & Cronje, 2010).

16. PROPOSAL 6
Student Response Systems (SRS) or Clicker
System will be introduced to the faculty and
university. This will help to enhance interactive
communication between individual students in a
class and the teacher. With availability of mobile
device, implementation of SRS education is
easier.
We will use SRS or Clicker for the following
purpose:
 Course related quizzes
 Feedback collections
 Attendance taking

17. PROPOSAL 7
introduce open educational resources to the
students. Students can access material from
some of the best universities in the world. This
will keep them up-to-date with other students
around the world in terms of source of
information. Again, these learning materials can
be accessed by the students anytime, anywhere
with their laptops, mobile devices or smart
phones. For this, we apply Connectivism as
learning theory.

18. PROPOSAL 8
Introduce cloud applications to the students. Some of
the famous cloud applications available are Microsoft
OfficeLive, DropBox, Google Docs etc. Students are
able to access to all of their data, all the time as long
as the internet connection is available. Centralize of
data helps the student to look for references when
needed. Students learn better if they have more
organized data. Cloud application like Google Docs
makes sharing, viewing and real-time collaborative
editing of media not only possible but engaging.
Students now able to do their discussion with editing
of discussion notes immediately even they are at
different location. The learning theory that we apply
will be Constructivism.

19. REFERENCES
 El-Hussein, M. O. M., & Cronje, J. C. (2010). Defining Mobile Learning in the
Higher Education Landscape. Educational Technology & Society, 13 (3), 12–21.
 Williams, A., & Pence, H. (2011). Smart phones, a powerful tool in the
chemistry classroom. Journal of Chemistry Education, 88(6), 683-686.
 Jones, B., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. (1994). Designing
Learning and Technology for Educational Reform. Oak Brook, IL: North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
 Kenny, G., Kenny, D. and Dumont, R. (1995). Mission and place :
strengthening Learning and Community Campus Design. Oryx/Greenwood, 37
 Srydom, J.F. & Mentz, M. (2010). Focusing the Student Experience on Success
through Student Engagement. Pretoria: Council for Higher Education/South
African Survey of Student Engagement.
 Kuh G.D., Cruce T.M., Shoup R., Kinzie J. & Gonyea R.M.(2008) Unmasking
the effects of student engagement on First-year college grades and persistence.
Journal of Higher Education, 79, 540–563
 Coates, H. (2005). The Value of Student Engagement for Higher Education
Quality
 Assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25-36.
 Taylor, L. & Parsons, J. (2011). Improving Student Engagement. Current
Issues in Education, 14(1).