The present study used an explanatory mixed-method design to examine the effects of the Achievement Motivation Enhancement (AME)+Cyber enrichment program and teachers’ perception of procedures and outcomes in the context of emergency remote teaching, including online and hybrid formats, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Three teachers implemented the program with 57 students in grades 9 through 12. To evaluate the program, we combined change score analysis of pretest and posttest data on academic self-perception, self-regulation, goal valuation, cyber-related interest, as well as descriptive interpretative analysis of interview data. We found the online learning format was more effective than the hybrid format for the affective and cognitive outcomes. Qualitative findings suggested pedagogical concerns and struggle with online learning due to emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic, centered around a lack of student engagement and interaction that appropriate levels of training and practice could remedy. Implications and future research suggestions are discussed.
AlaviM.DufnerD. (2005). Technology-mediated collaborative learning: A research perspective. In S RHiltzRGoldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 191–213). Routledge.
2.
AllyM. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In TAnderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed., pp. 3–31). Athabasca University Press.
3.
AlmekhlafiA. G.AlmeqdadiF. A. (2010) Teachers’ perceptions of technology integration in the United Arab Emirates school classrooms. Educational Technology & Society13(1): 165–175. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.13.1.165.
4.
AmhagL.HellströmL.StigmarM. (2019). Teacher educators’ use of digital tools and needs for digital competence in higher education. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(4), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1646169
5.
AndersonK. (2017). LMS market adoption report by country: The future of learning management.
6.
AndradeM. S. (2015). Teaching online: A theory-based approach to student success. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(5), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i5.904
7.
BensonA. D. (2002) Using online learning to meet workforce demand: A case study of stakeholder influence. Quarterly Review of Distance Education3(4): 443–452. Available at: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/95258/.
8.
CarlinerS. (2004). An overview of online learning (2nd ed.). HRD Press.
9.
CavanaughC.ClarkT.BarbourM. (2008, March). Research and practice in K–12 online learning: A review of literature. [Paper presented] The annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v10i1.607
10.
CherifA. H.AdamsG.HarrisJ. D.MovahedzadehF.MartynM.GialamasS. (2019). Front line strategies for improving student success in online education. Research Journal of Education, 5(9), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.32861/rje.59.167.176
11.
ClarkJ. (2001) Stimulating collaboration and discussion in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 4(2), 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(01)00054-9
12.
ComiS. L.ArgentinG.GuiM.OrigoF.PaganiL. (2017) Is it the way they use it? Teachers, ICT and student achievement. Economics of Education Review56: 24–39. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.11.007.
13.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2017) Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
14.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L.GutmannM. L.HansonW. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In ATashakkoriCTeddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Sage.
15.
DeCuir-GunbyJ. T.SchutzP. A. (2017). Developing a mixed methods proposal: A practical guide for beginning researchers (Vol. 5). SAGE Publications.
16.
DesmetO. (2020). The achievement motivation enhancement model: evaluating an affective intervention to resolve underachievement [doctoral dissertation, Purdue University Graduate School].
17.
DesmetO. A.PereiraN. (2021) The achievement motivation enhancement model evaluating an affective intervention for gifted students. Journal of Advanced Academics. In Press.
18.
ElliottR.TimulakL. (2021). Essentials of descriptive-interpretive qualitative research: A generic approach. American Psychological Association.
19.
ForbesD.KhooE. 2015. Voice over distance: A case of podcasting for learning in online teacher education. Distance Education, 36(3), 335–350. https://doi,org/10.1080/01587919.2015.1084074
20.
FredericksenE.PickettA.SheaP.PelzW.SwanK. (2000) Student satisfaction and perceived learning with online courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY Learning Network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks4(2): 134–150. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v4i2.1899.
Gil-FloresJ.Rodríguez-SanteroJ.Torres-GordilloJ. J. (2017) Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure. Computers in Human Behavior68: 441–449. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.057.
23.
HewK. F.CheungW. S. (2013) Use of web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review9: 47–64. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.08.001.
KimmonsR. (2015). Online system adoption and K-12 academic outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(4), 378–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12101
28.
KoehlerM. J.MishraP.CainW.2013. What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)?Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303
KuoY. C.WalkerA. E.SchroderK. E.BellandB. R.. 2014. Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education20, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001
31.
LeppL.AavikuT.LeijenÄ.PedasteM.SaksK. (2021). Teaching during COVID-19: The decisions made in teaching. Education Sciences, 11(2), 47. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020047
32.
LouwsM. L.van VeenK.MeirinkJ. A.van DrielJ. H.2017. Teachers' professional learning goals in relation to teaching experience. European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(4), 487–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1342241
33.
McCoachD. B. (2002). A validation study of the school attitude assessment survey. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 35(2), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2002.12069050
34.
MukhtarK.JavedK.AroojM.SethiA. (2020). Advantages, limitations and recommendations for online learning during COVID-19 pandemic era. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 36(COVID19-S4), S27. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.COVID19-S4.2785
Olszewski-KubiliusP.LeeS. Y. (2004). Gifted adolescents' talent development through distance learning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28(1), 7–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320402800102
37.
PaceC.PettitS. K.BarkerK. S. (2020). Best practices in middle level quaranteaching: Strategies, tips and resources amidst COVID-19. Becoming: Journal of the Georgia Association for Middle Level Education, 31(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.20429/becoming.2020.310102
38.
PottsJ. A. (2018). Profoundly gifted students’ perceptions of virtual classrooms. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(1), 58–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986218801075
39.
ReichJ., et al. (2020) Remote Learning Guidance from State Education Agencies during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A First Look. osf.io/k6zxy/.
40.
SharpL. A.SharpJ. H. (2016). Enhancing student success in online learning experiences through the use of self-regulation strategies. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 27(2), 57–75.
41.
TashakkoriA.CreswellJ. W. (2007). The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 3–7.
42.
TeyeA. C.PeasleeL. (2015). Measuring educational outcomes for at-risk children and youth: Issues with the validity of self-reported data. In Child & youth care forum (Vol. 44, pp. 853–873). Springer US.
43.
ThomsonD. L. (2010). Beyond the classroom walls: Teachers’ and students’ perspectives on how online learning can meet the needs of gifted students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(4), 662–712. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X1002100405
44.
TondeurJ.van BraakJ.SiddiqF.SchererR. (2016) Time for a new approach to prepare future teachers for educational technology use: Its meaning and measurement. Computers & Education94: 134–150. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.009.
45.
UngarO. A.BaruchA. F. (2016) Perceptions of teacher educators regarding ICT implementation. Interdisciplinary. Journal of E-Skills and Life Long Learning12: 279–296. Available at: http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3606.
46.
van der SpoelI.NorooziO.SchuurinkE.van GinkelS. (2020). Teachers’ online teaching expectations and experiences during the Covid19-pandemic in the Netherlands. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 623–638. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1821185
