Peer to Peer Synchronous Interaction and Student Engagement: A Perspective of Postgraduate Management Students in a Developing Country

Nazlee Siddiqui^1, , Khasro Miah² and Afreen Ahmad³

¹Tasmanian School of Business and Economics, University of Tasmania, Sydney, Australia

²School of Business and Economics, North South University, Dhaka, Bangladesh

³Southeast Business School, Southeast University, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Cite this paper

Nazlee Siddiqui, Khasro Miah and Afreen Ahmad. Peer to Peer Synchronous Interaction and Student Engagement: A Perspective of Postgraduate Management Students in a Developing Country. American Journal of Educational Research. 2019; 7(7):491-498. doi: 10.12691/EDUCATION-7-7-9

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the association between synchronous peer to peer interaction (PPSI) and student engagement in postgraduate management units in Bangladesh. Understanding of this association focused on outcomes of engagement with learning materials and workplace relevant learning. This study utilized an interventional and convergent parallel mixed methods research design. A PPSI intervention, involving teamwork of five students from working and non-working status, was applied on 80 students in two different management units. The intervention was followed by a survey on student’s perception of the association between PPSI and student engagement, which received 80% response rate. Content analysis was applied to the qualitative survey data while quantitative data were analyzed with SPSS software. Participant profile were 60% female, 95% below the age of 30 and 71% having work experience. The study found a significant positive association (r =.53) between PPSI and student engagement in postgraduate management study in Bangladesh. Peer to peer interaction helped students to collect different viewpoints, engage with learning material and practice workplace relevant skills. However, success of PPSI is influenced by factors such as task design, student’s attitude toward teamwork and ease of use of technology. This study is first of its kind to explore the in-depth relationship between PPSI and student engagement in an education setting in a developing country. It could open avenues for further research on designing and implementation of PPSI for student centered and work relevant learning, across developed and developing countries.

Keywords

peer to peer, synchronous interaction, student engagement, workplace relevant learning, engagement with learning materials

Copyright

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References

[1]	Anthony SC. Synchronous and Asynchronous Interactions: Convenience and Content. In: Ari S, editor. Advancing Library Education: Technological Innovation and Instructional Design. Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global; 2013. p. 127-40.
[2]	Oztok M, Zingaro D, Brett C, Hewitt J. Exploring asynchronous and synchronous tool use in online courses. Computers & Education. 2013; 60(1): 87-94.
[3]	Cherney MR, Fetherston M, Johnson LJ. Online Course Student Collaboration Literature: A Review and Critique. Small Group Research. 2017; 49(1):98-128.
[4]	Cook M, Dickerson DL, Annetta LA, Minogue J. IN-SERVICE TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS OF ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS. Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2011; 12(2): 73-9.
[5]	Bower M, Kenney J, Dalgarno B, Lee M, Kennedy G. Blended synchronous learning: Patterns and principles for simultaneously engaging co-located and distributed learners. 30th Ascilite Conference Macquarie University, Sydney 2013.
[6]	Cunningham U. Teaching the disembodied: Othering and activity systems in a blended synchronous learning situation. 2014. 2014; 15(6).
[7]	Powell KC, Kalina CJ. Cognitive and Social Constructivism: Developing Tools for an Effective Classroom. Education. 2009; 130(2): 241-50.
[8]	Norberg A. Blended Learning and New Education Logistics in Northern Sweden. In: Oblinger D, editor. Game Changers: Education and information technologies. 1st ed: Boulder: Educause Publications; 2012. p. 327-30.
[9]	Power M. The Emergence of a Blended Online Learning Environment. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 2008; 4(4):503-14.
[10]	Reese SA. Online learning environments in higher education: Connectivism vs. dissociation. Education and Information Technologies. 2014; 20(3): 579-88.
[11]	McCann J, Holt R. An Exploration of Burnout Among Online University Professors. JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION. 2009; 23(3): 97-110.
[12]	Maushak NJ, Ou C. USING SYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION TO FACILITATE GRADUATE STUDENTS' ONLINE COLLABORATION. Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2007; 8(2): 161-9.
[13]	Holzweiss PC, Joyner SA, Fuller MB, Henderson S, Young R. Online graduate students’ perceptions of best learning experiences. Distance Education. 2014; 35(3): 311-23.
[14]	Kahu ER, Nelson K. Student engagement in the educational interface: understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research & Development. 2018; 37(1): 58-71.
[15]	Tanaka M. The international diversity of student engagement. In: Tanaka M, editor. Student Engagement and Quality Assurance in Higher Education. 1st edition. London: Rutledge; 2019.
[16]	Economist Intelligence Unit Limited. Connecting universities: Future models of higher education. Analyzing innovative models for Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. British Council; 2015.
[17]	Botticello C. Technology sector makes unprecedented progress. Beaming Bangladesh: A magazine of the Embassy of Bangladesh. 2019:24-5.
[18]	Mahmuda M. Teaching and Learning Through Technology In Bangladesh Higher Education. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research. 2016; 7(4).
[19]	Zhoc K, Webster B, King R, Li J, Chung T. Higher Education Student Engagement Scale (HESES): Development and Psychometric Evidence2018.
[20]	Finn JD, S. Zimmer K. Student Engagement: What Is It? Why Does It Matter? 2012. p. 97-131.
[21]	Lam S-f, P. H. Wong B, Yang H, Liu Y. Understanding Student Engagement with a Contextual Model. 2012. p. 403-19.
[22]	Kuh GD. The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research. 2009(141): 5-20.
[23]	Lev Vygotsky [Internet]. 2014 [cited March 12, 2016 www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html].
[24]	Quality framework: Most influential theories of learning [Internet]. 2016 [cited March 13, 2016 http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/strengthening- education-systems/quality-framework/technical-notes/influential- theories-of-learning/].
[25]	Park YJB, Curtis J. Synchronous Learning Experiences: Distance and Residential Learners' Perspectives in a Blended Graduate Course. Journal of Interactive Online Learning. 2007; 6(3): 245-64.
[26]	Moule P, Ward R, Lockyer L. Nursing and healthcare students’ experiences and use of e-learning in higher education. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2010; 66(12): 2785-95.
[27]	Watts H, Malliris M, Billingham O. Online Peer Assisted Learning: Reporting on practice. Journal of Peer Learning. 2015; 8(1): 85-104.
[28]	MacNeill H, Telner D, Sparaggis-Agaliotis A, Hanna E. All for one and one for all: understanding health professionals' experience in individual versus collaborative online learning. The Journal of continuing education in the health professions. 2014; 34(2): 102-11.
[29]	McKenna L, Boyle M, Palermo C, Molloy E, Williams B, Brown T. Promoting interprofessional understandings through online learning: A qualitative examination. Nursing & Health Sciences. 2014; 16(3): 321-6.
[30]	Islam A, Salma U. The Role of Private Universities in Higher Education of Bangladesh: An Empirical Investigation. International Journal of Finance and Banking Research. 2 (4): 121-8.
[31]	University Grants Commission of Bangladesh. List of Universities Dhaka: University Grants Commission of Bangladesh; 2019 [Available from http://www.ugc.gov.bd/.
[32]	Nusrat M, Sultana N. Soft skills for sustainable employment of business graduates of Bangladesh. Higher Education, Skills, and Work-Based Learning. 2019.
[33]	Chowdhury TA, Miah, MK. Employability skills for, entry-level human resources management positions: Perceptions of students and employers. Australian Journal of Career Development. 2016; 25(2): 55-68.
[34]	Al-Masum, MA, Chowdhury SI. e-Learning for Expanding Distance Education in Tertiary Level in Bangladesh: Problems and Progress. Higher Learning Research Communications. 2013; 3(4): 81-91.
[35]	Mahmuda M. Teaching and Learning Through Technology In Bangladesh Higher Education. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research. 2016; 7(4): 257-62.
[36]	Sohail E. A digital education for a digital Bangladesh? Dhaka Tribune. 2018 26 January Available online at http://www.dhakatribune.com/opinion/2018/01/26/digital-education-digital-bangladesh.
[37]	Creswell JW. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; 2014.
[38]	Cohen JW. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
[39]	Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O, Pölkki T, Utriainen K, Kyngäs H. Qualitative Content Analysis: A Focus on Trustworthiness. SAGE Open. 2014; 4(1): 2158244014522633.
[40]	Elo S, Kyngas H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008; 62(1): 107-15.
[41]	Del Valle R, Duffy TM. Online learning: Learner characteristics and their approaches to managing learning. Instructional Science. 2009; 37(2): 129-49.
[42]	Johnson L, Adams S, Cummins M, New Media C, Griffith U. Technology Outlook for Australian TertiaryEducation 2012-2017: An NMC Horizon Report Regional Analysis. New Media Consortium; 2012. Report No.: 978-0-9846-6015-5.
[43]	Alavi SB, McCormick J. Why Do I Think My Team Is Capable? A Study of Some Antecedents of Team Members' Personal Collective Efficacy Beliefs. Educational Psychology. 2018; 38(9):1147-62.