International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 11, Issue 11 (November 2024), Pages: 240-248

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Evaluating art students' engagement with digital technologies in classroom settings

 Author(s): 

 Masoumeh Shiri *, Karim Baigutov

 Affiliation(s):

 Department of Art Education, Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0246-7517

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.11.025

 Abstract

This study explores how art students engage with digital technologies, focusing on the emotional, behavioral, and cognitive dimensions of engagement. Conducted at Abai Kazakh Pedagogical University, the research used a descriptive case study approach with online surveys completed by 60 graduate students from the Art Education, Graphic, and Design Department. The survey, consisting of 31 questions, assessed students’ familiarity with digital tools and their engagement levels. Analysis with SPSS software revealed that students were most familiar with traditional digital art tools but less so with advanced technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), 3D printing, and Augmented Reality (AR). Engagement was highest with familiar tools, while less familiar technologies saw reduced emotional and behavioral involvement despite strong cognitive engagement driven by curiosity and motivation to learn. The study highlights the direct relationship between familiarity and engagement, suggesting that greater exposure to digital tools can enhance voluntary participation and skill development. These findings offer insights into integrating digital technologies into art education and call for further research to include educators' perspectives for a broader understanding of engagement in art classrooms.

 © 2024 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Student engagement, Digital technologies, Art education, Cognitive engagement, Classroom integration

 Article history

 Received 12 June 2024, Received in revised form 26 October 2024, Accepted 13 November 2024

 Acknowledgment

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

This study was conducted in compliance with ethical standards for research involving human participants. Ethical approval was granted by the Ethical Committee of Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University, Kazakhstan, on 24 February 2023 (Ref. No. 6). All participants were informed about the purpose of the research and their consent was obtained prior to data collection. Participation was voluntary, and respondents were assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses. Data were securely stored and used solely for the purposes of this study.

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Shiri M and Baigutov K (2024). Evaluating art students' engagement with digital technologies in classroom settings. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(11): 240-248

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 

----------------------------------------------   

 References (35)

  1. Afzal F and Crawford L (2022). Student's perception of engagement in online project management education and its impact on performance: The mediating role of self-motivation. Project Leadership and Society, 3: 100057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plas.2022.100057   [Google Scholar]
  2. Appleton JJ, Christenson SL, Kim D, and Reschly AL (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5): 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002   [Google Scholar]
  3. Bedenlier S, Bond M, Buntins K, Zawacki-Richter O, and Kerres M (2020). Facilitating student engagement through educational technology in higher education: A systematic review in the field of arts and humanities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4): 126-150. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5477   [Google Scholar]
  4. Bergdahl N, Nouri J, Fors U, and Knutsson O (2020). Engagement, disengagement, and performance when learning with technologies in upper secondary school. Computers and Education, 149: 103783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103783   [Google Scholar]
  5. Bond M, Buntins K, Bedenlier S, Zawacki-Richter O, and Kerres M (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8   [Google Scholar]
  6. Chiu TKF (2021a). Student engagement in K-12 online learning amid COVID-19: A qualitative approach from a self-determination theory perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(6): 3326–3339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1926289   [Google Scholar]
  7. Chiu TKF (2021b). Digital support for student engagement in blended learning based on self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 124: 106909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106909   [Google Scholar]
  8. Dalayeva T (2013). The e-learning trends of higher education in Kazakhstan. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93: 1791–1794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.118   [Google Scholar]
  9. Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC, and Paris AH (2004). School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1): 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059   [Google Scholar]
  10. Godsk M and Møller KL (2024). Engaging students in higher education with educational technology. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12901-x   [Google Scholar]
  11. González-Zamar MD and Abad-Segura E (2020). Implications of virtual reality in arts education: Research analysis in the context of higher education. Education Sciences, 10(9): 225. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10090225   [Google Scholar]
  12. González-Zamar MD and Abad-Segura E (2021). Digital design in artistic education: An overview of research in the university setting. Education Sciences, 11(4): 144. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11040144   [Google Scholar]
  13. Henderson M, Selwyn N, and Aston R (2015). What works and why? Student perceptions of 'useful' digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8): 1567–1579. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946   [Google Scholar]
  14. Henrie CR, Halverson LR, and Graham CR (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers and Education, 90: 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005   [Google Scholar]
  15. Hernandez-de-Menendez M, Escobar Díaz C, and Morales-Menendez R (2020). Technologies for the future of learning: State of the art. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing, 14: 683-695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00640-0   [Google Scholar]
  16. Kapezovich KG and Toktarbekovna DT (2014). E-learning in the system of the pedagogical education in Kazakhstan. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152: 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.177   [Google Scholar]
  17. Kong F (2020). Application of artificial intelligence in modern art teaching. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(13): 238-251. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i13.15351   [Google Scholar]
  18. Kropachev P, Imanov M, Borisevich J, and Dhomane I (2020). Information technologies and the future of education in the republic of Kazakhstan. Scientific Journal of Astana IT University, 1: 30-38. https://doi.org/10.37943/AITU.2020.1.63639   [Google Scholar]
  19. Lam YW, Hew KF, and Chiu KF (2018). Improving argumentative writing: Effects of a blended learning approach and gamification. Language Learning and Technology, 22(1): 97–118.   [Google Scholar]
  20. Lobo J, Dimalanta G, Bautista C, Buan E, and De Dios DA (2022). TikTok consumption and level of class engagement of performing arts students in the new normal: Destructive or beneficial? American Journal of Education and Technology, 1(1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajet.v1i1.305   [Google Scholar]
  21. Nurmuhametov HH, Temirova A, and Bekzhanova T (2015). The problems of development of distance education in Kazakhstan. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182: 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.729   [Google Scholar]
  22. Oubibi M, Fute A, Kangwa D, Barakabitze AA, and Adarkwah MA (2024). Interactive technologies in online teacher education in Africa: A systematic review 2014–2024. Education Sciences, 14(11): 1188. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111188   [Google Scholar]
  23. Phothongsunan S (2020). Student and teacher engagement in learning and assessment with portfolios. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 15(6): 1569–1573. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v15i6.5317   [Google Scholar]
  24. Ryan RM and Deci EL (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61: 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860   [Google Scholar]
  25. Salaber J (2014). Facilitating student engagement and collaboration in a large postgraduate course using wiki-based activities. The International Journal of Management Education, 12(2): 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2014.03.006   [Google Scholar]
  26. Schindler LA, Burkholder GJ, Morad OA, and Marsh C (2017). Computer-based technology and student engagement: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14: 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0063-0   [Google Scholar]
  27. Selwyn N (2016). Digital downsides: Exploring university students' negative engagements with digital technology. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(8): 1006–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1213229   [Google Scholar]
  28. Siddiq F, Gochyyev P, and Valls O (2020). The role of engagement and academic behavioral skills on young students' academic performance—A validation across four countries. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 66: 100880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100880   [Google Scholar]
  29. Skinner EA and Pitzer JR (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In: Reschly AL and Christenson SL (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement: 21–44. Springer US, Boston, USA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_2   [Google Scholar]
  30. Sneck S, Syväoja H, Järvelä S, and Tammelin T (2022). More active lessons: teachers' perceptions of student engagement during physically active maths lessons in Finland. Education Inquiry, 14(4): 458–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2022.2058166   [Google Scholar]
  31. Sousa MJ, Carmo MD, Gonçalves AC, Cruz R, and Martins JM (2019). Creating knowledge and entrepreneurial capacity for HE students with digital education methodologies: Differences in the perceptions of students and entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Research, 94: 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.005   [Google Scholar]
  32. Thomas C, Sarma KP, Gajula SS, and Kumar S (2022). Automatic prediction of presentation style and student engagement from videos. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3: 100079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100079   [Google Scholar]
  33. Walsh JN, O'Brien MP, and Costin Y (2021). Investigating student engagement with intentional content: An exploratory study of instructional videos. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(2): 100505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100505   [Google Scholar]
  34. Yefimenko IV, Yakymchuk O, Кравцова Н, Sotska H, and Korol AM (2021). Art education development in the context of global changes. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S2): 501–513. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS2.1386   [Google Scholar]
  35. Zen Z, Reflianto, Syamsuar, and Ariani F (2022). Academic achievement: The effect of project-based online learning method and student engagement. Heliyon, 8(11): e11509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11509   [Google Scholar] PMid:36411883 PMCid:PMC9674908