Search

Collaboration proves to be an effective way to facilitate students' engagement and solve the mostly-mentioned problems of blended learning (BL). For collaborative BL, self-regulated learning (SRL), self-efficacy and engagement are frequently referred to in BL studies and represent key elements of effective BL. Furthermore, the interaction of these elements correlates closely with the performance of students. There have been few research attempts to draw synergies and explore the relationship among these key elements. To address this gap, data were collected through a questionnaire and records on LMS from 125 students in a Chinese university. Descriptive analytics show that students fully recognize the positive effects of collaborative BL. Correlation analysis and regression analysis find that self-regulated learning (SRL) is significantly correlated with all factors except workload. It is also a significant predictor of behavioral engagement. Therefore, SRL proves to be central among the essential BL elements. Emotional engagement is significantly correlated to and interact with multiple key BL factors. Specifically, emotional engagement is a significant predictor of behavioral engagement. The findings offer insight into the interactions of key elements of BL and provide practical implications for improving BL learning design.

Introduction: In light of the significant impact that teachers have on education quality and student growth, their mental health warrants special attention. With the increasing popularity of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and the rise of online teaching during the pandemic, teachers have become a group prone to developing problematic smartphone use (PSU). Psychological need thwarting (PNT) has been shown to be closely related to PSU, psychological distress, and perceived administrative support. However, most previous studies have adopted a variable-centered approach, which may overlook the possibility that the three basic needs are not closely associated and could form distinct profiles. Therefore, this study aims to apply latent profile analysis to identify different PNT profiles and their associations with PSU, psychological distress, and perceived administrative support., Methods: A longitudinal survey was conducted using convenience and purposive sampling methods. The survey involved 1,642 primary and middle school teachers working in China over a two-month interval, with the first assessment in November 2021 (Time 1) and the second in January 2022 (Time 2)., Results: The results indicate that a three-profile model, intricately based on the PNT data gathered at Time 1, is most optimal: Class 1 is labeled as 'High autonomy-High competence and Moderate relatedness thwarting', Class 2 as 'High autonomy-High competence and High relatedness thwarting', and Class 3 as 'Low psychological needs thwarting'. Distinct associations were observed among the three profiles concerning PSU, psychological distress, and perceived administrative support. Specifically, in terms of PSU, the score of Class 2 was higher than Class 1, with that of Class 3 being the lowest at Time 1, while at Time 2 no significant difference was found between any two of these three groups; in terms of distress, the scores of the three profiles were arranged from high to low as Class 2, 1, and 3 at both time points; and in terms of perceived administrative support, the order was just the opposite, with 3, 1, and 2 from high to low at both Time 1 and Time 2., Conclusion: Notably, the consistent ranking of the three classes in terms of psychological distress and administrative support suggests a lasting influence of PNT. Future studies should explore this enduring impact further by employing additional longitudinal data sets and examining potential mediators or moderators beyond the current study's scope., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2023 Liao, Cao, Gamble, Li, Jiang, Bo and Chen.)