Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students' Engagement During The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of Singapore Mathematics Teachers
Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students' Engagement During The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of Singapore Mathematics Teachers
Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students' Engagement During The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of Singapore Mathematics Teachers
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00572-y
REGULAR ARTICLE
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has forced school Keywords Home-based learning ICT in education
closure thus shifting teaching and learning towards full Student engagement
home-based learning (HBL). Technology plays a key role
but the considerations to design online learning environ-
ments that meaningfully engage students are complex. This Introduction
exploratory, qualitative study attempted to elicit eight
mathematics teachers’ considerations and perspectives in The COVID-19 pandemic has put many societies’ capacity
designing online home-based learning lessons for the and capability in handling the situation to the test. Many
engagement of elementary and secondary students. Data schools and institutions of higher learning have shifted
were gathered through interviews. Ground-up thematic their teaching and learning activities online due to school
analyses were conducted. The following implications are closures and lockdowns to reduce virus transmissions,
derived—(1) student engagement in online learning con- forcing a change from face-to-face mode of schooling to
text is paramount to their learning, (2) there is no one online home-based learning (HBL). Instead of the sup-
software application for all the learning activities, (3) tea- portive role, the use of technology has become a core
cher professional development is necessary to keep them essential for teaching and learning. There are, however,
up-to-date, (4) online social networking platforms may be considerations related to issues of using technology for
necessary for students’ discussion beyond official online teaching and learning, such as accessibility of hardware
lesson time, and (5) students need to be inculcated with and software, screen time, ownership, student engagement
more self-directed skills and habits for learning in online and most importantly, pedagogy. In Singapore, despite the
and face-to-face contexts. This study gathers evidence-in- short notice and some teething technical and logistical
formed considerations for teachers to design lessons and issues, evidences from newspapers (Davie, June 28, 2020;
engage students meaningfully in a unique, online HBL Kurohi, April 14, 2020; Sin, Jun 18, 2020) have shown that
environment. While this is an exploratory study, future the nationwide implementation of online home-based
studies can inform this area of work by including more learning was relatively well accepted and implemented.
teachers across subjects, grades, schools, and geographical This study seeks to have evidence-informed under-
contexts. Studies involving students and parents would also standings by gathering mathematics teachers’ considera-
be meaningful. tions about how they designed online home-based lessons
and their perspectives of students’ engagement during the
COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. Although the Singapore
education system has reaped the benefits of more than two
& Lee Yong Tay decades of Information and Communication Technology
[email protected] (ICT) Masterplans since 1997 (Koh & Lee, 2008), this
1 period of online HBL presented teachers with different
Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice, National
Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 challenges and opportunities to explore new modalities in
Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616, Singapore pedagogy. The experimentations and innovations that took
123
300 L. Y. Tay et al.
place during this period are what we believe to be impor- A Theoretical Perspective to Study Student
tant to document for insights on how teachers designed Engagement in an Online Context
learning experiences with technology to engage students
meaningfully. This paper aims to address this research A number of studies suggested the importance of taking a
question, ‘‘what are teachers’ design of online HBL expe- sociocultural perspective in looking at students’ online
riences and how they perceive students’ engagement?’’ engagement (Borup et al., 2014; Burnham & Walden,
1997; Moore, 1989). More recently, Bond and Bedenlier
(2019) also proposed a sociocultural perspective of looking
Research Gap—K-12 Student Engagement at student learning engagement, taking into considerations
in an Online Learning Context of the macro, exo, meso, and micro systems. Inevitably,
student learning engagement with technology will be
There has been a steady growth in the number of students influenced by availability of the national network infras-
enrolled in online courses in the United States and other tructure and the accessibility to resources. The micro sys-
countries, such as, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. tem, which includes the student, learning environment and
This number has been projected to grow further (Barbour, technology, teacher, learning activities, peers, and family,
2013). is of particular interest and direct relevance to student
Despite the steady growth and enrolment of online learning engagement with technology. These above-men-
courses, the focus of research about student engagement in tioned factors are elaborated in the following sub-sections
online courses has been on institutes of higher learning and to include: (1) definition of student engagement; (2) student
not on K-12 students—Patrick and Powell (2009) reported engagement in an online learning context; and (3) the
that in a meta-analysis of 51 studies by the U.S. Depart- different sociocultural elements that shape student online
ment of Education in 2009, 44 studies were research on engagement.
older learners. In addition, the high dropout rates for online
courses in institutes of higher learning remain a challenge Definition of Student Engagement
(Henrie et al., 2015). Borup et al. (2014) highlighted that
adolescent online enrolments have increased dramatically Bangert-Drowns and Pyke (2002) define student engage-
despite reports of lower student engagement levels and ment as the mobilisation of cognitive, affective, and
there are higher student attrition rates when compared with motivational strategies for interpretive transactions while
typical face-to-face learning environments (Hawkins & (Kuh, 2003, 2009) sees engagement as the time and energy
Barbour, 2010; Rice, 2006). This research gap of contin- students devote to educationally sound activities. Students’
uous increase in online learning and high dropout rates engagement in a conventional K-12 classroom and school
presents an opportunity to study considerations related to settings are well documented (Fredricks et al., 2004, 2011)
student learning in an online context for K-12 students. as a multifaceted construct. Fredricks et al. (2004) see
Student engagement is paramount for productive learn- student engagement comprising three dimensions—be-
ing (Herrington et al., 2003). The key determinant of stu- havioural, emotional and cognitive. Behavioural engage-
dents’ learning experiences relates to professional learning ment includes forms of positive conduct, such as following
(Mourshed et al., 2010). A research opportunity would be of rules, adhering to classroom norms, involvement in
to examine K-12 students’ engagement in online home- learning and academic tasks, and the absence of disruptive
based learning environments to inform future training and behaviours. Emotional engagement refers to the students’
capacity building of teachers and education institutions, affective reactions in the classroom, including interest,
especially at the elementary and secondary school levels boredom, happiness, sadness, and anxiety. Cognitive
(i.e., K-12 equivalent). The study of students’ engagement engagement describes the investment in learning by the
in online environments is important because the pandemic students which involves mental efforts and the use of
presents first hand professional learning opportunities learning strategies to manage learning tasks.
(Borko, 2004) as teachers find ways to meaningfully
engage students, leverage technology and teach them Student Engagement in an Online Learning Context
content beyond the face-to-face classroom.
Teaching and learning with technology inevitably adds
another layer of complexity in understanding student
engagement because learning is mediated by both techno-
logical hardware and software applications. In studying
students’ online engagement, Dixson (2015) considers
123
Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students’ Engagement During the COVID-19… 301
these four factors: (a) skills (e.g., keeping up with readings, engagement with students in online learning environment.
being organised, and listening and reading carefully); The findings indicated that there was no particular activity
(b) emotion (e.g., putting effort and making lessons that will automatically facilitate students to be more
meaningful and relevant); (c) participation (e.g., engage in engaged in online classes. She suggested for online
online conversations, interact with other students); and instructors to incorporate multiple and meaningful ways of
(d) performance (e.g., able to do well in tests and assess- interacting with students and to design online lessons that
ments). Martin and Bolliger (2018) further stress the encourage and require students to interact among them-
importance of three types of interactions inherent in selves. It seemed that interaction was an important element
effective online courses: learner-to-learner interaction, in online courses (Gray & DiLoreto, 2016; Martin &
learner-to-content interaction, and learner-to-instructor Bolliger, 2018; Martin et al., 2012). Given the short time
interaction. Technological hardware and software applica- that teachers had to switch to teaching in the online envi-
tions, student factors, and types of interactions are con- ronment during the pandemic situation, teachers could be
siderations that shape the ways teachers design and presented with different challenges that shape how teachers
implement online learning experiences to engage students design for interactions that support student engagement.
meaningfully. Thus, there is a research opportunity to study how teachers
The pandemic situation presents an interesting context come together as a community to prepare and implement
and dynamics for studying student engagement because online learning to support student engagement and the
teachers and students had to quickly shift from learning in a kinds of professional learning that they had to go through.
face-to-face context to an online environment. Teachers
had relatively little time to prepare. There are also uncer- Learning Environment and Technology
tainties as to how long learning in the online environment
would persist with the possibilities of moving back to the One of the most fundamental considerations for student
face-to-face environment again. Such a context presents an engagement and learning with technology is the avail-
opportunity to study online student engagement, the ability and accessibility to the technology itself (Hew &
sociocultural elements that shaped student online learning Brush, 2007; Tay et al., 2017; Turgut & Aslan, 2021).
engagement and the considerations that teachers made to Students need to be equipped with the necessary techno-
design online learning experiences for students. logical hardware (e.g., computers and Internet access) and
the technological know-how of operating the technological
Sociocultural Factors that Shape Student hardware and navigating the software applications for
Engagement learning to occur. Given the array of software applications
for learning, it would be interesting to understand how
The teacher, learning environment and technology, learn- teachers choose appropriate applications and its affor-
ing activities, peers and parents are significant sociocultural dances for learning. What would take precedence in
elements that shape student online learning engagement. teachers’ considerations, the technological affordances for
learning, students’ readiness or using the latest techno-
Teacher logical tools? The demands on technological hardware
would also be high in students’ homes as learning and
Just like the typical face-to-face classroom learning, stu- working have shifted to the online environment. Conse-
dents’ engagement would be enhanced when student–tea- quently, there could be sharing of devices for learning. For
cher relationships are strong. There is student engagement students who do not have access to technology, how would
when students perceive the teacher to be supportive, they cope with learning in an online engagement? These
effective, and knowledgeable (Baker, 2010; Bond & questions present opportunities for research to find out how
Bedenlier, 2019). Everett (2015) reviewed several studies teachers design the online learning experience and student
related to student engagement in online learning environ- engagement during this period.
ments and emphasised the importance of teachers design-
ing purposeful interactions (teacher-student and student– Learning Activities
student interactions) to facilitate learning. Robinson and
Hullinger (2008) suggested that instructors need to pur- Several authors highlighted the importance of learner-
posefully incorporate opportunities for students to learn content interaction (Martin & Bolliger, 2018; Moore,
from one another to create a sense of classroom commu- 1989). The choice of content (e.g., whether challenging and
nity, which could potentially enhance students’ engage- relevant) and how it is being taught or delivered (e.g.,
ment. Dixson (2010) attempted to examine activities and whether active and collaborative forms of learning)
instructional procedures that might lead to better impacts students’ learning engagement, be it online or in
123
302 L. Y. Tay et al.
face-to-face settings. Patrick and Powell (2009) reported parents to oversee and support students who are completing
that learning activities and instruction combining online their education in an online environment. Parents play a
and face-to-face elements had a larger advantage relative to significant role in educating students who attend school
purely face-to-face or purely online instruction. In addition, online, and research has been conducted on their roles’’
online learning can be enhanced by giving learners control (Curtis & Werth, 2015, p. 165). Parent engagement can
of their interactions with technological media and positively influence student engagement by facilitating
prompting of learner reflection. Teachers interacting with interaction, organising students’ learning environments,
students, parents, and colleagues are identified as one of the and instructing students. Although the roles and responsi-
primary differences between online and face-to-face bilities of parents and teachers are not the same, their
instruction and as one of the most important aspects of influence overlaps. The pandemic presents a unique situa-
online learning (Weiner, 2003). Teachers are designers of tion where parents are working and students are learning
students’ learning experiences. It is useful to understand from homes at the same time. It would be timely to
the rationalisations that teachers have in their choice of investigate how teachers leverage parents to support stu-
tools, instructional strategies and learning activities in the dents’ online learning experiences.
online context. How do teachers implement learning
activities, as synchronous or asynchronous formats or a
combination of formats? Purpose of Study
123
Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students’ Engagement During the COVID-19… 303
as the Singapore Learning Designers’ Circle ( perceptions of students’ engagement. The semi-structured
https://www.facebook.com/groups/sglearningdesigners/). interview was guided by the questions shown in Appendix
This community grew exponentially to more than 15,000 with additional questions constructed as the interview
members during the COVID-19 circuit breaker period. evolved based on teachers’ responses. All interviews were
transcribed for analyses. Ground-up thematic analyses
Home-Based Learning in Singapore During Its were conducted in phases. Member checking was done
Circuit Breaker Period throughout the analyses to ensure the validity and relia-
bility of findings.
Full home-based learning in Singapore was declared from
• Phase 1—initial coding and familiarisation of data. The
8 April to 4 May 2020 during its Circuit Breaker Period
researchers read the interview transcripts. Annotations
(Kurohi, April 14, 2020). Despite the short notice, there
were done together with initial codes to highlight
was mass acceptance of online learning by students,
notable considerations that teachers made in designing
teachers, and parents although there were also challenges
online HBL experiences and their observations of
faced by some of the students and their families (Davie,
student engagement.
June 28, 2020). This pandemic had fast-forwarded the use
• Phase 2—analysing codes and identifying themes. The
of technology and online learning in many education sys-
authors discussed their initial codes to understand
tems, including that of Singapore. The government of
different interpretations and align any differences. As
Singapore also announced on 17 June 2020 that all sec-
there were three researchers, any differences were
ondary school students will receive a personal laptop or
mediated by the third researcher. Initial codes were
tablet for learning in the coming year—7 years ahead of the
combined to form an initial set of themes
original target. ‘‘This is one of the ways the government,
• Phase 3—reviewing and defining themes. Initial themes
schools, and the community are working together to keep
were reviewed by regrouping smaller themes to form
social mobility alive, and ensure every individual is
broader themes or broader themes were divided into
afforded the opportunity to do well, regardless of his
subthemes. This process was done iteratively until the
starting point’’ (Sin, Jun 18, 2020).
researchers came up with a thematic map that ade-
quately described findings.
Research Design and Method
123
304 L. Y. Tay et al.
HBL engagement
Students' factors
meetings…. we discuss about the things that we want to do materials from SLS and adapted it accordingly. Teachers
with our students and then that is how we share and cross also shared their teaching resources with communities
pollinate the ideas…’’. The school timetable was re-or- within and beyond schools to support each other.
ganised to manage students’ screen time. Teachers used the Lessons in synchronous formats used video conferenc-
ministry’s SLS platform and supplemented it with other ing software application (e.g., Zoom) to mimic classroom
tools (e.g., Google applications) to implement online HBL. practices and implemented all three segments as ‘‘live’’
Technology familiarisation sessions were conducted for sessions. ‘‘There was a lot of promotion on use of video
teachers who needed instructions on how to use online conferencing in Google Meet and zoom … a lot of what
applications for HBL. Teachers also shared lesson ideas was being delivered was the same thing, frontal teaching,
and resources across schools through an existing commu- classroom teaching’’. Synchronous lessons lasted between
nity, Learning Designers Circle Facebook page, which was 35 and 40 min. Each segment was no longer than 15 min
set up by Educational Technology Division (ETD) of the because teachers were mindful of students’ attention span.
Ministry of Education (Singapore). ‘‘There is SGLDC ‘‘For the HBL to be effective, maybe the lesson cannot be
[Singapore Learning Designers Circle], it is a Facebook one hour… because one hour is actually quite strenuous on
group … teachers will share their lesson ideas, their the eyes…it is only like about 35–40 min.’’ Synchronous
considerations on that Facebook page. So, I will use the lessons were also digitally recorded and uploaded to SLS
materials that I found there and share with my teachers.’’ or Google Classroom so students, particularly absentees,
In addition, teachers also reviewed their scheme of work could revisit lessons. Teachers found it challenging to
and decided to teach topics that required students to acquire monitor students’ engagement and learning online as stu-
less conceptual understanding during HBL. ‘‘I think it dents could be multitasking. Furthermore, the ‘cut and
depends on topics… because certain topics, say construc- paste’ technological affordance meant students could pla-
tion, I don’t think I can actually put that into a home-based giarise answers from online sources. ‘‘not every lesson that
learning. I really need to tell them physically how to do I do, will be live [synchronous]. So, I will mix it up a little
certain things.’’ bit. Sometimes it’s [asynchronous] just assessing SLS,
sometimes it’s just doing the timed practice on their
Teachers Implementing Lessons in Synchronous and own…’’. Asynchronous lessons implemented the first and
Asynchronous Formats Online HBL was implemented in third segments described earlier as ‘‘live’’ sessions. The
synchronous and asynchronous formats to emphasise sub- second segment was implemented as an ‘‘off-line’’ expe-
ject content delivery and monitor students’ learning. ‘‘It is rience where students accessed teacher prepared lesson
a mix of synchronous and asynchronous teaching. So, resources in SLS, PowerPoint slides or screencast with the
depending on the level, depending on the type of student teacher’s voice, and teacher curated learning activities
profile of the class…’’. Teachers could implement more from the Internet (e.g., educational websites or digital
variations of HBL for higher grade students by toggling videos). Teachers monitored students’ progress and
between formats in contrast with elementary students who understanding by using self-marking functions when it was
needed more teachers’ support. Typically, lessons included available in software applications, by getting students to
three segments (1) reviewing students’ mistakes in the take pictures of the written mathematics solutions and
assigned homework; (2) teaching lesson content; and (3) submitting it through the relevant software applications or
clarifying understandings through question and answer. by using the inking function on laptops and tablets to grade
Teachers acknowledged that they needed more time to students’ work and provide feedback. Teachers also taught
design teaching resources, so they leverage existing students to file their online homework for future revisions.
123
Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students’ Engagement During the COVID-19… 305
Constant feedback was exchanged between students and Students’ HBL Engagement
teachers to refine the HBL lessons.
Teachers Leverage Novelty Effects and Parents to Support
Professional Learning as a Community—Just-in-Time Emotional Engagement Students’ emotional engagement
Professional Learning were important considerations as teachers designed and
enacted HBL experiences. The novelty effects of technol-
Before school closure for HBL, just-in-time professional ogy got students excited to start the online HBL experi-
learning sessions were conducted to update teachers about ence. Even before the HBL period, when students were
the latest technological tools. Teachers also attended online brought to the computer laboratory to familiarise with the
tutorials to learn about different software applications to Zoom software application, they were very excited about it.
support HBL. ‘‘a lot of like online learning platform that ‘‘It was like shiny new platform; it was like a novelty for
were available. So, the ICT head will tell us, oh if you want them’’. As the weeks progressed, fatigue set in. ‘‘So, I think
to learn about how to use Google Classroom, there is this after a while, it wears off, you see.’’
online lesson, tutorial like that…’’ Occasional trouble Students from graduating classes became insecure over
shooting was done amongst teachers and technical per- missing schools and their pending examinations. ‘‘I think
sonnel using emails and mobile phone applications (e.g., the kids who are sitting for national exams, I think they are
WhatsApp) to ensure the HBL run smoothly. ‘‘we had also feeling quite worried and insecure, that we didn’t have
some form of professional development…. Then during the a mid-year exam or some assessments.’’ Teachers tried to
HBL period, we were very actively using the WhatsApp allay students’ fears by using synchronous online video
level chat, like oh, I have difficulty with this and all, what conferencing to check-in and chit-chat with them and
do I do. So, we are helping each other… Yeah, so that support their emotional well-being. Teachers also worked
helps a lot.’’ The teaching community supported each other with parents and guardians to ensure students had emo-
by sharing different ideas and diverse perspectives for tional support during this period of learning.
teaching and learning with technology.
Teachers acknowledged that HBL required more time Teachers Manage Classroom Discussions and Issues to
and resources. However, it was not necessary for them to Support Behaviour Engagement The HBL environment
have or learn about the latest technology for HBL. ‘‘it’s not was conducive for learning because students could pay
so much of the number of apps to learn to use at this point attention without disruptions from classmates. Compared
in time. It’s more of like, okay, like how do you enhance the to the classroom environment, ‘‘quietness’’ could be
use of zoom. ……, I want to learn how to further leverage maintained because teachers could mute all or some stu-
on those apps. … you know, learn more about what other dents in the online environment. Talkative or disruptive
features of these apps, like for example, zoom, you can students could be managed by technology. One interesting
organise them into different chat groups and then they can observation was that students who were usually quiet and
discuss about certain problems, then after that they can less participative in face-to-face contexts became proactive
come back to the main class.’’ It was more important for in asking questions and participated actively. ‘‘I finally
teachers to have professional learning experiences that hear those quieter ones, when they have questions, they
focused on understanding and using the affordances of finally start to ask. Because usually in a physical class-
technological tools to design meaningful learning experi- room, I think it will be dominated by the vocal ones.’’
ences. Teachers welcomed the sharing of resources and The online environment also brought about behavioural
teaching ideas within and across schools. engagement issues, such as students being late, absent,
multitasking, and late homework submission. For some
Theme Two: Student’ Factors for HBL students, teachers had to call up students or their par-
ents/guardians to find out reasons for being late or absent.
Theme two describes students’ engagement and readiness Teachers managed students’ behavioural engagement by
for HBL. The two sub-themes describe teachers’ consid- requesting students to activate their webcam to mark
erations to support students’ emotional, behavioural, cog- attendance and check their identity. Teachers wanted to
nitive and social engagement during HBL as well as ensure students were at their computers all the time and
teachers’ understandings of how students’ readiness for paying attention. Teachers also reflected that students
HBL is shaped by accessibility of technology, maturity and needed more ‘‘chasing’’ to submit their homework in an
age. online environment.
123
306 L. Y. Tay et al.
Teachers Recognise the Importance of Assessment, Feed- Learning with technology is not new to teachers and
back, and Guidance for Cognitive Engagement Teachers- students, thanks to the consistent efforts by schools and the
associated cognitive engagement with the learning of ministry of education since the first ICT Masterplan in
content knowledge. Teachers were more confident of stu- 1997. Prior experiences with virus like SARS, H1N1, and
dents’ cognitive engagement in the face-to-face setting MERS, which threatened to close schools, had also
than the online environment. Teachers observed that stu- prompted the ministry of education to have periodic
dents who were usually engaged or self-directed students in learning experiences with schools to prepare teachers and
the classroom remained equally engaged in the online students with the possibility of online HBL. Consequently,
setting. ‘‘students who show up for my live lessons will tend teachers and students, are ready for HBL. However, the
to be the more engaged and the more serious ones…. they lengthy 4 weeks of HBL was unprecedented. Teachers
are listening and as I’m explaining a certain question, reflected that students rose to the challenge because they
usually from the workbook or textbook, they are there understood the seriousness of the situation and persevered
writing down or taking notes’’. in learning. This experience forced students to become self-
Teachers recognised that online formative assessments directed learners, especially for those in the upper ele-
were key in online HBL to gather students’ feedback on mentary (Grades 4–6) and secondary (Grades 7–10) levels.
their understanding and progress. Unlike the physical ‘‘I think the benefits is that the home-based learning,
classroom, where such feedback could be done seamlessly basically, I think it forces the kids to be independent in
and adapted ‘‘on the fly’’, the online environment required their learning. … I realised, that the success of home-
prior planning. Thus, teachers had to adjust their practices. based learning, it’s really self-directed and being inde-
‘‘One of the things, I thought was an issue for home-based pendent in their learning and being able to do that.’’
learning, was that there’s less face time, so harder for us to
give feedback. Immediate feedback. So, like doing [face-to- Students’ Readiness for HBL is Shaped by Their Maturity
face] lessons we can, I can move around, you know… and I and Age Teachers mentioned that students’ maturity, in
can point them their mistakes straight away.’’ terms of self-directedness, motivation and ICT-savviness,
Teachers also reflected that younger or special needs and age, played a role in their engagement of the online
students needed more guidance because online HBL posted HBL experience. ‘‘I see a general trend with the younger
different learning challenges and additional demands of ones. I think they are not so used to this. This whole home-
handling technology. Even when lesson packages were based learning. I think the older ones actually adapt a lot
well-designed, these students needed home support to faster.’’ Younger students, especially those from Grades
facilitate cognitive engagement. 1–3, needed more synchronous learning experiences and
support from adults at home. Secondary students (Grades
Teachers Acknowledge Constraints for Social Engage- 7–10) seemed more self-directed and could manage asyn-
ment Teachers shared that peer-to-peer discussions were chronous lessons. ‘‘Then, for your really, really low pro-
less prevalent in online HBL contexts. However, teachers gress, your specialised groups, …video conferencing really
had the inclinations that students engaged in discussions helped them.’’ Lower progress and special needs students
outside of lesson time. ‘‘They will, like chat with each needed face-to-face experiences with teacher scaffolding
other, either by calling each other or by texting each other, and guidance at home for HBL to be productive. ‘‘we need
outside of the lesson, like in their own time. We learnt that to monitor. So, usually, this type of students, we monitor
through chatting with them in the morning…’’ Interactions and realise they have an issue, they cannot study at home.
during online asynchronous lessons were mainly between They have to call back to school, this is called special
teacher and students. Teachers felt that the limited student- need.’’ Special arrangements were made for students with
to-student interactions could be attributed to how teachers special needs to return to school so teachers could conduct
kept lessons within 30–40 min. either one-to-one or small group lessons for them.
123
Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students’ Engagement During the COVID-19… 307
• Teachers need to make deliberate and consistent efforts to monitor • Expand online learning spaces to include social network
students’ engagement and progress platforms for students to continue discussions beyond lesson
time
• Teachers use a variety of software applications for their lesson delivery • Inculcate students with skills and habits for learning in online and
face-to-face contexts
• Teachers need continuous PD to understand how to more effectively use
instructional strategies and technological affordances for meaningful
learning with technology
123
308 L. Y. Tay et al.
professional learning involves continued practice through have the technological know-how to use the hardware and
first hand experiences of online learning in different software so that learning can occur.
classroom contexts (Borko, 2004). Continuous teacher
professional development is necessary to keep our teachers
up-to-date with the technological know-how. Professional Limitations
learning communities provide possible platforms for
teachers to engage in effective, continuous professional This study is limited by the small sample size of eight
learning because it embodies substantive features of mathematics teachers. This is an exploratory, qualitative
effective professional learning which focus on continuity study. The intent is not to make generalisations but to
and sustenance (Hairon, 2020). provide initial understandings of how online HBL was
conducted during the pandemic to inform future, more in-
Implications—Student Factors depth studies involving more teachers and subjects.
Another limitation is that findings only included teachers’
Expand Online Learning Spaces to Include Social Network perspectives. It would be meaningful to include students’
Platforms for Students to Continue Discussion Beyond and parents’ voices to have a holistic understanding of
Lesson Time student engagement and challenges during the online HBL
experience.
Social engagement seems lacking in online HBL because
of the limited lesson duration and functions on video
conferencing applications that our teachers used. Teachers Conclusion
acknowledged that there were limited student group work
and collaboration sessions. However, they did not rule out The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns have caused
that students connect through other social networking schools to shift their teaching and learning online. In such a
platforms for school or social purposes. The practice situation, technology plays a core supportive role in
implications, therefore, is for teachers to expand the online teaching students and their learning. The considerations to
spaces for HBL to include social network platforms for design online learning experiences to engage students
students to continue discussions beyond lesson time. In meaningfully are more complex than face-to-face class-
other words, social engagement as defined by Fredricks room contexts. This paper attempts to gather Singapore
et al. (2004) may not be confined to official lesson time teachers’ considerations in designing mathematics, online
during HBL. Teachers could intentionally design for stu- HBL lessons and teachers’ perspectives of students’
dents’ social engagement before and after lesson time engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in
during the HBL experience. This is important because 2020.
peer-to-peer relationship is critical to support students’ Findings share nuanced considerations describing
learning engagement (Everett, 2015; Gray & DiLoreto, teachers’ implementations of HBL and the importance of
2016; Moore, 1989; Northey et al., 2015). engaging students in an online learning context. Findings
also highlight how engaged students are in an online
Inculcate Students with Skills and Habits for Learning learning context and how teachers could design online
in Online and Face-to-Face Contexts lessons to capture the attention of their students better.
Although this study only looks into the perspectives of a
Our findings show that age and maturity play a role in group of mathematics teachers, findings may also apply to
student engagement and in students having a productive other subject areas.
HBL experience. Similarly, students with the right learning While this study is an exploratory, qualitative study that
dispositions benefited from online HBL. This finding reit- elicits insights from a small number of mathematics
erates the importance of continuous inculcating of the teachers, findings provide evidence-informed understand-
necessary skills and habits of being a motivated and self- ings by unpacking the considerations teachers take to
directed learner so that students can toggle between design lessons and engage students meaningfully in an
learning in the online and face-to-face contexts. As high- online HBL environment. Future studies can continue to
lighted by researchers (Hew & Brush, 2007; Tay et al., inform this area of work by involving more teachers from
2017; Turgut & Aslan, 2021), student engagement and different subjects, grade levels, schools, and geographical
learning is shaped by technological availability and contexts. The inclusion of students and parents would
accessibility. Having access to technological hardware is likely provide further insights in this field of study as well.
important but what is more fundamental is for students to
123
Implementation of Online Home-Based Learning and Students’ Engagement During the COVID-19… 309
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the participat- a. What do you think are factors that hindered your
ing schools and teachers for the time taken for the interviews. teaching and student’s learning?
b. How effective do you think is your teaching and
Funding This study was not funded.
students’ learning in HBL?
Data Availability The datasets generated during and/or analysed 13. How do you think home-based learning can be
during the current study are available from the corresponding author
on reasonable request. improved?
14. What kind of support do you think is needed to
Declarations enhance home-based learning and increase the stu-
dents’ engagement in HBL?
Conflict of interest The authors declare that we have no conflict of
interest.
123
310 L. Y. Tay et al.
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online The Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/
course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online singapore/education/schools-to-shift-to-full-home-based-learning-
Learning, 19(4), n4. from-april-8
Everett, D. R. (2015). Adding value: Online student engagement. Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student
Information Systems Education Journal, 13(6), 68. perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the
Farmer, T., & West, R. (2019). Exploring the concerns of online K-12 online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222.
teachers. Journal of Online Learning Research, 5(1), 97–118. Martin, F., Parker, M. A., & Deale, D. F. (2012). Examining
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School interactivity in synchronous virtual classrooms. International
engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(3),
Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. 227–261.
Fredricks, J. A., McColskey, W., Meli, J., Mordica, J., Montrosse, B., Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American
& Mooney, K. (2011). Measuring student engagement in upper Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7.
elementary through high school: A description of 21 instruments. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659.
Issues & Answers. REL 2011-No. 098. Regional Educational Mourshed, M., Chijioke, C., & Barber, M. (2010). How the world’s
Laboratory Southeast. most improved school systems keep getting better. McKinsey.
Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student Northey, G., Bucic, T., Chylinski, M., & Govind, R. (2015).
engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in Increasing student engagement using asynchronous learning.
online learning environments. International Journal of Educa- Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3), 171–180.
tional Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1. Patrick, S., & Powell, A. (2009). A summary of research on the
Hairon, S. (2020). Back to the future: Professional learning commu- effectiveness of K-12 online learning. International Association
nities in Singapore. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 40(4), for K-12 Online Learning. Retrieved from
501–515. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509626.pdf.
Hawkins, A., & Barbour, M. K. (2010). US virtual school trial period Rice, K. L. (2006). A comprehensive look at distance education in the
and course completion policy study. The American Journal of K–12 context. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
Distance Education, 24(1), 5–20. 38(4), 425–448.
Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher
student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of
Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. Education for Business, 84(2), 101–109.
Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. C. (2003). Patterns of Sin, Y. (Jun 18, 2020). Each secondary student to get learning device
engagement in authentic online learning environments. Aus- by next year. The Straits Times. Retrieved from
tralasian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59–71. https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/each-secondary-student-
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 to-get-learning-device-by-next-year
teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommen- Smith, S. J., Burdette, P. J., Cheatham, G. A., & Harvey, S. P. (2016).
dations for future research. Educational Technology Research Parental role and support for online learning of students with
and Development, 55(3), 223–252. disabilities: A paradigm shift. Journal of Special Education
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical Leadership, 29(2), 101–112.
content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technol- Tay, L. Y., Nair, S. S., & Lim, C. P. (2017). A regression analysis of
ogy and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. elementary students’ ICT usage vis-à-vis access to technology in
Koh, T. S., & Lee, S. C. (2008). Digital skills and education: Singapore. Educational Media International, 54(1), 34–47.
Singapore’s ICT master planning for the school sector. In S. Turgut, Y. E., & Aslan, A. (2021). Factors affecting ICT integration
K. Lee, C. B. Goh, B. Fredriksen, & J. P. Tan (Eds.), Toward a in TURKISH education: A systematic review. Education and
better future—Education and training for economic development Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-
in Singapore since 1965 (pp. 167–190). The World Bank. 10441-2.
Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement Weiner, C. (2003). Key ingredients to online learning: Adolescent
from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. students study in cyberspace—The nature of the study. Interna-
Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24–32. tional Journal on E-learning, 2(3), 44–50.
Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement:
Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
Institutional Research, 2009(141), 5–20. jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Kurohi, R. (April 14, 2020). Singapore schools to shift to full home-
based learning from April 8 to May 4 amid Covid-19 pandemic.
123