The Silent Catalysts: How Engagement in Blended Learning Shapes Science Students’ Critical Thinking
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21009/jtp.v27i3.60853Keywords:
Blended Learning Engagement, Critical Thinking, Science Students, Online Learning, Distance LearningAbstract
Blended learning becomes a central post-pandemic instructional model and understanding how learners engage within these environments is important for enhancing higher-order thinking skill. This study examines the extent to which students’ blended learning engagement predicts the critical thinking skills of high school science students, and whether socioeconomic status (SES) moderates this relationship. A quantitative correlational design was employed, involving 469 science students from Indonesian high schools that have consistently implemented blended learning. Data were collected through a 4-point Likert-scale questionnaire and analyzed using Spearman’s rank-order correlation and bootstrap regression. The results indicated that cognitive engagement was the strongest predictor of critical thinking (ρ = .793, p < .001; β = .751, p < .001), while emotional engagement had a positive but smaller effect (ρ = .291, p < .001; β = .066, p = .029), and behavioral engagement was insignificant (ρ ≈ .000, p = .998; β = –.028, p = .326). Simultaneously, the three dimensions of engagement explained 59.9% of the variability in critical thinking, with no significant moderating effect of SES. However, split-group correlations indicated that the correlation between blended learning engagement and critical thinking was stronger among students from low- (ρ = .512) and high- (ρ = .481) SES groups compared to those from the middle group (ρ = .386), indicating variation in effect magnitude but not direction, thereby clarifying the apparent contradiction with the non-significant moderation test. These findings confirmed cognitive engagement as the core component of reflective learning in blended learning, as well as highlighted the need for instructional designs that strengthen metacognitive regulation and epistemic autonomy for diverse learners.
References
Adams, D., Tan Hwee Joo, M., Sumintono, B., & Siew Pei, O. (2020). Blended learning engagement in higher education institutions: A differential item functioning analysis of students’ backgrounds. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 133–158.
Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2023). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. In Interactive Learning Environments (Vol. 31, Issue 2, pp. 863–875). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180
Akpinar, Y., & Aslan, Ü. (2015). Supporting Children’s Learning of Probability Through Video Game Programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(2), 228–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115598492
Almahasees, Z., Mohsen, K., & Amin, M. O. (2021). Faculty’s and Students’ Perceptions of Online Learning During COVID-19. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.638470
Azubuike, O. B., Adegboye, O., & Quadri, H. (2021). Who gets to learn in a pandemic? Exploring the digital divide in remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 2, 100022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100022
Bach, K. M., Reinhold, F., & Hofer, S. I. (2025). Unlocking math potential in students from lower SES backgrounds – using instructional scaffolds to improve performance. Npj Science of Learning, 10(1), 66. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00358-7
Bashir, A., Bashir, S., Rana, K., Lambert, P., & Vernallis, A. (2021). Post-Covid-19 adaptations; the Shifts towards online learning, hybrid course delivery and the implications for biosciences courses in the higher education setting. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.711619
Bohnert, M., & Gracia, P. (2023). Digital use and socioeconomic inequalities in adolescent well‐being: Longitudinal evidence on socioemotional and educational outcomes. Journal of Adolescence, 95(6), 1179–1194. https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12193
Castro, R. (2019). Blended learning in higher education: Trends and capabilities. Education and Information Technologies, 24(4), 2523–2546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09886-3
Çevik, M., & Senturk, C. (2019). Multidimensional 21th century skills scale: Validity and reliability study. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 14(1), 11–028. www.cjes.eu
Chang, D., Hwang, G.-J., Chang, S.-C., & Wang, S.-Y. (2021). Promoting students’ cross-disciplinary performance and higher order thinking: a peer assessment-facilitated STEM approach in a mathematics course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(6), 3281–3306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10062-z
Chin, W. M., Ahmad, N. A., Ismail, I. A., Alias, S. N., & Asri, A. S. (2025). A Serial Mediation Model on Trait Emotional Intelligence, Basic Psychological Needs, and Academic Motivation as Antecedents of Student Engagement. SAGE Open, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251352752
Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
Creswell. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Australia.
D. Pagcamaan, L. R. (2024). Engagement and satisfaction in science employing blended earning in junior high school students. International Journal of Research Publications, 141(1). https://doi.org/10.47119/IJRP1001411120245996
de Bruin, A. B. H., Janssen, E. M., Waldeyer, J., & Stebner, F. (2025). Cognitive load and challenges in self-regulation: An introduction and reflection on the topical collection. Educational Psychology Review, 37(3), 65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10042-2
Dillenbourg, P. (2016). The Evolution of Research on Digital Education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2), 544–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0106-z
ElSayary, A. (2023). Students’ Active Engagement in Online Learning. In Overcoming Challenges in Online Learning (pp. 97–106). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003342335-12
Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage publications limited.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. . (2019). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (10th ed., Vol. 10). McGraw Hill Education.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (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
García-Carmona, A. (2025). Scientific Thinking and Critical Thinking in Science Education . Science & Education, 34(1), 227–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00460-5
Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Prentice.
Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2019). Learner Engagement in Blended Learning Environments: A Conceptual Framework. Online Learning, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1481
Hujjatusnaini, N., Corebima, A. D., Prawiro, S. R., & Gofur, A. (2022). The effect of blended project-based learning integrated with 21st-century skills on pre-service biology teachers’ higher-order thinking skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(1), 104–118. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.27148
Iglesias-Pradas, S., Hernández-García, Á., Chaparro-Peláez, J., & Prieto, J. L. (2021). Emergency remote teaching and students’ academic performance in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106713
Kay, R., MacDonald, T., & DiGiuseppe, M. (2019). A comparison of lecture-based, active, and flipped classroom teaching approaches in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31(3), 449–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9197-x
Li, W., Huang, J.-Y., Liu, C.-Y., Tseng, J. C. R., & Wang, S.-P. (2023). A study on the relationship between student’ learning engagements and higher-order thinking skills in programming learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101369
Papavlasopoulou, S., Giannakos, M. N., & Jaccheri, L. (2019). Exploring children’s learning experience in constructionism-based coding activities through design-based research. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 415–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.008
Pasquinelli, E., Farina, M., Bedel, A., & Casati, R. (2021). Naturalizing Critical Thinking: Consequences for Education, Blueprint for Future Research in Cognitive Science. Mind, Brain, and Education, 15(2), 168–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12286
Qaribilla, R., Indrajaya, K., & Mayawati, C. I. (2024). Digital Learning Inquality: The Role of Socioeconomic Status in Access to Online Education Resources. International Journal of Social and Human, 1(2), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.59613/55gdmt96
Qureshi, A., Wall, H., Humphries, J., & Bahrami Balani, A. (2016). Can personality traits modulate student engagement with learning and their attitude to employability? Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 349–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.08.026
Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers and Education, 144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701
Salas‐Pilco, S. Z., Yang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2022). Student engagement in online learning in Latin American higher education during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 593–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13190
Scherer, R., & Siddiq, F. (2019). The relation between students’ socioeconomic status and ICT literacy: Findings from a meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 138, 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.011
Yang, J., Chen, Y., & Wang, Y. (2025). Exploring the Interplay of Motivation, Engagement and Critical Thinking Among EFL Learners: Evidence From Structural Equation Modelling. European Journal of Education, 60(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.70187
Zhou, X., & Tsai, C.-W. (2023). The Effects of Socially Shared Regulation of Learning on the Computational Thinking, Motivation, and Engagement in Collaborative Learning by Teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 28(7), 8135–8152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11527-1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jovita Ridhani, Fatma Sukmawati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan is an Open Access Journal. The authors who publish the manuscript in Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan agree to the following terms.
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)
-
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
-
ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
- You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
- No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
