Author(s):
Swati Singh, Rachit Roshan
Email(s):
swati6271@gmail.com , rachitroshan1@gmail.com
DOI:
10.52711/2321-581X.2025.00013 
Address:
Swati Singh1, Rachit Roshan2
1Lecturer, Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science and Application, Government Home Science and Science Women Autonomous College, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh.
2Assistant Professor, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Satyam International Institute of Technology, Gaurichak, Patna.
*Corresponding Author
Published In:
Volume - 16,
Issue - 4,
Year - 2025
ABSTRACT:
This empirical study examines 210 active e-learning users to investigate how instructional design elements, assessment methodologies, and learning flexibility correlate with perceived educational value. The research reveals that content organization demonstrates the strongest association with learning satisfaction (50.0% approval), while assessment integration and time management capabilities show significant variance (ranging 39.6%-52.4% approval). The study identifies a "pedagogical engagement gap" where 72.4% of students access materials but only 51.4% confirm meaningful learning progression. Age-based analysis reveals that traditional-age students (21-23 years, 47.1% of sample) report higher engagement than mature learners, suggesting differential pedagogical needs. These findings provide evidence-based insights for designing effective e-learning experiences that transcend mere content delivery to foster authentic learning.
Cite this article:
Swati Singh, Rachit Roshan. Pedagogical Mediation and Learning Outcomes in Virtual Environments: A Data-Driven Assessment Framework. Research Journal of Engineering and Technology. 2025; 16(4):139-6. doi: 10.52711/2321-581X.2025.00013
Cite(Electronic):
Swati Singh, Rachit Roshan. Pedagogical Mediation and Learning Outcomes in Virtual Environments: A Data-Driven Assessment Framework. Research Journal of Engineering and Technology. 2025; 16(4):139-6. doi: 10.52711/2321-581X.2025.00013 Available on: https://ijersonline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2025-16-4-1
7. REFERENCES:
1. Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed., pp. 45-74). Athabasca University Press.
2. Biggs, J., and Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press.
3. Bonk, C. J., and Graham, C. R. (2012). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. Pfeiffer.
4. Chickering, A. W., and Ehrmann, S. C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever. AAHE Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6.
5. Clark, R. C., and Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). Wiley.
6. Cobb, S. C. (2009). Social presence and online learning: A current state of the art. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 179-188.
7. Cronin, B., Stead, B., and Robins, S. (1995). The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. Taylor Graham Publishers.
8. Dabbagh, N., and Kitsantas, A. (2012). Institutional support for social media learning. Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 214-221.
9. Debourgh, G. A. (2003). Predictors of student satisfaction in distance-delivered graduate nursing courses: What matters most? Journal of Professional Nursing, 19(3), 149-163.
10. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi.
11. Donavant, B. W. (2009). The missing link: Learning theory and web-based instruction. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 12(4), 339-350.
12. Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., and Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students' perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215-235.
13. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., and Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
14. Garrison, D. R., and Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148.
15. Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
16. Johnson, L., Levine, A., and Smith, R. S. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report. The New Media Consortium.
17. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
18. Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge.
19. Merriam, S. B., and Bierema, L. L. (2014). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. Jossey-Bass.
20. Moore, M. G., and Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning (3rd ed.). Cengage Learning.
21. Paechter, M., Maier, B., and Macher, D. (2010). Student expectations and experiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning outcomes and course satisfaction. Computers and Education, 54(1), 222-229.
22. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
23. Reeves, T. C. (2006). How did we get here? A historical perspective on contemporary educational technology and learning sciences. Applications of Information and Communication Technologies, 2006, 1-22.
24. Rovai, A. P., and Ponton, M. K. (2005). An examination of sense of classroom community and learning outcomes in online and blended learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(3), 199-209.
25. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.
26. Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., and Yeh, D. (2008). What drives successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of critical factors. Computers and Education, 50(4), 1183-1202.
27. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
28. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., and Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1-30.
29. Wlodkowski, R. J., and Ginsberg, M. B. (2017). Enhancing adult motivation to learn: A comprehensive guide for teaching all adults (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.