A Study on the Relationship Between Transactional Distance, Student Involvement, and Curriculum Satisfaction in a Flipped Class Model: A Case Study in Guilin, Guangxi Province of China
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52152/800167Keywords:
Flipped Class Model; Transactional Distance; Student Involvement; Curriculum Satisfaction; SEMAbstract
The Flipped Class Model (FCM) model has gained increasing popularity in higher education, enabling educators and institutions to address the challenges of distance and blended learning. This study explores the correlation between transactional distance, student involvement, and curriculum satisfaction in a flipped piano education classroom in Guilin, Guangxi of China. Additionally, it examines the impact of students' perceptions of transactional distance on their learning experience. The study employs Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) for path analysis. Data were collected from 69 female and 51 male students in a public university in Guilin. Three established measurement tools were used to assess the relationships among transactional distance perception, student involvement, and curriculum satisfaction. The study investigates five sub-dimensions of transactional distance e—interaction between students and the interface, content, teachers, peers, and the learning environment—to evaluate how these factors influence participation and satisfaction. The results indicate a significant positive correlation between students' perceptions of transactional distance and their involvement and curriculum satisfaction. Specifically, each of the five sub-dimensions of transactional distance positively influences student involvement and satisfaction. These findings provide empirical evidence supporting the crucial role of transactional distance in flipped classroom teaching. This study offers valuable insights for educators and curriculum designers, emphasizing that optimizing students' perceptions of transactional distance can enhance their involvement and satisfaction, thereby improving overall teaching effectiveness. This is particularly relevant in the design of Flipped Class Model, where promoting effective interaction can significantly enhance the students' learning experience.
References
Al Mamun, M. A., Lawrie, G., Wright, T. J. C., & Education. (2022). Exploration of learner-content interactions and learning approaches: The role of guided inquiry in the self-directed online environments. 178, 104398.
Awidi, I. T., Paynter, M. J. C., & education. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. 128, 269-283.
Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. J. E. r. r. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. 22, 1-18.
Bond, M. J. C., & Education. (2020). Facilitating student engagement through the flipped learning approach in K-12: A systematic review. 151, 103819.
Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R., Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., & Sokolovskaya, A. J. D. e. (2012). Are contextual and designed student–student interaction treatments equally effective in distance education? 33(3), 311-329.
Bundick, M. J., Quaglia, R. J., Corso, M. J., & Haywood, D. E. J. T. C. R. (2014). Promoting student engagement in the classroom. 116(4), 1-34.
Chin, C. J. I. j. o. s. e. (2006). Classroom interaction in science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. 28(11), 1315-1346.
Choi, J., Lee, Y. J. I. i. E., & International, T. (2018). To what extent does ‘flipping’make lessons effective in a multimedia production class? , 55(1), 3-12.
Comeau, G., Huta, V., & Liu, Y. J. I. J. o. M. E. (2015). Work ethic, motivation, and parental influences in Chinese and North American children learning to play the piano. 33(2), 181-194.
Curry, L. A., Nembhard, I. M., & Bradley, E. H. J. C. (2009). Qualitative and mixed methods provide unique contributions to outcomes research. 119(10), 1442-1452.
Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C. J., Shin, C. H., & Woo, B.-D. J. A. P. J. o. E. (2021). Structural relationships among self-regulation, transactional distance, and learning engagement in a large university class using flipped learning. 41(3), 609-625.
Drexler, W. J. A. j. o. e. t. (2010). The networked student model for construction of personal learning environments: Balancing teacher control and student autonomy. 26(3).
Durak, H. Y. J. J. o. E. C. R. (2020). Modeling different variables in learning basic concepts of programming in flipped classrooms. 58(1), 160-199.
Ertmer, P. A., Sadaf, A., & Ertmer, D. J. J. J. o. C. i. H. E. (2011). Student-content interactions in online courses: The role of question prompts in facilitating higher-level engagement with course content. 23, 157-186.
Falloon, G. J. J. o. R. o. T. i. E. (2011) . Making the connection: Moore’s theory of transactional distance and its relevance to the use of a virtual classroom in postgraduate online teacher education. 43(3), 187-209.
Gamlath, S., Wilson, T. J. K. M. R., & Practice. (2022). Dimensions of student-to-student knowledge sharing in universities. 20(4), 542-556.
Garland, A. M. (2010). Assessing the relationship between student involvement and academic performance in higher education.
Havik, T., & Westergård, E. J. S. j. o. e. r. (2020). Do teachers matter? Students’ perceptions of classroom interactions and student engagement. 64(4), 488-507.
Hill, B. D. (2011). The sequential Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin procedure as an alternative for determining the number of factors in common-factor analysis: A Monte Carlo simulation: Oklahoma State University.
Hyo-Jeong, S. J. T. T. T. O. J. o. E. T. (2010). Towards rigor of online interaction research: Implication for future distance learning research. 9(2).
Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. J. E. P. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? 51(2), 247-265.
Kahu, E. R., Nelson, K. J. H. e. r., & development. (2018). Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. 37(1), 58-71.
Karagöl, İ., & Esen, E. J. H. Ü. E. F. D. (2019). The effect of flipped learning approach on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. 34(3), 708-727.
Karaoglan-Yilmaz, F. G., Zhang, K., Ustun, A. B., & Yilmaz, R. J. I. L. E. (2024). Transactional distance perceptions, student engagement, and course satisfaction in flipped learning: a correlational study. 32(2), 447-462.
Kim, Y. K., Sax, L. J. J. H. e. H. o. t., Research, r. P. u. t. s. o. t. A. f. I., & Education, t. A. f. t. S. o. H. (2017). The impact of college students’ interactions with faculty: A review of general and conditional effects. 85-139.
Kurucay, M., Inan, F. A. J. C., & Education. (2017). Examining the effects of learner-learner interactions on satisfaction and learning in an online undergraduate course. 115, 20-37.
Lau, K. W., & Lee, P. Y. J. I. L. E. (2015). The use of virtual reality for creating unusual environmental stimulation to motivate students to explore creative ideas. 23(1), 3-18.
Lei, M., Clemente, I. M., Hu, Y. J. C., & Education. (2019). Student in the shell: The robotic body and student engagement. 130, 59-80.
Li, Z., Zhou, M., Lam, K. K. L. J. T. s., & creativity. (2022). Dance in Zoom: Using video conferencing tools to develop students' 4C skills and self-efficacy during COVID-19. 46, 101102.
Liaw, S.-S., Huang, H.-M. J. C., & Education. (2013). Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e-learning environments. 60(1), 14-24.
Lin, H.-C., & Hwang, G.-J. J. I. L. E. (2019) . Research trends of flipped classroom studies for medical courses: A review of journal publications from 2008 to 2017 based on the technology-enhanced learning model. 27(8), 1011-1027.
Lowell, N. O. (2004). An investigation of factors contributing to perceived transactional distance in an online setting: University of Northern Colorado.
Lv, H. Z. J. E., & Technologies, I. (2023). Innovative music education: Using an AI-based flipped classroom. 28(11), 15301-15316.
Makri, A., Vlachopoulos, D., & Martina, R. A. J. S. (2021). Digital escape rooms as innovative pedagogical tools in education: A systematic literature review. 13(8), 4587.
Molinillo, S., Aguilar-Illescas, R., Anaya-Sánchez, R., Vallespín-Arán, M. J. C., & Education. (2018). Exploring the impacts of interactions, social presence and emotional engagement on active collaborative learning in a social web-based environment. 123, 41-52.
Ng, D. T., Ng, E. H., Chu, S. K. J. E., & Technologies, i. (2022). Engaging students in creative music making with musical instrument application in an online flipped classroom. 27(1), 45-64.
Oliván Blázquez, B., Masluk, B., Gascon, S., Fueyo Díaz, R., Aguilar-Latorre, A., Artola Magallón, I., & Magallón Botaya, R. J. P. o. (2019). The use of flipped classroom as an active learning approach improves academic performance in social work: A randomized trial in a university. 14(4), e0214623.
Osterman, K. F. J. R. o. e. r. (2000). Students' need for belonging in the school community. 70(3), 323-367.
Öztüre Yavuz, G., Akçapınar, G., Çıralı Sarıca, H., Koçak Usluel, Y. J. E., & Technologies, I. (2024). Investigating features that play a role in predicting gifted student engagement using machine learning: Video log and self-report data. 1-27.
Paechter, M., Maier, B., Macher, D. J. C., & education. (2010). Students’ expectations of, and experiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning achievements and course satisfaction. 54(1), 222-229.
Pandita, A., & Kiran, R. J. S. (2023). The technology interface and student engagement are significant stimuli in sustainable student satisfaction. 15(10), 7923.
Parahoo, S. K., Santally, M. I., Rajabalee, Y., & Harvey, H. L. J. J. o. M. f. H. E. (2016). Designing a predictive model of student satisfaction in online learning. 26(1), 1-19.
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. J. J. o. e. p. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. 104(3), 700.
Rumble, G. (2019). The planning and management of distance education: Routledge.
Shin, N. J. D. e. (2003). Transactional presence as a critical predictor of success in distance learning. 24(1), 69-86.
Shoaib, M., Sayed, N., Singh, J., Shafi, J., Khan, S., & Ali, F. J. C. i. H. B. (2024). AI student success predictor: Enhancing personalized learning in campus management systems. 158, 108301.
Steen-Utheim, A. T., & Foldnes, N. J. T. i. H. E. (2018). A qualitative investigation of student engagement in a flipped classroom. 23(3), 307-324.
Van den Bergh, L., Ros, A., & Beijaard, D. J. A. e. r. j. (2014). Improving teacher feedback during active learning: Effects of a professional development program. 51(4), 772-809.
Vaughn, S. D. (2018). Online Doctoral Student Satisfaction as Influenced by Personality and Transactional Distance. University of West Florida,
Wang, F. H. J. C., & Education. (2017). An exploration of online behaviour engagement and achievement in flipped classroom supported by learning management system. 114, 79-91.
Wong, W. H., & Chapman, E. J. H. e. (2023). Student satisfaction and interaction in higher education. 85(5), 957-978.
Yilmaz, R. J. C. i. H. B. (2017). Exploring the role of e-learning readiness on student satisfaction and motivation in flipped classroom. 70, 251-260.
Zainuddin, Z., Perera, C. J. J. J. o. f., & education, h. (2019). Exploring students’ competence, autonomy and relatedness in the flipped classroom pedagogical model. 43(1), 115-126.
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. J. J. o. S. P. (2017) . Similarities and dissimilarities between teachers' and students' relationship views in upper elementary school: The role of personal teacher and student attributes. 64, 43-60.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Lex localis - Journal of Local Self-Government
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
