logo

Articles

Vol. 1 No. 2 (2021): Technology enhanced learning in the MENA region

An examination of undergraduate students’ engagement in an information literacy blended course

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.d9353801
Submitted
8 August 2026
Published
15-08-2026

Abstract

To develop information literacy (IL) skills of Arab students enrolled in a first year premedical programme of an American branch campus in Qatar, the Education and Research Librarian designed a blended IL curriculum that was integrated in the English for Academic Purposes course. The IL curriculum used the flipped classroom modality that combined e-learning materials with face-to-face sessions taking place every other week. The e-learning materials consisted of biweekly online modules and practice quizzes that students needed to review and submit prior to the face-to-face sessions designed to engage students in class discussions and hands-on activities. While a few students showed a modest level of engagement during the face-to-face sessions, the majority did not seem to be fully engaged or aware of the content in the online modules. To find out why, this study sought to research the reasons for this disengagement by investigating students’ perceptions of their engagement. A case study methodology consisting of a survey and three in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of students was used to collect data. The study concludes that students’ perceptions of a blended IL curriculum are impacted by the importance they attribute to the topics covered in IL. Results also suggest students’ preference for just-in-time, online, and asynchronous access to content with an optional face-to-face attendance that would help them learn about a skill when they need to use it.

References

  1. Alhazmi, A. K., Rahman, A. A., & Zafar, H. (2014, December). Conceptual model for the academic use of Social Networking Sites from student engagement perspective. In 2014 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services (IC3e) (pp. 1-6). doi: 10.1109/IC3e.2014.7081232
  2. Anderson, G. (1993). Fundamentals of educational research. Falmer Press.
  3. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 518-529. Retrieved from https://www.asec.purdue.edu/lct/hbcu/documents/Student_Involvement_A_Developmental_Theory_for_HE_Astin.pdf
  4. Balwant, P. T. (2018). The meaning of student engagement and disengagement in the classroom context: Lessons from organisational behaviour. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 42(3), 389-401. doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2017.1281887
  5. Bendriss, R., Saliba, R., & Birch, S. (2015). Faculty and librarians' partnership: Designing a new framework to develop information fluent future doctors. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(6), 821-838. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.09.003
  6. Bruce, C. S., & Candy, P. (Eds.). (2000). Information literacy around the world: advances in programs and research. Charles Sturt University.
  7. Carder, L., Willingham, P., & Bibb, D. (2001). Case-based, problem-based learning: Information literacy for the real world. Research Strategies, 18(3), 181-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0734-3310(02)00087-3
  8. Chapman, E. (2003). Assessing student engagement rates: ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED482269
  9. Clark, R. E. (2009). Past and future research in online education. In Paper presented at the 2009 annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, San Diego, California.
  10. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
  11. Delialioğlu, O. (2012). Student engagement in blended learning environments with lecture-based and problem-based instructional approaches. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 310-322. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.15.3.310
  12. Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The online student engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1079585.pdf
  13. Dziuban, C., Hartman, J., Cavanagh, T., & Moskal, P. (2011). Blended courses as drivers of institutional transformation. In A. Kitchenham (Ed.), Blended learning across disciplines: Models for implementation. IGI Global.
  14. Duderstadt, J., Atkins, D., & Houweling, D. (2002). Higher education in the digital age: Technology issues and strategies for American colleges and universities. Praeger.
  15. Ellis R. A., Han F., Pardo A. (2018). Measuring engagement in the university student Experience of learning in blended environments. In R. Ellis & P. Goodyear (Eds.), Spaces of teaching and learning: Understanding teaching-learning practice. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7155-3_8
  16. Frambach, J. M., Driessen, E. W., Chan, L., & van der Vleuten, C. P. (2012). Rethinking the globalisation of problem‐based learning: How culture challenges self‐directed learning. Medical Education, 46, 738-747. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04290.x
  17. Burch, G. F., Heller, N. A., Burch, J. J., Freed, R., & Steed, S. A. (2015). Student engagement: Developing a conceptual framework and survey instrument. Journal of Education for Business, 90(4), 224-229. doi: 10.1080/08832323.2015.1019821
  18. Grant, D. M., Malloy, A. D., & Murphy, M. C. (2009). A comparison of student perceptions of their computer skills to their actual abilities. Journal of Information Technology Education, 8, 141-159. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol8/JITEv8p141-160Grant428.pdf
  19. Güzer, B., & Caner, H. (2014). The past, present and future of blended learning: an in depth analysis of literature. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 116, 4596-4603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.992
  20. Haraldstad, A. M. (2002). Information literacy – Curriculum integration with medical school’s syllabus. Liber Quarterly, 12(2/3), 192-198. Retrieved from https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/241294
  21. Hardy, C., & Bryson, C. (2010). Student engagement: Paradigm change or political expediency? Networks Magazine, (9), 19-23. Retrieved from https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/19300/1/200478_6878%20Hardy%20Publisher.pdf
  22. Henrie, C., Bodily, R., Manwaring, K., & Graham, C. (2015). Exploring intensive longitudinal measures of student engagement in blended learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2015
  23. Hubackova, S., & Semradova, I. (2016). Evaluation of blended learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 551-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.044
  24. Jeffrey, L., Hegarty, B., Kelly, O., Penman, M., Coburn, D., & McDonald, J. (2011). Developing digital information literacy in higher education: Obstacles and supports. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 10(1), 383-413. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111528/
  25. Jeffrey, L. M., Milne, J., Suddaby. G., & Higgins, A. (2014). Blended learning: How teachers balance the blend of online and classroom components. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 121-140. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol13/JITEv13ResearchP121-140Jeffrey0460.pdf
  26. Johnson, D. (1994). Research methods in educational management. UK: Longman.
  27. Jones, C., & Healing, G. (2010). Networks and locations for student learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 35(4), 369-385. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2010.529914
  28. Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758-773. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
  29. Kingsley, K., Galbraith, G. M., Herring, M., Stowers, E., Stewart, T., & Kingsley, K. V. (2011). Why not just Google it? An assessment of information literacy skills in a biomedical science curriculum. BMC Medical Education, 11(17), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-11-17
  30. Kohut, A., Taylor, P., Keeter, S., Parker, K., Morin, R., Cohn, D. V., . . . Clement, S. (2010). Millennials: A portrait of generation next: Confident. connected. open to change. Pew Research Centre.
  31. Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009
  32. Mayes, T., & de Freitas, S. (2004) Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models. London: Joint Information Systems Committee.
  33. McGuinness, C., & Fulton, C. (2019). Digital literacy in higher education: A case study of student engagement with e-tutorials using blended learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 18, 1-28. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearningpedagogy/outcomes.aspx
  34. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Department of Education.
  35. Meyer, K. A. (Ed.). (2014). Student Engagement Online: What Works and Why: ASHE Higher Education Report, Volume 40, Number 6. John Wiley & Sons.
  36. Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 15-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.001
  37. Natriello, G. (1984). Problems in the evaluation of students and student disengagement from secondary schools. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 17, 14-24.
  38. Owston, R., York, D., & Murtha, S. (2013). Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 38-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003
  39. Pankin, J., Roberts, J., & Savio, M. (2012). Blended Learning at MIT [White paper]. Retrieved from https://web.mit.edu/training/trainers/resources/blended_learning_at_mit.pdf
  40. Patton, M. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Sage Publication.
  41. Pike, G. R., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (2012). The mediating effects of student engagement on the relationships between academic disciplines and learning outcomes: An extension of Holland’s Theory. Research in Higher Education, 53, 550–575.
  42. Pintrich, P.R., & De Groot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
  43. Pintrich, P.R., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students’ motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In D.H. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Student Perceptions in the Classroom (pp. 149-179). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  44. Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101-108.
  45. Shank, J., & Bell, S. (2011). Blended librarianship. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 51(2), 105-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/rusq.51n2.105
  46. Shu, H., & Gu, X. (2018). Determining the differences between online and face-to-face student–group interactions in a blended learning course. The Internet and Higher Education, 39, 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.05.003
  47. Sinclair, B. (2009). The blended librarian in the learning commons: New skills for the blended library. College & Research Libraries News,70(9), 504-516. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.70.9.8250
  48. Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behaviour and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.
  49. Sriarunrasmee, J., Techataweewan, W., & Mebusaya, R. P. (2015). Blended learning supporting self-directed learning and communication skills of Srinakharinwirot University's first year students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1564-1569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.111
  50. Swanson, A. G., & Anderson, M. B. (1993). Educating medical students: Assessing change in medical education—the road to implementation (ACME—TRI report). Academic Medicine, 68(6 Suppl), S13–S48.
  51. Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. The higher education academy, 11(1), 1-15. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/studentengagementliteraturereview_1.pdf
  52. Vaughan, N. D. (2010). A blended community of inquiry approach: Linking student engagement and course redesign. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 60-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.007
  53. Virkus, S. (2003). Information literacy in Europe: A literature review. Information Research, 8(4), paper no. 159. Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/8-4/paper159.html
  54. Walton, G., Barker, J., Hepworth, M., & Stephens, D. (2007). Using online collaborative learning to enhance information literacy delivery in a Level 1 module: An evaluation. Journal of information literacy, 1(1), 13-30. https://doi.org/10.11645/1.1.5
  55. Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.