Increasing Student Engagement in Online Modules

By Georgie Crewdson

Updated May 28, 2026

Online learning fails quickly when students feel invisible. The problem is rarely the screen by itself. It is the absence of rhythm, contact and reassurance that tells students someone is watching the learning process and will intervene before they drift away.

Malan's action research study of a 7-week online accounting module is useful because it treats engagement as something staff can design, observe and adjust, not as a personality trait students either have or lack. The module ran during the COVID-19 outbreak, so the findings speak to a difficult teaching context: students were learning online while also dealing with uncertainty, anxiety and competing responsibilities.

The study organised engagement into five connected areas: social, cognitive, behavioural, collaborative and emotional. That framework is helpful for UK higher education teams because student comments about online learning often mix these issues together. A complaint about poor communication may also be a belonging issue. A comment about workload may also be a sign that the course structure is not helping students regulate their study.

What the study shows

The strongest message is that tutor presence matters. Students responded positively when the facilitator was visible, responsive and consistent. The course used weekly tasks, feedback, reminders and online spaces to keep students connected to the module. That combination made participation easier to sustain.

Social engagement needed more than a discussion board. The facilitator created a Facebook learning group, but the study also found that some mature students preferred the learning management system because they did not use social media. The practical lesson is not that every module needs a Facebook group. It is that students need more than one route into the learning community. A single channel will usually suit some students better than others.

Cognitive engagement depended on structure. Students watched videos, read textbook sections and completed activities in a clear sequence. Most students reported that the videos were useful, and many valued clear and timely feedback. That matters because online modules can easily become content repositories. Students need to know what to do first, how each activity connects to the next, and how to judge whether they are on track.

Behavioural engagement was supported through early prompts. The facilitator monitored weekly activity and emailed students who had not started tasks by the middle of the week. That is a small operational choice, but it changes the tone of the module. Instead of waiting for students to fail quietly, the course created a visible intervention point. For student experience teams, that is exactly the kind of design detail that can sit behind comments about support, communication and organisation.

Collaborative engagement worked best when group work had limits and structure. Groups were kept small, roles were clearer, and students had some flexibility in how they produced their final report. That gave students room to work in ways that suited the task, while still making individual contribution harder to hide.

Emotional engagement was the least visible but perhaps the most important. Students were asked to share their goals, and the facilitator watched for anxiety and uncertainty in the online spaces. Half of the students still reported anxiety about the course, which is a useful caution. Good online design does not remove pressure. It gives staff more chances to notice it early.

What universities can do with this

For online and blended modules, the first question should be: where will students experience staff presence? That does not mean staff being online all the time. It means a predictable pattern of contact, response and intervention. Weekly prompts, short feedback loops and named spaces for questions can make the course feel held together.

Second, teams should separate different engagement problems in student feedback. Comments about loneliness, unclear tasks, poor group work, late feedback and anxiety should not all be filed under "online learning". They point to different fixes. Student Voice teams can code these comments separately so programme teams know whether the sharper issue is course structure, staff responsiveness, peer connection or workload.

Third, online engagement should be reviewed before the module ends. Waiting for end-of-module feedback means the evidence arrives after the design choices have already done their work. Short in-term checks can ask whether students know what to do this week, where to ask for help, and whether they feel connected to anyone else on the course.

Limits of the evidence

This was a single accounting module, not a sector-wide study. It also took place in a highly unusual pandemic context. The exact tools and percentages should not be treated as universal benchmarks. The value is in the mechanism: online engagement improves when students experience visible teaching presence, clear sequencing, early intervention and more than one route into participation.

FAQ

Q: What is the main lesson for online module design?

A: Do not treat engagement as a student attitude problem. Design the module so students know what to do, where to ask for help, how to connect with peers, and when staff will step in if participation drops.

Q: Should every module create an informal social space?

A: Not necessarily. The important point is that students need a social route that feels accessible. Some cohorts may use WhatsApp or Teams; others may prefer the VLE. The risk is choosing one channel and assuming it works for everyone.

Q: How should student feedback teams analyse online learning comments?

A: Split them by the kind of engagement they describe. A comment about missing tutor contact is different from a comment about confusing weekly tasks or weak group coordination. That separation makes the evidence more useful for course teams.

References

[Source Paper] Malan, M. (2020) Engaging students in a fully online accounting degree: an action research study, Accounting Education, 29:4, 321-339,
DOI:10.1080/09639284.2020.1787855

Request a walkthrough

Book a free Student Voice Analytics demo

See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and reporting designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.

All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
Versioned outputs with TEF-ready reporting.
Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.

Prefer email? info@studentvoice.ai

UK-hosted · No public LLM APIs · Same-day turnaround