Skip to content
1981
Volume 14, Issue 2-3
  • ISSN: 1752-7066
  • E-ISSN: 1752-7074

Abstract

This article explores the use of a technological tool, the , in the music classroom, to support student engagement and motivation. An experimental, descriptive and correlational quantitative design was designed and done over a sample of 104 students at high school level. Pre- and post- measures of engagement and motivation indicators were collected and compared to a control group to explore and compare the impact of the use of the over these indicators. The research findings indicate a significant difference between the experimental and control group in relation to their levels of engagement and motivation, suggesting that the use of technological tools in the music classroom can have potential benefits over these indicators. The results also show that are the affective and emotional dimensions that have more incidence over the student engagement, suggesting that educational interventions aimed at improving student engagement and motivation should focus on nurturing their emotional engagement. However, the results from this study cannot be generalized due to the study’s limitations, which make evident the need for more experimental studies and further exploration of the impact of technology in student engagement and motivation indicators.

© 2022 (2021) Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/jmte_00039_1
2023-02-17
2026-04-21

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ainley, M.. ( 2012;), ‘ Students’ interest and engagement in classroom activities. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 283–302.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderman, E. M., and Patrick, H.. ( 2012;), ‘ Achievement goal theory, conceptualization of ability/intelligence, and classroom climate. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 173–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Appleton, J. J.,, Christenson, S. L., and Furlong, M. J.. ( 2008;), ‘ Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. ’, Psychology in the Schools, 45:5, pp. 369–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Appleton, J. J.,, Christenson, S. L.,, Kim, D., and Reschly, A. L.. ( 2006;), ‘ Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. ’, Journal of School Psychology, 44:5, pp. 427–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Aznar, I.,, Cáceres, M. P.,, Trujillo, J. M., and Romero, J. M.. ( 2019;), ‘ Mobile learning y tecnologías móviles emergentes en Educación Infantil: percepciones de los maestros en formación. ’, Revista ESPACIOS, 40:5, pp. 14–20, https://revistaespacios.com/a19v40n05/19400514.html.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bandura, A.. ( 2010;), ‘ Self-efficacy. ’, The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology, New York:: John Wiley & Sons;, pp. 1–3.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bandura, A.,, Barbaranelli, C.,, Caprara, G. V., and Pastorelli, C.. ( 2001;), ‘ Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. ’, Child Development, 72:1, pp. 187–206.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Belmonte, J. L.,, Sánchez, S. P.,, Cabrera, A. F., and Bújez, M. R. V.. ( 2020;), ‘ Escenarios innovadores en Educación Física: El trabajo de la expresión corporal y musical mediado por la robótica’ (‘Innovative scenarios in physical education: Body and musical expression work mediated by robotics’). , Retos, 38, pp. 567–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Berea, G. A. M.,, González, J. G., and Sampedro-Requena, B. E.. ( 2019;), ‘ El efecto de las TIC y redes sociales en estudiantes universitarios. ’, RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 22:2, pp. 153–76, https://www.redalyc.org/jatsRepo/3314/331460297009/html/index.html. Accessed 11 June 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Betts, J. E.,, Appleton, J. J.,, Reschly, A. L.,, Christenson, S. L., and Huebner, E. S.. ( 2010;), ‘ A study of the factorial invariance of the student engagement instrument (SEI): Results from middle and high school students. ’, School Psychology Quarterly, 25:2, pp. 84–93.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bravo, F. Á., and Guzmán, A.. ( 2012;), ‘ La robótica como un recurso para facilitar el aprendizaje y desarrollo de competencias generales. ’, Teoría de la Educación: Educación y Cultura en la Sociedad de la Información, 13:2, pp. 120–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Bronfenbrenner, U.. ( 1992;), ‘ Ecological systems theory. ’, in R. Vasta. (ed.), Six Theories of Child Development: Revised Formulations and Current Issues, London:: Jessica Kingsley Publishers;, pp. 187–249.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Calvillo Castro, A. J.. ( 2019;), ‘ Makey Makey y Scratch en el aula de música. ’, Madrid:: Instituto Nacional de Tecnologías Educativas y de Formación del Profesorado;.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Camilleri, P.. ( 2017;), ‘ Minding the gap: Proposing a teacher learning-training framework for the integration of robotics in primary schools. ’, Informatics in Education, 16:2, pp. 165–79.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Camilleri, M., and Camilleri, A.. ( n.d;.), ‘ The students’ perceptions of digital game-based learning. ’, CORE, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/93183923.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Carriedo Cayón, A.,, Méndez Giménez, A.,, Fernández Río, F. J., and Cecchini Estrada, J. A.. ( 2020;), ‘ Nuevas posibilidades y recursos para la enseñanza de la expresión corporal en educación física: internet y los retos virales. ’ (‘ New ways and resources for teaching body expression in physical education: The internet and viral challenges’). , Retos, 37, pp. 722–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Chaves, I.,, Esquivel, J.,, Jiménez, A. C., and Sánchez, H.. ( 2018;), ‘ Makey Makey and its possible application in libraries. ’, E-Ciencias de la Información, 8:1, pp. 190–205.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Chaves Arias, I.,, Esquivel Guillén, J.,, Jiménez Varela, A. C.,, Sánchez López, H., and Solera Thomas, L.. ( 2017;), ‘ Makey Makey y su aplicación en unidades de información. ’, E-Ciencias de La Información, 8:1, pp. 1–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Chen, X.,, Zou, D.,, Cheng, G., and Xie, H.. ( 2020;), ‘ Detecting latent topics and trends in educational technologies over four decades using structural topic modeling: A retrospective of all volumes of Computers & Education. ’, Computers & Education, 151, p. 103855.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Cheng, K. H.,, Liang, J. C., and Tsai, C. C.. ( 2015;), ‘ Examining the role of feedback messages in undergraduate students’ writing performance during an online peer assessment activity. ’, The Internet and Higher Education, 25, pp. 78–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Christenson, S. L.,, Reschly, A. L., and Wylie, C.. (eds) ( 2012), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Cleary, T. J., and Zimmerman, B. J.. ( 2012;), ‘ A cyclical self-regulatory account of student engagement: Theoretical foundations and applications. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 237–57.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Darr, C. W.. ( 2012;), ‘ Measuring student engagement: The development of a scale for formative use. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 707–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Elliot, A. J.. ( 1999;), ‘ Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. ’, Educational Psychologist, 34:3, pp. 169–89.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Eyles, A. M.. ( 2018;), ‘ Teachers’ perspectives about implementing ICT in music education. ’, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43:5, pp. 110–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Field, A.. ( 2013), Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage Publications;.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Field, A.. ( 2018), Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, , 5th ed.., Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage Publications;.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Finn, J. D.. ( 1989;), ‘ Withdrawing from school. ’, Review of Educational Research, 59:2, pp. 117–42.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Fokides, E., and Papoutsi, A.. ( 2019;), ‘ Using Makey Makey for teaching electricity to primary school students: A pilot study. ’, Education and Information Technologies, 25:2, pp. 1193–215.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Fonseca, D.,, Martí, N.,, Redondo, E.,, Navarro, I., and Sánchez, A.. ( 2014;), ‘ Relationship between student profile, tool use, participation, and academic performance with the use of augmented reality technology for visualized architecture models. ’, Computers in Human Behavior, 31, pp. 434–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Francis, J.. ( 2017;), ‘ The effects of technology on student motivation and engagement in classroom-based learning. ’, Ph.D. thesis, Armidale:: University of New England, https://dune.une.edu/theses/121/. Accessed 12 June 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Fredricks, J. A.,, Filsecker, M., and Lawson, M. A.. ( 2016;), ‘ Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. ’, Learning and Instruction, 43, pp. 1–4.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Fuchs, T., and Woessmann, L.. ( 2004;), ‘ What accounts for international differences in student performance?. ’, CESifo Working Paper No. 1235, Munich:: Center for Economic Studies and IFO Institute;, https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/18874. Accessed 12 June 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. García, J. M.. ( 2015;), ‘ Robótica Educativa. La programación como parte de un proceso educativo. ’, Revista de Educación a Distancia, 46, pp. 1–11.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Gembris, H., and Davidson, J. W.. ( 2002;), ‘ Environmental influences. ’, in R. Parncutt, and G. McPherson. (eds), The Science and Psychology of Music Performance, New York:: Oxford University Press;, pp. 17–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. González-García, G.,, Becerril Carbajal, M. L.,, Fonseca Munguía, A.,, González-García, G.,, Becerril Carbajal, M. L., and Fonseca Munguía, A.. ( 2018;), ‘ El engagement como factor de formación y desarrollo de la cultura emprendedora en estudiantes universitarios. ’, IE Revista de Investigación Educativa de La REDIECH, 9:17, pp. 103–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. González Martínez, J.,, Estebanell Minguell, M., and Peracaula Bosch, M.. ( 2018;), ‘ ¿Robots o programación? El concepto de Pensamiento Computacional y los futuros maestros. ’, Education in the Knowledge Society, 19:2, p. 29.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Gulek, J. C., and Demirtas, H.. ( 2005;), ‘ Learning with technology: The impact of laptop use on student achievement. ’, The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 3:2, pp. 4–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Hickey, M.. ( 2012), Music Outside the Lines: Ideas for Composing in K–12 Music Classrooms, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Hrastinski, S.. ( 2020;), ‘ Informed design for learning with digital technologies. ’, Interactive Learning Environments, pp. 1–8.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Juntunen, M. L.. ( 2017;), ‘ National assessment meets teacher autonomy: National assessment of learning outcomes in music in Finnish basic education. ’, Music Education Research, 19:1, pp. 1–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Kaschub, M., and Smith, J.. ( 2009), Minds on Music: Composition for Creative and Critical Thinking, Lanham, MD:: R&L Education;.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Klem, A. M., and Connell, J. P.. ( 2004;), ‘ Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. ’, Journal of School Health, 74:7, pp. 262–73, https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ743599. Accessed 12 June 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Lamborn, S.,, Newmann, F., and Wehlage, G.. ( 1992;), ‘ The significance and sources of student engagement. ’, Student Engagement and Achievement in American Secondary Schools, New York:: Teachers College Press;, pp. 1–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Lewis, M. D.. ( 2000;), ‘ The promise of dynamic systems approaches for an integrated account of human development. ’, Child Development, 71:1, pp. 36–43, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00116. Accessed 12 June 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. López-Gil, M., and Bravo, C. B.. ( 2019;), ‘ El perfil del profesorado en la Sociedad Red: reflexiones sobre las competencia digital de los y las estudiantes en Educación de la Universidad de Cádiz. ’, International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 11, pp. 83–100.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Lozano, P. A.,, Guerrero, B. A., and Gordillo, W. D.. ( 2016;), ‘ Scratch y Makey Makey: herramientas para fomentar habilidades del pensamiento de orden superior. ’, Redes de Ingeniería, 1:7, pp. 16–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Lozano, J., and Eduardo, J.. ( 2020;), ‘ Estilo interpersonal de apoyo a la autonomía y su relación con la motivación en estudiantes universitarios. ’, Barranquilla:: Universidad de la Costa;.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Marín-Marín, J.-A.,, Costa, R. S.,, Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J., and López-Belmonte, J.. ( 2020;), ‘ Makey Makey as an interactive robotic tool for high school students’ learning in multicultural contexts. ’, Education Sciences, 10:9, p. 239.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Maslow, A.. ( 1968;), ‘ Some educational implications of humanistic psychologies. ’, Harvard Educational Review, 38:4, pp. 685–96.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Mehdinezhad, V.. ( 2011;), ‘ First year students’ engagement at the university. ’, International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3:1, pp. 47–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Navarro, G. M.. ( 2017;), ‘ Tecnologías y nuevas tendencias en educación: aprender jugando. El caso de Kahoot. ’, Opción: Revista de Ciencias Humanas Y Sociales, 83, pp. 252–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Newmann, F. M.. ( 1992;), ‘ Classroom thoughtfulness. ’, in Student Engagement and Achievement in American Secondary Schools, New York:: Teachers College Press;, pp. 62–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Pekrun, R., and Linnenbrink-Garcia, L.. ( 2012;), ‘ Academic emotions and student engagement. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 259–82.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Rashid, T., and Asghar, H. M.. ( 2016;), ‘ Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. ’, Computers in Human Behavior, 63, pp. 604–12.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Reeve, J.. ( 2012;), ‘ A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 149–72.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Reschly, A. L., and Christenson, S. L.. ( 2006;), ‘ Prediction of dropout among students with mild disabilities. ’, Remedial and Special Education, 27:5, pp. 276–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Rodríguez-García, A. M.,, Reche, M. P. C., and García, S. A.. ( 2018;), ‘ La competencia digital del futuro docente: Análisis bibliométrico de la productividad científica indexada en Scopus’ (‘The digital competence of the future teacher: Bibliometric analysis of scientific productivity indexed in Scopus. ’), International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 10, pp. 317–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Rojas, J. R.. ( 2018;), ‘ Makey Música: una propuesta para hacer música en contextos educativos hospitalarios. ’, Nuevas Ideas en Informática Educativa, 14, pp. 595–99.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Russell, K. L., and Bray, S. R.. ( 2010;), ‘ Promoting self-determined motivation for exercise in cardiac rehabilitation: The role of autonomy support. ’, Rehabilitation Psychology, 55:1, pp. 74–80.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L.. ( 2000;), ‘ Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. ’, American Psychologist, 55:1, p. 68.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Sana, F.,, Weston, T., and Cepeda, N. J.. ( 2013;), ‘ Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. ’, Computers and Education, 62, pp. 24–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Sánchez García, A. B., and Galindo Villardón, P.. ( 2018;), ‘ Uso e Integración de las Tic en el Aula y Dificultades del Profesorado en Activo de cara a su integración. ’, Profesorado, Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 22:3, pp. 341–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Schunk, D. H., and Mullen, C. A.. ( 2012;), ‘ Self-efficacy as an engaged learner. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 219–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Serrano Pastor, R. M.. ( 2017;), ‘ Tecnología y educación musical obligatoria en España: referentes para la implementación de buenas prácticas. ’, Revista Electrónica Complutense de Investigación En Educación Musical, 14, pp. 153–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Skinner, E. A.,, Kindermann, T. A.,, Connell, J. P., and Wellborn, J. G.. ( 2009;), ‘ Engagement and disaffection as organizational constructs in the dynamics of motivational development. ’, in K. R. Wenzel, and A. Wigfield. (eds), Handbook of Motivation at School, New York:: Routledge;, pp. 223–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Skinner, E. A.,, Kindermann, T. A., and Furrer, C. J.. ( 2008;), ‘ A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection. ’, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69:3, pp. 493–525.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Trimmel, M., and Bachmann, J.. ( 2004;), ‘ Cognitive, social, motivational and health aspects of students in laptop classrooms. ’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20:2, pp. 151–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Vivas, L., and Sáez, J. M.. ( 2019;), ‘ Integración de la robótica educativa en Educación Primaria. ’, Relatec, 18:1, pp. 108–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Voelkl, K. E.. ( 2012;), ‘ School identification. ’, in S. L. Christenson,, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. (eds), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;, pp. 193–218.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Webster, P. R.. ( 2016;), ‘ Towards pedagogies of revision: Guiding a student’s music composition. ’, in O. Odena. (ed.), Musical Creativity: Insights from Music Education Research, Abingdon:: Routledge;, pp. 115–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Wellborn, J. G.. ( 1992;), ‘ Engaged and disaffected action: The conceptualization and measurement of motivation in the academic domain. ’, Dissertation Abstracts International, 53:2B, p. 1099.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Yu-mei, D.. ( 2017;), ‘ The practical research on robot curriculum of maker education in primary school. ’, Science Journal of Business and Management, 5:3, p. 105.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Zimmerman, B. J., and Schunk, D. H.. ( 2012), Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theory, Research, and Practice, New York:: Springer Science and Business Media;.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Serra-Marín, Laura, and Berbel-Gómez, Noemy. ( 2022 [2021];), ‘ The impact of the use of technology on student engagement and motivation in the music classroom. ’, Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 14:2&3, pp. 157–78, https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte_00039_1
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/jmte_00039_1
Loading
The impact of the use of technology on student engagement and motivation in the music classroom
Journal of Music, Technology & Education 14, 157 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte_00039_1
/content/journals/10.1386/jmte_00039_1
/content/journals/10.1386/jmte_00039_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): academic performance; collaborative learning; ICTs; innovation; meaningful learning; music education; robotics

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test