Development and application of a learning enjoyment scale for pedagogical activities

Tarig Merghani; Rasha Babiker; Azza O. Alawad

doi:10.12688/f1000research.147393.2

Home Browse Development and application of a learning enjoyment scale for pedagogical...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Data Note

Revised

Development and application of a learning enjoyment scale for pedagogical activities

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

Tarig Merghani ¹, Rasha Babiker¹, Azza O. Alawad²

PUBLISHED 31 Jul 2024

Author details Author details

¹ Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates
² Physiology, Al-Neelain University, Khartoum, Sudan

Tarig Merghani
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Rasha Babiker
Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Azza O. Alawad
Roles: Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

The impact of learning enjoyment on motivation, enthusiasm, and overall learning experiences is significant. Previous studies, lacking an unbiased tool for measuring enjoyment and confronting various influencing factors, produced conflicting results regarding enjoyment levels in different instructional methods. Hence, we developed a learning enjoyment scale for evaluating both active and passive educational activities. We applied the developed scale to 112 first-year medical and dental students to assess their enjoyment during didactic physiology lectures and explored possible associated factors. Within this data note, we present students’ responses to the developed LES. The LES encompasses six dimensions: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, concentration, and enjoyment. Students provided ratings for each dimension on a five-point Likert scale, spanning from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The cumulative scores across the six dimensions range from a minimum of 6 to a maximum of 30. These total scores can be categorized as excellent (> 24), acceptable (18-24), or low (< 18). The second section of the dataset examines specific factors influencing overall enjoyment, such as teacher proficiency, topic difficulty, active student participation, objectives fulfillment, low stress levels, and self-perceived acquisition of skills. In addition to objective measurement of students’ enjoyment level, the LES can be utilized for quantitative cross-comparisons between different teaching activities. By employing this dataset, we will undertake an analysis to determine the internal consistency of the Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES), with the anticipation that the outcomes will be published in another venue.

Keywords

Pedagogical Activities, Learning Enjoyment Scale, Teaching Methods, Didactic Lectures, Teacher Proficiency

Corresponding author: Tarig Merghani

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2024 Merghani T et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Merghani T, Babiker R and O. Alawad A. Development and application of a learning enjoyment scale for pedagogical activities [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2024, 13:273 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.147393.2) First published: 15 Apr 2024, 13:273 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.147393.1) Latest published: 31 Jul 2024, 13:273 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.147393.2)

Revised Amendments from Version 1

In the revised version we updated the introduction, acknowledged previous efforts of educators in measurement of enjoyment level and clearly stated the objectives of our study. In the methods we explained the rationale of using Likert scale and the cutoff points used for categorization of enjoyment level into three categories, excellent, acceptable and low.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Tarig Fadelelmoula
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Mohi Eldin Magzoub

Introduction

The ongoing discourse on the effectiveness of teacher-centred learning approaches (passive instruction) versus student-centred learning methods (active instruction) persists, despite numerous studies conducted over the past three decades. Traditional lectures have been consistently criticized for their perceived lack of student engagement, largely due to their reliance on passive one-way information delivery. Students often view didactic lectures as dull or ineffective¹^–³ when compared to the active learning approaches. Consequently, many educators have embraced strategies such as incorporating real-life scenarios,⁴ introducing games,⁵ utilizing technology,⁶ or integrating problem-solving elements⁷ to enhance the enjoyability of their lectures. However, the challenge persists, as there are no universally clear guidelines on how to structure lectures that are both educational and enjoyable.

Student Enjoyment is a state of psychological happiness experienced during learning. It is nicely defined by Hartley as the pleasant emotional state of the learner that develops during an educational activity due to experiencing a positive situation that motivates the learner to complete the task to persevere this feeling.⁸ Although it is different from engagement, satisfaction or motivation, the combination contributes to a positive and effective learning atmosphere, fostering academic success and passion for knowledge.⁹^,¹⁰

Students’ enjoyment may be influenced by various factors, including but not limited to the instructor’s skill, the nature of the topic, and the educational environment. Furthermore, the diverse personalities and learning styles of students all contribute to and impact the level of enjoyment experienced during a teaching activity.¹¹^–¹³

Due to the intricate nature of these variables and the significance of enjoyment in the learning process, there is a pressing need for an objective measurement tool to gauge students’ enjoyment across various teaching activities. Such a tool would not only streamline the assessment of diverse teaching methods but also aid in pinpointing the factors contributing to fluctuations in enjoyment levels within the same teaching method when presented by different instructors or for different subjects by the same faculty. Many educators tried different methods for measuring level of enjoyment during learning activities, ranging from a single question rating (for example from 0 to 6),¹⁴ to different types of questionnaires such as satisfaction questionnaire with open ended questions,¹⁵^,¹⁶ adapted items from Achievement Emotions Questionnaire¹⁷ and researcher-prepared questionnaire based on enjoyment indicators.¹⁸ In this study, our primary objective is to develop a comprehensive learning enjoyment scale (LES) for the evaluation of both active and passive teaching activities. We applied the developed scale to 112 first-year medical and dental students, evaluating their enjoyment during didactic Physiology lectures and investigating potential associated factors. This data note presents the students’ responses to the developed LES. Our newly created scale, coupled with the associated dataset,¹ provides valuable insights into the nuances of student enjoyment, offering a tool that transcends the conventional dichotomy of teaching methods and delves into the factors shaping students’ learning experiences.

Methods

We developed the Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES) as a comprehensive and objective tool for measuring students’ enjoyment in the learning process, Figure 1.¹ The scale items are strategically aligned with the major categories of Bloom’s Taxonomy, emphasizing cognitive knowledge and affective attitude. Furthermore, the third domain, psychomotor skills, is partially assessed in the second section of the scale, highlighting its role as part of the overall enjoyment attributes. The LES first section consists of six items: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, concentration, and enjoyment. Students are instructed to rate each item on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 5 (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = unsure, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree). The minimum and total scores across the six items amount to 6 and 30, respectively. An excellent score is defined as above 80% (25-30), an acceptable score falls within the range of 60-80% (18-24), and a low score is considered less than 60% (<18). The 5-Likert scale selection and categorization into excellent, acceptable, and low is justified by its ability to provide clear interpretations of students’ enjoyment levels. In addition, the thresholds (60% and 80%) align with educational standards commonly used to assess performance and satisfaction levels in various academic contexts.

Figure 1. The learning enjoyment scale.

The second section of the LES evaluates the impact of various factors on students’ enjoyment. These factors encompass the teacher’s talent or proficiency, the complexity of the topic, student participation, objectives fulfillment, perceived stress levels, and the development of skills. Through direct analysis, the contribution of each factor to the overall LES is determined, offering a detailed understanding of the specific elements influencing students’ enjoyment during the learning process. The scoring system of the LES questionnaire aims to provide a quantitative assessment of the multifaceted aspects contributing to students’ enjoyment in educational settings.

The provided dataset represents students’ responses to the items of the developed scale. The data was collected from first-year undergraduate medical and dental students during two physiology lectures. We selected first-year students as they are newcomers to university education, suggesting a lack of established preferences for specific instructional methods at this early stage. A total of 112 university students, age ≥ 18 y contributed, with an overall participation rate of 68%. Prior to completing the questionnaire, students provided written informed consent to participate. The University Research Ethics Committee (RAKMHSU-HEC) granted approval for the study on 15^th November 2023, under the reference number “HEC-10-2023/24-F-M.”

Several limitations need to be taken into consideration when interpreting the results of this study. Firstly, the exclusive inclusion of first-year students raises the possibility that their perceptions may differ from those of students in later academic years. Additionally, with a response rate of 68%, the potential impact of non-participating students’ perspectives on the results remains uncertain. Furthermore, the preference for didactic lectures may be influenced by the different learning styles of the students, which are not shown in this dataset.¹³ Lastly, additional investigation is warranted by applying this scale to different subjects, employing varied teaching methods, and exploring diverse geographic locations to enhance the generalizability of the scale. In conclusion, we believe that our scale contributes significantly to the medical education field by addressing the gap in measuring student enjoyment in educational contexts. Our full manuscript that contains enhanced findings, analysis and discussion will be published in another venue.

Ethics and consent

The University Research Ethics Committee (RAKMHSU-HEC) granted approval for the study on 15^th November 2023, under the reference number “HEC-10-2023/24-F-M.”

Students provided written informed consent to participate.

Data availability

Underlying data

Zenodo: Development and Application of a Learning Enjoyment Scale for Pedagogical Activities, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10526239.¹⁹

This project contains the following underlying data:

- Students’ responses to the developed LES: To assess students’ enjoyment during didactic lectures and explore possible associated factors.

Extended data

Zenodo: Development and Application of a Learning Enjoyment Scale for Pedagogical Activities, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10526239.¹⁹

This project contains the following extended data:

- Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES): Developed for evaluating both active and passive educational activities.

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).

References

1. Alamoudi AA, Al Shawwa LA, Gad H, et al.: Team-based learning versus traditional didactic lectures in teaching clinical biochemistry at King Abdulaziz University; learning outcomes and student satisfaction. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2021; 49: 546–559. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
2. Susanto T, Rasni H, Susumaningrum LA: The Comparing of Problem-Based Learning and Lecture-Based Learning on Students’ Learning Outcomes and Satisfaction for a Family Health Nursing Course. J. Keperawatan Padjadjaran. 2022; 10(2): 134–139. Publisher Full Text
3. Imran M, Halawa TF, Baig M, et al.: Team-based learning versus interactive lecture in achieving learning outcomes and improving clinical reasoning skills: a randomized crossover study. BMC Med. Educ. 2022; 22(1): 348. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
4. Narayanan SN, Merghani TH: Real-life scenario blended teaching approach for nurturing inquisitive learning of central nervous system in medical students. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2023; 47(1): 124–138. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
5. Narayanan SN, Ahmed I, Saherawala B, et al.: Appraisal of a novel pedagogical approach to demonstrating neuromuscular transmission to medical students. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2021 Sep 1; 45(3): 580–588. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
6. Premkumar K, Coupal C: Rules of engagement-12 tips for successful use of “clickers” in the classroom. Med. Teach. 2008; 30(2): 146–149. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
7. Alaagib NA, Musa OA, Saeed AM: Comparison of the effectiveness of lectures based on problems and traditional lectures in physiology teaching in Sudan. BMC Med. Educ. 2019 Sep 23; 19(1): 365. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
8. Hartley D: Excellence and enjoyment: The logic of a ‘contradiction’. Br. J. Educ. Stud. 2006; 54(1): 3–14. Publisher Full Text
9. Kassab SE, Taylor D, Hamdy H: Student engagement in health professions education: AMEE Guide No. 152. Med. Teach. 2023 Sep; 45(9): 949–965. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
10. Xiaoming X, Bos NA, Hongbin W: The relationship between medical student engagement in the provision of the school’s education programme and learning outcomes. Med. Teach. 2022; 44(8): 900–906. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
11. Gifford H, Varatharaj A: The ELEPHANT criteria in medical education: can medical education be fun? Med. Teach. 2010; 32(3): 195–197. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
12. Deslauriers L, McCarty LS, Miller K, et al.: Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2019; 116(39): 19251–19257. Publisher Full Text
13. Buşan AM: Learning styles of medical students - implications in education. Curr. Health Sci. J. 2014; 40(2): 104–110. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
14. Griffee DT: Connecting Theory to Practice: Evaluating a Brain-based Writing Curriculum. Learning Assistance Review. 2007; 12(1): 17–27.
15. Marín-Vinuesa LM, Rojas-García P: Expected Usefulness of Interactive Learning Platforms and Academic Sustainability Performance: The Moderator Role of Student Enjoyment. Sustainability. 2024; 16(9): 3630. Publisher Full Text
16. Dehghan S, Horan EM, Frome G: Investigating the Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Learning and Enjoyment in an Organic Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2022; 99(7): 2512–2519. Publisher Full Text
17. Bieleke M, Gogol K, Goetz T, et al.: The AEQ-S: a short version of the achievement emotions questionnaire. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2021; 65: 101940. Publisher Full Text
18. Mirawati M, Sikarni W. Description of Student Attitudes: Enjoyment in Learning Physics and Interest in More Time Studying Physics.Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed [Internet].2023 Mar. 31 [cited 2024 Jul.24]; 4(1): 1–6. Publisher Full Text https://cahaya-ic.com/index.php/SJPE/article/view/490
19. Merghani T, Babiker R, Alawad A: Development and Application of a Learning Enjoyment Scale for Pedagogical Activities. [dataset]. Zenodo. 2024. Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 15 Apr 2024

Author details Author details

¹ Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates
² Physiology, Al-Neelain University, Khartoum, Sudan

Tarig Merghani
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Rasha Babiker
Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Azza O. Alawad
Roles: Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 31 Jul 2024, 13:273

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.147393.2

version 1

Published: 15 Apr 2024, 13:273

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.147393.1

© 2024 Merghani T et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Merghani T, Babiker R and O. Alawad A. Development and application of a learning enjoyment scale for pedagogical activities [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2024, 13:273 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.147393.2)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 2

VERSION 2

PUBLISHED 31 Jul 2024

Revised

Views

Reviewer Report 09 Sep 2024

Mohi Eldin Magzoub, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169714.r309317

The responses are ... Continue reading

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 15 Apr 2024

Views

Reviewer Report 22 Jul 2024

Mohi Eldin Magzoub, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.161586.r300476

This study introduced a new instrument called the Learning Enjoyment Scale, which is used to assess the degree of enjoyment experienced by students. It is derived from Bloom's taxonomy. The scale encompasses the majority of the taxonomy categories on the knowledge domain and few items on the affective domain.
Nevertheless, the scale primarily serves to categorize learning objectives in order to facilitate course design and direct assessment. Thus, it aims to enhance the overall efficacy of the learning and teaching process, and not directly put an emphasis on enjoyment.
Although enjoyment is not explicitly stated as an objective in the affective domain, it can be seen as a constituent of favorable attitudes and values towards learning. The affective domain encompasses various categories, such as perceiving events, reacting to phenomena, assigning value, organizing, and characterizing based on a set of values. Enjoyment can be understood as the process of appreciating and reacting to various experiences, where the active involvement and curiosity of students in educational tasks play a significant role.
There are only four items in the scale that directly focus on enjoyment and satisfaction, which are questions 5, 6, 11, and 12.
Other learning theories might be explored that nest suit student enjoyment such as experiential l learning self-determination, and constructivism theories.
Another issue with the methodology is the lack of clear objectives. It is unclear whether the goal is to validate the scale by assessing reliability and validity, or to present the performance of students based on the items of the scale. The objectives must be explicitly stated and appropriately included into this section.
Another concern is how the cut-off points for determining excellence, poor, and low are established.
The utilization of the five-point Likert scale is not suitable in this context. The scale must adhere to a linear format instead than a categorized format. For example, a value of 3 for "unsure" indicates that it cannot be decided whether it is high or low. An optimal approach would be to employ a rating scale consisting of either 5 or 10 points, including a spectrum from poor to excellent. Subsequently, a composite score can be calculated based on this scale.

Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?

Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: This article aims at developing a useful tool for measuring student engagement and satisfaction

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 31 Jul 2024

Tarig Merghani, Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates

31 Jul 2024

Author Response
Thank you very much for the comprehensive review and valuable comments. We have carefully considered the points you raised and prepared an updated version of our data note (version 2). ... Continue reading
Thank you very much for the comprehensive review and valuable comments. We have carefully considered the points you raised and prepared an updated version of our data note (version 2). Please, find our detailed responses to the raised points below.

Student Enjoyment is a state of psychological happiness experienced during learning. It is nicely defined by Hartley as the pleasant emotional state of the learner that develops during an educational activity due to experiencing a positive situation that motivates the learner to complete the task to persevere this feeling (1). It is different from engagement, satisfaction or motivation. Since it is subjective feeling, there is no widely accepted scale for assessing enjoyment. Authors tried different methods ranging from a single question rating (for example from 0 to 6) (2), to different types of questionnaires such as satisfaction questionnaire with open ended questions (3, 4), adapted items from Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (5) and researcher-prepared questionnaire based on enjoyment indicators (6). In our scale, we utilized direct questions to measure enjoyment, and we added other questions to assess the students’ perception of different domains of learning (knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis) which are known to be influenced by enjoyment (Q1 to 6). Other questions (Q7 to 12) are not intended to measure the enjoyment, they are intended to study certain factors that are known to influence enjoyment. The primary objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive learning enjoyment scale for the evaluation of both active and passive teaching activities. We sought to apply this scale objectively to measure the enjoyment scores of Physiology lectures and investigate associated factors. As suggested by the reviewer, we clearly mentioned the objectives of our study in the updated version of the article.

The suggestion to explore other learning theories like experiential learning, self-determination theory, and constructivism is well-taken. We plan to incorporate discussions on how these theories could complement our findings on student enjoyment and educational outcomes in future studies. We also have the idea to revise and update our scale in the future based on feedback from reviewers and valuable suggestions from colleagues.

The Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES) employs a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) across its six dimensions, yielding total scores ranging from 6 to 30. The 80% represents the fourth option of the Likert scale (agree = 4), as 4/5 x 100%= 80%. Therefore, scores above 80% generally indicate that all responses are agree or above. The 60% represents the third option (unsure= 3), as 3/5 x 100%= 60%. Therefore, scores below 60% generally indicate that all the responses are disagree or below. The 5-Likert scale selection and categorization into excellent, acceptable, and low is justified by its ability to provide clear interpretations of students' enjoyment levels. In addition, the thresholds (60% and 80%) align with educational standards commonly used to assess performance and satisfaction levels in various academic contexts.

In conclusion, we believe that our scale contributes significantly to the medical education field by addressing the gap in measuring student enjoyment in educational contexts. We appreciate the opportunity to revise our manuscript based on the reviewer's valuable feedback and look forward to sharing our full manuscript that contains enhanced findings, analysis and discussion with the academic community in the near future.

Thank you once again for your thorough evaluation and insightful comments.

Best regards,

Tarig Merghani

References:

Hartley D. Excellence and enjoyment: The logic of a ‘contradiction’. British Journal of Educational Studies 2006; 54(1):3-14.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00331.x

Griffee DT. Connecting Theory to Practice: Evaluating a Brain-based Writing Curriculum. Learning Assistance Review 2007;12(1):17-27

Marín-Vinuesa LM, Rojas-García P. Expected Usefulness of Interactive Learning Platforms and Academic Sustainability Performance: The Moderator Role of Student Enjoyment. Sustainability. 2024; 16(9):3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093630

Dehghan S, Horan EM, Frome G. Investigating the Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Learning and Enjoyment in an Organic Chemistry Course. Journal of Chemical Education 2022; 99(7):2512-2519. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01104

Bieleke M, Gogol K, Goetz T, Daniels L, Pekrun R. The AEQ-S: a short version of the achievement emotions questionnaire. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2021; 65:101940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101940

Mirawati M, Sikarni W. Description of Student Attitudes: Enjoyment in Learning Physics and Interest in More Time Studying Physics. Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed [Internet]. 2023 Mar.31 [cited 2024Jul.24];4(1):1-. Available from: https://cahaya-ic.com/index.php/SJPE/article/view/490
Thank you very much for the comprehensive review and valuable comments. We have carefully considered the points you raised and prepared an updated version of our data note (version 2). Please, find our detailed responses to the raised points below.

Student Enjoyment is a state of psychological happiness experienced during learning. It is nicely defined by Hartley as the pleasant emotional state of the learner that develops during an educational activity due to experiencing a positive situation that motivates the learner to complete the task to persevere this feeling (1). It is different from engagement, satisfaction or motivation. Since it is subjective feeling, there is no widely accepted scale for assessing enjoyment. Authors tried different methods ranging from a single question rating (for example from 0 to 6) (2), to different types of questionnaires such as satisfaction questionnaire with open ended questions (3, 4), adapted items from Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (5) and researcher-prepared questionnaire based on enjoyment indicators (6). In our scale, we utilized direct questions to measure enjoyment, and we added other questions to assess the students’ perception of different domains of learning (knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis) which are known to be influenced by enjoyment (Q1 to 6). Other questions (Q7 to 12) are not intended to measure the enjoyment, they are intended to study certain factors that are known to influence enjoyment. The primary objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive learning enjoyment scale for the evaluation of both active and passive teaching activities. We sought to apply this scale objectively to measure the enjoyment scores of Physiology lectures and investigate associated factors. As suggested by the reviewer, we clearly mentioned the objectives of our study in the updated version of the article.

The suggestion to explore other learning theories like experiential learning, self-determination theory, and constructivism is well-taken. We plan to incorporate discussions on how these theories could complement our findings on student enjoyment and educational outcomes in future studies. We also have the idea to revise and update our scale in the future based on feedback from reviewers and valuable suggestions from colleagues.

The Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES) employs a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) across its six dimensions, yielding total scores ranging from 6 to 30. The 80% represents the fourth option of the Likert scale (agree = 4), as 4/5 x 100%= 80%. Therefore, scores above 80% generally indicate that all responses are agree or above. The 60% represents the third option (unsure= 3), as 3/5 x 100%= 60%. Therefore, scores below 60% generally indicate that all the responses are disagree or below. The 5-Likert scale selection and categorization into excellent, acceptable, and low is justified by its ability to provide clear interpretations of students' enjoyment levels. In addition, the thresholds (60% and 80%) align with educational standards commonly used to assess performance and satisfaction levels in various academic contexts.

In conclusion, we believe that our scale contributes significantly to the medical education field by addressing the gap in measuring student enjoyment in educational contexts. We appreciate the opportunity to revise our manuscript based on the reviewer's valuable feedback and look forward to sharing our full manuscript that contains enhanced findings, analysis and discussion with the academic community in the near future.

Thank you once again for your thorough evaluation and insightful comments.

Best regards,

Tarig Merghani

References:

Hartley D. Excellence and enjoyment: The logic of a ‘contradiction’. British Journal of Educational Studies 2006; 54(1):3-14.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00331.x

Griffee DT. Connecting Theory to Practice: Evaluating a Brain-based Writing Curriculum. Learning Assistance Review 2007;12(1):17-27

Marín-Vinuesa LM, Rojas-García P. Expected Usefulness of Interactive Learning Platforms and Academic Sustainability Performance: The Moderator Role of Student Enjoyment. Sustainability. 2024; 16(9):3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093630

Dehghan S, Horan EM, Frome G. Investigating the Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Learning and Enjoyment in an Organic Chemistry Course. Journal of Chemical Education 2022; 99(7):2512-2519. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01104

Bieleke M, Gogol K, Goetz T, Daniels L, Pekrun R. The AEQ-S: a short version of the achievement emotions questionnaire. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2021; 65:101940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101940

Mirawati M, Sikarni W. Description of Student Attitudes: Enjoyment in Learning Physics and Interest in More Time Studying Physics. Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed [Internet]. 2023 Mar.31 [cited 2024Jul.24];4(1):1-. Available from: https://cahaya-ic.com/index.php/SJPE/article/view/490
Competing Interests: I have no competing interests Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 31 Jul 2024

Tarig Merghani, Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates

31 Jul 2024

Author Response
Thank you very much for the comprehensive review and valuable comments. We have carefully considered the points you raised and prepared an updated version of our data note (version 2). ... Continue reading
Thank you very much for the comprehensive review and valuable comments. We have carefully considered the points you raised and prepared an updated version of our data note (version 2). Please, find our detailed responses to the raised points below.

Student Enjoyment is a state of psychological happiness experienced during learning. It is nicely defined by Hartley as the pleasant emotional state of the learner that develops during an educational activity due to experiencing a positive situation that motivates the learner to complete the task to persevere this feeling (1). It is different from engagement, satisfaction or motivation. Since it is subjective feeling, there is no widely accepted scale for assessing enjoyment. Authors tried different methods ranging from a single question rating (for example from 0 to 6) (2), to different types of questionnaires such as satisfaction questionnaire with open ended questions (3, 4), adapted items from Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (5) and researcher-prepared questionnaire based on enjoyment indicators (6). In our scale, we utilized direct questions to measure enjoyment, and we added other questions to assess the students’ perception of different domains of learning (knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis) which are known to be influenced by enjoyment (Q1 to 6). Other questions (Q7 to 12) are not intended to measure the enjoyment, they are intended to study certain factors that are known to influence enjoyment. The primary objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive learning enjoyment scale for the evaluation of both active and passive teaching activities. We sought to apply this scale objectively to measure the enjoyment scores of Physiology lectures and investigate associated factors. As suggested by the reviewer, we clearly mentioned the objectives of our study in the updated version of the article.

The suggestion to explore other learning theories like experiential learning, self-determination theory, and constructivism is well-taken. We plan to incorporate discussions on how these theories could complement our findings on student enjoyment and educational outcomes in future studies. We also have the idea to revise and update our scale in the future based on feedback from reviewers and valuable suggestions from colleagues.

The Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES) employs a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) across its six dimensions, yielding total scores ranging from 6 to 30. The 80% represents the fourth option of the Likert scale (agree = 4), as 4/5 x 100%= 80%. Therefore, scores above 80% generally indicate that all responses are agree or above. The 60% represents the third option (unsure= 3), as 3/5 x 100%= 60%. Therefore, scores below 60% generally indicate that all the responses are disagree or below. The 5-Likert scale selection and categorization into excellent, acceptable, and low is justified by its ability to provide clear interpretations of students' enjoyment levels. In addition, the thresholds (60% and 80%) align with educational standards commonly used to assess performance and satisfaction levels in various academic contexts.

In conclusion, we believe that our scale contributes significantly to the medical education field by addressing the gap in measuring student enjoyment in educational contexts. We appreciate the opportunity to revise our manuscript based on the reviewer's valuable feedback and look forward to sharing our full manuscript that contains enhanced findings, analysis and discussion with the academic community in the near future.

Thank you once again for your thorough evaluation and insightful comments.

Best regards,

Tarig Merghani

References:

Hartley D. Excellence and enjoyment: The logic of a ‘contradiction’. British Journal of Educational Studies 2006; 54(1):3-14.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00331.x

Griffee DT. Connecting Theory to Practice: Evaluating a Brain-based Writing Curriculum. Learning Assistance Review 2007;12(1):17-27

Marín-Vinuesa LM, Rojas-García P. Expected Usefulness of Interactive Learning Platforms and Academic Sustainability Performance: The Moderator Role of Student Enjoyment. Sustainability. 2024; 16(9):3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093630

Dehghan S, Horan EM, Frome G. Investigating the Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Learning and Enjoyment in an Organic Chemistry Course. Journal of Chemical Education 2022; 99(7):2512-2519. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01104

Bieleke M, Gogol K, Goetz T, Daniels L, Pekrun R. The AEQ-S: a short version of the achievement emotions questionnaire. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2021; 65:101940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101940

Mirawati M, Sikarni W. Description of Student Attitudes: Enjoyment in Learning Physics and Interest in More Time Studying Physics. Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed [Internet]. 2023 Mar.31 [cited 2024Jul.24];4(1):1-. Available from: https://cahaya-ic.com/index.php/SJPE/article/view/490
Thank you very much for the comprehensive review and valuable comments. We have carefully considered the points you raised and prepared an updated version of our data note (version 2). Please, find our detailed responses to the raised points below.

Student Enjoyment is a state of psychological happiness experienced during learning. It is nicely defined by Hartley as the pleasant emotional state of the learner that develops during an educational activity due to experiencing a positive situation that motivates the learner to complete the task to persevere this feeling (1). It is different from engagement, satisfaction or motivation. Since it is subjective feeling, there is no widely accepted scale for assessing enjoyment. Authors tried different methods ranging from a single question rating (for example from 0 to 6) (2), to different types of questionnaires such as satisfaction questionnaire with open ended questions (3, 4), adapted items from Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (5) and researcher-prepared questionnaire based on enjoyment indicators (6). In our scale, we utilized direct questions to measure enjoyment, and we added other questions to assess the students’ perception of different domains of learning (knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis) which are known to be influenced by enjoyment (Q1 to 6). Other questions (Q7 to 12) are not intended to measure the enjoyment, they are intended to study certain factors that are known to influence enjoyment. The primary objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive learning enjoyment scale for the evaluation of both active and passive teaching activities. We sought to apply this scale objectively to measure the enjoyment scores of Physiology lectures and investigate associated factors. As suggested by the reviewer, we clearly mentioned the objectives of our study in the updated version of the article.

The suggestion to explore other learning theories like experiential learning, self-determination theory, and constructivism is well-taken. We plan to incorporate discussions on how these theories could complement our findings on student enjoyment and educational outcomes in future studies. We also have the idea to revise and update our scale in the future based on feedback from reviewers and valuable suggestions from colleagues.

The Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES) employs a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) across its six dimensions, yielding total scores ranging from 6 to 30. The 80% represents the fourth option of the Likert scale (agree = 4), as 4/5 x 100%= 80%. Therefore, scores above 80% generally indicate that all responses are agree or above. The 60% represents the third option (unsure= 3), as 3/5 x 100%= 60%. Therefore, scores below 60% generally indicate that all the responses are disagree or below. The 5-Likert scale selection and categorization into excellent, acceptable, and low is justified by its ability to provide clear interpretations of students' enjoyment levels. In addition, the thresholds (60% and 80%) align with educational standards commonly used to assess performance and satisfaction levels in various academic contexts.

In conclusion, we believe that our scale contributes significantly to the medical education field by addressing the gap in measuring student enjoyment in educational contexts. We appreciate the opportunity to revise our manuscript based on the reviewer's valuable feedback and look forward to sharing our full manuscript that contains enhanced findings, analysis and discussion with the academic community in the near future.

Thank you once again for your thorough evaluation and insightful comments.

Best regards,

Tarig Merghani

References:

Hartley D. Excellence and enjoyment: The logic of a ‘contradiction’. British Journal of Educational Studies 2006; 54(1):3-14.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00331.x

Griffee DT. Connecting Theory to Practice: Evaluating a Brain-based Writing Curriculum. Learning Assistance Review 2007;12(1):17-27

Marín-Vinuesa LM, Rojas-García P. Expected Usefulness of Interactive Learning Platforms and Academic Sustainability Performance: The Moderator Role of Student Enjoyment. Sustainability. 2024; 16(9):3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093630

Dehghan S, Horan EM, Frome G. Investigating the Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Learning and Enjoyment in an Organic Chemistry Course. Journal of Chemical Education 2022; 99(7):2512-2519. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01104

Bieleke M, Gogol K, Goetz T, Daniels L, Pekrun R. The AEQ-S: a short version of the achievement emotions questionnaire. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2021; 65:101940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101940

Mirawati M, Sikarni W. Description of Student Attitudes: Enjoyment in Learning Physics and Interest in More Time Studying Physics. Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed [Internet]. 2023 Mar.31 [cited 2024Jul.24];4(1):1-. Available from: https://cahaya-ic.com/index.php/SJPE/article/view/490
Competing Interests: I have no competing interests Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 17 May 2024

Tarig Fadelelmoula, National University of Science and Technology, Muscat, Oman

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.161586.r268529

Existing student learning enjoyment evaluation scales are not sufficiently tested. The objective of this project is to develop and apply a new learning enjoyment scale for evaluating students’ enjoyment during different pedagogy sessions. The researchers designed the tool in accordance with Bloom's taxonomy. The tool had two sections: (1) A six-domain Likert scale, (2) examining specific factors influencing overall enjoyment, such as teacher proficiency, topic difficulty, active student participation, objectives fulfillment, low stress levels, and self-perceived acquisition of skills. The scale was implemented in year 1 medical and dental students. The initial analysis of data reflected the internal consistency of the scale; however, the results are limited by the low response rate, the confinement to didactic lectures, and student level. Further research is needed to include a larger group of students, check the reliability of the scale, and test it in student centered pedagogies.

Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?

Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

References

1. Oliveira W, Hamari J, Joaquim S, Toda A, et al.: The effects of personalized gamification on students’ flow experience, motivation, and enjoyment. Smart Learning Environments. 2022; 9 (1). Publisher Full Text
2. H, Joanna J:Elżbieta: THE EFFECT OF ENJOYMENT ON LEARNING. 2018. 508-514 Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Pulmonology, Physiology, Medical Education, Healthcare Simulation

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 11 Jun 2024

Tarig Merghani, Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates

11 Jun 2024

Author Response

Many thanks for the review comments. We appreciate your insights and feedback on our data note. Further results and analysis will be presented in a full article (under review).
We ... Continue reading Many thanks for the review comments. We appreciate your insights and feedback on our data note. Further results and analysis will be presented in a full article (under review).
We acknowledge that existing student learning enjoyment evaluation scales have not been sufficiently tested, which is why our project aimed to fill this gap by designing a comprehensive tool based on Bloom's taxonomy. We are pleased that the initial analysis reflected the internal consistency of the scale. However, we also recognize the limitations you pointed out, namely the low response rate, the confinement to didactic lectures, and the restriction to year 1 medical and dental students. We are planning to address these limitations by including a larger and more diverse group of students. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback.

Regards
Tarig Merghani
Many thanks for the review comments. We appreciate your insights and feedback on our data note. Further results and analysis will be presented in a full article (under review).
We acknowledge that existing student learning enjoyment evaluation scales have not been sufficiently tested, which is why our project aimed to fill this gap by designing a comprehensive tool based on Bloom's taxonomy. We are pleased that the initial analysis reflected the internal consistency of the scale. However, we also recognize the limitations you pointed out, namely the low response rate, the confinement to didactic lectures, and the restriction to year 1 medical and dental students. We are planning to address these limitations by including a larger and more diverse group of students. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback.

Regards
Tarig Merghani
Competing Interests: I have no competing interests to disclose Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 11 Jun 2024

Tarig Merghani, Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates

11 Jun 2024

Author Response

Many thanks for the review comments. We appreciate your insights and feedback on our data note. Further results and analysis will be presented in a full article (under review).
We ... Continue reading Many thanks for the review comments. We appreciate your insights and feedback on our data note. Further results and analysis will be presented in a full article (under review).
We acknowledge that existing student learning enjoyment evaluation scales have not been sufficiently tested, which is why our project aimed to fill this gap by designing a comprehensive tool based on Bloom's taxonomy. We are pleased that the initial analysis reflected the internal consistency of the scale. However, we also recognize the limitations you pointed out, namely the low response rate, the confinement to didactic lectures, and the restriction to year 1 medical and dental students. We are planning to address these limitations by including a larger and more diverse group of students. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback.

Regards
Tarig Merghani
Many thanks for the review comments. We appreciate your insights and feedback on our data note. Further results and analysis will be presented in a full article (under review).
We acknowledge that existing student learning enjoyment evaluation scales have not been sufficiently tested, which is why our project aimed to fill this gap by designing a comprehensive tool based on Bloom's taxonomy. We are pleased that the initial analysis reflected the internal consistency of the scale. However, we also recognize the limitations you pointed out, namely the low response rate, the confinement to didactic lectures, and the restriction to year 1 medical and dental students. We are planning to address these limitations by including a larger and more diverse group of students. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback.

Regards
Tarig Merghani
Competing Interests: I have no competing interests to disclose Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 15 Apr 2024

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 2 (revision) 31 Jul 24		read
Version 1 15 Apr 24	read	read

Tarig Fadelelmoula, National University of Science and Technology, Muscat, Oman
Mohi Eldin Magzoub, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

10 Views

09 Sep 2024 | for Version 2

Mohi Eldin Magzoub, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

10 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The responses are appropriate and satisfactory

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

This article aims at developing a useful tool for measuring student engagement and satisfaction

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

19 Views

22 Jul 2024 | for Version 1

Mohi Eldin Magzoub, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

19 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?

Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

This article aims at developing a useful tool for measuring student engagement and satisfaction

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

31 Jul 2024

Tarig Merghani, Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates

Thank you very much for the comprehensive review and valuable comments. We have carefully considered the points you raised and prepared an updated version of our data note (version 2). Please, find our detailed responses to the raised points below.

Student Enjoyment is a state of psychological happiness experienced during learning. It is nicely defined by Hartley as the pleasant emotional state of the learner that develops during an educational activity due to experiencing a positive situation that motivates the learner to complete the task to persevere this feeling (1). It is different from engagement, satisfaction or motivation. Since it is subjective feeling, there is no widely accepted scale for assessing enjoyment. Authors tried different methods ranging from a single question rating (for example from 0 to 6) (2), to different types of questionnaires such as satisfaction questionnaire with open ended questions (3, 4), adapted items from Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (5) and researcher-prepared questionnaire based on enjoyment indicators (6). In our scale, we utilized direct questions to measure enjoyment, and we added other questions to assess the students’ perception of different domains of learning (knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis) which are known to be influenced by enjoyment (Q1 to 6). Other questions (Q7 to 12) are not intended to measure the enjoyment, they are intended to study certain factors that are known to influence enjoyment. The primary objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive learning enjoyment scale for the evaluation of both active and passive teaching activities. We sought to apply this scale objectively to measure the enjoyment scores of Physiology lectures and investigate associated factors. As suggested by the reviewer, we clearly mentioned the objectives of our study in the updated version of the article.

The suggestion to explore other learning theories like experiential learning, self-determination theory, and constructivism is well-taken. We plan to incorporate discussions on how these theories could complement our findings on student enjoyment and educational outcomes in future studies. We also have the idea to revise and update our scale in the future based on feedback from reviewers and valuable suggestions from colleagues.

The Learning Enjoyment Scale (LES) employs a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) across its six dimensions, yielding total scores ranging from 6 to 30. The 80% represents the fourth option of the Likert scale (agree = 4), as 4/5 x 100%= 80%. Therefore, scores above 80% generally indicate that all responses are agree or above. The 60% represents the third option (unsure= 3), as 3/5 x 100%= 60%. Therefore, scores below 60% generally indicate that all the responses are disagree or below. The 5-Likert scale selection and categorization into excellent, acceptable, and low is justified by its ability to provide clear interpretations of students' enjoyment levels. In addition, the thresholds (60% and 80%) align with educational standards commonly used to assess performance and satisfaction levels in various academic contexts.

In conclusion, we believe that our scale contributes significantly to the medical education field by addressing the gap in measuring student enjoyment in educational contexts. We appreciate the opportunity to revise our manuscript based on the reviewer's valuable feedback and look forward to sharing our full manuscript that contains enhanced findings, analysis and discussion with the academic community in the near future.

Thank you once again for your thorough evaluation and insightful comments.

Best regards,

Tarig Merghani

References:

Hartley D. Excellence and enjoyment: The logic of a ‘contradiction’. British Journal of Educational Studies 2006; 54(1):3-14.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00331.x
Griffee DT. Connecting Theory to Practice: Evaluating a Brain-based Writing Curriculum. Learning Assistance Review 2007;12(1):17-27
Marín-Vinuesa LM, Rojas-García P. Expected Usefulness of Interactive Learning Platforms and Academic Sustainability Performance: The Moderator Role of Student Enjoyment. Sustainability. 2024; 16(9):3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093630
Dehghan S, Horan EM, Frome G. Investigating the Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Learning and Enjoyment in an Organic Chemistry Course. Journal of Chemical Education 2022; 99(7):2512-2519. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01104
Bieleke M, Gogol K, Goetz T, Daniels L, Pekrun R. The AEQ-S: a short version of the achievement emotions questionnaire. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2021; 65:101940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101940
Mirawati M, Sikarni W. Description of Student Attitudes: Enjoyment in Learning Physics and Interest in More Time Studying Physics. Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed [Internet]. 2023 Mar.31 [cited 2024Jul.24];4(1):1-. Available from: https://cahaya-ic.com/index.php/SJPE/article/view/490

View more View less

Competing Interests

I have no competing interests

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

27 Views

17 May 2024 | for Version 1

Tarig Fadelelmoula, National University of Science and Technology, Muscat, Oman

27 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved

Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?

Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

References

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Pulmonology, Physiology, Medical Education, Healthcare Simulation

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

11 Jun 2024

Tarig Merghani, Physiology, RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al-Khaimah, 11172, United Arab Emirates

Many thanks for the review comments. We appreciate your insights and feedback on our data note. Further results and analysis will be presented in a full article (under review).
We acknowledge that existing student learning enjoyment evaluation scales have not been sufficiently tested, which is why our project aimed to fill this gap by designing a comprehensive tool based on Bloom's taxonomy. We are pleased that the initial analysis reflected the internal consistency of the scale. However, we also recognize the limitations you pointed out, namely the low response rate, the confinement to didactic lectures, and the restriction to year 1 medical and dental students. We are planning to address these limitations by including a larger and more diverse group of students. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback.

Regards
Tarig Merghani

View more View less

Competing Interests

I have no competing interests to disclose

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. Alamoudi AA, Al Shawwa LA, Gad H, et al.: Team-based learning versus traditional didactic lectures in teaching clinical biochemistry at King Abdulaziz University; learning outcomes and student satisfaction. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2021; 49: 546–559. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[2] 2. Susanto T, Rasni H, Susumaningrum LA: The Comparing of Problem-Based Learning and Lecture-Based Learning on Students’ Learning Outcomes and Satisfaction for a Family Health Nursing Course. J. Keperawatan Padjadjaran. 2022; 10(2): 134–139. Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Imran M, Halawa TF, Baig M, et al.: Team-based learning versus interactive lecture in achieving learning outcomes and improving clinical reasoning skills: a randomized crossover study. BMC Med. Educ. 2022; 22(1): 348. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[4] 4. Narayanan SN, Merghani TH: Real-life scenario blended teaching approach for nurturing inquisitive learning of central nervous system in medical students. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2023; 47(1): 124–138. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Narayanan SN, Ahmed I, Saherawala B, et al.: Appraisal of a novel pedagogical approach to demonstrating neuromuscular transmission to medical students. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2021 Sep 1; 45(3): 580–588. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[6] 6. Premkumar K, Coupal C: Rules of engagement-12 tips for successful use of “clickers” in the classroom. Med. Teach. 2008; 30(2): 146–149. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[7] 7. Alaagib NA, Musa OA, Saeed AM: Comparison of the effectiveness of lectures based on problems and traditional lectures in physiology teaching in Sudan. BMC Med. Educ. 2019 Sep 23; 19(1): 365. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[8] 8. Hartley D: Excellence and enjoyment: The logic of a ‘contradiction’. Br. J. Educ. Stud. 2006; 54(1): 3–14. Publisher Full Text

[9] 9. Kassab SE, Taylor D, Hamdy H: Student engagement in health professions education: AMEE Guide No. 152. Med. Teach. 2023 Sep; 45(9): 949–965. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[10] 10. Xiaoming X, Bos NA, Hongbin W: The relationship between medical student engagement in the provision of the school’s education programme and learning outcomes. Med. Teach. 2022; 44(8): 900–906. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[11] 11. Gifford H, Varatharaj A: The ELEPHANT criteria in medical education: can medical education be fun? Med. Teach. 2010; 32(3): 195–197. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Deslauriers L, McCarty LS, Miller K, et al.: Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2019; 116(39): 19251–19257. Publisher Full Text

[13] 13. Buşan AM: Learning styles of medical students - implications in education. Curr. Health Sci. J. 2014; 40(2): 104–110. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[14] 14. Griffee DT: Connecting Theory to Practice: Evaluating a Brain-based Writing Curriculum. Learning Assistance Review. 2007; 12(1): 17–27.

[15] 15. Marín-Vinuesa LM, Rojas-García P: Expected Usefulness of Interactive Learning Platforms and Academic Sustainability Performance: The Moderator Role of Student Enjoyment. Sustainability. 2024; 16(9): 3630. Publisher Full Text

[16] 16. Dehghan S, Horan EM, Frome G: Investigating the Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Learning and Enjoyment in an Organic Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2022; 99(7): 2512–2519. Publisher Full Text

[17] 17. Bieleke M, Gogol K, Goetz T, et al.: The AEQ-S: a short version of the achievement emotions questionnaire. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2021; 65: 101940. Publisher Full Text

[18] 18. Mirawati M, Sikarni W. Description of Student Attitudes: Enjoyment in Learning Physics and Interest in More Time Studying Physics.Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed [Internet].2023 Mar. 31 [cited 2024 Jul.24]; 4(1): 1–6. Publisher Full Text https://cahaya-ic.com/index.php/SJPE/article/view/490

[19] 19. Merghani T, Babiker R, Alawad A: Development and Application of a Learning Enjoyment Scale for Pedagogical Activities. [dataset]. Zenodo. 2024. Publisher Full Text

Development and application of a learning enjoyment scale for pedagogical activities

Abstract

Keywords

Revised Amendments from Version 1

Introduction

Methods

Figure 1. The learning enjoyment scale.

Ethics and consent

Data availability

Underlying data

Extended data

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated