MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411310523 · doi:10.1111/jcal.70064

High School Students' Perspectives on Their Online Learning Experiences: A Systematic Literature Review

2025· article· en· W4411310523 on OpenAlexaff
Jia Li, Novera Roihan, Matthew McGravey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer Assisted Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisPsychologyFlexibility (engineering)Blended learningEducational technologyOnline discussionContent analysisDescriptive statisticsSocial mediaInstructional designMathematics educationPedagogyComputer scienceQualitative researchWorld Wide WebSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Online learning has become a popular form of education. Prior to the Covid‐19 pandemic, online learning was mainly associated with higher education, with an incremental growth at the K‐12 level. The pandemic changed this situation rapidly. Online instruction has been increasingly integrated into secondary schools and has significantly impacted students' learning experiences and outcomes, particularly for high school students experiencing the critical transition to higher education. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop an in‐depth understanding of their perspectives through a synthesis study to provide insights into critical factors influencing their online learning. Objectives Following the PRISMA guidelines, this article systematically reviewed 46 empirical studies that examined high school students' perspectives through their experiences of taking at least one online course in synchronous and/or asynchronous learning environments by leveraging diverse technologies. Methods We extracted and summarised results from studies and applied descriptive statistics analysis and thematic analysis to identify and synthesise the major patterns/themes of findings. Results and Conclusions Students perceived the main benefits of learning online, ranging from their increased learning autonomy and communicative flexibility to their skill development across subject content areas. They identified several challenges in taking online courses, including staying motivated, lacking instructional support and social engagement, and time management issues. These findings suggested that educators and stakeholders develop evidence‐based and ‘smart’ designs of online learning environments and course structures, given careful consideration of the needs and characteristics of intended student groups and content to be delivered.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0250.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computer Assisted LearningSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207