Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 48 no. 6 (2025)

Multimodal Literacy Instruction and Learning Comfortability as Determinants of Classroom Interaction Among College Students

Joy Kennith Comawas | Louie Jay Caloc

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study aimed to investigate the predictive influence of multimodal literacy instruction and students’ learning comfort on the classroom interaction of college students. Grounded in the increasing emphasis on multimodal pedagogies and affective learning environments, the study posits that both instructional modality and learner affect significantly shape interaction patterns within higher education classrooms. A quantitative research design employing a descriptive-correlational approach was utilized. Data were collected through stratified random sampling using standardized survey questionnaires. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation), Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r), and multiple regression analysis were employed to analyze the data and address the study’s objectives. Findings indicated that the levels of multimodal literacy instruction, learning comfort, and classroom interaction were all rated as very high. Significant positive correlations were found between multimodal literacy instruction (r = 0.603, p < 0.001) and learning comfort (r = 0.683, p < 0.001) and classroom interaction. Moreover, regression analysis revealed that both multimodal literacy instruction (β = 0.280, t = 3.327, p < 0.05) and learning comfort (β = 0.487, t = 5.653, p < 0.05) were significant predictors of classroom interaction, jointly explaining 51.2% of its variance (R² = 0.512). The results highlight the crucial role of multimodal pedagogical strategies and learners’ affective states in promoting classroom engagement. These findings support instructional practices that enhance both multimodal comprehension and student comfort, thereby promoting enriched classroom interactions and increased learner participation.



References:

  1. Abdusyukur, M. R. (2024). Exploring EFL classroom interactions in an online setting: A case study in Indonesia. Study of Applied Linguistics and English Education, 5(2), 411–426. https://doi.org/10.35961/salee.v5i2.1347
  2. Alahmadi, N. S., & Alraddadi, B. M. (2020). The impact of virtual classes on second language interaction in the Saudi EFL context: A case study of Saudi undergraduate students. Arab World English Journal, 11(3), 56–72. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol11no3.4
  3. Allen, K., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2018). What schools need to know about fostering school belonging: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9389-8
  4. Al-Munawwarah, S. F. (2021). Teacher-students’ interaction in EFL teaching: Analyzing patterns of classroom interaction. Eralingua Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Asing Dan Sastra, 5(2), 416. https://doi.org/10.26858/eralingua.v5i2.19811
  5. Araújo, S. (2021). Multimodal science communication: From documentary research to infographic via mind mapping. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2936, 2233–2236.
  6. Aşık, A. (2022). Digital storytelling: An alternative method and a multimodal task to improve writing skill of English language learners. In English language education (pp. 69–80). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13540-8_4
  7. Bonsignori, V., & Cappelli, G. (2021). Developing strategies for conceptual accessibility through multimodal literacy in the English for tourism classroom. Multimodal Communication, 11(1), 31–47. https://doi.org/10.1515/mc-2020-0026
  8. Bozkurt, A., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2021). Trends and patterns in distance education (2014–2019): A synthesis of scholarly publications and a visualization of the intellectual landscape. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(2), 19–45. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i2.5381
  9. Burns, E. C., Martin, A. J., & Collie, R. J. (2019). Examining the yields of growth feedback from science teachers and students’ intrinsic valuing of science: Implications for student‐ and school‐level science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(8), 1060–1082. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21546
  10. Caloc, L. J. (2025). Language anxiety as corollary of teacher efficacy: A quantitative study among senior high school students. International Journal of Philosophy, Linguistics, and Humanities, 1(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.70847/632138
  11. Caloc, L. J., & Baradillo, D. (2023). The post-pandemic challenges of college students on the use of English language in oral reporting: A qualitative inquiry. International Journal of Education Research for Higher Learning, 29(1), 97-109. https://philarchive.org/rec/CALTPC-5
  12. Caloc, L. J., Imperial, D., Matalam, A., & Diamante, R. (2025). Classroom behavior as a predictor of competency-based learning: A regression analysis of senior high school students. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Higher Education, 2(3), 72-86. https://doi.org/10.70847/632199
  13. Chang, C., & Lin, H. K. (2018). Classroom interaction and learning anxiety in the IRS-integrated flipped language classrooms. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(3), 193–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0426-x
  14. Conley, D. T., & French, E. M. (2013). Student ownership of learning is a key component of college readiness. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(8), 1018–1034. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213515232
  15. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2020). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  16. Davis, H., Summers, J., & Miller, L. (2012). An interpersonal approach to classroom management: Strategies for improving student engagement. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483387383
  17. Decristan, J., Jansen, N. C., & Fauth, B. (2023). Student participation in whole-class discourse: Individual conditions and consequences for student learning in primary and secondary school. Learning and Instruction, 86, 101748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101748
  18. Eisenring, M. a. A., & Margana, M. (2019). The importance of teacher–student’s interaction in communicative language teaching (clt). Prasasti/UNS Journal of Language Studies, 4(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.20961/prasasti.v4i1.17052
  19. Entusiastik, N., & Siregar, Y. D. (2022). The role of classroom interaction in online learning: Voices from the students. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies, 9(1), 51–71. https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v9i1.4182
  20. Escosar, P. P. & Caloc, L. J. R. (2024). Self-regulated learning promotion and teaching practices of SHS teachers on the study skills of SHS students. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 28(8), 831-839. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14413315
  21. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  22. Gómez, L., & Aiken, M. (2022). Exploring multimodal literacy: Theory and practice in education. Educational Review, 74(3), 245-260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0426-x
  23. Harvey, M., Deuel, A., & Marlatt, R. (2019). “To be, or not to be”: Modernizing Shakespeare with multimodal learning stations. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63(5), 559–568. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1023
  24. Hu, R., & Wang, X. (2021). Multimodal teaching strategy of college English based on computer technology. International Conference Proceeding Series, 227–230. https://doi.org/10.1145/3482632.3482679
  25. Huang, S. (2019). A critical multimodal framework for reading and analyzing pedagogical materials. English Teaching Practice & Critique, 18(1), 52–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-08-2018-0078
  26. Jackson, D., & Wilton, N. (2016). Perceived employability among undergraduates and the importance of career self-management, work experience and individual characteristics. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(4), 747–762. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1229270
  27. Jackson, L. (2017). Leaning out in higher education: A structural, postcolonial perspective. Policy Futures in Education, 15(3), 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210317708496
  28. Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O’Halloran, K. (2016). Introducing multimodality. In Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315638027
  29. Johnson, L., Moyi, P., & Ylimaki, R. M. (2023). Successful school leadership in the USA: The role of context in core leadership practices. Education Sciences, 13(10), 968. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100968
  30. Jones, B. A. (2018). An experiential look at learner engagement in University EFL courses in Japan.
  31. Kholisoh, M. N., & Bharati, D. A. L. (2021). Teachers’ questioning strategies and students’ perceptions toward critical questions in EFL classroom interaction. ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching, 10(2), 136-145.
  32. King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2002). The reflective judgment model: Twenty years of research on epistemic cognition. APA Psycnet.
  33. Korpershoek, H., Canrinus, E. T., Fokkens-Bruinsma, M., & De Boer, H. (2019). The relationships between school belonging and students’ motivational, social-emotional, behavioural, and academic outcomes in secondary education: A meta-analytic review. Research Papers in Education, 35(6), 641–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1615116
  34. Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication.
  35. Kuby, C. R., Zapata, A., & Fontanella‐Nothom, O. (2019). Teaching and learning literacy in early childhood education. ResearchGate, 301 – 328. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119148104.ch14
  36. Kumar, A., Bhattamishra, S., Bhandari, M., & Talukdar, P. (2019). Submodular optimization-based diverse paraphrasing and its effectiveness in data augmentation. ACL Anthology. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/n19-1363
  37. Lansdown, G., Jimerson, S. R., & Shahroozi, R. (2014). Children’s rights and school psychology: Children’s right to participation. Journal of School Psychology, 52(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2013.12.006
  38. Lee, J. S. (2020). The role of grit and classroom enjoyment in EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 43(5), 452–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1746319
  39. Liu, L., & Fraser, B. J. (2013). Development and validation of an English classroom learning environment inventory and its application in China. Sense Publishers eBooks (pp. 75–89). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-332-4_4
  40. Luchavez, L. J., & Caloc, L. J. (2024). Mathematical proficiency as an output of enrichment programs and pedagogical preparedness. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Studies, 9(4), 13-27. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5066885
  41. McNally, S., & Slutsky, R. (2017). Teacher–child relationships make all the difference: Constructing quality interactions in early childhood settings. Early Child Development and Care, 188(5), 508–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1417854
  42. Méndez, J., Sánchez-Hernández, Ó., Garber, J., Espada, J. P., & Orgilés, M. (2021). Psychological treatments for depression in adolescents: more than three decades later. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(9), 4600. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094600
  43. Moneva, J. C., & Cuizon, A. J. P. (2020). Confidence: Before and after oral recitations. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 5(1), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v5i1.10046
  44. Müller-Kuhn, D., Herzig, P., Häbig, J., & Zala-Mezö, E. (2021). Student participation in everyday school life—linking different perspectives. Zeitschrift Für Bildungsforschung, 11(1), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s35834-021-00296-5
  45. Nash, B. L., Dunham, H., Murdter-Atkinson, J., & Wetzel, M. M. (2023). A culturally sustaining approach to multimodal literacies: Building from students’ funds of knowledge in field-based teacher education. Literacy Research and Instruction, 63(2), 151–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2022.2153766
  46. Nguyen, T. D., Cannata, M., & Miller, J. (2016). Understanding student behavioral engagement: Importance of student interaction with peers and teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 111(2), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2016.1220359
  47. Niu, W., Cheng, L., Duan, D., & Zhang, Q. (2022). Impact of perceived supportive learning environment on mathematical achievement: The mediating roles of autonomous self-regulation and creative thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.781594
  48. Oconnor, G. K., Steig, E. J., & Hakim, G. J. (2021). Southern hemisphere winds, pressure, and temperature over the 20th century from proxy-data assimilation. In Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5507607
  49. Olivier, E., Morin, A.J.S., Langlois, J. (2020). Internalizing and externalizing behavior problems and student engagement in elementary and secondary school students. J Youth Adolescence 49, 2327–2346 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01295-x
  50. Pascarella, E. T., Edison, M., Nora, A., Hagedorn, L. S., & Terenzini, P. T. (1996). Influences on students’ openness to diversity and challenge in the first year of college. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 174–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1996.11780255
  51. Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H. W., Murayama, K., & Goetz, T. (2017). Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development, 88(5), 1653–1670. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12704
  52. Rahman, M. S. (2016). Investigating pedagogical techniques in classroom interactions at a CELTA training programme. English Language Teaching, 9(9), 1. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n9p1
  53. Rashid, T., & Asghar, H. M. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 604–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.084
  54. Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In Springer eBooks (pp. 149–172). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_7
  55. Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In Springer eBooks (pp. 3–19). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_1
  56. Schöninger, C. L. K. (2020). Literacy and multimodality in English teaching: Practices in technical and technological courses. Diacritica, 34(1), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.21814/diacritica.267
  57. Serafini, F. (2015). Multimodal literacy: From theories to practices. Language Arts, 92(6), 412–423. https://doi.org/10.58680/la201527389
  58. Serafini, F., & Gee, E. (2017). Remixing multiliteracies: Theory and practice from new London to new times (language and literacy series).
  59. Siedlecki, S. L. (2019). Understanding descriptive research designs and methods. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 34(1), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/nur.0000000000000493
  60. Silk, M., Correia, R., Veríssimo, D., Verma, A., & Crowley, S. L. (2021). The implications of digital visual media for human–nature relationships. People and Nature, 3(6), 1130–1137. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10284
  61. Smith, K. M., & Jeffery, D. I. (2021). Critical pedagogies in the neoliberal university: What happens when they go digital? Géographies Canadiennes, 57(3), 372–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12023
  62. So, H. J. (2019). Co-designing multimodal pedagogical content knowledge with Indonesian teachers. ICCE 2019 - 27th International Conference on Computers in Education, Proceedings, 1, 720–728.
  63. Stankić, D. L. P. (2022). Incorporating multiliteracies and multimodality into literacy instruction for efl students at tertiary level: A case study. Filolog (Banja Luka), 13(25), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.21618/fil2225068p
  64. Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2021). Quality teaching in online higher education: The perspectives of 250 online tutors on technology and pedagogy. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(06), 40. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i06.20173
  65. Voelkl, K. E. (2012). School identification. In Springer eBooks (pp. 193–218). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_9
  66. Wang, S., & Zhang, D. (2020). Perceived teacher feedback and academic performance: The mediating effect of learning engagement and moderating effect of assessment characteristics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(7), 973–987. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1718599
  67. Weizheng, Z. (2019). Teacher-student interaction in EFL classroom in China: Communication accommodation theory perspective. English Language Teaching, 12(12), 99-111.
  68. Winanta, A., Rochsantiningsih, D., & Supriyadi, S. (2020). Exploring EFL classroom interaction: An analysis of teacher talks at senior high school level. ELS Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 3(3), 328–343. https://doi.org/10.34050/elsjish.v3i3.11061
  69. Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic