Vol. 2 (2026)
Special Issue: Advancing Teaching Innovation and Reform through Transdisciplinary Approaches: Supporting SDGs and Education for All

The Impact of Teaching Methods and Course Design on College Students' Self-Reported Learning Performance: An Empirical Study Based on SDG4

Peng Jiaxin
INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia
Yang Yifan
INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia
Zeng Ziyi
INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia

Published 2026-08-12

Keywords

  • Teaching adaptability,
  • Teaching innovation,
  • Course design,
  • Self-reported learning performance,
  • SDG4,
  • Educational equity,
  • Higher education reform
  • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

The Impact of Teaching Methods and Course Design on College Students’ Self-Reported Learning Performance: An Empirical Study Based on SDG4 . (2026). Journal of Teaching Innovation and Reform, 2, 148-157. https://doi.org/10.65638/2978-5634.2026.2.12

Abstract

Against the background of SDG4's emphasis on inclusiveness, equity and high-quality education, higher education teaching reform needs to pay attention to students' classroom participation, learning engagement and sustainable learning ability. Based on self-determination theory and student engagement theory, this study uses a questionnaire survey method to survey 310 Chinese college students, and uses descriptive statistics, reliability analysis and multiple linear regression analysis to This study explored the predictive role of teaching methods and course design in college students’ comprehensive self-reported learning performance scores. The results show that the questionnaire has an acceptable internal consistency, and Cronbach's α is 0.732 and 0.760. Regression analysis shows that teaching methods and curriculum design variables can significantly predict the comprehensive score of students' self-reported learning performance, F(5,304) = 149.27, p < 0.001, R² = 0.711. Among them, teaching adaptability is the strongest predictor, β = 0.311, which shows that teachers choose teaching methods flexibly according to the teaching content and the actual situation of students, which is an important mechanism that affects students' overall classroom learning experience. Since the dependent variable is a self-reported comprehensive score, and some questions overlap with the independent variable, the results of this study should be understood as a predictive relatedness, not a direct proof of objective academic performance or causal relatedness. The study also found that there is still room for improvement in classroom equity participation and technology-assisted expression. This article provides practical inspiration for the improvement of college English classrooms, the innovation of higher education teaching and the sustainable development of SDG4-oriented education.

References

  1. Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International journal of educational technology in higher education, 17(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
  2. Buchs, C., Margas, N., & Hascoët, M. (2023). Evaluating an inclusive program for promoting equal-status participation in classrooms with high sociolinguistic diversity: diversity valuation and multilingual cooperative activities. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1257372. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1257372
  3. Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the field. International journal of educational technology in higher education, 20(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
  4. Fredricks, J. A., Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (Eds.). (2019). Handbook of student engagement interventions: Working with disengaged students. Academic Press.
  5. Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., Vitta, J. P., & Wu, J. (2024). Engagement in language learning: A systematic review of 20 years of research methods and definitions. Language teaching research, 28(1), 201-230. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211001289
  6. Leilei, J., Siqi, H., Yuhan, S., Vijayaratnam, P., Sivarajah, A., & Pengfei, D. (2023). Quality education: A study on the factors influencing enjoyment of learning English among higher educational institution students. Migration Letters, 20(S3), 54-62.
  7. Leal Filho, W., Simaens, A., Paço, A., Hernandez-Diaz, P. M., Vasconcelos, C. R., Fritzen, B., & Mac-Lean, C. (2023). Integrating the Sustainable Development Goals into the strategy of higher education institutions. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 30(5), 564-575. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2023.2167884
  8. Holmes, W., & Miao, F. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. Unesco Publishing.
  9. Ooi, S. X., & Cortina, K. S. (2023, September). Cooperative and competitive school climate: Their impact on sense of belonging across cultures. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 8, p. 1113996). Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1113996
  10. Parsons, S. A., Vaughn, M., Scales, R. Q., Gallagher, M. A., Parsons, A. W., Davis, S. G., ... & Allen, M. (2018). Teachers’ instructional adaptations: A research synthesis. Review of educational research, 88(2), 205-242. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317743198
  11. Reeve, J., Basarkod, G., Jang, H. R., Gargurevich, R., Jang, H., & Cheon, S. H. (2025). Specialized purpose of each type of student engagement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 37(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09989-z
  12. Rotar, O. (2025). Beyond technology tools: supporting student engagement in technology enhanced learning. Education Sciences, 15(12), 1617. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121617
  13. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2024). Self-determination theory. In Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 6229-6235). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17299-1_2630
  14. Skarpaas, K. G. (2024). The importance of relevance: Factors influencing upper secondary vocational students’ engagement in L2 English language teaching. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 68(7), 1395-1409. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2023.2250360
  15. Ummi, A., Chenshuai, W., Vijayaratnam, P., Rajanthran, S. K., Girija, V., & Ravindran, T. (2024). Exploring teaching strategies used by university instructors to enhance student engagement in academic subjects. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(9), 543-559. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.9.27
  16. Unesco. (2024). Global education monitoring report summary, 2024/5: Leadership in education: lead for learning/UNESCO. Unesco.
  17. Vansteenkiste, M., Ryan, R. M., & Soenens, B. (2020). Basic psychological need theory: Advancements, critical themes, and future directions. Motivation and emotion, 44(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09818-1
  18. Wong, Z. Y., Liem, G. A. D., Chan, M., & Datu, J. A. D. (2024). Student engagement and its association with academic achievement and subjective well-being: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of educational psychology, 116(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000833
  19. Yılmaz Bodur, Z., Kılıç, A. F., & Aktan, S. (2023). Perceived instructional environment and English achievement: The mediating role of student engagement. The Journal of educaTional research, 116(2), 100-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2023.2203093