Engaging students at school and with learning: A relevant construct for all students

Abstract

There is consensus that student engagement is a relevant and multidimensional construct that integrates students' thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (Fredericks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004;Furlong et al., 2003). Most typically, researchers have incorporated a three-part typology, emphasizing affective, behavioral, and cognitive dimensions of engagement (Finn, 1989;Fredericks et al., 2004;Jimerson, Campos, & Greif, 2003). Practitioners, however, have often been highly influenced by academic engaged time (i.e., time on task) or academic learning time (i.e., amount of time engaged completing an academically relevant task) when identifying a student's difficulty in school and/or designing an intervention in collaboration with teachers. In this special issue, the articles represent the seminal nature of considering a four-part typology-the degree to which students are engaged academically, behaviorally, cognitively, and affectively (i.e., psychologically) at school and with learning-for creating an assessment-to-intervention link that enhances students' connection to the school environment. Even a cursory reading of the literature supports that student engagement is defined as a concept that requires psychological connections within the academic environment (e.g., positive relationships between adults and students and among peers) in addition to active student behavior (e.g., attendance, effort, prosocial behavior). Effective interventions address engagement comprehensively, not only focusing on academic or behavioral skill deficits, but also on the social, interpersonal aspects of schooling, particularly the need for supportive connections to other adults and peers and the explicit programming for motivation to address students' confidence and apathy (Brophy, 2004).Both academic and social aspects of school life are posited to be integral for student success, especially those students who are vulnerable to educational failure, showing signs of withdrawal from learning or motivational difficulties. McPartland (1994) provided an organizing framework for broad interventions to engage students. In this 2 × 2 framework, the type of school goals (academic or social) interact with the nature of the concern (within or out-of-school experiences) to produce four recommendations for engaging students. Opportunities for success in schoolwork and communicating the relevance of schooling experiences to students' future endeavors are necessary to help students meet academic goals. Equally important, creating a caring and supportive environment and helping students with personal problems are necessary to facilitate students' reaching social goals. This framework also reifies that student performance in school is best conceptualized from systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1992), wherein students are engaged because of what students do in the classroom; however, students' engagement is influenced by the context, including instructional support from teachers and the academic and motivational home support for learning (Christenson & Thurlow,...

Do girls and boys perceive themselves as equally engaged in school? The results of an international study from 12 countries

“…The results of the present study shed light in this respect. The findings provide support to Furlong and Christenson (2008) that student engagement "is highly influenced by contextual factors -home, school, and peers" (p. 366). Indeed, the key to enhance boys' engagement in school may lie in the enhancement of support from teachers, parents, and peers.…”

Assessing Behavioral Engagement in Flipped and Non-Flipped Mathematics Classrooms: Teacher Abilities and Other Potential Factors

“…While the current study did not examine student achievement, the results of this study suggest that flipped classrooms may impact student engagement -which many link to achievement (e.g., Carini, Kuh, & Klein, 2006;Furlong & Christenson, 2008;Lazowski & Hulleman, 2016). As suggested by numerous research articles and confirmed by our research, however, factors affecting student engagement in both flipped and non-flipped classes are numerous and varied (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004).…”

“…There is growing evidence that student engagement, a multi-dimensional construct that Astin (1984, p. 297) defines as "total amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience," is directly related to student achievement (Carini, Kuh, & Klein, 2006;Furlong & Christenson, 2008;Lazowski & Hulleman, 2016;Lee & Smith, 1993;Willingham, Pollack, & Lewis, 2002). It is for that reason that student engagement is, itself, becoming an objective of classroom instruction.…”

A conceptual review of engagement in healthcare and rehabilitation

“…We would argue that clinicians are not well-positioned to judge this subjective, internal state and that their 'assessment' of a patient's engagement may at best provide only a partial view of engagement and at worst, reflect an inaccurate picture [45]. It could be anticipated that the patient may have a different perspective that should be considered [32,40,57,66]. …”