Why are students' self-initiated contributions important(?) A study on agentic engagement
Downloads
Abstract
This article is part of a broader research project on student engagement, achievement goals, and autonomy support in higher education. This observational study presents a categorization of students’ self-initiated contributions for learning. For this purpose, an observation form was developed and implemented in both a large and a small course delivered by the same professor. The research question was “Which students’ verbal contributions in lecture-based courses are aligned with the concept of agentic engagement?” This question also aimed to explore the premise that agentic behavior is performed differently by male and female students in small and large courses. Each self-initiated contribution was classified, counted, and described, and then compared between courses. The findings revealed that (1) expected self-initiated contributions were the most observed ones in both courses, and (2) the number and type of contributions were different regarding student’s gender and class size. The paper concludes with recommendations to advance the state of research on agentic engagement.
Downloads
References
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Google Scholar CrossrefBandura, A. (1980). Gauging the relationship between self-efficacy judgment and action. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4(2), 263–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01173659
Google Scholar CrossrefBandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x
Google Scholar CrossrefBrown, G. (1987). Lectures and lecturing. In M. J. Dunkin (Ed.), Advances in Education. The International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (pp. 284–288). Pergamon Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefBrown, G., & Manogue, M. (2001). Refreshing lecturing: A guide for lecturers. Medical Teacher, 23(3), 231–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120043000
Google Scholar CrossrefBrown, S. (2015). Learning, teaching and assessment in higher education: Global perspectives. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar CrossrefBrown, S., & Race, P. (2005). Lecturing: A practical guide. London: Taylor & Francis.
Google Scholar CrossrefBryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefCao, L., & Nietfeld, J. L. (2007). Examining relationships between achievement goals, study strategies, and class performance in educational psychology. Teaching Educational Psychology, 2(1), 1–20.
Google Scholar CrossrefCappella, E., Kim, H. Y., Neal, J. W., & Jackson, D. R. (2013). Classroom peer relationships and behavioral engagement in elementary school: The role of social network equity. American Journal of Community Psychology, 52(3-4), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-013-9603-5
Google Scholar CrossrefCoates, H. (2009). Engaging students for success: Australasian student engagement report. Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Google Scholar CrossrefCuseo, J. (2007). The empirical case against large class size: Adverse effects on the teaching, learning, and retention of first-year students. Journal of Faculty Development, 21(1), 5–21.
Google Scholar CrossrefEvertson, C. M., Anderson, C. W., Anderson, L. M., & Brophy, J. E. (1980). Relationships between classroom behaviors and student outcomes in junior high mathematics and English classes. American Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312017001043
Google Scholar CrossrefFredricks, 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
Google Scholar CrossrefFredricks, J., McColskey, W., Meli, J., Montrosse, B., Mordica, J., & Mooney, K. (2011). Measuring student engagement in upper elementary through high school: A description of 21 instruments. (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2011–No. 098). Washington, DC: U.S.: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs
Google Scholar CrossrefFriesen, N. (2011). The lecture as a transmedial pedagogical form: A historical analysis. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 95–102. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11404603
Google Scholar CrossrefFurrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children's academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
Google Scholar CrossrefGlaesser, J., & Cooper, B. (2014). Using rational action theory and Bourdieu’s habitus theory together to account for educational decision-making in England and Germany. Sociology, 48(3), 463–481.
Google Scholar CrossrefGoffe, W. L., & Kauper, D. (2014). A survey of principles instructors: Why lecture prevails. The Journal of Economic Education, 45(4), 360–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2014.946547
Google Scholar CrossrefGoodman, A. (2016). The manifestation of student engagement in classrooms: A phenomenological case study of how teachers experience student engagement and how it influences pedagogical decision making (Doctoral dissertation). University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Google Scholar CrossrefHardy, C., & Bryson, C. (2010). Student engagement: Paradigm change or politicalexpediency? Networks Magazine, 9, 19–23. Retrieved from http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011
Google Scholar CrossrefHardy, C., & Bryson, C. (2016). The salience of social relationships and networks in enabling student engagement and success. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 1(1). Retrieved from https://journals.studentengagement.org.uk/index.php/raise/article/download/376/335
Google Scholar CrossrefHoward, J. R., & Henney, A. L. (1998). Student participation and instructor gender in the mixed age college classroom. The Journal of Higher Education. (69), 384–405.
Google Scholar CrossrefKarabenick, S. A. (2004). Perceived achievement goal structure and college student help seeking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 569–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.569
Google Scholar CrossrefKuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099
Google Scholar CrossrefLaurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology (2nd edition). London: Routledge.
Google Scholar CrossrefLom, B. (2012). Classroom activities: Simple strategies to incorporate student-centered activities within undergraduate science lectures. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 11(1), 64–71.
Google Scholar CrossrefLowman, J. (1995). Mastering the techniques of teaching (2nd Edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Google Scholar CrossrefMameli, C., & Passini, S. (2018). Development and validation of an enlarged version of the student agentic engagement scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282918757849
Google Scholar CrossrefMontenegro, A. (2017). Understanding the concept of agentic engagement for learning. Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J., 19(1), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.14483/calj.v19n1.10472
Google Scholar CrossrefNunn, C. E. (1996). Discussion in the college classroom: Triangulating observational and survey results. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(3), 243–266. https://doi.org/10.2307/2943844
Google Scholar CrossrefPerson, N. K., Graesser, A. C., Magliano, J. P., & Kreuz, R. J. (1994). Inferring what the student knows in one-to-one tutoring: The role of student questions and answers. Learning and Individual Differences, 6(2), 205–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/1041-6080(94)90010-8
Google Scholar CrossrefPineda-Báez, C., Bermúdez, J.-J., Rubiano-Bello, Á., Pava-García, N., Suárez-García, R., & Cruz-Becerra, F. (2014). Compromiso estudiantil en el contexto universitario colombiano y desempeño académico. RELIEVE - Revista Electrónica de Investigación y Evaluación Educativa, 20(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.7203/relieve.20.2.4238
Google Scholar CrossrefPineda-Báez, C., Hennig-Manzuolib, C., & Vargas-Sánchez, A. D. (2019). Supporting student cognitive and agentic engagement: Students’ voices. International Journal of Educational Research, 96, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.06.005
Google Scholar CrossrefReeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149–172). Boston, MA: Springer US.
Google Scholar CrossrefReeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 579–595. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032690
Google Scholar CrossrefReeve, J. (2016). Autonomy-supportive teaching: What it is, how to do it. In W. C. Liu, J. C. K. Wang, & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Building Autonomous Learners: Perspectives from Research and Practice using Self-Determination Theory (1st ed., pp. 129–152). Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-630-0_7
Google Scholar CrossrefReeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students' autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.209
Google Scholar CrossrefReeve, J., & Lee, W. (2014). Students’ classroom engagement produces longitudinal changes in classroom motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 527–540.
Google Scholar CrossrefReeve, J., & Tseng, C.-M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
Google Scholar CrossrefRotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Cognitive engagement in the problem-based learning classroom. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 465–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9272-9
Google Scholar CrossrefSagayadevan, V., & Jeyaraj, S. (2012). The role of emotional engagement in lecturer-student interaction and the impact on academic outcomes of student achievement and learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(3), 1–30. Retrieved from http://josotl.indiana.edu/article/download/2152/2057
Google Scholar CrossrefShernoff, D. J. (2012). Engagement and positive youth development: Creating optimal learning environments. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), The APA educational psychology handbook (pp. 195–220). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Google Scholar CrossrefShernoff, D. J., Kelly, S., Tonks, S. M., Anderson, B., Cavanagh, R. F., Sinha, S., & Abdi, B. (2016). Student engagement as a function of environmental complexity in high school classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 43, 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.12.003
Google Scholar CrossrefSinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
Google Scholar CrossrefTakashiro, N. (2016). What are the relationships between college students’ goal orientations and learning strategies? Psychological Thought, 9(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.5964/psyct.v9i2.169
Google Scholar CrossrefTatum, H. E., Schwartz, B. M., Schimmoeller, P. A., & Perry, N. (2013). Classroom participation and student-faculty interactions: Does gender matter? The Journal of Higher Education, 84(6), 745–768. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2013.0036
Google Scholar CrossrefTinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599. https://doi.org/10.2307/2959965
Google Scholar CrossrefTinto, V. (2003). Learning better together: The impact of learning communities on student success. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University.
Google Scholar CrossrefWalker, C. O., Greene, B. A., & Mansell, R. A. (2006). Identification with academics, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Learning and Individual Differences, 16(1), 1–12.
Google Scholar CrossrefWang, M.-T., Chow, A., Hofkens, T., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2015). The trajectories of student emotional engagement and school burnout with academic and psychological development: Findings from Finnish adolescents. Learning and Instruction, 36, 57–65.
Google Scholar CrossrefWaring, H. Z. (2011). Learner initiatives and learning opportunities in the language classroom. Classroom Discourse, 2(2), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2011.614053
Google Scholar CrossrefWinstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2016). Supporting learners' agentic engagement with feedback: A systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538
Google Scholar CrossrefWoodring, B., & Woodring, R. (2011). The lecture: Long-lasting, logical, and legitimate. In M. J. Bradshaw & A. J. Lowenstein (Eds.), Innovative teaching strategies in nursing and related health professions (pp. 127–147). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
Google Scholar CrossrefDownloads
Published
Almetric
Dimensions
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All articles are published under Creative Commons copyright (CC BY). Authors hold the copyright and retain publishing rights without restrictions, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles as the original source is cited.
