Behavioral engagement and disaffection in school activitiesexploring a model of motivational facilitators and performance outcomes

  1. González Fernández, Antonio
  2. Paoloni, Paola Verónica
  3. Donolo, Danilo
  4. Rinaudo, María Cristina
Revista:
Anales de psicología

ISSN: 0212-9728 1695-2294

Ano de publicación: 2015

Volume: 31

Número: 3

Páxinas: 869-878

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.6018/ANALESPS.31.3.176981 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Outras publicacións en: Anales de psicología

Resumo

Previous research has shown that perceived control, task value, behavioral engagement and disaffection are personal determinants of aca-demic performance. However, little research has simultaneously examined these constructs in secondary education. The present study analyzed the structural relationships between these variables and the role of engagement and disaffection as mediators of control and value on performance. Partic-ipants were 446 students (51.3% girls) ranging in age from 12 to 16 years attending six Spanish compulsory secondary schools (from 7th to 10th grades). The variables were assessed over a nine-month period. Structural equation models results confirmed the hypotheses: control and value sig-nificantly predicted engagement, disaffection, and performance; engage-ment and disaffection predicted performance and partially mediated the ef-fects from control and value on performance. Implications for psycho-educational theory and practice are discussed

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Arbuckle, J. (2013). AMOS 22. User’s Guide. Chicago, IL: SmallWaters Corporation.
  • Archambault, I., Eccles, J., & Vida, M. (2010). Ability self-concepts and subjective value in literacy: Joint trajectories from grades 1 through 12. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 804-816. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/.a00221075.
  • Bempechat, J., & Shernoff, D. (2012). Parental influences on achievement motivation and student engagement. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 315-342). New York: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_15.
  • Bong, M., Arum, H., Arum, K, & Sung-il, K. (2014). Perfectionism and motivation of adolescents in academic contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 711-721. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035836.
  • Brislin, R. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. Lonner & J. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137-164). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Byrne, B. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Chouinard, R., Karsenti, T., & Roy, N. (2007). Relations among competence beliefs, utility value, achievement goals, and effort in mathematics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 501-517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709906X133589.
  • Cleary, T., & Zimmerman, B. (2012). A cyclical self-regulatory account of student engagement: Theoretical foundations and applications. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 237-257). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_11.
  • Cole, J., Bergin, D., & Whittaker, T. (2008). Predicting student achievement for low stakes tests with effort and task value. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 609-624. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/jedpsych.2007.10.002
  • Durik, A., Vida, M., & Eccles, J. (2006). Task value and ability beliefs as predictors of high school literacy choices: A developmental analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 382-393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.382.
  • Eccles, J. S., O’Neill, S. A., & Wigfield, A. (2005). Ability self-perceptions and subjective task values in adolescents and children. In K. A. Moore & L. H. Lippman (Eds.), What do children need to flourish? Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development (pp. 237-249). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23823-9_15.
  • Eccles, J., & Wang, M. (2012). So what is student engagement anyway? In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 133-145). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_6.
  • Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Per-sonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215-225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167295213003.
  • Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153.
  • Elmore, G., & Huebner, S. (2010). Adolescents’ satisfaction with school experiences: Relationships with demographics, attachment relationships, and school engagement behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 525-537. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.20488.
  • Extremera, N., Durán, A. & Rey, L. (2007). Inteligencia emocional y su relación con los niveles de burnout, engagement y estrés en estudiantes universitarios. Revista de Educación, 342, 239-256.
  • Fletcher, K., & Neumeister, K. (2012). Research on perfectionism and achievement motivation: Implications for gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 49(7), 668-677. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.21623
  • Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148-162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028089
  • García, M., Casal, J., Merino, R., & Sánchez, A. (2013). Itinerarios de abandono escolar y transiciones tras la enseñanza secundaria obligatoria. Re-vista de Educación, 361, 65-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2011-361-135.
  • Gniewosz, B., & Noack, P. (2012). What you see is what you get: The role of early adolescents’ perceptions in the intergenerational transmission of academic values. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 70-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.10.002.
  • González González, M. (2010). El alumno ante la escuela y su propio aprendizaje: algunas líneas de investigación en torno al concepto de implicación. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación. 8, 11-31.
  • Greene, B., Miller, R., Crowson, M., Duke, B., & Akey, K. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462-482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.006.
  • Hall, N., Perry, R., Chipperfield, J., Clifton, R., & Haynes, T. (2006). Enhancing primary and secondary control in achievement settings through writing-based attributional retraining. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4, 361-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2006.25.4.361.
  • Hong, E., Peng, Y., & Rowell, L. (2012). Homework self-regulation: Grade, gender, and achievement-level differences. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 269-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.11.009
  • Hughes, J., & Kwok, O. (2006). Classroom engagement mediates the effect of teacher-student support on elementary students’ peer acceptance: A prospective analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 465-480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2005.10.001
  • Hughes, J., Wu, W., & West, S. (2011). Teacher performance goal practices and elementary students’ behavioral engagement: A developmental perspective. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2010.09.003.
  • Hulleman, Ch., Godes, O., Hendricks, B., & Harackiewicz, J. (2010). En-hancing interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 880-895. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019506
  • Husman, J., Derryberry, W., Crowson, H., & Lomax, R. (2004). Instrumen-tality, task-value, and intrinsic motivation: Making sense of their independent interdependence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 63-76. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(03)00019-5.
  • INEE (2010). PISA 2009. Programa para la evaluación internacional de los alumnos OCDE. Informe español. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación.
  • INEE (2011). Panorama de la educación. Indicadores de la OCDE. Informe español. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación.
  • Jang, H. (2008). Supporting students’ motivation, engagement, and learning during an uninteresting activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 798-811.. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028089.
  • Johnson, M. L., & Sinatra, G. M. (2013). Use of task-value instructional inductions for facilitating engagement and conceptual change. Contempo-rary Educational Psychology, 38, 51-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.09.003
  • Lawson, M., & Lawson, H. (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83 (3), 432-479. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654313480891.
  • Liem, A., Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcomes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 486-512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.08.001.
  • Liem, A., & Martin, A. (2011). Peer relationships and adolescents’ academic and non academic outcomes: Same-sex and opposite-sex peer effects and the mediating role of school engagement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 183-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2010.02013.x.
  • Linnenbrink-García, L., Rogat, T., & Kosley, K. (2011). Affect and engagement during group instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 13-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.09.001.
  • Martin, A. (2008). Enhancing student motivation and engagement: The effects of a multidimensional intervention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 239-269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.11.003.
  • Martin, A. (2009). Motivation and engagement across the academic life span: A developmental construct validity study of elementary school, high school, and university/college students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 794-824. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164409332214.
  • Martin, A., Anderson, J., A Bobis, Way, J., & Vellar, R. (2012). Switching on and switching off in mathematics: An ecological study of future intent and disengagement among middle school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025988.
  • Martin, A., & Marsh, H. (2008). Academic buoyancy: Towards an under-standing of students’ everyday academic resilience. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 53-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2007.01.002.
  • Miñano, P., Gilar, R. & Castejón, J. L. (2012). A structural model of cognitive-motivational variables as explanatory factors of academic achievement in Spanish language and mathematics. Anales de Psicología, 28, 45-54. http://hdl.handle.net/10045/22527.
  • OECD (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do. Student performance in reading, mathematics and science (Volume I). Paris: OECD.
  • Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Daniels, L., Stupnisky, R., & Perry, R. (2010). Boredom in achievement settings: Exploring control-value antecedents and performance outcomes of a neglected emotion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 531-549. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019243.
  • Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-García, L. (2012). Academic emotions and student engagement. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 259-282). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_12.
  • Perry, R., Hladkyj, S., Pekrun, R., & Pelletier, S. (2001). Academic control and action control in the achievement of college students: A longitudinal field study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 776-789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.4.776.
  • Pianta, R., Hamre, B., & Allen, J (2012). Teacher-student relationships and engagement: Conceptualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 365-386). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_17.
  • Pyryt, M. (2007). The giftedness/perfectionism connection: recent research and implications. Gifted Education International, 23, 273-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026142940702300308.
  • Raftery, J., Grolnick, W., & Flamm, E. (2012). Families as facilitators of student engagement: Toward a home-school partnership model. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 343-364). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_16.
  • Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149-172). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_7.
  • Reeve, J. & Tseng, C. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ en-gagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257-267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028089
  • Roebers, C., Cimeli, P., Röthlisberber, M., & Neuenschwander, R. (2012). Executive functioning, metacognition, and self-perceived competence in elementary school children: an explorative study on their interrelations and their role for school achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 7, 151-173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11409-012-9089-9.
  • Salanova, M., Martínez, I., Bresó, E., Llorens, S. & Grau, R. (2005). Bienestar psicológico en estudiantes universitarios: facilitadores y obstaculizadores del desempeño académico. Anales de Psicología, 21, 170-180.
  • Salanova, M., Schaufeli, W., Martínez, I., & Bresó, E. (2010). How obstacles and facilitators predict academic performance: The mediating role of study burnout and engagement. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 22, 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10615800802609965.
  • Sastre-Riva, S. (2013). High intellectual ability: Extracurricular enrichment and cognitive management. Journal of the Education of the Gifted, 36 (1), 119-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162353212472407.
  • Skinner, E. (1996). A guide to constructs of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 549-570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.549.
  • Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kinderman, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 765-781. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028089.
  • Skinner, E., Kinderman, T., Connell, J., & Wellborn, J. (2009a). Engagement and disaffection as organizational constructs in the dynamic of motivational development. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 223-245). London: Routledge.
  • Skinner, E., Kinderman, T., & Furrer, C. (2009b). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection. Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in the academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 493-525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233.
  • Skinner, E. & Pitzer, J. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21-44). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_2.
  • Stoeber, J., Feast, A., & Hayward, J. (2009). Self-oriented and socially oriented perfectionism: Differential relationships with intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and text anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 423-428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.014.
  • Stoeber, J., Hutchfield, J., & Wood, K. (2008). Perfectionism, self-efficacy, and aspiration level: differential effects of perfectionistic striving and self-criticism after success and failure. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 323-327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.04.021.
  • Stupnisky, R., Perry, R., Hall, N., & Guay, F. (2012). Examining perceived control level and instability as predictors of first-year college students’ academic achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 81-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.01.001.
  • Thompson, S., & Schlehofer, M. (2008). The many sides of control motivation: Motives for high, low, and illusory control. In J. Shah & W. Gard-ner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 41-56). New York, NY: Guilford Press
  • Tomarken, A., & Waller, N. (2005). Structural equation modeling: Strengths, limitations, and misconceptions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1, 31-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.144239.
  • Wigfield, A., Tonks, S., & Klauda, S. (2009). Expectancy-value theory. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 171-195). London: Routledge.
  • Wu, A., & Zumbo, B. (2008). Understanding and using mediators and moderators. Social Indicators Research, 87, 367-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-007-9143-1.