All better than being disengaged: Student engagement patterns and their relations to academic self-concept and achievement

Abdullah, M. Y., Bakar, N. R. A., & Mahbob, M. H. (2012). Student’s participation in classroom: what motivates them to speak up? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 516–522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.199. Ainley, M., & Ainley, J. (2011). Student engagement with science in early adolescence: the contribution of enjoyment to students’ continuing interest in learning about science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.08.001. Akaike, H. (1998). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In E. Parzen, K. Tanabe, & G. Kitagawa (Eds.), Selected papers of Hirotugu Akaike (Vol. 21, pp. 199–213, Springer Series in Statistics (Perspectives in Statistics)). New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_15. Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002 . Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303 . Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J.-S., & Pagani, L. S. (2009). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007 . Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2020). Auxiliary variables in mixture modeling: using the BCH method in Mplus to estimate a distal outcome model and an arbitrary secondary model. Mplus Web Notes: No. 21 May 14, 2014. Revised April 27, 2020. Bae, C. L., & DeBusk-Lane, M. (2019). Middle school engagement profiles: implications for motivation and achievement in science. Learning and Individual Differences, 74, 101753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101753. Bakadorova, O., Lazarides, R., & Raufelder, D. (2020). Effects of social and individual school self-concepts on school engagement during adolescence. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 35(1), 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-019-00423-x. Bakk, Z., Tekle, F. B., & Vermunt, J. K. (2013). Estimating the association between latent class membership and external variables using bias-adjusted three-step approaches. Sociological Methodology, 43(1), 272–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175012470644. Bolck, A., Croon, M., & Hagenaars, J. (2004). Estimating latent structure models with categorical variables: one-step versus three-step estimators. Political Analysis, 12(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mph001. Böheim, R., Knogler, M., Kosel, C., & Seidel, T. (2020). Exploring student hand-raising across two school subjects using mixed methods: An investigation of an everyday classroom behavior from a motivational perspective. Learning and Instruction, 65, 101250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101250. Burns, C., & Myhill, D. (2004). Interactive or inactive? A consideration of the nature of interaction in whole class teaching. Cambridge Journal of Education, 34(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764042000183115. Chi, M. T. H., Adams, J., Bogusch, E. B., Bruchok, C., Kang, S., Lancaster, M., Levy, R., Li, N., McEldoon, K. L., Stump, G. S., Wylie, R., Xu, D., & Yaghmourian, D. L. (2018). Translating the ICAP theory of cognitive engagement into practice. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 43(6), 1777–1832. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12626. Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (2012). Preface. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. v–ix). New York: Springer. Cobb, J. A. (1972). Relationship of discrete classroom behaviors to fourth-grade academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 74–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032247 Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: a motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. R. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), The Minnesota symposia on child psychology, Self-processes and development (Vol. 23, pp. 43–77). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Conner, J. O., & Pope, D. C. (2013). Not just robo-students: why full engagement matters and how schools can promote it. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(9), 1426–1442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9948-y. Corno, L. (2008). On teaching adaptively. Educational Psychologist, 43(3), 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520802178466. Coxe, S., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2009). The analysis of count data: a gentle introduction to Poisson regression and its alternatives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(2), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890802634175. Denissen, J. J. A., Zarrett, N. R., & Eccles, J. S. (2007). I like to do it, I’m able, and I know I am: longitudinal couplings between domain-specific achievement, self-concept, and interest. Child Development, 78(2), 430–447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01007.x. Dinsmore, D. L., & Alexander, P. A. (2012). A critical discussion of deep and surface processing: what it means, how it is measured, the role of context, and model specification. Educational Psychology Review, 24(4), 499–567.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9198-7. Dixon, J. K., Egendoerfer, L. A., & Clements, T. (2009). Do they really need to raise their hands? Challenging a traditional social norm in a second grade mathematics classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8), 1067–1076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.04.011. Engels, M. C., Colpin, H., van Leeuwen, K., Bijttebier, P., van den Noortgate, W., Claes, S., Goossens, L., & Verschueren, K. (2016). Behavioral engagement, peer status, and teacher-student relationships in adolescence: a longitudinal study on reciprocal influences. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(6), 1192–1207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0414-5. Flieller, A., Jarlégan, A., & Tazouti, Y. (2016). Who benefits from dyadic teacher–student interactions in whole-class settings? The Journal of Educational Research, 109(3), 311–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.950718. Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: a comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763–782). New York: Springer. 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. Fung, F., Tan, C. Y., & Chen, G. (2018). Student engagement and mathematics achievement: unraveling main and interactive effects. Psychology in the Schools, 55(7), 815–831. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22139. Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Hall, N. C., & Pekrun, R. (2008). Antecedents of academic emotions: testing the internal/external frame of reference model for academic enjoyment. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(1), 9–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.12.002. Gogol, K., Brunner, M., Preckel, F., Goetz, T., & Martin, R. (2016). Developmental dynamics of general and school-subject-specific components of academic self-concept, academic interest, and academic anxiety. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 356. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00356. Greene, B. A. (2015). Measuring cognitive engagement with self-report scales: reflections from over 20 years of research. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.989230. Grossman, P. L., & Stodolsky, S. S. (1995). Content as context: the role of school subjects in secondary school teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(8), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X024008005. Hagenaars, J. A. (Ed.). (2006). Applied latent class analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hospel, V., Galand, B., & Janosz, M. (2016). Multidimensionality of behavioural engagement: Empirical support and implications. International Journal of Educational Research, 77, 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.02.007. Howard, M. C., & Hoffman, M. E. (2017). Variable-centered, person-centered, and person-specific approaches: where theory meets the method. Organizational Research Methods, 21(4), 846–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428117744021. Howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: a systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 325–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2013.786024. Hughes, J. N., Luo, W., Kwok, O.-M., & Loyd, L. K. (2008). Teacher-student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: a 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.1. Inagaki, K., Hatano, G., & Morita, E. (1998). Construction of mathematical knowledge through whole-class discussion. Learning and Instruction, 8(6), 503–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00032-2. Ingram, J., & Elliott, V. (2015). A critical analysis of the role of wait time in classroom interactions and the effects on student and teacher interactional behaviours. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2015.1009365. Jang, H. (2008). Supporting students’ motivation, engagement, and learning during an uninteresting activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 798–811. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012841. Jang, H., Kim, E. J., & Reeve, J. (2016). Why students become more engaged or more disengaged during the semester: a self-determination theory dual-process model. Learning and Instruction, 43, 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.002. Jansen, M., Lüdtke, O., & Schroeders, U. (2016). Evidence for a positive relation between interest and achievement: examining between-person and within-person variation in five domains. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.05.004. Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., Malmberg, J., Isohätälä, J., & Sobocinski, M. (2016). How do types of interaction and phases of self-regulated learning set a stage for collaborative engagement? Learning and Instruction, 43, 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.005. Jurik, V., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2013). How student characteristics affect girls’ and boys’ verbal engagement in physics instruction. Learning and Instruction, 23, 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.09.002. Jurik, V., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2014). Predicting students’ cognitive learning activity and intrinsic learning motivation: How powerful are teacher statements, student profiles, and gender? Learning and Individual Differences, 32, 132–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.01.005. Lawson, M. A., & Lawson, H. A. (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 432–479. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313480891. Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (2013). Interrelations of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive school engagement in high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9857-5. Liem, A. D., 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 outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 486–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.08.001. Lo, Y. (2001). Testing the number of components in a normal mixture. Biometrika, 88(3), 767–778. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/88.3.767. Loibl, K., Leuders, T., & Dörfler, T. (2020). A framework for explaining teachers’ diagnostic judgements by cognitive modeling (DiaCoM). Teaching and Teacher Education, 91, 103059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103059. Mang, J., Ustjanzew, N., Schiepe-Tiska, A., Prenzel, M., Sälzer, C., Müller, K., et al. (2018). PISA 2012 Skalenhandbuch: Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente [PISA 2012 scale manual: documentation of the survey instruments]. Münster, New York: Waxmann. Mangold. (2014). INTERACT: Mangold International GmbH. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Trautwein, U., & Morin, A. J. S. (2009). Classical latent profile analysis of academic self-concept dimensions: synergy of person- and variable-centered approaches to theoretical models of self-concept. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(2), 191–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510902751010. McCutcheon, A. L. (1987). Latent class analysis (Sage University Papers Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences) (Vol. 64). Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (2014). The study of talk between teachers and students, from the 1970s until the 2010s. Oxford Review of Education, 40(4), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.934087. Möller, J., Retelsdorf, J., Köller, O., & Marsh, H. W. (2011). The reciprocal internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 48(6), 1315–1346. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211419649. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén. Nurmi, J.-E. (2012). Students’ characteristics and teacher–child relationships in instruction: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 7(3), 177–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.03.001. Nurmi, J.-E., & Kiuru, N. (2015). Students’ evocative impact on teacher instruction and teacher–child relationships. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39(5), 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025415592514. Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: a Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(4), 535–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396. Nylund-Gibson, K., Grimm, R. P., & Masyn, K. E. (2019). Prediction from latent classes: a demonstration of different approaches to include distal outcomes in mixture models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 26(6), 967–985. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2019.1590146. O’Connor, C., Michaels, S., Chapin, S., & Harbaugh, A. G. (2017). The silent and the vocal: participation and learning in whole-class discussion. Learning and Instruction, 48, 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.003. O’Mara, A. J., Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., & Debus, R. L. (2006). Do self-concept interventions make a difference? A synergistic blend of construct validation and meta-analysis. Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 181–206. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep41034. Olivier, E., Archambault, I., Clercq, M., & Galand, B. (2019). Student self-efficacy, classroom engagement, and academic achievement: comparing three theoretical frameworks. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(2), 326–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0952-0. Pauli, C., & Lipowsky, F. (2007). Mitmachen oder zuhören? Mündliche Schülerinnen- und Schülerbeteiligung im Mathematikunterrichts [Student participation in whole-class discussions and teacher–student interactions in mathematics classrooms]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 35(2), 101–124. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4. Pinxten, M., Marsh, H. W., de Fraine, B., van den Noortgate, W., & van Damme, J. (2014). Enjoying mathematics or feeling competent in mathematics? Reciprocal effects on mathematics achievement and perceived math effort expenditure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 152–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12028. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68. Schmidt, J. A., Rosenberg, J. M., & Beymer, P. N. (2018). A person-in-context approach to student engagement in science: examining learning activities and choice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21409. Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461–464. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136. Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., Svaricek, R., Majcik, M., Navratilova, J., Drexlerova, A., Kychler, J., & Salamounova, Z. (2019). Do those who talk more learn more? The relationship between student classroom talk and student achievement. Learning and Instruction, 63, 101217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101217. Seidel, T. (2005). Video analysis strategies of the IPN Video Study – a methodological overview. In T. Seidel, M. Prenzel, & M. Kobarg (Eds.). How to run a video study: Technical report of the IPN Video Study (pp. 70–78). Münster: Waxmann. Seidel, T., Rimmele, R., & Dalehefte, I. M. (2003). Skalendokumentation: Schülerfragebogen [Scales: student questionaire]. In T. Seidel, M. Prenzel, R. Duit, & M. Lehrke (Eds.). Technischer Bericht zur Videostudie “1Lehr-Lern-Prozesse im Physikunterricht“ (pp. 317–388). Kiel: IPN. Seidel, T., & Prenzel, M. (2006). Stability of teaching patterns in physics instruction: Findings from a video study. Learning and Instruction, 16, 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.002. Seidel, T., Schnitzler, K., Kosel, C., Stürmer, K., & Holzberger, D. (2020). Student characteristics in the eyes of teachers: Differences between novice and expert teachers in judgment accuracy, observed behavioral cues, and gaze. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09532-2. Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407–441. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543046003407. Sidelinger, R. J., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2010). Co-constructing student involvement: an examination of teacher confirmation and student-to-student connectedness in the college classroom. Communication Education, 59(2), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903390867. Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571. Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). New York: Springer. Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840. Stahl, S. A., & Clark, C. H. (1987). The effects of participatory expectations in classroom discussion on the learning of science vocabulary. American Educational Research Journal, 24(4), 541–555. Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMMS videotape classroom study: methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eight-grade mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States (NCES 1999-074). Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. Tas, Y. (2016). The contribution of perceived classroom learning environment and motivation to student engagement in science. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 557–577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-016-0303-z. Tein, J.-Y., Coxe, S., & Cham, H. (2013). Statistical power to detect the correct number of classes in latent profile analysis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(4), 640–657. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2013.824781. Walker, 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2005.06.004. Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012a). Adolescent behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement trajectories in school and their differential relations to educational success. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00753.x. Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012b). Social support matters: longitudinal effects of social support on three dimensions of school engagement from middle to high school. Child Development, 83(3), 877–895. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01745.x. Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: a longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.002. Wang, M.-T., & Peck, S. C. (2013). Adolescent educational success and mental health vary across school engagement profiles. Developmental Psychology, 49(7), 1266–1276. Wang, J., & Wang, X. (2012). Structural equation modeling: applications using Mplus (Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics). Chichester: Wiley. Wang, M.-T., Fredricks, J., Ye, F., Hofkens, T., & Linn, J. S. (2019). Conceptualization and assessment of adolescents’ engagement and disengagement in school. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 592–606. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000431. Watt, H. M. G., Carmichael, C., & Callingham, R. (2017). Students’ engagement profiles in mathematics according to learning environment dimensions: developing an evidence base for best practice in mathematics education. School Psychology International, 38(2), 166–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034316688373. Wedel, M., & Kamakura, W. A. (2000). Market segmentation: conceptual and methodological foundations (International Series in Quantitative Marketing) (Vol. 8). Boston: Springer. Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review, 30(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.12.001.