STUDENT ENGAGEMENT: A CONSTRUCT REVISITED FROM A SOCIO-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

Authors

  • Thérèse Laferrière Université Laval
  • Séverine Parent Université du Québec à Rimouski
  • Michelle Desch¨ênes Université du Québec à Rimouski
  • Sylvie Barma Université Laval

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51657/ric.v6i1.51525

Keywords:

student attention, interaction, learning object, peers, community

Abstract

This article examines the literature on student engagement in the classroom or school in order to suggest a socio-culturally inspired definition of this construct, one that emphasizes participation in context rather than defining it along three or four dimensions. Six nuclei of activities are distinguished, three at the micro level and three at the macro level: 1) Attention to the teacher's discourse; 2) Direct interaction with the learning object; 3) Interaction with peers to carry out a project, understand the meaning of a question or a problem, explore it further, or even solve it in a learning or knowledge-building community; 4) School attendance; 5) Expected or constructive contribution to the dynamics of a group; 6) Contribution to the environment, to a local or external community. To illustrate these, the PERISCOPE network’s repertory of publications was searched, and 61 publications were selected according to independent criteria. Although the manifestations of student engagement are likely to multiply and diversify, the six activity nuclei have thus passed a first validation test.

References

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L. et 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

Appleton, J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D. et Reschly, A. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002

Archambault. I. (2006). Continuité et discontinuité dans le développement de l’engagement scolaire chez les élèves du secondaire : une approche centrée sur la personne pour prédire le décrochage [Thèse de doctorat, Université de Montréal, Québec].

Archambault, I., Pagani, L.S. et Fitzpatrick, C. (2013). Transactional associations between classroom engagement and relations with teachers from first through fourth grade. Learning and Instruction, 23, 1-9.

Archambault, I. et Dupéré, V. (2017). Joint trajectories of behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement in elementary school. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(2), 188-198.

Azevedo, R. (2015). Defining and measuring engagement and learning in science: Conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and analytical issues. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1004069

Bader, B., Morin, É et Therriault, G. (2017). Éducation à l’environnement et au développement durable du Saint-Laurent. Principes, démarches éducatives et types d’engagement écocitoyen des jeunes. Dans Archambault, P., Schloss I.R., Grant, C., et Plante, S (dir.). Les hydrocarbures dans le golfe du Saint-Laurent - Enjeux sociaux, économiques et environnementaux (p. 295-320). Notre Golfe.

Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 164–180.

Barma, S., Deslandes, R. et Ste-Marie, N. (2021). The adolescent at the center of activity systems in the context of COVID-19: Redefining routines and relationships at the heart of learning. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 17(2), 133-143.

Barma, S. (2013). Mot de la rédaction : innover dans la tradition de Vygotsky. Revue Internationale Du CRIRES : Innover Dans La Tradition De Vygotsky, 1(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.51657/ric.v1i1.41016

Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M. et Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. Dans R. K. Sawyer (dir.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475-488). Cambridge University Press.

Bransford, J., Brown, A. et Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Academy Press.

Brougère, G. (2011). Apprendre en participant. Dans Étienne Bourgeois et Gaétane Chapelle (dir.), Apprendre et faire apprendre (p. 115-124). PUF.

Chi, M.T.H. et Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2014.965823

Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L. et Wylie, C. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer.

Delors, J. (1996). L’éducation, un trésor est caché dedans. Rapport à l’UNESCO de la Commission internationale sur l’éducation pour le 21e siècle. Éditions Odile Jacob et UNESCO.

D’Mello, S., Dieterle, E. et Duckworth, A. (2017). Advanced, analytic, automated (AAA) measurement of engagement during learning. Educational Psychologist, 52(2), 104–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1281747

Eccles, J. S. (2016). Engagement: Where to next? Learning and Instruction, 43, 71-75.

Engeström, Y. (1987), Learning by Expanding: An Activity-theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Orienta-Konsultit, Helsinki.

Engeström, Y. et Sannino, A. (2013). La volition et l’agentivité transformatrice : perspective théorique de l’activité. Revue internationale du CRIRES : innover dans la tradition de Vygotsky, 1, 4-19. https://revues.ulaval.ca/ojs/index.php/RIC/article/view/41017

Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. 2nd Ed. Cambridge University Press.

Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117–142.

Finn, J. D. et Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, et C. Wylie (dir.), Handbook of research on student engagement (p. 97–131). Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_5

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C. et 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

Fredricks, J. A., Wang, M. T., Schall Linn, J., Hofkens, T. L., Sung, H., Parr, A. et Allerton, J. (2016). Using qualitative methods to develop a survey measure of math and science engagement. Learning and Instruction, 43, 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.009

Fredricks, J., Rescly, A. L. et Christenson, S. L. (2019). Handbook of student engagement interventions: Working with disengaged youth. Elsevier.

Janosz, M., Archambault, I., Morizot, J. et Pagani, L. (2008). School engagement trajectories and their differential predictive relations to dropout. Journal of Social Issues, 64, 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00546.x

Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change, 35(2), 24-32.

Lave, J. et Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

Meece, J., Blumenfeld, P. C. et Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students' goal orientation and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514-523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.514

Nadeau, S. (2018). Études réalisées hors du Canada sur l’engagement de l’élève/étudiant-e en classe ou à l’école. Série Leviers PRS (p.1-17). https://www.periscope-r.quebec/publication/61a6d84d036ba74f1636881e

Nadeau, S., Boulay, M. et Lafond, B. (2018). Synthèse de connaissances issues de la recherche sur l’engagement des élèves/étudiant-e-s dans la classe ou l’école. Série Leviers PRS (p.1-36). https://periscope-r.quebec/_engagement_recensions_resume.pdf

Newmann, F. M., Wehlage, G. G. et Lamborn, S. D. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In F. Newmann (Dir.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (p. 11-39). Teachers College Press.

Parent, S. (2017). L’engagement d’enseignants, la variation de l’engagement d’étudiants sur une base trimestrielle et la présence de conditions d’innovation en situation d’enseigner et d’apprendre avec le numérique au collégial. [Thèse de doctorat, Université Laval]. https://corpus.ulaval.ca/jspui/bitstream/20.500.11794/28027/1/33337.pdf

O’Donnell, K. et Reschly, A. L. (2020). Assessment of student engagement. In A. L. Reschly, A. J. Pohl et S. L. Christenson (dir.), Student engagement: Effective academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective interventions at school (p. 55-76). Springer.

Rogoff, B. (2017) : Participer pour apprendre! https://periscope-r.quebec/rogoff_final.pdf

Poellhuber, B. et Michelot, F. (2019). L’engagement et les stratégies d’autorégulation des apprenants adultes en e-Formation. Dans A. Jézégou (Dir.), Traité de l’e-Formation des adultes : état de la recherche (p. 233-262). De Boeck Supérieur.

Reeve, J. et Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257-267. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002

Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L. et Wylie, C. (dir.), Handbook of research on student engagement (p. 149-172). Springer.

Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 579-595. doi:10.1037/ a0032690

Reeve, J. et Shin, S. H. (2020a). How teachers can support students’ agentic engagement. Theory into Practice, 59(2), 150-161.

Reeve, J., Cheon, S. H. et Yu, T. H. (2020b). An autonomy-supportive intervention to develop students’ resilience by boosting agentic engagement. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 1-14. DOI: 10.1177/0165025420911103

Reschly, A. L. et Christenson, S.L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly et C. Wylie (dir.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (p. 3-19). Springer.

Rogoff, B. (1994). Developing Understading of the Idea of Communities of Learners. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1(4), 209-229.

Ryu, S. et Lombardi, D. (2015). Coding classroom interactions for collective and individual engagement. Educational Psychologist, 50,70-84.

Sawyer, R.K. (2006). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press. Cet ouvrage a été réédité en 2014.

Shernoff, D. J., Kelly, S., Tonks, S. M., Anderson, B., Cavanagh, R. F., Sinha, S. et 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

Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C. et 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

Sinha, S., Rogat T. K., Adams-Wiggins, K. R. et Hmelo-Silver, C.-E. (2015) Collaborative group engagement in a computer-supported inquiry learning environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 10(3), 273-307. doi: 10.1007/s11412-015-9218-y

Voelkl, K. E. (1997). Identification with school. American Journal of Education, 105, 204–319.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.

Willms, J. D. (2003). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation. Results from PISA 2000. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). https://www.oecd.org/education/school/programmeforinternationalstudentassessmentpisa/33689437.pdf

Willms, J. D., Friesen, S. et Milton, P. (2009). What did you do in school today: Transforming classrooms through social, academic and intellectual engagement. Canadian Education Association. https://www.edcan.ca/wp-content/uploads/cea-2009-wdydist.pdf

Downloads

Published

2022-07-22

How to Cite

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT: A CONSTRUCT REVISITED FROM A SOCIO-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE. (2022). International Review of CRIRES: Innovating in the Tradition of Vygotsky, 6(1), 111-135. https://doi.org/10.51657/ric.v6i1.51525