A Model of Academic Enablers and
Elementary Reading/Language Arts
Achievement
James Clyde DiPerna & Robert J. Volpe
Lehigh University
Stephen N. Elliott
University of Wisconsin-Madison
School Psychology Review
1
1. Theoretical and Empirical Models of
Academic Achievement
• DiPerna and Elliott (2002) define the construct of academic
enablers as “attitudes and behaviors that allow a student to
participate in, and ultimately benefit from academic instruction in
the classroom” and suggest that academic enablers include
broad domains such as motivation, interpersonal skills,
engagement, and study skills.
• One of the few empirically tested theories of academic
achievement including student variables is Walberg’s (1981)
theory of educational productivity.
• This theory posits that psychological characteristics of
individual student and their immediate psychological
environments influence educational outcomes (cognitive,
behavioral, and attitudinal) (Reynolds & Walberg, 1992c)
2
1. Theoretical and Empirical Models of
Academic Achievement
• Walberg (1986) identified nine key variables that influence
educational outcomes:
(1) student ability/prior achievement
(2) motivation
(3) age/developmental level
(4) quantity of instruction
(5) quality of instruction
(6) classroom climate
(7) home environment
(8) peer group
(9) exposure to mass media outsoide of school
3
1. Theoretical and Empirical Models of
Academic Achievement
• Both Walberg and Keith consistently found that a student
variable, prior achievement, had the largest direct effects on
current achievement, and another student variable, motivation,
had significant total effects on achievement.
• Wang, Haertel, and Walberg (1993) attempted to explore the
relative magnitude of each of 228 variables on academic
achievement.
• The authors used three different review methods (content
analysis of review articles, expert ratings, and meta-analysis)
to determine which of the 228 variables have the most
significant effect on student achievement.
4
2. Relationships Between Social Behavior,
Engagements, Study Skills, and Academic
Achievement
• Wentzel (1993) and Malecki (1998) have contributed to a
program of research exploring the relationship between social
behaviors, problem behaviors, and academic outcomes.
• Wntzel examined the relationship between measures of
academic outcomes (i.e., grades and standardized
achievement test scores) and students’ social and academic
behavior.
• Malecki (1998; Malecki & Elliott, 2002) extended the work of
Wentzel through the use of standardized measures completed
by multiple informants (parent, teacher, and student) to
explore the relationships between social behaviors and
academic outcomes.
5
2. Relationships Between Social Behavior,
Engagements, Study Skills, and Academic
Achievement
• Additional evidence supporting the relationships between
academic achievement and the student variables of social
skills, motivation, engagement, and study skills resulted from
the development and standardization of the Academic
Competence Evaluation Scales (ACES: DiPerna & Elliott,
2000)
• A teacher rating scale designed to measure students’ skills,
attitudes, and behaviors that contribute to academic success
in the classroom.
6
3. A Theoretical Model of Academic Enablers
and Academic Achievement
• Based on the work of Reynolds and Walberg (1991), Cool and
Keith (1991), DiPerna (1999), five student predictor variables
were identified for inclusion in a theoretical model of academic
enablers and academic achievement. These variables were:
Prior achievement, interpersonal skills, study skills, motivation,
and engagement.
7
Academic achievement
Academic enablers
Figure 1. Hypothesized model of academic enablers and academic achievement
8
3. A Theoretical Model of Academic Enablers
and Academic Achievement
• The model resulting from the use of the aforementioned
empirical and theoretical criteria suggest that motivation plays
an indirect but central role in the promotion of academic
achievement.
• Motivation is hypothesized to influence two other skills –
engagement and study skills – that directly influence
development of academic skills.
• Prior achievement and interpersonal skills, however, are
hypothesized to influence a student’s level of motivation for
academic learning.
9
4. Method
• Participants
• Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to analyze data
collected for a sample of elementary students.
• Participants in this study were 394 students and 104 teachers
in kindergarten through sixth grade from 21schools in the
Northeastern United States.
• Participants were divided into two samples: primary (Grades
K-2) and intermediate (Grades 3-6).
• The primary sample (Grades K-2) consisted of 192 students
and included slightly higher percentages of both females
(56%) and first graders (48%).
10
4. Method
• Participants
• The intermediate sample (Grades 3-6) consisted of 202
students and included slightly higher percentages of females
(55%) and fourth graders (33%).
11
4. Method
• Instrumentation
• The ACES (Academic Competence Evaluation Scales) was
designed to measure students’ skills, attitudes, and behaviors
that contribute to academic competence (DiPerna & Elliott,
2000).
• The teacher version of the ACES used in this study was an
81-item questionnaire with two separate scales (Academic
Skills and Academic Enablers).
• The Academic Skills Scale includes three subscales
(Reading/Language Arts, Mathematics, and Critical Thinking),
and Academic Enablers Scale includes four subscales
(Interpersonal Skills, Motivation, Study Skills, and
12
Engagement).
4. Method
• Instrumentation
• 5-point ratings for each items.
• The Reading/Language Arts subscale was the only Academic
Skills subscale used in the current analyses, and sample
items from this subscale include “reading comprehension,”
“written communication,” and “oral communication.”
• All four of the Academic Enablers subscales were used for
the current analyses, and sample items include “follows
classroom rules” (Interpersonal), “participates in class discussions”
(Engagement). “prefers challenging tasks” (Motivation), and
“completes homework” (Study Skills).
13
4. Method
• In the initial research exploring the psychometric properties of
the ACES, each of the scales and subscales has
demonstrated strong evidence of reliability and validity
(DiPerna & Elliott, 1999).
• Internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s alphas) were
high for the scales, ranging from (0.92) to (0.98).
• Correlations between the ACES and students’ scores
(Composite, Mathematics, Reading, and Language) from the
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS; Hoover, Hieronymus, Frisbie
& Dunbar, 1993) ranged from moderate (.55) to high (.76).
14
5. Procedure
• Each participating teacher randomly selected up to 5 students
form her class roster and completed an ACES rating for each
student approximately 6 to 8 weeks into the school year.
• Teachers then completed a second ACES rating for each
student during the final month of the academic year.
15
6. Data Analysis
• Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used as the primary
method for analyzing the data.
• Several indices were used to assess the fit of the proposed model
based on the recommendations of Kline (1998) and Hu and Bentler
(1995).
• These indices and threshold included the generalized likelihood ratio

( d. f ) < 3.0; Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) >= 0.9; Comparative Fit
Index (CFI) >= 0.9; Non-Normed Fit Index (NNFI) >= 0.9; and Root
Mean Squared Error of Approximation (RMSEA) < 0.08.
2
16
7. Results
Table 1. Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations of the Variables Included
in the Model for the Primary Group (n=192)
Prior Reading Interpersonal
Achievement Skills
Motivation Study Skill
Skill
Engagement Reading
Achievement

2
(  (7) = 36.34, p = .00, GFI = .94, CFI = .95, NNFI = .90, RMSEA = .15)
2
Good model fit !
17
7. Results
Table 2. Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations of the Variables Included
in the Model for the Intermediate Group (n=202)
Prior Reading
Achievement
Interpersonal
Skills
Motivation Study Skill
Skill
Engagement Reading
Achievement
(  (7) = 13.74, p = .06, GFI = .98, CFI = .99, NNFI = .98, RMSEA 18
= .07)
Good model fit !
2
7. Results
• The pathway coefficients resulting from this analysis are displayed in
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Model of reading/language arts achievement for primary grades.
(Effects reported as standardized regression weights.)
19
• The pathway coefficients resulting from this analysis are displayed in
Figure 3.
Figure 3. Model of reading/language arts achievement for intermediate grades.
20
(Effects reported as standardized regression weights.)
7. Results
Table 4. Comparison of Parameter Estimates between Primary and IntermediateGrade Groups
• That indicated statistically significant differences between groups in the
pathway between Motivation and Engagement (critical ratio = -2.09) and the
pathway linking Engagement and Current Achievement (critical ratio = -2.56)
(尚未標準化)
21
8. Discussion
• (See Table 3) Prior achievement and motivation demonstrate
large and moderate total effects, with current
reading/language arts achievement in both samples.
Table 3.
Direct, Indirect, and Total
Effects of Variables Included in
the Best-Fitting Model of
Reading Achievement
22
8. Discussion
• Interpersonal skills also exhibited consistent relationships with
achievement across the two samples; however, similar to the
findings of Wentzel (1993) and Malecki and Elliott (2002), the
magnitude of total effects was small. (Table 3)
• Engagement and study skills, exhibited different levels of total
effects across the two samples. Specifically, engagement
demonstrated large effects in the primary sample and
moderate effects for the intermediate sample. (Table 3)
• In contrast, study skills demonstrated negligible effects for
the primary level and moderate effects for the intermediate
level.
23
9. Limitations
1. The first limitation is that the findings require replication to
demonstrate that they are not unique to the current sample.
2. A second but related limitation is that alternative models of
academic enablers must be explored to determine if the
current model best represents the relationship between
student variables and academic outcomes.
• Multiple models can demonstrate good fit with the same
dataset; thus, it is important that a variety of models are
explored to determine which model is optimal from both an
empirical and theoretical perspective.
24
9. Limitations
3. A third limitation of the current study regards the use of
teacher judgments to measure all of the variables included in
the model.
• Although there is substantial evidence to support the accuracy
of teacher judgments of academic achievement, data were
not collected to cross-validate measured variables via source
(e.g., parent, teacher, and/or student).
25
10. Implications of Findings for Practice
• The results of this study suggest that prior achievement is a
strong predictor of current achievement.
• A slight variation on the interpretation of this finding is that
current achievement (knowledge and skills) is a strong
predictor of future achievement.
• Thus, for students experiencing academic difficulty, chances
for future academic success may be limited unless a change
(intervention) is implemented to address specific academic
skill problems.
26
10. Implications of Findings for Practice
• In addition, the results of this study also suggest that the four
academic enablers included in the model (i.e., motivation,
engagement, study skills, and interpersonal skills) are worth
considering when developing assessment protocols for
students experiencing academic difficulty.
• If a practitioner designs an assessment that focuses
exclusively on motivation and current academic skills, he may
be overlooking key variables possibly contributing to the
child’s academic performance (e.g., study skills, interpersonal
skills).
27
10. Implications of Findings for Practice
• This omission could result in the identification of the wrong
cause of the academic difficulty (e.g., low motivation) as well
as the development of an intervention that fails to address the
true problem (e.g., difficulty getting along with others in their
class that has decreased a student’s motivation to succeed in
the classroom).
Motivation
Study skills
Current
Achievement
interpersonal
skills
28
11. Directions for Future Research
- Models of academic enablers
• The first is to conduct additional studies with similar samples
to explore the replicability of the current results. (Generalized)
• After identifying a best-fitting model, it should be tested across
groups of students distinguished by sex, race, disability status,
and level of education to determine the effect of these variables
on the strength of relationships among academic enablers
and academic achievement.
29
11. Directions for Future Research
- Intervention research
• Models of academic enablers provide a framework to
generate testable hypotheses for intervention research.
• They also provide a framework for thinking about outcomes
that should be considered when conducting research to
evaluate the efficacy of interventions.
30
• For example, if a researcher is attempting to determine the
effect of an intervention to promote social skill development
for students with behavioral difficulties, that researcher may
want to include additional measures to assess the effect of
the intervention on related variables (e.g., motivation,
academic achievement).
Study skills
Academic
achievement
Motivation
Social skill development
for students
Engagement
31
12. Conclusions
• The purpose of this article was to introduce readers to
theoretical and empirical models of academic achievement as
well as to facilitate thinking about how academic enablers
might contribute to overall academic achievement.
• The results from this study suggest that prior achievement
and interpersonal skills influence motivation, which in turn
influences study skills and engagement to promote
achievement.
• Further investigation of this model, as well as alternatives, is
necessary to identify specific skills and behaviors that
practitioners should consider in their assessment, intervention,
32
and prevention practices.