Webinar:
How Do We Use Student Engagement Data to
Improve Instruction?
May 8, 2015
WebEx Instructions
2
WebEx instructions
Attendees can
provide nonverbal feedback
to presenters
utilizing the
Feedback tool.
3
WebEx instructions
Feedback
options:
4
WebEx instructions
Attendees should utilize the “Q&A”
feature to pose questions to the
speaker, panelists, and/or host.
The host will hold all questions
directed toward the speaker or
panelists, and they will be answered
during a Q&A session at the end of
each discussion.
5
Welcome and Overview
Elizabeth Collins
Interim Director, REL Appalachia
CNA
Agenda
1.
2.
Welcome and Overview
•
What is a REL?
•
REL Appalachia’s mission
•
Introductions and webinar goals
Student Engagement
•
What it is
•
How to measure and monitor it
•
How to proactively support it and how to intervene to improve it
3.
Q&A
4.
Stakeholder Feedback Survey
7
What is a REL?
• A REL is a Regional Educational Laboratory.
• There are 10 RELs across the country.
• The REL program is administered by the U.S. Department of Education,
Institute of Education Sciences (IES).
• A REL serves the education needs of a designated region.
• The REL works in partnership with the region’s school districts, state
departments of education, and others to use data and research to
improve academic outcomes for students.
8
What is a REL?
9
REL Appalachia’s mission
• Meet the applied research and technical assistance needs of Kentucky,
Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.
• Conduct empirical research and analysis.
• Bring evidence-based information to policy makers and practitioners:
– Inform policy and practice – for states, districts, schools, and other
stakeholders.
– Focus on high-priority, discrete issues and build a body of knowledge over
time.
http://www.RELAppalachia.org
Follow us! @REL_Appalachia
10
Today’s speaker
• James Appleton, Ph.D.
• Director, Office of Research and Evaluation, Gwinnett County Public
Schools (Georgia)
• University of Georgia – Part-time professor
• Georgia Tech – Computational Science and Engineering
• Research: Student engagement
• Student engagement work with Sandra Christenson, Amy Reschly,
doctoral students (Lovelace, Landis, Carter, Parker, Pinzone)
Main sources:
• Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (2012).
• Revision to “Best Practices” chapter on engagement
(Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014).
11
Webinar goals
• Continue a series of support by REL Appalachia on student engagement.
– Webinar: What is Student Engagement and How Do We Measure It?
– Workshop: Measuring and Improving Student Engagement
– Workshop: Action Planning for Schoolwide Student Engagement Strategies
– Materials available at www.relappalachia.org/events
• Increase participants’ understanding of how student engagement can be
measured.
• Provide participants with best practices and tools that can increase
student engagement in their schools and classrooms.
12
Monitoring and Intervening with
Student Engagement Data
James Appleton, Ph.D.
Director, Office of Research and Evaluation
Gwinnett County Public Schools
What is student engagement?
• Defined variously by different researchers and theorists, but there is
consistency around key ideas.
• A broad conceptual definition that reflects those varied perspectives:
Student engagement is a measure of the extent to which a student
willingly participates in schooling activities.
• There is consensus among researchers and theorists that student
engagement is a multidimensional construct with four elements:
– Academic engagement.
– Affective engagement.
– Behavioral engagement.
– Cognitive engagement.
14
What does existing research say about student engagement?
• Student engagement is closely associated with desirable schooling
outcomes.
• Higher attendance, higher academic achievement, fewer disciplinary incidents,
lower dropout and retention rates, higher graduation rates.
(Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008; Finn, 1989, 1993; Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris,
2004; Jimerson, Campos, & Grief, 2003; Jimerson, Renshaw, Stewart, Hart, & O’Malley,
2009; Shernoff & Schmidt, 2008)
• Student engagement is closely associated with general measures of wellbeing.
•
Lower rates of health problems, lower rates of high-risk behaviors.
(Carter, McGee, Taylor, & Williams, 2007; McNeely, Nonnemaker, & Blum, 2002; Patton
et al., 2006)
• Student engagement levels can be effectively influenced through schoolbased interventions.
(Appleton, Christenson, Kim, & Reschly, 2006; Christenson et al., 2008; Fredricks,
Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004)
15
How is student engagement measured?
• Three primary data collection strategies are available for measuring student
engagement:
• Student self-reports.
• Teacher reports.
• Observational measures.
• Three dimensions of engagement are assessed via available instruments:
• Affective/emotional: the extent of the student’s positive and negative reactions
to teachers, classmates, academics, and school.
• Behavioral: the student’s involvement in academic, social, and extracurricular
activities.
• Cognitive: the student’s level of investment in his/her learning.
Note: Academic engagement is measured using traditional outcome data, such as
student achievement results.
(Fredericks et al., 2011)
16
How is student engagement monitored (school-level)?
Average Student Engagement Ratings
Percentage of Students Reporting Positive Levels
17
How is student engagement monitored (school-level)?
18
How is student engagement monitored (student-level)?
19
How is student engagement monitored (EWIS)?
20
What do we know about interventions?
21
What do we know about interventions?
22
What do we know about interventions?
• IES reviews and others underscore points made earlier by Dynarski &
Gleason, others:
– Many programs don’t work; need good designs and evaluations.
• Draw from promising practices
programs and initiatives.
importance of evaluating
• Comprehensive, individualized, long-term interventions positively affect
school completion among youth (Christenson & Thurlow, 2004).
• Most promising practices and programs address student engagement in
some way.
23
Engagement as remedy
Given the connections between engagement and
outcomes … not surprising that it is also the
cornerstone of school reform (Christenson et al., 2008).
• Cornerstone of high school reform initiatives.
• Remedy to conditions in schools:
– Bored, unmotivated, and uninvolved.
• Engaging Schools (National Research Council, 2004).
24
Engagement interventions
• Engagement as an organizing
framework.
• Important contexts for
intervention (e.g., families,
schools).
• Universal and individualized
levels.
• Types interrelated.
– An intervention that addresses
self-regulation may also affect
time on task or homework
completion.
Intensive
Targeted
Universal
25
Strategies for promoting student engagement
Engagement domain
Promising strategies
Academic engagement
Using after-school programs (tutoring,
homework help), increasing home support for
learning, and implementing self-monitoring
interventions.
Affective engagement
Using problem-solving skills, setting realistic
goals, and creating an active interest in
learning.
Behavioral engagement
Devising individualized approach to attendance
and participation issues, implementing
programs to address skills such as problem
solving and anger management, and
developing behavior contracts to address
individual needs.
Cognitive engagement
Using problem-solving skills, setting realistic
goals, and creating an active interest in
learning.
26
Academic engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Make the most of available time
– Academic engaged time (AET) is highly predictive of achievement.
• Involve team and other personnel
– Consultation regarding instruction and management, use tips for increasing
AET, use interventions to target instructional variables (e.g., variety, match,
feedback) and use of time.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
27
Academic engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Monitor failures and credits
– Check against number of credits required to earn a diploma (defined by each
state). Course grades—and possibly state assessments—can be used to
determine credits earned.
– Course failures in math or English in the 6th grade are highly predictive of
failure to graduate from high school (Balfanz et al., 2007).
• Teams…
– Should regularly examine course grades and credits earned, and follow up to
help recapture credits (retaking courses, online credit recovery, and summer
school).
– Should link academic engagement to early warning systems.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
28
Academic engagement: Universal strategies
• Enhance classroom managerial strategies (Gettinger & Walther, 2012).
– Establish efficient and consistent classroom routines.
– Decrease class and group sizes.
– Minimize classroom disruptions/effectively manage off-task behavior.
– Reduce transition time.
• Utilize student-mediated strategies (Gettinger & Walther, 2012).
– Teach meta-cognitive, self-monitoring, and study strategies to students.
– Have students set their own goals for learning.
– Ensure effective use of homework to enhance learning.
29
Academic engagement: Universal strategies
• Facilitate home-school support for learning.
– Enhance bi-directional communication with families.
– Encourage parents to volunteer in the classroom (Lee & Smith, 1993).
– Incorporate projects that take place in the community (Lewis, 2004).
• Use a variety of interesting texts and resources.
• Support student autonomy by providing choices within courses and
assignments (Skinner et al., 2005).
30
Academic engagement: Individualized strategies
• Utilize afterschool programs (tutoring, homework help).
• Intensify partnering and communication efforts with families (e.g., homeschool notes, assignment notebooks, enrichment activities; Klem &
Connell, 2004).
– Ensure adequacy of educational resources in the home.
– Help parents to understand and set expectations .
• Implement individual self-monitoring interventions.
• Foster positive teacher-student relationships for marginalized students.
• Seek out and utilize college outreach programs and tutors for students
(Rodriquez et al., 2004).
31
Consider
• In what area do you think your school is strong in supporting academic
engagement?
• What area would you like to strengthen?
32
Strategies: Affective engagement
Engagement domain
Associated strategies
Affective (general)




Affective (teacher-student
relationships)
Affective (peer support at
school)
Affective (family support for
learning)









Student-centered instructional strategies.
Community-based learning activities.
Student participation in decision-making processes at the school
or classroom level.
Targeted interventions like Check and Connect.
Student-centered instructional strategies.
Targeted interventions like Check and Connect.
Positive peer culture (PPC) techniques.
Cross-age peer mentoring programs.
Peer tutoring, including strategies specifically targeting students
receiving special education services in an inclusion setting.
Targeted interventions like Check and Connect.
“Parent University” programs.
Involvement of parents in students’ career exploration/planning
activities.
Targeted interventions like Check and Connect.
33
Affective engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Promote belonging and bonding with school.
– Belonging is associated with persistence in rigorous coursework, academic
self-efficacy, stronger self-concept, and task/goal orientations (Goodenow,
1993a/b) and reduced rates of risky behaviors (McBride et al, 1995).
• Teams…
– Work with teachers/administrators to emphasize the importance of adultstudent connections during school day.
– Ensure availability of additional support.
– Implement and evaluate school programs that facilitate frequent positive
contact between staff and students and use students’ engagement data to
link those showing increased risk to more intensive support.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
34
Affective engagement: Formal interventions
• Seattle Social Development Project
– Comprehensive intervention for elementary students to promote positive
social development and improved relationships with families and schools.
– Goal to prevent adolescent health and behavior problems.
– 3 components: classroom management and instruction; curriculum based in
cognitive-behavioral methods (self-control, social competence); and parent
workshops.
– Intervention effects evaluated at regular intervals through adulthood.
 Studies found early (1st grade) and persistent (6 years) intervention produced
results (at 18)  increase in school bonding and achievement, reductions in grade
retention, misbehavior, violence, and sexual activity (Hawkins et al, 2007).
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
35
Affective engagement: Universal strategies
• Implement advisory programs, with advisors monitoring engagement
data.
• Systematically build relationships/connections for all students –
– Educators identify students who may not have a connection with a staff
member (i.e., list all students’ names at grade levels and determine who
knows the student) and match staff members and alienated students for
future regular “mentor like” contact.
• Address student population size through implementation of smaller
learning communities.
• Enhance peer connections through peer-assisted learning strategies.
• Implement a mentoring program (can use college-age students).
• Increase participation in extracurricular activities.
36
Strategies: Behavioral and Cognitive engagement
Engagement domain
Associated strategies
Behavioral (general)

Cognitive (control & relevance
of school work)





Cognitive (future aspirations
and goals)




Involvement of student in developing/implementing
behavior plans.
Positive peer culture (PPC) techniques.
Student-centered instructional strategies.
Community-based learning activities.
Career exploration and planning activities.
Student participation in decision-making processes at the
school or classroom level.
Targeted interventions like Check and Connect.
Career exploration and planning activities.
Community-based learning activities.
Targeted interventions like Check and Connect.
37
Behavioral engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Implement timely academic and behavior interventions.
– Attendance, preparation, and behavior—even in early grades—are associated
with achievement across grade levels, race, SES, and gender.
– Related to later patterns of engagement/disengagement.
– Absences and behavior problems interfere with learning and inhibit
relationships with teachers/peers; source of stress for educators.
– 3 domains: school environment, home environment, student characteristics
(Goldstein, Little, & Akin-Little, 2003).
• Teams…
– It’s critical to intervene when attendance and behavior data indicate
disengagement.
– Interventions that target across domains, rather than addressing only one, are
more likely to be effective.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
38
Behavioral engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Encourage and facilitate extracurricular participation.
– Higher academic achievement, reduced rates of dropout and substance use,
less sexual activity (for girls), better psychological adjustment (e.g., higher
self-esteem), and reduced delinquent behavior (Feldman & Matjasko, 2005).
• Teams….
– Pay attention to those at either end of the spectrum—low levels of
participation or overscheduling.
– Monitor effects of trying out and not making competitive teams.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
39
Behavioral engagement: Formal interventions
• Check & Connect
– Comprehensive intervention to enhance student engagement.
– Research demonstrated increased persistence, attendance, credit accrual, and
school completion, as well as reduced rates of truancy, suspensions, and
course failures (Christenson et al., 2012).
– Personalized interventions to target all 4 subtypes of engagement
 Tutoring, behavior contracts, problem-solving, goal-setting, extracurricular
activities.
•
Mentors facilitate relationships with home, school, and community.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
40
Behavioral engagement: Individualized strategies
• Develop specific behavior plans or contracts to address individual needs.
• Provide intensive wrap-around services.
• Provide alternative programs for students who have not completed
school.
• Encourage parents to monitor and supervise student behavior.
• Implement student advisory programs that monitor academic and social
development of secondary students (middle or high).
• Implement school-to-work programs that foster success in school and
relevant educational opportunities.
41
Consider
At your school:
• What are you doing well in terms of promoting behavioral engagement?
• How do you monitor it?
• Where is work needed?
42
Cognitive engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Enhance self-efficacy.
– Perceived capabilities for learning or performing a task.
– Self-efficacy beliefs are associated with engagement in learning, effort,
persistence, and achievement.
• Encourage students to set challenging, reachable mastery goals; monitor
progress.
• Allow students to observe and work with students similar to themselves
who can model target skills.
• Provide students with specific feedback that praises effort and use of
specific strategies in learning a skill or completing a task.
Sources: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014; Schunk & Mullen, 2012
43
Cognitive engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Promote a mastery goal orientation
– Helping students approach academic tasks as opportunities to learn rather
than as a way to prove ability or a means of peer comparison.
– TARGET (Epstein, 1989)






Tasks are meaningful and relevant.
Authority is shared.
Students are recognized for progress and effort.
Grouping is heterogeneous and flexible.
Evaluation is criterion-referenced.
Time is flexible in class to allow for self-pacing.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
44
Cognitive engagement: Recommendations for practice
• Teams…
– Help students see failures as learning opportunities.
– Give students chances to try again or improve performance based on
feedback.
– Consult with teachers about classroom goal structures.
 Focus on learning and understanding, skill development, and personal
improvement rather than competition (Anderman & Patrick, 2012).
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
45
Cognitive engagement: Universal strategies
• Teach, model, and promote the use of self-regulated learning strategies,
such as planning, goal setting, self-monitoring of progress, strategy
selection, and self-evaluation (Zimmerman, 2002).
• Facilitate the goal-setting process (Greene et al., 2004; Miller & Brickman,
2004).
– Help students set long-term, future-oriented goals and short-term goals that
include the action steps to be taken in order to reach future goals, and taskspecific goals.
– Discuss the relevance of academic tasks and skills to students’ future goals.
• Promote a mastery goal orientation.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
46
Cognitive engagement: Universal strategies
• Keep the focus on understanding, skill development, and personal
improvement (Anderman & Patrick, 2012).
• Encourage educators and administrators to foster a mastery-oriented goal
structure in the classroom and school. Remind them of the TARGET
acronym (Epstein, 1989).
• Provide students with choices when completing assignments.
Source: Reschly, Appleton, & Pohl, 2014
47
Cognitive engagement: Individualized strategies
• Enhance student’s personal belief in self through repeated contacts, goal
setting, problem solving, and relationship building (e.g., Check & Connect).
• Aid the student in defining goals for the future. Discuss the connection
between education and those goals for the future (Miller & Brickman,
2004).
• Explicitly teach cognitive and metacognitive strategies, such as managing
time, chunking assignments, studying for tests, using mnemonic devices,
taking notes, making outlines, and comprehending textbooks.
• Implement self-monitoring interventions (e.g., graph progress toward
goals).
48
Consider
• How familiar were you with cognitive engagement interventions?
• Give an example of how you might structure interventions for a student
who seems to be both academically and cognitively disengaged.
49
Connecting other types of data
50
Connecting other types of data
51
(Gaertner & McClarty, 2015)
Questions & Answers
Stakeholder Feedback Survey
Stakeholder Feedback Survey
Please visit
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KNY22SL
to provide feedback on today’s webinar event.
54
Connect with us!
www.relappalachia.org
@REL_Appalachia
Elizabeth Collins
CollinsE@cna.org
55
Cited and other Relevant Resources
Anderman, E. M., & Patrick, H. (2012). Achievement goal theory,
conceptualization of ability/intelligence, and classroom climate. In A.
Christenson, A. Reschly & C. Wylie (Eds.) The handbook of research
on student engagement. (pp. 173–191). New York, New York:
Springer Science.
Andrews, D., & Lewis, M. (2004). Building sustainable futures: emerging
understandings of the significant contribution of the professional
learning community. Improving Schools, 7(2), 129-150.
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, 369–386.
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, 427–445.
56
Cited and other Relevant Resources
Balfanz, R., Herzog, L., & Mac Iver, D. J. (2007). Preventing Student
Disengagement and Keeping Students on the Graduation Path in
Urban Middle-Grades Schools: Early Identification and Effective
Interventions. Educational Psychologist, 42(4), 223–235.
Carter, M., McGee, R., Taylor, B., & Williams, S. (2007). Health outcomes in
adolescence: Associations with family, friends, and school
engagement. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 51–62.
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., Appleton, J. J., Berman, S., Spangers, D., &
Varro, P. (2008). Best practices in fostering student engagement. In
A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V
(pp. 1099–1120). Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of
Research on Student Engagement. New York: Springer.
57
Cited and other Relevant Resources
Dynarski, M., & Gleason, P. (2002). How can we help? What we have learned
from federal dropout prevention programs. Journal of Education for
Students Placed At Risk, 7(1), 43-69.
Epstein, J. L. (1989). Family structures and student motivation: A
developmental perspective. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research
on motivation in education: Vol. 3. goals and cognitions (pp. 259–
295). New York: Academic Press.
Feldman, A. F., & Matjasko, J. L. (2005). The Role of School-Based
Extracurricular Activities in Adolescent Development: A
Comprehensive Review and Future Directions. Review of Educational
Research, 57(2), 159-210.
Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research,
59, 117–142.
Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics.
58
Cited and other Relevant Resources
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.
Fredricks, J., McColskey, W., Meli, J., Mordica, J., Montrosse, B., & 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. Department of
Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational
Laboratory Southeast. Retrieved September 13, 2013, from
http://ies.ed.gove/ncee/edlabs.
Gaertner, M.N., & McClarty, K.L. (2015). Middle school indicators of college
readiness. Center for College & Career Success: Pearson.
Gettinger, M., & Walther, M. J. (2012). Classroom strategies to enhance
academic engaged time. In S.L. Christenson, A.L. Reschly & C. Wylie
(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 653-674).
New York: Springer.
59
Cited and other Relevant Resources
Goldstein, J.S., Little, S.G., & Akin-Little, A. (2003). Absenteeism: A review of
the literature and school psychology’s role. The California School
Psychologist, 8, 127-139.
Goodenow, C. (1993a). The psychological sense of school membership among
adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates.
Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79–90.
Goodenow, C. (1993b). Classroom belonging among early adolescent
students: Relationship to motivation and achievement. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 13, 21–43.
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004).
Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and
achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and
motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462– 482.
60
Cited and other Relevant Resources
Hawkins, J. D., Smith, B. H., Hill, K. G., Kosterman, R., Catalano, R. F., &
Abbott, R. D. (2007). Promoting social development and preventing
health and behavior problems during the elementary grades: Results
from the Seattle Social Development Project. Victims & Offenders, 2,
161–181.
Jimerson, S., Campos, E., & Grief, J. (2003). Toward an understanding of
definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms.
The California School Psychologist, 8, 7–27.
Jimerson, S., Renshaw, T., Stewart, K., Hart, S., & O’Malley, M. (2009).
Promoting school completion through understanding school failure:
A multi-factorial model of dropping out as a developmental process.
Romanian Journal of School Psychology, 2, 12–29.
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships Matter: Linking Teacher
Support to Student Engagement and Achievement. Journal of School
Health, 7(74).
61
Cited and other Relevant Resources
Lee, V.E., & Smith, J.B. (1993). Effects of school restructuring on the
achievement and engagement of middle-grade students. Sociology
of Education, 66, 164-187.
McBride, C. M., Curry, S. J., Cheadle, A., Anderman, C., Wagner, E. H., Diehr,
P., & Psaty, B. (1995). School-level application of a social bonding
model to adolescent risktaking behavior. Journal of School Health,
65, 63–68.
McNeely, C. A., Nonnemaker, J. M., & Blum, R. W. (2002). Promoting school
connectedness: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Study of
Adolescent Health. Journal of School Health, 72, 138–146.
Miller, R. B., & Brickman, S. J. (2004) A Model of Future-Oriented Motivation
and Self-Regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1).
62
Cited and other Relevant Resources
National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. (2004). Engaging
schools: Fostering high school students’ motivation to learn.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Patton, G. C., et al. (2006). Promoting social inclusion in schools: A grouprandomized trial of effects on student health risk behavior and wellbeing. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 1582–1587.
Reschly, A.L., Appleton, J.J., & Pohl, A. (2014). Best practices in fostering
student engagement. In A. Thomas and P. Harrison (Eds.) Best
practices in school psychology – 6th Ed. Bethesda, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists.
Schunk, D. H., & Mullen, C. A. (2012). Self-Efficacy as an Engaged Learner. In
S. L Christenson et al (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student
Engagement. New York: Springer.
63
Cited and other Relevant Resources
Shernoff, D., & Schmidt, J. (2008). Further evidence of an engagementachievement paradox among U.S. high school students. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, 37(5), 564–580.
Skinner, C. H., Pappas, D. N., & Davis, K. A. (2005). Enhancing academic
engagement: Providing opportunities for responding and influencing
students to choose to respond. Psychology in the Schools, 42(4),
389–403.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2002). Achieving self-regulation: The trial and triumph of
adolescence. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic motivation of
adolescents (Vol. 2, pp. 1–27). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
64