Browsing by Subject "Student Engagement"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    An observational study : investigating the relationship among achievement goal structures, students’ personal characteristics, motivation and engagement
    (2017-05) Gür, Nazmiye
    The present study aimed to investigate the relationship among teacher promoted achievement goal structures (mastery and performance-approach goal structures), students’ dispositional achievement motives (need for achievement and fear of failure), student motivation (achievement goals) and engagement in specific class sessions. While dispositional achievement motives and achievement goals were measured through only the students’ self-reports, promoted achievement goal structures and student engagement were measured assessed by students, teachers and additionally by external observers. The study was conducted in a public Anatolian high school in Ankara, Turkey with the participation of 310 students and 10 teachers. Two trained observers carried out the observations of 10 different classes.The results of the regression and Bootstrap analyses revealed that the student perceived mastery goal structures had a positive indirect effect on all aspects of engagement through mastery-approach goal endorsement (i.e., the goal to learn and improve). The results also showed that fear of failure had a negative relation to engagement through low mastery-approach goal endorsement. Performance goal structures, on the other hand, failed to predict any aspect of student engagement. However, the endorsed performance-approach goals weakly predicted engagement showing that the goal to outperform others could weakly support students’ engagement. The results revealed the equal importance of contextual and personal factors in relation to student motivation and engagement. Furthermore, the teachers overestimated their promotion of achievement goal structures and student engagement in comparison to students’ and observers’ evaluation. Although student evaluations regarding these variables were higher than that of the observers, a MANOVA showed that students in classes with high mastery goal structures according to the observers tended to engage with the lesson and endorse mastery-approach goals more compared to the students in classes with low and average mastery goal structures. Overall, instructional behaviors such as supporting learning and self-based evaluation was indicated to be promoting good quality of student motivation, which in turn predicts student engagement with the lesson.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The relationship among teachers’ instructional behaviors, student motivation and student engagement : an observational study
    (2017-05) Bulut, Gökçe Bala
    This study investigated the relationship among teachers’ need supportive instructional behaviors (i.e., autonomy support and provision of structure), student motivation (achievement goals and autonomous or controlling underlying reasons) and engagement. The investigation included the assessment of all these three aspects in a specific class session. Teachers’ need supportive instructional behaviors were assessed by both external observers and students’ self-reports. Student motivation and engagement were assessed by students’ self-reports. The participants (N = 310) were from a public Anatolian high school in Ankara, Turkey. The observations were carried out by two observers in 10 different classes. Regression analyses showed that autonomy support and provision of structure were positive predictors of mastery-approach (MAp) goals and autonomous reasons underlying these goals whereas performance-approach (PAp) goals and underlying reasons were not found to be related to teachers’ need supportive teaching. MAp goals were predictors of all four aspects of student engagement (behavioral, emotional, agentic, cognitive) and overall engagement, while autonomous reasons underlying MAp goals were positive predictors of emotional and cognitive engagement as well as of the overall engagement. PAp goals were predictors only for behavioral and cognitive engagement, while their underlying reasons did not predict engagement. A positive relation between need supportive teaching and student engagement (all aspects, excluding agentic engagement) was found. Furthermore, bootstrap analyses showed that MAp goals and autonomous reasons underlying MAp goals acted as a mediating mechanism between need supportive teaching and student engagement. Finally, the results revealed some degree of difference in students’ and observers’ perception of need supportive teaching; the majority of the students overestimated their teachers’ autonomy support and provision of structure. However, as the MANOVA indicated, students in high need supportive classrooms (according to the observers’ grouping) reported higher perception of autonomy support, provision of structure, MAp goals and their autonomous underlying reasons and engagement compared to students in average and low need supportive classrooms. Teachers’ autonomy support and provision of structure revealed important instructional approaches for students’ quality of motivation and engagement.