The Relationship Among Motivation, Engagement and Academic Achievement of Ninth Grade Students.
Keywords:
Motivation, Engagement, Academic Achievement, At-risk Students, Ninth gradeAbstract
The objectives of this study were to 1) develop and validate an instrument to measure motivation and engagement of ninth grade students; 2) investigated the effect of motivation and engagement on ninth grade students’ school academic achievement; 3) compare the motivation and engagement of students whose self-assessment risk to the teacher is assessed. The data from the usable responses (n = 227) and include of 38 at-risk students were summarized and then tested for and optimal factor solution using exploratory factor analysis, create three causal model, then validate with empirical data by analyzing the structural equation modeling, and t-test were used to compare the motivation and engagement of students in the third objective. The results revealed that both the motivation and engagement instrument have good internal consistency. The motivation was a multidimensional construct consisting of 5 factors. The 15-items student engagement questionnaire with best model fit mathing previous research and theory in which a four-factors model was found. The three causal models were consistent with empirical data. Show that motivation indirectly influences on academic achievement through engagement. Finally, self-assessment of the students in the risk group on motivation and teacher evaluation was significantly at .01 level. Similarly, the engagement to evaluate was statistically different at .01 level, except for the agentic engagement was congruent.References
Atkin, A.A. 2016. The relation between scores from the student risk screening scale : Internalizing and externalizing ( SRSS-IE) and score from student engagement instrument (SEI) in a sixth-grade sample. Educational Specialist thesis, Brigham Young University.
Deci, E.L., and Ryan, R.M.(Eds.) 2002. The handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Dotterer, A.M., and Lowe, K. 2011. Classroom context, school engagement, and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Youth Adolescence. 40: 1649-1660.
Dumsuwarn , W. (2016). Engagement. Vocational Education Today. 2(2),25-27 (in Thai)
Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., and Paris, A.H. 2004. School engagement: potential of the
concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research. 74: 59-109.
Hart, S.R., Stewart, K., and Jimerson, S.R. 2011. The student engagement in school questionnaire (SESQ) and the teacher engagement report form-new (TERF-N): Examining the preliminary evidence. Contemporary School Psychology. 15: 67-79.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2002. Reading for change: Performance and engagement across countries: results from PISA 2000, Paris.
Reeve, J. 2012. A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S.L. Christenson, A. Reschly, and C.Wylie (Eds.) Handbook of research on student engagement. (Chpt.7, pp. 149-172) New York: Springer.
Reeve, J., and Tseng, C.-M. 2011. Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational psychology. 36: 257-267.
Veiga, F.H. 2012. Proposal to the PISA of a new scale of students’engagement in school. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 46: 1224-1231.
Wah, L. 1999. Engaging employees a big challenge. Management Review. 88: 10
Wellborn, J.G. 1991. Engaged and disaffected action: The conceptualization and
measurement of motivation in the academic domain. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Rochester, Rochester.
Deci, E.L., and Ryan, R.M.(Eds.) 2002. The handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Dotterer, A.M., and Lowe, K. 2011. Classroom context, school engagement, and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Youth Adolescence. 40: 1649-1660.
Dumsuwarn , W. (2016). Engagement. Vocational Education Today. 2(2),25-27 (in Thai)
Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., and Paris, A.H. 2004. School engagement: potential of the
concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research. 74: 59-109.
Hart, S.R., Stewart, K., and Jimerson, S.R. 2011. The student engagement in school questionnaire (SESQ) and the teacher engagement report form-new (TERF-N): Examining the preliminary evidence. Contemporary School Psychology. 15: 67-79.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2002. Reading for change: Performance and engagement across countries: results from PISA 2000, Paris.
Reeve, J. 2012. A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S.L. Christenson, A. Reschly, and C.Wylie (Eds.) Handbook of research on student engagement. (Chpt.7, pp. 149-172) New York: Springer.
Reeve, J., and Tseng, C.-M. 2011. Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational psychology. 36: 257-267.
Veiga, F.H. 2012. Proposal to the PISA of a new scale of students’engagement in school. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 46: 1224-1231.
Wah, L. 1999. Engaging employees a big challenge. Management Review. 88: 10
Wellborn, J.G. 1991. Engaged and disaffected action: The conceptualization and
measurement of motivation in the academic domain. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Rochester, Rochester.
Downloads
Published
2019-01-01
Issue
Section
Research Article
License
บทความทุกบทความเป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของวารสารคณะศึกษาศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์ วิทยาเขตบางเขน
วารสารศึกษาศาสตร์ปริทัศน์ (Kasetsart Educational Review)