Abstract Validity and Reliability of Student Engagement in School Scale

Document Type : Scientific Articles

Authors

1 PhD Student of Educational Psychology, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Babol, Iran.

2 PhD Student of Educational Psychology, Babol Azad University, Education Organization, Semnan, Iran.

3 Master of Psychometrics, Department of Measurement and Measurement, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop a student engagement scale in school)SES)Viga 2016 and determine its validity and reliability. This research was acorrelation type of factor analysis (exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis). Factor analysis and reliability studies were conducted using data on 420(230 girls, 190 boys) tenth, eleventh, and twelfth graders of Semnan(academic year 2016- 2017) that were selected by Multistage Cluster Random Sampling and completed Students´ Engagement in School Scale(Viga, 2016) and Student engagement to school scale(Wang, Willett & Eccles, 2011 . Result of Confirmatory factor analysis through varimax rotation and Exploratory factor analysis, the axplored factors were behavioural, agency, self-regulation, affective and cognitive. The Cronbach's alpha were 0/78, 0/80, 0/67, 0/60, 0/42 for behavioural, agency, self-regulation, affective , cognitive and %78 for Student engagement in school. Also Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed these factors.To test the validity of instrument, Student engagement to school scale(Wang, Willett & Eccles, 2011) was used and correlation of 0/44 was concluded. The results permitted to find this scale presents psychometric qualities and can be used in research and psychoeducational practice, to assess the multidimensional students’ engagement in school. The future use of the SES is considered and proposed. This scale may be a useful opportunity for psychologists and teachers. and researcher can use to a valid instrument for Measuring engagement in school.

Keywords


4.Al Mamun, M. A., Lawrie, G., & Wright, T. (2016). Student Behavioral Engagement in Self-Paced Online Learning. In 33rd International Conference of Innovation, Practice and Research in the Use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary Education (pp. 381-386). ASCILITE (Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education).
5.Conner, T. (2016). Relationships: The key to student engagement. International Journal of Education and Learning, 5(1), 13-22.
6.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.
7.Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (2013). Interrelations of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive school engagement in high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(1), 20-32.
8.McFerren, J. G. (2016). The effects of motivation and engagement on academic achievement among college students (Doctoral dissertation, Middle Tennessee State University).
9.Reschly, A. L., Appleton, J. J., & Pohl, A. (2014). Best practices in fostering student engagement. Best practices in school psychology: Student level services (6th ed., pp. 37-50). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
10.Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic ac
11.Veiga, F. H. (2016). Assessing student Engagement in School: Development and validation of a four-dimensional scale.Journal of Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217(2), 813-819.
12.Wang, M. T., Willett, J. B., & Eccles, J. S. (2011). The assessment of school engagement: Examining dimensionality and measurement invariance by gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of School Psychology, 49(4), 465-480.
13.Wonglorsaichon, B., Wongwanich, S., & Wiratchai, N. (2014). The influence of students school engagement on learning achievement: A structural equation modeling analysis.Journal of Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(2), 1748-1755.