Student engagement and classroom variables in improving mathematics achievement

The study explored how much student engagement and classroom variables predicted student achievement in mathematics. Since students were nested within a classroom, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was employed for the analysis. The results indicated that student engagement had positive effects on student academic growth per month in math after taking into account student variables such as gender, SES, race, and interaction effects. The effects of student engagement are consistent regardless of minority and gender. Among classroom level variables such as teachers’ degree, experience, certification, authentic instruction, content coverage, and class size, there is no significant predictor of student math achievement growth. The findings suggest that student engagement should be emphasized in a school and educational policy for students’ success in a school.

[1]  L. Poundie Burstein.  Chapter 4: The Analysis of Multilevel Data in Educational Research and Evaluation , 1980 .

[2]  R. Bosker.  Boekbespreking van "A.S. Bryk & S.W. Raudenbusch - Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods" : Sage Publications, Newbury Parki, London/New Delhi 1992 , 1995 .

[3]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[4]  Larry V. Hedges,et al.  The Long-Term Effects of Small Classes in Early Grades: Lasting Benefits in Mathematics Achievement at Grade 9 , 2001 .

[5]  P. Wasley.  Teaching Worth Celebrating. , 1999 .

[6]  L. Darling-Hammond.  Teacher Quality and Student Achievement , 2000 .

[7]  Susan B. Gerber,et al.  The Enduring Effects of Small Classes. , 2001 .

[8]  Lawrence C. Stedman.  International Achievement Differences: An Assessment of a New Perspective , 1997 .

[9]  Andrew C. Porter,et al.  Reform up Close: An Analysis of High School Mathematics and Science Classrooms. Final Report. , 1993 .

[10]  Roel Bosker,et al.  Multilevel analysis : an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling , 1999 .

[11]  W. Owings,et al.  Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: Recommendations for Principals , 2001 .

[12]  J. Best,et al.  Research in Education , 1966, Nature.

[13]  C. Lemer,et al.  Money matters , 1956, Nature Medicine.

[14]  L. Darling-Hammond,et al.  Doing what matters most : investing in quality teaching , 1997 .

[15]  L. Hedges,et al.  Are Effects of Small Classes Cumulative? Evidence From a Tennessee Experiment , 2001 .

[16]  C. Teddlie,et al.  The International Handbook of School Effectiveness Research , 1999 .

[17]  S. Warren,et al.  Enhancing Engagement in Early Language Teaching , 1991 .

[18]  Brian Rowan,et al.  What Large-Scale, Survey Research Tells Us About Teacher What Large-Scale, Survey Research Tells Us About Teacher Effects on Student Achievement: Insights From the Prospectus Effects on Student Achievement: Insights From the Prospectus Study of Elementary Schools Study of Elementary Schools , 2015 .

[19]  Shenyang Guo,et al.  Analyzing Longitudinal Rating Data: A Three-Level Hierarchical Linear Model , 1999 .

[20]  Y. Lincoln,et al.  Scientific Research in Education , 2004 .

[21]  Kate Walsh,et al.  Teacher Certification Reconsidered: Stumbling for Quality. , 2001 .

[22]  Eric A. Hanushek,et al.  The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in Public Schools , 1986 .

[23]  H. M. Marks,et al.  Student Engagement in Instructional Activity: Patterns in the Elementary, Middle, and High School Years , 2000 .

[24]  Gaea Leinhardt,et al.  The Instructional Dimensions Study , 1980 .

[25]  S. Silverman.  Student Characteristics Mediating Engagement-Outcome Relationships in Physical Education , 1985 .

[26]  C. Walker,et al.  Powerful Learning , 1997 .

[27]  J. Finn,et al.  Answers and Questions About Class Size: A Statewide Experiment , 1990 .

[28]  Fred M. Newmann,et al.  Continuing the bifurcation of affect and cognition , 1996 .

[29]  Jeremy D. Finn,et al.  Using Class Size to Reduce the Equity Gap. , 1998 .

[30]  Amy Robinson,et al.  Strengthening Student Engagement: What Do Students Want (and what really motivates them)? , 1995 .

[31]  J. Finn,et al.  Measuring Class Size: Let Me Count the Ways. , 2002 .

[32]  L. Darling-Hammond.  Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence , 2000 .

[33]  A. Krueger,et al.  Would Smaller Classes Help Close the Black-White Achievement Gap? , 2001 .

[34]  Leo J. Th. van der Kamp,et al.  Longitudinal Data Analysis: Designs, Models and Methods , 1999 .

[35]  文部科学省.  Educational reform for the 21st century , 2002 .

[36]  L. Poundie Burstein.  The Analysis of Multilevel Data in Educational Research and Evaluation , 1980 .

[37]  Larry V. Hedges,et al.  Does Money Matter? A Meta-Analysis of Studies of the Effects of Differential School Inputs on Student Outcomes. (An Exchange: Part 1). , 1994 .

[38]  Larry V. Hedges,et al.  The Effect of School Resources on Student Achievement , 1996 .

[39]  J. Finn.  Withdrawing From School , 1989 .

[40]  Constance V. Hines.  Teacher Behavior, Task Engagement, and Student Achievement: A Path Analytic Study. , 1986 .

[41]  C. Greenwood,et al.  Longitudinal Analysis of Time, Engagement, and Achievement in At-Risk versus Non-Risk Students , 1991, Exceptional children.

[42]  Lei Chang.  Variable effects of children's aggression, social withdrawal, and prosocial leadership as functions of teacher beliefs and behaviors. , 2003, Child development.

[43]  Jeremy D. Finn,et al.  School Engagement & Students at Risk. , 1993 .

[44]  P. Wolfe.  Revisiting Effective Teaching , 1998 .

[45]  Glen E. Robinson,et al.  Synthesis of Research on the Effects of Class Size. , 1990 .

[46]  Jan de Leeuw,et al.  Introducing Multilevel Modeling , 1998 .