Academic Course Engagement During One Semester Forecasts College Success: Engaged Students Are More Likely to Earn a Degree, Do It Faster, and Do It Better
Academic Course Engagement During One Semester Forecasts College Success: Engaged Students Are More Likely to Earn a Degree, Do It Faster, and Do It Better
复制标题
一学期学术课程的参与度预示着大学的成功：参与度高的学生更有可能获得学位、做得更快、做得更好
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. Bigatti
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Svanum;S. Bigatti
在过去的几十年里，有一系列令人印象深刻的研究试图确定和解释学生在接受大学教育时成功和失败的重要因素。考虑到教育水平对各种生活领域的影响（Pascarella和Terenzini，2005年），并考虑到大学在留住学生方面的困难（布拉克斯顿，2001年; Tinto，1993年），这种努力的程度并不令人惊讶。大学的成功有不同的定义，重点是表现成果，如个别课程或学期的成绩;结果，如大学的持久性，通常在一个或两个学期测量;和，不太常见，学位的获得。这些研究中的许多都是由学生成功的教育或参与理论指导的（例如，Bean，1985; Tinto，1993）。这些理论都集中在大学的学生参与，并提出了一个独特的背景下的观点：成功的影响程度，学生成为从事和参与学术和其他活动的大学生活。这些参与方法强调个人做什么，机构做什么，以鼓励和支持个别学生的参与。Astin（1984）对学生参与的定义抓住了学生行为和行为在参与理论中的中心地位，以及可以反映参与的行为的范围：学生参与“是指学生致力于学术体验的身体和心理能量的数量”（Astin，第297页）。以前的研究通常广泛地测量学术投入，包括诸如时间管理和任务管理技能（Garavalia & Gredler，2002; Trockel，巴恩斯，& Egget，2000），寻求同伴的帮助（Larose，罗宾逊，Roy，& Legault，1998），以及与教授的互动（Strage，1999）。因此，学术参与是广义上的，不仅包括与课程相关的活动（例如，上课出勤率，完成作业），但包括广泛定义的参与学术生活。此外，参与度通常是通过学生的意图或对学术参与度的看法来衡量的，通常是通过在单个时间点评估的单个项目来衡量的。虽然这些措施提供了关于学生的意图或看法的重要信息，但它们并不一定能告诉我们学生的实际参与行为。为了解决代表复杂内容领域的单个项目的测量缺点，Handelsman，Briggs，Sullivan和Towler（2005）探索了学术参与的一个子集的结构，即学生在单一课程中的参与。他们开发了一个代表课程参与度的多项目量表，并分析了学生样本的因素结构
The past several decades have witnessed an impressive array of studies that have attempted to identify and explain the factors important to the success and failure of students as they pursue a college education. The extent of this effort is not surprising given the impact that level of education has on a variety of life domains (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005) and given the difficulties universities have in retaining students (Braxton, 2001; Tinto, 1993). College success has been variously defined with a focus upon either performance outcomes, such as grades for individual courses or semesters; outcomes such as college persistence, often measured over one or two semesters; and, less frequently, degree attainment. Many of these studies have been guided by educational or engagement theories of student success (e.g., Bean, 1985; Tinto, 1993). These theories have focused upon student involvement in college and propose a distinctly contextual perspective: success is influenced by the degree to which students become engaged and involved in academic and other activities of college life. These engagement approaches emphasize what individuals do and what institutions do to encourage and support individual student involvement. Astin’s (1984) definition of student involvement captures the centrality of student actions and behaviors in engagement theorizing as well as the scope of behaviors that could reflect engagement: student involvement “refers to the amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience” (Astin, p. 297). Previous studies have often broadly measured academic engagement including such components as, for example, time and taskmanagement skills (Garavalia & Gredler, 2002; Trockel, Barnes, & Egget, 2000), seeking help from peers (Larose, Robinson, Roy, & Legault, 1998), and interactions with professors (Strage, 1999). Thus, academic engagement is broadly conceived and captures not just courserelated activities (e.g., class attendance, completion of assignments) but includes broadly defined involvement in academic life. Additionally, engagement is often measured by student intentions or perceptions of academic engagement, often captured by single items assessed at a single point in time. Although these measures provide important information regarding student intentions or perceptions, they do not necessarily inform us about students’ actual engagement behaviors. To address measurement shortcomings of single items representing a complex content domain, Handelsman, Briggs, Sullivan, and Towler (2005) explored the structure of a subset of academic engagement, student engagement in a single course. They developed a multiitem scale representing course engagement and analyzed the factor structure on a sample of students