Mathematics Education Research Journal

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 545–566 | Cite as

What secondary teachers think and do about student engagement in mathematics

  • Karen Skilling
  • Janette Bobis
  • Andrew J. Martin
  • Judy Anderson
  • Jennifer Way
Original Article

Abstract

What teachers’ think about student engagement influences the teaching practices they adopt, their responses to students and the efforts they make in the classroom. Interviews were conducted with 31 mathematics teachers from ten high schools to investigate their perceptions and beliefs about student engagement in mathematics. Teachers also reported the practices they used to engage their students during mathematics lessons. Teacher perceptions of student engagement were categorised according to recognised ‘types’ (behavioural, emotional and cognitive) and ‘levels’ (ranging from disengaged to engaged). The teachers’ reports emphasised immediate attention being paid to students’ behaviours and overt emotions towards mathematics with fewer and less extensive reports made about students’ cognitive engagement. Teachers’ abilities to implement practices considered supportive of student engagement were linked to a number of elements, including their self-efficacy. Perceptions of being powerless to engage their students resulted in many teachers limiting their efforts to attempt some form of intervention.

Keywords

Student engagement Mathematics Teacher beliefs and practices Teacher self-efficacy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by an Australian Research Council Linkage Projects grant LP0776843 in partnership with the Catholic Education Office, Sydney.

References

  1. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behaviour change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown, M., Brown, P., & Bibby, T. (2008). “I would rather die”: reasons given by 16 year-olds for not continuing their study of mathematics. Research in Mathematics Education, 10(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chatzistamatiou, M., Dermitzaki, I., & Bagiatis, V. (2014). Self-regulatory teaching in mathematics: relations to teachers’ motivation, affect and professional commitment. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 29(2), 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Draper, J. (2013). Teacher self-efficacy: internalized understandings of competence. In S. Phillipson, K. Y. L. Ku, & S. N. Philipson (Eds.), Construction educational achievement (pp. 70–83). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: a comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763–782). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  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, 59–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Givvin, K. B., Stipek, D. J., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). In the eyes of the beholder: students’ and teachers’ judgments of students’ motivation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(3), 321–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldin, G. A. (2014). Perspectives on emotion in mathematical engagement. In R. Pekrun & L. Linnenbrink-Garcia (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Hardré, P. L. (2011). Motivation for math in rural schools: student and teacher perspectives. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 23, 213–233.Google Scholar
  11. Hardré, P. L., Davis, K. A., & Sullivan, D. W. (2008). Measuring teacher perceptions of the “how” and “why” of student motivation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14(2), 155–179.Google Scholar
  12. Harris, L. (2011). Secondary teachers’ conceptions of student engagement: engagement I learning or in schooling? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 376–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Krippendorf, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411–433.Google Scholar
  14. Lee, W., & Reeve, J. (2012). Teachers’ estimates of their students’ motivation and engagement: being in synch with students. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(6), 727–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lewis, G. (2013). A portrait of disaffection with school mathematics: the case of Anna. Journal of Motivation, Emotion and Personality, 1(1), 36–43.Google Scholar
  16. Martin, A., Anderson, J., Bobis, Way, J., & Vellar, R. (2012). Switching on and switching off in mathematics: an ecological study of future intent and disengagement among middle school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin, A. J., Papworth, B., Ginns, P., Malmberg, L., Collie, R., & Calvo, R. (2015). Real-time motivation and engagement during a month at school: every moment of every day for every student matters. Learning and Individual Difference, 38, 26–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mason, J. (2008). PCK and beyond. In P. Sullivan & T. Wood (Eds.), The international handbook of mathematics education: knowledge and beliefs in mathematics teaching and teaching development (vol. 1). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  19. McLeod, D. B. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: a reconceptualization. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  20. Nardi, E., & Steward, S. (2003). Is mathematics T.I.R.E.D? A profile of quiet disaffection in the secondary mathematics classroom. British Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 345–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2014). Introduction to emotions in education. In R. Pekrun & L. Linnenbrink-Garcia (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Philipp, R. A. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and affect. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 257–315). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. QRS-International. (2008). NVivo 8, QRS International Pty Ltd.Google Scholar
  24. Raphael, L., Pressley, M., & Mohen, L. (2008). Engaging instruction in middle school classrooms: an observational study of nine teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 109(1), 61–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reeve. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–19). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schweinle, A., Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2006). Striking the right balance: students’ motivation and affect in elementary mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(5), 271–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Skilling, K. (2013). Factors that Influence Year 7 Students’ Engagement and Achievement in Mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Sydney, Sydney:Australia.Google Scholar
  29. Skilling, K. (2014). Teacher practices: how they promote or hinder student engagement. In Anderson, J., Cavanagh, M., & Prescott, A. (Eds.), Curriculum in focus: research guided practice. Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, (pp, 589–598). Sydney: MERGA.Google Scholar
  30. Skilling, K., Bobis, J., & Martin, A. (2015). The engagement of students with high and low achievement levels in mathematics. In Beswick, K., Muir, T., & Wells, J. (Eds), Proceedings of the 39th Psychology of Mathematics Education conference (vol. 4, pp. 185–192). Hobart: PME.Google Scholar
  31. Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping and everyday resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). Pedagogies of engagement: classroom based practices. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stipek, D., Salmon, J. M., Givven, K. B., Kazemi, E., Saxe, G., & MacGyvers, V. L. (1998). The value (and convergence) of practices suggested by motivation research and promoted by mathematics education reformers. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 29(4), 465–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Turner, J. C., Warzon, K., & Christenson, A. (2011). Motivating mathematics learning: changes in teachers’ practices and beliefs during a nine-month collaboration. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 718–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Fredricks. J. A., Simpkins, S., Roeser, R. W., & Schiefele, U. (2015). Development of achievement motivation and engagement. Handbook of child psychology and developmental science, volume 3 (pp. 1–44).Google Scholar
  36. Williams, S. R., & Ivey, K. M. C. (2001). Affective assessment and mathematics classroom engagement: a case study. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47, 75–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zazkis, R., & Hazzan, O. (1999). Interviewing in mathematics education: choosing the questions. Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 17(4), 429–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zyngier, D. (2007). Listening to teachers-listening to students: substantive conversations about resistance, empowerment and engagement. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(4), 327–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Inc. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.King’s College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.The University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.University of NSWKensingtonAustralia

Personalised recommendations