Abstract
Student engagement in school is an important construct that has been associated with student success. For the current study, researchers examined the psychometrics of the Student Engagement in Schools Questionnaire (SESQ) and the Teacher Engagement Report Form (TERF-N) of student engagement. The results revealed that both the SESQ and the TERF-N have good internal consistency. The exploratory factor analysis results for the SESQ demonstrated alignment with the theoretically driven development (five factors: Affective Engagement-Liking for Learning, Affective Engagement-Liking for School, Behavioral Engagement-Effort & Persistence, Behavioral Engagement-Extracurricular, and Cognitive Engagement) whereas the results for the TERF-N were more complicated. The items did not load as conceptualized in a 3-factor model, but instead loaded on one, General Engagement factor. Finally, while it may be that teachers viewed a student’s level of engagement as a global construct, the correlations between the measures indicated that they might be used to provide helpful, convergent information obtained from a variety of sources regarding a student’s levels of engagement. Future directions and implications for school psychologists are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Appleton, J.J., Christenson, S.L., & Furlong, M.J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 369–386. doi: 10.1002/pits.20303
Appleton, J.J., Christenson, S.L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A.L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427–445. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.
Carter, M., McGee, R., Taylor, B., & Williams, S. (2007). Health outcomes in adolescence: Associations with family, friends and school engagement. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 51–62. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.04.002
Cattell, R.B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.
Christenson, S.L., Sinclair, M.F., Lehr, C.A., & Godber, Y. (2001). Promoting successful school completion: Critical conceptual and methodological guidelines. School Psychology Quarterly, 16, 468–484. doi: 10.1521/scpq. 16.4.468.19898
Costello, A.B., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1–9.
Cronbach, L.J., & Shavelson, R.J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391–418. doi: 10.1177/0013164404266386
Csikszentmihalyi, M., (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., MacCallum, R.C., & Strahan, E.J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
Finn, J.D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117–142.
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. doi: 10.3102/00346543074001059
Furr, R.M., & Bacarach, V.R. (2008). Psychometrics: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Furlong, M.J., Whipple, A.D., St. Jean, G., Simental, J., Soliz, A., & Punthuna, S. (2003). Multiple contexts of school engagement: Moving toward a unifying framework for educational research and practice. The California School Psychologist, 8, 99–114.
Gliner, J.A., & Morgan, G.A. (2000). Research methods in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and analysis. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79–90. doi: 10.1002/1520-6807(199301)30:1<79::AID-PITS231030011 3>3.0.CO;2-X
Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
Jimerson, S.R., Campos, E., & Greif, J.L. (2003). Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California School Psychologist, 8, 7–27.
Jimerson, S.R., Renshaw, T.L., Stewart, K., Hart, S., & O’Malley, M. (2009). Promoting school completion through understanding school failure: A multi-factorial model of dropping out as a developmental process. Romanian Journal of School Psychology, 2, 12–29.
Kahn, J.H. (2006). Factor analysis in counseling psychology research, training, and practice: Principles, advances, and applications. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 684–718. doi: 10.1177/0011000006286347
Kline, P. (2002). An easy guide to factor analysis. New York: Routledge.
Kovacs, M. (1992). The Children’s Depression Inventory. New York: Multi-Health Systems.
Lam, S.F., & Jimerson, S.R. (2008). Exploring student engagement in schools internationally: Consultation paper. Chicago, IL: International School Psychologist Association.
Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (2009). Mplus Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables: User’s Guide (5th Ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Patrick, H., Ryan, A.M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents’ percpetions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 83–98. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.83
Reschly, A.L., Appleton, J.J., & Christenson, S.L. (2007). Student engagement at school and with learning: Theory and interventions. NASP Communiqué, 35(8).
Reschly, A.L., & Christenson, S.L. (2006). Prediction of dropout among students with mild disabilities: A case for inclusion of student engagement variables. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 276–292. doi: 10.1177/07419 325060270050301
Shernoff, D.J., & Schmidt, J.A. (2008). Further evidence of an engagement-achievement paradox among U.S. high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37(5), 564–580. doi: 10.1007/s10964-007-9241-z
SPSS, Inc. (2007). SPSS Base 16.0 for Mac User’s Guide. Chicago, IL: Author.
Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Thurstone, L.L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Walker, C.O., Greene, B.A., & Mansell, R.A. (2006). Identification with academics, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2005.06.004
Yates, A. (1987). Multivariate exploratory data analysis: A perspective on exploratory factor analysis. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hart, S.R., Stewart, K. & Jimerson, S.R. The Student Engagement in Schools Questionnaire (SESQ) and the Teacher Engagement Report Form-New (TERF-N): Examining the Preliminary Evidence. Contemp School Psychol 15, 67–79 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340964
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340964