Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Part V Commentary: Possible New Directions in the Measurement of Student Engagement

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Research on Student Engagement

Abstract

Karen Samuelsen, a respected researcher and methodologist, provided ­commentary on the chapters in Part V of this volume. She described the difficulty of measuring latent constructs like student engagement. She argued for greater complexity in study designs and hypotheses to account for the complex nature of proposed relationships between engagement, contexts, and outcomes. She provided examples of how various statistical methods (Structural Equation Modeling, Differential Item Functioning) may be used to address some of the current measurement issues in engagement and outlined several areas of future research to advance the study of engagement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ackerman, T. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(1), 67–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrich, D. (1978). Application of a psychometric model to ordered categories which are scored with successive integers. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, 581–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, J. J. (2012). Systems consultation: Developing the assessment-to-intervention link with the Student Engagement Instrument. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 725–741). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betts, J. E. (2012). Issues and methods in the measurement of student engagement: Advancing the construct through statistical modeling. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 783–803). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betts, J. E., Appleton, J. J., Reschly, A. L., Christenson, S. L., & Huebner, E. S. (2010). A study of the factorial invariance of the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI): Results from middle and high school students. School Psychology Quarterly, 25(2), 84–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, G. E., & Okagaki, L. (2012). Ethnicity and student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 65–95). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clauser, B. E., & Mazor, K. M. (1998). Using statistical procedures to identify differentially functioning test items. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17(1), 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finch, H. (2005). The MIMIC model as a method for detecting DIF: comparison with Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST, and the IRT likelihood ratio. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 278–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanville, L., & Wildhagen, T. (2007). The measurement of school engagement: Assessing dimensionality and measurement in variance across race and ethnicity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 1019–1041. doi:10.1177/0013164406299126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreira, P. A. S., Vaz, F. M., Dias, P. C., & Petracchi, P. (2009). Psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Student Engagement Instrument. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 24(4), 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penfield, R. D., Gattamorta, K., & Childs, R. A. (2009). An NCME instructional module on using differential step functioning to refine the analysis of DIF in polytomous items. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(1), 38–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portes, P. R. (2011). Examining the problem of cultural validity in psychological measures: The case of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and implications for practice. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association 2011 Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., & Allik, J. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale in 53 nations: Exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(4), 623–642.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zwick, R., & Thayer, D. T. (1996). Evaluating the magnitude of differential item functioning in polytomous items. Journal of Educational Statistics, 21(3), 187–201.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

    Karen M. Samuelsen

Authors
  1. Karen M. Samuelsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen M. Samuelsen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, E. River Road 56, Minneapolis, 55455, Minnesota, USA

    Sandra L. Christenson

  2. Dept. Educational Psychology &, Instructional Technology, University of Georgia, Aderhold Hall 325N, Athens, 30602, Georgia, USA

    Amy L. Reschly

  3. Educational Research, New Zealand Council for, Wellington, New Zealand

    Cathy Wylie

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Samuelsen, K.M. (2012). Part V Commentary: Possible New Directions in the Measurement of Student Engagement. In: Christenson, S., Reschly, A., Wylie, C. (eds) Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_39

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation