Abstract
This chapter draws together all the many strands and analytical moves made in this complex study. It discusses findings using as a lens the synthesised theoretical framework first introduced in Chap. 3. The framework combines Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological Process-Person-Context-Time (PPCT) model and key concepts in Holland et al.’s Figured Worlds theory, such as history-in-person, positionality, artifacts and agency. The chapter begins by considering Bronfenbrenner’ person characteristics and in particular how they can operate to generate or disrupt individuals’ development. It does so by comparing and contrasting the characteristics of some of the students whose pen portraits were presented in Chap. 5. Students’ development as person-in-context is then discussed around the other three components of the PPCT model and the shaping of their identities is considered using terms in the Figured Worlds theory. Further insight into the analysis is drawn from discussion of the literature introduced in Chap. 2. At the end of the chapter we present an overarching conceptual framework, which integrates the synthesised theoretical model and the analytical framework developed earlier from the empirical data.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The vast majority of students at Shandong University were Han students.
- 2.
Although notably in the UK, course and university teaching and learning committees always include student representatives, this is not very likely to happen at a Chinese university.
- 3.
It should be noted that themes and indicators covered in this conceptual framework are not necessarily exhaustive as they are derived on the basis of the empirical findings in our research, so should not be regarded as normative.
References
Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1993). The ecology of cognitive development: Research models and fugitive findings. In R. Wonziak & K. Fischer (Eds.), Development in context: Acting and thinking in specific environments (pp. 3–44). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp. 993–1023). New York: Wiley.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 793–828). New York: Wiley.
Christie, H., Tett, L., Cree, V. E., Hounsell, J., & Mccune, V. (2008). “A real rollercoaster of confidence and emotions”: Learning to be a university student. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 567–581.
Croft, T., & Grove, M. (2015). Progression within mathematics degree programmes. In M. Grove, T. Croft, J. Kyle, & D. Lawson (Eds.), Transitions in undergraduate mathematics education (pp. 173–189). Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
Crombie, G., Pike, S. W., Silverthorn, N., Jones, A., & Piccinin, S. (2003). Students’ perceptions of their classroom participation and instructor as a function of gender and context. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(1), 51–76.
Daskalogianni, K., & Simpson, A. (2002). “Cooling off”—the phenomenon of a problematic transition from school to university. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Teaching Mathematics at the Undergraduate Level (pp. 103–110), Crete, Greece.
Gasiewski, J. A., Eagan, M. K., Garcia, G. A., Hurtado, S., & Chang, M. J. (2012). From gatekeeping to engagement: A multicontextual, mixed method study of student academic engagement in introductory STEM courses. Research in Higher Education, 53, 229–261.
Goulding, M., Hatch, G., & Rodd, M. (2003). Undergraduate mathematics experience: Its significance in secondary mathematics teacher preparation. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6, 361–393.
Gump, S. E. (2007). Classroom research in a general education course: Exploring implications through an investigation of the sophomore slump. Journal of General Education, 56(2), 105–125.
Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Jr., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. London: Harvard University Press.
Horowitz, G. (2010). It’s not always just about the grade: Exploring the achievement goal orientations of pre-med students. Journal of Experimental Education, 78(2), 215–245.
Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2002). Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 555–576.
Jackson, C. (2003). Transitions into higher education: Gendered implications for academic self-concept. Oxford Review of Education, 29(3), 331–346.
Kahu, E. R. (2011). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773.
Kuh, G. D., & Hu, S. (2001). The effects of student faculty interaction in the 1990s. Review of Higher Education, 24(3), 309–332.
Lawson, D. (2015). Mathematics support at the transition to university. In M. Grove, T. Croft, J. Kyle, & D. Lawson (Eds.), Transitions in undergraduate mathematics education (pp. 39–56). Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
Light, R. (2001). Making the most of college: Students speak their minds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lin, J. G., & Yi, J. K. (1997). Asian international students’ adjustment: Issues and program suggestions. College Student Journal, 31(4), 473–484.
Luo, Y., Shi, J., & Tu, D. (2009). Annual report of Tsinghua College Education Survey 2009: Comparing with American Top research universities. Tsinghua Journal of Education, 30(5), 1–13.
Markwell, D. (2007). The challenge of student engagement. University of Western Australia, January 30–31. Retrieved from http://www.catlyst.catl.uwa.edu.au/catlyst/archive/2007/1/don_markwell.
Mason, J. H. (2002). Mathematics teaching practice: A guide for university and college lecturers. Chichester, UK: Horwood/Open University.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research (Vol. 2). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Popenici, S. (2013). Towards a new vision for university governance, pedagogies and student engagement. In E. Dunne & D. Owen (Eds.), The student engagement handbook: Practice in higher education (pp. 23–41). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Pritchard, D. (2015). Lectures and transition: From bottles to bonfires? In M. Grove, T. Croft, J. Kyle, & D. Lawson (Eds.), Transitions in undergraduate mathematics education (pp. 57–69). Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
Robinson, M. (2015). Providing effective feedback. In M. Grove, T. Croft, J. Kyle, & D. Lawson (Eds.), Transitions in undergraduate mathematics education (pp. 159–172). Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
Ross, H., Cen, Y. H., & Zhou, Z. J. (2011). Assessing student engagement in China: Responding to local and global discourse on raising educational quality.
Thomas, S. T., & Jaworski, B. (2015). Developing mathematics teaching: What can we learn from the literature? In M. Grove, T. Croft, J. Kyle, & D. Lawson (Eds.), Transitions in undergraduate mathematics education (pp. 259–276). Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
Thompson, S., Milsom, C., Zaitseva, E., Stewart, M., Darwent, S., & Yorke, M. (2013). The forgotten year? Tackling the second year slump. York, UK: The Higher Education Academy.
Trowler, V., & Trowler, P. (2010). Student engagement evidence summary. Retrieved from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/studentengagement/StudentEngagementEvidenceSummary.pdf.
Tudge, J. R. H., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B. E., & Karnik, R. B. (2009). Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 1(4), 198–210.
Umbach, P. D., & Wawrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 153–184.
Urrieta, L., Jr. (2007). Figured worlds and education: An introduction to the special issue. The Urban Review, 39(2), 107–116.
Williams, J. (2015). Mathematics education and the transition into higher education—Transmaths demands better learning-teaching dialogue. In M. Grove, T. Croft, J. Kyle, & D. Lawson (Eds.), Transitions in undergraduate mathematics education (pp. 25–37). Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
Zhang, Z., Hu, W., & McNamara, O. (2015). Undergraduate student engagement at a Chinese university: A case study. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 27(2), 105–127.
Zhu, H. (2010). The relationship between student engagement and college student achievement—The analysis of 2010 annual data set of Beijing college student survey. Tsinghua Journal of Education, 31(6), 35–43.
Zhu, C., Valcke, M., & Schellens, T. (2010). A cross-cultural study of teacher perspectives on teacher roles and adoption of online collaborative learning in higher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33(2), 147–165.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zhang, Z., McNamara, O. (2018). Theorising Student Engagement. In: Undergraduate Student Engagement. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1721-7_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1721-7_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-1720-0
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-1721-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)