Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education

Living Edition
| Editors: Steve Lerman

Engagement with Mathematics

  • Amanda JansenEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77487-9_100040-1


A person is engaged when he or she participates in an activity with cognitive and affective investment. Engagement in school has been studied in terms of students’ observable behaviors, students’ perceptions and beliefs about themselves, their affective feelings, and their sense of belonging in the school setting (Jimerson et al. 2003). Engagement is a complex meta-construct that accounts for cognitive, affective, and socio-behavioral dimensions (Fredricks et al. 2004). Engagement can be viewed as “…the in-the-moment relationship between someone and her immediate environment, including the tasks, internal states, and others with whom she interacts. Engagement manifests itself in activity, including both observable behavior and mental activity involving attention, effort, cognition, and emotion” (Middleton et al. 2017, p. 667). Thus, engagement with mathematics is an interactive relationship students have with the subject matter, as manifested in the moment through...


Engagement Motivation Affect Participation 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Anderson A, Hamilton RJ, Hattie J (2004) Classroom climate and motivated behavior in secondary schools. Learn Environ Res 7(3):211–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Csikszentmihalyi M (1997) Finding flow: the psychology of engagement with everyday life. The masterminds series. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Esmonde I (2009) Mathematics learning in groups: Analyzing equity in two cooperative activity structures. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 18(2):247–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fraser BJ (1989) Twenty years of classroom climate work: progress and prospect. J Curric Stud 21(4):307–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC, Paris AH (2004) School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Rev Educ Res 74(1):59–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goldin GA, Epstein YM, Schorr RY, Warner LB (2011) Beliefs and engagement structures: behind the affective dimension of mathematical learning. ZDM 43(4):547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hohensee C (2016) Student noticing in classroom settings: a process underlying influences on prior ways of reasoning. J Math Behav 42:69–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horn IS (2007) Fast kids, slow kids, lazy kids: framing the mismatch problem in mathematics teachers’ conversations. J Learn Sci 16(1):37–79Google Scholar
  9. Ing M, Webb NM, Franke ML, Turrou AC, Wong J, Shin N, Fernandez CH (2015) Student participation in elementary mathematics classrooms: the missing link between teacher practices and student achievement? Educ Stud Math 90(3):341–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jimerson SR, Campos E, Greif JL (2003) Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. Calif Sch Psychol 8(1):7–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lobato J, Hohensee C, Rhodehamel B (2013) Students’ mathematical noticing. J Res Math Educ 44(5):809–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Middleton J, Jansen A, Goldin G (2017) The complexities of mathematical engagement: Motivation, affect, and social interactions. In J. Cai (Ed.) First Compendium for Research in Mathematics Education (chapter 25, p. 667–699), Reston, VA: NCTMGoogle Scholar
  13. Peterson PL, Janicki TC (1979) Individual characteristics and children’s learning in large-group and small-group approaches. J Educ Psychol 71(5):677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Peterson PL, Swing SR, Stark KD, Waas GA (1984) Students’ cognitions and time on task during mathematics instruction. Am Educ Res J 21(3):487–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sanchez Leal L, Schorr RY, Warner LB (2013) Being challenged in an urban classroom: a case study documenting the engagement of a young male who wanted to “look smart”. J Urban Learn Teach Res 9:78–88Google Scholar
  16. Schiefele U, Csikszentmihalyi M (1995) Motivation and ability as factors in mathematics experience and achievement. J Res Math Educ 26(2):163–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Shernoff DJ (2013) Optimal learning environments to promote student engagement. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shernoff DJ, Csikszentmihalyi M (2009) Flow in schools: cultivating engaged learners and optimal learning environments. In: Gilman RC, Heubner ES, Furlong MJ (eds) Handbook of positive psychology in schools. Routledge, New York, pp 131–145Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of DelawareNewarkUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Ruhama Even
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Science TeachingThe Weizmann Institute of ScienceRehovotIsrael