Using engagement strategies to facilitate children's learning and success

Young Children

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 12-16

  Jablon, Judy R ^b   Wilkinson, Michael ^a  

^a Facilitation Company   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33644893635     PISSN: 00440728     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Brewster, C., & J. Fager. 2000. increasing student engagement and motivation: From time on task to homework. Portland, OR: North-west Regional Educational Laboratory. Online: www.nwrel.org/ request/oct00/textonly.html.
2. Felner, R.D., A.W. Jackson, D. Kasak, P. Mulhall, S. Brand, & N. Flowers. 1997. The impact of school reform for the middle years: Longitudinal study of a network engaged in Turning Points-based comprehensive school transformation. Phi Delta Kappan 78 (March): 528-32; 541-50.
3. Finn, J.D., & D.A. Rock. 1997. Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of Applied Psychology 82 (2): 221-34.
4. Goodlad, J.I. 2004. A place called school: Prospects for the future. 20th anniversary ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
5. Graham, S., & B. Weiner. 1996. Theories and principles of motivation. In Handbook of educational psychology, eds. D. Berliner & R.C. Calfee, 62-84. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Marks, H.M. 2000. Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle and high school years. American Educational Research Journal 37 (1): 153-84.
7. McDermott, P.A., M. Mordell, & J.C. Stolzfus. 2001. The organization of student performance in American schools: Discipline, motivation, verbal and non-verbal learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 93 (1): 65-76.
8. Roderick, M., & M. Engle. 2001. The grasshopper and the ant: Motivational responses of low-achieving students to high-stakes testing. Educational Evaluation Policy Analysis 23 (3): 197-227.
9. Rossi, R., & A. Montgomery. 1994. Education reforms and students at risk: A review of the current state of the art. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
10. Schlechty, P. 2001. Shafting up the school house: How to support and sustain educational innovation: San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11. Willingham, W.W., J.M. Pollack, & C. Lewis. 2002. Grades and test scores: Accounting for observed differences. Journal of Educational Measurement 39 (1): 1-37.
12. Yair, G. 2000. Reforming motivation: How the structure of instruction affects students' learning experiences. British Educational Journal 26 (2): 191-210.