The assessment of school engagement: Examining dimensionality and measurement invariance by gender and race/ethnicity

Journal of School Psychology

Volumn 49, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 465-480

  Wang, Ming Te ^a,c   Willett, John B ^a   Eccles, Jacquelynne S ^b  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Confirmatory factor analysis; Measurement invariance; Multidimensionality; School engagement

Indexed keywords

ACHIEVEMENT; ADOLESCENT; AFRICAN AMERICAN; ARTICLE; CAUCASIAN; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MOTIVATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCHOOL; SEX DIFFERENCE; STUDENT;

ACHIEVEMENT; ADOLESCENT; AFRICAN AMERICANS; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; EUROPEAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTIVATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; SCHOOLS; SEX FACTORS; STUDENTS;

EID: 79959909060     PISSN: 00224405     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsp.2011.04.001     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Aiken L.S., Stein J.A., Bentler P.M. Structural equation analyses of clinical subpopulation differences and comparative treatment outcomes: Characterizing the daily lives of drug addicts. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1994, 62:488-499.
2. Ainsworth-Darnell J.W., Downey D.B. Assessing the oppositional culture explanation for racial/ethnic differences in school performance. American Sociological Review 1998, 63:536-553.
3. Anderson J.C., Gerbing D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 1988, 103:411-423.
4. Appleton J.J., Christenson S.L., Kim D., Reschly A.L. Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology 2006, 44:427-445.
5. Bagozzi R.P., Yi Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1988, 16:74-94.
6. Bandura A., Barbaranelli C., Caprar G.V., Pastorelli C. Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development 1996, 67:1206-1222.
7. Baraldi A.N., Enders C.K. An introduction to modern missing data analyses. Journal of School Psychology 2010, 48:5-37.
8. Bentler P.M. Comparative fit indices in structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin 1990, 107:238-246.
9. Bentler P.M. EQS 6.1: Structural equations program manual 2005, Multivariate Software, Encino, CA.
10. Bollen K.A. Structural equations with latent variables 1989, John Wiley, New York.
11. Bowen G.L., Richman J.M. The school success profile 1995, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
12. Brooks-Gunn J., Duncan G. The effects of poverty on children and youth. The Future of Children 1997, 7:55-71.
13. Byrne B.M. Structural Equation Modeling with Lisrel, Prelis, and Simplis: Basic concepts, applications, and programming 1998, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
14. Byrne B.M. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming 2001, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
15. Byrne B.M., Stewart S.M. Teacher's corner: The MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of s second-order structure: A walk through the process. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 2006, 13:287-321.
16. Byrne B.M., Watkins D. The issue of measurement invariance revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 2003, 34:155-175.
17. Caraway K., Tucker C.M., Reinke W.M., Hall C. Self-efficacy, goal orientation, and fear of failure as predictors of school engagement in high school students. Psychology in the Schools 2003, 40:417-427.
18. Chen F.F., Sousa K.H., West S.G. Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Structural Equation Modeling 2005, 12:471-492.
19. Cheung G.W., Rensvold R.B. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling 2002, 9:233-255.
20. Connell J.P., Wellborn J.G. Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. Self processes in development: Minnesota symposium on child psychology 1991, Vol. 23:43-77. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
21. Cook T.D., Herman M.R., Phillips M., Setterstein R.A. Some ways in which neighborhoods, nuclear families, friendship groups, and schools jointly affect changes in early adolescent development. Child Development 2002, 73:1283-1309.
22. Csikszentmihalyi M., Schneider B. Becoming adult: How teenagers prepare for the world 2000, Basic Books, New York.
23. Daly B.P., Shin R.Q., Thakral C., Selders M., Vera E. School engagement among urban adolescents of color: Does perceptions of social support and neighborhood safety really matter?. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 2009, 38:63-74.
24. Eccles J.S., Midgley C., Buchanan C.M., Flanagan C., Mac Iver D., Reuman D., et al. Development during adolescence: The impact of stage/environment fit. The American Psychologist 1993, 48:90-101.
25. Fan X., Thompson B., Wang L. The effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on SEM fit indexes. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 1999, 6:56-83.
26. Finn J.D. Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research 1989, 59:117-142.
27. Finn J.D., Rock D.A. Academic success among students at risk for school failure. The Journal of Applied Psychology 1997, 82:221-234.
28. Finn J.D., Voelkl K.E. School characteristics related to school engagement. Journal of Negro Education 1993, 62:249-268.
29. Fredricks J.A., Blumenfeld P.C., Paris A.H. School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research 2004, 74:59-109.
30. Glanville J.L., Wildhagen T. The measurement of school engagement: Assessing dimensionality and measurement invariance across race and ethnicity. Educational and Psychological Measurement 2007, 67:1019-1041.
31. Guthrie J.T., Wigfield A. Engagement and motivation in reading. Handbook of reading research 2000, Vol. 3:403-422. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
32. Hu L.-T., Bentler P.M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods 1998, 3:424-453.
33. Hu L.-T., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 1999, 6:1-55.
34. Hu L.-T., Bentler B.M., Kano Y. Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted?. Psychological Bulletin 1992, 112:351-362.
35. Institute for Research and Reform in Education (IRRE) Research Assessment Package For Schools (RAPS) Manual 1998, Institute for Research and Reform in Education, Philadelphia, PA.
36. Jimerson S.R., Campos E., Greif J.L. Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California School Psychologist 2003, 8:7-27.
37. Johnson M.K., Crosnoe R., Elder G. Students' attachment and academic engagement: The role of the race and ethnicity. Sociology of Education 2001, 74:318-340.
38. Kline R.B. Principals and practices of structural equation modeling 1998, Guilford Press, New York, NY.
39. Little T.D. Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1997, 32:53-76.
40. Little R.J.A., Rubin D.B. Statistical analysis with missing data 1987, Wiley, New York.
41. Marks H.M. Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in elementary, middle and high school years. American Educational Research Journal 2000, 37:153-184.
42. Marsh H.W., Hey J., Roche L.A. Structural of physical self-concept: Elite athletes and physical education students. Journal of Educational Psychology 1997, 89:369-380.
43. Martin A.J. School motivation of boys and girls: differences of degree, differences of kind, or both?. Australian Journal of Psychology 2004, 56:133-146.
44. Martin A.J. Examining a multidimensional model of student motivation and engagement using a construct validation approach. The British Journal of Educational Psychology 2007, 77:413-440.
45. McDermott P.A., Mordell M., Stolzfus J.C. The organization of student performance in American schools: discipline, motivation, verbal learning, and nonverbal learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 2001, 93:65-76.
46. Meredith W. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika 1993, 58:525-543.
47. Muthén L.K., Muthén B.O. Mplus user's guide 2007, [Computer software manual]. Los Angeles: author. 5th ed.
48. National Research Council and Institute of Medicine Engaging schools: Fostering high school students' motivation to learn 2004, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
49. Newmann F., Wehlage G.G., Lamborn S.D. The significance and sources of student engagement. Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools 1992, 11-39. Teachers College Press, New York. F. Newmann (Ed.).
50. Perry J.C., Liu X., Pabian Y. School engagement as mediator of academic performance among urban youth: The role of career preparation, parental career support, and teacher support. The Counseling Psychologist 2010, 38:269-295.
51. Reise S.P., Widaman K.F., Pugh R.H. Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin 1993, 114:552-566.
52. Satorra A., Bentler P.M. Scaling corrections for chi-square statistics in covariance structure analysis. American Statistical Association 1988 proceeding of the business and economics section 1988, 308-313. American Statistical Association, Alexandria VA.
53. Simons-Morton B., Chen R. Peer and parent influences on school engagement among early adolescents. Youth and Society 2009, 41:3-25.
54. Skinner E.A., Belmont M.J. Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effect of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology 1993, 85:571-581.
55. Skinner E., Furrer C., Marchand G., Kindermann T. Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic?. Journal of Educational Psychology 2008, 100:765-781.
56. Steiger J.H. Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1990, 25:173-180.
57. Thompson M.S., Green S.B. Evaluating between-group differences in latent variable means. A second course in structural equation modeling 2006, 119-169. Wiley, New York. G.R. Hancock, R.O. Mueller (Eds.).
58. Tomarken A.J., Waller N.G. Structural equation modeling: Strengths, limitations, and misconceptions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 2003, 1:31-65.
59. Van de Vijver F.J.R., Leung K. Methods and data analysis for comparative research. Handbook of cross-cultural psychology 1997, Vol. 1:259-300. Allyn & Bacon, Boston.
60. Voelkl K.E. Identification with school. American Journal of Education 1997, 105:204-319.
61. Wang M.T., Holcombe R. Adolescents' perceptions of classroom environment, school engagement, and academic achievement. American Educational Research Journal 2010, 47:633-662.
62. Wellborn J.G., Connell J.P. Manual for the Rochester assessment package for schools 1987, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
63. Wicherts J.M., Dolan C.V., Hessen D.J. Stereotype threat and group differences in test performance: A question of measurement invariance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2005, 89:696-716.
64. Widaman K.F., Resie S.P. Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research 1997, 281-324. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. K.J. Bryant, M. Windle, S.G. West (Eds.).
65. Yazzie-Mintz E. Voices of students on engagement: A report on the 2006 High School Survey of Student Engagement 2007, Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, Indiana University, Bloomington, Retrieved December 13, 2009, from. http://ceep.indiana.edu/hssse.
66. You S., Sharkey J. Testing a developmental-ecological model of student engagement: A multilevel latent growth curve analysis. Educational Psychology 2009, 29:659-684.
67. Zimmerman B.J. Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research and practice 1989, 1-25. Springer-Verlag, New York. B.J. Zimmerman, D. Schunk (Eds.).
68. Zimmerman B.J., Martinez-Pons M. Student differences in self-regulated learning: relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology 1990, 82:51-59.