Teaching Quality as Predictor of Student Engagement, Well-Being and Performance

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The relevance of the study is due to the need to obtain reliable data on the components of effective teaching that affect important learning outcomes, such as motivation, engagement, academic performance, and well-being of school students. The purpose of the study was to analyze the contribution of three, actively discussed in the literature, psychological and pedagogical indicators of teaching quality, assessed by the school students, to their engagement, psychological well-being and academic performance. The study involved 2028 eighth-grade students (1085 girls, 906 boys and 35 of unspecified gender; mean age - 13.96, SD = 0.46) from 73 schools and 16 regions of the Russian Federation. The analysis of the respondents’ assessments included such indicators of teaching quality as the relevance of the learning content, psychological and instrumental support, as well as school engagement, indifference, academic performance and indicators of their satisfaction (with themselves, their teachers and school). The results of the regression analysis showed that the perceived psychological support from the teacher was the strongest predictor of the growth of all the types of educational engagement of school students and the decrease of all the types of educational indifference; besides, this component of teaching quality was a predictor of well-being in the context of school life (including the respondents’ satisfaction with their school, their teachers and themselves). The teacher’s instrumental support was the next most important predictor of cognitive and emotional engagement of the students and, no less important, was a negative predictor of all the types of learning indifference; it was also a predictor of the students’ satisfaction with their school and relationships with their teachers. Thus, the present study, conducted on a large and representative sample of Russian school students, has shown the positive effects of two components of teaching quality, namely, psychological support and instrumental support provided by the teacher. The effects of actual learning content are less clear, which casts doubt on the importance of teachers emphasizing the connection between the educational material and real life in order to maintain the motivation of school students. The results obtained can be used for training and retraining school teachers and improving teaching quality in Russian schools.

About the authors

Maria V. Lunkina

“Investment to the Future” Charitable Foundation

Author for correspondence.
Email: marusamendelevich@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0009-0008-0401-1950

Ph.D. in Psychology, is Appraiser

32 Kutuzova Prospekt, Moscow, 121170, Russian Federation

Tamara O. Gordeeva

Lomonosov Moscow State University; HSE University

Email: tamgordeeva@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3900-8678
SPIN-code: 2687-2013

Doctor of Psychology, is Professor of the Department of Psychology of Education and Pedagogy, Faculty of Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow State University ; Leading Researcher, International Laboratory for Positive Psychology of Personality and Motivation, HSE University

11 Mokhovaya St, bldg 9, Moscow, 125009, Russian Federation; 20 Myasnitskaya St, Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation

Elena G. Diryugina

“Investment to the Future” Charitable Foundation

Email: diryugina@vbudushee.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0006-0103-4642

Head of “Methodology and Evaluation” Direction

32 Kutuzova Prospekt, Moscow, 121170, Russian Federation

Diana V. Pshenichnyuk

Lomonosov Moscow State University

Email: psdiana@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0706-6347
SPIN-code: 1968-0013

Ph.D. in Psychology, is Researcher of the Department of Educational Psychology and Pedagogy, Faculty of Psychology

11 Mokhovaya St, bldg 9, Moscow, 125009, Russian Federation

References

  1. Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Haerens, L., Soenens, B., Fontaine, J.R.J., & Reeve, J. (2019). Toward an integrative and fine-grained insight in motivating and demotivating teaching styles: The merits of a circumplex approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000293
  2. Assor, A., Kaplan, H., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Roth, G. (2005). Directly controlling teacher behaviors as predictors of poor motivation and engagement in girls and boys: The role of anger and anxiety. Learning and Instruction, 15(5), 397-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.07.008
  3. Batten, M. (1993). Students’ perceptions of effective teaching. In M. Batten, P. Marland & M. Khamis. Knowing How to Teach Well: Teachers Reflect on Their Classroom Practice. Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.
  4. Bondarenko, I.N., Ishmuratova, Yu.A., & Tsyganov, I.Yu (2020). Problems of the relationship between school engagement and academic achievements in modern teenagers. Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 9(4), 77-88 (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2020090407
  5. Cairns, D., & Areepattamannil, S. (2022). Teacher-directed learning approaches and science achievement: Investigating the importance of instructional explanations in Australian schools. Research in Science Education, 52(4), 1171-1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10002-0
  6. Chirkov, V.I., & Ryan, R.M. (2001). Parent and teacher autonomy-support in Russian and U.S. adolescents: Common effects on well-being and academic motivation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 618-635. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032005006
  7. Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problembased learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 533-568. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(02)00025-7
  8. Fatou, N., & Kubiszewski, V. (2018). Are perceived school climate dimensions predictive of students’ engagement? Social Psychology of Education, 21(2), 427-446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9422-x
  9. Fomina, T.G., & Morosanova, V.I. (2020). Russian adaptation and validation of the “Multidimensional school engagement scale”. Moscow University Psychology Bulletin, (3), 194-213. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.11621/vsp.2020.03.09
  10. Fomina, T.G., Potanina, A.M., & Morosanova, V.I. (2020). The relationship between school engagement and conscious self-regulation of learning activity: The current state of the problem and research perspectives in Russia and abroad. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 17(3), 390-411. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2020-17-3-390-411
  11. Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children's academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 148-162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
  12. Gauthier, C., Dembélé, M., Bissonnette, S., & Richard, M. (2004). Quality of teaching and quality of education: A review of research findings. Background paper for the Education for all global monitoring report 2005: The quality imperative. Paris: UNESCO.
  13. Gordeeva, T.O., & Sychev, O.A. (2021). Diagnostics of motivating and demotivating styles of teachers: “Situations-in-School” questionnaire. Psychological Science and Education, 26(1), 51-65. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/pse.2021260103
  14. Hattie, J. (2021). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Moscow: Nacional'noe Obrazovanie Publ. (In Russ.)
  15. Hattie, J., & Anderman, E.M. (Eds.). (2012). International guide to student achievement (1st ed.). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203850398
  16. Howard, J.L., Bureau, J.S., Guay, F., Chong, J.X.Y., & Ryan, R.M. (2021). Student motivation and associated outcomes: A meta-analysis from self-determination theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1300-1323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966789
  17. Irving, S.E. (2004). The development and validation of a student evaluation instrument to identify highly accomplished mathematics teachers. Ph.D. in Education Thesis. Auckland: The University of Auckland.
  18. Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E.L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588-600. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019682
  19. Kember, D., Ho, A., & Hong, C. (2008). The importance of establishing relevance in motivating student learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 249-263. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787408095849
  20. Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805-820. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032583
  21. Leon, J., Medina-Garrido, E., & Núñez, J.L. (2017). Teaching quality in math class: The development of a scale and the analysis of its relationship with engagement and achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 895. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00895
  22. Li, J (2015). Cultural foundations of learning: East and west. Moscow: HSE Publishing House. (In Russ.)
  23. Marsh, H.W., & Roche, L.A. (1997). Making students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility. American Psychologist, 52(11), 1187-1197. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.11.1187
  24. Ning, B., Van Damme, J., Van Den Noortgate, W., Yang, X., & Gielen, S. (2015). The influence of classroom disciplinary climate of schools on reading achievement: A cross-country comparative study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(4), 586-611. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2015.1025796
  25. Peng, X., Sun, X., & He, Z. (2022). Influence mechanism of teacher support and parent support on the academic achievement of secondary vocational students. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 863740. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.863740
  26. Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students' engagement by increasing teachers' autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28(2), 147-169. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:MOEM.0000032312.95499.6f
  27. Rjosk, C., Richter, D., Hochweber, J., Lüdtke, O., Klieme, E., & Stanat, P. (2014). Socioeconomic and language minority classroom composition and individual reading achievement: The mediating role of instructional quality. Learning and Instruction, 32, 63-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.007
  28. Ruiz-Alfonso, Z., & León, J. (2019). Teaching quality: Relationships between passion, deep strategy to learn, and epistemic curiosity. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 30(2), 212-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1562944
  29. Ruiz-Alfonso, Z., León, J., Santana-Vega, L.E., & González, C. (2021). Teaching quality: An explanatory model of learning in secondary education. Psicología Educativa, 27(1), 67-76. https://doi.org/10.5093/psed2020a18
  30. Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: The Guilford Press. https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28806
  31. Schönwetter, D.J., Clifton, R.A., & Perry, R.P. (2002). Content familiarity: Differential impact of effective teaching on student achievement outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 43, 625-655. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020999014875
  32. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R.J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454-499. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307310317
  33. Soenens, B., Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Dochy, F., & Goossens, L. (2012). Psychologically controlling teaching: Examining outcomes, antecedents, and mediators. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 108-120. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025742
  34. Sychev, O.A., Gordeeva, T.O., Lunkina, M.V., Osin, E.N., & Sidneva, A.N. (2018). Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale. Psychological Science and Education, 23(6), 5-15. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/pse.2018230601
  35. Tao, Y., Meng, Y., Gao, Z., & Yang, X. (2022). Perceived teacher support, student engagement, and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology, 42(4), 401-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2022.2033168
  36. Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Nagy, N., Lenski, A., Niggli, A., & Schnyder, I. (2015). Using individual interest and conscientiousness to predict academic effort: Additive, synergistic, or compensatory effects? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(1), 142-162. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000034
  37. Van de Grift, W. (2007). Quality of teaching in four European countries: a review of the literature and application of an assessment instrument. Educational Research, 49(2), 127-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880701369651
  38. Wang, M.-T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633-662. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209361209

Copyright (c) 2023 Lunkina M.V., Gordeeva T.O., Diryugina E.G., Pshenichnyuk D.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies