Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.15267/keses.2020.39.1.145

Latent Class Analysis and Difference Investigation of Elementary Students' Multidimensional Engagement in Science Classes  

Lim, Heejun (Gyeongin National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education / v.39, no.1, 2020 , pp. 145-153 More about this Journal
Abstract
Students' engagement is very important for effect science learning. Multidimensional approaches on students' engagement defines engagement in three ways which includes cognitive, behavioral, and cognitive engagement. Based on the multidimensional approaches on students' engagement, this study identified latent groups of elementary students characterized by patterns of cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagement in science classes. This study also compared students' perceptions of their engagement in general science classes and small-group activities by the latent groups. 377 elementary students were involved in this study. 5-scale Likert survey were used in order to investigate students' engagement in science classes. Latent class analysis using Mplus program identified 3 latent groups of students engagement in science classes: Highly engaged, moderately engaged, and minimally engaged in three ways of engagement. The mean scores of cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagement were significantly different by three latent groups. In addition, there were significant difference in students perceptions on participating experiments activities and carefully listening of teacher among latent groups. However, there was no significant difference in students' perceptions on their actions during small-group activities. Educational implications were discussed.
Keywords
student engagement; multidimensional engagement; elementary science; latent class analysis;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 교육부(2015). 과학과 교육과정. 교육부 고시 제2015-74호, 별책 9.
2 김용진 등(2018). 학생 참여형 과학수업 선도학교 지원 연구단 사업보고서. 한국과학창의재단, BD18040002.
3 김현경, 최병순(2009). 과학고 토론수업을 위한 수업모형 개발과 적용과정에서 나타난 언어적 상호작용의 특징. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(4), 359-372.
4 남정희, 이순덕, 임재항, 문성배(2010). 멘토링을 통한 초임중등과학교사의 수업에서의 교사,학생 상호작용 변화 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 30(8), 953-970.   DOI
5 박종윤, 정인화, 남정희, 최경희, 최병순(2006). 중학교 과학 수업에서 질문과 피드백을 활용한 교사-학생 상호작용 강화 수업 전략의 개발 및 적용. 한국과학교육학회지, 26(2) 239-245.
6 유신복, 신이나(2017). 중학생의 수업참여 잠재 프로파일 분류 및 영향요인 탐색. 학습자중심교과교육연구, 17(23), 517-539.
7 유은정, 이선경, 오필석, 신명경, 김찬종(2008). 중등 과학 수업의 참여구조 사례 연구: 혼성적 의미 창출 공간의 형성 가능성 탐색. 한국과학교육학회지, 28(6), 603-617.
8 이혜정, 양일호, 서형두, 정재구(2005). 초등학교 6학년 과학 수업의 사회적 참여구조 유형. 초등과학교육, 24(2), 123-129.
9 최준영(2015). 과학수업에서 나타나는 중학생 행동의 정량적 분석 :참여와 침묵을 중심으로, 서울대학교 석사학위논문.
10 최준영, 나지연, 송진웅(2015). 과학수업에서 나타나는 학생들의 행동적 참여 분석을 위한 영상 분석 도구의 개발. 한국과학교육학회지, 35(2), 247-258.   DOI
11 Ainley, M. (1993). Styles of engagement with learning: Multidimensional assessment of their relationships with strategy use and school achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 395-405.   DOI
12 Birch, S. H. & Ladd, G. W. (1997). The teacher-child relationship and children's early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 61-79.   DOI
13 Finn, J. & Voelkl, K. (1993). School characteristics related to student engagement. Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 249-268.   DOI
14 Blumenfeld, P., Modell, J., Bartko, W. T., Secada, W., Fredricks, J., Friedel, J., et al. (2005). School engagement of inner-city students during middle childhood. In Cooper, C., Coll, C. G., Bartko, W. T., Davis, H. & Chatman, C. (Eds.), Developmental pathway through middle childhood: Rethinking contexts and diversity as resources. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15 Brophy, J. E. (1987). Socializing students' motivation to learn. In Maehr, M. L. & Kleiber, D. (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Enhancing motivation (pp. 181-210). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
16 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
17 Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C. & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.   DOI
18 Geiser, G. (2019), 김진현, 한지나(역). Mplus를 이용한 데이터 분석. 학지사: 서울.
19 Guthrie, J. T. & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In Kamil, M. & Mosenthal, P. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20 Harris, L. R. (2008). A phenomenographic investigation of teacher conceptions of student engagement in learning. The Australian Educational Researcher, 35(1), 57-79.   DOI
21 Hart, S., Stewart, K. & Jimerson, S. (2011). The student engagement in schools questionnaire (SESQ) and the teacher engagement report form-new (TERF-N): Examining the preliminary evidence. Contemporary School Psychology, 15, 67-79.
22 Natriello, G. (1984). Problems in the evaluation of students and student disengagement from secondary schools. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 17, 14-24.
23 Lim, H. (2018). Elementary students' and teachers' perceptions on science class engagement. The 7th International Conference for Network for Inter-Asian Chemistry Educators. Seoul, Korea.
24 McKinney, J. D., Mason, J., Perkerson, K. & Clifford, M. (1975). Relationship between classroom behaviour and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(2), 198-203.   DOI
25 Miller, R. B., Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B. & Nichols, J. D. (1996). Engagement in academic work: The role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 388-422.   DOI
26 Wang, M. T. & Peck, S. C. (2013). Adolescent educational success and mental health vary across school engagement profiles. Developmental Psychology, 49(7), 1266-1276.   DOI