Higher Education

, Volume 75, Issue 4, pp 589–605 | Cite as

Student engagement in academic activities: a social support perspective

  • Matthew J. Xerri
  • Katrina Radford
  • Kate Shacklock
Article

Abstract

Student engagement in academic activities is a critical factor contributing to the overall success of students studying in higher education institutions. Yet the factors influencing student engagement in academic activities are still largely unknown. This study begins to address this knowledge gap by investigating the influence of student connectedness (relationships with peers and teachers), motivation to study (sense of purpose) and perception of workload upon student engagement in academic activities. During 2015, a total of 209 students responded to a survey distributed to first-year undergraduate students enrolled in a university business school in Queensland, Australia. Structural equation modelling was used to investigate the proposed relationships. Results suggest that student-student (peer) relationships, teacher-student relationships, and students’ sense of purpose for studying a higher education degree, were central to student engagement in academic activities. In addition, teacher-student relationships, and a strong sense of purpose were central to perceptions of student workloads. Finally, sense of purpose was found to moderate the relationship between both teacher-student and student-student relationships and also, perceptions of workload and student engagement. The findings from this study support the importance of developing effective teacher-student relationships, facilitating positive student-student relationships and communicating a clear sense of purpose to students, so as to improve their engagement in academic activities and optimise perceptions of workloads.

Keywords

Student engagement Sense of purpose Student connectedness Higher education Student workload 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Mr. Christopher Graham, Ms. Amanda Campbell, the grant approvers and first-year business course convenors (subject/course managers). Funding was received from the university teaching and learning grant body to conduct this research during 2015.

References

  1. Anderson, L. E., & Carta-Falsa, J. (2002). Factors that make faculty and student relationships effective. College Teaching, 50(4), 134–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong, J., & Overton, T. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentler, P. M. (2005). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
  5. Braxton, J. M., Milem, J. F., & Sullivan, A. S. (2000). The influence of active learning on the college student departure process: Toward a revision of Tinto's theory. Journal of Higher Education, 71(5), 569–590.Google Scholar
  6. Bridgstock, R. S., Thomas, A., Lyons, K., Carr, L., & Zelenko, O. (2012). Putting the cart before the horse? Driving student engagement through first year career identity development in a large multidisciplinary creative industries cohort. Paper presented at the First Year in Higher Education Conference, Sofitel Brisbane Central, Brisbane, QLD.Google Scholar
  7. Bryson, C., & Hand, L. (2007). The role of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(4), 349–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chambers, E. (1992). Work-load and the quality of student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 17(2), 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coates, H. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, S., & McKay, G. (1984). Social support, stress and the buffering hypothesis: A theoretical analysis. Handbook of Psychology and Health, 4, 253–267.Google Scholar
  13. Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 310–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feldon, D. F. (2007). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: The double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 123–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ganotice Jr., F. A., & King, R. B. (2014). Social influences on students’ academic engagement and science achievement. Psychological Studies, 59(1), 30–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gerdes, H., & Mallinckrodt, B. (1994). Emotional, social, and academic adjustment of college students: A longitudinal study of retention. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72(3), 281–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  19. Haley, W. E., Levine, E. G., Brown, S. L., & Bartolucci, A. A. (1987). Stress, appraisal, coping, and social support as predictors of adaptational outcome among dementia caregivers. Psychology and Aging, 2(4), 323–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harrison, J. L. (2009). Untangling the value of information scope: An investigation in retail pharmacies. Journal of Management & Organization, 15(4), 470–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Advances in Psychology, 52, 139–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hopwood, C. J. (2007). Moderation and mediation in structural equation modeling: Applications for early intervention research. Journal of Early Intervention, 29(3), 262–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. House, R. J. (1971). A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(3), 321–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jackling, B., & Natoli, R. (2011). Student engagement and departure intention: An Australian university perspective. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 35(4), 561–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. James, R., Krause, K.-L., & Jennings, C. (2010). The first year experience in Australian universities: Findings from 1994 to 2009. Melbourne: Centre for Studies in Higher Education.Google Scholar
  26. Jogaratnam, G., & Buchanan, P. (2004). Balancing the demands of school and work: Stress and employed hospitality students. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(4), 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Karimi, L., Leggat, S. G., Donohue, L., Farrell, G., & Couper, G. E. (2014). Emotional rescue: The role of emotional intelligence and emotional labour on well-being and job-stress among community nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(1), 176–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kember, D. (2004). Interpreting student workload and the factors which shape students' perceptions of their workload. Studies in Higher Education, 29(2), 165–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. (2006). Characterising a teaching and learning environment conducive to making demands on students while not making their workload excessive. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kember, D., Ho, A., & Hong, C. (2010). Characterising a teaching and learning environment capable of motivating student learning. Learning Environments Research, 13(1), 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  33. Krause, K. L., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Krause, K. L., Hartley, R., James, R., & McInnis, C. (2005). The first year experience in Australian universities: Findings from a decade of national studies. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  35. Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706.Google Scholar
  37. LaNasa, S. M., Olson, E., & Alleman, N. (2007). The impact of on-campus student growth on first-year student engagement and success. Research in Higher Education, 48(8), 941–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. (2010). Strengthening commencing students’ sense of purpose: Integrating theory and practice. Paper presented ate the 13th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, Adelaide: Australia.Google Scholar
  39. Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University students' perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Malecki, C. K., & Demaray, M. K. (2003). What type of support do they need? Investigating student adjustment as related to emotional, informational, appraisal, and instrumental support. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(3), 231–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mann, S. J. (2001). Alternative perspectives on the student experience: Alienation and engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57, 519–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mardia, K. V. (1974). Applications of some measures of multivaraite skewness and kurtosis in testing normality and robustness studies. Sankhya, B36, 115–128.Google Scholar
  44. McGrath, H., & Noble, T. (2010). Supporting positive pupil relationships: Research to practice. Educational and Child Psychology, 27(1), 82–94.Google Scholar
  45. Mehdinezhad, V. (2011). First year students' engagement at the university. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(1), 47–66.Google Scholar
  46. Mehrabian, A. (1966). Immediacy: An indicator of attitudes in linguistic communication. Journal of Personality, 34(1), 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mottet, T. P., Parker-Raley, J., Cunningham, C., & Beebe, S. A. (2005). The relationships between teacher nonverbal immediacy and student course workload and teacher availability expectations. Communication Research Reports, 22(4), 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mottet, T. P., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  49. Nyadanu, S. D., Garglo, M. Y., Adampah, T., & Garglo, R. L. (2015). The impact of lecturer-student relationship on self-esteem and academic performance at higher education. Journal of Social Science Studies, 2(1), 264–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pitkethly, A., & Prosser, M. (2001). The first year experience project: A model for university-wide change. Higher Education Research and Development, 20(2), 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Prussia, G. E., & Weis, W. L. (2004). Experiential learning effects on retention: Results from a required MBA course. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 5(4), 397–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Robertson, J., & Blackler, G. (2006). Students' experiences of learning in a research environment. Higher Education Research & Development, 25(3), 215–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ross, J., Head, K., King, L., Perry, P. M., & Smith, S. (2014). The personal development tutor role: An exploration of student and lecturer experiences and perceptions of that relationship. Nurse Education Today, 34(9), 1207–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ruiz-Gallardo, J.-R., Castaño, S., Gómez-Alday, J. J., & Valdés, A. (2011). Assessing student workload in problem based learning: Relationships among teaching method, student workload and achievement. A case study in natural Sciences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 619–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ruohoniemi, M., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2009). Students' experiences concerning course workload and factors enhancing and impeding their learning–a useful resource for quality enhancement in teaching and curriculum planning. International Journal for Academic Development, 14(1), 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schoffstall, D. G., Arendt, S. W., & Brown, E. A. (2013). Academic engagement of hospitality students. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 13, 141–153.Google Scholar
  58. Semmer, N. K., Elfering, A., Jacobshagen, N., Perrot, T., Beehr, T. A., & Boos, N. (2008). The emotional meaning of instrumental social support. International Journal of Stress Management, 15(3), 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Southgate, E., Douglas, H., Scevak, J., Macqueen, S., Rubin, M., & Lindell, C. (2014). The academic outcomes of first-in-family in an Australian university: An exploratory study. International Studies in Widening Participation, 1(2), 31–45.Google Scholar
  60. University Experience Survey (2015). 2014 University Experience Survey National Report: March 2015. Retrieved 6/6/16 at: https://www.qilt.edu.au/docs/default-source/ues-national-report/2014-university-experience-survey-national-report/ues14_report_final_access2a.pdf?sfvrsn=4
  61. Whiteman, S. D., Barry, A. E., Mroczek, D. K., & MacDermid Wadsworth, S. (2013). The development and implications of peer emotional support for student service members/veterans and civilian college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(2), 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wilcox, P., Winn, S., & Fyvie-Gauld, M. (2005). ‘it was nothing to do with the university, it was just the people’: The role of social support in the first-year experience of higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 30(6), 707–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wilson, K. (2009). Success in first year: the impact of institutional, programmatic and personal interventions on an effective and sustainable first-year student experience. Paper presented at the 12th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference - Preparing for tomorrow today: The First Year Experience as foundation., Queensland, Australia Available at www.fyhe.com.au/past_papers/papers09/content/html/keynote.html
  64. Wintre, M. G., & Yaffe, M. (2000). First-year students’ adjustment to university life as a function of relationships with parents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15(1), 9–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew J. Xerri
    • 1
  • Katrina Radford
    • 1
  • Kate Shacklock
    • 1
  1. 1.Griffith Business SchoolGriffith UniversityGold Coast CampusAustralia

Personalised recommendations