Abstract
This chapter digs more deeply into the multiple views about student engagement introduced in Chap. 1. Three different meaning perspectives are discussed: a quantitative generic pedagogical perspective; a cognitive learning focused perspective and a holistic lifewide experience perspective. Together, these perspectives provide a historical account of the development of student engagement. But this account focuses on theoretical developments and does not offer a clear view of possible practical differences between perspectives. To offer a more practice orientated overview of student engagement, the chapter identifies four practice frameworks derived from the three broad perspectives. The quantitative generic pedagogical perspective and the cognitive learning focused perspective are retained as separate practice frameworks. The holistic lifewide experience perspective divides into psychocultural and sociopolitical frameworks. Four variables—how learning agency and motivation are stimulated; what key learning and teaching processes are practised; how learner wellbeing is promoted; and how active citizenship is conceived—reveal differences between them.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Axelson, R., & Flick, A. (2010). Defining student engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43(1), 38–43. Doi:10.1080/00091383.2011.533096
Báez, C. (2011). Crafting programs to stimulate student engagement and persistence in higher education. Paper Presented at the 15th Biennial of the International Study Association on Teachers and Teaching (ISATT), University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Barnett, R. (2010). Life-wide education: A new and transformative concept for higher education? Enabling a More Complete Education e-Proceedings On-line. Retrieved from http://lifewidelearningconference.pbworks.com/w/page/24285296/E%20proceedings
Barnett, R., & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Maidenhead, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Biggs, J. (1978). Individual and group differences in study processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 48(3), 266–297. Doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1978.tb03013.x
Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7.
Coates, H. (2007). A model of online and general campus-based student engagement. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 121–141.
Entwistle, N. (2005). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning: Implications for teaching and studying in higher education (3rd (Internet) ed., pp. 3–22). Edinburgh, UK: Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment, University of Edinburgh.
Entwistle, N., McCune, V., & Hounsell, J. (2002). Approaches to studying and perceptions of university teaching-learning environments: Concepts, measures and preliminary findings. Occasional Report 1. Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments (ETL) Project.
Entwistle, N., McCune, V., & Tait, H. (2013). Approaches and study skills inventories for students (ASSIST) incorporating the revised approaches to studying inventory. Report of the development and use of the inventories. Retrieved from https://www.mededportal.org/publication/9404
Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London, UK: Croom Helm.
Field, J. (2009). Well-being and happiness: Inquiry into the future for lifelong learning. Thematic Article 4. Retrieved from Leicester, UK
Forgeard, M., Jayawickreme, E., Kern, M., & Seligman, M. (2011). Doing the right thing: Measuring wellbeing for public policy. International Journal of Wellbeing, 1(1), 79–106.
Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.
Furman, G., & Gruenewald, D. (2004). Expanding the landscape of social justice: A critical ecological analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 47–76.
Kahu, E. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. Doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
Kuh, G. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 141, 5–20. Doi:10.1002/ir.v2009:141/issuetoc
Kuh, G., Cruce, T., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79, 540–563. Doi:10.1080/01421590701721721
Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B., & Hayek, J. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/IPEDS/research/pdf/Kuh_Team_Report.pdf
Lam, S., Wong, B., Yang, H., & Liu, M. (2012). Understanding student engagement with a conceptual model. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 403–420). New York, NY: Springer.
Lawson, M., & Lawson, H. (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 432–479.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11.
McCormick, A., Gonyea, R., & Kinzie, J. (2013). Refreshing engagement: NSSE at 13. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 45(3), 6–15. Doi:10.1080/00091383.2013.786985
McLaren, P. (2003). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education (4th ed.). New York, NY: Allyn and Bacon.
McMahon, B., & Portelli, J. (2004). Engagement for what? Beyond popular discourses of student engagement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 3(1), 59–76.
McMahon, B., & Portelli, J. (2012). The challenges of neoliberalism in education: Implications for student engagement. In B. McMahon & J. Portelli (Eds.), Student engagement in urban school: Beyond neoliberal discourses (pp. 1–10). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Meyer, J. (1991). Study orchestration: The manifestation, interpretation and consequences of contextualised approaches to studying. Higher Education, 22(3), 297–316.
Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Nelson, K., Kift, S., & Clarke, J. (2012). A transition pedagogy for student engagement and first-year learning, success and retention. In I. Solomonides, A. Reid, & P. Petocz (Eds.), Engaging with learning in higher education (pp. 117–144). Faringdon, UK: Libri Publishing.
Ramsden, P., & Callender, C. (2014). Review of the national student survey: Appendix A: Literature review. Retrieved from London, UK: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rereports/year/2014/nssreview/#alldownloads
Seligman, M. (2011). Flourish. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Solomonides, I., Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2012). A relational model of student engagement. In I. Solomonides, A. Reid, & P. Petocz (Eds.), Engaging with learning in higher education (pp. 11–24). Faringdon, UK: Libri Publishing.
Tinto, V. (1987). The principles of effective retention. Paper Presented at the Maryland College Personnel Association, Prince George’s Community College, Largo, MD. http://files.eric.ed.govt/fulltext/ED301267.pdf
Tinto, V. (2010). From theory to action: Exploring the institutional conditions for student retention. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 51–89). New York, NY: Springer.
Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. Retrieved from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/studentengagement/StudentEngagementLiteratureReview.pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zepke, N. (2017). Mainstream Perspectives and Frameworks. In: Student Engagement in Neoliberal Times. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3200-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3200-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3198-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3200-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)