Student engagement appears to be associated with high-quality learning outcomes. Thus, it is important to measure whether students are engaging effectively in class. This article describes the development and validation of a measure of student engagement named the Student Course Engagement Scale (SCES). Exploratory and confirmatory analyses were conducted on two independent samples (n = 543 and n = 893, respectively) of Taiwanese college students. The resultant 20-item SCES demonstrated good reliability and factorial validity as well as being correlated positively with other engagement measures. The results also confirm the measurement invariance of the five-factors SCES across different gender groups. This instrument provides a practical and valuable tool for assessing course engagement among Chinese college students.
AppletonJ. J.ChristensonS. L.KimD.ReschlyA. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427-445.
2.
AxelsonR.FlickA. (2011). Defining student engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43, 38-43.
3.
BettsJ. E.AppletonJ. J.ReschlyA. L.ChristensonS. L.HuebnerE. S. (2010). A study of the factorial invariance of the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI): Results from middle and high school students. School Psychology Quarterly, 25, 84-93.
4.
BulgerM. E.MayerR. E.AlmerothK. C.BlauS. D. (2008). Measuring learner engagement in computer-equipped college classrooms. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17, 129-143.
5.
ChangC. C. (2015). Analysis of learning involvement of junior high students by grade level and gender. Taiwan Education Review, 4, 143-146.
6.
ChangD. F. (2012). Exploring the theory and praxis of college student engagement. Evaluation in Higher Education, 8, 41-62.
7.
ChapmanE. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=13
8.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing MI. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 235-255.
9.
ChouR. T. C. (2008). To construct college students’ course engagement questionnaire. Journal of Taiwan intelligent Technologies and Applied Statistics, 6, 173-188.
10.
ChristensonS. L.ReschlyA. L.WylieC. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. New York, NY: Springer Science.
11.
CoatesH. (2007). A model of online and general campus-based student engagement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 121-141.
12.
DottererA. M.LoweK. (2011). Classroom context, school engagement, and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 1649-1660.
13.
FredericksJ. A.BlumenfeldP. C.ParisA. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
14.
GlanvilleJ. L.WildhagenT. (2007). The measurement of school engagement: Assessing dimensionality and measurement invariance across race and ethnicity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 1019-1041.
15.
HandelsmanM. M.BriggsW. L.SullivanN.TowlerA. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 98, 184-191.
16.
HarrisL. R. (2008). A phenomenographic investigation of teacher conceptions of student engagement in learning. The Australian Educational Researcher, 35, 57-79.
17.
HuL.BentlerP. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 10, 424-453.
18.
HuY. L.ChingG. S.ChaoP. C. (2012). Taiwan student engagement model: Conceptual framework and overview of psychometric properties. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 1, 69-90.
19.
JohnsonM. K.CrosnoeR.ElderG. (2001). Students’ attachment and academic engagement: The role of the race and ethnicity. Sociology of Education, 74, 318-340.
20.
JoreskogK. G. (2004). Structural equation modeling with ordinal variables using LISREL (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
KahuE. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38, 758-773.
23.
KazmiA. (2010). Sleep walking through undergrad: Using student engagement as an institutional alarm clock. College Quarterly, 13, 1-15.
24.
KlineP. (1993). The handbook of psychological testing. London, England: Routledge.
25.
KrauseK. L.CoatesH. (2008). Students’ engagement in first year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 493-505.
26.
LeeY. M.SunS. H. (2010). The relationship between autonomous motivation of course-taking and learning engagement on college students. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 55, 155-182.
27.
LinS. H.HuangY. C. (2012). Development of learning engagement scale for college students. Psychological Testing, 59, 373-396.
28.
LiuS.RosaM. J. (2008). Quality assessment of undergraduate education in China: A policy analysis. Higher Education Management and Policy, 20, 79-96.
29.
LovelaceM. D.ReschlyA. L.AppletonJ. J.LutzM. E. (2014). Concurrent and predictive validity of the student engagement instrument. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 32, 509-520.
30.
LutzM. E.CulverS. (2010). The National Survey of Student Engagement: A university-level analysis. Tertiary Education and Management, 16, 35-44.
31.
LuzeckyjA.SchmidtL.ReynoldsL. C. (2012). Using Australian Survey of Student Engagement data to stimulate discussion in a First Year Community of Practice. In MortimerR., ed. 15th International First Year in Higher Education Conference. Brisbane, QLD: QUT Events. 2012 FYHE Conference. Brisbane, QLD. June 2012, pp. 1-5.
32.
MartinA. J. (2007). Examining a multidimensional model of student motivation and engagement using a construct validation approach. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 413-440.
33.
Motti-StefanidiF.MastenA.AsendorpfJ. B. (2015). School engagement trajectories of immigrant youth: Risks and longitudinal interplay with academic success. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39, 32-42.
34.
National Survey of Student Engagement. (2000). The NSSE report: National benchmarks of effective educational practice. Bloomington: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning.
35.
ReeveJ. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their students benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106, 225-236.
36.
ReschlyA. L.BettsJ.AppletonJ. J. (2014). An examination of the validity of two measures of student engagement. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 2, 106-114.
37.
ReyesM. R.BrackettM. A.RiversS. E.WhiteM.SaloveyP. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 700-712.
38.
SassD. A. (2011). Testing measurement invariance and comparing latent factor means within a confirmatory factor analysis framework. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 347-363.
39.
SunJ. C.-Y. (2014). Influence of polling technologies on student engagement: An analysis of student motivation, academic performance, and brainwave data. Computers & Education, 72, 80-89.
40.
SvanumS.BigattiS. M. (2009). Academic course engagement during one semester forecasts college success: Engaged students are more likely to earn a degree, do it faster and do it better. Journal of College Student Development, 50, 120-132.
41.
TreloarH. R.MartensM. P.McCarthyD. M. (2014). Testing measurement invariance of the Protective Behavioral Strategies Scale in college men and women. Psychological Assessment, 26, 307-313.
42.
Van RyzinM. J. (2011). Protective factors at school: Reciprocal effects among adolescents’ perceptions of the school environment, engagement in learning, and hope. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 1568-1580.
43.
WonglorsaichonB.WongwanichS.WiratchaiN. (2014). The influence of students school engagement on learning achievement: A structural equation modeling analysis. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1748-1755.
44.
YangC. H.WuM. L.ChouP. P. (2014). A study of technology university students’ English learning engagement scale construction. Bulletin of Meiho University, 33, 1-16.
45.
YinH.WangW. (2016). Undergraduate students’ motivation and engagement in China: An exploratory study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41, 601-621.
46.
ZhaoC. M.CariniR. M.KuhG. D. (2005). Searching for the peach blossom Shangri-La: Student engagement of men and women SMET majors. Review of Higher Education, 28, 503-525.
