KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research / 2026 / Volume: 10 Issue: 1

The role of teachers’ autonomy support, involvement, and structure support on students’ collective engagement in science classes: An observational study

Münevver Subaşı(HATAY MUSTAFA KEMAL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6777-6995
Gülşen Koçak(ATATÜRK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7048-7545
Yasemin Taş(ATATURK UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-3553-8711
Sundus Yerdelen(KAFKAS UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-2100-0822
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2023-03-31
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

In other words,, it can be assumed that teacher behaviours play a crucial role in students’ collective engagement.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study aims to reveal the need-support profiles of science teachers by using the variables of teachers’ autonomy support, involvement and structure support as well as the role of the teachers with such profiles in students’ collective engagement.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Within the scope of the study, first of all, the observation form developed by Reeve, Jang, Carrell, Jeon, and Barch (2004) was adapted into Turkish and then, 41 science lessons taught by different teachers were observed by using the form during a class hour.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:In other words,, it can be assumed that teacher behaviours play a crucial role in students’ collective engagement.
🔬Tür:Research Article
📍Kapsam:2004 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Teachers’ autonomy support · Teacher's involvement · Teachers' structure support

Abstract

This study aims to reveal the need-support profiles of science teachers by using the variables of teachers’ autonomy support, involvement and structure support as well as the role of the teachers with such profiles in students’ collective engagement. Within the scope of the study, first of all, the observation form developed by Reeve, Jang, Carrell, Jeon, and Barch (2004) was adapted into Turkish and then, 41 science lessons taught by different teachers were observed by using the form during a class hour. Descriptive statistics, cluster analysis and independent samples t-test were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20 to analyse the variables of the study. The cluster analysis showed that teachers in most classes (n= 35) were highly need-supportive, while a few teachers (n= 6) were moderately need-supportive. The independent samples t-test analysis demonstrated that the collective engagement of the students in the classrooms where the teachers were highly need-supportive was more than those of the students in the classrooms where the teachers were moderately need-supportive. Students’ collective engagement varied according to the teachers’ need-supportive profiles. In other words,, it can be assumed that teacher behaviours play a crucial role in students’ collective engagement.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Subaşı, M., Koçak, G., Taş, Y., Yerdelen, S. (2023). The role of teachers’ autonomy support, involvement, and structure support on students’ collective engagement in science classes: An observational study. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, Volume: 10 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.1099080

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (69)

  1. Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the constrcut. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
  2. Archambault, I., Pascal, S., Tardif-Grenier, K., Dupéré, V., Janosz, M., Parent, S., & Pagani, L. S. (2020). The contribution of teacher structure, involvement, and autonomy support on student engagement in low-income elementary schools. Teachers and Teaching, 26(5-6), 428-445. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2020.1863208
  3. 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
  4. Barkley, E. F., & Major, C. H. (2020). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college faculty. John Wiley & Sons.
  5. Benlahcene, A., Awang-Hashim, R., & Kaur, A. (2020). Personal best goals: Do they mediate the relationship between teacher autonomy support and student engagement? Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 25-49. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1248970.pdf
  6. Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International journal of educational technology in higher education, 17(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
  7. Carpentier, J., & Mageau, G. A. (2013). When change-oriented feedback enhances motivation, well-being and performance: A look at autonomy-supportive feedback in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14(3), 423-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.01.003
  8. Cents-Boonstra, M., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A., Denessen, E., Aelterman, N., & Haerens, L. (2020). Fostering student engagement with motivating teaching: an observation study of teacher and student behaviours. Research Papers in Education, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1767184
  9. Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., Yu, T. H., & Jang, H. R. (2014). The teacher benefits from giving autonomy support during physical education instruction. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 36(4), 331-346. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2013-0231
  10. Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Song, Y. G. (2016). A teacher-focused intervention to decrease PE students’ amotivation by increasing need satisfaction and decreasing need frustration. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 38(3), 217-235. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2015-0236
  11. Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2020). When teachers learn how to provide classroom structure in an autonomy-supportive way: Benefits to teachers and their students. Teaching and teacher education, 90, 103004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.103004
  12. Coates, H. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in higher education, 11(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320500074915
  13. Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology: Vol. 23. Self processes in development (pp. 43-77). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://drjameswellborn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Connel-and-Wellborn-Chapter.pdf
  14. Deci, E. L. ve Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
  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. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543074001059
  16. Haerens, L., Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Soenens, B., & Van Petegem, S. (2015). Do perceived autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching relate to physical education students' motivational experiences through unique pathways? Distinguishing between the bright and dark side of motivation. Psychology of sport and exercise, 16, 26-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.08.013
  17. Hıdıroğlu, F. M. (2014). The role of perceived classroom goal structures, self-efficacy, and the student engagement in seventh grade students’ science achievement. Unpublished Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey. http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12617812/index.pdf
  18. Hornstra, L., Stroet, K., & Weijers, D. (2021). Profiles of teachers’ need-support: How do autonomy support, structure, and involvement cohere and predict motivation and learning outcomes? Teaching and Teacher Education, 99, 103257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103257
  19. Jang, H., Kim, E. J., & Reeve, J. (2016). Why students become more engaged or more disengaged during the semester: A self-determination theory dual-process model. Learning and Instruction, 43, 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.002
  20. 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. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0019682
  21. Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
  22. Kiefer, S. M., Alley, K. M., & Ellerbrock, C. R. (2015). Teacher and peer support for young adolescents’ motivation, engagement, and school belonging. Rmle Online, 38(8), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2015.11641184
  23. Klassen, R. M., Al-Dhafri, S., Mansfield, C. F., Purwanto, E., Siu, A., Wong, M. W., & Woods-McConney, A. (2012). Teachers’ engagement at work: An international validation study. Journal of Experimental Education, 80, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2012.678409
  24. Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B., & Hayek, J. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Retrived from, https://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/Kuh_Team_Report.pdf
  25. Lam, S.-F., Jimerson, S., Kikas, E., Cefai, C., Veiga, F. H., Nelson, B.,. Zollneritsch, J. (2012). Do girls and boys perceive themselves as equally engaged in school? The results of an international study from 12 countries. Journal of School Psychology, 50(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.004
  26. Lawson, M. A., & Lawson, H. A. (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 432-479. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654313480891
  27. Li, W., Gao, W., & Sha, J. (2020). Perceived teacher autonomy support and school engagement of tibetan students in elementary and middle schools: mediating effect of self-efficacy and academic emotions. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 50. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00050
  28. Lietaert, S., Roorda, D., Laevers, F., Verschueren, K., & De Fraine, B. (2015). The gender gap in student engagement: The role of teachers’ autonomy support, structure, and involvement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 498-518. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12095
  29. Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153-184. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00028312037001153
  30. Martin, A. J., & Collie, R. J. (2019). Teacher–student relationships and students’ engagement in high school: Does the number of negative and positive relationships with teachers matter?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(5), 861. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/edu0000317
  31. Mouratidis, A., Michou, A., Aelterman, N., Haerens, L., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2018). Begin-of-school-year perceived autonomy-support and structure as predictors of end-of-school-year study efforts and procrastination: the mediating role of autonomous and controlled motivation. Educational Psychology, 38(4), 435-450. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.1402863
  32. Mouratidis, A., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Sideridis, G. (2008). The motivating role of positive feedback in sport and physical education: Evidence for a motivational model. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 30(2), 240-268. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.30.2.240
  33. Miles, M. B.,& Huberman, A. M. (2015). Nitel veri analizi: [Qualitative Data Analysis]. S. Akbaba Altun ve A. Ersoy (Çev. Eds). Ankara: Pagem Akademi.
  34. Patall, E. A., Dent, A. L., Oyer, M., & Wynn, S. R. (2013). Student autonomy and course value: The unique and cumulative roles of various teacher practices. Motivation and Emotion, 37(1), 14-32. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11031-012-9305-6.pdf
  35. Patall, E. A., Steingut, R. R., Vasquez, A. C., Trimble, S. S., Pituch, K. A., & Freeman, J. L. (2018). Daily autonomy supporting or thwarting and students’ motivation and engagement in the high school science classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(2), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000214
  36. 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://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/B:MOEM.0000032312.95499.6f
  37. Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students' autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.209
  38. Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational psychologist, 44(3), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903028990
  39. Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
  40. Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 579. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0032690
  41. Reeve, J., Cheon, S. H., & Jang, H. (2020). How and why students make academic progress: Reconceptualizing the student engagement construct to increase its explanatory power. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 62, 101899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101899
  42. Reeve, J., & Shin, S. H. (2020). How teachers can support students’ agentic engagement. Theory Into Practice, 59(2), 150-161.https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2019.1702451
  43. Rolland, R. G. (2012). Synthesizing the evidence on classroom goal structures in middle and secondary schools: A meta-analysis and narrative review. Review of Educational Research, 82(4), 396-435. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654312464909
  44. Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher– student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493–529. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654311421793
  45. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
  46. Ryu, S., & Lombardi, D. (2015). Coding classroom interactions for collective and individual engagement. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 70-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1001891
  47. Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., & Dochy, F. (2009). The synergistic relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in the prediction of self‐regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 57-68. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709908X304398
  48. Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science, Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
  49. Skinner, E. A., and M. J. Belmont. 1993. “Motivation in the Classroom: Reciprocal Effects of TeacherBehavior and Student Engagement across the School Year.” Journal of Educational Psychology 85:571–581.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571
  50. Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0012840
  51. Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (2009). Engagement and disaffection as organizational constructs in the dynamics of motivational development. Handbook of motivation at school, 223-245.
  52. Stornes, T., Bru, E., & Idsoe, T. (2008). Classroom social structure and motivational climates: On the influence of teachers' involvement, teachers' autonomy support and regulation in relation to motivational climates in school classrooms. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(3), 315-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830802025124
  53. Tas, Y. (2016). The contribution of perceived classroom learning environment and motivation to student engagement in science. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 557-577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-016-0303-z
  54. Thijs, J., & Verkuyten, M. (2009). Students’ anticipated situational engagement: The roles of teacher behavior, personal engagement, and gender. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 170(3), 268-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221320903218323
  55. Tsai, Y.-M., Kunter, M., Lüdtke, O., Trautwein, U., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). What makes lessons interesting? The role of situational and individual factors in three school subjects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 460–472. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.460
  56. Tucker, C. M., Zayco, R. A., Herman, K. C., Reinke, W. M., Trujillo, M., Carraway, K.,. & Ivery, P. D. (2002). Teacher and child variables as predictors of academic engagement among low‐income African American children. Psychology in the Schools, 39(4), 477-488. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10038
  57. Ucar, F. M., & Sungur, S. (2017). The role of perceived classroom goal structures, self-efficacy, and engagement in student science achievement. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(2), 149-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1278684
  58. Valdes, O. M., Denner, J., Dickson, D. J., & Laursen, B. (2021). Teacher expectations and perceived teacher involvement anticipate changes in Latino/a middle school students’ expectations of math success. Educational Psychology, 41(6), 786-805. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1837345
  59. Van Uden, J. M., Ritzen, H., & Pieters, J. M. (2014). Engaging students: The role of teacher beliefs and interpersonal teacher behavior in fostering student engagement in vocational education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37, 21-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.08.005
  60. Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Dochy, F., Mouratidis, A.,. & Beyers, W. (2012). Identifying configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and structure: Associations with self-regulated learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 431-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.002
  61. Vollet, J. W., Kindermann, T. A., & Skinner, E. A. (2017). In peer matters, teachers matter: Peer group influences on students’ engagement depend on teacher involvement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(5), 635–652. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000172
  62. Walker, C. O., B. A. Greene, and R. A. Mansell. (2006). “Identification with Academics, Intrinsic/Extrinsic Motivation, and Self-efficacy as Predictors of Cognitive Engagement.” Learning and Individual Differences 16 (1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2005.06.004
  63. Xu, B., Chen, N. S., & Chen, G. (2020). Effects of teacher role on student engagement in WeChat-Based online discussion learning. Computers & Education, 157, 103956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103956
  64. Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2018). The effects of autonomy support on student engagement in peer assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(1), 25-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9538-x
  65. Zepke, N., Leach, L., & Butler, P. (2014). Student engagement: students' and teachers' perceptions. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(2), 386-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832160
  66. Zhou, M., Ma, W. J., & Deci, E. L. (2009). The importance of autonomy for rural Chinese children's motivation for learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 492-498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.05.003
  67. Lam, S.-F., Jimerson, S., Kikas, E., Cefai, C., Veiga, F. H., Nelson, B.,. Zollneritsch, J. (2012). Do girls and boys perceive themselves as equally engaged in school? The results of an international study from 12 countries. Journal of School Psychology, 50(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.004
  68. Tucker, C. M., Zayco, R. A., Herman, K. C., Reinke, W. M., Trujillo, M., Carraway, K.,. & Ivery, P. D. (2002). Teacher and child variables as predictors of academic engagement among low‐income African American children. Psychology in the Schools, 39(4), 477-488. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10038
  69. Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Dochy, F., Mouratidis, A.,. & Beyers, W. (2012). Identifying configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and structure: Associations with self-regulated learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 431-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.002