The issue of high school dropout has long concerned policy makers, educational professionals, and the general public. In the gifted literature, this concern is no less pressing. Student engagement is becoming an increasingly discussed construct for conceptualizing the dropout phenomenon and designing appropriate interventions to prevent this phenomenon. The purpose of this literature review was to review prior findings in the gifted underachievement and dropout literature within the framework of student engagement. Specifically, academic, behavioral, affective, and cognitive indicators of student engagement are examined. Findings of the review and implications for research and practice are presented. Student engagement may prove to be an essential construct in understanding, predicting, and preventing dropout behavior among gifted students.
AlexanderK. L.EntwisleD. R.HorseyC. S. (1997). From first grade forward: Early foundations of high school dropouts. Sociology of Education, 70, 87-107. doi:10.2307/2673158
2.
AndersonA. R.ChristensonS. L.SinclairM. F.LehrC. A. (2004). Check & Connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 95-113. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2004.01.002
3.
AppletonJ. J.ChristensonS. L.DongjinK.ReschlyA. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427-445. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
4.
AppletonJ. J.ChristensonS. L.FurlongM. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 369-386. doi:10.1002/pits.20303
5.
ArchambaultI.JanoszM.FalluJ.PaganiL. S. (2009). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 651-670. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
6.
AudS.HussarW.JohnsonF.KenaG.RothE.ManningE. . . . ZhangJ. (2012). The condition of education 2012 (NCES 2010-028). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
7.
AudS.HussarW.PlantyM.SnyderT.BiancoK.FoxM. . . . DrakeL. (2010). The condition of education 2010 (NCES 2010-028). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
8.
BakerJ. A.BridgerR.EvansK. (1998). Models of underachievement among gifted preadolescents: The role of personal, family, and school factors. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 5-15. doi:10.1177/001698629804200102
9.
BaldufM. (2009). Underachievement among college students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 274-294. doi:10.1177/1932202X0902000204
10.
BarringtonB. L.HendricksB. (1989). Differentiating characteristics of high school graduates, dropouts, and nongraduates. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 309-319.
11.
BartnickW. M.ParkayF. W. (1991). A comparative analysis of the “holding power” of general and exceptional education programs. Remedial and Special Education, 12(5), 17-22. doi:10.1177/074193259101200504
12.
BaslantiU.McCoachD. B. (2006). Factors related to the underachievement of university students in Turkey. Roeper Review, 28, 210-215. doi:10.1080/02783190609554366
13.
BaumS. M.RenzulliJ. S.HébertT. P. (1995). Reversing underachievement: Creative productivity as a systematic intervention. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 224-235. doi:10.1177/001698629503900406
14.
BridgelandJ. M.DiIulioJ. J.Jr.MorisonK. B. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Civic Enterprises, LLC.
15.
CaseyK. M. A.ShoreB. M. (2000). Mentor’s contributions to gifted adolescents’ affective, social, and vocational development. Roeper Review, 22, 227-230. doi:10.1080/02783190009554043
16.
ChapmanC.LairdJ.IfillN.KewalRamaniA. (2011). Trends in high school dropout and completion rates in the United States: 1972–2009 (NCES 2012-006). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
17.
ChapmanC.LairdJ.KewalRamaniA. (2010). Trends in high school dropout and completion rates in the United States: 1972-2008 (NCES 2011-012). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
18.
ChristensonS. L.AndersonA. R. (2002). Commentary: The centrality of the learning context for students’ academic enabler skills. School Psychology Review, 31, 378-393.
19.
ChristensonS. L.ReschlyA. L.AppletonJ. J.BermanS.SpanjersD.VarroP. (2008). Best practices in fostering student engagement. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 1099-1119). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
20.
ChristensonS. L.ReschlyA. L.WylieC. (2012). Epilogue. In ChristensonS. L.ReschlyA. L.WylieC. (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 813-817). New York, NY: Springer.
21.
ChristensonS. L.SinclairM. F.LehrC. A.HurleyC. M. (2000). Promoting successful school completion. In MinkeK.BearG. (Eds.), Preventing school problems—Promoting school success: Strategies and programs that work (pp. 377-420). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
22.
ChristensonS. L.ThurlowM. L. (2004). School dropouts: Prevention considerations, interventions, and challenges. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 36-39. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01301010.x
23.
ColangeloN.KerrB.ChristensenP.MaxeyJ. (1993). A comparison of gifted underachievers and gifted high achievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 155-160. doi:10.1177/001698629303700404
24.
CramondB.KussK. D.NordinR. G. (2007, August). Why high-ability students drop out: School-related factors. Presentation at the World Conference for Gifted Children, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
25.
DiPernaJ. C.VolpeR. J.ElliottS. N. (2002). A model of academic enablers and elementary reading/language arts achievement. School Psychology Review, 31, 298-312.
26.
DiPernaJ. C.VolpeR. J.ElliottS. N. (2005). A model of academic enablers and mathematics achievement in the elementary grades. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 379-392. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2005.09.002
27.
DumaisS. A. (2006). Elementary school students’ extracurricular activities: The effects of participation on achievement and teachers’ evaluations. Sociological Spectrum, 26, 117-147. doi:10.1080/02732170500444593
28.
DynarskiM.GleasonP. (2002). How can we help? What we have learned from recent federal dropout prevention evaluations. Journal of Education for Students Placed, 7, 43-69. doi:10.1207/S15327671ESPR0701_4
29.
DynarskiM.GleasonP.RangarajanA.WoodR. (1998). Impacts of dropout prevention programs: Final report (A research report from the School Dropout Demonstration Assistance Program evaluation). Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.
30.
DynarskiM.WoodR. (1997). Helping high-risk youth: Results from the Alternative Schools Demonstration Program. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.
31.
EmerickL. J. (1992). Academic underachievement among the gifted: Students’ perceptions of factors that reverse the pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 140-146. doi:10.1177/001698629203600304
32.
EnsmingerM. E.SlusarcickA. L. (1992). Paths to high school graduation or dropout: A longitudinal study of a first-grade cohort. Sociology of Education, 65, 95-113. doi:10.2307/2112677
33.
FeldmanA. F.MatjaskoJ. L. (2005). The role of school-based extracurricular activities in adolescent development: A comprehensive review and future directions. Review of Educational Research, 75, 159-210. doi:10.3102/00346543075002159
34.
FinnJ. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117-142. doi:10.2307/1170412
35.
FinnJ. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
36.
FinnJ. D. (2006). The adult lives of at-risk students: The roles of attainment and engagement in high school. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
37.
FinnJ. D.CoxD. (1992). Participation and withdrawal among fourth-grade pupils. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 141-162. doi:10.2307/1162905
38.
FredricksJ. A.BlumenfeldP. C.ParisA. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059
39.
FurrerC.SkinnerE. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148-162. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
40.
HansenJ. B.TosoS. J. (2007). Gifted dropouts: Personality, family, social, and school factors. Gifted Child Today, 30(4), 30-41.
41.
HébertT. P. (2001). “If I had a new notebook, I know things would change”: Bright underachieving young men in urban classrooms. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 174-194. doi:10.1177/001698620104500303
42.
HébertT. P.NeumeisterK. L. S. (2000). University mentors in the elementary classroom: Supporting the intellectual, motivational, and emotional needs of high-ability students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24, 122-148.
43.
HébertT. P.OlenchakF. R. (2000). Mentors for gifted underachieving males: Developing potential and realizing promise. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 196-207. doi:10.1177/001698620004400307
44.
HessG. A.LyonsA.CorsinoL.WellsE. (1989). Against the odds: The early identification of dropouts. Chicago, IL: Chicago Panel on Public School Policy and Finance.
45.
HickmanG. R.BartholomewM.MathwigJ.HeinrichR. S. (2008). Differential developmental pathways of high school dropouts and graduates. Journal of Educational Research, 102, 3-14. doi:10.3200/JOER.102.1.3-14
46.
HughesJ. N.LuoW.KwokO.LoydL. K. (2008). Teacher-student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 1-14. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.1
47.
HuntH. D. (2005). The effect of extracurricular activities in the educational process: Influence on academic outcomes?Sociological Spectrum, 25, 417-445. doi:10.1080/027321790947171
48.
IrvineD. J. (1987). What research doesn’t show about gifted dropouts. Educational Leadership, 44(6), 79-80.
49.
JimersonS. R.FergusonP. (2007). A longitudinal study of grade retention: Academic and behavioral outcomes of retained students through adolescence. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 314-339. doi:10.1037/1045-3830.22.3.314
50.
JordanW. J.McPartlandJ. M.LaraJ. (1999). Rethinking the causes of high school dropout. Prevention Researcher, 6(3), 1-4.
51.
KanevskyL.KeighleyT. (2003). To produce or not to produce: Understanding boredom and the honor of underachievement. Roeper Review, 26, 20-28. doi:10.1080/02783190309554235
52.
KempleJ. J.HerlihyC.SmithT. (2005). Making progress toward graduation: Evidence from the talent development high school model. New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
53.
KempleJ. J.SnipesJ. C. (2000). Career academies: Impacts on students’ engagement and performance in high school. New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
54.
KorteringL. J.BrazielP. M. (1999). Staying in school: The perspectives of ninth-grade students. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 106-113. doi:10.1177/074193259902000208
55.
LovelaceM. D.ReschlyA. L.AppletonJ. J.LutzM. E. (2012). A construct validity study of the student engagement instrument: Fit with at-risk youth and degree of association with behavioral indicators of disengagement. Manuscript in preparation.
56.
MarlandS. P. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented—Volume I: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
57.
MatthewsM. S. (2006). Gifted students dropping out: Recent findings from a Southeastern state. Roeper Review, 28, 216-223. doi:10.1080/02783190609554367
58.
MatthewsM. S.McBeeM. T. (2007). School factors and the underachievement of gifted students in a Talent Search Summer Program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 167-181. doi:10.1177/0016986207299473
59.
McBeeM. T. (2006). A descriptive analysis of referral sources for gifted identification screening by race and socioeconomic status. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 103-111.
60.
McClainM.PfeifferS. (2012). Identification of gifted students in the United States today: A look at state definitions, policies, and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28, 59-88. doi:10.1080/15377903.2012.643757
61.
McClellandE. (1985). Defining giftedness (ERIC Report No. ED262519). Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children. Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-923/defining.htm
62.
McCoachD. B.SiegleD. (2003). Factors that differentiate underachieving gifted students from high-achieving gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 144-154. doi:10.1177/001698620304700205
63.
McPartlandJ. M. (1993). Dropout prevention in theory and practice (Report No. ED 366 695). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
64.
NeildR. C.BalfanzR. (2006). Unfulfilled promise: The dimensions and characteristics of Philadelphia’s dropout crisis, 2000-2005. Philadelphia, PA: Philadelphia Youth Transitions Collaborative. Retrieved from http://www.csos.jhu.edu/new/Neild_Balfanz_06.pdf
65.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110 (Title IX, Part A, Definitions (22) (2002); 20 U.S.C. Sec. 7802 (22) (2004).
66.
OaklandT.RossenE. (2005). A 21st-century model for identifying students for gifted and talented programs in light of national conditions: An emphasis on race and ethnicity. Gifted Child Today, 28(4), 56-63.
67.
OuS.ReynoldsA. J. (2008). Predictors of educational attainment in the Chicago educational study. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 199-229. doi:10.1037/1045-3830.23.2.199
68.
PetersonJ. S. (2001). Successful adults who were once adolescent underachievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 236-249. doi:10.1177/001698620104500402
69.
ReisS. M.McCoachD. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go?Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 152-170. doi:10.1177/001698520004400302
70.
RenzulliJ. S.ParkS. (2000). Gifted dropouts: The who and the why. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 261-271. doi:10.1177/001698620004400407
71.
RenzulliJ. S.ParkS. (2002). Giftedness and high school dropouts: Personal, family, and school-related factors (Report No. RM02168). Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
72.
ReschlyA. L.ChristensonS. L. (2006a). Prediction of dropout among students with mild disabilities: The case for the inclusion of student engagement variables. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 276-292. doi:10.1177/07419325060270050301
73.
ReschlyA. L.ChristensonS. L. (2006b). Promoting successful school completion. In BearG.MinkeK. (Eds.), Children’s needs III (pp. 103-113). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
74.
ReschlyA. L.ChristensonS. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In ChristensonS. L.ReschlyA. L.WylieC. (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3-19). New York, NY: Springer.
75.
ReschlyA. L.LovelaceM. (2010). Student engagement and school completion: Strategies for educators. In CanterA. S.PaigeL. Z.ShawS. (Eds.), Helping children at home and at school (3rd ed., pp. S2H23). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
76.
ResnickM. D.BearmanP. S.BlumR. W.BaumanK. E.HarrisK. M.JonesJ. . . . UdryJ. R. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 823-832. doi:10.1001/jama.278.10.823
77.
RosenthalB. S. (1998). Non-school correlates of dropout: An integrative review of the literature. Children and Youth Services Review, 20, 413-433. doi:10.1016/S0190-7409(98)00015-2
78.
RumbergerR. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of students and schools. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 583-625. doi:10.2307/1163325
79.
SeeleyK. (2004). Gifted and talented students at risk. Focus on Exceptional Children, 37(4), 1-8.
80.
ShawS. M.Tallent-RunnelsM. K. (2007). Gifted dropouts: Life after high school. Understanding Our Gifted, 19(3), 10-11.
81.
ShevitzB.WeinfeldR.JewelerS.Barnes-RobinsonL. (2003). Mentoring empowers gifted/learning disabled students to soar!Roeper Review, 26, 37-40. doi:10.1080/02783190309554237
82.
SinclairM. F.ChristensonS. L.EveloD. L.HurleyC. M. (1998). Dropout prevention for youth with disabilities: Efficacy of a sustained school engagement procedure. Exceptional Children, 65(1), 7-21.
83.
SinclairM. F.ChristensonS. L.LehrC. A.AndersonA. R. (2003). Facilitating student engagement: Lessons learned from Check & Connect longitudinal studies. California School Psychologist, 8, 29-41.
84.
SinclairM. F.ChristensonS. L.ThurlowM. (2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emotional and behavior disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 465-482.
85.
SinghK.GranvilleM.DikaS. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 95, 323-332. doi:10.1080/00220670209596607
86.
SpanjersD. M. (2007). Cognitive engagement as a predictor of achievement (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
87.
StillwellR. (2010). Public school graduates and dropouts from the common core of data: School year 2007-08 (NCES 2010-341). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2010341
88.
TownsendL.FlisherA. J.KingG. (2007). A systematic review of the relationship between high school dropout and substance use. Clinical Child and Family Psychology, 10, 295-317. doi:10.1007/s10567-007-0023-7
89.
WentzelK. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 411-419. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.411
90.
YouS.FurlongM. J.FelixE.SharkeyJ. D.TanigawaD.GreenJ. G. (2008). Relations among school connectedness, hope, life satisfaction, and bully victimization. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 446-460. doi:10.1002/pits.20308
