Factor analytic procedures were used to gather validity evidence on the internal structure of Skinner, Kinderman, and Furrer’s Engagement versus Disaffection With Learning measure to operationalize students’ classroom engagement. Independent samples of middle school students (Sample 1 = 618, Sample 2 = 493) were used to test the scale’s factor structure and invariance of measurement model parameters. Factor analytic results supported an alternative three-factor model of the scale’s previously reported four-factor solution. Cross-validation was based on the use of multisample confirmatory factor analysis, which supported strict factorial invariance of the scale’s measurement model parameters (e.g., factor loadings) across samples. Subscale reliability estimates, based on coefficient omega, exceeded 0.74. Implications of findings for research and practice are discussed.
AbbottA. L. (2017). Fostering student interest development: An engagement intervention. Middle School Journal, 48, 34-45. doi:10.1080/00940771.2017.1297666
2.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3.
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
4.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255.
5.
FloraD. B.CurranP. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods for estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
6.
FredricksJ. A.BlumenfeldP. C.ParisA. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
7.
FredricksJ. A.McColskeyW. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In ChristensonS. L.ReschlyA. L.WylieC. (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763-782). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.
8.
FredricksJ. A.McColskeyW.MeliJ.MordicaJ.MontrosseB.MooneyK. (2011). Measuring student engagement in upper elementary through high school: A description of 21 Instruments (Issues & answers, REL 2011-No. 098). Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast.
9.
HensonR. K.RobertsJ. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 393-416.
10.
HughesJ.KwokO. (2007). Influence of student-teacher and parent-teacher relationships on lower achieving readers’ engagement and achievement in the primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 39-51.
11.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
MuthenB.du ToitS. H. C.SpisicD. (1997). Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equation in latent variable modeling with categorical and continuous outcomes. Unpublished manuscript.
14.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998-2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
15.
OrthnerD. K.Jones-SanpeiH.AkosP.RoseR. A. (2013). Improving middle school student engagement through career-relevant instruction in the core curriculum. The Journal of Educational Research, 106, 27-38. doi:10.1080/00220671.2012.658454
16.
ReschlyA.ChristensonS. L. (2006). Prediction of dropout among students with mild disabilities: A case for the inclusion of student engagement variables. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 276-292.
17.
RevelleW.ZinbargR. E. (2009). Coefficients alpha, beta, omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma. Psychometrika, 74, 145-154.
18.
SkinnerE. A.KindermannT. A.ConnellJ. P.WellbornJ. G. (2009). Engagement and disaffection as organizational constructs in the dynamics of motivational development. In WenzelK. R.WigfieldA. (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 223-245). New York, NY: Routledge.
19.
SkinnerE. A.KindermannT. A.FurrerC. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 493-525. doi:10.1177/0013164408323233
20.
WangM.HolcombeR. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 633-662.
21.
WillmsJ. D. (2003). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
