This qualitative research study investigated the agency perceptions of students who had applied to a highly selective research program at a northeastern university in the United States. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which high-achieving college students feel it is important to experience ownership over educational experiences and how these students describe their responses to agentic opportunities. This study was modeled in accordance with Social Cognitive Theory, which posits that individuals desire and exercise agency through self-regulative, evaluative, and adaptive behaviors and constructivism, which suggests that individuals actively construct knowledge informed by their interactions with their environments. Eleven undergraduate students were selected to participate in two interviews. Thematic Analysis was used to analyze data across these interviews. This study revealed three themes: (a) Recognition of Personal Agency; (b) Authenticity; and (c) Taking Initiative.
AnagünS. S. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions about the relationship between 21st century skills and managing constructivist learning environments. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 825–840. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11452a
2.
AndersonR. C.GrahamM.KennedyP.NelsonN.StoolmillerM.BakerS. K.FienH. (2019). Student agency at the crux: Mitigating disengagement in middle and high school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 56(2019), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.12.005
3.
BalthasarA. (2011). Critical friend approach: Policy evaluation between methodological soundness, practical relevance, and transparency of the evaluation process. German Policy Studies/Politikfeldanalyse, 7(3), 187–231.
4.
BanduraA. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org.ezproxy.lib.uconn.edu/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
5.
Bar-TalD.Bar-ZoharY. (1977). The relationship between perception of locus of control and academic achievement: Review and some educational implications. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2(2), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(77)90020-0
6.
BasuS. J.BartonA. C. (2007). Developing a sustained interest in science among urban minority youth. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(3), 466–489. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20143
7.
BodnerG. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education, 63(10), 873–878. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed063p873
8.
BoudD. (1988). Developing student autonomy in learning (2nd ed.). Routledge.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
11.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2021). To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 13(2), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846
12.
CannellaG. S.ReiffJ. C. (1994). Individual constructivist teacher education: Teachers as empowered learners. Teacher Education Quarterly, 21(3), 27–38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23475804
13.
CreswellJ. W.PothC. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.
14.
DeciE. L.EghrariH.PatrickB. C.LeoneD. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62(1), 119–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00797.x
15.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum.
16.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie Canadienne, 49(3), 182–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801
17.
Dounas-FrazerStanleyJ. T.LewandowskiH. J. (2017). Student ownership of projects in an upper-division optics laboratory course: A multiple case study of successful experiences. Physical Review: Physics Education Research, 13(2), 020136-1-020136-22. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.020136
18.
EvansM.BoucherA. R. (2015). Optimizing the power of choice: Supporting student autonomy to foster motivation and engagement in learning. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9(2), 87–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12073
19.
FindleyM. J.CooperH. M. (1983). Locus of control and academic achievement: A literature review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(2), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.2.419
20.
HarrisL. R.BrownG. T.DarguschJ. (2018). Not playing the game: Student assessment resistance as a form of agency. The Australian Educational Researcher, 45(1), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0264-0
21.
KemberD.HaT. S.LamB. H.LeeA.NgS.YanL.YumJ. C. (1997). The diverse role of the critical friend in supporting educational action research projects. Educational Action Research, 5(3), 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650799700200036
22.
MacKayK. (2020). Authenticity and normative authority: Addressing the agency dilemma with values of one’s own. Journal of Social Philosophy, 51(3), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12309
MatusovE. (2011). Authorial teaching and learning. In WhiteE. J.PetersM. (Eds.), Bakhtinian pedagogy: Opportunities and challenges for research, policy and practice in education across the globe (pp. 21–46). Peter Lang.
26.
MatusovE.von DuykeK.KayumovaS. (2016). Mapping concepts of agency in educational contexts. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50(3), 420–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-015-9336-0
SeculesG. A.ElbyA.TanuE. (2018). Supporting the narrative agency of a marginalized engineering student. Journal of Engineering Education, 107(2), 186–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20201
35.
ShogrenK. A.LittleT. D.WehmeyerM. L. (2017). Human agentic theories and the development of self-determination. In WehmeyerM.ShogrenK.LittleT.LopezS. (Eds.), Development of self-determination through the life-course (pp. 17–26). Springer.
36.
StenaltM. H.LassesenB. (2022). Does student agency benefit student learning? A systematic review of higher education research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(5), 653–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1967874
37.
TaubM.SawyerR.SmithA.RoweJ.AzevedoR.LesterJ. (2020). The agency effect: The impact of student agency on learning, emotions, and problem-solving behaviors in a game-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 147(2020), 103781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103781
38.
TerryG.HayfieldN.ClarkeV.BraunV. (2017). Thematic analysis. In WiligC.Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 17–37). Sage.
39.
TisdellE. J.MerriamS. B.Stuckey-PeyrotH. L. (2025). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
40.
TuckettA. G. (2005). Applying thematic analysis theory to practice: A researcher’s experience. Contemporary Nurse, 19(1-2), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.19.1-2.75
WimpennyK.Savin-BadenM. (2013). Alienation, agency and authenticity: A synthesis of the literature on student engagement. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.725223
44.
XuW.ZammitK. (2020). Applying thematic analysis to education: A hybrid approach to interpreting data in practitioner research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19(2020), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920918810
45.
YangY.GentryM. L. (2023). Striving to excel in STEM: Insights from underrepresented, minoritized graduate students with high academic ability. Gifted Child Quarterly, 67(2), 110–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862221119208
