17547840 1

Researching, Teaching & Learning 2

Assignment 1: Literature Review
What factors influence student engagement within a classroom

This literature review will aim to discuss literature regarding self-efficacy and student

engagement as a reference base to inform a research protocol explanation on investigating the

research question listed below via artefact analysis and textual analysis. This will be followed

by data collection material extracts and templates that will be used in the research project.

Part 1: Literature Review – Does teaching students about self-efficacy via learning outcomes

alter the way students engage in the classroom?

The definition of ‘engagement’ is intriguing and in this review, will be defined as

being about the ‘positive perspective’ research has taken a turn to in terms of influences of

interpersonal and social elements within school contexts (Furlong, Whipple, Jean, Simental,

Soliz & Punthana, 2003), furthermore, it is also referred to under the terms school bonding

and connections (Furlong et al., 2003). This specific positivity entails that students have

better experiences with safety and academic achievement, also, the sense of bond they have

to their school life “...found that youth reporting positive social “connections” to school have

lower rates of negative developmental outcomes.” (Resnick et al, as cited in Furlong et al,

2003, p.99). Engagement is also understood as responsive participation (Halliday, Kern,

Garrett & Turnball, 2019) whereby willingness in student involvement is valued.

Furthermore, Mameli, Molinari & Passini (2018), actually reference a suggestion to add an

additional component to the structural understanding of student engagement in that it

acknowledges them as agents who can take control of their situational learning and respond

to its conditions and settings in ways which benefit individual needs (Reeve as cited in

Mameli et al, 2018).

17547840 2

The aspect of willingness can lead to the conversation and discussion of student

motivation, their perceptions and extent of their beliefs within themselves, which

interestingly in context of established student motivation models within research, are often

left discarded. (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003). Models of motivation can be tri-layered

according to Perry and Steck (2015) who list them as; personal expectations about individual

ability for a task, the relevance and value of said task and the interest and emotional appeal of

the ask to the student (Perry & Steck, 2015). These all help to inform a student’s sense self-

efficacy and perseverance for academic work, which lead to the progressive development of

their competency and becoming learning goal oriented rather than performance goal (Perry &

Steck, 2015). The aspect of relatability, competency and personal contextual needs and

abilities of students for sake of motivation (autonomy), are also elements that increase self-

determination according to the self-determination theory (SDT) when fulfilled as

psychological needs (Mameli, et al., 2018)

For this review self-efficacy will be interpreted for this review as one’s refined and

specified capabilities determined by situational judgements and evaluations (Linnenbrink &

Pintrich, 2003), it can also be seen by students themselves as a portrayal of their ability on the

completion of academic work with competency (Rowan-Kenyon as cited in Perry & Steck,

2015).

To best understand self-efficacy in its most fundamental, basic and biological form is

to cover information processing at the cognitive level whereby the self-regulatory processes

which dictate adaptation and development, and contribute to cognitive function socially,

motivationally and affectively, “...are best addressed within the conceptual framework of the

exercise of human agency.”(Bandura, 1993, p.118) Here self-perception on self-belief on

individual capability and functioning is about control in application, similar to the description

by Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2003). The concept of self-ability as tested in the Bandura
17547840 3

(1993) article revealed an important insight into perceptive understanding, in that those who

interpreted the concept as some sort of innate and “inherent intellectual aptitude” (Bandura,

1993, p.121) became increasingly frustrated when dealing with problem solving and

uncoordinated and uneven in their approaches as opposed to those viewed the concept as an

“acquirable skill fostered by highly resilient sense of personal efficacy” (Bandura, 1993, p.

121).

The set standard to measure personal efficacy is a potential issue as technically it

would and should require affirmations from students themselves. The lack of student voices

within the sphere of research conducted on their experiences should be noted, specifically,

the aspect of assumptions on what is beneficial for students regarding their ‘positivity’ and

wellbeing in school contexts being made instead of asking students themselves about it

(Halliday et al, 2019). Research by Halliday et al (2019) was conducted via ’participation

action research’ (PAR) to involve students in learning about student self-efficacy, well-being,

competencies autonomy and emotional assets (Halliday et al., 2019) and its link to the

effectiveness of implementations for positive education. Four key elements of their critical

assessment of the context of effective positive behaviour programme implementations

regarding student agency and involvement were; that most schools studied and stated to have

benefitted from such programs with a range of extensive academic and curricular support

(internal and external especially) are well funded or resourced leading them to overlook the

factor of students themselves as a vital resource to programme implementation, compatibility

of programs interventions in that school contexts need to be regarded for applicability, buy in

of programme from all stake holders including students and lastly the issue of top down

chain of communication and command to that students are subjected to and therefore

expected to ‘consume’ and accept what is implemented by teachers and staff (Halliday et al.,

2019).
17547840 4

In addition to this angle on the absence of student voices and involvement within

research meant to benefit them, Mameli et al, (2018) agree with this notion even though there

is an overwhelming acknowledgement of it within the discourse on it, they state that there is

especially a lacking in the area which links student involvement and agency with

accountability and responsibility (Mameli et al., 2018).

According to Slaby and Benedict (2019) who researched improving students

struggling with reading poetry by using the ‘I Notice’ method, providing students with four

scorecard sheet packets containing details of ‘levels’ of poetry and asking them to respond to

short poem extracts to apply themselves. They structured their methodical approach to

increasing student regulated involvement and awareness of their own agency by

foregrounding the component of ‘making meaning’ from essentially fundamental levels of

language (Slaby & Benedict, 2019), a layered and complex differentiation approach and

scaffold to connecting student originated ideas in compliance with poetry standards present

within the ‘level’s, student autonomy was recognised and capitalised on. In fact, they found

that the students realised this afterward and felt, via self-reporting, they were not only more

engaged throughout the unit on poetry but looked forward to each lesson as they felt some

sense of achievement and progress in their abilities for this type of literature (Slaby &

Benedict, 2019). The element of making meaning was prioritised by pitching students on

different types of approaches to critical thinking and analysis in the level score cards,

deconstructing the instructive and conceptual terminology at its core level and allowing

students to form their own definitions and applications of them, and measure it as a

competency as well as helping the development of their carefulness and thoughtfulness in

literature (Slaby & Benedict, 2019). This greatly assisted in their self-perception of their

agency and therefore their capabilities, their self-efficacy (Slaby & Benedict, 2019).
17547840 5

Perceptions on capabilities do not always mean they will attest to guaranteed

accomplishment in application and reality, rather they “...help determine what individuals do

with the knowledge and skills they have.” (Pajares, 2003, p.140). For student application and

teacher practice, this would mean meeting potential situations which could cause student

perceptions on self-efficacy to lower with preparedness and strategies. For example, their

perceptions can be affected negatively by their vicarious experiences through others doing

tasks via any comparisons they make of themselves and others socially, and by persuasions or

comments, here positive uplifting support and peer modelling can play a huge role in

deterring a downward spiral in their self-efficacy perceptions (Pajeres, 2003).

17547840 6

Part B: Protocol Explanation

Before detailing the procedural intentions of this qualitative research in terms of data

collection method (artefact analysis and textual analysis), the context of content within the

artefacts for analysis should be established.

Student understanding of all components of their ‘wellbeing’ or benefit are as

discussed above in the literature review, usually presumed to a large extent without student

involvement (Halliday et al., 2019 & Mameli et al, 2019) and this was a major factor that I

wish to deconstruct in my research project. In planning for action research with secondary

students regarding their own self efficacy, I want to ensure their perspectives be wholly

considered above all as valuable resources, and to identify any gaps in their interpretation of

set standards for their wellbeing and positive development. This is based off Nelson and

Bishop (2013) who recounted an action research conducted in New Zealand by teachers who

sought insight into student perceptions on effective teaching, engagement and what made

conditions good for them (Nelson & Bishop, 2013), found that students’ interpretations of the

purpose of weekly reflections distorted negatively. In that, instead of receiving the activity as

a mode of individual expression and input that enabled a sense of student a student agency,

students felt burdened by the pressure of having to submit a task they felt asked them to

‘prove’ their efforts from that week (Nelson & Bishop, 2013). Similarly, the stage 6 Society

and Culture students in question from my previous practical placement experience had

similar misunderstandings and their own perceptions of strategies in place to improve their

academic capabilities. Specifically, the learning outcomes from the syllabus which they were

expected to be able to effectively and successfully apply and use, regarding the concepts of

the unit being studied and especially the key terms present in the actual outcomes and its

content. Students had expressed concerns about their capabilities in utilising the language of

the learning outcomes with and against their analysis content for assessable tasks and
17547840 7

classwork leading up to this, they could not correlate any sense of academic success or

achievement with in depth analysis of content material without measuring it against their

misconstrued understanding of its applicability towards the learning outcomes. Despite the

good intention to aim to manage their learning against a ‘criteria’ (learning outcomes from

the syllabus), the aspect of their misunderstanding of the learning outcomes and how they are

to be applied, must be noted as it became foregrounded as the issue which intercepted their

sense of self efficacy and therefore, regulation, motivation and agency.

From here, teacher journal reflections and their comments, feedback, lessons plans

and attached resources for activities and strategies which were constructed to tackle this

concern in a step by step manner aiming to synthesise student perceptions of self-efficacy

with capabilities regarding usage of learning outcomes, will be subject to artefact and textual

analysis using auto-ethnographic techniques.

Lesson plans will be analysed in regard to their sequence order, editing, adjustments

and differentiations made in the structure, strategies and content, specifically the attached

resource for instructions on student activities designed to deconstruct and train students on

using terminology and concepts of the learning outcomes for proper methodical application

and integration into their analytical work. Commonalities regarding patterns and themes will

be noted, categorised and analysed against the research question, the weight of their impact,

to see what kind of alteration they had if any, on perceptions of self-efficacy and student

engagement will be measured by evaluating them against content from end of day teacher

journal reflection entries. These will detail the response and outcome of students partaking in

the prescribed activities designed to better student agency, regulation and efficacy in

application via using learning outcomes properly and the successes and shortcomings of it.

Evaluations of all three materials as well as the general approach to this project will

follow the ‘plan, act, observe and reflect’ cycle of the action research ‘spiral’ to ensure
17547840 8

‘critical’ participation as a member of the collaborative team (Kervin, Vialle, Howard,

Herrington & Okely, 2016) seeking answers for the overarching topic on factors determining

student engagement. Most importantly, it will also reveal any gaps in assumed knowledge on

the my part as a researcher, especially in being informed about or making judgements on

external factors of student perspectives when configuring the why aspect of the research

question (Baumfield, Hall & Wall, 2013). Importantly, this requires a disciplined accuracy on

identifying and processing all internal components of perspective, these elements are crucial

to informing perspective which is vital for qualitative action research (Baumfield et al, 2013).

The attached consent form is for ethical consideration in planning for and conducting

this research, whilst no individual student or teacher will be named, there will only be vague

descriptive references to describe the settings of the participants and their responses.

However, these forms will be provided to the head teacher of the Social Studies faculty/my

previous mentor who oversaw my practical placement, as well as being informed of the full

intentions of this project and uses of the materials.

17547840 9

Part C: Data Collection Protocol (Materials - Artefacts)

The materials intended for artefact and textual analysis using auto ethnographic techniques

are lesson plans, instructional resources for activities (power point slides) for these lessons

and journal entries/reflections. The following are extracts of each listed material.

Dear Potential Participant:

I am working on a project titled ‘What factors influence student engagement within a
classroom?’ for the class, ‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2,’ at Western Sydney
University. As part of the project, I am collecting information to help inform the design of a
teacher research proposal.
This is a group project aiming to investigate factors that influence student engagement within
a secondary context, my individual approach toward this is to look at the topic of self-
efficacy and if teaching it via learning outcomes alters the students engage within a
classroom. I plan to refer to documents and information from my recently completed
professional practical experience with stage 6 students in the Society and Culture subject.
The mode of data collection for this research will be artefact analysis with textual analysis,
specifically lesson plans, instructional resources on activities and teacher journal reflections.
By signing this form I acknowledge that:
 I have read the project information and have been given the opportunity to discuss the
information and my involvement in the project with the researcher/s.
 The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained to
me, and any questions I have about the project have been answered to my satisfaction.
 I consent to allowing samples and extracts of lesson plans, resource materials and
journal reflections describing events within the classroom to be used to analysis.
 I understand that my involvement is confidential and that the information gained
during this data collection experience will only be reported within the confines of the
‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2’ unit, and that all personal details will be de-
identified from the data.
 I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my
relationship with the researcher/s, now or in the future.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time

university student who is 17 years old.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________
By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17
years old, and provide my consent for the person’s participation.
17547840 10

Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________

Lesson Plan Template

SAC LESSON PLAN 1 (Wk. X, DATE)

Class: Stage 6 (Year 12) Time: 76 mins

Outcomes
XX xxxxxxx
XX xxxxx
XX xxxxxxxxxx

Materials

XXXX
XXXX
XXXXXX

NOTES ON USING MATERIALS

Procedures
Time Organisation Teaching/ learning activities
X mins

X mins
X mins

X mins

Homework
17547840 11

Instructional Resources (Power point slide extract)

H3, H5
1. Which parts of this issue refer to continuity, and
change, respectively? (WHAT + HOW AND
WHY)
2. What can you say about interactions between
social and cultural groups?
3. Focus study questions and ‘nature of popular
culture’ characteristics.

Journal Reflection Entry (Extract)

Week 4/5 Tuesday XXXXXX

Year 12 SAC (no.X)

Used ‘what+how and why’ approach to answering questions, students were intially slow in

their progress to fully comprehending the basis of this approach in link to outcomes and

syllabus content/requirements. However, clarifying definitions of terms and concepts in

context to analysed subject content and constructing sentences on board together by including

said key terms and concepts as examples provided practise for them. Students then moved to

individual attempts to replicate this method and were ensured to apply their own

interpretations regardless of how unlikely it seemed, as long as the key concepts and terms

from the learning outcomes could be used within their explanations.

17547840 12

References

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and

Functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), (pp.117-148.). Available at:

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/ehost/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=fe4413

30-cd96-412c-b25f-24e3666d607b%40sdc-v-

sessmgr03&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=6412974&

db=ehh

Baumfield, V. M., Hall, E., & Wall, K. (2012). How to do a practitioner enquiry: Deciding on

an approach and complementary methods. In Action research in education: Learning

through practitioner enquiry (2nd ed.). (pp.50-69). London: Sage Publications.

Available from:

https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwsau/reader.action?docID=1110172&ppg=61

&tm=1498797123287

Furlong, M., Whipple, J., St. Jean, A., Simental, D., Soliz, G., & Punthuna, J. (2003).

Multiple Contexts of School Engagement: Moving Toward a Unifying

Framework for Educational Research and Practice. The California School

Psychologist, 8(1), (pp.99-113.). Available at: https://link-springer-

com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/content/pdf/10.1007%2FBF03340899.pdf

Halliday, A., Kern, M., Garrett, D., & Turnbull, D. (2019). The student voice in well-

being: A case study of participatory action research in positive

education. Educational Action Research, 27(2), (pp.173-196). Available at:

17547840 13

https://www-tandfonline-

com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/09650792.2018.1436079

Kervin, L., Vialle, W., Howard, S., Herrington, J. & Okely, T. (2016). Planning your

research. Research for Educators (2nd ed.) (pp.61-67). Melbourne: Cengage Learning

Australia.

Linnenbrink, E., & Pintrich, P. (2003). The Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Student

Engagement and Learning in the Classroom. Reading & Writing

Quarterly, 19(2), (pp.119-137.). Available at: https://www-tandfonline-

com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1080/10573560308223

Mameli, C., Molinari, L., & Passini, S. (2019). Agency and responsibility in adolesce nt

students: A challenge for the societies of tomorrow. The British Journal of

Educational Psychology, 89(1), (pp.41-56.). DOI:10.1111/bjep.12215

Nelson, E. & Bishop, P. (2013). Students as Action Research Partners: A New Zealand

example. Middle School Journal. (pp.19-26). Available at:

https://vuws.westernsydney.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-4733780-dt-content-rid-

32008140_1/courses/102097_2019_2h/Students%20as%20Action%20Research%20P

artners.pdf

Pajares, F. (2003). Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Motivation, and

Achievement in Writing: A Review of the Literature. Reading &Writing Quarterly,

19(2), (pp.139-158). DOI: 10.1080/10573560308222

17547840 14

Perry, D., & Steck, A. (2015). Increasing Student Engagement, Self-Efficacy, and

Meta-Cognitive Self-Regulation in the High School Geometry Classroom: Do

iPads Help? Computers in the Schools, 32(2), (pp.122-143.). Available at:

https://www-tandfonline-

com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/07380569.2015.1036650

Slaby, S. & Benedict, J. (2019). Data Diving into “Noticing Poetry”: An Analysis of Student

Engagement with the “I Notice” Method. Journal of Inquiry & Action in Education.

10(1). (pp,91-101). Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1205163.pdf