BSED Thesis

St.
Paul University Philippines

Tuguegarao City, Cagayan 3500
ACADEMIC ENGAGEMENT AMONG GRADE 5 AND 6 PUPILS
----------------------------------------
A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the School of
Arts, ScienceS and Teacher Education
Saint Paul University Philippines
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan
____________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
BACHELOR IN ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
____________________
By:
Sr. Maria Linda Neves,SPC
Karla B. Reyes
Rica Mae C. Cadangan
Mary Rose A. Lopez
June 2019
SPUP School of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education 1

St. Paul University Philippines
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
Title Page.......................................... 1
Approval Sheet
Dedication
Acknowledgement
Table of Contents................................... 2
CHAPTER 1: THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE
Introduction .................................. 4
Review of Related Literature .................. 6-12
Theoretical Framework ..........................15
Statement of the Problem ...................... 20
Hypothesis .................................... 21
Significance of the Study ..................... 21
Scope and Limitation .......................... 21-22
Definition of Terms ........................... 22-23
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY
Research Design ............................... 24
Participants of the Study ..................... 24
Instrumentation ............................... 25

Data Gathering Procedure ...................... 25
Data Analysis ................................. 26
CHAPTER 3: RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Result and Discussion ......................... 27-49
CHAPTER 4: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary ....................................... 50-52
Conclusions ................................... 53
Recommendations ............................... 54
REFERENCES ......................................... 55-56
APPENDICES .........................................
CURRICULUM VITAE ...................................

Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Introduction
Engagement has attracted increasing attention as
representing a possible antidote to declining academic
motivation and achievement. Engagement is presumed to be
malleable, responsive to contextual features, and amenable
to environmental change. Researchers describe behavioral,
emotional, and cognitive engagement and recommend studying
engagement as a multifaceted construct. Engagement is also
an essential component that need to be fulfilled even in a
home. Engagement is an indispensable, effective method not
only in giving opinion or idea but also in receiving
important information.
Academic engagement also means student’s engagement
in the classroom. Engagement requires not only being active
but also feeling and sense making (Harper and Quaye, 2009).
Bomia and colleagues (1997) define student engagement as
students’ willingness, needs, desire motivation and success
in the learning process. Hu and Kuh (2001) and Kuh (2009a)
refer to student engagement as the time allocated by

students to educational activities to contribute to the
desired outcomes and as the quality of their related
efforts. According to Stovall (2003), student engagement
includes not only the time students spend on tasks but also
their willingness to take part in activities. Krause and
Coates (2008) associated student engagement with the high
quality in learning outcomes.
All these definitions could be said to have common
points for each school level. It is also important that
student engagement in higher education is defined in a way
to cover the processes of campus engagement and class
engagement. In this respect, student engagement was defined
by Gunuc and Kuzu (2014) as “the quality and quantity of
students’ psychological, cognitive, emotional and
behavioral reactions to the learning process as well as to
in-class/out-of-class academic and social activities to
achieve success learning outcomes.”
Nowadays, academic engagement is also a great part
of success. Many problems are solved by academic
engagement. Likewise, the establishment and availability
of various technologies is also a result of engagement.

This is one of the most important things that everyone has
to do because it is one way to get important information.
Academic Engagement also takes into account the
important exchanges of ideas that become the basis of
decision making .For example, having the engagement of a
different countries in the United Nations result in peace
that benefits most countries. Also, the engagement of
legislators results in the development of bills and laws
that benefits the people.
Academic engagement is an indicator that combined
academic identification (which refers to getting along with
teachers, having an interest in the subject matter, and
related behaviors and attitudes) and academic participation
and Academic engagement is considered a hallmark of an
optimal studying experience and a key to academic success
for all students.
In the Education system, academic engagement is also
an important component that results in success. Thus, at
the school the academic engagement is appreciated by the
teachers and also becomes one of the bases for giving
grades to the pupils. In any formal education, most of
learning activities take place in a classroom.

Most pupils can obtain the benefits such as the
enjoyment of sharing ideas with others and learn more if
they are active to contribute in class discussion.
Academic Engagement means class discussions,
cooperative learning, debates, role playing, problem based
learning, asking questions, responding to the questions,
and case studies.
Academic Engagement is often equated with
discussion, which typically involves a lengthy
conversation with the whole class. However, engagement can
also include short exchanges between instructors and
pupils, or within small groups of pupils. Engagement in
class is a valuable teaching method to promote a more
active involvement in learning. It allows pupils the
opportunity to receive input from others, to apply their
knowledge and to develop public speaking skills. In
addition, class participation provides a way in which
teachers can gain a more accurate idea of how well pupils
understand the concepts being taught (Rehman, 2011).
There are Forms of Engagement that our student’s posses
such as the following:

 Intellectual engagement: To increase student engagement
in a course or subject, teachers may create lessons,
assignments, or projects that appeal to student
interests or that stimulate their curiosity. For
example, teachers may give students more choice over the
topics they are asked to write about (so students can
choose a topic that specifically interests them) or they
may let students choose the way they will investigate a
topic or demonstrate what they have learned (some
students may choose to write a paper, others may produce
short video or audio documentary, and still others may
create a multimedia presentation). Teachers may also
introduce a unit of study with a problem or question
that students need to solve. For example, students might
be asked to investigate the causes of a local
environmental problem, determine the species of an
unknown animal from a few short descriptions of its
physical characteristics and behaviors, or build a robot
that can accomplish a specific task. In these cases,
sparking student curiosity can increase “engagement” in
the learning process. For related discussions,
see authentic learning, community-based

learning, differentiation, personalized
learning, project-based learning, and relevance.
 Emotional engagement: Educators may use a wide variety
of strategies to promote positive emotions in students
that will facilitate the learning process, minimize
negative behaviors, or keep students from dropping out.
For example, classrooms and other learning
environments may be redesigned to make them more
conducive to learning, teachers may make a point of
monitoring student moods and asking them how they are
feeling, or school programs may provide counseling, peer
mentoring, or other services that generally seek to give
students the support they need to succeed academically
and feel positive, optimistic, or excited about school
and learning. Strategies such as advisories, for
example, are intended to build stronger relationships
between students and adults in a school. The basic
theory is that students will be more likely to succeed
if at least one adult in the school is meeting with a
student regularly, inquiring about academic and non-
academic issues, giving her advice, and taking an
interest in her out-of-school life, personal passions,

future aspirations, and distinct learning challenges and
needs.
 Behavioral engagement: Teachers may establish classroom
routines, use consistent cues, or assign students roles
that foster behaviors more conducive to learning. For
example, elementary school teachers may use cues or
gestures that help young students refocus on a lesson if
they get distracted or boisterous. The teacher may clap
three times or raise a hand, for example, which signals
to students that it’s time to stop talking, return to
their seats, or begin a new activity. Teachers may also
establish consistent routines that help students stay on
task or remain engaged during a class. For example, the
class may regularly break up into small groups or move
their seats into a circle for a group discussion, or the
teacher may ask students on a rotating basis to lead
certain activities. By introducing variation into a
classroom routine, teachers can reduce the monotony and
potential disengagement that may occur when students sit
in the same seat, doing similar tasks, for extended
periods of time. Research on brain-based learning has
also provided evidence that variation, novelty, and

physical activity can stimulate and improve learning.
For a related discussion, see classroom management.
 Physical engagement: Teachers may use physical
activities or routines to stimulate learning or
interest. For example, “kinesthetic learning” refers to
the use of physical motions and activities during the
learning process. Instead of asking students to answer
questions aloud, a teacher might ask students to walk up
to the chalkboard and answer the question verbally while
also writing the answer on the board (in this case, the
theory is that students are more likely to remember
information when they are using multiple parts of the
brain at the same time—i.e., the various parts dedicated
to speaking, writing, physical activity, etc.). Teachers
may also introduce short periods of physical activity or
quick exercises, particularly during the elementary
years, to reduce antsy, fidgety, or distracted
behaviors. In addition, more schools throughout the
United States are addressing the physical needs of
students by, for example, offering all students free
breakfasts (because disengagement in learning and poor
academic performance have been linked to hunger and

malnutrition) or starting school later at a later time
(because adolescent sleep patterns and needs differ from
those of adults, and adolescents may be better able to
learn later in the morning).
 Social engagement: Teachers may use a variety of
strategies to stimulate engagement through social
interactions. For example, students may be paired or
grouped to work collaboratively on projects, or teachers
may create academic contests that students compete in—
e.g., a friendly competition in which teams of students
build robots to complete a specific task in the shortest
amount of time. Academic and co-curricular activities
such as debate teams, robotics clubs, and science fairs
also bring together learning experiences and social
interactions.
In addition, strategies such as demonstrations of
learning or capstone projects may require students to
give public presentations of their work, often to panels
of experts from the local community, while strategies
such as community-based learning or service learning
(learning through volunteerism) can introduce civic and
social issues into the learning process. In these cases,

learning about societal problems, or participating
actively in social causes, can improve engagement.
 Cultural engagement: Schools may take active steps to
make students from diverse cultural backgrounds—
particularly recently arrived immigrant or refugee
students and their families—feel welcomed, accepted,
safe, and valued. For example, administrators, teachers,
and school staff may provide special orientation
sessions for their new-American populations or offer
translation services and informational materials
translated into multiple languages. Students, families,
and local cultural leaders from diverse backgrounds may
be asked to speak about their experiences to students
and school staff, and teachers may intentionally modify
lessons to incorporate the history, literature, arts,
and perspectives of the student ethnicities and
nationalities represented in their classes. School
activities may also incorporate multicultural songs,
dances, and performances, while posters, flags, and
other educational materials featured throughout the
school may reflect the cultural diversity of the
students and school community. The general goal of such

strategies would be to reduce the feelings of confusion,
alienation, disconnection, or exclusion that some
students and families may experience, and thereby
increase their engagement in academics and school
activities. For related discussions, see dual-language
education, English-language learner, multicultural
education, and voice.
In education, student engagement refers to the degree
of attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and passion
that students show when they are learning or being taught,
which extends to the level of motivation they have to learn
and progress in their education. Generally speaking, the
concept of “student engagement” is predicated on the belief
that learning improves when students are inquisitive,
interested, or inspired, and that learning tends to suffer
when students are bored, dispassionate, disaffected, or
otherwise “disengaged.” Stronger student
engagement or improved student engagement are common
instructional objectives expressed by educators.
In many contexts, however, student engagement may also

refer to the ways in which school leaders, educators, and
other adults might “engage” students more fully in the
governance and decision-making processes in school, in the
design of programs and learning opportunities, or in the
civic life of their community.
In education, the term student engagement has grown in
popularity in recent decades, most likely resulting from an
increased understanding of the role that certain
intellectual, emotional, behavioral, physical, and social
factors play in the learning process and social
development. For example, a wide variety of research
studies on learning have revealed connections between so-
called “non-cognitive factors” or “non-cognitive skills”
(e.g., motivation, interest, curiosity, responsibility,
determination, perseverance, attitude, work habits, self-
regulation, social skills, etc.) and “cognitive” learning
results (e.g., improved academic performance, test scores,
information recall, skill acquisition, etc.)
The concept of student engagement typically arises
when educators discuss or prioritize educational strategies
and teaching techniques that address the developmental,

intellectual, emotional, behavioral, physical, and social
factors that either enhance or undermine learning for
students.
There is a lot of research around that argues that
pupils who are more engaged in class learn better. Even
so, many more studies prove the lack of engagement of
pupils despite the various methods teachers make so that
they will be motivated to be united in the study.
The researchers believe that lack of engagement
could be due to multiple factors. Student's reluctance
could be due to lack of understanding and motivation in
particular subjects. Gender differences may also provide
information in seeking factors that contribute to academic
engagement.
Moreover, the researchers believed that there are
many factors that can be seen as culprit in lack of
engagement among pupils. Thus, through and continuous
studies is definitely needed to determine which among
these factors are recurring and dominant so that necessary
actions may be developed to improve academic engagement
of pupils. However, in this study the factors will be

based on the perceptions of the teachers.
These are the factors affecting academic engagement:
Learning Motivation. Participants’ experiences showed that
individual motivation as an internal factor could increase
students’ academic engagement by stimulating the learning
of theory lessons and acquiring clinical skills. Students
consider learning theory lessons as the core for better
learning of practical skills.
Interest in Learning. Participants’ experiences
demonstrated that interest in learning was one of the
factors increasing academic engagement in nursing students.
Among factors influencing interest in learning, was
students’ appeal towards subjects or educational contents.
Interest can also provide intellectual and mental
concentration on educational subjects, increase learning
efforts, and ultimately lead to a greater and deeper
learning.
Participation in Extracurricular Scientific Activities.

Our analysis reflected that students’ participation in
extracurricular scientific activities could indirectly
increase their professional awareness and capabilities.
Self-directedness. In learning can result in lifelong
learning. One of the aspects of self-directedness in
learning is students’ efforts and planning for learning.
Mental Concentration. Participants’ experiences indicated
that one of the factors influencing their learning was
mental and intellectual concentration on theoretical and
practical teaching contents. Considering that the
prerequisite for learning intellectual and mental contents
is to focus on educational materials, such concentration on
educational contents can promote academic engagement.
Therefore, it can be said that one of the components of
academic engagement is intellectual and mental
concentration on educational contents as well as active
participation of students in the classroom.
Demonstration of Emotions. Learning can lead to students’
academic achievement and increase their satisfaction with
learning activities. Such a sense of satisfaction can

encourage students to be more active. Satisfaction with
learning also increases student engagement in education and
training.
Conducting this study is very important to every
school or teachers for them to see what the things
that they need to enhance with the students and to
see if the four engagements are balance. This study
suggested that student-related factors such as
individual motivation and interest, mental
concentration, participation in extracurricular
activities, self-directedness and demonstration of
emotions could play important roles in learning and
academic engagement among students.
Therefore, it is recommended that further studies
focusing on applying the findings to improve academic
engagement in these students. The purpose of the study is
to check on the weaknesses and strengths of each of the
students. What area are the teacher’s needs to enhance more
and to focus on. And to provide students new experiences

work that is meaningful, not easy: they want to work with
ideas that matter, solve real problems, learn from each
other, people in their communities, and experts in the
subjects they are studying, engage in dialogue in their
classes, and know that their learning contributes to making
a difference in the world. They consistently demand to be
respected.
This study intends to find out the learning areas that
affects the academic engagement among grade 5 and 6 pupils.
Review of Related Literature
One of the major challenges faced by faculty is to
draw learners’ attention to educational contents and to
help with their learning, which is named academic
engagement. Academic engagement can be defined as
efforts devoted by students to academic activities. It
is a result of dynamic interactions between students,
educators, academic activities, as well as educational
conditions and environments. It is recognized as a
significant indicator of quality of higher education.
Lack of academic engagement can lead to unfavorable

outcomes such as low academic achievement, incivility,
increased risk of failure and dropout.
Pointed out that academic engagement is the outcome
of education, Wikipedia (2013); it is the extent to which
a student, teacher or institution has achieved their
educational goals.
Thus performance is characterized by performance on tests
associated with coursework and the performance of
students on other types of examinations (Kyoshaba, 2009).
Various studies have been carried out on the factors that
affect students’ academic performance or achievement in
schools, colleges and universities. Some of the factors
identified and reported to have affected the academic
engagement of students in these different settings are:
student effort, previous or prior educational performance,
self-motivation, the social-economic status of the students’
parents, the students’ age, number of hours of study per
day, admission points, different entry qualifications,
tuition trends and the students’ area of residence (rural or
urban) (Farooq, Chaudry, Shafiq & Berhanu, 2011; Ali,
Haider, Munir, Khan & Ahmed, 2013).

The type of school a child attended also affects the
academic engagement of the student. In this regard,
Kyoshaba (2009) observed that students’ educational
outcome and academic success is greatly influenced by the
type of school which they attended. The school we attend
is the institutional environment that sets the parameters
of a student’s learning experience.
In agreement with this, Considine and Zappala
(2002) reported that the type of school a child attends
influences the educational outcomes; furthermore, schools
have an independent effect on the students’ educational
attainment, and this is likely to operate through the
variation of quality and attitudes. Thus, a student’s
school background is positively related to his or her
academic performance at an undergraduate level.
In addition, Ali et al. (2013) and Kwesiga (2002)
also observed that the learning outcomes and educational
performance of students are strongly affected by the type
of educational institution where they received their
education. However, this is a function of the number of
facilities a school offers, which usually determines

their quality, and which in turn affects the performance
and accomplishments of its students.
Jamuan (1974) stated that efficient learning depends
not only on good teaching methods but also on satisfactory
learning procedures. Farely and Rosnow (1975) studied the
responsible factors for schooling.
Brophy (1987) also suggested that teachers viewed
themselves as active socialization agent who works capable
of stimulating student’s motivation to learn. One of the
major finding by (Small, 1996) was that instruction were
perceived by students as having the prime responsibility
for learner interests or boredom.
Moreover Kapoor, R. (1987) found that better
adjustment, study habits high intelligence and socio-
economic status were related with high achievement at
Junior high school level. These studies suggest that not
only the mental abilities, but the other motivational
factors may also be the responsible for academic
performance.
TROLLS FORM (1988) reported that teachers typically
attributed students of low achievement to low effort

moreover, teachers viewed student characteristics such as
poor work habits as being more important than either
classroom or teacher variables. In some instances, some
students agreed that it was their responsibility to
motivate themselves. Gohfied (1990)also found positive
correlation between motivation and achievement
specifically, young student with higher academic intrinsic
motivation has significantly high achievement and
intellectual performance. She also found that early
intrinsic motivation correlated with later motivation and
achievement and later motivation is the predictable from
early achievement (Gohfied 1990). It was found that
perceived academic competence was positively related to
intrinsic motivation.
Tiwari and bansal (1994) mentioned that a child with
high academic achievement is likely to be well-treated as
well behaved and independent and low achieves as incapable
and deprived of employment with may lead this to met
adjustment to life. Chaudhary and Muni (1995) reported that
parental support had positive effect on their children
academic performance. They carried out a study on the role
of parental support in children’s need satisfaction and

academic achievement. The sample consisted of fifty
children from 7th grade of equal number of boys and girls.
Family effectiveness and need satisfaction inventory and
academic marks were used as measures in this study. HIGBEE
(1996) found that most students attributed to their own
actions.
Cimmino (2007) pointed out that classroom engagement
is important because learning is not just between the
student and the teacher but part of the whole classroom
experience.
When pupils participate, they learn from each other and
internalize the knowledge better. Pupils who are able to
share their opinions in small class discussions feel that
there is a personal reward from it. Engagement in the class
also boosts how much the student likes the class.
In addition, Dopkiss (2015) emphasized that pupils
that regularly engage in class are constantly involved with
the material and are more likely to remember a greater
portion of the information. Active class engagement also
improves critical and higher level thinking skills. Pupils
who engage in class have studied the material well enough
to introduce new concepts to their peers.

Despite the many benefits of class engagement, the vast
majority of pupils do not regularly contribute to their
classes.
Moreover (Johnson 1996,) 2004, Skaalvik and Skaalvik,
(2004), Skaalvik and Skaalvik,( 2006), Sandra,( 2002)
revealed-significant relationship between academic
performance and motivation.
According to Mustapha et al. (2010) there have been a
variety of reasons identified in prior studies as having
influences in encouraging or discouraging pupils’
participation.
Factors specific to the pupils like age, gender,
pupils’ willingness to talk, course level, student
preparation and student emotions like confidence or fear
have been reported to influence their engagement.
For instance, in the study conducted by Moffett and
associates (2014) they found out that there are
statistically significant differences between male and
female pupils when asked to self-report their level of
engagement and their confidence to participate. However, no
statistically significant difference was identified between
different age groups of pupils.

Meanwhile, as noted by Dundar et al. (2014), as seen
from studies regarding school subjects, attitudes towards
school in general and particular school subjects impact
many aspects of
academic life such as achievement. Their study showed that
the most-liked subject was science and technology, the most
important and also difficult subject was mathematics.
Whether classes were amusing, boring and/or linked to daily
life experiences was found to be among the most frequently
mentioned reasons.
Moreover, Washington University in St. Louis (2016)
asserted that, ideally, the goal of increasing engagement
is not to have every student participate in the same way or
at the same rate. Instead, it is to create an environment
in which all participants have the opportunity to learn and
in which the class explores issues and ideas in depth, from
a variety of viewpoints. Some pupils will raise their
voices more than others; this variation is a result of
differences in learning preferences as well as differences
in personalities.
Similarly, Abdullah and company (2012) opined that
classroom is a built-in environment where formal learning

process takes place. It is an important context where both
pupils and instructor come into contact to share
information in their quest for knowledge. For the
instructor, classroom time is a golden opportunity to meet
face to face with the pupils, delivering the teaching
material effectively with the aim to ensure that pupils are
learning what is being taught.
A conducive classroom environment involved two-way
interaction between pupils and instructors. This type of
classroom environment will stimulate learning and makes
both the instructor and pupils feel satisfied, which
eventually leads to effective learning process.
Student engagement focuses on the extent to which
students are engaging in activities that higher education
research has shown to be linked with high‐quality learning
outcomes. Reflecting the work of Astin (1985
Astin, A. 1985. Achieving educational excellence: a
critical assessment of priorities and practices in higher
education, San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass.
From good practices to good products: relating good
practices in undergraduate education to student

achievement. Paper presented at the Association of
Institutional Research. ( Boston. Hu and Kuh, (2001
Hu, S. and Kuh, G.D.). Being (dis)engaged in educationally
purposeful activities: the influences of student and
institutional characteristics. Paper presented at the
American Educational Research Association Annual
Conference. 3) define engagement as ‘the quality of effort
students themselves devote to educationally purposeful
activities that contribute directly to desired outcomes’.
The phenomenon has achieved recognition in the last decade
as a cogent means of guiding higher education research
policy and practice.
Research on student engagement is underpinned by the
constructivist view that education is fundamentally about
students constructing their own knowledge. From this
perspective, learning also depends on institutions and
staff generating conditions that stimulate and encourage
student involvement (Davis and (Murrell 1993
Davis, T. and Murrell, P. 1993.) A structural model of
perceived academic, personal, and vocational gains related
to college student responsibility. Engagement is a broad
phenomenon that encompasses academic as well as selected

non‐academic and social aspects of the student experience.
At a certain level of analysis, engagement is taken to
provide a singularly sufficient means of determining
whether students are engaging with their study and
university learning community in ways likely to promote
high‐quality learning.
The concept of engagement embraces a specific understanding
of the relationship between students and institutions.
Institutions are responsible for creating environments that
make learning possible, and that afford opportunities to
learn. The final responsibility for learning, however,
rests with students. The nature and degree of learning is
dependent on how the student makes use of his/her
environmental resources. Concurs that an individual’s
involvement or quality of effort plays a central role in
determining the extent and nature of development and
learning at university. Student engagement develops from
the dynamic interplay between student and institutional
activities and conditions.
While student engagement tends to be viewed as a

quintessential reflection of learning processes, there is
an important sense in which such involvement is one of the
more significant outcomes of first‐year study. Indeed,
fostering engagement in key educational processes is a
crucial means of establishing the foundations for
successful later year study (Astin 1993
Astin, A. 1993. Further, the large‐scale and highly
normative nature of assessment in the first year may mean
that measures of engagement provide a relatively good index
of academic involvement and potential.
Working from this perspective, the current study reinforces
the primary educational role played by engagement. Indeed,
it goes further in this direction than most other studies
of engagement. Despite the emphasis placed on engagement,
most studies of the phenomenon consider its relationship
with academic achievement, and in particular to students’
own perceived learning and developmental outcomes
(Pace 1979 Pace, C.R. 1979; Kuh 1995 Kuh, G. 1995. The
other curriculum: out‐of‐class experiences associated with
student learning and personal
development. NSSE 2005aNational Survey of Student

Engagement (NSSE). 2005a. In such circumstances, engagement
variables are typically treated in statistical models as
explanatory or mediating variables used to predict social,
cognitive and affective outcomes. For current purposes,
however, it is assumed that, while engagement may mediate
the influence of these other phenomena, engagement also
plays more than a mediating role. That is, engagement is
taken to be more than a phenomenon subordinated to the
effects of other variables. While it may be going too far
to suggest that engagement be conceptualized primarily as
an educational outcome, our analysis below suggests that
engagement is a phenomenon worth examining in its own
right.
In studying engagement, it is necessary to assume that
it is possible to identify a range of beneficial activities
and conditions associated with learning. It is more
difficult, however, to identify these processes and
contexts as being necessary, sufficient or, at least,
enriching for learning. One reason for this is the lack of
suitable outcome measures which has meant that, so far,
engagement research has relied on

student self‐reported outcomes. However, even if
phenomena could be identified by principle or experiment,
the complexity and individualised nature of the educational
endeavour would make accurate and reliable generalisation
difficult. Indeed, what is meant by ‘involvement’ may vary
between individuals and situations.
(Pascarella, E. 1991). The impact of college on students:
the nature of the evidence. Notes, change at university is
dependent on a ‘dynamic web of influences’.
For an understanding of involvement to carry any
explanatory power, it must focus on the circumstances and
conditions understood to be quite fundamental for certain
types of learning.
Student engagement has been the focus of a substantial
amount of research in the last few years, particularly in
the USA (Kuh 2001 Kuh, G. 2001. Alternative perspectives
on the student experience: alienation and engagement. The
most polished framework appears to be that which has been
developed for the National Survey of Student Engagement
(NSSE 2005a National Survey of Student Engagement
(NSSE). 2005a. For the purposes of providing aggregate

reports to institutions, the framework divides student
engagement into five dimensions: level of academic
challenge, active and collaborative learning, student–
faculty interaction, enriching educational experiences, and
supportive campus environment. While no doubt related, it
is proposed that these dimensions capture a necessary and
sufficient range of the educationally important qualities
of the university student experience. Although it was built
on decades of research (Pace 1979 Pace, C.R. 1979. Seven
principles for good practice in undergraduate education.
The NSSE framework was the first developed explicitly as a
model of university student engagement. It has become
widely integrated into higher education practices and
policies in the United States.
In a recent study, Coates (2006 Coates, H. 2006. Student
engagement in campus‐based and online education: university
connections, London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]) proposed
that campus‐based early‐year students’ engagement with their
study should be conceptualized in terms of nine qualities:
constructive teaching, supportive learning environments,
teacher approachability, student and staff interaction,

academic challenge, active learning, collaborative work,
beyond‐class collaboration, and complementary activities.
Recognising that online learning plays a formative
role in contemporary campus‐based study, Coates also
proposed seven qualities of the online dimensions of
campus‐based study: online engagement, online active
learning, online academic relevance, online teaching,
online collaboration, online social interaction, and online
contact with staff. Analysis of the general and online
scales in the Coates study suggested that they were
underpinned by a common typology which provided an
interpretive context for diagnosing and benchmarking levels
of student engagement.
Working from these earlier studies, a primary focus of
our analysis in this paper is the definition of key
qualities of Australian students’ engagement with their
first year of university study. Evidence of the importance
of the first year in determining student persistence and
success in higher education abounds in the research
literature. Understanding the first‐year experience plays a
critical role in managing transitions to tertiary study, in

retaining students (Krause 2005K rause, K. 2005. Serious
thoughts about dropping out in first year: trends, patterns
and implications for higher education. Studies in Learning,
Evaluation, Innovation and
Development, 2(3): 55–67. [Google Scholar]), and in setting
up the educational foundations for academic success
(Upcraft and
Gardner 1989Upcraft, M.L. and Gardner, J.N. 1989. The
freshman year experience, San
Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. [Google Scholar]; Kuh et
al. 2005Kuh, G., Gonyea, R. and Williams, J. 2005. “What
students expect from college and what they get”.
In Promoting reasonable expectations, Edited
by: Miller, T., Bender, B., Schuh, J. and and
associates. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. [Google Scholar]).
The Australian first‐year experience studies have made a
significant contribution in this regard.
Synthesis
Although there is a considerable variation in how
“academic engagement” is defined and measured, the term is
generally used to describe meaningful student involvement

throughout the learning environment. Thus, “academic
engagement” is best understood as a relationship between
the student and the following elements of the learning
environment:
• The school community
• The adults at school
• The student’s peers
• The instruction
• The curriculum
Theoretical Framework
This study would focus on the academic engagement
and its factors and even in their daily performances.
Academic engagement features of many course designs. It can
result in insightful comments and interesting connections
being made by students and can foster a high level of
energy and enthusiasm in the classroom learning
environment.
In the study context, academic engagement is regarded
as the most frequently used and often embraced pedagogical
strategies. In attempting to enhance participation quality

and discussion effectiveness, there is concern over what to
do about students who are less inclined to participate
voluntarily. In order to present the objective and purpose
of the study the researchers adopted the theoretical
framework of Student Engagement Scale (SES) developed by
Gunuc and Kuzu(2014) as our guide.
Figure 1: Student Engagement Structure
In this framework, the study carried out by Gunuc and
Kuzu (2014), student engagement was examined in two main
components such as campus engagement and class engagement
with 6 dimensions: Valuing, Sense of Belonging, Cognitive
Engagement, Peer Relationships (Emotional Engagement-I),

Relationships with the Faculty Member (Emotional
Engagement-II) and Behavioral Engagement.
Campus Engagement
Student engagement in higher education has certain
differences when compared to student engagement in other
school levels, especially the context of campus or social
life. It was observed that the campus itself and campus
activities have indirect effects on students especially in
higher education (Gunuc, 2013).
Such concepts as giving value to campus (university)
or to education, sense of belonging and participation in
campus activities are considered to be among important
parts of student engagement (Blimling, 1993; Chickering,
1975; Gunuc & Kuzu, 2014; Pike, & Kuh, 2005; Terenzini et
al., 1996). In this respect, Willms (2003) defines
engagement as students’ sense of belonging, accepting the
value of school and active participation in school
activities. Voelkl (1996) refers to school engagement by
emphasizing the themes of sense of belonging to school and
value given to school. According to Goodenow (1992), sense
of belonging occurs when students feel that they are

accepted, supported and involved by other people in the
social setting of a campus/school (other students, teachers
and so on). On the other hand, sense of belonging is one of
important components of psychology because sense of
belonging could be said to have positive or indirect
influence on academic achievement and on motivation
(Goodenow, 1993; Kember, Lee & Li, 2001).
In addition, in several studies, it was pointed out that
the campus/school climate is likely to have influence on
students’ performance, their achievement and on their
positive and negative behavior (Gunuc, 2013; Finn, 1989;
1993; Finn & Voelkl, 1993). Matthews and colleagues (2011)
and Nauffal (2011) indicated that social learning areas or
the campus itself have important contributions to the
development of sense of belonging and student engagement.
The concept of sense of belonging also includes
participation in campus. Participation is regarded as
taking part especially in out-of-class activities or in
campus.
It could be stated that giving value not just means
giving value to the campus or to other related elements but

also covers the value given to the concepts of school,
university, education and learning (Gunuc & Kuzu, 2014).
Class Engagement
Class engagement involves students’ cognitive,
emotional and behavioral responses to in-class and out-of-
class activities. Cognitive engagement includes investment
in learning, value given to learning, learning goals, self
regulation and planning. Cognitive engagement has an
important relationship with learning motivation. Cognitive
engagement refers to students who invest in their own
learning, who accordingly determine their needs and who
enjoy the mental difficulties (Gunuc & Kuzu, 2014;
Fredricks et al. 2004). Emotional engagement involves
students’ responses to the teacher, peers, course content
and to the class which all include attitudes, interests and
values (Bryson & Hand, 2007; Gunuc & Kuzu, 2014).
In addition, such emotions as sense of belonging to
school/university, loving the university and feeling
oneself to be a member of a group are also examined within
the scope of emotional engagement (Fredricks et al. 2004).
Behavioral engagement includes students’ participation in

academic, their efforts, their attendance in classes and
their participation in class (Gunuc & Kuzu, 2014). The
basic of behavioral engagement could be said to be related
to class activities. The campus (out-of-class) and social
activities are also examined within the scope of behavioral
engagement (Fredricks et al. 2004). Patrick and colleagues
(2007) considered social and emotional environments in the
classroom to be among prerequisites to students’ engagement
with activities and tasks. In addition, in several studies,
it was reported that emotional engagement, emotional
support or positive emotions increased participation in
activities or behavioral engagement (Ladd et al. 2000; Li
et al. 2010; Skinner et al. 2008). In another saying,
positive emotions were found important to maintain the
behavior and action (Clore, 1994; Fredrickson, 2001). Also,
it was pointed out that positive emotions made
contributions not only in behavioral context but also in
cognitive context (Aspinwall, 1998). Li and Lerner (2013)
demonstrated that behavioral engagement had influence on
cognitive engagement. Similarly, Gibbs and Poskitt (2010)
regarded emotional and behavioral engagements as
prerequisites to cognitive engagement. In this respect, it

was reported that the student is supposed to develop
emotional and behavioral engagements prior to cognitive
engagement.
In addition, studies conducted generally revealed
that there were mutual relationships between behavioral and
emotional engagements (Li & Lerner, 2013; Skinner et al.,
2008). Fredricks and colleagues (2004) pointed out that the
cognitive, emotional and behavioral dimensions were not
examined together in many studies and that examining these
dimensions together was important. In this respect, in
related literature, it is seen that mostly emotional and
behavioral engagements were examined (Furrer & Skinner,
2003; Patrick et al. 1993; Ryan et al. 1994; Skinner &
Belmont, 1993). One of the most important reasons for this
could be the fact that it is much more difficult to measure
cognitive engagement.
Furthermore, to show the step-by-step procedure that is
undertaken in conduct of the study, the given paradigm used
as researchers’ guide.

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Participants’  Ascertain
profile
ed
Pupil’s perceptio
Academic
Analysis of n on the
Engagement
the level level of
 Emotional pupils’ pupils’
 Cognitive academic academic
engagement engagemen
 Behavioral
and; t in
school
 Affective
FEEDBACK
Figure 1. Paradigm of the Study
Figure 1 shows the paradigm of this study. The first
box is the input from the participants profile variables:
school, grade level, gender, age, parent’s occupation, and
pupils’ academic engagement.
The second box shows the process of the study, which
involves the analysis on the level of pupils’ academic
engagement and with the use of student engagement survey
developed by Skinner, 1991.

Moreover, the last part box shows the output of this
study, which is the ascertained perception on the level of
pupils’ academic engagement in school and the action plan
in promoting academic engagement.
Statement of the Problem
The study aimed to determine the academic engagement
among grade 5 and 6 pupils who are currently enrolled in
the A.Y. 2018-2019.
Specifically, the study sought to answer the following
questions:
1. What is the profile of the Grade 5 and 6 pupils in
terms of the following:
1.1 School
1.2 Grade level
1.3 Sex
1.4 Age and
1.5 Parent’s occupation?
2. What is the pupils’ level of academic engagement
along the following areas:
2.1 Emotional engagement,
2.2 Cognitive engagement,

2.3 Behavioral engagement, and
2.4 Affective engagement?
3. Is there a significant difference on pupils’ academic
engagement when they are grouped according to profile
variables?
Hypothesis of the Study
This study tested the null hypothesis that there is no
significant difference on the level of academic engagement
of Grade 5 and 6 pupils when grouped according to profile
variables.
Scope and Limitation
This was conducted in some public and private
elementary school in Tuguegarao City. The researchers
target would be 100 participants among male and female 5th-
grade and 6th-grade students specifically those who were 10
and 11 years old. The study confines itself in determining,
analyzing and interpreting the academic engagement of the
participants and the significant difference when grouped
according to profile variables.

To specify the data collected, the researchers
developed Academic Engagement Questionnaire to be able to
align the data taken in the checklist.
Significance of the Study
The researchers believe that the study will be
beneficial in teaching and learning process since both
pupils and teachers will learn in the actual interactions
when pupils actively engage in the classroom.
More specifically, the results will be beneficial to
the following:
Grade 6 & 5 Pupils. Being at the receiving end, they will
be benefited in the findings of the study as their level of
academic engagement will be enhanced as it generates
important data that can be used by their teachers to come
up with intervention program.
Teachers. The result of the study will give them important
points for them to develop teaching strategy and
intervention materials to ensure high level of class
participation inside the classroom.

Parents. The improvement of the academic engagement of the
study will also mean improvement of the performance of
their children.
Researchers. Research would benefit the researcher of this
study by expanding her knowledge of academic engagement and
skills in the research process.
Future Researchers. This study would serve as their basis
to conduct research in similar studies.
Definition of Terms
For complete understanding of the different terms
utilized in the study, the researcher employed operational
and conceptual definition.
Student Engagement. This refers to the degree of
attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and passion that
students show when they are learning or being taught, which
extends to the level of motivation they have to learn and
progress in their education.
Academic Engagement . Is a multidimensional
(multifaceted) construct that can be measured with all the
dimensions dynamically interrelated.

Emotional Engagement. Focusing on the extent and
nature of positive and negative reactions to teachers,
classmates, academics, and school.
Cognitive Engagement. Focusing on students’ level of
investment in learning.
Behavioral Engagement. Focusing on participation in
academic, social, and co-curricular activities.
Affective Engagement. The relationship between their
peers, teachers and other part of the community.

Chapter 2
METHODOLOGY
This chapter deals with the research design,
participants of the study, research instrument, data
gathering procedure and analysis of data.
Research Design
In order to determine the academic engagement among
Grade 6 pupils, descriptive research design was used.
According to Calmorin (2007) the descriptive research
includes present facts or current conditions concerning the
nature or persons, a number of subjects or class of events,
classification of events, classification or measurement.
Descriptive research characterized as a fact-finding with
adequate interpretations.
Participants of the Study
This study would be undertaken during the A.Y. 2018-
2019. The present study would consider randomly selected
section of Grade 6 & 5 pupils.

School Grade Level Number of

Participants
A Grade 5 25
Grade 6 25
B Grade 5 25
Grade 6 25
Instrumentation
The researcher used a questionnaire as the main
instrument of the study.
The questionnaire composed of two parts with 38
questions. On the first part, the participants were ask to
fill out their demographic profile that includes their
school, grade, gender, age and parents occupation; and on
the second part, they were asked to answer the questions
that utilized to assess their level of academic engagement
along four areas such as; emotional, cognitive, behavioral
and affective engagement.
Data Gathering Procedure
To obtain the necessary data needed in this study, the
researchers have chosen participants randomly among grade 5

and 6 pupils in private and public elementary school.
Primarily, the researchers wrote a permission letter
addressed to the Principal of Tuguegarao West Central
School and St. Paul University Philippines and noted by the
adviser to allow the researchers to conduct the study in
the school. When the necessary data were gathered,
the researcher coded and organized the data for
interpretation and analysis.
Data Analysis
The data gathered were statistically treated to answer
the questions posed in the study. Statistical tools used in
the analysis and interpretation of data were:
1. Frequency counts and percentage. This was used to
determine the frequency and percentage distribution
of the profile variables.
2. Mean. This was used to determine level of pupil’s
academic engagement of the Grade 6 pupils in general
and in terms of the specific subjects, classroom
activities and teachers intervention.

Table 2. Engagement
To further analyze the weighted mean, the scale below
was used:
Mean Descriptive Interpretation

3.25-4.00 Very High
2.50-3.24 High
1.75-2.49 Low
1.00-1.74 Very Low
T-test for Independent Scale. This was used to
determine whether there exist the significant difference
on pupil’s academic engagement in terms of their profile
variables.
3. ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) This is used to
determine the significant difference in the pupils’
academic engagement of the participants when grouped
according to the profile variables.

CHAPTER 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the data gathered with their
corresponding analysis and interpretation. The data are
presented in tabular form. For better understanding, the
tables were analyzed and interpreted in textual discussion.
1. Profile of the Participants
1.1 School
1.2 Grade level
1.3 Sex
1.4 Age and
1.5 Parent’s occupation?
1.5.1 Father’s Occupation
1.5.2 Mother’s Occupation
Table 1. Frequency and percentage distribution of the
participants in terms of School.
School Frequency Percentage
A 50 50.0
B 50 50.0
Total 100 100.0

Table 1 reveals that there is an equal number of
pupils taken from school A and B.
participants in terms of Grade Level.
Grade Level Frequency Percentage
V 50 50.0
VI 50 50.0
Total 100 100.0
Table 2 reveals that there is an equal number of
pupils taken from school each grade level.
Table 3 Frequency and Percentage distribution of the
participants in terms of gender.
Gender Frequency Percentage
Male 42 42.0
Female 58 58.0
Total 100 100.0
Table 3 shows that, majority or 58.0% of the
participants are females while 42.0% are males. This shows
that the participants are female dominated.

participants in terms of Age.
Age Frequency Percentage
9 2 2.0
10 45 45.0
11 41 41.0
12 12 12.0
Total 100 100.0%
Table 4 reveals that 45.0% of the participants are 10
years old, 41.0% of the participants are 11 years old,
12.0% of the participants are 12 years old, and 2.0% of the
participants are 9 years old. The data further reveals
that, the majority of the participants are 10 years old.
participants in terms of Fathers occupation
Father’s Occupation Frequency Percentage
White Collar 80 80.0
Blue Collar 20 20.0
Total 100 100.0

The table shows that majority of the participants
father’s occupation are under white collar such as doctor,
engineer, nurses, architect, teacher, administrator,
manager, public safety, office employee, and OFW.
participants in terms of Mothers occupation.
Mother Frequency Percentage
White Collar 74 74.0
Blue Collar 26 26.0
Total 100 100.0
Table 6 shows that the majority of the participant is that
the mothers’ occupation are under white collar which are
doctor, engineer, nurses, architect, teacher,
administrator, manager, public safety, office employee, and
OFW.
2. Pupils’ level of school academic engagement along the
following areas:
2.1 Emotional engagement,
2.2 Cognitive engagement,

2.3 Behavioral engagement, and
2.4 Affective engagement
Table 7. Weighted Mean and Qualitative Description of the
Participants’ Emotional Engagement.
Item Mean Qualitative

Description
1. I talk about my 2.41 Low
problems in school with
my leaders or trusted
adults.
2. I am happy to be at my 3.34 Very high
school.
3. I feel I can go to my 2.57 High
teachers with the
things that I need to
talk about.
4. My teachers believe 3.1 High
that I can do well in
school.
5. I am interested in the 3.15 High
extracurricular
activities that this
school offers.
Category Mean 2.914 High
It is manifested from the table above that the
participants’ emotional engagement are high when they are
at school. Respectively they also have high engagement in
terms of being with their teachers and in extracurricular

activities that the school offers. Lastly, it also
indicates that the participants have low engagement in
terms of trusting others at school. In general, the
participants have a high engagement in school with a
descriptive interpretation of high as indicated by the
overall mean of 2.914.
Participants Cognitive Engagement.

Description
1. When I study, I try 3.07 High
to understand the
material better by
relating it to
things I already
know.
2. When I study, I 2.9 Low
figure out how the
information might be
useful in the real
world.
3. When learning new 2.8 Low
information, I try
to put the ideas in
my own words.
4. When I study, I try 3 High
to connect what I am
learning with my own
experiences.
5. I make up my own 2.91 High
examples to help me
understand the
important concepts I
learn from school.
6. When learning things 2.76 High

for school, I try to
see how they fit
together with other
things I already
know.
7. When learning things 2.79 High
for school, I often
try to associate
them with what I
learnt in other
classes about the
same or similar
things.
8. I try to see the 2.83 High
similarities and
differences between
things I am learning
for school and
things I know
already.
9. I try to understand 2.84 High
how the things I
learn in school fit
together with each
other.
10. When studying, 2.75 High
I try to combine
different pieces of
information from
course material in
new ways.
participants’ cognitive engagement on item 1,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
has descriptive high with means 3.07, 3, 2.91, 2.76, 2.79,
2.83, 2.84, 2.75 respectively and items 2,3 have

descriptive very low with the means of 2.9, and 2.8. The
overall mean of 2.865 indicates that the participants have
high cognitive engagement at school.
Participants’ Behavioral Engagement.

Description
1. I follow the rules at 3.25 Very high
school.
2. I feel at home in the 2.76 High
school.
3. I am interested in what 3.29 Very high
I am learning in school.
4. I greet my schoolmates 3.17 High
with kindness and
respect.
5. I try to do my best in 3.45 Very high
school every day.
6. I try hard to do well in 3.16 High
school.
7. If I have trouble 2.84 High
understanding a problem,
I go over it again until
I understand it.
8. When I run into a 2.92 High
difficult homework
problem, I keep working
at it until I think I’ve
solved it.
9. I take an active role in 2.88 High
extracurricular
activities in my school.
10. I volunteer to help 2.9 Low
with school activities
such as sport day and

parent day.
participants’ behavioral engagement on item 1,3,5, has
descriptive very high with means 3.25, 3.29, 3.45
respectively items 2,4,6,7,8,9 has descriptive high with
means of 2.76, 3.17, 3.16, 2.84, 2.92, 2.88. Lastly, item
10 has descriptive low with means of 2.9. The overall mean
of 3.062 indicates that the participants are high in their
behavioral engagement at school.
Participants’ Affective Engagement.
Items Mean Qualitative Mean

A. Affective: Liking for
Learning
1. I am very interested 3.18 High
in learning.
2. I think what we are 3.05 High
learning in school is
interesting
3. I talk with people 2.59 High
outside of school
about what I am
learning in class.
4. I like what I am 3.24 High
learning in school
5. I enjoy learning new 3.46 Very high
things in class.
6. I learn a lot from my 3.14 Very high
classes.
7. Learning is an 3.33 Very high
opportunity to acquire
life skills.
B. Affective: Liking for
School
1. I like my school 3.61 Very high
2. I am proud to be at 3.49 High
this school.
3. Most mornings, I look 3.3 Very high
forward to going to
school
4. I am happy to be at 3.45 High
this school
5. I often study or do 2.93 Very high
assignments with
friends at school
6. I try my best at 3.45 High

school.
participants’ affective engagement on linking of learning
item 5,6,7, has descriptive very high with means 3.46,
3.14, 3.33 respectively items 1,2,3,4 has descriptive high
with means of 3.18, 3.05, 2.59, 3.24. While, affective
engagement on linking for school item 1,3,5 has descriptive
very high with means 3.61, 3.3, 2.93 respectively items
2,4,6 has descriptive high with means of 3.49, 3.45, 3.45.

The overall mean of 3.247 indicates that the
participants are high in their affective engagement at
school.
Summary Table
3.1 Comparative analysis between the pupils academic

engagement in school when grouped according to their
profile variables.
Categories Mean Interpretation

Emotional 2.914 Low
Cognitive 2.865 High
Behavioral 3.062 High
Affective 3.247 High
Grand Mean 3.022 High
Table 11. Significant Difference on pupils’ engagement when

grouped according to school
Engagement School Mean F.Ratio Probability At α=0.05

Value
Emotional A 2.98 1.470 0.228 Accept HO
B 2.84
Cognitive A 2.84 0.137 0.712 Accept HO
B 2.87
Behavioral A 3.00 0.712 0.401 Accept
B 3.11 HO
Affective A 3.21 0.281 0.597 Accept HO
B 2.28

Table above reveals that there is no significant
difference on the pupil’s engagement when grouped according
to school. This is supported by the probability value of
which are all greater than 0.5 level of significance. Thus,
the null hypothesis is accepted. It means that the pupils
from school A and B are comparable in terms of their
academic engagement at school.
3.2 Significant Difference of pupils’ engagement when
grouped according to their grade level
Engagement Grade Mean F.Ratio Probability At

level Value α=0.05
Emotional Grade V 2.95 0.449 0.504 Accept

HO
Grade VI 2.87
Cognitive Grade V 2.96 2.276 0.100 Accept

HO
Grade VI 2.77
Behavioral Grade V 3.11 0.660 0.418 Accept

HO
Grade VI 3.01
Affective Grade V 3.25 0.018 0.895 Accept

HO
Grade VI 3.24

It can be observed from table 12 that there is no
significant difference on the pupils’ academic engagement
when grouped according to their grade level. This is proven
by the probability values which are all greater than 0.5.
Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.
3.3 Significant Difference of pupils engagement when
grouped according to their gender
Engagement Gender Mean F.Ratio Probability At
Value α=0.05
Emotional Male 2.88 0.205 0.652 Accept
HO
Female 2.93
Cognitive Male 2.90 0.277 0.600 Accept
HO
Female 2.84
Behavioral Male 3.11 0.439 0.509 Accept
HO
Female 3.03
Affective Male 3.30 0.599 0.441 Accept
HO
Female 3.20

Based on table 13, there is no significant difference
on the pupils’ academic engagement and when they are mix in
gender. This is validated by the probability value which is
greater than 0.5. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.
This implies that both male and female participants have
the same level of academic engagement at school.
3.4 Significant Difference of pupils engagement when group
according to their ages
Engagement Age Mean F.Ratio Probability At α=0.05

Value
Emotional 9 2.90 0.184 0.907 Accept HO
10 2.95
11 2.89
12 2.82
Cognitive 9 2.90 1.581 0.199 Accept HO
10 2.99
11 2.74
12 2.80
Behavioral 9 3.10 0.329 0/567 Accept HO
10 3.15
11 2.97
12 3.04

Affective 9 3.65 2.287 0.958 Accept HO
10 3.30
11 3.17
12 3.24
It can be inferred from table 14 that there is
significant difference between the academic engagement
among grade 5 and 6 pupils when grouped according to their
ages. This is approbate by the probability values which are
all greater by 0.5. Wherefore, the null hypothesis is
accepted. This implies that with regards to the pupils’
ages, academic engagement of grade 5 and 6 pupils is the
same.
3.5 Significant Difference of pupils engagement when group
according mothers occupation
Engagement Mother’s Mean F.Ratio Probability At

Occupation Value α=0.05
Emotional BCJ 2.89 0.207 0.650 Accept

WCJ 2.95 HO
Cognitive BCJ 2.88 0.003 0.958 Accept

HO
WCJ 2.81
Behavioral BCJ 3.10 0.555 0.646 Accept

HO
WCJ 2.95
Affective BCJ 3.29 0.337 0.535 Accept

HO
WCJ 3.12
From table 15, it shows that there is no significant
difference on the pupils’ academic engagement and when
grouped according to Mother’s Occupation. This is supported
by the probability values, which is greater than 0.5 level
of significance. Thus, the null hypothesis is accepted.
Therefore it implies that whatever work that their
mother’s have there is no discrimination or significant
difference.

3.6 Significant Difference of pupils’ engagement when
group according fathers occupation
Engagement Father’s Mean F.Ratio Probability At
Occupation Value α=0.0
Emotional BCJ 2.93 0.675 0.413 Accep
t HO
WCJ 2.81
Cognitive BCJ 2.88 0.207 0.605 Accep
t HO
WCJ 2.80
Behavioral BCJ 3.11 1.080 0.301 Accep
t HO
WCJ 2.87
Affective BCJ 3.25 1.691 0.197 Accep
t HO
WCJ 3.25
Table 16 reveals that there is no significant
difference on the academic engagement among grade 5 and 6
pupils when they are blocked according to their Father’s
occupation. This is proven by the probability values which

are all greater than 0.5. Thus, the null hypothesis is
accepted.
This implies that no matter what occupation their
father’s have they are equal and there is no significant
difference.

Chapter 4
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter represents the summary of findings,
conclusions and recommendations that were drawn from the
results of gathered data from the participants.
Summary of Findings
The summary of findings presented hereby answered the
statement of the problem of the study based on the data
gathered.
1. Profile of the participants
1.1 School
There is equal distribution (50.0% of
participants taken from each school.
1.2 Grade level
There is equal distribution (50.0%)of
participants taken in each grade level.
1.3 Gender
Majority (58.0%) of the participants are females.

1.4 Age
Majority (45.0%) of the participants are 10 years
old.
1.5 Parent’s Occupation
In terms of fathers’ occupation the majority are
under white-collar jobs likewise with mothers’
occupation majority are under white-collar jobs.
2. Pupils’ level of school academic engagement along the
following areas:
2.1 Emotional and Cognitive Engagement
The participants have high emotional and
cognitive engagement.
2.2 Behavioral and Affective Engagement
The participants have very high behavioral and
affective engagement.
3. Significant difference on pupils’ school engagement
when they are grouped according to profile variables
There is no significant difference on
pupils’ engagement when grouped according to their
profile variables.

Conclusion
Based on the findings of the study, the following
conclusions were derived:
The following conclusions were drawn from the findings
of the study:
1. The participants have high as the descriptive
interpretation in their emotional and cognitive
engagement at school. Furthermore, the
participants have very high as the descriptive
interpretation in terms of behavioral and
affective engagement in school.
2. Participants have no any significant difference
when grouped according to their profile
variables. There are also action plan that is
suggested by the researcher to fully enhanced
pupils engagement at school.
Recommendations
Based on the results of this study, the researchers
recommend the following:

1. School administrators should always see and embrace
the important role of ensuring that the system/school
is operating effectively and efficiently.
2. Teachers should involve pupils in the development of
school the different areas of academic engagement.
3. Parents should be involved in the academic engagement
of their children.s
4. Future researchers, who wants to broaden this study,
may conduct a research to focus on addressing the
academic engagement of pupils with the use of modern
technologies.

REFERENCES
Abdullah, Yusof M., Abu Bakar, Rahamah Noor and Mahbob,
Maizatul Haizan (2012). Student’s participation in
classroom: What motivates them to speak up? Social and
Behavioral Sciences.
Calmorin, Laurentina P. (2007). Methods of Research,
Manila: National Bookstore, p. 46.
Cimmino, Christina (April, 2007). Class participation
essential to student learning (Blogpost) Retrieved
from
http://www.theloquitur.com/classparticipationessential
tostudentlearning/
Dopkiss, Madison (January, 2015). How to participate in
class and why it is important? (Blogpost) Retrieved
from
https://collegesofdistinction.com/resource/participate
-in-class-important/
Dundaar, Sahin, Guvendir, Meltem Acar, Kocabiyik, Oya Onat
and Papatga, Erdal (2014). Which elementary school
subjects are the most likeable, most important, and

the easiest? Why?: A study of science and technology,
mathematics, social studies, and Turkish. Educational
Research and Reviews.
Moffett, Jennifer, Berezowski, John, Spencer, Dustine and
Lanning, Shari (2014). An investigation into the
factors that encourage learner participation in a
large group medical classroom. Advanced Medical
Education Practices, Vol. 5, pp. 65-71.
Mustapha, Siti Maziha, Rahman, Nik Suryani Abd and Yunus,
Melor M.D. (2010). Factors influencing classroom
participation: a case study of Malaysian undergraduate
students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 9.
Rehman, Shafiqur (2018). Effects of student participation
in a classroom. Retrieved from
https://pamirtimes.net/2011/09/12/opinon-effects-of-
student-participation-in-a-classroom/
Factors Influencing Academic Engagement and Achievement:
Exploration of Impact of Parentification and Poverty in
Adolescents’ Student-Teacher Relationships Retrived from

http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations
SAMPLE TEACHER INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Retrived from
https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.taspa.org/resource/resmgr/201
5_Winter_Conference/EFFECTIVE_INTERVIEW_QUESTION.pdf
The Student Engagement in Schools Questionnaire
University of California Santa Barbara
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ934707.pdf
Las Cruces Public Schools October 30 – November 16,
2012Student Engagement Survey Retrieved from
http://lcps.k12.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/LCPS-
Student-Engagement-Survey-Results.pdf
Research in Higher Education, 34: 267–89.[Crossref], [Web
of Science ®], , [Google Scholar]).
Measuring outcomes in college: fifty years of findings and
recommendations for the future, San
Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. [Google Scholar];
Astin 1993Astin, A. 1993.
What matters in college? Four critical years revisited, San
Francisco: Jossey‐Bass.

[Google Scholar]; Chickering and
Gamson 1987Chickering, A. and Gamson, Z. 1987.
Astin (1985Astin, A. 1985. Achieving educational excellence: a
critical assessment of priorities and practices in higher
education, San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. [Google Scholar])

BSED Thesis

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

BSED Thesis

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

St.

Paul University Philippines

ACADEMIC ENGAGEMENT AMONG GRADE 5 AND 6 PUPILS

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the School of

Arts, ScienceS and Teacher Education

Saint Paul University Philippines

Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

of the Requirements for the Degree of

BACHELOR IN ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

Sr. Maria Linda Neves,SPC

Rica Mae C. Cadangan

Mary Rose A. Lopez

SPUP School of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education 1

CHAPTER 1: THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE

Review of Related Literature .................. 6-12

Theoretical Framework ..........................15

Statement of the Problem ...................... 20

Significance of the Study ..................... 21

Scope and Limitation .......................... 21-22

Definition of Terms ........................... 22-23

Research Design ............................... 24

Participants of the Study ..................... 24

SPUP School of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education 2

Data Gathering Procedure ...................... 25

Data Analysis ................................. 26

CHAPTER 3: RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Result and Discussion ......................... 27-49

CHAPTER 4: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

Summary ....................................... 50-52

REFERENCES ......................................... 55-56

CURRICULUM VITAE ...................................

SPUP School of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education 3

THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Engagement has attracted increasing attention as

representing a possible antidote to declining academic

motivation and achievement. Engagement is presumed to be

malleable, responsive to contextual features, and amenable

to environmental change. Researchers describe behavioral,

emotional, and cognitive engagement and recommend studying

engagement as a multifaceted construct. Engagement is also

an essential component that need to be fulfilled even in a

home. Engagement is an indispensable, effective method not

only in giving opinion or idea but also in receiving

Academic engagement also means student’s engagement

in the classroom. Engagement requires not only being active

Bomia and colleagues (1997) define student engagement as

students’ willingness, needs, desire motivation and success

in the learning process. Hu and Kuh (2001) and Kuh (2009a)

refer to student engagement as the time allocated by

SPUP School of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education 4

students to educational activities to contribute to the

desired outcomes and as the quality of their related

efforts. According to Stovall (2003), student engagement

their willingness to take part in activities. Krause and

Coates (2008) associated student engagement with the high

quality in learning outcomes.

All these definitions could be said to have common

points for each school level. It is also important that

student engagement in higher education is defined in a way

to cover the processes of campus engagement and class

engagement. In this respect, student engagement was defined

by Gunuc and Kuzu (2014) as “the quality and quantity of

students’ psychological, cognitive, emotional and

behavioral reactions to the learning process as well as to