Exploring Factors Affecting Behavioral, Cognitive and Emotional Engagement of International Undergraduate Students in China 来华本科留学生学习性投入的影响因素研究——基于行为、认知和情感三维度

  • Meiqiong Gong
  • Yuhao Cen
Keywords: international students in China, student engagement, behavioral engagement, cognitive engagement, emotional engagement, 来华留学生,学习性投入,行为投入,高阶认知投入,情感投入

Abstract

Student engagement is one of the critical measures assessing the quality of international student education. This survey study examined the behavioral, cognitive and emotional engagement of international students at a research-intensive university on the east coast of China. The findings showed the interrelationship of the behavioral, cognitive and emotional dimensions of student engagement. The research revealed that individual characteristics had significant effects on emotional engagement, while having no effect on behavioral or cognitive engagement. Male students, first-generation students, and students enrolling in degree programs displayed a lower level of emotional engagement compared with their counterparts. The research also found that supportive campus environment and frequent student-faculty interactions were positively related to the three dimensions of student engagement, whereas peer interactions had no effect on any of the dimensions. 来华留学生的学习性投入水平,是衡量高校留学生教育质量的重要方式。本文将学习性投入划分为行为投入、高阶认知投入、情感投入三维度,基于中国东海岸一所研究型大学来华本科留学生的调查数据,对留学生的学习性投入水平与影响因素进行描述性统计与回归分析。研究发现,留学生三维度的学习性投入显著正相关。个人背景特征对留学生的情感投入存在显著影响,但对行为和高阶认知投入没有影响。男性、第一代大学生、攻读学位项目的留学生均呈现较低的情感投入。校园环境支持度和师生互动因素对学习性投入三维度都具有显著影响,但生生互动对学习性投入各维度没有影响。

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

Meiqiong Gong

龚美琼,上海交通大学高等教育研究院硕士研究生,中国上海。研究方向:留学生学习与发展、学生投入。电子邮箱:joangong@sjtu.edu.cn

MEIQIONG GONG is a graduate student in the Graduate School of Education at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China. Her research interests lie in international student learning and development, and student engagement. Email: joangong@sjtu.edu.cn.

Yuhao Cen

岑逾豪(通讯作者),上海交通大学高等教育研究院副研究员(通讯作者),中国上海。研究方向:学生发展、大学对学生的影响。电子邮箱:ycen@sjtu.edu.cn

YUHAO CEN (corresponding author) is an Associate Professor in the Graduate School of Education at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China. Her areas of research interest include student development and college impact on students. Email: ycen@sjtu.edu.cn.

References

Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years. San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.
Axelson, R. D., & Flick, A. (2010). Defining student engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43(1), 38-43.
Bauer, K. W., & Liang, Q. (2003). The effect of personality and precollege characteristics on first-year activities and academic performance. Journal of College Student Development, 44(3), 277-290.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY, US: McKay, 20-24.
Brint, S., Cantwell, A. M., & Hanneman, R. A. (2008). The two cultures of undergraduate academic engagement. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 383-402.
Coates, H. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25-36.
Fazey, D. M., & Fazey, J. A. (2001). The potential for autonomy in learning: Perceptions of competence, motivation and locus of control in first-year undergraduate students. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 345-361.
Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC, US: National Center for Education Statistics.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.
Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2002). Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 555-575.
Hughes, J. N., Luo, W., Kwok, O. M., & Loyd, L. K. (2008). Teacher-student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 1-14.
Juvonen, J., Espoinoza, G., & Knifsend, C. (2012). The role of peer relationships in student academic and extracurricular engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 387-401). New York, NY, US: Springer.
Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2009). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the national survey of student engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10-17, 66.
Kuh, G. D., Hu, S., & Vesper, N. (2000). They shall be known by what they do: An activities-based typology of college students.Journal of College Student Development,41(2), 228-244.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Commissioned Report for the National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a dialog on student success. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/kuh_team_report.pdf.
Lee, J. S. (2012). The effects of the teacher–student relationship and academic press on student engagement and academic performance. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 330-340.
Miliszewska, I., & Horwood, J. (2004). Engagement theory: A framework for supporting cultural differences in transnational education. Paper presented at the 27th HERDSA Annual Conference, Miri, Malaysia.
Newmann, F. M. (1991). Student engagement in academic work: Expanding the perspective on secondary school effectiveness. In J. R. Bliss & W. A. Firestone (Eds.), Rethinking effective schools: Research and practice (pp. 58-76). Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall.
Pike, G. R. (1999). The effects of residential learning communities and traditional residential living arrangements on educational gains during the first year of college. Journal of College Student Development, 40(3), 269-284.
Pike, G. R. (2000). The influence of fraternity or sorority membership on students' college experiences and cognitive development. Research in Higher Education, 41(1), 117-139.
Pike, G. R., & Killian, T. S. (2001). Reported gains in student learning: do academic disciplines make a difference? Research in Higher Education, 42(4), 429-454.
Pike, G. R., Schroeder, C. C., & Berry, T. R. (1997). Enhancing the educational impact of residence halls: the relationship between residential learning communities and first-year college experiences and persistence. Journal of College Student Development, 38(6), 609-621.
Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). A typology of student engagement for American colleges and universities. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 185-209.
Pike, G. R., Smart, J. C., Kuh, G. D., & Hayek, J. C. (2006). Educational expenditures and student engagement: When does money matter? Research in Higher Education, 47(7), 847-872.
Porter, S. R. (2006). Institutional structures and student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 47(5), 521-558.
Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464-481.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.
Schuetz, P. (2008). A theory-driven model of community college student engagement. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 32, 305-324.
Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (1991). Twenty years of research on college students: lessons for future research. Research in Higher Education, 32(1), 83-92.
Umbach, P. D., & Wawrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher education, 46(2), 153-184.
Zepke, N. (2011). Understanding teaching, motivation and external influences in student engagement: How can complexity thinking help?. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 16(1), 1-13.
岑逾豪. (2014). 本科教学中的高阶学习:问题、实践和挑战. 复旦教育论坛, 12(2), 47-53.
岑逾豪. (2016). 大学生成长的金字塔模型--基于实证研究的本土学生发展理论.高等教育研究, (10), 74-80.
方来坛, 时勘, & 张风华. (2008). 中文版学习投入量表的信效度研究. 中国临床心理学杂志, 16(6), 618-620.
韩宝平. (2014). 大学生学习投入影响因素分析. 国家教育行政学院学报, (8), 77-82.
中华人民共和国教育部. 教育统计数据. http://www.moe.gov.cn/s78/A03/moe_560/jytjsj_2017/
靳敏, & 胡寿平. (2018). 工科专业本科生学习性投入的性别差异分析. 复旦教育论坛, 16(05), 63-69.
孙超. (2009). 对美国大学生学习产出研究的反思. 高教发展与评估, 25(6), 81-84, 112.
吴明隆. (2010). 问卷统计分析实务: SPSS 操作与应用. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社.
吴素梅, & 宋彩萍. (2010). 关于高校学生学习性投入状况的调查研究--以上海w大学为例. 教育理论与实践, 30(7), 3-6.
张信勇, 卞小华, & 徐光兴. (2008). 大学生的学习投入与人格坚韧性的关系. 心理研究, 1(6), 72-76.
张轶文, & 甘怡群. (2005). 中文版Utrecht工作投入量表(UWES) 的信效度检验. 中国临床心理学杂志, 13(3), 268-270, 281.
朱红灿. (2014). 大学生学习投入影响因素的研究--基于学习行为投入、情感投入、认知投入维度. 高教论坛, (4), 36-40.
Published
2020-01-01
How to Cite
Gong, M., & Cen, Y. (2020). Exploring Factors Affecting Behavioral, Cognitive and Emotional Engagement of International Undergraduate Students in China 来华本科留学生学习性投入的影响因素研究——基于行为、认知和情感三维度 . Journal of International Students, 10(S(1), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v10iS(3).1771
Section
Special Issue - International Students in China (in Chinese)