TOPIC: The impact of male educators on students academic achievement. The body of the paper must be 3,000–3,500 words. There must be a title page, abstract, and reference list in addition to the headi
THE IMPACT OF LEARNER AUTONOMY 17
The Impact of Learner Autonomy on Adolescent Academic Engagement
Student’s Name
School of Education, Liberty University
Author Note
Student’s Name
I have no known conflict of interest to disclose.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Student’s Name
Email: Student’s Name
Abstract
Student academic engagement decreases as students get older. In the last decade, academic engagement, specifically of adolescents, has become a growing body of research. Most of this research uses self-determination theory (SDT) as a basis for defining the factors that impact engagement. Self-determination theory asserts that through the satisfaction of the basic psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness, engagement can be achieved. A review of the literature confirmed that this theory is true in practice. In fact, some studies show that the presence of autonomy is a good predictor of the other two needs also being met. Supporting autonomy can be achieved by giving learners a voice and choice in their learning experience. Teachers do not need to teach a specific content area or have a certain number of years of experience; they just need to have the willingness to create a student-directed learning environment.
Keywords: academic engagement, adolescents, intrinsic motivation, learning autonomy, psychological needs, student-directed learning
The Impact of Learner Autonomy on Adolescent Academic Engagement
Niemiec and Ryan (2009) pointed out that humans are innately curious creatures who want to learn. Although people may be natural learners, as students enter adolescence, their academic engagement and motivation have been found to decline ( Moreira & Lee, 2020; Raufelder & Kulakow, 2021; Salmela‐Aro et al., 2021; Schweder & Raufelder, 2021 ). Salmela‐ Aro et al. (2021) conducted a review of the research on student engagement over the past decade and found that studies had increased to six times what they had been in the previous decade, with most of the research focusing on adolescent engagement . This increase in research indicates that there is a growing concern for engaging students in their learning process due to the benefits that are derived from engagement. While the general trend is downward, certain populations of students, such as males, experience a steeper decline in motivation than others (Morsink et al., 2019; Salmela-Aro et al., 2021).
Through engagement and motivation, students experience higher academic achievement, learn more deeply, and develop a more positive affect toward learning (Dela Rosa, 2017; Guo, 2018; Morsink et al., 2019; Moreira & Lee, 2020). According to Salmela‐Aro et al. (2021), engagement is so critical to the learning process that it has been referred to by some as “the holy grail of learning” (p. 257). Not only does engagement promote learning, but it also can improve adolescent life satisfaction by fulfilling their psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Guo, 2018). Students who are engaged in their learning have also been found to have better physical and mental health than their counterparts who are less engaged (Guo, 2018).
The inverse of engagement is boredom; engagement has been found to have a negative correlation with dropout rates, whereas boredom has a positive correlation to dropping out (Guo, 2018; Moreira & Lee, 2020; Tvedt et al., 2021). When student interests and perspectives are honored rather than ignored, motivation and engagement in learning increase (Dela Rosa, 2017). For example, it is no surprise that reading is declining, given that students’ preferred formats of reading, such as graphic novels, are often ignored in the school setting (Dela Rosa, 2017). However, teachers are often the primary decision-makers for how learning will occur in their classrooms and use a system of punishments and rewards to maintain control rather than providing students with opportunities to autonomously demonstrate their learning competence (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). These teacher-directed learning environments are especially problematic for adolescents who are seeking to become more independent (Raufelder & Kulakow, 2021). Nevertheless, engagement is shaped by context, which indicates that schools and teachers have the power to impact learner engagement (Inayat & Ali, 2020; Moreira & Lee, 2020). The research question that guided this literature review is: What impact does learner autonomy have on adolescent academic engagement?
Definitions of Key Terms
Academic engagement -A positive view and commitment to learning displayed through emotions, cognitive effort, behavior, social interactions, and/or agency (Guo, 2018; Moreira & Lee, 2020; Salmela-Aro et al., 2021; Tvedt et al., 2021).
Adolescents - Children aged eight to 16 (Morsink et al., 2019).
Intrinsic motivation - Achieved when a person is committed to a goal based on an internal desire to achieve and/or obtain knowledge (Schunk, 2020).
Learning autonomy -The degree to which learners control the direction of their learning through voice and choice (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009; Dela Rosa, 2017; Guo, 2018; Bobis et al., 2020; Tripon, 2021).
Psychological needs -A person’s need for autonomy, competence, and belonging to feel fulfilled according to self-determination theory (SDT) (Schunk, 2020).
Student-directed learning - Occurs when students are given opportunities to make meaningful learning choices based on their interests (Schunk, 2020; Wong, 2020; Schweder & Raufelder, 2021).
Related Literature
Academic Engagement
Engagement is constructed of multiple dimensions: emotional (feelings about learning), cognitive (mental effort devoted to learning), behavioral (participation in learning), social (cooperation with others in learning), and agentic (students shape their learning activities) (Salmela-Aro et al., 2021). According to Salmela-Aro et al. (2021), behavioral engagement is the dimension that has been most heavily studied, perhaps because it is the easiest to observe or because behavioral engagement is promoted by other types of engagement. For instance, children may actively participate in a learning activity that allows them to cooperate with one another or that they feel is an important issue to solve. Moreira and Lee (2020) used the Student Engagement Instrument to measure cognitive engagement in their study which was informed by student perception of control in learning and perceived meaningfulness of the content. While Moreira and Lee (2020) were primarily measuring cognitive engagement, one can see that other types of engagement may be connected such as agentic and emotional. This shows that while there are different dimensions of engagement, they are sometimes difficult to separate from one another (Salmela-Aro et al., 2021).
In addition to engagement being multidimensional, there are multiple characteristics of tasks that have been found to be engaging to different types of students (Morsink et al., 2019). Morsink et al. (2019) found that students who had externalizing problems such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or behavior disorders were less motivated by tasks that required a lot of focus or that were cognitively challenging and were more motivated by external rewards. On the other hand, students with internalizing problems such as anxiety or depression preferred tasks that required focus and were socially evaluated but experienced decreased motivation with collaborative tasks (Morsink et al., 2019). Morsink et al. (2019) and Schweder and Raufelder (2021) have shown that boys were more motivated than girls by tasks that have a reward or an element of competition. Additionally, Schweder and Raufelder (2021) determined that girls have less decrease in motivation over time than boys do.
Learning Autonomy
External controls have been found to take away a student’s intrinsic love of learning and cause the student to disengage (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009; Morsink et al., 2019). However, sometimes motivation can begin as external and then move along the internalization continuum until integrated regulation is achieved and the person associates a value with something that they are going to pursue and relates their pursuits with other components of themselves (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). For instance, a student learns biology because they want to be a doctor and because being a doctor will allow them to help others. According to Tripon (2021), the opposite of being an authoritative teacher who exercises external control by being highly structured, inflexible, and focusing on competition over cooperation is being a coaching teacher. Coaching teachers adapt to student needs, place a high emphasis on cooperation, and are found to have autonomy-supportive learning environments (Tripon, 2021).
Learning Autonomy and Academic Engagement
Teachers who supported learner autonomy in their classrooms have seen increases in student intrinsic motivation, competence, and self-esteem (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009; Meškauskienė, 2017; Bobis et al., 2020; Inayat & Ali, 2020). Additionally, Bobis et al. (2020) found that autonomy support can reduce student anxiety about grades due to their increased feelings of control. Autonomy support was also found to be critical in Bobis et al.’s study (2020) where math teachers who provided more autonomy support saw less decrease in learner engagement over time. Increasing learner autonomy leads to decreases in burnout and increases in internal motivation (Guo, 2018). Tvedt et al. (2021) studied student intentions to drop out of school in Norway and found that autonomy support was the support variable reported the least by all students across the board, but it also had the strongest negative correlation to boredom and disengagement.
When Dela Rosa (2017) studied factors related to reading enjoyment, the study revealed that learner interest in book themes or types of books is less predictable than previous studies had indicated. Dela Rosa posited that this variety of interests is a result of the vast array of information and entertainment available to Generation Z learners online. This indicates that learner choice and autonomy in reading material may be more important to current adolescent learners than previous generations (Dela Rosa, 2017). Wong (2021) suggested harnessing the technology that Generation Z learners are so familiar with as a means for increasing engagement with student choice in digital resources and ways to share what they know. However, Wong also cautioned educators that access to technology within and across nations is not equal, so teachers and administrators will sometimes have to be prepared to bridge that access gap.
Teachers who feel they have autonomy professionally are more likely to extend autonomy to their students (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). However, teachers’ perceptions of their roles in the classroom can be influenced and shifted to become more autonomy-supportive of professional learning (Bobis et al., 2020). While it may be tempting to assume that certain content areas or years of experience in education produce an autonomy-supportive classroom, Tripon (2021) found that was not the case. Any teacher can support autonomy by providing students with learning choices, allowing students to voice their perspectives on debatable issues, giving opportunities to self-regulate, and offering explanations for the value and relevance of content (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009; Meškauskienė, 2017; Inayat & Ali, 2020). Self-regulation can be achieved with standards-based learning progressions where students are assessed at the beginning of a unit of study to determine their starting point and then continue the learning progression to meet their growth goal (Raufelder & Kulakow, 2021). When students have a clear understanding of tasks and their goals and are permitted to be self-directed, their perceived competence and engagement increase (Tripon, 2021).
Findings show a positive relationship between a student belonging to a student-directed learning environment and maintaining or increasing motivation throughout the school year (Raufelder & Kulakow, 2021; Schweder & Raufelder, 2021). Lee and Hannafin (2016, as cited in Wong, 2021) defined a student-centered learning environment as one where students are provided with autonomy in their learning (Own It), scaffolding is used to close the gap between what students know and want to know (Learn It), and students have an authentic audience with whom they can share their learning (Share It). Schweder and Raufelder (2021) conducted their research during a week-long student-directed learning intervention where students chose what they learned about and whether they wanted to answer the learning questions that they identified independently or with others. Schunk (2020) also summarizes the American Psychology Association’s (APA) learner-centered principles based on a constructivist learning approach. According to these principles, a student’s intrinsic motivation to learn is increased by tasks that are novel, of the optimal difficulty level, pertain to student interests, and give the learner choices and control (Schunk, 2020). In these examples, students are at the center of the learning process rather than just being receivers of information from the teacher.
Learning Theory Association
A theoretical grounding that can explain where engagement comes from based on psychological and environmental needs is self-determination theory (SDT) (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009; Guo, 2018; Morsink et al., 2019; Inayat & Ali, 2020; Moreira & Lee, 2020; Salmela‐Aro et al., 2021; Schweder & Raufelder, 2021; Tvedt et al., 2021). “Self-determination theory postulates that intrinsic motivation is influenced by three basic innate psychological needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness,” (Schunk, 2020, p. 402). Thus, by helping students satisfy these psychological needs, both motivation and engagement would increase (Schunk, 2020). Competence comes from being able to complete given challenges, autonomy is achieved when learners feel in control of their actions, and relatedness happens when learners feel they are an accepted part of their learning community (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Self-determination theory, as a theory of motivation, assumes that people have a natural desire to learn and explore environments freely in which they feel safe (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009).
Throughout the literature, studies confirmed what is postulated by SDT (Guo, 2018; Morsink et al., 2019; Bobis et al., 2020; Tvedt et al., 2021). Guo’s (2018) study revealed that a high sense of learner autonomy predicted overall needs satisfaction and, thus, engagement. In Morsink et al. (2019), the task elements measured positively corresponded to the satisfaction of one of the three basic psychological needs according to SDT, except for rewards which seem to have a negative relationship to autonomy since it shifts the locus of control to an external source. Tvedt et al. (2021) confirmed SDT as each of the measures of student support studied (quality feedback, autonomy granting, and emotional support) was associated with one of the psychological needs of SDT, and the three needs have been found to have an impact on engagement. Bobis et al. (2020) found that students who had supportive peers experienced less decrease in engagement over time due to the sense of belonging those students had. Moreover, experiences in the math classroom, including interactions with teachers and peers, influenced students’ sense of belonging, autonomy, and self-perception (Bobis et al., 2020).
Even if teachers are not ready for their classrooms to become completely learner-driven, there are steps that can be taken to foster the psychological needs identified by SDT and thereby bolster engagement. Autonomy can be supported by giving students a voice and choice in their learning activities and by providing reasoning for why learning is useful in the real world (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Students’ sense of competence can be bolstered by ensuring they are learning the right content at the right time, providing them with appropriate tools to complete tasks, and by providing feedback (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). To help students feel a sense of relatedness, teachers need to show students that they care for and respect them and foster an overall positive classroom climate (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009; Raufelder & Kulakow, 2021).
Gaps in Research
Despite the increase in research conducted on adolescent learner engagement, there is still more to learn. Future studies should gain data from multiple methods rather than relying primarily on student self-report surveys (Guo, 2018; Salmela‐Aro et al., 2021). There is also a need for studies to incorporate both long-term longitudinal studies as well as momentary designs (Tvedt et al., 2019; Moreira & Lee, 2020; Salmeal-Aro et al., 2021). New tools should be developed and used to measure engagement (Salmela‐Aro et al., 2021). While Morsink et al. (2019) developed the Children and Adolescent Motivation Profile (CHAMP) survey, this survey needs to be used with more frequency and in more locations to be further verified as a valid measurement tool. More information is needed about how engagement develops for specific sub-groups, such as boys (Morsink et al., 2019; Salmela‐Aro et al., 2021). Schweder and Raufelder (2021) felt their findings could be further established with a pre and post-assessment design or a control group participating in teacher-directed learning rather than student-directed learning. Inayat and Ali (2020) considered autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching styles together, so more information could be gained by looking at those teaching styles separately.
Biblical Worldview
The words of God and his son, Jesus, explicitly inform Christians how to lead a Godly life in the Bible. Followers of Jesus also learn about living free from sin from Jesus’s actions. As a teacher, Jesus demonstrated the importance of building relationships with his followers, used relevant stories as a source of instruction to facilitate engagement and understanding and modeled expectations through his perfect life. Students look at teachers as learning models and as examples of how to treat others. While Jesus informed and showed his followers how they should behave, God also gave people free will to choose their own direction and the resulting consequences. The free will of people explains the longing of adolescents for independence which can be achieved in an autonomous learning environment.
An example of a parable that Jesus used to demonstrate his care for all is his parable of the lost sheep:
What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should perish. (Holy Bible, New International Version, 1973, Matt 18:12-14)
A shepherd who heard this message would truly understand God’s love for him. Classroom content should also be situated in real-world contexts to foster student engagement and understanding. If Jesus would go searching when just one sheep had become lost, one can only imagine how he would have responded to most of the flock wondering. Disengagement is the process of students gradually wandering away from a love of learning, and it should not just be accepted as a natural part of the time spent in school. Much like the shepherd from this parable, educators should strive to keep all students in the fold and engaged, even if that means changing their classroom practices to a more student-directed approach.
Conclusion
If ignored, the problem of student disengagement in schools will lead to student apathy and dropout (Guo, 2018; Moreira & Lee, 2020; Tvedt et al., 2021). Generation Z students live in a world that is filled with technology and fully customizable to their needs and preferences (Dela Rosa, 2017; Wong, 2021). Educators cannot just ask students to turn off their voices and no longer make choices when they enter the classroom. Even in a standards-based learning environment, there are opportunities for all classrooms to be autonomy supportive and student-directed. Simply making the progression of learning clear for students so they can set appropriate goals and monitor their progress allows learners to feel more in control of their learning environment (Raufelder & Kulakow, 2021). When students are provided with autonomy, it increases their sense of competence and self-esteem as learners and can create feelings of belonging to a classroom where their voice is valued (Guo, 2018). This fulfills students’ basic psychological needs according to SDT and motivates them to continue to learn (Schunk, 2020).
References
Bobis, J., Khosronejad, M., Way, J., & Anderson, J. (2020). “Sage on the stage” or “meddler in the middle”: Shifting mathematics teachers’ identities to support student engagement. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 23(6), 615–632.
Dela Rosa, J. P. O. (2017). From coercion to autonomy: Designing a literature program for “Generation Z” learners. Journal on English Language Teaching, 7(3), 7–21.
Guo, Y. (2018). The influence of academic autonomous motivation on learning engagement and life satisfaction in adolescents: The mediating role of basic psychological needs satisfaction. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(4), 254-261. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v8n5p254
Holy Bible, New International Version. (Original work published 1973). Bible Gateway. https://www.biblegateway.com/
Inayat, A., & Ali, A. Z. (2020). Influence of teaching style on students’ engagement, curiosity, and exploration in the classroom. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 7(1), 87–102.
Meškauskienė, A. (2017). The influence of educational teacher-learner interaction on adolescent self-esteem. Pedagogy Studies/Pedagogika, 126(2), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.15823/p.2017.23
Moreira, P. A. S., & Lee, V. E. (2020). School social organization influences adolescents’ cognitive engagement with school: The role of school support for learning and of autonomy support. Learning & Individual Differences, 80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101885
Morsink, S., Sonuga‐Barke, E., Van der Oord, S., Van Dessel, J., Lemiere, J. & Danckaerts, M. (2019). Measuring individual differences in task‐related motivation in children and adolescents: Development and validation of a new self‐report measure. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 28(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1787
Niemiec, C. P. & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133-144. https://doi/10.1177/1477878509104318
Raufelder, D. & Kulakow, S. (2021). The role of the learning environment in adolescents’ motivational development. Motivation and Emotion, 45(3), 299-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-021-09879-1
Salmela‐Aro, K., Tang, X., Symonds, J. & Upadyaya, K. (2021). Student engagement in adolescence: A scoping review of longitudinal studies 2010–2020. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 31(2), 256-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12619
Schunk, D. H. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson.
Schweder, S. & Raufelder, D. (2021). Needs satisfaction and motivation among adolescent boys and girls during self-directed learning intervention. Journal of Adolescents, 88, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2021.01.007
Tripon, C. (2021). Helping teenagers reconnect to learning- the power of supportive teachers to design autonomy. Journal of Educational Sciences & Psychology, 11(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.51865/JESP.2021.1.03
Tvedt, M. S., Bru, E., & Idsoe, T. (2021). Perceived teacher support and intentions to quit upper secondary school: Direct, and indirect associations via emotional engagement and boredom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(1), 101–122.
Wong, K. M. (2021). “A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centered learning: own it, learn it, and share it” by Lee and Hannafin (2016): An international perspective. Educational Technology Research & Development, 69(1), 93–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09842-w
