Problems of the relationship between school involvement and academic achievements in modern teenagers



The article focuses on the current problem of school involvement as a predictor of high academic performance. It is based on the data of international studies, which underlie the presented analysis of the factors that support and weaken this involvement. The special thing about the study is the analysis of the age specificity of engagement, which is still in the process of its evolvement, and also attention to the difficulties of Generation Z adolescents, who are especially vulnerable in the situation of the coronavirus epidemic due to high personal anxiety. Two leading approaches to school involvement are reviewed: The North American model by Fredricks et al. (2004) and the European Approach by Schaufeli et al. (2002). Insufficient knowledge of the cognitive aspect of involvement was revealed in terms of the development of conscious self-regulation and resilience, which are resources for overcoming difficulties in learning and overcoming stressful situations. A theoretical model is proposed concerning the relationship between school involvement and academic performance with factors that support and hinder involvement. The model will allow us to study the specifics of the causal relationships between the constructs under study, analyze the age aspect of the formation of involvement, and offer predictive models of the efficiency of school involvement in predicting academic achievement.

General Information

Keywords: school engagement, learning activities, academic success, predictors of academic success, generation Z

Journal rubric: Educational Psychology

Article type: review article


Funding. The research was carried out with the financial support of the Russian Science Foundation within the framework of the scientific project 20-18-00470 “Self-regulation and school involvement as psychological resources of academic success: a longitudinal study”.

For citation: Bondarenko I.N., Ishmuratova Y.A., Tsyganov I.Y. Problems of the relationship between school involvement and academic achievements in modern teenagers [Elektronnyi resurs]. Sovremennaia zarubezhnaia psikhologiia = Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 2020. Vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 77–88. DOI: 10.17759/jmfp.2020090407. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Kutuzova D. Organizatsiya deyatel'nosti i stil' samoregulyatsii kak faktory professional'nogo vygoraniya pedagoga-psikhologa. Diss. kand. psikhol. nauk. [Organization of activities and style of self-regulation as factors of professional burnout of a teacher-psychologist. Ph. D. (Psychology) diss.]. Moscow, 2006. 213 p. (In Russ.).
  2. Legostaeva E.S., Okonechnikova L.V., Denisova D.S. Zhiznestoikost', samootsenka i motivatsiya kak lichnostnye faktory uspeshnosti obucheniya starsheklassnikov [Resilience, self-esteem and motivation as personal factors for the success of senior school students]. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii = Pedagogical Education in Russia, 2019. Vol. 8. P. 149–156. DOI:10.26170/po19-08-19 (In Russ.).
  3. Ivanova T.Yu. et al. Sovremennye problemy izucheniya lichnostnykh resursov v professional'noi deyatel'nosti [Contemporary Issues in the Research of Personality Resources at Work] [Elektronnyi resurs]. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya = Organizational psychology, 2018. Vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 85–121. URL: (Accessed 28.07.2020). (In Russ.).
  4. Roorda D.L. et al. Affective Teacher–Student Relationships and Students' Engagement and Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Update and Test of the Mediating Role of Engagement. School Psychology Review, 2017. Vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 239–261. DOI:10.17105/SPR-2017-0035.V46-3
  5. Alrashidi O., Phan H., Ngu B. Academic engagement: an overview of its definitions, dimensions, and major conceptualisations. International Education Studies, 2016. Vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 41–52. DOI:10.5539/ies.v9n12p41
  6. Audas R., Willms J.D. Engagement and dropping out of school: A life-course perspective [Elektronnyi resurs]. Hull, Québec: Human Resources Development Canada, 2002. 62 p. URL: (Accessed 28.07.2020).
  7. Baker J.A. Contributions of teacher-child relationships to positive adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 2006. Vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 211–229. DOI:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.02.002
  8. Bakker A., Demerouti E. Job demands–resources theory. Wellbeing: A Complete Reference Guide, 2014. Vol. 3, part 2, pp. 37–64. DOI:10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell019
  9. Bergin C., Bergin D. Attachment in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 2009. Vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 141–170. DOI:10.1007/s10648-009-9104-0
  10. Schaufeli W. et al. Burnout and engagement in university students: a cross-national study. Journal Cross Cultur Psychol, 2002. Vol. 33, no. 5. P. 464–481. DOI:10.1177/0022022102033005003
  11. Castellano M., Stringfield S., Stone J. Secondary Career and Technical Education and Comprehensive School Reform: Implications for Research and Practice [Elektronnyi resurs]. Review of Educational Research, 2003. Vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 231–272. URL: (Accessed 28.07.2020).
  12. Cleary T.J., Zimmerman B.J. A Cyclical Self-Regulatory Account of Student Engagement: Theoretical Foundations and Applications. In Christenson S.L. (ed.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. MA, Boston: Springer, 2012, pp. 237–257. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_11
  13. Conner J.O., Pope D.C. Not just robo-students: Why full engagement matters and how schools can promote it. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2013. Vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 1426–1442.
  14. Csikszentmihalyi M. Happiness, flow, and economic equality. American Psychologist, 2000. Vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 1163–1164. DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.55.10.1163
  15. Skinner E. et al. Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 2008. Vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 765–781. DOI:10.1037/a0012840
  16. Finn J.D., Rock D.A. Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of applied psychology, 1997. Vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 221–234. DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.221
  17. Fredricks J., Reschly A., Christenson S. Handbook of student engagement interventions: working with disengaged students. London; San Diego: Academic Press, 2019. 410 p.
  18. Fredricks J.A., Blumenfeld P.C., Paris A.H. School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 2004. Vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 59–109. DOI:10.3102/00346543074001059
  19. Handbook of research on student engagement. Christenson S.L., Reschly A.L., Wylie C. (eds.). New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. 840 p.
  20. Kobasa S.C., Maddi S.R., Kahn S. Hardiness and health: a prospective study. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1982. Vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 168–177. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.168
  21. Mohr K.J., Mohr E. Understanding Generation Z Students to Promote a Contemporary Learning Environment. Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence, 2017. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 84–94. DOI:10.15142/T3M05T
  22. Newmann F.M. Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. New York: Teachers College Press, 1992. 243 p.
  23. Nota L., Soresi S., Zimmerman B.J. Self-regulation and academic achievement and resilience: A longitudinal study. International journal of educational research, 2004. Vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 198–215. DOI:10.1016/j.ijer.2005.07.001
  24. Ouweneel E., Le Blanc P.M., Schaufeli W.B. On being grateful and kind: Results of two randomized controlled trials on study-related emotions and academic engagement. The Journal of psychology, 2014. Vol. 148, no. 1, pp. 37–60. DOI:10.1080/00223980.2012.742854
  25. Patrick H., Ryan A.M., Kaplan A. Early adolescents' perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of educational psychology, 2007. Vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 83–98. DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.83
  26. Wehlage G.G. et al. Reducing the risk: Schools as communities of support. Philadelphia: The Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis Inc, 1989. 275 p.
  27. Trzesniewski K.H. et al. Revisiting the association between reading achievement and antisocial behavior: New evidence of an environmental explanation from a twin study. Child development, 2006. Vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 72–88. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00857.x
  28. Ripke M.N., Huston A.C., Casey D.M. Low-Income Children's Activity Participation as a Predictor of Psychosocial and Academic Outcomes in Middle Childhood and Adolescence. In Huston A.C., Ripke M.N. (eds.), Cambridge studies in social and emotional development. Developmental contexts in middle childhood: Bridges to adolescence and adulthood. Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 260–282.
  29. Ripski M.B., Gregory A. Unfair, unsafe, and unwelcome: Do high school students' perceptions of unfairness, hostility, and victimization in school predict engagement and achievement? Journal of School Violence, 2009. Vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 355–375. DOI:10.1080/15388220903132755
  30. Rothman D. A Tsunami of learners called Generation Z [Elektronnyi resurs]. Rothman D. A Tsunami of learners called Generation Z [Электронный ресурс]. 2016. 5 p. URL: (дата обращения: 28.07.2020). URL: (Accessed 28.07.2020).
  31. Seemiller C., Grace M. Generation Z goes to college. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2016. 320 p.
  32. Kenny M.E. et al. Setting the stage: Career development and the student engagement process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2006. Vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 272–279. DOI:10.1037/0022-0167.53.2.272
  33. Hughes J.N. et al. Teacher-student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of educational psychology, 2008. Vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 1–14. DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.1
  34. Lam S. et al. Understanding student engagement with a contextual model. In Christenson S.L., Reschly A.L., Wylie C. (eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement. Boston, MA: Springer, 2012. P. 403–419.
  35. Vasalampi K., Salmela-Aro K., Nurmi J.E. Adolescents’ self-concordance, school engagement, and burnout predict their educational trajectories. European psychologist, 2009. Vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 332–341. DOI:10.1027/1016-9040.14.4.332
  36. Wang M., Deng X., Du X. Harsh parenting and academic achievement in Chinese adolescents: Potential mediating roles of effortful control and classroom engagement. Journal of School Psychology, 2018. Vol. 67, pp. 16–30. DOI:10.1016/j.jsp.2017.09.002
  37. Wang M.T., Holcombe R. Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American educational research journal, 2010. Vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 633–662. DOI:10.3102/0002831209361209
  38. Wolters C., Taylor D.A. Self-regulated Learning Perspective on Student Engagement [Elektronnyi resurs]. In Christenson S.L., Reschly A.L., Wylie C. (eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement. Boston, MA: Springer, 2012, pp. 635–653. URL: (Accessed 28.07.2020). DOI:
  39. Yazzie-Mintz E. Leading for Engagement. Principal Leadership, 2010. Vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 54–58.

Information About the Authors

Irina N. Bondarenko, PhD in Psychology, Leading Researcher, Department of Psychology of Self-regulation, Psychological Institute of the Russian Academy of Education,, Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Yulia A. Ishmuratova, Researcher, Laboratory of Psychology of Self-Regulation, Psychological Institute of the Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Igor Y. Tsyganov, PhD in Psychology, Senior Researcher, Psychological Institute of the Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:



Total: 538
Previous month: 8
Current month: 1


Total: 604
Previous month: 6
Current month: 0