Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying cognitive engagement in the mathematics classroom

  • Articles
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper reports an analysis of videotape and interview data from four Year 8 mathematics lessons from the perspective of student cognitive engagement. The study extends our understanding of cognitive engagement by locating empirical evidence for its occurrence within the classroom. On the basis of the data we have examined, it appears that cognitive engagement can be consistently recognised by specific linguistic and behavioural indicators and is promoted by particular aspects of the classroom situation, the task, and the individual.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainley, M. (1993). Styles of engagement with learning: Multidimensional assessment of their relationship with strategy use and school achievement.Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 395–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ainley, M. (2001). Interest in learning and classroom interaction. In D.J. Clarke (Ed.),Perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms (pp. 105–130). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, J. R. (2001). From ignorance to understanding: Thinking, feeling and acting. In D.J. Clarke (Ed.),Perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms (pp. 255–290). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P. C., Puro, P., & Mergendoller, J. R. (1992). Translating motivation into thoughtfulness. In H. H. Marshall (Ed.),Redefining student learning: Roots of educational change. Norwood, NJ:Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourke, S. F. (1984).The teaching and learning of mathematics. Canberra:Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D. J. (1996). Refraction and reflection: Modelling the classroom negotiation of meaning.RefLecT 2(1), 46–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D. J. (1998). Studying the classroom negotiation of meaning: Complementary accounts methodology. In A. Teppo (Ed.),Qualitative research methods in mathematics education (Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph No. 9). Reston, VA:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D. J., & Helme, S. (1997). The resolution of uncertainty in mathematics classrooms. In F. Biddulph & K. Carr (Eds.),People in mathematics education (Proceedings of the 20th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp. 116–123). Hamilton, NZ:MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Como, L., & Mandinach, E. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation.Educational Psychologist, 18, 88–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (Eds.). (1988).Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rathunde, K. (1992). The measurement of flow in everyday life: Toward a theory of emergent motivation. In J. E. Jacobs (Ed.),Developmental perspectives on motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 40, 57–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987).Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London, UK:Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullarton, S. (1996, November).Transition to secondary school: A help or hindrance to engagement in mathematics? Paper presented at the joint conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education and the Educational Research Association of Singapore, Singapore.

  • Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1984).Looking in classrooms (3rd ed.). New York, NY:Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooding, A., & Stacey, K. (1991, June). Aspects of knowledge development through interaction in small groups.Procedings of the fifth conference on the Theory of Mathematics Education, Paderno, Italy.

  • Hart, L. E. (1989). Classroom processes, sex of student, and confidence in learning mathematics.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20 (3), 242–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helme, S. (1994).Mathematics embedded in context: The role of context in task perceptions, performance and the solution methods of adult women students. Unpublished Master of Education Thesis, Australian Catholic University.

  • Holton, D., & Thomas, G. (2001). Mathematical interactions and their influence on learning. In D.J. Clarke (Ed.),Perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms (pp. 75–104). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leder, G. c., & Forgasz, H. J. (1992).Inside the mathematics classroom. Paper presented at the joint conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education and the New Zealand Association for Research in Education, 1992.

  • Lerman, S. (2001). Accounting for accounts of learning mathematics: Reading the ZPD in videos and transcripts. In D.J. Clarke (Ed.),perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms (pp. 53–74). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C. & Hoyle, R. (1988). Students’ goal orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities.Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen, S. B. (1995). Effects of a visible author in statistical texts.Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuthall, G., & Alton-Lee, A. (1995). Assessing classroom learning: How students use their knowledge and experience to answer classroom achievement test questions in science and social studies.American Educational Research Journal, 32, 185–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, P. L., & Fennema, E. (1985). Effective teaching, student engagement in classroom activities, and sex-related differences in learning mathematics.American Educational research Journal, 22, 309–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, P. L., & Swing, S. R. (1982). Beyond time on task: Students’ reports of their thought processes during classroom instruction.The Elementary School Journal, 82, 481–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintiich, P.R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In M. C. Maehr & C. Ames (Eds.),Advances in motivation and achievement: Vol. 6: Motivation enhancing environments. Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated. learning components of classroom academic performance.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, R., & Reynolds, F. (2001). The role of gesture in collaborative problem-solving: The case of mathematics. In D. J. Clarke (Ed.),Perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms (pp. 231–254). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behaviour and student engagement across the school year.Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 571–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, E. A., Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1990). What it takes to do well in school and whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control and children’s engagement and achievement in school.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 22–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stipek, D. J. (1996). Motivation and instruction. In D. C. Berliner & R C. Calfee (Eds.),Handbook of educational psychology. New York, NY:Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swing, S. R., Stoiber, K. C. & Peterson, P. L. (1988). Thinking skills versus learning time: Effects of alternative classroom-based interventions on students’ mathematics problem solving.Cognition and Instruction, 5, 123–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups.International Journal of EducationalResearch, 13, 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, G., & Clarke, D.,J. (1997). Mathematical task complexity and task selection. In D. Clarke, P. Clarkson, D. Gronn, M. Horne, L. Lowe, M. Mackinlay, & A. McDonough (Eds.),Mathematics: Imagine the possibilities (Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the Mathematical Association of Victoria, pp. 406–415). Melbourne:MAV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. (1998). Metacognition within mathematics: A new and practical multi-method approach. In C. Kanes, M. Goos, & E. Warren (Eds.),Teaching mathematics in new times (Proceedings of the 21st annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp. 693–700). Gold Coast, QLD:MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview.Educational Psychologist, 25, 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science and Mathematics Education, University of Melbourne, 3052, Parkville, VIC

    Sue Helme & David Clarke

Authors
  1. Sue Helme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Clarke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Helme, S., Clarke, D. Identifying cognitive engagement in the mathematics classroom. Math Ed Res J 13, 133–153 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217103

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217103

Keywords

Search

Navigation