Vol.

24, 2021

A new decade
for social changes

ISSN 2668-7798

[Link]
9 772668 779000
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

Factors and Levels of Student Engagement in a State College:

A Mixed-Methods Study

Antonio Jr. T. Enerio

Northwestern Mindanao State College of Science and Technology, Tangub City,
Philippines

[Link]@[Link]

Abstract. This sequential explanatory mixed-methods study determined the factors and levels of
student engagement among the 493 students in Northwestern Mindanao State College of Science
and Technology, Tangub City, Philippines. The quantitative data gathered using survey
questionnaires revealed the following: the students’ levels of perception on the importance of
competence, autonomy, relatedness, student-teacher transaction, and student-institution
transaction to students’ engagement are very important; the levels of affective engagement,
cognitive engagement, and behavioral engagement are very high, and social engagement is high;
the factors and levels of student engagement have positive correlation; and the student-teacher
transaction is the best predictor of student engagement. Using in-depth interviews of 12
participants picked using criterion purposive sampling, the qualitative data, analyzed using Braun
and Clarke analysis, arrived at nine themes for the importance of the factors to students’
engagement and 15 themes for the students’ engagement in the four dimensions. The factors of
student engagement are important since students are given the freedom to accomplish their
dreams and develop themselves through good relationships with classmates, desirable personal
and professional qualities of the teachers, and the support of the college. The students’
engagement in the four dimensions can be attributed to the goals that they have to achieve, the
support from teachers and the school, their active participation, the guidance from the more
knowledgeable others and the harmonious relationship with peers. It is recommended that the
College invest in various support services to create a pleasant learning environment, devote itself
to faculty training to prepare them for teaching, and implement activities that will enhance
student engagement.

Keywords. student engagement, autonomy, competence, relatedness, student-teacher

transaction, student-institution transaction, mixed-methods study

Introduction
Student engagement is the most significant factor in the learning process. Students are
empowered to attain their goals since they acquire a greater sense of responsibility for their
actions. Their engagement plays a crucial role in achieving academic success. Northwestern
Mindanao State College of Science and Technology (NMSCST), under Republic Act No.
11186, is preparing to become the University of Northwestern Mindanao. One of the key result
areas that needs to be given focus is the quality of teaching and learning, which includes
processes that look at outcomes regarding student achievements and graduates’ performance.
Based on the Commission on Higher Education (2020) data, the average graduation rate for the

99
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

past years from AY 2015-2016 until 2018-2019 is 19.82%. The national passing rate for
licensure examinations across all disciplines from 2014 to 2018 is 38.26%. NMSCST
contributes to these national data, with an average graduation rate of 17.66% and a board exam
passing rate of 36.28%. NMSCST graduation rate and board exam passing rate are below the
average national rates. This could be due to low student engagement levels. This research
determined the factors and levels of student engagement so that the College can help the
students improve their engagement and yield positive outcomes.

Review of Related Literature

According to Zepke (2014), student engagement is a “meta-construct” wherein students,
educators, staff, and institutions collaborate to enrich higher education experiences. Academic
time is necessary but not adequate to achieve the educational outcomes, including academic,
behavioral, and socio-emotional development. Student engagement is the mediating variable
that integrates important factors within student progress, including a student’s personal life,
relationship with peers, and participation in institutional and social endeavors.
Factors are described as the contributing facilitators outside of the target construct that
can influence the target (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012). Deci et al. (1985) distinguished two possible
factors in the motivational model: personal and social. Personal factors are the self-perceptions
or self-system mechanisms of students that lead to lifelong perceptions of various aspects of
oneself, like self-efficacy or the sense of being part and accepted in the school. Social factors,
often known as social contexts, are interpersonal experiences with important social
stakeholders, such as teachers and peers, including characteristics, like being warm, reliable, or
regulating. Zepke et al. (2010) conducted a study of the international engagement literature and
found that various lenses were used to examine engagement influences. This analysis resulted
in a Conceptual Organizer being created. The organizer emphasizes student motivation and
institutional transactions. The concept of motivation is not unitary (Zepke & Leach, 2010). In
their Self-Determination Theory (SDT) of motivation, Deci and Ryan (2002) differentiated
extrinsic and intrinsic motivations. The Conceptual Organizer of Zepke et al. (2010) indicates
that the most engaged students are intrinsically motivated. Competence is the psychological
need to have a significant impact on one’s surroundings. Autonomy is the basic need to be self-
directed and self-determined. Relatedness is the interpersonal aspect, indicating how connected
students feel to others, how caring relationships are, and how much of a community they belong
to (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Institutional transactions include student-teacher interactions and
institutional support. Teachers should be seen as available (Russell & Slater, 2011), ready to
engage with students, and on a one-to-one basis (Case, 2007) and considered to be genuinely
interested in students, available to discuss student progress (Krause & Coates, 2008). The
institution’s culture (Leach & Zepke, 2011) and its first-year experience (Reason et al., 2006)
are critical factors in promoting student engagement.
Based on higher education literature, cognitive, behavioral, affective, and social are
identified as distinct yet interrelated dimensions of student engagement (Bowden et al., 2017).
The cognitive dimension is a set of constant and active mental processes involving the primary
objects of engagement (Vivek et al., 2014). It includes the level of positive focus and concern
provided to tertiary communication, preparation, and coordination of academic activities
(Zepke et al., 2010). The behavioral dimension refers to the collective activities and visible
student performance (Dessart et al., 2015). Behavioral engagement is assessed by the
measurable academic performance of a student, which includes: constructive conduct of the
student; attendance; effort and time to be on task; ability to contribute; active class participation;
curricular and co-curricular activities involvement; and dedication and determination to meet

100
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

difficult tasks (Kahu et al., 2015). The affective dimension is related to students’ mutual and
sustained emotional levels and the degree of passion that students feel towards tertiary
experience (Bowden, 2013). Affective engagement develops through heightened feelings
during on-campus and off-campus activities, illustrated by satisfaction, pride, excitement,
enthusiasm, flexibility, and pleasure (Klem & Connell, 2004). The social dimension considers
the ties and relationships between students and their colleagues, academic staff, administrative
personnel, and other figures (Pekrun & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2012). It creates feelings of
inclusiveness, affiliation, social interaction, and connection with the tertiary institution
(Eldegwy et al., 2018).

Methods
Sequential explanatory mixed-methods research was used in this study. In the
quantitative phase, the participants were identified using proportionate stratified random
sampling. The sample population is 2735, and the sample size is 493. In the qualitative phase,
12 participants were chosen through criterion purposive sampling. The data collection
instrument was a self-report questionnaire to gather and measure the participants’ engagement
levels and their perceptions on the factors that affected their engagement. The qualitative
phase used in-depth interviews with each participant to co-construct the narratives. Pearson
Product Moment Correlation Coefficient and multiple regression analysis were used to
analyze the data in the quantitative phase, while Thematic Analysis was used for the data in
the qualitative phase.

Results and Discussion

Quantitative Phase

Students’ Levels of Perception on the Importance of the Factors to Students’

Engagement
As shown in Table 1, the five identified factors of student engagement: competence,
autonomy, student-institution transaction, student-teacher transaction, and relatedness, are very
important to the students of NMSCST.

Factors Weighted Mean Interpretation

Competence 3.58 Very Important
Autonomy 3.58 Very Important
Student-Institution transaction 3.52 Very Important
Student-Teacher transaction 3.49 Very Important
Relatedness 3.45 Very Important
Table 1: Students’ Levels of Perception on the Importance of the Factors to Students’
Engagement

Competence is very important to the students. This means that aside from establishing
their goals, they knew how to achieve them. To understand the lessons, they approached their
teachers to help them. Meeting the teachers’ expectations was also a motivating factor. Some
subjects are challenging, but they were able to analyze and solve problems correctly by applying
what they have learned from the other subjects. The students tried their best to participate in the
discussion and answered the teacher’s questions using their prior knowledge and ideas from
their classmates’ answers. They were motivated to engage in all activities because they wanted
to learn new skills and abilities.

101
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

Autonomy is very important to the students. Taking responsibility for their learning,
setting clear and achievable goals, looking for learning resources to help them learn, and setting
standards for themselves are very important. This is commendable since the students take
responsibility for their learning. They shared that they looked for resources to understand the
topics, answered questions, searched the internet, and watched video tutorials. They had clear
and achievable goals to learn and graduate. They are motivated to engage in the class to
accomplish this goal. This goal gave them direction and a sense of purpose.
Relatedness is very important to the students. The college has met the students’ need to
belong to the school, to be valued as a person, and accepted by the teachers and students.
Learning experiences are founded on relationships. Students benefited from their strong ties
with the teachers and students. Yusof et al. (2020) confirmed this when he said that in the
context of learning experiences, students need to feel connected to achieve their learning goals,
acquire social skills, and develop positive attitudes. Furthermore, having a good relationship
with their classmates is a very important motivating factor. They loved working with other
students in group activities, played games together, helped each other understand the lessons
by sharing their ideas about the concepts they learned.
Student-teacher transaction is very important to the students as shown in the ratings of
each indicator. Their ratings showed that their teachers have commendable pedagogical skills.
Indeed, as facilitators of learning teachers have to motivate and challenge students to learn by
making the subject interesting, by giving prompt feedback on their performance and most of all
by teaching them how to learn. Furthermore, the students considered the teachers as motivators
in their engagement. They were motivated to attend classes and participate in the discussion.
On the other hand, students were challenged in accomplishing requirements, so they liked
teachers who were flexible with assessment deadlines. Most importantly, they needed someone
who gives advice and words of wisdom. This feedback stresses the importance of building
relationships with students. The teachers’ motherly approach and kindness are definitely
motivating qualities in establishing good relationships with the students.
Student-institution transaction is very important to the students. A college must be able
to meet the personal, social, and physical needs of the students. The College provided them
facilities, resources, and learning materials that facilitated their learning. The students felt that
the College supported them with everything they needed. For them, the College provided them
a pleasant environment equipped with instructional technology. Infrastructures in schools give
students the knowledge and tools they need to succeed academically (Gonzalez, 2013). Aside
from the college support system, the students added another one that significantly helped them
in their college life during the interviews. For them, the most significant support provided by
the College is free education. They were all united in saying that they benefited the most from
the free education because they no longer have to pay for the tuition. They could not study and
pursue college if it is not free. With this support, they were more motivated to engage and
participate in all activities to express their gratefulness.

Levels of Student Engagement

As shown in Table 2, the overall level of engagement of the students in NMSCST is
very high. Among the four dimensions of student engagement, the students have very high
affective engagement, cognitive engagement and behavioral engagement. The students have
high social engagement.

102
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

Weighted
Dimensions of Engagement Interpretation
Mean
Affective Engagement 3.38 Very High
Cognitive Engagement 3.34 Very High
Behavioral Engagement 3.31 Very High
Social Engagement 3.22 High
Overall Level of Engagement 3.31 Very High
Table 2: Students’ Levels of Engagement in the Four Dimensions

The students have very high affective engagement. This is reflected in the students’
perceptions of the college campus as a supportive environment to learning which motivated
them to explore new ideas. As the primary stakeholder of the College, students felt part of the
academic community because all activities initiated in the College were geared towards their
holistic development. Furthermore, the support provided by the College made them feel valued
as a person because they were given the essential things they needed to learn.
The students have very high cognitive engagement. It is worthy to note that the first two
indicators are rated very high by the students. Working and pushing hard to understand difficult
content speak of students who are self-directed. They did things on their own to learn the
lessons. This finding on the students’ self-regulation is supported by Zimmerman (2010) who
stated that one of the significant features of cognitive engagement is that learning is strategic or
self-regulating. When students use metacognition techniques to deal with academic challenges,
they are cognitively engaged.
The students have very high behavioral engagement. The first three indicators: studying
at their own pace, looking for resources, and actively asking for help reflect of strategic learning
strategies and active self-regulation. This finding corroborates the very high cognitive
engagement on working hard to understand difficult and confusing lessons. These practices:
researching, studying, exploring, solving, listening, preparing for class also reflect of good
study habits. Mahatmya et al. (2012) repeated that students who demonstrated behavioral
engagement, such as paying attention in class, completing homework, arriving prepared for
class, and engaging in academic curricular activities, reached higher levels than their less
behaviorally engaged peers.
The level of social engagement of the students is high. They worked with other students
on projects and assignments inside and outside the class. They worked together by helping each
other accomplish the tasks and understand the lessons by sharing each other’s ideas of the
concepts. This reveals a good relationship among the students. They reached out to their
classmates whenever they needed help. They were not just classmates, but they were friends
and even treated each other like brothers and sisters. The students also attended social activities
organized by the College such as acquaintance parties. These activities happen monthly or
annually, so they looked forward to attending these events.

Test of Significant Relationship between the Factors and Levels of Student

Engagement
As shown in Table 3, there is a significant relationship between the factors and levels of
student engagement as indicated by the p-value of .000 which is lower than the 0.05 level of
significance.

103
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

Factors p- Interpretation Pearson Interpretation

value r
Student-teacher Moderate Positive
.000 Significant .566
transaction Correlation
Student-institution Moderate Positive
.000 Significant .535
transaction Correlation
Moderate Positive
Relatedness .000 Significant .498
Correlation
Low Positive
Competence .000 Significant .485
Correlation
Low Positive
Autonomy .000 Significant .432
Correlation
Table 3: Test of Significant Relationship between the Factors and Levels of Student
Engagement

The student-teacher transaction, student-institution transaction, and relatedness factors

have indicated moderate positive correlation, while competence, and autonomy have low
positive correlation. The moderate positive correlation between student-teacher transaction and
student engagement means that the students’ level of engagement increases when the student-
teacher transaction increases. Students are more engaged when they have a good relationship
with the teachers. Students like teachers who give them hands-on activities, give them positive
reinforcement and provide guidance at the side. The students are engaged because of the support
provided by the institution. Aside from providing them with a pleasant and supporting
environment, the school has supported their dreams to get a college degree which is a passport
to social mobility. The students are engaged because relatedness is satisfied. Having a good
relationship with their classmates, treating each other like brothers and sisters indicates that they
value each other. The good relationship with the teachers and staff also satisfied the need for
relatedness. On the other hand, competence and autonomy do not have much influence because
of low correlation, but they can still influence engagement. The students of NMSCST also
considered these factors as influencers of student engagement.

Best Predictor of Student Engagement

Which among the five factors of student engagement: autonomy, competence,
relatedness, student-teacher transaction, and student-institution transaction, is the best predictor
of student engagement? In determining it, multiple regression was used. As shown in Table 4,
the engagement of the students is predicted by these factors: student-teacher transaction and
relatedness with a p-value .000, and student-institution transaction with a p-value of .014, which
are lower than the 0.05 level of significance. It has a regression equation of y = 1.183 + 0.201t
+ 0.131r + 0.113i, where 0.201t is for student-teacher transaction, 0.131r is for relatedness, and
0.113i is for student-institution transaction. This means that for every unit increase of student-
teacher transaction, student engagement also increases by .201; for every unit increase of
relatedness, student engagement increases by .131; and for every unit increase of student-
institution transaction, student engagement level increases by .113.

Factors Beta P-value

Student-Teacher transaction .201 .000
Relatedness .131 .000
Student-Institution transaction .113 .014

104
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

Autonomy .088 .057

Competence .073 .133
Table 4: Best Predictor of Student Engagement

For the students of NMSCST, their engagement is predicted by these three factors, but
the best predictor of their engagement is student-teacher transaction. According to the students,
they listened and participated in the class if they liked the teacher. They also considered
teachers as their mother who is always there for them, helping and motivating them to study,
someone who gives them advice whenever they have academic and personal struggles.
Furthermore, teachers are the primary sources of information. While students can learn through
reading articles and watching videos, learning is better when a teacher discusses the concepts.

Qualitative Phase
Importance of the Factors to Students’ Engagement
Nine themes emerged from the participants’ responses to the importance of the factors
to students’ engagement. The themes are presented in Table 5.

Factors of Student
Themes
Engagement
Competence 1.
Students engaged because they are capable.
2.
Students engaged to satisfy their hunger for knowledge.
3.
Student leaders are engaged because of their position.
Autonomy 4.
Students are more engaged because of their freedom to
accomplish tasks their own way.
5. Students are driven to engage because of their goals.
Relatedness 6. Students’ good relationships with others encouraged
engagement.
Student-teacher transaction 7. Students are more engaged if they have a good
relationship with the teachers.
8. Students are more engaged because of the teachers’
positive qualities
Student-institution 9. Students are more engaged because of the support of the
transaction College.
Table 5: Importance of the Factors to Students’ Engagement

Three themes emerged from the importance of competence to students’ engagement.

The first theme that emerged is, students engaged because they are capable. The students
engaged and participated in the class because they were competent and capable of doing such
things. The students engaged in the class because they were capable of doing the tasks. They
were confident to engage because they had the knowledge to answer questions, the skills to
accomplish the tasks, and the mastery to deliver results. Deci and Ryan (2008) argued that when
people do not feel capable and effective, their motivation plummets, and they suffer ill-being.
Conversely, the experience of mastery leads to feelings of personal satisfaction, vitality,
interest, and well-being. Hence, competence is important to student engagement because it
promotes the pursuit of challenging and deeply satisfying experiences and is a criterion for
psychological growth and well-being. The second theme is, students engaged to satisfy their
hunger for knowledge. The students engaged in different class activities because they wanted
to develop themselves by gaining more knowledge. Students engaged in different activities

105
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

because they wanted to learn, develop themselves and improve their capability. This need to
know more pushed them to engage in different learning activities. Deci and Ryan (2002)
supported this when they said that human beings have an inherent tendency to develop
themselves. This means that they actively strive to become effective to master their
environments, and to hone their capacities to reach their innate potential. The third theme is,
student leaders are engaged because of their position. The students’ leadership position had
driven them to engage in different college activities. Among the 12 participants, ten are student
leaders, and they all said that being a student leader engaged them in different college activities
because they are at the forefront of these activities. They are part of the implementing body and
the link between the students and the administration. It is noteworthy that the participants said
that they would still engage even if they were not leaders.
Two themes emerged from the importance of autonomy to students’ engagement. The
fourth theme is, students are more engaged because of their freedom to accomplish tasks
their own way. The students appreciated the fact that they were given the autonomy to do
things their way. Students are more engaged in the class if they are given the freedom to do
things their way. Deci and Ryan (2002) said that human beings wanted to make their own
decisions and develop their ideas. In other words, they wanted to feel autonomous. When people
felt autonomous, they perceived their needs, motivations, preferences, and behaviors to be
aligned and congruent with one another. In other words, they felt like the directors of their own
lives and live according to their interests and values. The fifth theme is, students are driven to
engage because of their goals. Students were driven to engage in activities because they
wanted to achieve their goals. When students have clear and achievable goals, they do whatever
it takes to achieve that goal. Their goal served as their drive, inspiration, guide, and source of
strength. Since they are driven to achieve that goal, they do things because they want to do it
rather than they must do it. When they accomplish something they love or consider relevant and
worthwhile, they feel autonomous. Deci and Ryan (2002) added that human beings have the
innate need to pursue their own goals. This desire to feel self-directed and self-endorsed is
innate. All individuals will naturally strive to fulfil this need as long as their environment
facilitates and supports this striving.
One theme emerged from the importance of relatedness to students’ engagement. The
sixth theme is, students’ good relationships with others encouraged engagement. Having a
good relationship with classmates fostered engagement. The students were encouraged to
participate in the class because of the influence of their classmates. According to the
participants, having a good relationship with their classmates affected their engagement.
Students are engaged in the class if they have a good relationship with their classmates. Their
classmates influenced some students to participate in the class. At the same time, others like to
work on group tasks if they like their group mates. If there is cooperation in the group, tasks are
easily accomplished because they are working together to finish them. They help each other
when someone does not understand something in the lesson. Friends feel the need to listen to
others’ struggles, be it academic, personal, or family problems.
Two themes emerged from the importance of student-teacher transaction to students’
engagement. The seventh theme is, students are more engaged if they have a good
relationship with the teachers. Having a good relationship with teachers promoted
engagement. Students engaged in class activities if they have a good relationship with the
teachers. The students participated in the class if they can interact with their teachers. The
students’ interest in the subject is also affected by their relationship with the teachers. Some
students hate the subject if they do not like the teacher because the teacher is the personification
of the subject. The eighth theme is, students are more engaged because of the teachers’

106
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

positive qualities. Being trusted by teachers developed self-confidence. Students were more
engaged when their teachers trusted them. The students are more engaged because of the
teachers’ positive qualities like having a sense of humor and believing in the student’s capacity.
This was confirmed by Noddings (1988) when he said that warmth, empathy, and time with the
students are three key aspects for creating relationships that contribute to emotional engagement
with students.
One theme emerged from the student-institution transaction. The ninth theme is,
students are more engaged because of the support of the College. Having free education
stimulated engagement. Students were engaged because they were provided with their needs
and did not have to think of payment for the tuition. The students are united in saying that the
number one support they got from the College is free education. Having free education
stimulated engagement. It is a great help to the students because they no longer have to pay the
tuition fee. Most of the students belong to families who are classified between the poor to middle
class. Aside from the free tuition, scholarships are offered to the students like varsity
scholarship, performing arts scholarship, and others. Because of this support, the students were
more engaged.

Students’ Engagement in the Four Dimensions

There were fifteen themes that emerged from the participants’ responses to the
students' engagement in the four dimensions. The themes are presented in Table 6.

Dimensions of
Themes
Engagement
Affective 1. Leading and serving others enhanced positive feelings.
Engagement 2. Support from College and teachers motivated engagement.
3. Students acquired desirable feelings by participating in college
activities.
4. Negative experiences resulted to discouragement.
Cognitive 5. Students learned from teachers.
Engagement 6. Students learned from classmates.
7. Students learned from online resources.
8. Students’ learning is challenged during the pandemic.
Behavioral 9. Students participated actively in the class to learn.
Engagement 10. Students managed themselves to accomplish tasks.
11. Students prepared only for assessments.
12. Students’ lack of preparation hindered participation.
Social Engagement 13. Students helped each other accomplish tasks.
14. Students participated in social activities to experience college life.
15. Students participated in college activities to showcase their talents
and skills.
Table 6: Students’ Engagement in the Four Dimensions
Four themes emerged from the students’ affective engagement. The first theme is,
leading and serving others enhanced positive feelings. This positive feeling was due to their
student leadership which elicited a sense of belongingness in the College. For these student
leaders, their sense of belongingness was heightened because the organization members made
them feel part of a family by asking for their answers to questions and their advice. The activities
were tiring, but they were happy to serve other students, felt good when trusted, and did not feel
alone when other students greeted them wherever in campus. This feeling is not about being

107
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

famous, but it is about being able to help others. The second theme is, support from College
and teachers motivated engagement. The support from the College greatly motivated them.
The students were extremely grateful because the College supported them with their financial
needs, specifically free education. Studies indicated that institutions need to provide for the
emotional needs of their students (Walsh et al., 2009). If students perceived that the school
supported them, it could have a powerful influence on their desire to complete college. Schools
that make a deliberate effort to support students through their policies may help increase
graduations (Thomas, 2014). The third theme is, students acquired desirable feelings by
participating in college activities. They were happy and proud to be students because of the
great experience in the College. Participating in the activities generated positive emotions. They
shared that they participated in activities designed for them and were encouraged because they
were satisfied by these activities. Representing the College boosted students’ confidence.
Students were honored to represent the College in competitions. Not all students were given a
chance to represent the College in local, regional, and national competitions. Students’ skills
were tapped, which boosted their confidence. The College has been active in joining sports and
socio-cultural competitions. Students were proud to represent the College. Whether they won
or lost, the pride of representing the College was already engraved in each student. Wherever
they went, they brought the name of the College, so they gave their best. The fourth theme is,
negative experiences resulted to discouragement. Personal issues affected engagement. The
limited resources for laboratory work caused discouragement. Personal and family problems
affected student engagement. Although they tried their best to focus and engage in the class,
they cannot help but be affected by the problems they left at home. They wanted to give their
best and do everything, but their problems hindered them from doing their tasks. Although
there was only one participant who mentioned this in the interviews, it is very possible that
other students have this problem too.
Five themes emerged from the students’ cognitive engagement. The fifth theme is,
students learned from teachers. Knowledgeable teachers inspire learning. Teachers who
utilized different strategies inspired engagement. Students considered teachers as the primary
source of learning. The teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical skills played an essential
role in the students’ learning. They learned better when teachers utilized different teaching
strategies, such as giving them hands-on activities. They were more engaged when they were
given challenging activities. Finally, students liked teachers who are approachable and
answered their questions whenever they were confused. The sixth theme is, students learned
from classmates. Help from classmates facilitated understanding. They asked classmates to
explain difficult concepts and topics to solve problems and to guide them in accomplishing
tasks. Another source of learning is engaging with their classmates. When students found it hard
to understand topics independently, while others did not want to bother the teachers with
questions, so they asked classmates who understood the lesson to explain them. Some students
were not good at problem-solving; instead of trying hard to understand the process, they asked
for help from their classmates in solving the problems. The seventh theme is, students learned
from online resources. Searching the internet enriched understanding of the lessons. The
students searched online resources to understand the lessons. While others read online articles
to add more knowledge. Another cognitive engagement is, watching online video tutorials.
They watched online video tutorials to understand the topics and finish the tasks. The internet
is another source of learning. Students searched the internet to find answers, which vary from
articles to video tutorials. When teachers and classmates were not available, their last option
was the internet. Searching the internet enriched their understanding of the lessons. The eighth
theme is, students’ learning is challenged during the pandemic. Learning in the pandemic is

108
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

challenging. The students mentioned that learning during the pandemic is different because
teachers cannot see who participated in the discussion. They added that participating in online
classes is challenging because they were unable to express themselves, and there was no student
reaction and engagement. They also mentioned that attending online classes was limited due to
insufficient gadget load. According to Pokhrel and Chhetri (2021), lockdown and social
distancing measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic have led to closures of schools, training
institutes and higher education facilities in most countries. There is a paradigm shift in the way
educators deliver quality education, through various online platforms.
Four themes emerged from the students’ behavioral engagement. The ninth theme is,
students participated actively in the class to learn. This is that that emerged from the
students’ engagement in the four dimensions. Participating in class activities led to learning.
They attended classes all the time, volunteered to answer questions and performed tasks in the
class. Furthermore, they also participated in oral recitations by sharing their ideas on familiar
questions. Learning takes most effectively through the efforts and the perseverance to learn. Liu
(2001) stated that students must engage actively by playing the roles of information seekers.
The acts of asking questions, giving opinions, or simply answering questions posed by the
instructor or fellow students are examples of the active type of classroom participation. The
tenth theme is, students managed themselves to accomplish tasks. Managing time helped
accomplish requirements. They managed their time by working on activities one at a time so
that they can accomplish and submit requirements on time. Some students tried their best to
stop procrastination. They were still able to submit the requirements on time, but they had to be
absent on some subjects to work on it. Time management is essential in accomplishing tasks.
This is a good indicator of good behavioral engagement since this reflects one’s determination
and persistence to pass requirements on time. The eleventh theme is, students prepared only
for assessments. The students shared that they only studied if there are quizzes and exams.
These experiences reflect poor study habits which indicate poor behavioral engagement.
However, according to the participants, even though they did not study on a daily basis, they
spent hours reading and reviewing their lessons if there were announced quizzes and major
examinations. They still got high scores in summative assessments because they prepared for
them. The twelfth theme is, students’ lack of preparation hindered participation. Coming
to class without preparation hindered participation. The students came to class without
preparation, as a result they were not able to participate in the discussion because they were not
able to read about the lesson for that day.
Three themes emerged from the students’ social engagement. The thirteenth theme is,
students helped each other accomplish tasks. Helping each other accomplishes tasks lighter.
The students helped their classmates to understand the lessons and worked together to
accomplish tasks. Others were motivated to participate in the class because of the influence of
the classmates. Helping classmates to understand the process of arriving at correct answers
rather than giving answers right away is very commendable. This social engagement is
beneficial since students develop increasingly important skills in the professional world (Caruso
& Woolley, 2008). The fourteenth theme is, students participated in social activities to
experience college life. The students participated in the activities because they wanted to
experience everything in the College. Some of them did not experience these activities in
previous schools, while others could use this experience for future positions. Tenhouse (2021)
stressed the importance of extracurricular activities in college campuses. These activities exist
to complement the university’s academic curriculum and to augment the student’s educational
experience. The fifteenth theme is, students participated in college activities to showcase
their talents and skills. The students participated in different college activities because they

109
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

wanted to develop their talents and skills. The students performed in socio-cultural events
because they wanted to express their creative side. They played in different sporting events
because they had the skills for specific sports. The students participated in different college
activities because they wanted to entertain others by sharing their talents and skills.
The following findings from the qualitative phase expanded the data gathered from the
quantitative phase. First, being a student leader heightened their sense of belongingness to the
College. They were happy to serve other students because they felt good to be trusted. Second,
negative experiences resulted to discouragement. Personal and family problems affected student
engagement. Although they tried their best to focus and engage in the class, they cannot help
but be affected by the problems they left at home. Another negative experience is the lack of
chemicals in the laboratories. Instead of performing experiments, they watched videos about
them. Third, students’ learning in the pandemic is challenging. They lost the eagerness to
participate during the discussion because they cannot fully express themselves during online
classes, and they cannot see their classmates’ reactions. Lastly, the students come to class
without any preparation. As a result, they cannot participate during the discussion. They only
study whenever there are quizzes and exams. These experiences reflect poor study habits which
indicate poor behavioral engagement.

Conclusion
Student engagement is influenced by students’ goals in life, the support and guidance
from the significant others, the harmonious relationships in school and most of all their active
participation. The students of NMSCST have a very high engagement level. The College must
have provided the students a conducive learning environment to attain this level of engagement.
The students’ transaction with teachers wields a tremendous effect on student engagement.
Hence, teachers who are given the privilege and opportunity to touch the lives of students should
possess both desirable personal and professional qualities. Teachers who are open,
approachable, friendly, motherly, equipped with content and pedagogical expertise can
definitely ensure student engagement that ultimately results to effective learning.

References
[1] Bowden, J. (2013). What’s in a Relationship. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics, 25(3), 428–451.
[2] Caruso, H., & Woolley, A. (2008). Harnessing the power of emergent interdependence
to promote diverse team collaboration. Diversity and Groups, 11, 245-266.
[3] Case, J. (2007). Alienation and Engagement: Exploring Students’ Experiences of
Studying Engineering. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(1), 119–133.
[Link]
[4] Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). A Motivational Analysis of Self
Determination and Self-Regulation in the Classroom. In Ames, C. & Ames, R. (Eds.),
Research on Motivation in Education: Vol. 2: The Classroom Milieu, 13-52. Academic.
[5] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human
Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
[Link]
[6] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002). The Handbook of Self-Determination
Research. University of Rochester Press.
[7] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macro theory of human
motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne,
49(3), 182–185. [Link]

110
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

[8] Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., & Morgan-Thomas, A. (2015). Consumer Engagement in
Online Brand Communities: A Social Media Perspective. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 24, 28-42. [Link]
[9] Eldegwy, A., Elsharnouby, T., & Kortam, W. (2018). How Sociable is your University
Brand? An Empirical Investigation of University Social Augmenters’ Brand Equity.
International Journal of Educational Management, 32. [Link]
12-2017-0346
[10] Gonzalez, J. (2013). Understanding the role of social capital and school structure on
Latino academic success. LUX: A Journal of Transdisciplinary Writing and Research
from Claremont Graduate University, 2.
[11] Kahu, E. (2013). Framing Student Engagement in Higher Education. Studies in Higher
Education, 38(5),758-773. [Link]
[12] Kahu, E., Stephens, C., Leach, L., & Zepke, N. (2015). Linking Academic Emotions
and Student Engagement: Mature-Aged Distance Students’ Transition to University.
Journal of Further and Higher Education, 39(4), 481-497.
[Link]
[13] Klem, A., & Connell, J. (2004). Relationships Matter: Linking Teacher Support to
Student Engagement and Achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262-273.
[Link]
[14] Krause, K. L., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ Engagement in First-year University.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493-505.
[Link]
[15] Leach, L., & Zepke, N. (2011). Engaging Students in Learning: A Review of a
Conceptual Organizer. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(2),193-
204. [Link]
[16] Liu, J. (2001). Asian students classroom communication patterns in U.S. universities:
an emic perspective Westport, CT. U.S.A: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
[17] Mahatmya, D., Lohman, B., Matjasko, J., & Farb, A. (2012). Engagement Across
Developmental Periods. In Christenson, S.L. et al. (eds.), Handbook of Research on
Student Engagement, 45-63. Springer Science & Business Media.
[Link] 4614-2018-7_37.
[18] Noddings, N. (1998). An ethic of caring and its implications for instructional
arrangements. American Journal of Education, 96(2), 215-230.
[Link]
[19] Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012). Academic Emotions and Student
Engagement. In Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L. & Wylie, C. (Eds.),
Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, 259–282. Springer
Science & Business Media. [Link]
[20] Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A Literature Review on Impact of COVID-19
Pandemic on Teaching and Learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 133-
141. [Link]
[21] Reason, R., Terenzini, P., & Domingo, R. (2006). First Things First: Developing
Academic Competence in the First Year of College. Research in Higher Education,
47(2), 149–175. [Link]
[22] Russell, B., & Slater, G. (2011). Factors that Encourage Student Engagement: Insights
from a case study of ‘first time’ students in a New Zealand University. Journal of
University Teaching and Learning Practice, 8(1),1-15.
[Link]

111
 Technium Social Sciences Journal
Vol. 24, 99-112, October, 2021
ISSN: 2668-7798
[Link]

[23] Skinner, E., & Pitzer, J. (2012). Developmental Dynamics of Student Engagement,
Coping, and Everyday Resilience. In Christenson, S.L. et al. (eds.), Handbook of
Research on Student Engagement, 21-44. Springer Science & Business Media.
[Link]
[24] Tenhouse, A. (2021). College Extracurricular Activities - Impact on Students, Types
of Extracurricular Activities. Education Encyclopedia - [Link].
[Link]
[Link]
[25] Thomas, D. (2014). Factors that influence college completion intention of
undergraduate students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(2), 225-235.
[26] Vivek, S. D., Beatty, S. E., Dalela, V., & Morgan, R. M. (2014). A Generalized
Multidimensional Scale for Measuring Customer Engagement. The Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 22(4), 401-420.
[Link]
[27] Walsh, C., Larsen, C., & Parry, D. (2009). Academic tutors at the frontline of student
support in a cohort of students succeeding in higher education. Educational Studies,
35(4), 405-424.
[28] Yusof, N., Awang-Hashim, R., Kaur, A., Malek, M.A., Shanmugam, S. K., Manaf,
N.A., Yee, A. S., & Zubairi, A.M. (2020). The Role of Relatedness in Student Learning
Experiences. Asian Journal of University Education 16(2).
[Link]
[29] Zepke, N., Leach, L., & Butler, P. (2010). Student Engagement: What is it and what
Influences it? Wellington, Teaching and Learning Research Initiative.
[Link]
[30] Zepke, N. (2014). Student Engagement Research in Higher Education: Questioning an
Academic Orthodoxy. Teaching in Higher Education Volume, 19(5), 697-708.
[Link]
[31] Zimmerman, B. (2010). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An
overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2

112