Facilitators, Indicators and Consequences of Engagement in Learning Mathematics in the Written Memories of Preservice Primary School Teachers
Abstract
The present paper explores engagement in mathematics learning in order to identify factors that facilitate engagement. Given their future teaching responsibilities, the target group was preservice primary school teachers. Fifty-eight Hungarian preservice primary school teachers reported their favourite experience related to learning mathematics from school life before university. A content analysis of the written recollections was conducted, focusing on facilitators (mathematics, environment, self, peers, teacher), indicators (behavioural, emotional and cognitive) and consequences (academic success) of engagement. The method proved to be valid based on a satisfactory relatedness between two signs of engagement: the occurrence of different types of indicators in memories and the length of memories counted in words. The students recalled self-related facilitators (such as self-experience and perceived competence) and teacherrelated facilitators (such as control) with a high frequency of 31% and 43%, respectively, while mathematics-related facilitators appeared with a lower frequency of 13%. Academic performance was substantially associated with cognitive engagement co-occurring with facilitation from teachers, self and peers. Teacher facilitation was associated with all three types of engagement indicators. The findings suggest that having supportive teachers can enhance engagement even among students who show limited interest in mathematics. The study provides insights into preservice primary school teachers’ engagement in mathematics, potentially informing and enhancing teacher education programmes.
Downloads
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-019-09444-1
Bohanek, J. G., Fivush, R., & Walker, E. (2005). Memories of positive and negative emotional events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(1), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1064
Butler, A. S. (2021). The impact of external contextual factors on teaching candidates. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 11(3), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1072
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X019005002
Di Martino, P., & Zan, R. (2010). “Me and maths”: Towards a definition of attitude grounded on students’ narratives. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-009-9134-z
Durksen, T. L., Way, J., Bobis, J., Anderson, J., Skilling, K., & Martin, A. J. (2017). Motivation and engagement in mathematics: A qualitative framework for teacher-student interactions. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29(2), 163–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0199-1
Eshel, Y., & Kohavi, R. (2003). Perceived classroom control, self-regulated learning strategies, and academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 23(3), 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341032000060093
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763–782). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_37
Guo, W., Lau, K. L., & Wei, J. (2019). Teacher feedback and students’ self-regulated learning in mathematics: A comparison between a high-achieving and a low-achieving secondary schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 63, 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.STUEDUC.2019.07.001
Hallifax, S., Lavoué, E., & Serna, A. (2020). To tailor or not to tailor gamification? An analysis of the impact of tailored game elements on learners’ behaviours and motivation. In I. Bittencourt, M. Cukurova, K. Muldner, R. Luckin, & E. Millán (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education (Vol. 12163, pp. 216–227). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_18
Hannula, M. S., Di Martino, P., Pantziara, M., Zhang, Q., Morselli, F., Heyd-Metzuyanim, E., Lutovac, S., Kaasila, R., Middleton, J. A., Jansen, A., & Goldin, G. A. (2016). Attitudes, beliefs, motivation and identity in mathematics education. Springer International Publishing.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32811-9
Hauk, S. (2005). Mathematical autobiography among college learners in the United States. Adults Learning Mathematics, 1(1), 36–56.
Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664
Heikkilä, V., Uusiautti, S., & Määttä, K. (2012). Teacher students’ school memories as a part of the development of their professional identity. Journal of Studies in Education, 2(2), 215–229. https://doi.org/10.5296/jse.v2i2.1580
Kaasila, R. (2007). Using narrative inquiry for investigating the becoming of a mathematics teacher. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education, 39(3), 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-007-0023-6
Kalin, J., Peklaj, C., Pečjak, S., Levpušček, M. P., & Zuljan, M. V. (2017). Elementary and secondary school students’ perceptions of teachers’ classroom management competencies. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 7(4), 37–62. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.363
Kong, Q.-P., Wong, N.-Y., & Lam, C.-C. (2003). Student engagement in mathematics: Development of instrument and validation of construct. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217366
Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032583
Liu, R.-D., Zhen, R., Ding, Y., Liu, Y., Wang, J., Jiang, R., & Xu, L. (2018). Teacher support and math engagement: Roles of academic self-efficacy and positive emotions. Educational Psychology, 38(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.1359238
Lutovac, S., & Kaasila, R. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ future-oriented mathematical identity work. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(1), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9500-8
Lutovac, S., & Kaasila, R. (2018a). An elementary teacher’s narrative identity work at two points in time two decades apart. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 98(3), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9816-5
Lutovac, S., & Kaasila, R. (2018b). Future directions in research on mathematics-related teacher identity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(4), 759–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9796-4
Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. W. (2006). Academic resilience and its psychological and educational correlates: A construct validity approach. Psychology in the Schools, 43(3), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20149
Martins, J., Cunha, J., Lopes, S., Moreira, T., & Rosário, P. (2022). School engagement in elementary school: A systematic review of 35 years of research. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 793–849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09642-5
Muir, T., Douglas, T., & Trimble, A. (2020). Facilitation strategies for enhancing the learning and engagement of online students. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.3.8
Muir, T., Wang, I., Trimble, A., Mainsbridge, C., & Douglas, T. (2022). Using interactive online pedagogical approaches to promote student engagement. Education Sciences, 12(6), Article 415. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060415
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/international-results/
Panero, M., Castelli, L., Di Martino, P., & Sbaragli, S. (2023). Preservice primary school teachers’ attitudes towards mathematics: A longitudinal study. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 55(2), 447–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01455-2
Patkin, D., & Greenstein, Y. (2020). Mathematics anxiety and mathematics teaching anxiety of inservice and pre-service primary school teachers. Teacher Development, 24(4), 502–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2020.1785541
Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.83
Pehkonen, E. (1995). Pupils’ view of mathematics: Initial report for an international comparison project. Department of Teacher Education, University of Helsinki. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED419712
Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–19). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_1
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Baroody, A. E., Larsen, R. A. A., Curby, T. W., & Abry, T. (2015). To what extent do teacher-student interaction quality and student gender contribute to fifth graders’ engagement in mathematics learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 170–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037252
Roche, A., Gervasoni, A., & Kalogeropoulos, P. (2023). Factors that promote interest and engagement in learning mathematics for low-achieving primary students across three learning settings. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 35(3), 525–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00402-w
Schaefer, A., & Philippot, P. (2005). Selective effects of emotion on the phenomenal characteristics of autobiographical memories. Memory, 13(2), 148–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210344000648
Simons-Morton, B., & Chen, R. (2009). Peer and parent influences on school engagement among early adolescents. Youth & Society, 41(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X09334861
Skinner, E. A. (2016). Engagement and disaffection as central to processes of motivational resilience and development. In K. R. Wentzel, & D. B. Miele (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (2nd ed., pp. 145–168). Routledge
Skinner, E. A., & Raine, K. E. (2022). Unlocking the positive synergy between engagement and motivation. In A. L. Reschly, & S. L. Christenson (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (2nd ed., pp. 25–56). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07853-8_2
von Davier, M., Kennedy, A., Reynolds, K., Fishbein, B., Khorramdel, L., Aldrich, C., Bookbinder, A., Bezirhan, U., & Yin, L. (2024). TIMSS 2023 international results in mathematics and science. Retrieved July 2, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.6017/lse.tpisc.timss.rs6460
Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.002
Wang, M.-T., Fredricks, J. A., Ye, F., Hofkens, T. L., & Linn, J. S. (2016). The math and science engagement scales: Scale development, validation, and psychometric properties. Learning and Instruction, 43, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2016.01.008
Wang, T.-H., & Kao, C.-H. (2022). Investigating factors affecting student academic achievement in mathematics and science: Cognitive style, self-regulated learning and working memory. Instructional Science, 50(5), 789–806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09594-5
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
