The effect of autonomy training on student engagement in junior high school students

Indah Nova Susanti, Yuspendi Yuspendi, Maria Yuni Megarini



The Purpose of this study was determine the effect of Autonomy training on student of “X” junior high school in Bandung. The Sample of this study was 20 students who were classified as having low student engagement degrees were choosen used purposive sampling method. The Student Engagement instrument (SEI) adapted from theory J. Appleton, S. Christenson, D. Kim, dan A. Reschly (2017)is self-repot measure of cognitive and affective. Criterion Validity of this Instrument is 0.302- 0.877 and reliability is 0.747. Behavioral Engagement instrument adapted from theory J. Appleton, S. Christenson, D. Kim, dan A. Reschly (2017), with criterion validity is 0.317- 0.605 only for this research. The result showed there was an increase in the level of student engagement before and after training, statistical test show Asymp Sig <0.05 (N=-3.923) indicates the Hi is accepted, there is a difference in student engagement through autonomy training on student. The suggestion of this research is that student are expected to able to apply this training activity to daily life such as the method of making plans, goal and effort before the beginning of the school semester, So that they can be regular to make targets by themeselves and achieve them.

Full Text:



Appleton. J. et al. (2017). Student Engagement Instrument (SEI). Retrieved From

Bempechat, J., & Shernoff, D. J. (2012). Parental influences on achievement motivation and student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement New York, NY, US: Springer Science + Business Media. 315-342.

Bloom, Benjamin S., etc. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives : The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I Cognitive Domain. New York : Longmans, Green and Co.

Christenson L Sandra., Reschly L Amy., Wylie Cathy. 2012. Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. Spinger New York.

Connell, James P, and Wellborn James G. (1990). Competence, Autonomy, and Relatedness: A Motivational Analysis of Self-system Processes: Richester, NY: University of Rochester.

Deci, Edward L & Maarten Vansteenkiste. (2004). Self Determination Theory and Basic Need Satisfaction: Understanding Human Development in Positive Psychology. Ricerche di Psicologia, Vol 27, No. 1.

Deci. E. L & Ryan R.M. (2000). The What and Why of Goal Pursuit: Human Needs and the Self -Determination of Behavior. U.S: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. B., & Paris, A. H. (2003). School Engagement. Child Trend.

Fredricks, J., McColskey, W., Meli, J., Mordica, J., Montrosse, B., & Mooney, K. (2011). Measuring student engagement in upper elementary through high school: A description of 21 instruments. Issues and Answers Report, 098, 26–27. Retrieved from

Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., Paris, A.H., (2004). School Engagement : Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidance. Review of Educational Research. Spring 2004, Vol. 74, No. 1, pp. 59-109.

Friedenberg, L. 1995. Psychological Testing: Design, Analysis, and Use. USA: Allyn & Bacon

Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of Relatedness as a Factor in Children’s Academic Engagement and Performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148-162.

Goodenow, C. and Grady, K. E. (1993). The relationship of school belonging and friends= values to academic motivation among adolescent students. Journal of Experimental Education 62(1): 60–71.

Graziano, Anthony M. & Michael L. Raulin. (2000). Research Methods, A Process of Inquiry. Neidham Height : A Pearson Education Company.

Grolnick, W. S., Benjet, C., Kurowski, C. O., Apostoleris, N. H. (1997). Predictors of Parental Involvement in Children’s Schooling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 (3), 538-548

Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A Measure of College Student Engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98, 3, 184-191

Jenkins, P. H. (1995). School delinquency and school commitment. Sociology of Education 68 (July): 221–39

Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Evaluating Training Program. San Fransisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Kolodziej S., (2010). The Role of Achievement Motivation in Educational Aspirations and Performance. General and Professional Education.

Kusmiran, Eny. (2011). Reproduksi Remaja dan Wanita.Jakarta:Salemba Medika.

Lam, S., B. Wong, H. Yang, and M. Liu. (2012). “Understanding Student Engagement with a Conceptual Model.” In Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, edited by S. Christenson, A. Reschly, and C. Wylie, Heidelberg: Springer. 403–420.

LaNasa, S. M., Cabrera, A. F., & Transgurd, H. (2009). The Construct Validity of Student Engagement: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis Approach. Res High Educ, 50, 315-332.

Lovelace. D.M. (2014). Concurrent and Predictive Validity of Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. Vol.32. Page 509-520

Macklem. L. Gayle. (2015). Boredom in the Classroom : Addressing Student Motivation Self-Regulation, and Engagement in Learning. Springer.

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 153–184. Retrieved From:

Moffit, T. E., Caspi, A. and Dickson, N. (1996). Childhood onset versus adolescent onset antisocial conduct problems in males: Natural history from ages 3 to 18 years.Development and Psychopathology 3: 399–424.

OECD. (2015). PISA 2015 Result : What Students Know and Can Do. Student performance in reading. matemathics and science. Paris: OECD-

Papalia, D. E., Old, S. W., Feldman, & R. D. (2001). Perkembangan Manusia. Jakarta: Salemba Humanika

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 (pp. 259-292). New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar, Crossref

Pintrich, Paul R & Schunk, Dale H. (2002). Motivation in Education : Theory, Research and Applications-2nd. Upper Saddle River. New Jersey : Merril Prentice Hall

Prayitno, Dasar Teori dan Praksis Pendidikan, Jakarta: Grasindo, (2009)

Reeve, J., & Tseng, M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of student engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology ed 36, page 257–267.

Reeve, Jhonmarshall. (2005)., How Teacher Can Promote Students’ Autonomy During Intsruction : Lesson from a Decade of Research. Department of Psychological & Quantitative Foundations University Of Lowa. Lowa Educational Research and Evaluation Association 2005 Annual Conference.

Reeve, Jhonmarshall., (2012). A Self Determination Theory Perspective on Student Engagement., Handbook of research on A Student Engagement. Spinger Science-Business Media., LLC 2012

Reeve, Jhonmarshall., Jang, Hyungshim., Carrell Dan., Jeon Soohyun., Barch Jon. (2004)., Enhancing Student’ Engagement by Increasing Teachers’ Autonomy Support. Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 28., No. 2., June 2004

Reeve, Johnmarshall & Jang, Hyungshim. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students’ autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 98, No. 1. 209 – 218.

Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, vol 104, page 700-712.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). An overview of Self-determination Theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press. 3-33.

Ryan, R.M., Stiller, J.D. and Lynch, J.H. (1994) Representations of Relationships to Teachers, Parents, and Friends as Predictors of Academic Motivation and Self-Esteem. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 226-249.

Saeed, Sitwat dan David Zyngier. (2012). “How Motivation Influences Student Engagement: A Qualitative Case Study”. Journal of Education and Learning. 1 (2). Diakses pada 29 Januari 2016 (

Santock, John W. (2013). Adolescence. Mc Graw Hill Education.

Santrock, John W. (2011). Perkembangan Anak Edisi 7 Jilid 2. (Terjemahan: Sarah Genis B) Jakarta: Erlangga.

Schlechty, P.C., (2001). Inventing Better Schools: an action plan for educational reform. John Wiley and Sons. [Online]. Tersedia:

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581

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 achievement in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 22-32.

Trowler, Vicki. (2010). Student engagement literature review. Lancaster University: Departmen of Educational Research

Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No. 20 Tahun (2003) Tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional.

Voelkl, K. E. (1996). Measuring students identification with school. Educational and Psychological Measurement 56(5): 760–70

Vygotsky,L.S. (1978). Mind of society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wang, Ming-Te & Eccles, Jacquelynne (2013). School Context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement : a Longitudinal Study of School Engagement using a Multidimentional Perspective. ELSEVIER. Learning and Instruction 28 (2013) 12-23

Weinstein N. et al., (2012). The Index of autonomous functioning : Development od a scale of human autonomy. ELSEVIER. Journal od Research in Personality.

Werner, E. E. and Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca NY: Cornell Uni- versity Press.

Willms. J.D., (2003)., Student Engagement at School : A sense of belonging and Participation., Result From PISA 2000

Wood D.R. (2015). The impact of Students’ Perceived Relatedness and Competence upon their Motivated Engagement with Learning Activities : A self Determination Theory Perspective.

Article Metrics

Abstract view(s): 56 time(s)
PDF: 32 time(s)


  • There are currently no refbacks.