About the Measure

Domains Meta-cognition, Motivation, goal orientation and perseverance
Key stages Key Stage 2, Key Stage 3, Key Stage 4, Key Stage 5
Subscales Teacher–student relationships; Control and relevance of school work; Peer support for learning; Future aspirations and goals; Family support for learning
Description This instrument assesses pupils' cognitive and affective enegagment. The TSR, PSL and FSL subscales relate to affective engagement while CRSW and FG are linked to cognitive engagement.
Example Overall, adults at my school treat students fairly
Link http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440506000379

Implementation details

No. of items 33
Format Likert
Respondent Self
Scoring Standardised
Time 0
Age 8-18
Cost single purchase Free - Available
Cost per child Free - Available

Psychometric details

UK norms No
Cronbach's α .76-.88
Test retest Not reported
Inter-rater reliability Not reported
EFA 6-factor solutio
CFA Chi-square(373)= 1603
p< .001
CFI= .96
RMSEA= .04
Criterion validity Not reported
Construct validity r= [.01,.25] with Grade Point Average; r= [-.29,.17] with Northwest
Achievement Levels Test (NALT)
Concurrent validity Not reported
Predictive validity Not reported
Responsiveness Not reported
Floor/Ceiling Not reported
References Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427-445. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
Betts, J. E., Appleton, J. J., Reschly, A. L., Christenson, S. L., & Huebner, E. S. (2010). A study of the factorial invariance of the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI): Results from middle and high school students. School Psychology Quarterly, 25(2), 84–93. doi:10.1037/a0020259
Carter, C. P., Reschly, A. L., Lovelace, M. D., Appleton, J. J., & Thompson, D. (2012). Measuring student engagement among elementary students: Pilot of the Student Engagement Instrument—Elementary Version. School Psychology Quarterly, 27(2), 61–73. doi:10.1037/a0029229