Learning Motivation as Predictor of Student Engagement in Private
Junior High Schools Students
Dewi Mustamiah and Nurul Sih Widanti
Faculty of Psychology Hang Tuah University
Keywords: Learning motivation, student engagement
Abstract: Student engagement is an intensity of behavior, emotional quality and personal effort of active involvement
of students in learning activities. When students engage in learning, they will participate and engage in
academic and social activities and will have regulatory compliance and involvement in learning activities.
Such students will possibly get good learning achievement. Motivating students to learn in school is a topic
of great concern of educators today and motivating students that they can succeed in school is one of the
greatest challenges of this century. Various studies have shown the linkage between student engagement and
learning motivation. The aim of this research is to determine the effect of of achievement motivation toward
student engagement mainly in coastal area of Surabaya. The sample of this study consisted of 226 students
of total population of 540 students from 3 private Junior High Schools in Bulak sub district Surabaya. This
research uses quantitative approach with regression design to determine the extent to which student
engagement could be predicted through achievement motivation. Instruments used to measure learning
motivation and student engagement that developed by researchers in this research based on several theories.
Findings indicated that learning motivation could affect student engagement, so that in this research learning
motivation could be predictor of student engagement. The results also obtained that subjects in this research
had moderate level of student engagement., and also had learning motivation in the moderate category.
1 INTRODUCTION
Student engagement is very important in learning
process. Students who are actively involved in
learning, will feel the need to seek knowledge, enjoy
the atmosphere in learning and will always
interested to learn. When students engage in
learning, they will participate and engage in
academic and social activities. Students will have
regulatory compliance, involvement in learning
activities such as paying attention to the lessons,
asking questions and participating in discussions, as
well as participation in sporting activities as well as
school organizations (Fredricks et al., 2004). Such
students will possibly get good learning
achievement. Conversely, students who are not
involved in learning, it may be difficult to obtain
good learning achievement. This is in accordance
with the opinions of Finn & Rock, (1997) and Marks
(2000) (in Harris, 2011) which state that student
engagement has a correlation with improvement of
academic achievement.
Researchers had focused on student engagement
as key to solve the problem of low learning
achievement and the increasing of dropout cases
from schools (Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris,
2004). The decreasing in achievement and lack of
student involvement in schools becomes a serious
problem, both individually and in the community.
Student disengagement in learning process is often
manifested in some behaviors such as lazing in the
classroom, ignoring the teacher and not participating
in class discussions and ultimately leading to an
increase in the number of students dropping out (Fall
and Roberts, 2012).
The importance of student involvement in
learning has been discussed by previous researchers,
as done by Wang and Holcombe (2010), that student
involvement in schools is related to the student's
academic achievement. Explained also by
Hirschfield and Gasper, (2011) that students who are
actively involved can gain knowledge and skills
more adequately, can complete their education and
can avoid the increasing cases of drop out from
school.
486
Mustamiah, D. and Widanti, N.
Learning Motivation as Predictor of Student Engagement in Private Junior High Schools Students.
DOI: 10.5220/0008591204860493
In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Psychology in Health, Educational, Social, and Organizational Settings (ICP-HESOS 2018) - Improving Mental Health and Harmony in
Global Community, pages 486-493
ISBN: 978-989-758-435-0
Copyright
c
2020 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
Student engagement is the intensity of behavior,
emotional quality and personal effort of an active
student to involve in learning activities (Reeve,
2005). Student engagement has a correlation with
improvement of academic achievement (Finn &
Rock,1997 and Marks,2000 in Harris, 2011).
Furthermore, student engagement is also associated
with improving students' sense of belonging to
schools or other social institutions (Willms, 2003 in
Harris 2011). While Beeland (2002) states that
student engagement is one important factor that is
useful for the evaluation process of a teaching
method.
Student Engagement according to Natriello (in
Apleto, Christenson & Furlong, 2008) is a student
participation in activities that are part of school
programs. Meanwhile, according to Newmannn,
Wehlage & Lamborn (in Appleton, et al., 2008)
student engagement is a psychological investment
and effort deployed by students to the learning,
understanding or mastery of a knowledge, skills or
work that become the goal of academic activities.
Meanwhile, Reeve (2005) states that the student
engagement is the intensity of behavior, emotional
quality and personal effort of an active student to
involve in learning activities.
Fredicks et al. (2004) states that student
engagement is indicated by: (1) Behavioral
engagement. Behavioral engagement is
characterized by participation and involvement of
the students in academic and social activities. These
behaviors will appear from regulatory compliance,
involvement in learning activities (attention to
lessons, questioning and participation in
discussions), and participation in sporting activities
as well as school class organizations (Fredricks et
al., 2004). This is considered very important in
achieving positive academic outcomes and
preventing dropping out of school (Connel, Finn in
Fredricks et al., 2005). (2) Emotional engagement.
Emotional Engagement refers to the affective
attitudes, interests, assessments and affirmations of
students to the class, teachers, classmates or school
(Connell & Wellborn, Skinner & Belmont, Lee &
Smith, Stipek in Fredricks et al, 2005). This is
important to foster a sense of student interest in their
educational institutions and affect the willingness of
learners to learn (Connel, Finn, in Fredricks et al.,
2005). (3) Cognitive engagement. Cognitive
engagement refers to the concept of investment,
students are willing to exert the effort needed or
even more than necessary to understand a material
or mastery of an ability. Fredricks et al. (2004)
explained that cognitive engagement includes
motivation to learn and using cognitive and
metacognitive strategies in thinking and learning.
Skinner & Belmot (1993) argued that students
who have low level of student engagement will
appear passive, not trying hard, bored, easily give up
and display negative emotions, such as anger, blame
and rejection. Meanwhile, according to Connell
(1990); Finn & Rock (1997); Marks (2000), student
engagement is related to learning achievement. If
students have high student engagement, students will
get high learning achievement, on the contrary if
student engagement is low, student achievement will
also be low. Therefore, it can be stated that students'
low learning achievement is assumed to have
problems related to student engagement.
Researchers are interested in conducting research
related to student engagement, especially for private
junior high school students in Bulak District,
Surabaya City. Bulak sub-district of Surabaya is an
area located on the east coast of Surabaya which still
has characteristics as a coastal community. Although
the livelihoods are quite diverse but there are still
many people who live as fishermen. The education
level of the population in this region based on 2015
data indicates that 36.6 percent of the population in
Bulak sub-district have completed primary school,
27.6 percent of the population are educated at Junior
High School, 23.6 percent of the population are
educated at senior high school, 5.8 percent of the
population is educated Bachelor degree and 5.9
percent of the population are undergraduate
educated, and 0.5 percent are post-graduate educated
(in Kurnia, 2017). Number of school facilities, in
this case is Junior High Schools, are also limited.
Based on data from
http://referensi.data.kemdikbud.go.id/, the number
of Junior High Schools in Bulak sub-district are only
4 schools consisting of 2 State Junior High Schools
and 3 private Junior High Schools.
Based on the interview with some teachers who
taught in several private junior high schools in the
area, that their students' learning involvement was
still lacking. They have to be forced to go to school.
Sometimes they also have to be threatened that they
cannot take the exam or they will be failing the
grade if the don’t discipline come to school.
Students also often leave school before the time to
go home, or when the teacher is explaining the
students sleep or talk to each other. Schools also find
it difficult to invite students to do extra-curricular
activities if not required. Even during the national
exam, the teachers must pick up their students to
come to school and take the exam.
Learning Motivation as Predictor of Student Engagement in Private Junior High Schools Students
487
Based on the results of the acquisition of the
average value of the National Examination 2017 of
Private Junior High School students in Bulak, sub-
district, the ranking was above 100 of all High
Schools in Surabaya and the average score was less
than 55. The data is showed in table. 1 below :
Table 1 : The average grade of National Exam of private
junior high school in Bulak District.
Schools
National Exam
grades in 2017
National Exam
grades in 2016
Rank
Average
Rank
Aver
age
Romly
Tamim
150
51.33
139
53.40
Tri
Guna
Bhakti
296
40.55
271
43.37
Taman
Belajar
318
37.97
289
42.28
Based on the data in the table above, it is known
that the average acquisition value of National Exam
in 3 Private Junior High Schools Surabaya Bulak
area is less than 55 and decreased in the year 2017
when compared with the acquisition grade in 2016.
Tamim Romly Junior High School decreased by -
2.07, while Tri Guna Bhakti Junior High School
decreased by -2.82 and Taman Belajar Junior High
School decreased by -4.31. Based on the above data,
it can be concluded that the students' academic
achievement in those 3 junior high schools had not
been as optimal as expected by students, teachers,
schools or government.
One of some factors that influencing academic
involvement is learning motivation (Wormington,
Corpus & Anderson, 2011). Motivating students to
learn in school is a topic of great concern of
educators today and motivating students that they
can succeed in school is one of the greatest
challenges of this century (Awan, Noureen and Naz,
2011). According to Akpan & Umobong (2013),
lack of motivation is a major hurdle in learning and
the pertinent causes in deterioration of education
standards. Feldman (2005) sees motivation as a
factor that directs and energizes human behavior and
other organisms. Wood (2002) sees motivation as a
process for initiating, directing, and supporting
behavior to meet physiological or psychological
needs. Santrock (2005) divides motivation into two
types: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is
based on internal factors such as self-determination,
effort, challenge and curiosity, while extrinsic
motivation combines external factors such as
rewards and punishments. Moula (2010) states that
motivation is one of the factors that contribute to
academic success; that parents and educators should
strive to understand the importance of promoting
and encouraging early academic motivation.
Based on the description above, it is known the
important role of learning motivation in student
engagement, especially for junior high school
students. When students are in junior high school
grade, some studies got results of a decline in
student engagement and achievement motivation.
Based on that result, researchers are interested in
deepening the research, especially in private junior
high schools located in coastal areas in Surabaya.
This is because the research on achievement
motivation on student engagement, especially in
schools in coastal areas, is still rarely carried out.
2 METHODS
2.1 Participants
The population in this study is Private Junior High
School students in Bulak sub district Surabaya.The
sample of this study consisted of 226 students of
total population of 540 students. The number of
samples was taken based on Isacc and Michael
tables at 5% error level in 3 Private Junior High
Schools in Bulak sub district Surabaya. Data
collection was done by visiting 3 schools assisted by
research assistants and teachers in each school.
Implementation in 3 schools of Romly Tamim
Junior High School, Tri Guna Bhakti Junior High
School, and Taman Belajar Junior High School.
2.2 Procedures
This research uses quantitative approach with
regression design. Regression design is used to
determine the extent to which student engagement
can be predicted through achievement motivation.
Instruments used to measure learning motivation and
student engagement that developed by researchers in
this research based on several theories. The learning
motivation scale consists of 26 items while the
student engagement scale consists of 21 items. The
scale model used is Likert scale.
Reliability testing in this research is done with
internal consistency approach using statistical
technique that is Alpha Cronbach because the scale
used in this research is only charged once in the
subject group (Single Trial Administration). The
principle of Single Trial Administration method is
ICP-HESOS 2018 - International Conference on Psychology in Health, Educational, Social, and Organizational Settings
488
testing the consistency between parts or between
items in the overall measuring tool (Azwar, 2009).
The reliability estimate is measured by looking at
the consistency between item in the measuring
instrument itself.
This research used simple linear regression
analysis to analyze the data. In order to obtain a
good regression, it must fulfill the assumptions
required to meet the assumption test of normality,
linearity and heteroscedasticity.
3 RESULTS
Discrimination index of items on learning
motivation scale moves from 0.3 to 0.69 with
reliability coefficient is 0.851, while the
discrimination index of items on student engagement
scale moves from 0.3 to 0.47 with reliability
coefficient is 0.817.
Based on the result of simple regression test
known that the significance value is 0,000 (0.000
<0.05), then H0 is rejected which means that
learning motivation affects student engagement in
this research. The results shows in the table below:
Table 2: Simple linear regression test
Model
df
Mean
Square
F
Sig.
1
Regres
sion
1
12573.
194
196.91
2
.000
b
Residu
al
224
63.852
Total
225
a. Dependent variable: student engagement
Table 3: Model summary
Model
R
R
Squar
e
Adjusted
R Square
Std. Error
of the
Estimate
Durb
in-
Wats
on
1
.684
a
.468
.465
7.991
1.75
2
Based on the calculation result, it is known that R
Square is equal to 0.468, which means that the
influence of learning motivation to student
engagement is 46.8%, so that 53.2% other variables
that affect student engagement is not a focus in this
study.
Table 4: Coefficients.
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Stand
ardize
d
Coeff
icient
s
t
Sig.
B
Std.
Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
31.323
3.863
8.110
.00
0
VAR00001
.669
.048
.684
14.03
3
.00
0
a. Dependent variable: student engagement
b. Predictors: (constant), motivasi belajar
Based on the results of coefficients, it shows the
regression coefficient marked positive, which means
that the increased learning motivation also increases
student engagement, and the equation of the
regression line is Y = 31.323 + 0.669 X. It means
that every increase of one learning motivation unit,
there will be student engagement increase of 0.669.
Description of learning motivation of respondents
can be seen as follows:
Table 5: Description of leaning motivation
Categorize
Range
Frequency
Percenta
ge (%)
High
X>95
31
13.72 %
Average
74 < X ≤ 95
134
59.29 %
Low
X<74
61
26.99 %
Total
226
100%
Based on the above table, it is known that the
dominant respondents have learning motivation in
the moderate category, as many as 134 students
(59.29%), while 61 students have learning
motivation in the category less (26.69%). Students
who have high learning motivation as much as 31
students or 13.72%.
Table 6: Description of student engagement
Categorize
Range
Frequenc
y
Percenta
ge (%)
High
X>91
71
31.42 %
Average
69< X ≤ 91
128
56.64 %
Low
X<69
27
11.94 %
Total
226
100%
Based on the above table, the results obtained
that students who have student engagement in the
medium category is the dominant, as many as 128
students (56.64%), students who have student
engagement in the high category is 71 students or
Learning Motivation as Predictor of Student Engagement in Private Junior High Schools Students
489
31.42% and students who have student engagement
in the low category are as many as 27 students or
11.94%.
Table 7: Description of indicators of student engagement
Indicators
Mean
Cognitive engagement
27.69
Emotional engagement
25.04
Behavioral engagement
27.55
Based on the description of each indicator of the
student engagement, the most dominant indicator is
cognitive engagement that has mean value of 27.69.
Refers to the concept of investment, students are
willing to exert the effort needed or even more than
is needed to understand a material or mastery of an
ability. Fredricks et al. (2004) explains that cognitive
engagement includes motivation for learning and the
use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in
thinking and learning. The next indicator is
behavioral engagement which has a mean value of
27.55. Behavioral engagement is characterized by
the participation and involvement of students in
academic and social activities. This behavior can be
seen from compliance with regulations, involvement
in learning activities (pay attention to lessons, ask
questions and participate in discussions), and
participation in sporting activities as well as school-
class organization (Fredricks et al., 2004). This
dimension is considered very important in achieving
positive academic outcomes and preventing
dropping out from school (Connel, Finn in Fredricks
et al., 2005). The indicator of student engagement
with the lowest mean value is emotional engagement
with mean value of 25.04. Emotional engagement
refers to the attitudes, interests, judgments and
affective reactions of the students to the class,
teachers, classmates or school (Connell and
Wellborn, Skinner & Belmont, Lee & Smith, Stipek
in Fredricks et al., 2004). The dimension of
emotional engagement is important to foster a sense
of student interest in their education and affect the
willingness of students to learn (Connel, Finn, in
Fredricks et al., 2004).
Table 8: Description of indicators of learning motivation
Indicators
Mean
Increasing learning activities
27.55
Ensuring continuity of learning
25.04
Directing learning activities
27.88
Based on the calculation of the average value
obtained the result that the indicator directing
learning activities gets mean value of 27.88. It
shows that the willingness of students to direct their
learning activities in each lesson that has been taught
in order to achieve a certain goal in learning is the
most dominant in generating learning motivation.
While the indicator increasing learning activity has
an average value of 27.55. This shows that the desire
of students to do learning activities in school is
enough to form a motivation to learn. The last
sequence is ensuring continuity of learning that has
mean value of 25.04., which means that the students'
willingness to retain learning activities in each of the
lessons that taught at school is least to form student
learning motivation in this study.
Table 9: Crosstab correlation between motivation and
student engagement
Student Engagement
Le
ss
Moder
ate
Hig
h
To
tal
Motivation
Less
16
13
0
29
Moder
ate
11
129
15
15
5
High
0
18
24
42
Total
27
160
39
22
6
Based on the results of cross tabulation
correlation between motivation and student
engagement in table 9, it is known that there are 16
students who have motivation and student
engagement included in the category of less, 13
students have motivation in the category of less
while having student engagement in the medium
category. 11 students who have moderate
motivation, having student engagement in less
category. 129 students have both moderate
motivation and student engagement, 15 students
have moderate motivation and high student
engagement, 18 students have high motivation and
moderate student engagement. 24 students have
both high motivation and student engagement. Thus
proves that the motivation of learning is related to
student engagement. This can be seen in chi-square
test results below:
ICP-HESOS 2018 - International Conference on Psychology in Health, Educational, Social, and Organizational Settings
490
Table 10 : Chi-Square Test Results
From Chi-Square results in table-10 can be seen
that Asyimp.Sig. (2 sided) is 0,000 (sig <0.05). Thus
it can be concluded that there is correlation between
learning motivation and student engagement.
4 DISCUSSION
The result of this research shows that learning
motivation has an effect on student engagement,
meaning that learning motivation can be used as
predictor of student engagement. The higher the
motivation to learn, the higher the student
engagement, and the lower the motivation to learn
the students engagement will be lower. This result is
in accordance with Akpan & Umobong (2013)
research that achievement motivation influencing
student engagement. Wormington, Corpus &
Anderson (2011) also found that the learning
motivation is related to academic performance and
academic involvement.
Motivation is a factor that directs and energizes
human behavior and other organisms (Feldman
,2005). Wood (2002) sees motivation as a process
that initiates, directs, and supports behavior to meet
physiological or psychological needs. Santrock
(2005) divides the motivation into two types:
intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is based
on internal factors such as self-determination, effort,
challenge and curiosity, while extrinsic motivation
combines external factors such as rewards and
punishments. Students who are motivated to learn
will direct their energies to learning activities, by
showing a willingness to direct their learning
activities to achieve learning goals. Students have
the desire to do learning activities at school. and
have the will to maintain learning activities on every
lesson taught in school. When students exhibit such
behaviors, then students’ energy is directed to
engage in learning.
Student Engagement (Natriello in Apleton,
Christenson & Furlong, 2008) is the participation of
students in activities that are part of the school
program. Meanwhile, according to Newmann,
Wehlage & Lamborn (in Appleton, et al., 2008)
student engagement is a psychological investment
and effort deployed by learners toward
understanding or mastering a knowledge, skills or
work that become the goal of academic activities.
According to Skinner & Belmot (1993) students who
have low student engagement will appear passive,
not trying hard, bored, give up and display negative
emotions, such as anger, blame and rejection. Zepke,
Leach and Butler (2010) suggests that high
motivation to learn especially intrinsic motivation
influences student involvement. Kim, Park, Cozart
and Lee (2015) illustrate that in the learning process,
repetition is one of cognitive strategies and one of
the effort to stimulate students actively involved.
This will happen if the students have the willingness
to learn and the willingness will not guarantee
involvement without any effort.
Subjects of this research have student
engagement in the medium category, which means
that students have the intensity of behavioral,
emotional quality and personal effort in learning
activities which are sufficient, especially in the use
of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in thinking
and learning. Thus Private Junior High School
students in the area of Bulak Surabaya shows quite
able to engage in learning. Referring to the opinion
of Fredicks et al. (2004), private junior high school
students in the area Bulak Surabaya sufficiently
adhere to school rules, pay attention to the lessons,
ask questions and participate in discussions, as well
as participation in sports activities, organizational
and school classes. In addition, students are quite
happy with the atmosphere of the school, like the
teachers, the classmates and the school. Students are
also quite capable of using cognitive and
metacognitive strategies in thinking and learning.
However, the results indicate that some of the
subjects still have low level of student engagement.
Those students still passive, do not try hard, bored,
give up and display negative emotions, such as
anger, blame and denial in their learning process.
Based on the results of the indicator analysis of
student engagement, it is known that the students
have highest score on cognitive engagement.
Referring to the opinion of Fredricks et al. (2004),
that students with high cognitive engagement are
willing to exert the effort required or even more than
is necessary to understand a material or mastering an
ability. While the next indicator, that is behavioral
engagement, is characterized by participation and
involvement in academic and social activities.
Students as subjects of this research got moderate
score in this indicator. The behaviors will be evident
Value
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
113.085
a
4
.000
Likelihood Ratio
89.402
4
.000
N of Valid Cases
226
Learning Motivation as Predictor of Student Engagement in Private Junior High Schools Students
491
from regulatory compliance, involvement in learning
activities (attention to lessons, questions and
participation in discussions), and participation in
sporting activities as well as school organizations
(Fredricks et al., 2004). While the last dimension of
student engagement is emotional engagement, i.e.
attitude, interest, assessment and affective reaction
of students to class, teachers, classmates or school
(Connell and Wellborn, Skinner & Belmont, Lee &
Smith, Stipek in Fredricks et al, 2004). Students as
subjects of this research got lowest score in this
indicator. The findings are in line with the
information that given by the teachers of those
schools where the research was conducted that
students of those schools sometimes do not come to
school, especially if after they have done the exams.
Even when the national exam was held, the teachers
had to pick up some of their students to come and to
join the exams. If this condition is left, then it will
influence the willingness of students to learn.
Learning motivation of the subjects of this
research included in medium category, meaning that
the subjects have enough learning motivation, that is
students are happy enough to face challenge and also
have enough curiosity. But this condition still needs
to be improved continuously so that those students
will always have good learning motivation. Based
on the opinion of Sardiman (2012), students who
have good motivation to learn are able to direct the
energy for learning activities, able to generate
learning activities and able to ensure continuity of
learning. The results of this research also note that
the subjects mostly are able to direct the energy for
learning activities but least able to ensure continuity
of learning. Thus the things that need to be improved
is that students are always motivated to learn
regularly, whether there is an exam or not.
According to Santrock's opinion (2005) ideally
students learn must be based on intrinsic motivation,
which is based on internal factors of individuals, e.g.
a student learns because of the encouragement of
high curiosity of something so that student feels that
can reach good achievement in learning if he tries to
understand every subject matter.
The results of this research also found out that
there is a correlation between learning motivation
and student engagement. This is in line with
Wormington, Corpus & Anderson (2011) who
argued that learning motivation is related to
academic performance and academic engagement.
That is, if students are encouraged to do the learning
then the students will have willingness to participate
in many activities as parts of the school programs.
5 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the result of this research, it can be
concluded that there is influence of learning
motivation to student engagement. The results of
this study are useful for Educational psychology. In
the field of education, teachers need to create a good
learning atmosphere so that students will have a high
motivation to learn. If students have high motivation
to learn, students will actively involve in learning.
Parents also have important role so that students
have high learning motivation, which in the end
students will have high learning achievement.
REFERENCES
Akpan, I.D., & Umobong,M.E. (2013). Analysis of
achievement motivation and academis engagement of
students in the Nigerian classroom. Academic
Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2 (3), 385-390
Apleton, J.J., Christenson. S. L., & Furlog, M. (2008).
Student Engagement With School : Critical
Conceptual And Methodological Issues of The
Construct. Psychology in the Schools
Azwar, S. (2009).Penyusunan Skala Psikologi.
Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar
Azwar, S. (2010). Reliabilitas dan Validitas. Yogyakarta:
Pustaka Pelajar.
Chun-hong, Z. (2010) A riview of foreign researches on
influential factors affecting students engagement in
English classroom. Sino-US English Teaching, 7(12),
8-22
Connell, J.P. & Wellborn, J.G. (1994). Engagement versus
Disaffection : Motivated Patterns of Action in the
academic domain. New York : University of Rochester
Crow, L.D. & Crow, A. 1972. Educational Psychology.
New York : American Book. Co
Dharmayana, I.W. dkk. (2012). Keterlibatan Siswa
(Student Engagement) sebagai Mediator Kompetensi
Emosi dan Prestasi Akademik. Jurnal Psikologi
volume 39, no. 1, juni 2012: 76 – 94.
Djamarah, Syaiful Bahri. (2002).Psikologi
Belajar..Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Fredericks, J.A., Blumenfield, P.C., & Paris, A.H. (2004).
School Engagement : Potential of the concept, State of
evidence. Review of Educational Research, 59 – 109
Grove, M., Sellars, C., Smith,J., & Barber, A. (2015).
Factors Affecting Student Engagement : A case study
examining two cohorts of students attending a post-
1992 University in The United Kingdom. International
Journal of Higher Education Vol 4. No. 2. 2015. 27-
37
Hamalik, O. (2009). Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung:
Sinar Baru Algesindo
Hamid, M. (2013). Hubungan Antara Motivasi Dengan
Prestasi Belajar Ekonomi Siswa Kelas VIII SMP
ICP-HESOS 2018 - International Conference on Psychology in Health, Educational, Social, and Organizational Settings
492
Negeri 2 Jangka Kabupaten Bireuen. Jurnal
LENTERA: Vol.13 No.4, Nopember 2013.
Hamdhu, G. dan Agustina, L. (2011). Pengaruh Motivasi
Belajar Siswa Terhadap Pestasi Belajar IPA di
Sekolah Dasar (Studi Kasus Terhadap Siswa Kelas IV
SDN Tarumanagara Kecamatan Tawang Kota
Tasikmalaya. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Vol. 12 No.
1 April 2011
Kim, C., Park, S.W., Cozart, J., & Lee, H (2015). From
Motivation to engagement: The Role of Effort
Regulation of Virtual High Schoool Students in
Mathematics Courses. Educational Technology &
Society, 18 (4), 261-272)
Kurniawan, A. (2009). Prestasi Belajar Remaja di Daerah
Abrasi. Indigenous, Jurnal Ilmiah Berkala Psikologi
Vol. 11, No. 2, Nopember 2009 : 29-37
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student Engagement in Instructional
Activity: Patterns in the Elementary, Middle, and High
School Years. American Educational Research Journal
Spring 2000, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 153-184
Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods:
Qualitative and Quantitaive approaches fourth edition.
America: Allyn and Bacon.
Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social Research Methods:
Qualitaive and Quantitative Approaches Seventh
Edition. London: Pearson.
Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS: Survival Manual fourth edition.
Sidney: Allen & Unwin
Reeve. J. (2012). A Self-determination theory
perspectiveon student engagement. Handbook of
Research on Student Engagement. DOI 10.1007/978-
1-4614-2018-7_7, © Springer Science+Business
Media, LLC
Saleh, A.R. dan Wahab, A. (2005). Psikologi Suatu
Pengantar (Dalam Perspektif Islam), Jakarta :
Kencana.
Sardiman, A.M. (2012). Interaksi dan Motivasi Belajar
Mengajar. Jakarta : PT Raja Grafindo Persada
Skinner, E.A.,& Belmont, M.J. (1993). Motivation in the
classroom : Reciprocal Effect of Teacher Behavior
and Student Engagement Across the School Year.
Journal of Educational Psychology 1993, Vol. 85.
No.4. 571-581
Sudjana, N. (2013). Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar
Mengajar. Bandung : Remaja Rosdakarya
Tohirin. (2008). Bimbingan dan Konseling di Sekolah dan
Madrasah (Berbasis Integrasi). Jakarta: PT
RajaGrafindo Persada
Uno, H.B. (2012). Orientasi Baru dalam Psikologi
Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara
Utami, A.D. dan Kusdiyati, S. (2015). Hubungan antara
Student Engangement dengan Prestasi Belajar pada
Siswa Kelas XI di Pesantren Persatuan Islam No. 1
Bandung. Prosiding Penelitian Sivitas Akademika
Unisba (Sosial dan Humaniora), Psikologi Gelombang
2 Tahun Akademik 2014-2015.
Wills, J.D(2003). Students engagement at school:a sense
of belonging and participation result from PISA 2000,
organization for economic Cooperation and
development
Winkel, W.S. (2005). Psikologi Pengajaran. Yogyakarta :
Media Abadi.
Wormington, S.V., Corpus, J.H., Anderson, K.G. (2011).
A Person-Centered Investigation of Academic
Motivation, Performance and Engagement in a High
School Setting. Paper presented at annual meeting of
American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, LA, April 2011
Learning Motivation as Predictor of Student Engagement in Private Junior High Schools Students
493