The Relationship Between Study Engagement and Critical Thinking Among Higher Vocational College Students in China: A Longitudinal Study

Figures & data

Figure 1 LGM with unconditional variables of study engagement or critical thinking.

Abbreviations: LGM, latent growth model; I, intercept; S, slope; T1, T2, T3, Time 1, Time 2, Time 3.

Figure 2 LGM of study engagement and critical thinking.

Note: *** p<0.001.

Abbreviations: LGM, latent growth model; I SE, intercept of study engagement; S SE, slope of study engagement; I CT, intercept of critical thinking; S CT, slope of critical thinking; T1, T2, T3, Time 1, Time 2, Time 3.

Figure 3 LGM of critical thinking and study engagement.

Note: *** p<0.001.

Abbreviations: LGM, latent growth model; I CT, intercept of critical thinking; S CT, slope of critical thinking; I SE, intercept of study engagement; S SE, slope of study engagement; T1, T2, T3, Time 1, Time 2, Time 3.

Figure 4 Nested models of the relationship between study engagement and critical thinking.

Abbreviations: SE, study engagement; CT, critical thinking; T1, T2, T3, Time 1, Time 2, Time 3.

Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Among Main Measures

Variable	M(SD)	1	2	3	4	5	6
1.T1 CT	4.284(0.399)	1.000
2.T2 CT	4.207(0.366)	0.481**	1.000
3.T3 CT	4.174(0.340)	0.298**	0.352**	1.000
4.T1 SE	4.559(0.992)	0.343**	0.274**	0.202**	1.000
5.T2 SE	4.399(0.857)	0.314**	0.370**	0.242**	0.452**	1.000
6.T3 SE	4.332(0.808)	0.238**	0.274**	0.439**	0.306**	0.413**	1.000

Note: ** p<0.01.

Table 2 Coefficient and Fit Indices of Unconditional Latent Growth Model of SE and CT

Model	Fit Indices					Coefficients		Variance
	χ^2/df	CFI	TFI	SRMR	RMSEA	Intercept	Slope	Intercept	Slope
SE	2.420	0.995	0.985	0.014	0.047	4.540***	−0.011***	0.522***	0.089***
CT	3.024	0.993	0.978	0.014	0.056	4.279***	−0.056***	0.100***	0.016*

Note: *p<0.05;***p<0.001.

Abbreviations: CT, critical thinking; SE, study engagement; T1, T2, T3, Time 1, Time 2, Time 3.

Table 3 The Goodness-of-Fit Statistics for the Nested Models

model	χ^2	df	CFI	TLI	SRMR	RMSEA	Model Comparisons	Δχ^2	Δdf	p
M1	88.746	8	0.889	0.805	0.124	0.124	M4 vs.M1	66.285	4	<0.001
M2	44.920	6	0.946	0.875	0.069	0.100	M4 vs.M2	22.459	2	<0.001
M3	59.752	6	0.926	0.827	0.094	0.117	M4 vs.M3	37.291	2	<0.001
M4	22.461	4	0.975	0.911	0.037	0.084