How people learn and engage is a key topic of inquiry in the field of educational psychology. Eight outstanding studies featured in the current issue tackle this core question of our field. These studies take different conceptual and methodological approaches to this critical question and provide insights into the conditions of optimal learning and engagement. It is noteworthy that the featured studies have examined students at various developmental stages, ranging from Kindergarten to College from different parts of the world. Readers can gain insight into various dispositional, motivational, cognitive, and contextual factors leading to learning and engagement.
Classroom engagement among students has been examined in three studies in this issue.
Using a large sample of Singaporean secondary students, Luo, Liem, and Lee (Citation2019) investigated how motivational variables such as self-efficacy and implicit belief of ability might be related to students’ use of maladaptive learning approaches. Contrary to our intuition, the association between a fixed mindset and maladaptive learning behavior was much higher among the students with high self-efficacy. Why is this the case? This intriguing pattern invites further investigation. Zhao, Song, Zhang, and Zhao (Citation2019) investigated the role of teacher support for primary school students’ reading engagement. Their fine-grained analysis using structural equational modeling technique revealed complex mediation processes. Important mediators such as students’ interest and self-concept were considered. In their study with a large number of Vietnamese kindergarteners, Hoang, Holopainen, and Siekkinen (Citation2019) have confirmed different dimensions of classroom engagement, consistent with the current view of engagement as a multi-dimensional construct. They further examined the mean level differences in these engagement dimensions by gender, class size, and age.
Not surprisingly, individuals with different dispositional tendencies approach problem-solving contexts differently. Through a series of six carefully designed studies with German college students, Stiglbauer and Zuber (Citation2019) have shown that students’ regulatory focus was related to their test-taking response bias when answering a specific type of multiple-choice items. In addition to clear theoretical implications, the results offer educators important practical implications for the construction of multiple-choice items. Zhang, Dong, and Yang (Citation2019) examined how intelligence and personality might be related to academic interest. Latent class modeling has been conducted using the data collected from a large sample of Chinese secondary school students. The study considered interest in multiple subject matters and found some variability in the effect across the different subject matters. The results suggest that a personality trait such as openness is a strong predictor for academic interest.
Two studies in this issue have focused on the effects of worked examples. The benefits of tracing out worked examples with the index finger have been well documented. Extending the current literature, Zhang and Du (Citation2019) demonstrated that action based tracing (e.g. tracing with the index finger or tracing with a computer mouse) is much more effective than simply observing others tracing. The study’s educational implication is explicit.
Chen, Retnowati, and Kalyuga (Citation2019) also examined the role of worked examples. In their two experiments with Indonesian adolescents, they have shown the differential effects of worked examples across the problem-solving steps and across different skill levels of the learners. Consistent with a guidance fading effect in cognitive load theory, the results indicated that the transition from a full worked example to a conventional problem solving is an effective instructional strategy.
Chow (Citation2019) offers insights in the developmental changes in the capacity to accurately process orthographic form and function. Chinese primary school children seemed to use analytic strategies while learning pseudo-characters. It is fascinating to learn that these young students could identify print-sound regularities even though they were not explicitly taught.
In sum, each of the eight articles in the current issue offers important theoretical and practical implications. Please join me in congratulating the authors for their accomplishment and the contribution to the field of educational psychology. I also would like to express my deepest gratitude to all of the reviewers who generously shared their time and expertise to strengthen the articles.
References
- Chen, O., Retnowati, E., & Kalyuga, S. (2019). Effects of worked examples on step performance in solving complex problems. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 189–203.
- Chow, W.-Y. B. (2019). Analytic character learning in Chinese children: Evidence from associative pseudocharacter learning paradigm. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 224–236.
- Hoang, N., Holopainen, L., & Siekkinen, M. (2019). Children’s classroom engagement and disaffection in Vietnamese kindergartens. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 255–271.
- Luo, W., Liem, G. A. D., & Lee, K. (2019). Implicit beliefs of ability and maladaptive learning: Does self-efficacy matter? Educational Psychology, 39(2), 154–169.
- Stiglbauer, B., & Zuber, J. (2019). On the relationship between regulatory focus and response bias in multiple-choice exams. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 204–223.
- Zhang, J., Dong, Z., & Yang, X. (2019). The predictors of academic interest: Fluid intelligence, openness, and their interaction. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 272–290.
- Zhang, Q., & Du, X. (2019). Tracing worked examples: Effects on learning in geometry. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 170–188.
- Zhao, W., Song, Y., Zhang, R., & Zhao, Q. (2019). The effect of teacher support on primary school students’ reading engagement: The mediating role of reading interest and Chinese academic 1self-concept. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 237–254.