How teachers can support students’ agentic engagement

References

• Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Haerens, L., Soenens, B., Fontaine, J., & Reeve, J. (2019). Toward an integrative and fine-grained insight into motivating and demotivating teaching styles: The merits of a circumplex approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 497–521. doi:10.1037/edu0000293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assor, A., Kaplan, H., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Roth, G. (2005). Directly controlling teacher behaviors as predictors of poor motivation and engagement in girls and boys: The role of anger and anxiety. Learning and Instruction, 15, 397–413. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.07.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teaching behaviors predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 27, 261–278. doi:10.1348/000709902158883
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (2002). Growing primacy of human agency in adaptation and change in the electronic era. European Psychologist, 7, 2–16. doi:10.1027//1016-9040.7.1.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 164–180. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartholomew, K. J., Ntoumanis, N., Ryan, R. M., & Thogersen-Ntoumani, C. (2011). Self-determination theory and diminished functioning: The role of interpersonal control and psychological need thwarting. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1459–1473. doi:10.1177/0146167211413125
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhavsar, N., Ntoumanis, N., Quested, E., Gucciardi, D., Thogersen-Ntoumani, C., Ryan, R. M., … Sarrazin, P. (2019). Conceptualizing and testing a new tripartite measure of coach interpersonal behaviors. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 44, 107–120. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., Lee, Y., Ntoumanis, N., Gillet, N., Kim, B. R., & Song, Y.-G. (2019). Expanding autonomy psychological need states from two (satisfaction, frustration) to three (dissatisfaction): A classroom-based intervention study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(4), 685–705. doi:10.1037/edu0000306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Moon, I. S. (2012). Experimentally based, longitudinally designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be more autonomy supportive toward their students. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 34, 365–396. doi:10.1123/jsep.34.3.365
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Ntoumanis, N. (2018). A needs-based intervention to help PE teachers enhance students’ prosocial behavior and diminish antisocial behavior. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 35, 74–88. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.11.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Song, Y.-G. (2016). A teacher-focused intervention to decrease PE students’ amotivation by increasing need satisfaction and decreasing need frustration. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 38, 217–235. doi:10.1123/jsep.2015-0236
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Song, Y.-G. (2019). Recommending goals and supporting needs: An intervention to help physical education teachers communicate their expectations while supporting students’ psychological needs. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 41, 107–118. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.12.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., Yu, T. H., & Jang, H.-R. (2014). The teacher benefits from giving autonomy support during physical education instruction. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 36, 331–346. doi:10.1123/jsep.2013-0231
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (Eds.). (2012). The handbook of research on student engagement. New York, NY: Springer Science.
   Google Scholar
• Deci, E. L., La Guardia, J. G., Moller, A. C., Scheiner, M. J., & Ryan, R. M. (2006). On the benefits of giving as well as receiving autonomy support: Mutuality in close friendships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 313–327. doi:10.1177/0146167205282148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess adult’s orientations toward control versus autonomy in children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 642–650. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.73.5.642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Halusic, M. (2016). A new autonomy-supportive way of teaching that increases conceptual learning: Teaching in students’ preferred ways. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84, 686–701. doi:10.1080/00220973.2015.1083522
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matos, L., Reeve, J., Herrera, D., & Claux, M. (2018). Students’ agentic engagement predicts longitudinal increases in perceived autonomy-supportive teaching: The squeaky wheel gets the grease. The Journal of Experimental Education, 86, 592–609. doi:10.1080/00220973.2018.1448746
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44, 159–178. doi:10.1080/00461520903028990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 579–595. doi:10.1037/a0032690
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, J. (2015). Giving and summoning autonomy support in hierarchical relationships. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9, 406–418. doi:10.1111/spc3.v9.8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, J. (2016). Autonomy-supportive teaching: What it is, how to do it. In J. C. K. Wang, W. C. Liu, & R. M. Ryan’s (Eds.), Building autonomous learners: Perspectives from research and practice using self-determination theory (Chpt 5, pp. 129–152). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Reeve, J., & Cheon, S. H. (2020). An autonomy-supportive intervention to develop students’ resilience by boosting agentic engagement. International Journal of Behavioral Development.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, J., & Tseng, C.-M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257–267. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robitschek, C. (1998). Personal growth initiative: The construct and its measure. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 30(4), 183–198. doi:10.1080/07481756.1998.12068941
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sameroff, A. (Ed.). (2009). The transactional model of development: How children and contexts shape each other. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Sheldon, K. M., & Corcoran, M. (2019). Comparing the current and long-term career motivations of artists and business-people: Is everyone intrinsic in the end? Motivation and Emotion, 43, 218–231. doi:10.1007/s11031-018-9723-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, S., & Reeve, J. (2020). Antecedent conditions that empower students to become more agentically engaged in the classroom ( Manuscript under review).
   Google Scholar
• Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 493–525. doi:10.1177/0013164408323233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar