Résumés
Résumé
Déterminant pour l’apprentissage, l’engagement cognitif des étudiants se définit par le déploiement de stratégies d’étude et d’apprentissage qui visent une maitrise plus ou moins élevée des notions abordées durant les cours. Il peut être étudié à l’aide du questionnaire Cognitive Engagement Scale qui n’est disponible qu’en anglais. Le but de notre étude est de le traduire en français, de l’adapter et de valider la traduction auprès de 647 étudiants québécois de collège et d’université avec une méthode de contre-traduction. Nos résultats offrent une version en français de l’instrument, présentant des qualités métrologiques satisfaisantes, utile pour d’autres recherches portant sur différents contextes académiques postsecondaires.
Mots-clés :
- engagement cognitif,
- enseignement supérieur,
- étudiants,
- questionnaire,
- validation
Abstract
Important for learning, cognitive engagement is defined by the use of learning and study strategies that aim for mastery of the concepts taught in class. It can be studied with the Cognitive Engagement Scale available only in English. Our aim is to translate it in French and to validate the translation with 647 Quebec college and university students using a double translation method. As a result, we have a French version of the instrument that presents satisfactory metrological qualities, useful for other research relating to different postsecondary academic contexts.
Keywords:
- cognitive engagement,
- higher education,
- students,
- questionnaire,
- validation
Veuillez télécharger l’article en PDF pour le lire.
Télécharger
Parties annexes
Bibliographie
- Ali, H. I. H. et Ajmi, A. A. S. (2013). Towards quality assessment in an EFL programme. English Language Teaching, 6(10), 132-148.
- Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L. et Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369-386.
- Azevedo, R. (2015). Defining and measuring engagement and learning in science: Conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and analytical issues. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 84-94.
- Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K. et Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243-260.
- Bailey, T. R. et Alfonso, M. (2005). Paths to persistence: An analysis of research on program effectiveness at community colleges. New York, NY : Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.
- Beavers, A. S., Lounsbury, J. W., Richards, J. K., Huck, S. W., Skolits, G. J. et Esquivel, S. L. (2013). Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(6), 1-13.
- Bernet, S. (2010). Engagement affectif, comportemental et cognitif des élèves du primaire dans un contexte pédagogique d’intégration des TIC : une étude multicas en milieux défavorisé (Thèse de doctorat, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC). Repéré à https://papyrus.bib.umontreal.ca/xmlui/handle/1866/3943
- Bernet, E., Karsenti, T. et Roy, N. (2014). Mesure de l’engagement scolaire. Engagement scolaire en milieux défavorisés : traduction et validation exploratoire d’une échelle de mesure. Educational Journal of the University of Patras UNESCO Chair, 1(1), 20-33.
- Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347-364.
- Biggs, J. B., Kember, D. et Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The revised two factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149.
- Blumenfeld, P. C., Kemper, T. M. et Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. Dans S. Keith (dir.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. New York, NY : Cambridge University Press.
- Boud, D. et Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712.
- Bouletreau, A., Chouanière, D., Wild, P. et Fontana, J.-M. (1999). Concevoir, traduire et valider un questionnaire. À propos d’un exemple, EUROQUEST. Repéré à http://lara.inist.fr/bitstream/handle/2332/1730/INRS_178.pdf?sequence=1
- Bourque, J., Poulin, N. et Cleaver, A. F. (2006). Évaluation d’utilisations et de présentations des résultats d’analyses factorielles et d’analyses en composantes principales en éducation. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 32(2), 325-344.
- Brault-Labbé, A. et Dubé, L. (2010). Engagement scolaire, bien-être personnel et autodétermination chez des étudiants à l’université. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 42(2), 80-92.
- Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276.
- Coates, H., Hillman, K., Jackson, D., Tan, L., Daws, A., Rainsford, D. et Murphy, M. (2008). Attracting, engaging and retaining: New conversations about learning. Australasian Student Engagement Report (AUSSE). Camberwell, Australie : ACER.
- Conseil supérieur de l’éducation (2008). L’engagement de l’étudiant dans son projet de formation : une responsabilité partagée avec les acteurs de son collège. Québec, QC : Conseil supérieur de l’éducation.
- Costello, A. B. et Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10, 1-9. Repéré à http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY : Harper et Row.
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: the psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York, NY : BasicBooks.
- Desbiens, J.-F., Kozanitis, A., Lanoue, S., Fadel, F., Nehme, M., Eid, C … Nseir, G. (2012, mai). Analyse des facteurs d’influence de la participation verbale d’étudiants universitaires libanais. Communication présentée au Congrès de l’AIPU : Quelle université pour demain?, Trois-Rivières, QC.
- Dinsmore, D. L. et Alexander, P. A. (2012). A critical discussion of deep and surface processing: What it means, how it is measured, the role of context, and model specification. Educational Psychology Review, 24(4), 499-567.
- Dweck, C. et Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.
- Fabrigar, L., Wegener, D., MacCallum, R. et Strahan, E. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272-299.
- Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (and sex and drugs and rock’n’roll) (2e éd.). London, Royaume-Uni : Sage.
- Fréchette, S. (2008). Autorégulation de l’apprentissage de l’exercice du rôle de soutien à la motivation dans le cadre de la formation des enseignants (Thèse de doctorat inédite), Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC.
- Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld P. C. et Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concepts, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.
- Fredricks, J. A. et McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In Christenson et coll. (dir.), Handbook of research on student engagement. Boston, MA : Springer.
- Garson, D. (2010, February 11). Factor analysis. Repéré à http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/PA765/factor.htm
- Greene, B. A. (2015). Measuring cognitive engagement with self-report scales: Reflections from over 20 years of research. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 14-30.
- Greene, J. et Azevedo, R. (2010). The measurement of learners’ self-regulated cognitive and metacognitive processes while using computer-based learning environments. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 203-209.
- Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L. et Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462-482.
- Hakstian, A. R., Rogers, W. T. et Cattel, R. B. (1982). The behavior of number-of-factors rules with simulated data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17(2), 193-219.
- Handelsman, M. M, Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N. et Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184-191.
- Hockings, C. (2010). Reaching the students that student-centred learning cannot reach. British Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 83-98.
- Hockings, C., Cooke, S., Yamshita, H., McGinty, S. et Bowl, M. (2008). Switched off? A study of academic dis/engagement in university classrooms. Research Papers in Education, 23(2), 191-201.
- Hornsby, D.-J. et Osman, R. (2014). Massification in higher education: Large classes and student learning. Higher Education, 67(6), 711-719.
- Hutchins, A. (2015, 12 fevrier). National Survey of Student Engagement: A truer measure of quality. Student-engagement surveys evaluate best educational practices and provide valuable feedback for university administrators. Macleans. Reperé à https://www.macleans.ca/education/unirankings/national-survey-of-student-engagement-a-truer-measure-of-quality/
- Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758-773.
- Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
- Kline, P. (1999). The handbook of psychological testing (2e éd.). London, Royaume-Uni : Routledge.
- Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change, 35(2), 24-32.
- Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., et Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79, 540-563.
- Lin, S.-H. et Huang, Y.-C. (2017). Assessing college student engagement: Development and validation of the Student Course Engagement Scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. Repéré à https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282917697618
- Lison, C. et Jutras, F. (2014). Innover à l’université : penser les situations d’enseignement pour soutenir l’apprentissage. Revue internationale de pédagogie de l’enseignement supérieur, 1, 1-7.
- Loiola, F. A. et Tardif, M. (2001) Formation pédagogique des professeurs d’université et conceptions de l’enseignement. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 27(2), 305-326.
- Mandernach, J. (2015). Assessment of student engagement in higher education : A synthesis of literature and assessment tools. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 12(2), 1-14.
- Maringe, F. et Sing, N. (2014). Teaching large classes in an increasingly internationalising higher education environment: Pedagogical, quality and equity issues. Higher Education, 67, 761-782.
- McNaught, C., Leung, D. et Kember, D. (2006). Report on the Student Engagement Project [Working Paper 2]. Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR : Centre for Learning Enhancement And Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
- Miller, R. B., Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P, Ravindran, B. et Nichols, J. D. (1996). Engagement in academic work: The role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 388-422.
- Mulryan-Kyne, C. (2010). Teaching large classes at college and university level: Challenges and opportunities. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 175-185.
- Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2e éd.). New York, NY : McGraw-Hill.
- Pett, M., Lackey, N. et Sullivan, J. (2003). Making sense of factor analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
- Pintrich, P. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.
- Prosser, M. et Trigwell, K. (2014). Qualitative variation in approaches to university teaching and learning in large first-year classes. Higher Education, 67(6), 783-795.
- Rotgans, J. et Schmidt, H. (2011). Cognitive engagement in the problem-based learning classroom. Advances in Health Science Education, 16(4), 465-479. Reperé à http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10459-011-9272-9
- Sauvé, L., Racette, N. et Royer, M. (2008). L’abandon et la persévérance aux études postsecondaires. Rapport de recension. Repéré à https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwjYhZyFlfXfAhWBk1kKHXQVC9MQFjAAegQIBBAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.savie.qc.ca%2FCampusVirtuel%2FUpload%2FFichiers%2FSAMI-Perseverance_rapport_recension_15-06-09-VF.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1nyOzjPB61VMzE0MA4nSWF
- Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C. et Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1-13.
- Spielberger, C. D., et Sharma, S. (1976). Cross-cultural measurement of anxiety. Dans C. D. Spielberger et R. Diaz-Guerrero (dir.), Cross-cultural anxiety (p. 13-28). Washington, DC : Hemisphere/Wiley.
- Svanum S. et Bigatti S. M. (2009). Academic course engagement during one semester forecasts college success: Engaged students are more likely to earn a degree, do it faster, and do it better. Journal of College Student Development, 50, 120-132.
- Svinicki, M. et McKeachie, J. W. (2011). McKeachie’s teaching tips. Stategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (13e éd.). Belmont, CA : International Edition.
- Tabachnick, B. et Fidell, L. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights, MA : Allyn & Bacon.
- Vallerand, R. J. (1989). Vers une méthodologie de validation transculturelle de questionnaires psychologiques : implications pour la recherche en langue française. Psychologie Canadienne, 30 (4), 662-689.
- Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner, S. et Kovach, R. (1996). Developing self-regulated learners: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington, DC : American Psychological Association.
- Zimmerman, B. J. et Labuhn, A. S. (2012). Self-regulation of learning: Process approaches to personal development. Dans K. R. Harris, S. Graham et T. Urdan (dir.), APA Educational Psychology Handbook: Vol. 1. Theories, Constructs, and Critical Issues (p. 399-425). Washington, DC : American Psychological Association.
- Zimmerman, B. et Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284-290.
- Zimmerman, B. J. et Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51-59.
- Zwick, W. R. et Velicer, W. F. (1986). Factors influencing five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432-442.
10.7202/014411ar