Greatest engagement benefits do not emerge in classrooms high on two or three need-supportive practices (synergistic hypothesis not supported)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Classrooms combining high levels of two or three need-supportive practices do not show the greatest engagement benefits. → Olivier 2021

Evidence¶

Olivier 2021¶

Olivier, E., Galand, B., Morin, A., & Hospel, V. (2021). Need-supportive teaching and student engagement in the classroom: Comparing the additive, synergistic, and global contributions. Learning and Instruction, 71, 101389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101389

q3 · i? · associational · r2

In the same multilevel analysis of 1,193 students in 57 math classrooms, the study reports that results "failed to support the synergistic hypothesis (H2)". No effect size is printed for this finding.

"Results also failed to support the synergistic hypothesis (H2), which predicted that the greatest benefits would emerge in classrooms characterized by a high level of two or three of these practices."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Jointly considered, all three need-supportive practices are not each associated with classroom-level engagement (additive hypothesis not supported) — related
• A global factor across autonomy support, structure, and involvement provides optimal support to classroom-level engagement (global hypothesis supported) — related
• Specific imbalance factors in autonomy support, structure, and involvement contribute to some aspects of classroom-level engagement — related
• Challenging study demands combined with resources boost emotional engagement, though interaction effects on cognitive and behavioral engagement were mainly nonsignificant — related