The Impact of Teachers’ Student Voice Practices in the Classroom on Student Engagement and Achievement

• In Event: Empowering Student Voice in Educational Practice: Student Voice to Student Outcomes

Abstract

Objectives
This paper fills a gap in research on student voice by exploring the impact of teachers’ use of student voice practices (SVPs) in the classroom on student outcomes. The study asks: 1) How are students’ perceptions of their teachers’ use of SVPs associated with student outcomes? 2) Do student perceptions of teacher receptivity to their ideas and provision of choice in the classroom moderate the relationships between classroom-level SVPs and student outcomes?

Perspective
Our theoretical orientation to this research is informed by critical pedagogy (Friere, 1970). With regard to both its power sharing approach and its change-oriented agenda, critical pedagogy is consonant with the philosophical tenets and practices of student voice (Duncan-Andrade & Morrell, 2008; hooks, 1994), which involve disrupting traditional power imbalances by authorizing students to influence educational decision-making (Lac & Mansfield, 2018; Mitra, 2018).

Data Sources and Methods
The study uses survey data from 1,751 students in two middle schools and two high schools, all serving predominantly Latiné students (see Table 1 for demographics). Path models were conducted to test the association between classroom SVPs and student outcomes, and whether teacher receptivity and provision of choice moderated this association. Models were conducted in Mplus, utilized FIML to account for missing data, and controlled for grade level, gender, ELL status, family financial strain, race/ethnicity, and school site. Subsequent multigroup models were used to assess how associations varied across middle and high school students. Independent variables of interest consisted of a measure of classroom SVPs (α = .88), a four-item measure of choice (α = .82), and a three-item measure of teacher receptivity (α = .81; see Authors, for information on development and validation of measures). Students were asked, “How many of your teachers do the following?” and the response options included none, one, some/less than half, and most/more than half. Dependent variables included a previously validated measure of student academic engagement, consisting of nine items (α = .91) and student self-reported grades. Official GPA and attendance from the district will be integrated into the dataset by the time of AERA.

Findings
Findings show that classroom-level SVPs are positively associated with student engagement (β = .43, p < .001), but unrelated to self-reported grades. Although overall classroom-level SVPs are unrelated to grades, one specific form of SVPs, constructive critique, is related to ELA grades and Math grades at the high school level. Teacher receptivity and the provision of choice significantly interact with classroom-level SVPs across several models (see Figure 1, for example), such that the relationship between SVPs and student outcomes is strengthened when students perceive more of their teachers as receptive to their ideas and more of their teachers offer choice.

Significance
This study provides important empirical evidence for the oft-cited claim that student voice is a key driver of student engagement and achievement (Toshalis & Nakkula, 2012). By highlighting two key conditions that strengthen the impact of teachers’ classroom SVPs on student academic engagement (teacher receptivity and choice), this study generates clear implications for teacher practice and professional development.

Authors

• Jerusha O. Conner, Villanova University

• Cuibing Wu, University of Massachusetts - Lowell

• Katie Frazer, Tredyffrin/Easttown School District

• Enrique Rosado, Villanova University

• Ashley Boat, Search Institute