Abstract :

The study investigated the level of cognitive engagement among secondary school students in Southwestern Nigeria. In addition it examined the relative contribution of cognitive engagement sub-construct of deep cognitive and shallow engagement, cognitive strategy and persistence on prediction of problems-solving competence among secondary school students in the study zone.  The study investigated the predictive ability of cognitive engagement on problem-solving competence among the students in the study area. These were with a view to providing empirical information on the factors that could enhance problem-solving competence among the students. The study adopted the descriptive survey research design. The population of the study comprised 2,403,822 public secondary school students in Southwestern, Nigeria. A sample size of 2,160 students was selected from the study zone using multistage sampling procedure. Three States were selected from Southwestern Nigeria, likewise from each State, two senatorial districts were selected using simple random sampling technique. Furthermore, 18 LGAs and 54 public secondary schools were selected for the study. Lastly, systematic sampling technique was used to select 40 students (SSS II) from each school. Two adapted instruments were used to elicit information from the respondents. They were Questionnaire on Problem-Solving Competence (QPSC) and Cognitive Engagement (QCE). Data collected were analyzed using weighted mean and multiple regression analysis. The result showed that the level of cognitive engagement among secondary school students is low. The results showed that cognitive engagement (t=14.046, β =.383) had better contribution in the prediction of problem-solving competence among the students. The study concluded that cognitive engagement contributed in the prediction of problem-solving competence among the secondary school students.

---

Keywords :

Cognitive Engagement, Deep and Shallow Approaches, Cognitive Strategy, Persistence and Problem-Solving Competence.

---

References :

1. Abbing, J. (2013).The Effect of Students’ engagement on academic achievement in different stages of their academic career from a drop out perspective. Published Bachelor’s Thesis, University of Twente, Canada.
2. Abubakar, S. & Chem, Noraini, H. (2016). Evaluating the students’ level of cognitive engagement to achieve English Language curriculum objectives at International Islamic School, Gombak. Advances in Research8(2): 1-16, Article no.AIR.29456ISSN: 2348-0394, NLM ID: 101666096 SCIENCEDOMAIN international  sciencedomain.org
3. Acharya, B.B. (2017) Factors affecting difficulties in learning mathematics by
   mathematics learners. International Journal of Elementary Education, 6, 8-15. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeedu.20170602.11
4. Adegoke, B. A. (2013). A survey of Nigerian senior secondary school students‟ interest in physics. Nigerian Journal of Clinical and Counselling Psychology, 19(1), 1-7.
5. Adeyemo, S A. (2010). Students’ ability level and their competence in problem-solving task in physics. International Journal of Educational Research and Technology. 1(2), 35-47.
6. Adva, H. J. (2016). The Relationship between student engagement and academic achievement, PhD thesis,University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
7. Al-Alwan, A. F. (2014). Modeling the relations among parental involvement, school engagement and academic performance of high school students. International Education Studies, 7(4), pp 47-56.
8. Alrashidi, O., Phan, H. P. & Ngu, B. H. (2016). Academic engagement: An overview of its definitions, dimensions, and major conceptualizations. International Education Studies 9 (12) 41-52.
9. Andrews, P., & Xenofontos, C. (2015). Analysing the relationship between the problem-solving-related beliefs, competence and teaching of three Cypriot primary teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18(4): 299-325.
10. Aritia, E. & Suyanto, S. 2019. The Effect of problem based learning model and concept
    map strategy for problem solving and understanding of the ecosystem. Concept of
    high school students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1233:1-8.
    https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012005
11. Ataizi, M., & Donmez, M. (2014). Book review: 21st Century skills -learning for Life in Our times. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5(3), 272–274.
12. Bature, I.J. & Atweh, B. (2019) Collaboration: A collective bargain for achieving quality mathematics classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5, 347-361. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.5.3.347
13. Bature, I. J., & Igwe, O. (2010). An investigation into the factors affecting Junior Secondary School 3 students understandingof mathematics language in Gombe metropolis. African Journal of Educational Research and Administration, 3(1),47-52.
14. Bayoumy, H.M.M. & Alsayed, S. (2021). Investigating relationship of perceived learning engagement,motivation, and academic performance among nursing students: A multisite study. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 12, 351–369
15. Casimiro, L. T. (2016). Cognitive engagement in online intercultural interactions: BeyondInternational journal of information and education technology, 6(6), 441.
16. Cetin, B. (2016). Approaches to learning and age in college students’ academic achievement. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 13(1), 21–27.
17. Chukwunenye, J. N., & Adegoke, B. A. (2014). Catching students‟ interest in physics using computer simulated experiments. West African Journal of Education, XXXIV, 295-309
18. Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. New York: Springer Science & Business Media\
19. Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). A cyclical self-regulation account of student engagement. Theoretical foundation
20. Dogan, U. (2015). Student engagement, academic self-efficacy, and academic motivation as predictors of academic performance. Anthropologist, 20(3), 553-561.
21. D’Zurilla, T. J., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Gallardo-Pujol, D. (2011). Predicting social problem solving using personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 142–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.015
22. Erdem, D. K., & Ibrahim K. (2013). Motivational and learning strategies as predictors of high school students’ math achievement. Faculty of Education Journal. ;58(3): 258-265.
23. Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In Handbook of research on student engagement. Boston, MA: Springer US
24. García-Pérez, D., Fraile, J., & Panadero, E. (2021). Learning strategies and self-regulation incontext: How higher education students approach different courses, assessments, and challenges. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36(2), 533-550.
25. Glapaththi, I. ,Dissanayake, R., Welgama, T. , Somachandara, U., Weerarathna, R.S. & Pathirana, G.Y.(2019). A study on the relationship between student engagement and their academicAsian Social Science, 15(11), 1-16.
26. Gopal, K., Salim, N. R., & Ayub, A. F. M. (2019). Perceptions of learning mathematics among lowersecondary students in Malaysia: Study on students’ engagement using fuzzy conjoint analysis. Malaysian Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 13(2), 165- 185.
27. Gunuc, S. & Kuzu, A. (2014). Student engagement scale: Development, reliability and validity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2014.938019.
28. Herrmann, K. J., McCune, V. & Bager-Elsborg, A. (2017). Approaches to learning as predictors of academic achievement: Results from a large scale, multi-level analysis. Hogre Utbildning, 7(1), 29–42
29. Kyllonen, P.C. (2012). Measurement of 21st century skills within the common core state standards. Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from: https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/session5-kyllonen-paper-tea2012.pdf
30. Li, S., & Lajoie, S. P. (2021). Cognitive engagement in self-regulated learning: an integrative model. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1-20.
31. Mohammad, R. G.; Hossein, K. M. & Abbas, H. (2018). Student-related factors affecting academic engagement: A qualitative study exploring the experiences of Iranian undergraduate nursing students. Electronic Physician 10 (7), 7078-7085.
32. Nagadeepa, C. (2021). Students’ understanding and learning: mediation effects of cognitiveengagement in online classes. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(6), 2932-2939.
33. Nathan, E. D (2018) Relationship among Academic Self-Efficacy, Cognitive Engagement
34. and Academic Achievement of senior secondary School students in KadunaState,
35. NIGERIA A unpublished D Thesis Dissertation Submitted to the school of 
36. Postgraduate studies, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria
37. Olaniyan, A. O., & Omosewo, E. O. (2015). Effects of a target-task problem-solving model on senior secondary school students’ performance in physics. Science Education International, 25 (4), 522-53
38. Robb, M. K. (2014). Factors that influence cognitive engagement and academic success of pre-licensure Baccalaureate Millennial Nursing Students. A published Phd Thesis. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
39. Romano, L., Angelini, G., Consiglio, P., & Fiorilli, C. (2021). Academic resilience and engagement inhigh school students: The mediating role of perceived teacher emotional support. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 11(2), 334–344.
40. Sakiyo, J., & Badau, K.M. (2015). Assessment of the trend of secondary school students’ academic performance in Sciences, Mathematics and English: Implication for the attainment of the millennium development Goals in Nigeria. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 2(2), 31-38.
41. Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories. An educational perspective, Boston, MA:Pearson Allyn and Bacon.
42. Sedaghat, M., Abedin, A., Hejazi, E., & Hassanabadi, H. (2011). Motivation, cognitive engagement, and academic achievement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2406-2410.
43. Seah, W.T. and Andersson, A. (2015) Valuing diversity in mathematics pedagogy through the Volitional nature and alignment of values. In: Bishop, A., Tan, H. and Barkatsas, T., Eds., Diversity in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham, 167-183.https://doi. org/10.10 07/978-3-319-05978-5_10
44. Shukor, A.N., & Tasir, Z. (2011 ).Overcoming issues in cognitive engagement for learning computer related subject through computer supported collaborative learning. Journal of Edu pres.;26(1):145-151.
45. Skinner, Ellen A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.),Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (21–44).htt ps://doi.o rg/10.10 07/978-1-4614-2018-7_2.
46. Teoh, H. C., Abdullah, M. C., Roslan, S. & Daud, S. M.(2014). Assessing students approaches to learning using a matrix framework in a Malaysian public university. Springer Plus, 3.doi:10.1186/2193-1801-3-54.
47. Valle, A., Regueiro, B., Núñez, J. C., Rodríguez, S., Piñeiro, I., & Rosário, P. (2016). Academicgoals, student homework engagement, and academic achievement in elementary school. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 463
48. Vivek, S. D., S. E. Beatty, V. Dalela, & R. M. Morgan. (2014). A generalized multidimensional scale for measuring customer engagement. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice22 (4): 401–420
49. Wara, E., Aloka, P. J., & Odongo, B. C. (2018). Relationship between cognitive engagementand academic achievement among Kenyan Secondary School Students. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 9(2), 61-61.
50. Wang, M., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction,28 (December 2013), 12-23.Retrieved from https://nee.missouri.edu/documents/Wang%202013%20classroom%20engagement.pdf
51. Xie, K., Heddy, B. C., & Greene, B. A. (2019). Affordances of using mobile technology to support experience-sampling method in examining college students’ engagement. Computers & Education, 128, 183–198.