The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What Student Affairs Professionals Need to Know About Student Engagement
Abstract
What Student Affairs Professionals Need to Know About Student Engagement George D. Kuh (bio) In a 1992 Calvin and Hobbs cartoon (Watterson), 6-year-old Calvin asks his teacher whether he is being adequately prepared for the challenges of the 21st century. He wants to know if he will have the skills and competencies that will allow him to succeed in a tough, global economy. In response, the teacher suggests he start working harder because what he will get out of school depends on how much effort he puts into it. Calvin ponders this advice for a moment and says, "Then forget it." The exchange between Calvin and his teacher gets right to the point about what matters to student learning and personal development. Indeed, one of the few unequivocal conclusions from How College Affects Students (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005) is that the amount of time and energy students put forth-student engagement-is positively linked with the desired outcomes of undergraduate education. Unfortunately, Calvin's response is all too common, if not according to what students say, then by what they do or do not do. In this paper, I summarize the role and contributions of the scholarship and institutional research about student engagement and its relevance for student development professionals and others committed to enhancing the quality of the undergraduate experience. The presentation is organized into four major sections. First, I briefly describe the evolution of the student engagement concept and explain its importance to student development. Then, I summarize findings from research studies about the relationships between student engagement and selected activities including participation in high-impact practices, employment, and some other experiences of relevant a relevance to the current generation of undergraduates. Next, I discuss some topics that warrant additional investigation to better understand how to further potential and utility of student engagement research and institutional policies and practices that the findings suggest. I close with some observations about the implications of student engagement research for student affairs professionals and others on campus committed to improving the quality of undergraduate education. Meaning, Evolution, and Importance of Student Engagement Student engagement represents the time and effort students devote to activities that are empirically linked to desired outcomes of college and what institutions do to induce students to participate in these activities (Kuh, 2001, 2003, 2009). The meaning and applications of this definition of student engagement have evolved over time to represent increasingly complex understandings of the relationships between desired outcomes of college and the amount of time and effort students invest in their studies and other educationally purposeful activities (Kuh, 2009; Wolf-Wendel, Ward, & Kinzie, 2009). For example, building on Tyler's "time on task" concept (Merwin, 1969), Pace [End Page 683] (1980, 1984) developed the College Student Experiences Questionnaire (CSEQ) to measure "quality of effort" to identify the activities that contributed to various dimensions of student learning and personal development. His research across three decades (1960 to 1990) showed that students gained more from their studies and other aspects of the college experience when they devoted more time and energy to certain tasks that required more effort than others-studying, interacting with their peers and teachers about substantive matters, applying their learning to concrete situations and tasks in different contexts, and so forth (Pace, 1984, 1990). Astin (1984) further fleshed out and popularized the quality of effort concept with his "theory of involvement," which highlighted the psychological and behavioral dimensions of time on task and quality of effort. His landmark longitudinal studies about the impact of college on students empirically demonstrated the links between involvement and a range of attitudinal and developmental outcomes (Astin, 1977, 1993). Astin was a major contributor to the widely cited Involvement in Learning report (National Institute of Education, 1984) which underscored the importance of involvement to student achievement and such other valued outcomes as persistence and educational attainment (Astin, 1999). In that same decade, after an invitational conference of scholars and educators held at the Wingspread Conference Center in Wisconsin, Chickering and Gamson (1987) distilled the discussions about the features of high-quality teaching and learning settings into seven good practices in undergraduate education: (a) student-faculty contact, (b) active learning, (c...
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition
Bean, J. P. (1988) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.1080/00221546.1988.11780239 · Cited by 7,369
What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited.
Feldman, K. A., & Astin, A. W. (1994) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.2307/2943781 · Cited by 5,745
Student Involvement: A Developmental Theory for Higher Education
Astin, A. W. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315051888-15 · Cited by 5,265
Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1989) · Biochemical Education · doi:10.1016/0307-4412(89)90094-0 · Cited by 4,839
(2005) · Cited by 3,554
High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them, and Why They Matter
Kuh, G. D. (2008) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,986
Self-citationChickering, A. W. (1969) · Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (Québec government) · Cited by 2,667
Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research
(2007) · Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5666-6 · Cited by 2,359
(1993) · Cited by 2,050
Unmasking the Effects of Student Engagement on First-Year College Grades and Persistence
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.1080/00221546.2008.11772116 · Cited by 1,840
Self-citation
Cited by
Framing student engagement in higher education
Kahu, E. R. (2013) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.598505 · Cited by 2,103
The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades: Twitter and student engagement
Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x · Cited by 1,535
Junco, R. (2012) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004 · Cited by 1,233
Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8 · Cited by 1,097
“…force that energises behaviour (Lim, 2004; Reeve, 2012; Reschly & Christenson, 2012), whereas student engagement is energy and effort in action; an observable manifestation (Appleton et al., 2008; Eccles & Wang, 2012; Kuh, 2009; Skinner & Pitzer, 2012), evidenced through a range of indicators.”
BackgroundJunco, R. (2012) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.026 · Cited by 843
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuh, G. D.
- Venue
- Journal of College Student Development
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2009-11
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 683-706
- ISSN
- 0897-5264 (ISSN-L)
- 1543-3382
- OpenAlex
- W2050791284
- Cited by
- 1,298
- References
- 80
- FWCI
- 129.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What Student Affairs Professionals Need to Know About Student Engagement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1353/csd.0.0099
- The paper
- Kuh, G. D. (2009). What Student Affairs Professionals Need to Know About Student Engagement. Journal of College Student Development. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.