Table 4-42. All Student Mean Scores of Motivation Constructs
Construct N Mean SD Min Max
Total motivation 706 30.81 4.04 12.60 39.80
Intrinsic motivation 709 4.61 1.10 1.25 7.00
Extrinsic motivation 708 5.42 1.10 1.00 7.00
Task value 707 5.31 1.26 1.00 7.00
Control of learning 709 5.76 0.99 1.00 7.00
Self-efficacy 707 5.88 0.97 2.25 7.00
Test anxiety 708 3.83 1.48 1.00 7.00
Note. Motivation was measured with the MSLQ using 31 items with standardized
constructs. Possible range: Total motivation (6-48), all constructs (1-7). Coded: higher
score equals higher level of motivation.

least engaged student in this study had a total score of 32 while the most engaged student

had a total engagement score of 80. The total mean for student engagement of all students

was 49.58 (SD=8.20, n=712) which was 14.16 points lower than the national mean for

college seniors (Kuh et al., 2001). Constructs of student engagement were also lower than

the national mean for college seniors (Kuh et al.): academic challenge was 7.99 points

lower, active learning was 5.26 points lower and student-faculty interaction was 0.90

points lower. These construct mean score differences provide evidence that student

respondents had low levels of academic challenge and active learning, but an average

level of student-faculty interaction. See Table 4-43 for specific findings regarding student

engagement of all participants of this study.

Table 4-43. All Student Mean Scores of Engagement Constructs
Construct N Mean SD Min Max Range
Total student engagement 712 49.58 8.20 32 80 48
Academic challenge 713 25.19 4.33 14 38 24
Active learning 714 12.66 3.22 7 25 18
Student-faculty interaction 713 11.74 3.08 6 22 16
Note. Engagement was measured by the NSSE with 24 summated items. Possible range:
Total Engagement (24-96), Academic Challenge (11-44), Active Learning (7-28),
Student-Faculty Interaction (6-24). Coded: higher score equals higher level of
engagement.