Prediction of Dropout Among Students With Mild Disabilities

By Amy L. Reschly, S. Christenson. 2006

350 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a278509964d2485a86c9ac4805b298586eca7c98

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

1. Amy L. Reschly
2. R. N. Landis
3. Henk Ritzen
4. Jules M. Pieters
5. J. V. Uden
6. James J. Appleton
7. Sheri Bauman
8. S. Davis

In Education

1. Amy L. Reschly
2. Jennifer Fredricks
3. R. N. Landis
4. Wendy H. McColskey
5. Henk Ritzen
6. Jules M. Pieters
7. J. V. Uden
8. S. Christenson

Citations in the corpus

• The association between teaching students with disabilities and teacher turnover. (2020, background): “Many SWDs exhibit low academic achievement and behavioral challenges (Gilmour, Fuchs, & Wehby, 2018; Blackorby et al., 2005; Institute for Education Sciences, 2006; Reschly & Christenson, 2006; U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2014).”
• RELATIONS AMONG SCHOOL ASSETS, INDIVIDUAL RESILIENCE, AND STUDENT ENGAGEMENT FOR YOUTH GROUPED BY LEVEL OF FAMILY FUNCTIONING (2008, background): “Student engagement predicts school completion for students with and without disabilities above and beyond the impacts of socioeconomic status, achievement test scores, and grade retention status (Reschly & Christenson, 2006).”
• Reading and School Completion: Critical Connections and Matthew Effects (2010, background): “Many students who eventually drop out experience difficulty meeting the academic expectations of schools, often struggling for years prior to dropping out; however, social and interpersonal aspects of schooling are also a critical part of this phenomenon (Reschly & Christenson, 2006a ).”
• Academic Engagement: An Overview of Its Definitions, Dimensions, and Major Conceptualisations (2016, background): “…observable dimension of engagement, and the salient indicators of this dimension include truancy, preparation for school, attendance, participation in curricular and extracurricular tasks, and discipline referrals (Appleton et al., 2008; Fredricks et al., 2004; Reschly & Christenson, 2006).”
• Engaging students: The role of teacher beliefs and interpersonal teacher behavior in fostering student engagement in vocational education (2014, methodology): “We based our final instrument on the questionnaires used by Appleton, Christenson, Kim, and Reschly (2006), Archambault et al. (2009) and Reschly and Christenson (2006).”
• Reexamining Gifted Underachievement and Dropout Through the Lens of Student Engagement (2013, methodology): “It was suggested that cognitive engagement, like affective engagement, influences behavioral engagement, indirectly influencing dropout (Archambault et al., 2009; Reschly & Christenson, 2006a).”
• The Measurement of Student Engagement: A Comparative Analysis of Various Methods and Student Self-report Instruments (2012, background): “Finally, Christenson and her colleagues (Appleton, Christenson, Kim, & Reschly, 2006 ; Reschly & Christenson, 2006 ) conceptualized engagement as having four dimensions: academic, behavioral, cognitive, and psychological (subsequently referred to as affective) engagement.”
• Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument (2006, background): “…and refined a taxonomy, or organizing heuristic, not only for understanding student levels of engagement, but for recognizing the goodness-of-fit between the student, the learning environment and factors that influence the fit (Christenson & Anderson, 2002; Reschly & Christenson, 2006, in press).”
• Reading Motivation and Reading Engagement: Clarifying Commingled Conceptions (2014, background): “Engagement entails relationship and some form of fit between the reader and the environment (Reschly & Christenson, 2006).”
• The Effect of Teacher Coaching with Performance Feedback on Behavior-Specific Praise in Inclusion Classrooms (2011, background): “…high-incidence disabilities are enrolled in inclusion classrooms taught by general education teachers (Conderman & Katsiyannis, 2002; Handler, 2006; Reschly & Christenson, 2006) who may be unprepared to manage the academic and behavioral needs of students with disabilities that may interfere with…”