An ethics approval for this research was not required as per the ethical guidelines of the Faculty of Psychology at FernUniversität in Hagen and regulations of the German Psychological Society due to the noncontroversial nature of the content and the administration of the study. All subjects were parents (adults aged above 21 years). Before their participation, all subjects were informed about the research purposes. Also, they were informed that participation in this research is anonymously and voluntarily. Furthermore, they were informed about the applicable data protection guidelines and the possibility to quit participation whenever they wanted without any disadvantages. Informed consent of the participants was implied through survey completion.

### AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

SD contributed to the design of the study and the data collection, carried out the analyses and data interpretation, drafted and finalized the manuscript. SY and KJ contributed to the design of the study, parts of the analyses, and data interpretation and provided input for revisions of the manuscript draft.

Cooper, H. (1989). *Homework*. (White Plains, NY: Longman).

*of parenthood*. eds. M. Richter, and S. Andresen (Berlin, Germany: Springer), 165–180.

**Conflict of Interest Statement:** The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

*Copyright © 2019 Dettmers, Yotyodying and Jonkmann. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.*

# Student Perception of Teacher and Parent Involvement in Homework and Student Engagement: The Mediating Role of Motivation

José C. Núñez1 , Bibiana Regueiro2 , Natalia Suárez1 \*, Isabel Piñeiro2 , María Luisa Rodicio3 and Antonio Valle2

1 Department of Psychology, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain, 2 Department of Psychology, University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain, 3 Department of Specific Didactics and Methods of Research and Diagnosis in Education, University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain

#### Edited by:

Carl Senior, Aston University, United Kingdom

#### Reviewed by:

Amelia Mañá, University of Valencia, Spain Raquel Cerdan, University of Valencia, Spain

\*Correspondence:

Natalia Suárez<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
#### Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

Received: 20 December 2018 Accepted: 28 May 2019 Published: 13 June 2019

#### Citation:

Núñez JC, Regueiro B, Suárez N, Piñeiro I, Rodicio ML and Valle A (2019) Student Perception of Teacher and Parent Involvement in Homework and Student Engagement: The Mediating Role of Motivation. Front. Psychol. 10:1384. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01384 Currently, there is much debate about the value of assigning homework. Organizations such as the OECD have concluded that doing more homework is not synonymous with better performance. This study was designed to analyze the mediating role of student motivation in the relationship between the involvement of parents and teachers in homework and the engagement of students in these tasks. Seven hundred and thirty students in Compulsory Secondary Education (7th–10th grade) participated from 14 schools in the north of Spain. Three competing models were developed and tested to study motivational mediation: a non-motivational mediation model (direct effects model); a total motivational mediation model (indirect effects model); and a partial motivational mediation model (mixed effects model). The best model was adjusted according to gender and school year variables. The total mediation motivational model demonstrated the best fit (indirect effects model). The results suggest the total mediation of student motivation in the relationship between the perception of parents' and teachers' involvement in homework and student cognitive engagement in these tasks. Some differences, albeit slight, were observed with respect to gender and school year. The results have clear theoretical and educational implications.

Keywords: student homework motivation and engagement, perceived parental homework involvement, perceived teacher homework involvement, secondary education, homework engagement

### INTRODUCTION

Homework has been a very common topic in educational research in recent decades (Trautwein, 2007; Fernández-Alonso et al., 2015; Valle et al., 2015; Ba¸s et al., 2017; Fan et al., 2017), most of which has tended to analyze its relationships and its real impact on student academic achievement. Past research has often focused more on aspects related to the amount of homework done and the time spent on it than on the quality of the homework process, its precursors, and its effects on learning.

The homework process is what students do when dealing with homework; how they approach their work and how they manage their personal resources and settings when they do homework. Research and theory suggest that students' intentions and reasons for doing homework influence how they cope with it; in other words, the quality of their engagement (Ryan and Deci, 2000). Some students approach homework with the intention of learning and reinforcing the knowledge acquired in class, trying to resolve questions that may arise while doing homework, and relating the homework to what they have previously learned. It therefore involves an intrinsic purpose of understanding the ideas and using strategies to create meaning. In this context, intrinsic motivation has been associated with a host of positive outcomes such as persistence, performance, interest, and positive emotions (Bouffard et al., 2001; Hardre and Reeve, 2003; Coutts, 2004; Valle et al., 2016). Most studies have shown that the deeper students' approach to learning, the better their learning outcomes. When students are involved in academic tasks mainly for the purpose of understanding, they do those tasks more profoundly and meaningfully, they use self-regulation strategies in their learning process and exhibit better well-being (Bouffard et al., 2001; Midgley, 2002; Vansteenkiste et al., 2005). Conversely, if students work on homework because they feel compelled by their teachers, and perhaps by their parents, a sense of duty or avoidance of punishment (Walker et al., 2004), it is very likely that the student will exhibit poor persistence and little significant learning (Vallerand et al., 1997).

Various theoretical approaches have been used as frameworks for research in the past: Self-Determination Theory (SDT-Deci and Ryan, 2000), Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT- Eccles, 2005), Goal Orientation Theory (Elliot, 2005) and the Student Engagement Framework (Reschly and Christenson, 2012). These theoretical frameworks, in various ways, agree in assuming that academic motivation is context-dependent. The support provided by context (mainly parents and teachers) is fundamental in explaining the type of, and changes in, motivation (Katz et al., 2010). In Connell and Wellborn's (1991) model of self-system processes, motivation was viewed as a mediator between context and outcomes. In our study, as in recent research (e.g., Feng et al., 2019), we attempted to analyze the extent to which this model can be applied to the field of homework. The student engagement framework seems to be a good theoretical model to pursue this objective.

In this study we investigate to what extent students' homework motivation mediates between the support of the context (i.e., parental and teacher homework involvement) and student homework engagement.

### Motivation and Student Homework Engagement

Engagement and motivation to learn are highly interrelated. Some researchers use the terms engagement and motivation interchangeably (e.g., Martin, 2007), others have proposed that the meta-construct of student engagement subsumes motivation (e.g., Fredricks et al., 2004), while others argue that they are different, but closely related constructs. As different constructs, motivation represents intention and engagement represents action (e.g., Russell et al., 2004). In our study we follow this third line of thought: motivation and student engagement are understood as related, but different constructs.

Student engagement has been significantly associated with contextual factors (Lam et al., 2012). Parent and teacher involvement are two of the main variables responsible for student motivation and homework engagement. Research has identified parent involvement in homework as one way that parents and families can influence student motivation and school engagement. Parents who provide assistance with homework play a critical role not only in fostering learning, but in scaffolding strategies for time management and problem-solving (Moè et al., 2018). Furthermore, their interest in and help with homework predicts their children's self-perceptions of competence (Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001; Pomerantz et al., 2006).

So, how does parent and teacher involvement in homework impact children's engagement and achievement? To answer this primary question, we bring the proposal from Grolnick and Slowiaczek (1994) to the homework field. They suggest two models: (i) a direct effects model, and (ii) an indirect or motivational model.

Focusing on the field of parental involvement in homework, the direct effects model would suggest that parental involvement in children's homework helps children by teaching them the academic skills they need to do good homework. The indirect effects model suggests that parental homework involvement affects children by promoting their motivation to engage with their homework and school tasks and do them well. According to this indirect or motivational model, when parents place importance on homework, children themselves come to value homework and develop the sense of competence that enables them to make efforts in learning activities, such as homework. Thus, the motivational homework model suggests that parental involvement in homework facilitates the motivational resources that enhance children's homework engagement (Raftery et al., 2012). Both models would have similar explanations in the case of teacher involvement in homework.

### Teacher Involvement in Homework

Setting homework is an extremely widespread instructional practice (OECD, 2014). And, although the reasons for setting homework may be different depending on variables such as the type of culture (Moorhouse, 2018), teachers play absolutely critical roles in the homework process (Murillo and Martinez-Garrido, 2014). They play these important roles at two points in the homework process. In the first phase by setting the objectives of homework assignments and designing tasks; and in the final phase by implementing classroom follow-up practices (Cooper, 2001; Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2001; Rosário et al., 2015).

Some researchers found that middle and high school students who perceived their homework assignments as well-selected or well-prepared by their teachers reported higher motivation and effort at student and at class level (Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2007; Dettmers et al., 2010). As Trautwein et al. (2006) stated in

their theoretical homework model, the perceptions of homework quality influence homework expectations and the value ascribed to it, which predicts homework effort. In a recent study with elementary students, Rosário et al. (2019) concluded that what seemed to explain achievement was the students' perception of the quality of homework (i.e., assignments which are wellchosen by the teacher, which are interesting, related to the material taught in class, and useful for understanding the material covered in class), more than the type of homework set (see also, Fredricks, 2011).

Cunha et al. (2018a) explored teachers' conceptions of homework feedback (47 teachers from elementary and middle schools participated in six focus groups) focusing on definition, purpose, types, and perceived impact. Teachers conceptualized homework feedback in three directions (i.e., teacher feedback to students, student feedback to teachers, and homework selffeedback). The most common purpose reported by most teachers was teacher monitoring of student learning, with checking homework completion and checking homework on the board being the most commonly used type of homework feedback in class. In another study at middle school level, Rosário et al. (2019) found that teachers' purposes for homework follow-up practices in class were focused on identifying students' learning strengths and weaknesses, promoting students' engagement, and addressing students' difficulties in mathematics. The follow-up practices included homework feedback provided in class: oral or written praise, criticism, written comments (highlighting right and wrong answers), rewards, general review of homework in class, and grading (e.g., Elawar and Corno, 1985; Corno, 2000; Cooper, 2001; Medwell and Wray, 2018).

These homework feedback practices are an important instructional tool for teachers in their teaching processes (e.g., helping identify students' difficulties, errors or misconceptions in homework; approaching the learning content accommodating students' lack of prior knowledge, and redesigning homework to match student needs) (Corno, 2000; Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2001; An and Wu, 2012). However, feedback provided by the teacher is also important for students because it is a way for the students to perceive the quality of their progress and help them to overcome difficulties they may have when doing homework (Trautwein et al., 2009; Núñez et al., 2015a). To be effective, feedback should provide information on the progress achieved and on how to act in the future. Providing feedback about a particular task should include information about how successfully it was done, providing an opportunity to improve and expand knowledge.

Previous research has shown that teacher homework feedback, as perceived by students, is positively related to student interest in homework (Xu, 2008), quality of student motivation toward homework (Katz et al., 2010), homework management strategies (Xu et al., 2017), and amount of homework completed and academic achievement (Núñez et al., 2015a). For example, the study by Núñez et al. (2015a), with students from various school years (grades 5–12), concluded that the better the student perception of teachers' homework feedback, the greater the amount of homework completed and the better the homework time management. When students perceive their homework as of higher quality, they are more likely to put in more effort, complete homework more frequently, perform better on assignments, and achieve higher grades in mathematics. Moreover, these authors found that students' academic achievement is indirectly and positively associated with teacher homework feedback through students' homework behaviors and self-regulation (i.e., amount of homework completed; quality of homework time management), highlighting the importance of student engagement in the homework process. Research also shows engagement to be higher in students who have developed strong relationships with their teachers, in which the teachers support students' autonomy, have high expectations, and give consistent and clear feedback.

### Parental Involvement in Homework

Patall et al. (2008) found positive effects in relation to parental involvement in homework, among other variables, in student attitudes to homework, and Pomerantz et al. (2007) found that parental behavioral involvement improves student achievement because it promotes student motivation and encourages student commitment. However, relationships between parental involvement in homework and academic achievement have been extensively debated and frequently researched (Gonida and Cortina, 2014; Gonida and Vauras, 2014) with inconsistent results. Some studies have found a positive relationship (e.g., Cooper et al., 2001; Pomerantz and Eaton, 2001), others have reported a negative relationship (Schultz, 1999), and others mixed results (e.g., Dumont et al., 2012).

In three longitudinal studies, Van Voorhis (2011) found a positive relationship between parental involvement, guided by a systematic intervention, and student achievement in mathematics, science, and language. Although some studies using structural equation models (SEM) have also reported a positive relationship between parental involvement and achievement (Cooper et al., 2001; Pomerantz and Eaton, 2001), others have found a negative relationship, and some, mixed results (Dumont et al., 2012). In particular, Dumont et al. (2012) found both positive and negative relationships depending on the quality of parental involvement and the different measures of the educational outcome (achievement, self-concept, and attitudes).

The mixed results may be due to multiple factors. Results vary depending on factors such as research design (Patall et al., 2008); content domain (e.g., subject-specific vs. general homework and academic achievement, Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2012); different dimensions of the construct measured (Dumont et al., 2012, 2013; Karbach et al., 2013); student school year (Cooper and Valentine, 2001), etc. Of all of those, the type of parental involvement may be one of the most determining factors (Ng et al., 2004; Pomerantz et al., 2007; Patall et al., 2008; Karbach et al., 2013; Gonida and Cortina, 2014; Suárez et al., 2014; Núñez et al., 2015b). Dumont et al. (2012, p. 64) suggested that "it is therefore crucial to distinguish between different dimensions of parental homework involvement and not to focus only on its quantity. Because different forms of parental homework involvement may have contrasting effects, an exclusive focus on the extent of parents' involvement may lead to erroneous conclusions about its effectiveness."

Different types of parental involvement in homework have been reported in the literature. For example, Hoover-Dempsey et al. (2001) describe eight ways in which parents can be involved in their children's homework. From a more precise perspective, Pomerantz et al. (2007) indicated four qualitatively different dimensions of parent involvement in homework: autonomy support vs. control, process vs. person focus, positive vs. negative affect, and positive vs. negative beliefs about children's potential. At a more systematic and operational level, Lorenz and Wild (2007), proposed four different types of parental involvement: autonomy supportive practices (i.e., parents encourage selfinitiated homework activities), control (i.e., parents pressure children to complete their homework assignments and issue instructions that undermine autonomous behavior), structure (i.e., parents organize the homework environment), and emotional involvement (i.e., parents acknowledge children's feelings about homework). Gonida and Cortina (2014), basing their work on various ideas from previous research, developed and validated a self-report scale that provides information directly through parents' responses on four different forms of parental involvement in homework: (i) autonomy support and promotion of self-regulated learning, (ii) control, (iii) interference, and (iv) cognitive engagement related to schoolwork as supplementary to homework. Recently, Cunha et al. (2018b) validated the Parental Homework Management Scale (PHMS) for parents of elementary and junior high school children (ages 9– 13 years) in the domain of mathematics, based on the responses of a sample of 2,118 parent–child dyads. The PHMS scale was originally constructed to measure four common types of parental involvement: (1) environment, (2) time, (3) motivation, and (4) emotion management. However, the results showed that at such early ages the PHMS is composed of two different but related factors: (1) environment-time management and (2) motivationemotion management.

Different types of parental homework involvement have different implications for the student's engagement with homework. Dumont et al. (2012) found both positive and negative relationships, depending on the nature or quality of the involvement. For example, whereas perceived parent–child conflicts about homework were negatively associated with educational outcomes, perceived parental competence and support for students' self-direction were positively related to achievement. Similar results were reported by Karbach et al. (2013), who found that academic achievement was significantly and negatively associated with parental control and strict structure (i.e., excessive control and pressure on children to complete assignments, consistent guidelines and rules about homework and school work). Gonida and Cortina (2014) saw different patterns of student gain depending on the type of parental involvement in homework: autonomy support was the most positive (parents who are involved giving support and favoring the autonomy of the child promote the development of a motivational orientation directed to learning and mastery), while interference was the most damaging (because it undermines mastery goal orientation and reduces perceived competence). Data from the study by Cunha et al. (2018b) showed a similar picture to that of previous studies (e.g., Dumont et al., 2012; Karbach et al., 2013; Gonida and Cortina, 2014): the two dimensions of the PHMS (i.e., environment-time and motivation-emotion management) were positively associated with homework self-regulation strategies and positive homework emotions. Finally, Silinskas and Kikas (2019) found that perceived parental control negatively and significantly predicts mathematical performance, student self-concept and student persistence. However, perceived parental support positively predicts student task persistence.

So, the results from past research show without a doubt that autonomy support is the most advisable form of parental involvement in children's homework. Parental homework autonomy support can encourage the development of intrinsic motivation toward homework (see also Katz et al., 2011; Madjar et al., 2016; Moè et al., 2018; Feng et al., 2019), increased perceived competence and homework management (Xu et al., 2017; Moè et al., 2018), and task persistence (Silinskas and Kikas, 2019), as well as reducing procrastination (Katz et al., 2014). In general, all of this suggests that parental homework involvement may play a valuable role in student homework management.

### Role of Student Age and Gender

The association between parental homework involvement and student achievement proved to be mediated by school year (Skaliotis, 2010), happening less frequently as students grow older (Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler, 1997), although the data we have available seem to suggest greater consistency in middle and high school than in elementary school (see Chen, 2008; Patall et al., 2008). Silinskas and Kikas (2019) reported mixed results from their study with elementary school students. On the one hand, the results showed that perceived parental support was positively related to student task persistence, but the relationship disappeared when the sample was split by gender. Differences related to school year in the relationship between parental homework involvement and student homework management were also found by Núñez et al. (2015b). The data from that study indicated that perceived parental homework support and control was not related to student homework behaviors at the elementary school level, there was considerable association at the junior high school level, and more targeted association at the high school level. Finally, the study by Gonida and Cortina (2014), found differences associated with school year (elementary and junior high school years) in parental homework involvement. However, those differences were related to the mean scores for some of the variables (i.e., parent autonomy homework support and control), but no differences were seen in the structural part of the full mediation model tested.

Findings from Núñez et al. (2015b) suggested that higher school years (Grades 5–12) were associated with lower levels of perceived homework feedback from teachers. This coincides with data from other studies (e.g., Katz et al., 2010).

With respect to student variables (homework motivation and homework engagement), the available data suggest that as students move from elementary to high school, motivation and engagement decrease. For example, Katz et al. (2010) found school-year-related differences in student homework autonomous motivation: junior high school students have lower

motivation than elementary school students. Similar data has been seen in studies carried out in different cultures and environments. Hong et al. (2009), analyzing Chinese students' (7th and 11th graders), concluded that older students were less engaged, persisted less, and expressed less enjoyment doing homework than younger students did. This pattern of devaluing school work, and exhibiting less effort and persistence when completing homework is in line with other studies and analyses in western cultures (e.g., Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2012; Regueiro et al., 2018). The data from samples of European students gives us the same picture: statistically significant differences as a function of school year in student homework motivation and engagement. For example, the study from Regueiro et al. (2015) with fourth to tenth grade students found that students in the higher grades, compared with the youngest, are less interested in homework, find it less useful, and have a more negative attitude toward homework.

Finally, several studies have looked at gender. For example, in a recent study, Madjar et al. (2016) did not find statistically significant differences in boys and girls in goal orientation toward homework, although Xu (2006) had found such differences. In middle school students, Feng et al. (2019) found that boys reported higher homework autonomy motivation than girls. On the other hand, in contrast to the data from Xu and Corno (2006), Núñez et al. (2015a), reported the absence of gender differences in the perception of teacher homework feedback.

### The Current Study: Goals and Hypotheses

In this study we intend to analyze the validity of the indirect effects model (or motivational model) of student homework engagement, in students from two different school levels (middle and junior high school students), and by gender. We will analyze the extent to which motivation mediates the effect of the involvement of parents and teachers on student homework engagement (i.e., use of SRL strategies). In general terms, we intend to test the hypothesis that students' autonomous motivation to do quality homework mediates the relationship between perceived teacher and parental involvement on homework and the students' homework engagement. For a mediating effect to occur, the mediator variable must be significantly related to both the independent variable and the dependent variable. Based on the results of previous research (e.g., Katz et al., 2010; Feng et al., 2019), which support a model of indirect effects or motivational model (Raftery et al., 2012), in this study we hypothesize that (i) student's perceptions of the involvement of their parents and teachers in their homework significantly influences their motivation toward homework, and (ii) that this in turn influences their engagement (Bouffard et al., 2001) in the realization of quality homework (i.e., use of selfregulated learning strategies in homework).

Data from previous research lead us to specify both hypotheses in the following terms (see **Figure 1**). First, we expect that the perception of involvement of both parents and teachers in homework will significantly and positively affect student homework motivation. The greater the perception of the

involvement of teachers and parents in homework, the more motivated the student, and vice versa (e.g., Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2001; Patall et al., 2008; Karbach et al., 2013; Núñez et al., 2015a,b, 2017; Rosário et al., 2015, 2018). However, given the more direct relationship between teachers and homework, as reported in other studies (e.g., Feng et al., 2019), we expect teachers' behavior to be a more powerful predictor than parents' behavior. Secondly, we also expect the use of self-regulation strategies for working on homework to be significantly and positively conditioned by student's motivation for homework engagement (e.g., Midgley, 2002; Vansteenkiste et al., 2005; Valle et al., 2015). Students who are more motivated toward the task

(with the intention of learning) will tend to use more selfregulation strategies in their homework than students with less task-oriented motivation.

In order to examine these hypotheses, we formulated a model of structural equations with three variants: (i) a no motivational mediation model, or the direct effects model; (ii) a total motivational mediation model, or indirect effects model; and (iii) a partial motivational mediation model, or mixed effects model. In the total motivational mediation model, the effect of the perception of involvement of parents and teachers in homework on the use of self-regulation learning strategies occurs entirely through student homework autonomous motivation (there is an indirect effect, but not direct). However, there is partial mediation when, at the same time, both an indirect (mediation) and a direct effect occur. Finally, non-mediation takes place when the perception of involvement of parents and teachers in homework is not related to the mediating variable (i.e., homework autonomous motivation), and instead they directly influence the use of self-regulated learning strategies when working on homework.

Previous research leads us to assume a total motivational mediation hypothesis (although partial mediation could also occur). According to a model of total motivational mediation (see **Figure 1**), we hypothesize that:

data provided by other researchers that have worked with different academic levels with respect to effects of parental involvement (e.g., Cooper and Valentine, 2001; Núñez et al., 2015b) and teacher involvement (e.g., Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2007; Katz et al., 2010; Xu et al., 2017) in students' homework, we hypothesize the existence of statistically significant differences in the structural part of the established model.

### MATERIALS AND METHODS

### Participants

The sample included 730 students in 4 years of Compulsory Secondary Education (CSE) in Spain who were enrolled in one of the 14 public schools participating in the study (located in three provinces in northern Spain). Approximately half of the schools are located in urban areas, and the other half are in rural or semi-urban areas. Just over half (56.6%) of the students were girls. The distribution of participants by year is similar: 26.6% in 7th grade; 20.8% in 8th grade; 24.9% in 9th grade; and 27.7% in 10th grade. The ages of the participants ranged between 12 and 16 years old.

### Instruments

The variables Perceived Parental Homework Involvement and Perceived Teacher Homework Involvement were obtained from various items of the Homework Survey (see **Appendix**), used in previous research (e.g., Núñez et al., 2015a,b; Valle et al., 2015).

### Perceived Parental Homework Involvement (PPHWI)

This measures parents' supportive behavior (as perceived by the students) when their children do homework (see **Appendix**). The three items in this subscale were taken from the Parental Homework Support Scale (Xu et al., 2017). The measure mainly has to do with perceived parental content-oriented support, rather than parental homework autonomy as such. The students' responses are rated on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (totally false) to 5 (absolutely true). Taking into account the small number of items (three), the measure shows good reliability in the current study (α = 0.84).

### Perceived Teacher Homework Involvement (PTHWI)

This evaluates the teacher's feedback perceived by students when the students do homework in the classroom (see **Appendix**). It requests information about teachers' behavior in adapting homework to students' difficulties and supervising their level of comprehension, as well as errors made. In this study it is understood in the sense of teacher homework management (homework handling). Responses are rated on a 5-point Likerttype scale ranging from 1 (totally false) to 5 (absolutely true). Although the number of items is small (three), the reliability of the measurement in this study is moderate (α = 0.60).

The variables Student Homework Autonomous Motivation and Student Homework Engagement were provided by the students' responses to the "Inventario de Procesos de Estudio"

[(Study Process Inventory) Rosário et al., 2013], after adapting it to the process of doing homework. Respondents rate each one of the six items on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (totally false) to 5 (absolutely true).

### Student Homework Autonomous Motivation (SHWAM)

We estimated students' greater or lesser motivational involvement through their intention to master the homework and learn (task orientation). This instrument evaluates students' interest in homework, their satisfaction when doing it, as well as their positive feelings about working that way. The three items offer a measure of students' autonomous motivation for homework similar to that provided by the scale from Katz et al. (2011) and used in Moè et al. (2018). Taking into account the small number of items (three), the reliability of the measurement in this study is acceptable (α = 0.73).

### Student Homework Engagement (SHWE)

Students' engagement in homework was measured with three items that asked them about the self-regulated learning strategies used when doing homework (planning, monitoring, and evaluation). The three items were extracted from the Self-Regulation Learning Strategies Inventory (Rosário et al., 2012), and provide information about the use of a macro-SRL strategy consisting of the three phases described by Zimmerman's Model (e.g., Zimmerman, 2011). The reliability of the measure is modest in this study (α = 0.70), but if we take into account the number of items (three), it can be considered acceptable.

### Procedure

The target variable data were collected during regular school hours, after obtaining the consent of the school directors and the students' parents. The questionnaires were administered in a single session by specialized staff that collaborated in the investigation. Participants completed all the questionnaires individually and without a time limit. The procedures followed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Research and Teaching Ethics Committee of the University of A Coruña, the University of Oviedo, and the Helsinki Declaration.

### Data Analysis

The structural equation model (SEM) was adjusted with the AMOS 22 program in SPSS (Arbuckle, 2013). Students with a large number of missing values were removed from the database (1.23%), while the rest of the missing values were imputed.

The data were analyzed in three steps. Firstly, we calculated and reviewed the descriptive statistics and the Pearson correlation matrix. Secondly, considering that the variables exhibited a normal distribution, we estimated the goodness of fit of three versions of the structural equation model using robust maximum likelihood (RML): (i) no mediation (direct effects model), (ii) total mediation (indirect effects model), and (iii) partial mediation (mixed effects model). Thirdly, based on the AIC and BIC statistics, the best model of the three was identified and adjusted for the total population, for boys and girls, and for the two school levels. While we initially used data from 4 years (7th–10th grade) for the analysis of the effect of this variable, we regrouped the 4 years into two groups: middle school (7th and 8th grade) and junior high school (9th and 10th grade). In the Spanish educational system, 7th and 8th grade correspond to the first cycle of CSE and 9th and 10th grade to the second cycle of CSE. In the Spanish system these educational stages have different motivational, affective, cognitive and behavioral requirements at the student and context level. The first stage (7–8th) in which students "feel older" (e.g., greater autonomy, less parental control) also involves difficulties in adapting to a very different situation from the one they have left behind (new classmates, new friends, new teachers, etc.), and is more demanding. In contrast, in the second stage (9–10th) the students are more confident (of themselves and of the context), and have greater perceived control. Similarly, parents and teachers expect more autonomy from them but also more responsibility. This second stage also represents the end point of compulsory education. Taking all that into account, it seemed appropriate to adjust the homework motivational model in the two stages separately.

Model fit was evaluated using the most important indexes and statistics from AMOS 22 [i.e., χ 2 , χ 2 /df, the adjusted goodnessof-fit index (AGFI), the comparative fit index (CFI), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)]. Evidence of a good fit is when χ 2 has a p > 0.05, χ 2 /df < 5, AGFI ≥ 0.90, CFI ≥ 0.95, and RMSEA ≤ 0.05. The smallest values of AIC and BIC indicate the best model. The effect size of the regression coefficients were calculated using Cohen's (1988) d statistic.

## RESULTS

Following the data analysis strategy above, the results are described in three sections: (a) descriptive statistics; (b) selecting the best model; and (c) fit of the selected model and parameter evaluation.

### Descriptive Statistics

**Table 1** gives the descriptive statistics for the total sample of students. The data show: (1) that the variables were significantly correlated with each other (all the correlation coefficients were statistically significant), and (2) that the symmetry and kurtosis of the variables indicated a sufficiently normal distribution.

## Selecting the Best Model

**Table 2** shows the results of the adjustment of the three models in competition. The data indicates that the two models that include mediation (total and partial mediation models in **Figure 1**) have excellent indexes of fit. The small difference in the values of the fit indexes of the two models is due to the fact that the two direct effects that made partial mediation possible (perceived involvement of parents and teachers on the student's engagement in homework) are not statistically significant (perceived parental involvement → student homework engagement = 0.061, p > 0.05; perceived teacher involvement → student homework engagement = 0.036, p > 0.05). However, because the AIC

TABLE 1 | Pearson correlations, mean, standard deviation, skewnes, and kurtosis of observed measures.

PPHWI1 to PPHWI3 are observed measures of Perceived Parental Homework Involvement; PTHWI1 to PTHWI3 are observed measures of Perceived Teacher Homework Involvement; SAM1 to SAM3 are observed measures of Student Autonomous Motivation; SHWE1 to SHWE3 are observed measures of Student Homework Engagement. All variables have the same scale: minimum = 1, maximum = 5. All correlation coefficients are statistically significant at p ≤ 0.01.

TABLE 2 | Results of the fit of the three competing motivational mediation models.

TABLE 3 | Goodness-of-fit statistics for the Motivational Total Mediation Model of homework in the overall sample, and by gender and grade.

The models have 50 degrees of freedom.

**Table 4** shows the standardized regression coefficients, statistical significance, and effect size corresponding to the fit of the model in the four specific samples and in the total sample. In general, the data support the motivational total mediation model, both for girls and boys and for the two school levels analyzed. The data in **Table 4**, relative to the total sample give good support to the hypotheses that produce the motivational model of total mediation.

H3 was confirmed: motivation was a powerful determinant of the use of self-regulated learning strategies doing homework (student homework engagement), both in the total sample and as a function of gender and school level (the regression coefficients were higher than b = 0.90), except for the junior high school sample (9th–10th grade), which was slightly lower (b = 0.89). The effect sizes were very large (see the d statistic in **Table 4**). Likewise, H1 and H2 were confirmed in the total sample.

and BIC values of the total mediation model are lower than those of the partial mediation model, and because the total mediation model is more parsimonious than the partial mediation model, we selected the total mediation model as the model with best fit.

### Evaluation of the Total Mediation Model of Homework

The Total Mediation Model was adjusted for the total sample, for boys and girls, and for school years, grouped into two levels [middle (7th–8th) and junior high school (9th–10th)]. **Table 3** presents the corresponding fit statistics. The data show an excellent fit of the model in all cases for the total sample and for the four specific samples. These results suggest that the Total Mediation Model does not require additional modifications.

PPHWI (Perceived Parental Homework Involvement), PTHWI (Perceived Teacher Homework Involvement), SAM (Student Autonomous Motivation), SHWE (Student Homework Engagement). Effect (→), relationship (↔).

The data also support the hypothesis about the association between perceived teacher involvement on homework and student autonomous motivation, with a moderate effect size (d = 0.608), and the hypothesis about the relationship between perceived parental involvement in homework and student autonomous motivation, which was significant, albeit with a small effect size (d = 0.302). Confirming the fourth hypothesis (H4), that perceived teacher involvement in homework has a greater relationship than perceived parental involvement in homework with students' autonomous homework motivation. The confirmation of the first three hypotheses (along with the fourth) allow us to conclude that student autonomous motivation mediates the relationship between the involvement of parents and teachers perceived by students and student homework engagement.

Student homework engagement is explained to large degree (90.9%) by the direct effect of student autonomous motivation, but also due to the indirect effect of perceived teacher and parent homework involvement through student autonomous motivation. More specifically, of the total explanation of student homework engagement, the unique effect of student autonomous motivation is 24.79%; the effect corresponding to perceived parental homework involvement on student homework engagement through student autonomous motivation is 18.29%; and the effect corresponding to perceived teacher homework involvement on student homework engagement through student autonomous motivation is 47.74%. As it is a model of total mediation of student motivation, the direct effect of teacher and parent on student homework engagement is zero. Finally, parent and teacher homework involvement explain 36.4% of student autonomous motivation, directly (28.78%: 3.68% parents and 25.10% teachers) and indirectly (7.62%; one through the other: r = 0.399, d = 0.870).

The data support only a partial confirmation of the fifth hypothesis (H5). There are no significant differences in terms of two of the three direct effects of the model: both girls' and boys' perception of teacher homework involvement is statistically and significantly related to student autonomous motivation, to a similar extent (with a moderate effect size, slightly higher than d = 0.50). On the other hand, girls and boys exhibit positive, statistically significant and similar relationships between student autonomous motivation and student homework engagement (with a very large effect size, around d = 1.5). However, there are differences between the two groups in the association between perceived parental homework involvement and student autonomous motivation: while it is positive and statistically significant for girls (with a moderate effect size), it is not statistically significant in the sample of boys. Therefore, the data suggest that in the sample of girls there is mediation of student autonomous motivation in the relationship between perceived parental homework involvement and student homework engagement, while this is not so in the sample of boys. In other words, boys' homework engagement is not explained by perceived parental homework involvement.

Finally, the data related to school year (H6), indicate that the relationship between student autonomous motivation and student homework engagement does not vary according to whether the students are in middle or junior high school. Likewise, they are not significantly different in the association between perceived teacher homework involvement and student autonomous motivation. However, as with gender, significant differences were found in the association between perceived parental homework involvement and student autonomous motivation. In particular, while the relationship is statistically significant in junior high school (although the effect size is small, d = 0.346), it is not in middle school (p > 0.05). Also in this case, the data suggest that there is no mediation at middle school: perceived parental homework involvement does not directly or indirectly determine student homework engagement.

### Ancillary Analyses

The data in **Table 4** indicate that the association between student autonomous motivation and student homework engagement is very strong, both for the total sample (b = 0.953) and for girls (b = 0.950), boys (b = 0.942), middle school students (b = 0.951),

and junior high school students (b = 0.886). This adds fuel to the fire of the dispute over whether they are similar or different constructs. Although in this study we have assumed the theoretical position that motivation and engagement are different constructs, and were treated that way in the formulation of the model and the treatment of the data, there is no doubt that the two variables are intimately related, as the aforementioned data demonstrates. Are they different constructs (e.g., Russell et al., 2004; Reeve, 2012) or are they two dimensions of a macroconstruct (e.g., Fredricks et al., 2004; Martin, 2007)?

To answer this question, we produced two models by confirmatory factor analysis, with one and two factors, taking observed measures as the answers to the three items that theoretically measure student homework autonomous motivation and the three that theoretically measure student homework engagement. If the unifactorial model has the best fit, we could say we are faced with a macro-construction where motivation and engagement are two sides of the same coin. However, if the bifactorial model offers the best fit, then we may conclude that these are related but different constructs.

The data provided by the CFA seems to support a two-factor model. Although the fit of both models is good [one factor model: χ 2 (9) = 48.014, p < 0.001, GFI = 0.977, AGFI = 0.946, TLI = 0.950, CFI = 0.971, RMR = 0.046, RMSEA = 0.078; two factor model: χ 2 (8) = 41.455, p < 0.001, GFI = 0.980, AGFI = 0.946, TLI = 0.954, CFI = 0.980, RMR = 0.045, RMSEA = 0.076], the two factor model fits significantly better than the one factor model since the AIC is smaller (AIC one factor model = 72.014; AIC two factor model = 67.455). Therefore, the data seem to suggest that student motivation and student engagement are closely related but distinct constructs. The results of this research do not solve the question at all, so it may be a good idea to design a highly controlled study with zero threats to the validity.

### DISCUSSION

In this study, we wanted to analyze the mediating role of students' autonomous homework motivation in the relationship between perceived parental and teacher involvement in homework and the students' homework engagement (i.e., use of SRL strategies in homework). In order to examine this hypothesis, we produced a structural equation model, and three versions (no motivational mediation, partial motivational mediation and total motivational mediation) were tested, for the total sample, and by gender and school year (middle and junior high school). Below, we discuss the results and their educational implications. We also describe some limitations of the study that could influence the data.

From a general point of view, the data suggest a total motivational mediation model, with some differences by gender and by school year. Despite the differences, we can conclude that motivation completely mediates the effect of teacher and parental involvement on students' homework engagement (i.e., the use of self-regulated learning strategies).

The results of this study are largely in line with those from Feng et al. (2019), in that autonomous motivation mediates the relationship between perceived teacher homework management and perceived parent homework content-oriented support and student homework engagement. However, in our study, autonomous motivation mediated completely between perceived parent content-oriented support and student homework engagement, whereas the study by Feng et al. (2019) reported partial mediation.

As in previous research (e.g., Valle et al., 2016), in this study students' homework engagement is directly predicted by student autonomous motivational engagement (interest in learning and/or gaining competence and autonomy). As in other studies (e.g., Midgley, 2002; Vansteenkiste et al., 2005; Valle et al., 2015; Veas et al., 2018), the results suggest that student engagement in homework depends greatly on being motivated to acquire competence and autonomy. However, the dependence of autonomous motivation and student engagement in our study is even stronger than in previous studies. Our data seem to suggest that the three variables considered as predictors of student homework engagement really are predictors, and do not vary by gender or student age. Our data from secondary education students (7th–10th grade) complement the data from Valle et al. (2016), although that was from students in 4th, 5th, and 6th grades.

Likewise, the results in this study about the relationship between parent and teacher homework involvement and student homework autonomous motivation are in accordance with the initially proposed hypotheses in the case of the total sample, but not when gender or school year are considered.

More specifically, when it comes to parents' involvement in their children's homework (i.e., content-oriented support), in line with other studies (e.g., Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2001; Van Voorhis, 2001; Pomerantz et al., 2007; Patall et al., 2008; Karbach et al., 2013; Gonida and Cortina, 2014; Gonida and Vauras, 2014; Suárez et al., 2014; Núñez et al., 2015b; Cunha et al., 2018b; Moè et al., 2018; Feng et al., 2019; Silinskas and Kikas, 2019), when children perceive that their parents provide support (i.e., oriented to content), their interest grows due to increased competence and autonomy through their engagement in homework. However, the size of this association is weaker than expected. Although some studies have reported a moderate effect size (e.g., Katz et al., 2011; Moè et al., 2018; Feng et al., 2019), the data from our study, without looking at student age or gender, have a modest (e.g., Gonida and Cortina, 2014) to small (e.g., Silinskas and Kikas, 2019) effect size.

Looking at the responses of 5th and 8th grade students, Gonida and Cortina (2014) found a positive relationship between parent autonomy and student mastery (b = 0.18, p < 0.01), with a modest effect size. Despite finding differences between 5th and 8th grade in mean scores for some of the latent variables, they found no differences in the relationship between the variables. However, as in the study from Silinskas and Kikas (2019), in our study we also saw differences between girls and boys in the effect of perceived parental content-oriented support on student autonomous motivation. In addition, our study also found a link between middle and junior high grades. In terms of gender, the size of the effect of girls' perceptions of parental content-oriented homework support on

their autonomous motivation toward homework is moderate, in boys this relationship is not statistically significant. In other words, the girls' autonomous motivation for homework is much more sensitive to variations in the perception they have of the involvement of their parents in homework than in boys. In terms of age, our data indicate that the effect of perceived parental content-oriented support on student autonomous motivation is higher in junior high school (although the effect size is small) than in middle-school (the size of the effect is null). If we combine these results with those from other investigations in which parent homework support and student autonomous motivation for homework was seen to decrease as students age (e.g., Hong et al., 2009; Katz et al., 2010; Gonida and Cortina, 2014; Núñez et al., 2015b; Regueiro et al., 2018), the result seems somewhat paradoxical. As less student autonomous motivation is reported and less parental content-oriented support is perceived as the student gets older, the greater the impact of perceived parental content-oriented support on student autonomous motivation for homework. In other words, as one goes from 7th to 10th grade, there is less autonomous motivation for homework, lower perceived parental content-oriented support but nevertheless, a stronger relationship between the two variables (i.e., student autonomous motivation depends more on perceived parental contentoriented support). The explanation could lie in the child's own development. It is possible that this happens because as the child grows in competences (cognitive, motivational and affective) they find it logical for their parents to require them to be more autonomous while at the same time they have a better understanding of the importance of their parents' involvement in their homework.

The data on the effect of perceived teacher homework management on student autonomous motivation were completely in accordance with the hypothesis, both with and without controlling for gender and age. These results are consistent with previous research (e.g., Cooper, 2001; Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2001; Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2007; Trautwein et al., 2009; Dettmers et al., 2010; Katz et al., 2010; Xu et al., 2017; Feng et al., 2019), highlighting the important role of the association between teacher involvement in homework (e.g., feedback, follow-up practices, and designing homework) and student homework engagement (e.g., homework management strategies, time spent, amount of homework completed, and homework effort), and disengagement (Bempechat and Shernoff, 2012).

The impact of perceived teacher homework management on student autonomous motivation in our study is rather significant (with a moderate effect size in all cases), both in middle and junior high school, although perceived teacher content-oriented support decreases as students get older, both in our study [t(728) = 9.441; p < 0.001; medium effect, d = 0.70] and in previous studies (e.g., Katz et al., 2010; Núñez et al., 2015a). We believe that both results have a reasonable explanation. Perhaps the decrease in student perceptions of teacher involvement in homework management as they go up the grades may be a true reflection of what actually happens (as students get older, teachers support more student autonomy). And in relation to the effect of perceived teacher homework management on student homework management, it is well understood that the strength of the association is maintained, since in both middle and junior high school it can be equally important for students to perceive that their teachers (i) make sure students understand the assigned tasks, (ii) consider the students when deciding the type of homework, or difficulty and (iii) what homework they see in class to correct mistakes. This seems to be an acceptable explanation for the similar effect sizes in girls and boys.

Although in this study there were gender differences in the mean scores of perceived teacher homework management in favor of girls [t(675) = 2.90, p < 0.01, small effect size: d = 0.22], gender was not a factor related to the intensity of the effect of perceived teacher homework management on student homework engagement (a very similar effect size, see **Table 4**). This suggests that the autonomous motivation for homework is equally affected by perceived teacher homework management in boys and girls.

### Limitations of the Study

The study has some limitations which must be taken into account in the interpretation of the results, comparison with other studies, and generalization to other educational levels, contexts or cultures. Three are particularly important.

Firstly, the measures used to construct the latent variables of the homework motivational model were taken only through self-report scales. The importance of self-report methodology in educational research is undeniable (Zimmerman, 2011), but so are the associated problems of validity and reliability (Pike and Kuh, 2005), and incongruence with other innovative methods of assessment (Winne and Perry, 2000; Azevedo et al., 2017). In addition, in this research only three items per variable were used, which could be associated with some of the problems we indicated. For example, the internal consistency of three of the four scales is within the limits of what is acceptable (i.e., perceived teacher homework involvement, student homework autonomous motivation, and student homework engagement). Likewise, three items may be too few to adequately capture everything we wanted to measure. This is the case, for example, of the measure of perceived teacher homework management: three items are used that purport to provide information on three types of teacher actions that, while undoubtedly important, may not cover the construct "teacher homework management."

Secondly, the measures in this study regarding the involvement of parents and teachers correspond only to the perception of the students (i.e., parental homework involvement and teacher homework involvement perceived by the students). We were interested in the perception of the student, more so than that of the teacher or the parents. Although the literature supports the need to consider students' perspectives of homework assignments (e.g., Warton, 2001; Landers, 2013) because students are active players in their learning process (e.g., Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2007), it also recognizes the advantage of collecting and combining reports from different data sources (e.g., Dettmers et al., 2010; Saban, 2013; Rosário et al., 2018). However, in this study only the perception of the students was included, due to the weak relationship seen in other studies between the perception of the student and the perceptions of teachers or parents (i.e.,

Rosário et al., 2018). It is important to underline this in order for it not to be ignored if the data from this study were to be used in future studies, such as meta-analyses.

Another limitation is that the study is a cross-sectional survey. The data do not support causal analysis, even though our interpretations are based on previous findings and theoretical analysis. This issue must be addressed by future research, through repeated measure designs (e.g., Silinskas et al., 2013; Silinskas and Kikas, 2019) or using experimental or quasi-experimental designs which are as ecologically valid as possible (e.g., study 2 from Moè et al., 2018).

### Educational Implications

This study has clear educational implications. First, we found that one of the most important predictors of student homework engagement is student autonomous motivation (directly) and teacher and parental homework involvement (indirectly, through autonomous motivation). This highlights the importance of parents and teachers focusing on making students see that doing homework is not a punishment, or wasted time, but an opportunity to gain competence and above all, autonomy (Pomerantz et al., 2007).

Student engagement is affected by parents not only in terms of how much they participate, but also through the style with which they relate to their children in school-related tasks and aspects (Grolnick et al., 1997), including homework (Pomerantz et al., 2007). Parental autonomy support has significant consequences for motivation and student homework engagement. However, the impact should be greater than that reported by research. Because of this, it seems urgent to design interventions with parents in order to work with them to effectively use am autonomy support parental style when helping their children with homework. It is possible that this type of training would make this behavior clearer and more visible in the eyes of their children (as with the control style). An example of this type of intervention can be seen in Moè et al. (2018). The data from Moè's study showed that the training program reduced parental negative affect, and prevented a decrease in student homework motivation and emotions.

The effect of teacher homework management on student autonomous motivation for homework (directly) and student homework engagement (indirectly) was important in terms of quantity and quality. Even if things seem to be going well, they can always improve. As with parents, it is also necessary to design evidence-based interventions that facilitate the role of the teacher in the design and monitoring of homework (Pianta et al., 2012; Rosário et al., 2015).

Given that the real involvement (of parents and teachers) may be different from students' perceptions, we must train parents and teachers in effective ways of involvement that promote students' competences and autonomy, and that facilitate student's accurate perceptions of this. It is useless for teachers and parents to become involved in student homework to promote student competence and autonomy if students cannot perceive this behavior. This is what the study from Rosário et al. (2018) suggests, concluding that preparing good tasks (homework) is important, but it is not enough. In reality, it is the students who finally have to understand the teachers' purposes, the interest of the tasks and, of course, how useful the tasks are for the development of their own competence and autonomy.

## CONCLUSION

Student engagement is a very important construct for explaining student progress (and dropout) in school and extracurricular tasks (Raftery et al., 2012; Rumberger and Rotermund, 2012). Student engagement is also important for the field of homework, its relationship with learning and performance, and it is a crucial element for connecting students, schools and families (Epstein, 2011). The model developed by Connell and Wellborn (1991) clearly explains how student engagement is determined by students' motivational processes and the context. In this study we examined the mediating role of student autonomous motivation between context and student engagement.

Despite its limitations, our work provides interesting data, and some issues which may be of interest in the field of homework. For example, given the strong relationship between student autonomous motivation for homework and student homework engagement, are they different constructs or are they part of the same construct? Our data suggest that they are different constructs but there is little difference in the fit of both models. More research on this matter would be welcome. More research is also needed in order to clarify the differences between boys and girls and between middle and junior high school students regarding their perceptions of their parents' involvement in homework. Likewise, we think that the positive, significant relationship between students' perception of the involvement of parents and teachers in homework is very good news. This means that despite the difficulty of the connection between family and school, at least in the field of homework, there is a strong relationship: the better the perception of teacher homework management, the better the perception of parents' content-oriented support. Although, as we see, there is already a certain connection between school and family, schools do need to think creatively about how to involve families more in educational work with their children (Raftery et al., 2012). A good example may be the approach developed by the National Network of Partnerships Schools (NNPS).

### ETHICS STATEMENT

The data of the target variables were collected during regular school hours, after obtaining the written informed consent of the school directors and the students' parents. The questionnaires were administered in a single session by specialized staff that collaborated in the investigation. Participants completed all the questionnaires individually and without time limit. The procedures followed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Helsinki Declaration, and were approved by the Research and Teaching Ethics Committee of the University of A Coruña.

### AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

fpsyg-10-01384 June 13, 2019 Time: 12:27 # 13

JN, BR, NS, and AV contributed conception and design of the study. IP and MR organized the database. JN and AV performed the statistical analysis. JN, BR, and NS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. IP, MR, and AV wrote sections of the manuscript. All authors contributed to manuscript revision, read and approved the submitted version.

### REFERENCES

### FUNDING

This work was developed with the financing of the research projects EDU2013-44062-P (MINECO), EDU2017- 82984-P (MEIC), and Government of the Principality of Asturias, Spain. European Regional Development Fund (Research Groups Program FC-GRUPIN-IDI/ 2018/000199).

achievement. J. Educ. Res. 108, 204–216. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2013.87 8298

Examining the mediating role of students' perceived homework quality. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 53, 168–180. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.04.001

dropout. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72, 1161–1176. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.72. 5.1161

**Conflict of Interest Statement:** The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2019 Núñez, Regueiro, Suárez, Piñeiro, Rodicio and Valle. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

## APPENDIX: ITEMS USED AS OBSERVED VARIABLES

### Perceived Teacher Homework Involvement (Homework Management)

### Perceived Parental Homework Involvement (Content-Oriented Support)

### Student Homework Autonomous Motivation

### Student Homework Engagement (SRL Strategies Management)

# Academic Predictors of Early Adolescents' Perceived Popularity: The Moderating Effects of Classroom Academic Norm Salience

#### Yunyun Zhang1 , Ping Ren1 , Xin Li 1 , Hongyun Liu2 and Fang Luo2 \*

1 China Quality Basic Education Monitoring Collaborative Innovation Center, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China, 2 Beijing Key Laboratory of Applied Experimental Psychology, School of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

In order to extend our understanding of the effect of academic motivations and outcomes on the social status of adolescents in the classroom context, this study examined the predictive role of academic achievement and achievement goals on early adolescents' perceived popularity and the effect of classroom academic norm salience on these relationships. In total, 2,558 adolescents in grade 7 (mean age 12.97 years) in mainland China participated in the study. Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was used to examine predictive effects of within-class and between-class predictors on perceived popularity. The results showed that only girls' academic achievement and the performance-approach goals of both genders positively predicted adolescents' perceived popularity. Classroom academic norm salience strengthened the negative role of performance-avoidance goals on perceived popularity, and it seems to undermine gender differences in the effect of mastery goals on perceived popularity. The current study will not only fill the gaps in research on the relationship between academic development and social status, but also reveal the special influence and significance of collective cultures such as Chinese in this field and show a different relationship pattern from those found in previous Western studies.

Keywords: perceived popularity, academic achievement, achievement goals, classroom academic norm salience, early adolescents

### INTRODUCTION

Although the acquisition of knowledge is particularly important throughout all of adolescence, many young people show a decline in academic achievement and academic motivations beginning in early adolescence (Crosnoe and Benner, 2015). During this stage, adolescents tend to be highly concerned with their social status in peer groups (LaFontana and Cillessen, 2010), and gaining and maintaining popularity become particularly important developmental goals (Sijtsema et al., 2009). As individuals transition from elementary school to middle school, their peer groups become larger and more diverse, and they need to re-establish social status in the new groups. Meanwhile, middle school students need to put more effort into studying to adjust to challenging courses. However, the pursuit and maintainance of social status seems incompatible with—and sometimes even at the expense of—good academic performance (Mayeux et al., 2008; Troop-Gordon et al., 2011). A number of studies have shown that, from childhood to early adolescence, the relationship between

#### Edited by:

Mar Lorenzo Moledo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain

#### Reviewed by:

Panagiota Dimitropoulou, University of Crete, Greece Eva M. Romera, Universidad de Córdoba, Spain

> \*Correspondence: Fang Luo<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
#### Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Education

Received: 24 December 2018 Accepted: 20 May 2019 Published: 21 June 2019

#### Citation:

Zhang Y, Ren P, Li X, Liu H and Luo F (2019) Academic Predictors of Early Adolescents' Perceived Popularity: The Moderating Effects of Classroom Academic Norm Salience. Front. Educ. 4:52. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00052 academic achievement and perceived popularity changes from one that is positively correlated to one that shows no—or even negative—correlation (e.g., Meijs et al., 2010; Galván et al., 2011; Dijkstra and Gest, 2015). Good academic performance and hard work become less appreciated (Lasane et al., 1999; Juvonen and Cadigan, 2002); instead, poor academic behaviors (such as failing to complete homework) gain approval from peers (Juvonen and Cadigan, 2002). In their pursuit of social status, adolescents change the value they place on school to greater or lesser degrees. It is reasonable to theorize that this change in attitude is likely accompanied by a change in students' intrinsic academic motivations (Juvonen and Murdock, 1993). However, previous studies have focused on the association between academic achievement and perceived popularity (Meijs et al., 2010) and have hardly taken into account the relationship between academic motivations and perceived popularity. Thus, this relationship merits greater attention. While plenty of studies have proven that peer interactions are deeply influenced by cultural context—including peer culture (Fuller-Rowell and Doan, 2010; Veenstra et al., 2018) and sociocultural background (Chen et al., 2003b; Li et al., 2012) few studies have examined the relationship between academic achievement, academic motivation, and perceived popularity within the context of classroom norms. In addition, most studies have been carried out in Western countries, despite research showing that both academic achievement and academic motivation (e.g., achievement goals) have different meanings for adolescents in Eastern and Western cultures (Liem et al., 2008; Li et al., 2012). The first purpose of the current study was to examine the predictive effects of academic achievement and achievement goals on the perceived popularity of early adolescents in collective cultures such as China's. The second purpose was to examine the moderating role of classroom academic norms in order to reveal the unique peer effects and developmental patterns of adolescents in a non-Western context.

### ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT, ACHIEVEMENT GOAL, AND PERCEIVED POPULARITY

Perceived popularity is an indicator of a child or adolescent's social status, which reflects the consensus of his or her status, prestige or visibility in the peer group (Cillessen and Rose, 2005). Popular adolescents play a decisive role as leaders, rule makers and decision makers in their peer group, and are observed and emulated; in contrast, unpopular adolescents are subject to others' rejection and bullying and, as a result, face more developmental risks (Cillessen et al., 2011). Cultural values and norms may play roles in the behavioral profiles that define social status (Chen and French, 2008). A comparative study indicated that academic engagement not only was more strongly associated with social status in China (vs. the United States), but it was also a stronger predictor of youth's social status over time in China. This difference was most evident for perceived popularity (vs. likability and admiration) (Zhang et al., 2018).

The relationships between academic factors (both motivations and outcomes) and perceived popularity vary in different cultural contexts. Some studies conducted in individualism cultures, such as American culture, have found that early adolescents' academic achievement is negatively or not correlated with perceived popularity (Mayeux et al., 2008; Dijkstra and Gest, 2015). However, the correlation is positive in collective cultures, such as Chinese. Comparing with the influence of academic achievement on children in American culture, which is individual-oriented, this influence is more significant in promoting popularity of children in China (Li et al., 2012). It is unclear whether the positive effects of academic achievement among Chinese children persist into early adolescence.

As for motivation of academic achievement, Achievement goal orientations, which include mastery goals, performanceapproach goals and performance-avoidance goals, are typical indicators of academic motivation (Nicholls, 1984; Dweck and Leggett, 1988; Midgley et al., 2000). Although most research on academic achievement goals are mainly focused on the investigation of academic-related processes and outcomes, different goals may lead to differences in social outcomes because their different perceptions of situation and of others in distinct perceptual-cognitive frameworks (Poortvliet and Darnon, 2010).

Mastery-oriented students engage in tasks that emphasize learning, improving past performance, and acquiring new knowledge and skills. They are also more concerned about selfimprovement rather than impression management and thus develop a self-referenced focus (Poortvliet and Darnon, 2010). Similarly, some researchers believed that mastery goals that are self-reference focused can lead to investments in exchange relationships, endorsement of reciprocity norms, and active efforts to integrate different opinions, and they will get a variety of beneficial outcomes relative to performance goals in social contexts (Poortvliet and Darnon, 2010). Mastery goals were found to be helpful for promoting positive peer relationships (Liem et al., 2008) and prosocial intentions (Barrera and Schuster, 2018), which were also proven to be positively associated with the mutual sharing of difficulties, trust, and adaptive social problemsolving between friends (Levy-Tossman et al., 2007).

Performance-approach goals aim at demonstrating high ability, and performance-avoidance goals indicate attempts to avoid demonstrating low ability. Students with performance goals pay attention to the public demonstration of their selfworth, and thus develop another-referenced focus (Levy et al., 2004; Levy-Tossman et al., 2007; Liem et al., 2008). Studies have indicated that peer relationships might be benefited by mastery goals but would be negatively influenced by performanceavoidance goals. Performance-avoidance goals indicate attempts to avoid demonstrating low ability and were found to be associated with distrust, inconsideration, and tension between friends (Levy-Tossman et al., 2007). Performance-approach goals aim at demonstrating high ability. However, studies on performance-approach goals have produced inconsistent findings. In collective cultures such as Singapore (which is greatly influenced by Chinese collective culture), both performanceapproach and mastery goals were found to be directly associated with positive peer relationships (Liem et al., 2008); while in individualism cultures such as American, only mastery goals (but not performance goals) were found positively related to close friendship self-conceptions (Ben-Eliyahu et al., 2017). Israel is a mixture of both individualism and collectivism (Carmeli, 2001), and research conducted there found that performanceapproach goals were negatively related to intimate friendship (Levy-Tossman et al., 2007).

Perceived popularity is not only an indicator of peer relationships but also a power-related factor (Pellegrini et al., 2011), which is different from friendship or peer preference. There might be similarities and distinctions between the relationships of achievement goals and perceived popularity as well as the relationships of achievement goal and friendship or peer preference. Performance-oriented individuals may pay more attention to evaluating if their performance would have value in improving social status and getting more power. Levy et al. (2004) found that performance-oriented students focused on enhancing their own status during peer interactions and thus preferred to help in-group and high-status peers; masteryoriented students, in contrast, did not show this tendency. This finding suggested that teenagers with performance goals may be more actively pursuing social status and change their behaviors according to the clues in peer contexts. The relations between the three goals and popularity are still ambiguous. Previous studies have also found the influence of academic mastery goal orientations on peer relationships have gender differences. Some presented that academic mastery goal orientations predicted course performance and responsible classroom behavior only for girls, whereas for boys, academic mastery goal orientations were positively related to close friendship self-conceptions (Ben-Eliyahu et al., 2017).

Additionally, there are gender differences in the relationship between academic factors and perceived popularity. Good academic performance has been found to have a more negative effect on boys' popularity than girls' (Adler et al., 1992), and boys with high academic achievement are more likely to be victims of bullying (Lehman, 2015). Because adolescents often perceive good performance (or efforts toward good performance) as a feminized characteristic, hard-working boys are more likely to be considered feminine, unsociable, and less socially attractive (Lasane et al., 1999), whereas those who exhibit disengagement with academics tend to be considered masculine and subsequently rewarded with high social status (Czopp et al., 1998). One study showed that, when asked about their academic performance, boys were inclined to deny their good performance or hard efforts, whereas girls tended to admit their actual performance (Zook and Russotti, 2012).

### THE ROLES OF CLASSROOM ACADEMIC NORM SALIENCE

Group norms refer to the attitudes and behaviors that are accepted and recognized by peer groups (Henry et al., 2000). The classroom is the fundamental organizational unit at school where students spend most of their time in their daily life. Group norms in the classroom setting are known as classroom norms whereby students keep regular interactions with peers, share common beliefs and experiences, and build up their own rules and culture. Classroom norms are conceptualized and measured in diverse ways. Descriptive and injunctive classroom norms are typically measured by aggregating individual-level measures of behaviors and attitudes, respectively, across all individuals within a class, to generate classroom-level indices (Cialdini et al., 1991; Boor-Klip et al., 2017). Norm salience is obtained by calculating the correlation between a certain behavior and its popularity in the class (Henry et al., 2000; Dijkstra and Gest, 2015).

The classroom academic norm salience that was established reflected a group consensus of rewarding students who had certain academic performance with high social status (Dijkstra and Gest, 2015), thus conforming to classroom academic norms leading to a shared identity that provides social and emotional support, behavioral confirmation, and acceptance (Masland and Lease, 2013). High academic norms have been found to strengthen the relations between academic achievement and peer acceptance (Dijkstra and Gest, 2015), leadership (Chen et al., 2003a), and social dominance (Jonkmann et al., 2009). In addition, although the empirical evidence is limited, the process through which students with different goals pursue social status may also be influenced by classroom contexts. Students with mastery goals are self-reference focused (Poortvliet and Darnon, 2010), while students with performance-oriented goals are otherreferenced focused (Levy et al., 2004; Levy-Tossman et al., 2007; Liem et al., 2008). Students with performance goals may be more sensitive than those with mastery goals to the classroom norms. Therefore, it is necessary to explore whether the effects of achievement goals on perceived popularity are moderated by classroom academic norms.

The effect of classroom academic norm salience might vary by gender. Considering that boys care more about their status and competition in a group (Schneider et al., 2005), they might be more sensitive to classroom norms. However, some studies have suggested that because girls are brought up to be obedient, cooperative and particularly concerned with others' evaluation of them, they may be particularly averse to interpersonal rejection due to disobedience to the majority and find it harder to resist the pressure of classroom norms (Rose and Rudolph, 2006). The degree to which the above-mentioned moderating effects of gender vary according to the influence of classroom academic norms is worth exploring.

### THE PRESENT STUDY

Collective cultures emphasize filial devotion, sociability, harmony, and a willingness to compromise personal needs to benefit the social group. Additionally, self-identity is usually considered to be included in the shared group identity. Behaviors such as attitudes and actions toward learning are mainly governed by obligations and a sense of social norms (Triandis and Gelfand, 1998). In the collectivist cultural context of China, students associate their personal successes with others: they work hard for in-group goals (e.g., parents' expectations, teachers' expectations, peer evaluations) and place more emphasis on meeting external, rather than internal, needs in their social lives (Triandis, 2001). This orientation of valuing in-group goals may have two important implications. On the one hand, performance-approach goals may have positive social adaptive meaning for Chinese adolescents. For example, a study based on a Chinese sample found that the performance-approach goals of Chinese adolescents were directly related to their positive sense of academic efficacy and achievement (Xu and Chen, 2011); however, the effect of these goals on their social status remains unclear. On the other hand, peer group norms may exert a stronger influence on Chinese adolescents, because in the collectivist context, Chinese children place a higher value on interpersonal harmony, cooperation, and interdependence (Forbes et al., 2011). They may pay more attention to the attitudes and behaviors of class peers and be more willing to conform to peer pressure in order to avoid interpersonal rejection.

Chinese culture is profoundly influenced by Confucianism, which attaches great importance to education (Xu, 2011). Thus, a basic principle of Chinese parenting is that children should be encouraged to study hard. Children in China are more willing to meet their parents' academic expectations than their Western counterparts (Chen and Lan, 1998), and, to some extent, hard work is accepted as a family obligation. Therefore, Chinese adolescents and adults share similar attitudes toward learning, and confrontations between Chinese adults and adolescents are not as strong as those in Western cultures. Chinese children value high academic achievement and believe that good grades are beneficial in improving their popularity (Li et al., 2012). However, in Western cultures, early adolescents consider hard work as something valued by adults rather than young persons, and they are less keen than Chinese students to learn in order to gain the social approval of their peers (Chen and Lan, 1998).

Moreover, in many Western countries, classes are flexible, while Chinese middle schools have fixed classes that are larger in size (Li et al., 2012). These distinctive cultural and educational features make class norms more likely to have a greater impact on adolescents' social lives in China, relative to the West. If a Chinese adolescent is embedded in a class with a high academic classroom norm, the combination of the peer culture and the larger sociocultural context—which both value education—might have significant influences on adolescents' development.

The aim of this study was to explore the association between adolescents' academic achievement, achievement goals and perceived popularity in the context of Chinese culture and to examine the moderating effect of classroom academic norms and gender.

In the current study, students in Grade 7 (in the Chinese education system, the first year of middle school is Grade 7) were selected as participants because they were in the new schools and facing challenges in both social status and academic achievement. After collecting data at the end of two semesters, the study assumed that: (1) after controlling for prior popularity, academic achievement would positively predict perceived popularity; (2) the three achievement goals would have different effects on perceived popularity; (3) gender would moderate the relationship between academic achievement or achievement goals and perceived popularity; and (4) classroom academic norm salience would enhance the positive effect of academic achievement on perceived popularity and moderate the effects of achievement goals on perceived popularity. It was hoped that the current study would not only fill the gaps in research on the relationship between academic development and social status, but also reveal the special influence and significance of Chinese culture in this field and show a different relationship pattern from those found in previous Western studies.

### MATERIALS AND METHODS

### Participants and Procedure

The study chose three regions (one urban, one suburban, and one rural) in one large city in central mainland China. Then, using the stratified sampling method, seven schools (two in the urban area, two in the suburban region, and three in the rural village) were selected according to the school scale, region characteristics (urban, suburban, and rural), and school quality level (excellent, average, and poor). A total of 2,601 students in grade 7 from 47 classrooms were assessed at the end of the first and second semesters. The questionnaires were anonymous, and all questionnaires only had ID numbers. Except students and researchers, no one was allowed to have the access to responses. Perceived popularity and other variables were collected at the second semester. Perceived popularity at the first semester was also measured as prior popularity. The average class size was 56.25 (ranging from 45 to 66). After excluding students with missing values, a final sample was 2,558 students in grade 7 (1,337 boys, 1,221 girls; mean age = 12.97 years, SD = 0.62). We obtained institutional approval and students' written informed consent. All parents or legal caregivers also provided written informed consent for the present study.

### Measures

Self-report questionnaires, peer nomination forms, and achievement tests were used to examine the educational and psychological development of students and the relationship between this development and school and individual factors.

## Perceived Popularity (Individual Level)

Perceived popularity was measured through peer nomination forms (Rose and Swenson, 2009). Participants were provided with the names of all students in the class and were asked to nominate up to five classmates who were considered popular ("These are the most popular kids in my class"). Self-nominations were allowed but not included in the analysis. Subsequently, all nominations for "popular" were computed for each student. This score was divided by the number of nominators in the class in order to adjust for differences in class sizes.

### Achievement Goal Orientations (Individual Level)

Achievement goal orientations were measured through a Chinese revised version of the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey (PALS) questionnaire (Midgley et al., 2000). Five items assessed mastery goals (e.g., It's important to me that I thoroughly understand my class work.), five items assessed performanceapproach goals (e.g., One of my goals is to show others that class work is easy for me.) and four items assessed performanceavoidance goals (e.g., It's important to me that I don't look stupid in class). All ratings were made on 5-point scales ("1" not important at all, "3" moderately important, "5" very important). The alpha coefficients of the three dimensions ranged from 0.76 to 0.93.

### Academic Achievement (Individual Level)

Academic achievement scores in Chinese, math, English, history, biology, geography, and civics were obtained for all participants from school records. These scores were based on final examinations (which were the same in all sample schools). As the alpha coefficient of the scores in seven subjects was 0.925, we summed the scores to form a single index of academic achievement.

### Classroom Academic Norm Salience (Classroom Level)

Norm salience scores, representing the correlation of a particular behavior and peer-nominated popularity, were calculated separately for each class (Henry et al., 2000; Dijkstra and Gest, 2015). Academic norm salience for each class was calculated as the correlation of academic achievements and perceived popularity.

### DATA ANALYSIS METHODS

We first presented the descriptive statistics and correlations, and then conducted hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) analyses using HLM 4.0. (Bryk et al., 1996). HLM is a multilevel random coefficient regression-based technique that permits simultaneous analyses of within-class and between-class sources of variance (Bryk and Raudenbush, 1992). This study was designed to examine both effects. Perceived popularity was the outcome variable; the Level 1 or individual-level predictors were gender, prior popularity, academic achievement, and achievement goals; the Level 2 or classroom-level predictor was classroom academic norm salience.

Because perceived popularity was measured by a limited number of nominations, that was most of students nominate five classmates, the averages of perceived popularity in the different classrooms were very similar. It did not make sense to explore the difference of perceived popularity in different classrooms (Chen et al., 2005). Therefore, this study did not conduct the intercept model and computed the ICC of perceived popularity. We conducted four random slope models that treated the regression slopes of Level 1 predictors as random variables at Level 2, in order to examine whether the impact of predictors varied in the different classrooms and/or was moderated by classroom factors.

Model 0 was a basis model controlling for prior popularity in order to explore the effect of other predictors on perceived popularity more precisely. The intercept and slope of the controller were fixed at Level 2. Model 1 examined the effect of academic achievement and achievement goals on perceived popularity. Gender, academic achievement, mastery goals, performance-approach goals, and performance-avoidance goals were entered into the regression equation at Level 1. The TABLE 1 | The difference tests of variables at level 1 for boys and girls.

\*p< 0.05; \*\*\*p < 0.001.

slopes of predictors were set to be random at Level 2. Because prior popularity was controlled, Model 1 explored the impact of predictors on change in perceived popularity between the first and second semesters. Model 2 examined the interaction of gender and other predictors at Level 1. On the basis of Model 1, the following interactions were entered: academic achievement × gender; mastery goals × gender; performance-approach goals × gender; and performance-avoidance goals × gender. The slopes of interactions were also set to be random at Level 2. Model 3 examined cross-level interactions—that is, whether academic norm salience moderated the impact of predictors at Level 1. For any slope of predictors and interactions that was significantly random, academic norm salience was entered into the slope equation at Level 2. Following the methods of an existing study (Dijkstra and Gest, 2015), all variables were converted into zscores before they were input into the models in order to facilitate greater insight into the cross-level interactions; Level 1 predictors were centered by the group mean before they were input into the models. When interactions were significant, further simple slope tests were conducted (Preacher et al., 2006).

### RESULTS

Results are presented in three parts. First, descriptive statistics were reported for key study variables. Second, multilevel regression analysis was used to explore individual- and classroom-level predictors of perceived popularity. Finally, we explored the impact of interactions with simple slope tests.

### Descriptive Statistics

Mean and standard deviation of variables for boys and girls before being converted into z-scores are listed in **Table 1**. Independent t-tests showed that girls behaved better than boys in achievement, perceived popularity, and mastery goals. Boys pursued more performance-approach and performanceavoidance goals than girls.

\*p < 0.05; \*\*p < 0.01; \*\*\*p < 0.001; the correlations of class academic norms salience with other variables are all at the class level.

The correlation coefficients between variables were shown in **Table 2**. Almost all the predictors were correlated with perceived popularity significantly. In order to examine the complex impacts of predictors, multilevel regression analysis was conducted and the results are reported in the following text.

### Multilevel Regression Analyses

Model 0 revealed that 72.4% of the variance in perceived popularity was explained by prior popularity. This was a strong effect, meaning that perceived popularity was stable throughout the school year.

In Model 1, the proportion of variance explained by academic achievement and achievement goals was 3.2% when prior popularity was controlled; this represented the incremental predictability of perceived popularity.

Model 2 examined the interactions of gender with other predictors at Level 1. The total predictability of interactions at Level 1 was 4.5%. Model 2 showed significant between-class variations in the predictive slopes of performance-avoidance goals, academic achievement, mastery goals × gender, and academic achievement × gender. Thus, academic norm salience was entered into these slope questions at Level 2 in Model 3.

All the regression coefficients of predictors, interactions at Level 1 and cross-level interactions were reported in Model 3 as the complete model (see **Table 3**). Academic achievement positively predicted perceived popularity (γ = 0.0555, p < 0.05), and perceived popularity was positively predicted by performance-approach goals (γ = 0.0350, p < 0.01) and negatively predicted by performance-avoidance goals (γ = −0.0610, p < 0.001).

The interaction of academic achievement and gender was significant (γ = −0.0354, p < 0.05). Cross-level interactions such as academic norm salience × performance-avoidance goals and academic norm salience × mastery goals × gender were significant (γ = −0.0259, p < 0.01; γ = 0.0290, p < 0.001). Other predictors and interactions were not significant.

### Simple Slope Tests

In the framework of multilevel analysis, further simple slope tests were carried out for the three significant interactions. As illustrated in **Figure 1**, academic achievement showed a significant positive prediction for perceived popularity in girls (b = 0.093, t = 3.126, p < 0.01), but not boys (b = 0.026, t = 0.818, p > 0.05).

Academic norm salience showed a significant interaction with performance-avoidance goals. Performance-avoidance goals negatively predicted perceived popularity in classes with high academic norm salience scores (b = −0.073, t = −3.454, p < 0.001), but this prediction was not significant in classes with low academic norm salience scores (b = −0.014, t = −1.057, p > 0.05) (see **Figure 2**). Classroom academic norm salience accounted for 9.6% of the between-class variability in the predictive relationship between performance-avoidance goals and perceived popularity.

Furthermore, classroom academic norm salience explained 4.3% of the between-class variability in the predictive relationship between mastery goals × gender and perceived popularity. The results indicated that mastery goals positively predicted perceived popularity for girls (b = −0.049, t = 2.788, p < 0.01) and negatively predicted perceived popularity for boys (b = −0.044, t = −2.610, p < 0.01) in classes with low academic norm salience; and the interaction between gender and mastery goals was not significant in classes with low academic norm salience scores (girls: b = −0.010, t = −0.473, p > 0.05; boys: b = 0.011, t = 0.512, p > 0.05) (see **Figure 3**).

### DISCUSSION

The overall goal of this study was to investigate the associations between academic achievement and achievement goals with perceived popularity in adolescents in a Chinese classroom context. According to the results, the perceived popularity of boys and girls, respectively, was differently influenced by academic achievement and achievement goals; such influences also varied in relation to different classroom academic norms. This study may have been the first to examine the relationship between achievement goals and perceived popularity from the perspective of class academic norms. The findings revealed a moderating effect of classroom academic norms in the context of collective cultures, especially those that are influenced by both collectivism and Confucianism, such as Chinese culture. Chinese Confucianism and collectivism, which reflected the combined effects of proximal and distal culture and highlighted the necessity for follow-up studies in a variety of sociocultural contexts.

### Academic Achievement and Perceived Popularity of Early Adolescent Girls

A large number of Western studies have drawn the conclusion that, as children approach early adolescence, the relationship between academic achievement and perceived popularity decreases—or even reverses (Juvonen and Cadigan, 2002; Meijs et al., 2010; Dijkstra and Gest, 2015). However, a comparative

Zhang et al.

Achievement,

Goals, Classroom Academic Norm

TABLE 3 | Random effect regression of perceived population on predictors and their interactions at Level 1, cross-level interactions.

γ, the estimations of fixed effect; U, the variance components of random effect.\*p<0.05;\*\*p<0.01,\*\*\*p<0.001.

study of Chinese and American children in middle childhood found that Chinese children felt that good academic achievement was important for perceived popularity, and Chinese girls felt this more than boys; while the American girls and boys showed no difference (Li et al., 2012). However, does the stronger positive correlation between academic achievement and perceived popularity in Chinese children last to early adolescence? In this study, academic achievement significantly predicted the perceived popularity of Chinese girls (but not boys) in early adolescence, without the moderation of classroom academic norms. This finding may suggest cross-cultural similarities, as well as differences. First, similar to the trend in Western cultures, the positive effect of academic achievement on perceived popularity in the Chinese context gradually weakened from middle childhood to early adolescence. However, this speculation merits further investigation. Second, similar to Western teenagers, Chinese adolescent boys (compared with girls) tend not to emulate "feminine" behaviors of learning (Czopp et al., 1998; Lasane et al., 1999) in order to prove themselves in their peer group (Zook and Russotti, 2012). A cross-cultural difference was manifested in the relationship of "better learning, better status," which was unique to the Chinese early adolescent girls. This may be attributed to the fact that the Chinese girls were more academically successful than the boys, and traditional Chinese culture advocates that girls act in a pro-social, easygoing, academically and morally excellent manner (Chen et al., 2005). Therefore, even in early adolescence, the girls' academic achievements could still influence their perceived popularity.

### The Effect of Achievement Goals on Perceived Popularity

This study discovered the different effects of two performance goals on early adolescents' perceived popularity. First, performance-approach goals played a positive role in perceived popularity, which was consistent with the results of a study conducted in Singapore, which showed performance-approach goals to be positively correlated with peer relationships (Liem et al., 2008). These findings may have emerged because performance-approach goals are more acceptable in Chinese culture, and thus Chinese people do not pay an interpersonal cost for choosing them. Moreover, since adolescents with performance goals carefully considered their behaviors with regard to their implications for social status (Levy et al., 2004), such goals were conducive to promoting their social status. The positive effect of performance-approach goals on social status may reflect the fact that, within the Confucian tradition of valuing education, the pursuit of academic success—as a cultural gene—plays a crucial role that extends beyond the academic field, exerting a spillover effect. "Academic excellence" may be an important identity tag and status symbol for Chinese adolescents. Regardless of actual academic achievements, even "pretending" to do well (via performance-approach goals) in school can be conducive to creating an image of oneself as a "good student" among peers and thereby increasing one's social status. However, whether the effect of performance-approach goals on perceived popularity is long-lasting and whether these are good or bad for adolescents' future development remain questions for further study.

Second, performance-avoidance goals were negatively correlated with perceived popularity. This finding was consistent with those of previous studies, which have found performanceavoidance goals to be associated with peer relationships, friendship quality, and a defensive avoidance strategy (Levy et al., 2004; Levy-Tossman et al., 2007; Liem et al., 2008). The present study showed that performance-avoidance goals could disrupt interpersonal relationships and reduce the visibility of individuals in a peer group, thus adversely affecting their social status. Moreover, the study discovered that the extent to which performance-avoidance goals decreased perceived popularity

academic norm saliences in this, Figure 3 refer to classes that had one standard deviation above or below their mean.

depended on classroom academic norms. With greater classroom academic norm salience, the effect of performance-avoidance goals on perceived popularity became more negative. This might have occurred because students with such goals were concerned with others' evaluations of them, but they tried to escape peer evaluation by way of defensive avoidance (Levy et al., 2004). Regardless of the students' actual academic achievements, the classes with high academic norm salience—relative to those that showed less appreciation of learning—shared a group identity with low tolerance of negative learning attitudes and behaviors. Because avoidance behaviors ran contrary to the classroom norms, they were probably perceived by peers as

demonstrating weakness and incompetence, and thus resulted in lower social status.

### Complex Effects of Mastery Goals, Gender, and Classroom Academic Norm Salience on Perceived Popularity

Previous studies have confirmed that mastery goals are directly correlated with positive peer relationships (Liem et al., 2008) and friendship quality (Levy-Tossman et al., 2007). However, students with mastery goals do not consider peer interactions from the perspective of increasing their social status (Levy et al., 2004). Self-affirmation theory suggests that when people feel that their self-value is being threatened in a particular field, they seek self-worth in other areas (Steele, 1988). Considering that students who hold mastery goals are self-focused, they gain high self-worth from learning and have no need to turn to other fields; thus, this study assumed that mastery goals would have no effect on academic achievement. However, the results of the study showed that, despite the insignificant main effect of mastery goals on perceived popularity, there were complex interactions between mastery goals and the impact of gender and classroom academic norm salience on perceived popularity. With low classroom academic norm salience, girls' mastery goals positively predicted perceived popularity, while boys' mastery goals negatively predicted perceived popularity. When academic norm salience was high, the interaction of gender and mastery goals with perceived popularity was no longer significant. This finding shows that, although boys with mastery goals may have suffered social costs, according to the current study, this negative impact weakened in classes with high academic norm salience; and for girls, the positive effect of mastery goals on perceived popularity became moderate as classroom academic norm salience increased. Therefore, high levels of classroom academic norms may play a role in narrowing gender differences in the effect of mastery goals on perceived popularity. In classes that appreciate learning, neither boys nor girls with mastery goals experience additional effects on their perceived popularity. Developing classroom academic norms that appreciate learning may be an effective method of cultivating positive learning motivation and reducing the risk of exclusion or bullying by peers, especially for boys.

In addition, since previous studies have found that high academic norms enhance the correlation of academic achievement with peer acceptance (Chen et al., 2003a; Dijkstra and Gest, 2015) and social dominance (Jonkmann et al., 2009), this study assumed that classroom academic norms would enhance the relationship between academic achievement and perceived popularity. This assumption was not confirmed. The reason for this may be that this study accounted for the effects of academic achievement and achievement goals on perceived popularity and tried to better understand the moderating role of classroom academic norms by comparing the above two effects. Academic achievement is influenced by many factors (e.g., previous academic achievement, individual intelligence) and is not easily changed by students' subjective intentions. In contrast, achievement goals seem to be more controllable. When classroom norms exert significant influence on students, it is much easier for them to adjust their achievement goals than to adjust their academic achievement to conform to classroom norms. Therefore, compared with academic achievement, the relationship between achievement goals and perceived popularity may be more easily moderated by classroom academic norms.

### STRENGTHS, LIMITATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS

The current study tried to shed light on achievement predictors on perceived popularity in early adolescence in the collective cultural context. It also aimed to reveal the significance of academic achievement and performance-approach goals on perceived popularity among Chinese adolescents, as well as the differentiated effects of classroom academic norm salience on the effects of mastery goals and performanceavoidance goals on the perceived popularity of girls and boys, respectively.

The current study has two strengths. First, it examined the relationships between academic motivations and perceived popularity while previous research mainly focused on academic achievement and perceived popularity. Second, the results of this study revealed the unique role of academic-related factors on students' social status in collective cultures.

Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, although this study achieved some findings that contrast with the results of previous Western studies, it did not directly compare Chinese and Western samples. Thus, the findings must be re-examined by a two-sample design for intercultural comparison between China and Western countries. Second, this study only allowed for a limited number of nominations during data collection, and this may have hindered subjects from writing down every person they wanted to nominate due to the large class size (which is typical in China). An unlimited number of nominations might be preferable in future studies of Chinese samples.

The findings of the present study have some implications. They may help us better understand the important roles of two crucial factors—internal individual motivations and external peer groups—in early adolescents' competition for social status. These unique effects of academic achievement, achievement goals, and classroom norms on social status in the collectivist context of China reveal the importance and necessity of multicultural research. Furthermore, the findings suggest it is critical to conduct practical implications for developing the school environment and classroom atmosphere in ways that will be conducive to adolescents' academic development, positive peer status, and harmonious interaction between adolescents' academics as well as their interpersonal relationships.

In conclusion, the present study indicated that girls' academic achievement and performance-approach goals of both genders positively predicted students' perceived popularity. Classroom academic norm salience strengthened the negative role of performance-avoidance goals on perceived popularity and seemed to weaken gender differences of the influence of mastery goals on perceived popularity.

### ETHICS STATEMENT

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of Ethics review form studies at the faculty of psychology, BNU with written informed consent from all subjects. All subjects gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All parents or legal caregivers also provided written informed consents for the present study. The protocol was approved by the Scientific Review Committee, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University.

### AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

FL designed the study, supervised the quality in the process of researching and provided financial support. PR gathered data. YZ analyzed data and wrote the manuscript. XL interpreted data and revised the manuscript. HL analyzed data and revised the manuscript.

### REFERENCES

### FUNDING

The study was supported by the National Science Foundation for Young Scientists of China (Grant No. 61807005), the China Scholarship Council (CSC), and the Ministry of Education of Humanities and Social Science project (19YJA190011).

**Conflict of Interest Statement:** The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2019 Zhang, Ren, Li, Liu and Luo. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.