Contextual Teaching-Learning Method to Improve Student Engagement among College Students in Cognitive Psychology Course


This study focus on how contextual teaching-learning (CTL), as one of learning method, can improve student engagement. Participants of this study were 156 college students in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The study was conducted with an experimental approach. Measurement of student engagement was done by using School Engagement Scale. This scale was adapted into Indonesia version, and it has Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient 0.859 with 15 items. Result of data analysis showed that there was a significant difference on student engagement among college students (p=0.042), but student engagement scores in posttest was smaller than scores in pretest (N Negative Ranks = 83, Mean rank = 78.20; N Positive Rank = 64, Mean rank = 68.55; Ties = 9). Additional analysis was also discussed in this study.From this result, we can conclude that CTL not effective to improve student engagement among college students. Results and limitations of this study are discussed further in this paper.


student engagement, contextual teaching-learning (CTL), college students.


  1. Adelman, H., & Taylor, L. (2011). School Engagement, disengagement, learning supports, and school climate. Learning, (310).
  2. Adena, M., & James, P. (2004). Relationships Matter : Linking Teacher Support to Student Engagement and Achievement.
  3. Altun, S. (2015). The Effect of Cooperative Learning on Students’ Achievement and Views on the Science and Technology Course. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(3), 451–468.
  4. Appleton, J. J., Chirstenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386.
  5. Azmin, N. H. (2015). Effect of the Jigsaw-Based Cooperative Learning Method on Student Performance in the General Certificate of Education Advanced-Level Psychology: An Exploratory Brunei Case Study. International Education Studies, 9(1), 91.
  6. Azwar, S. (2005). Metode Penelitian. Yogyakart: Penerbit Pustaka Pelajar.
  7. Baker, E. ., Hope, L., & Karandjeff, K. (2009). Contextualized Teaching and Learning: A Faculty Primer. California.
  8. Bakker, A. B., Isabel, A., & Vergel, S. (2015). Student engagement and performance: A weekly diary study on the role of openness. Motivation Emotion, 39, 49–62.
  9. Beer, C., Clark, K., & Jones, D. (2010). Indicators of engagement. In Proceedings of ASCILITE Sydney (pp. 75–86).
  10. Berns, R., & Erickson, P. (2001). Contextual teaching and learning: Preparing students for the new economy. The Highlight Zone: Research, (5), 1–8.
  11. Bond, L. (2004). Using contextual instruction to make abstract learning concrete. Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers, 79(1), 30–34.
  12. Cappella, E., Yeon, H., Jennifer, K., & Jackson, D. R. (2013). Classroom Peer Relationships and Behavioral Engagement in Elementary School : The Role of Social Network Equity, 367–379.
  13. Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2004). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, (April), 1–44.
  14. Chiu, M. M., Pong, S., & Mori, I. (2012). Immigrant Students’ Emotional and Cognitive Engagement at School: A Multilevel Analysis of Students in 41 countries. Journal Youth Adolescence, 41, 1409–1425.
  15. Conner, J. O., & Pope, D. C. (2013). Not Just Robo-Students: Why Full Engagement Matters and How Schools Can Promote It. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1426–1442.
  16. Delialioǧlu, Ö. (2012). Student engagement in blended learning environments with lecture-based and problem-based instructional approaches. Educational Technology and Society, 15(3), 310–322.
  17. Dotterer, A. M., & Lowe, K. (2011). Classroom Context, School Engagement , and Academic Achievement in Early Adolescence. Journal Youth Adolescence, 40, 1649–1660.
  18. Doyle, A., & Richard, L. (2013). Adolescent Academic Achievement and School Engagement : An Examination of the Role of School-Wide Peer Culture, 6–19.
  19. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.
  20. Fredricks, J. A., & Mccolskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. . Christenson (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 763–782). Springer Science+Business Media.
  21. Ganyaupfu, E. M. (2013). Teaching Methods a nd Students ’ Academic Performance. International Journal of Hummanities and Social Science Invention, 2(9), 29–35.
  22. Greenwald, R., & Hedges, L. V. (1996). The Effect of School Resources on Student Achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361–396.
  23. Guenther, C., & Miller, R. . (2011). Factors that promote engagement. In R. L. Miller, E. Amsel, B. M. Kowalewski, B. C. Beins, K. D. Keith, & B. F. Peden (Eds.), Promoting student engagement (Vol 1): Programs, techniques and opportunities (Vol. 1, pp. 10–17). Society for the Teaching of Psychology. Retrieved from
  24. Haas, M. S. (2002). The Influence of Teaching Methods on Student Achievement on Virginia’s End of Course Standards of Learning Test for Algebra I. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
  25. Hudson, C. C., & Whisler, V. R. (2013). Contextual teaching and learning for practitioners. Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 6(4), 54–58.
  26. Johnson, E. . (2014). CTL: Contextual Teaching and Learning. Bandung: Penerbit Kaifa.
  27. Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 119–132.
  28. Kamaruddin, N. K. ., Rashid, W. M., Amin, Z. ., & Alias, M. (2012). A Study of the Effectiveness of The Contextual Approach to Teaching and Learning Statistics at the Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM). International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 4(25), 305–313.
  29. Khaefiatunnisa. (2015). The effectiveness of contextual teaching and learning in improving students’ reading skill in procedural text (A quasi-experimental study of the second grade students at one vocational school in Bandung). Journal of English and Education, 3(1), 80–95.
  30. Korobova, N. (2012). A comparative study of student engagement, satisfaction, and academic success among international and American students. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Iowa State University.
  31. Krause, K. (2005). Understanding and promoting student engagement in university learning communities. In Sharing Scholarship in Learning and Teaching: Engaging Students (pp. 1–15). Queensland: James Cook University Symposium. Retrieved from
  32. Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the Effects of Student Engagement on First-Year College Grades and Persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563.
  33. Leksono, A. B. (2010). Model pembelajaran Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) dalam proses belajar mengajar mata pelajaran sosiologi kelas X pada pokok bahasan nilai dan norma sosial di SMA Negeri 1 Tanjung Kabupaten Brebes Tahun Ajaran 2010/2011.
  34. Li, Y., Lerner, J. V, & Lerner, R. M. (2010). Personal and Ecological Assets and Academic Competence in Early Adolescence: The Mediating Role of School Engagement. Journal Youth Adolescence, 39, 801–815.
  35. Miller, P. M. (2006). Contextual Learning May Be a Better Teaching Model: a Case for Higher Order Learning and Transfer. Allied Academies International Conference, 11(2), 19–24.
  36. Park, S., Holloway, S. D., & Arendtsz, A. (2012). What Makes Students Engaged in Learning ? A Time-Use Study of Within- and Between-Individual Predictors of Emotional Engagement in Low-Performing High Schools, 390–401.
  37. Parsons, J., & Taylor, L. (2011). Student engagement: What do we know and what should we do?the University Partners. Retrieved from
  38. Ryzin, M. J. Van. (2011). Protective Factors at School: Reciprocal Effects Among Adolescents’ Perceptions of the School Environment, Engagement in Learning, and Hope. Journal Youth Adolescence, 40, 1568–1580.
  39. Ryzin, M. J. Van, Gravely, A. A., & Roseth, C. J. (2009). Autonomy, Belongingness and Engagement in School as Contributors to Adolescent Psychological Well-Being. Journal Youth Adolescence, 38, 1–12.
  40. Sa’diyah, S. K., & Qudsyi, H. (2016). Peer support and student engagement among high-school students in Indonesia. In International Conference on Education, Psychology, and Social Sciences. University Kuala Lumpur and Knowledge Association of Taiwan. 2518-2498
  41. Saeed, S., & Zyngier, D. (2012). How Motivation Influences Student Engagement: A Qualitative Case Study. Journal of Education and Learning, 1(2), 252–267.
  42. Sears, S. (2003). Introduction to Contextual Teaching and Learning. Bloomington: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
  43. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. . (2002). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  44. Sihono, T. (2004). Contextual Teaching and Learning Sebagai Model Pembelajaran Ekonomi dalam KBK. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Pendidikan, 1(1), 63–83.
  45. Siu, O. L., Bakker, A. B., & Jiang, X. (2014). Psychological Capital Among University Students: Relationships with Study Engagement and Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Happiness Study, 15, 979–994.
  46. Smalls, C. (2009). African American Adolescent Engagement in the Classroom and Beyond : The Roles of Mother ’ s Racial Socialization and Democratic-Involved Parenting, 204–213.
  47. Suryawati, E., Osman, K., & Meerah, T. S. M. (2010). The effectiveness of RANGKA contextual teaching and learning on student’s problem solving skills and scientific attitude. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1717–1721.
  48. Veiga, F. H., Galvão, D., Almeida, A., Carvalho, C., Janeiro, I., Nogueira, J., … Pereira, T. (2012). Student’s engagement in school: A literature review. In Proceedings of ICERI2012 Conference (pp. 1336–1344).
  49. Warwick, J. (2008). Mathematical self-efficacy and student engagement in the mathematics classroom, 8(3).
  50. Welch, B. K., & Bonnan-White, J. (2012). Twittering to increase student engagement in the university classroom. Knowledge Management and E-Learning, 4(3), 325–345.
  51. Willms, J. D. (2003). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation (Result from PISA 2000). OECD.