







































English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160  

       10.12928/eltej.v4i2.3551                            http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index               eltej@pbi.uad.ac.id 

 

Does class participation predict academic achievement?  

A mixed-method study 
 
Uğur Akpur 
Yildiz Technical University, Davutpaşa Kampüsü, İstanbul, Türkiye  

uakpur@yahoo.com 

 

A R T I C L E  I N F O 

 

ABST RACT  

 

 

Article history 

Received 24 January 2021 

Revised 22 March 2021 

Accepted 21 April 2021 

 The present study’s aim is to identify whether class participation is a 
significant predictor of English language achievement among 
university students and their views concerning class participation and 
academic achievement. A sequential mixed method design was 
applied and a total of 2013 university students (813 female 40.3%; 
1200 male, 59.7%) participated in the quantitative portion of the 
study. Course Participation Grade (CPG) criteria and English 
Proficiency Exam (EPE) held at the end of the academic year by the 
institution were used as data collection tools. The qualitative data were 
analysed through content analysis of a focus group interview with a 
group of seven participants. The findings suggested that the 
relationship between academic achievement and CPG was positive 
and significant. Correspondingly, the qualitative data revealed similar 
results with the quantitative data by showing that the class 
participation has powerful impact on academic achievement.  

 

This is an open access article under the CC–BY-SA license. 

    

 

 

Keywords 

class participation 

student engagement 

student involvement 

academic achievement 

 

 

How to Cite: Akpur, Uğur (2021). Does class participation predict academic achievement? A mixed-method 

study. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 4(2), 148-160 

1. Introduction  

Establishing effective learning environments in today’s increasingly complicated world to 
promote learning and academic success is one of the most addressed topics in education (Chapman, 
2003; Çelik et al., 2018; Hoyert et al., 2019; Kreng, 2013; Kuh et al., 2006, Hopland, & Nyhus, 
2016; Alzubaidi, Aldridge, & Khine, 2016; Lim & Fraser, 2018). Although factors affecting 
learners’ success stretch from the individuals’ readiness, characteristics, backgrounds to educational 
policies and practices as well as institutional facilities and many others, students’ engagement still 
stands as a key factor in educational settings (Chapman, 2003; Fredin et al., 2015). To Kuh (2009), 
as the number of hours that the students spend on a topic increase, they will more likely know and 
learn better. Accordingly, as they practice and participate in activities more, they will more likely 
get much more feedback from their teachers and the more in-depth they learn, the more masterfully 
they can cope with complex and ambiguous situations. In addition, engaging in educational 
activities also helps individuals develop basic skills to lead a more productive and more satisfactory 
life even after school life. In other words, engagement helps individuals build a fundamental 
structure in their minds upon which they can build necessary construction for the concept of lifelong 
learning. 

Regarded as one aspect of student engagement (Frisby, 2015), class participation has also 
attracted much attention (Baron & Corbin, 2012; Ko et al., 2016; Skinner et al., 2009, Mundelsee & 
Jurkowski, 2021) as one of the essential elements for the successful conduct of a learning activity 
(Sarıtepeci, 2012). Generally defined as the verbal interaction among participants in a learning 
environment (Karima, 2016), class participation connotes any remarks or questions voiced by 

http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index
mailto:uakpur@yahoo.com
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


ISSN 2621-6485                        English Language Teaching Educational Journal 149 
 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

students (Frisby, 2015), students’ active involvement in class activities (Ghalley & Rai, 2019; Lei et 
al., 2018; Skinner et al., 2009; Bond, Buntins, Bedenlier, S. et al., 2020; Lai, 2021; Sedláček & 
Šeďova, 2020; Sadoughi & Hejazi, 2021) and endeavours made by students to academic events 
(Ghasemi et al., 2018). As Chapman (2003) argues, class participation or student engagement 
traditionally was often described in terms of “time-based indices” such as doing a given task on time 
or attending classes timely. On the other hand, lately, the term has been depicted as students’ 
enthusiasm or eagerness to attend classes and to take part in class activities. Nowadays, however, 
another definition of the term has been emphasized. Within this context, participation is identified 
within three dimensions: affective, cognitive and behavioural (Dotterer et al., 2007; Stefansson et 
al., 2018).  

The affective dimension points out the emotional bond established between students and school, 
which is called “identification with school” by Voelkl (1997, p. 296). This dimension also applies to 
positive and negative responses towards the stakeholders of school such as students, teachers, 
administrators, school board members, parents and school itself as well as touching on the students’ 
commitment to school. Cognitive dimension refers to endeavours and efforts made by students to 
understand comprehensive and sophisticated ideas as well as the students’ use of self-regulatory 
strategies. The behavioural dimension contains students’ “observable actions or performance”, such 
as doing homework, attending classes and school grades (Archambault et al., 2009; Dotterer et al., 
2007; Stefansson et al., 2018; Ozdemir, 2017; Wang et al., 2014). 

Class participation depicts students’ emotions, behaviours and judgements about school life and 
it is an important variable since it affects academic outcomes such as achievement and high level of 
school commitment (Dotterer et al., 2007; Engels, Spilt, Denies, & Verschueren, 2021; Thararuedee 
& Wette, 2020). Reviewing the measurements that examine engagement, Ozdemir (2017) suggest 
that rather than affective and cognitive aspects, behavioural dimension has attracted more attention 
in terms of investigations. Thus, getting high grades, rate of completing homework or given tasks on 
time, and time spent on school-related events are generally considered as indicators of participation. 
In other words, since it could be assessed through monitoring students in the course of learning 
process, attendance, taking part in activities during classes, tutoring peers and preparedness are 
observable signs of participation (Syaveny & Johari, 2017). As a result, examining the link between 
class participation to other variables and its influence on students’ school life have been studied in 
terms of the mentioned indicators.  

Within this context, several studies have revealed that class participation is positively correlated 
with academic achievement whereas non-participation causes poor academic outcomes. Gürer 
(2013) found that in social studies lesson, class engagement and academic achievement positively 
correlated with each other. Likewise, Marks (2000), in her study, pointed that academically 
successful students are more engaged in class-related activities than those who were not engaged. 
Sirin and Rogers-Sirin (2004) in their research on African American students also suggested that 
school engagement was one of the variables that had the strongest relationship with academic 
performance. The significance of class participation as an indicator of academic achievement was 
also emphasized in Voelkl’s (1997) study. Gunuc’s (2014) study, exploring the predictive level of 
student engagement on academic achievement, revealed the significant relationship between the 
variables. Similarly, Wang and Eccles (2011) in their study found that school engagement was 
positively related to academic achievement. Pike, Smart and Ethington’s (2012) study in which 
20,000 students participated revealed that student participation was significantly correlated with 
academic success. Ko et al., (2016), in their study where over 18,000 students participated, as well 
as Konold, Cornell, Jia and Malone’s (2018) study including more than 60,000 participants also 
cited that class participation had significant impact on learning outcomes. In short, the agreed point 
is that class participation has profound impacts on the academic achievement in positive way.  

Similarly, in language learning context, class participation is of crucial importance in terms of 
positive academic outcomes (Permatasari, 2016; Albertson, 2020). Apart from enabling students in a 
language class to verbalize their thoughts, emotions and opinions, class participation also promotes 
their critical thinking and discussion abilities (Karima, 2016). Further, in classes, through 
participation, students can promote their motivation and productive skills which are fundamental 
steps in learning a foreign language. Furthermore, as Permatasari (2016) states, when students get 
involved in activities with their classmates and teachers, their cognitive skill levels raise, the roots of 
which can be found in socio-cultural theory. Hence, given that participation and taking part in class-



150 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

related activities are indispensable in acquiring a foreign language, the learners become successful in 
language development at the rate they participate (Hamouda, 2013). 

Several studies have explored the link between students’ participation and academic 
achievement, and it seems apparent that the positive and significant relationship between them is 
indisputable. In a study conducted by Syaveny and Johari (2017), it was found that English learning 
achievement increased when students’ participation was higher. Liu and Jackson (2009) investigated 
reticence in EFL classes and their study revealed that the more proficient the students, the higher 
was their participation level. Similarly, Fakeye and Amao’s (2013) study suggested that the 
relationship between participation and academic achievement in Literature in English was positive 
and significant. Crosthwaite, Bailey and Meeker’s (2015) findings from their study also supported 
the aforementioned results by confirming that there was a positive relationship between class 
participation and language proficiency levels. 

To summarise, although there is a large number of studies that mark the positive impacts of class 
participation on academic achievement, the relationship between the mentioned variables has not 
been much matter of interest in terms of university students’ participation and English language 
success specific to Turkish context. To this end, the present study tries to address this gap in an 
attempt to find an answer to the following research questions:  

1. Is class participation a significant predictor of English Language achievement among Turkish 
university students? 

2. What are the Turkish students’ views concerning class participation and academic achievement? 

2.  Method 

The present study was conducted in sequential mixed methods design in which the collection of 
qualitative data is followed by the collection of quantitative data (Creswell, 2012). According to 
Creswell (2017), with the introduction of multiple data collection methods and forms of analysis, 
more explicit methods are needed to eliminate the complexity of such research. These methods have 
also been developed to meet the need for the researcher to make a more understandable design. This 
is a kind of design in which qualitative phase of data collection and analysis are conducted initially 
and this step is followed by the stage of quantitative data collection and analysis. In the final phase, 
the findings from the separated data are integrated and interpreted (Berman, 2017). To further 
analyse the quantitative data, a focus group interview was organized for the part of the qualitative 
portion of the study. In the present study, it was evaluated that a more precise analysis was required 
due to the complication in interpreting the quantitative data. In addition, the students’ views 
regarding class participation were significant in that these views could lead to valuable suggestions 
in terms of planning and formulating participation framework. Thus, it was evaluated that, applying 
this method best suited the study since it could provide a deeper analysis. In line with the context of 
sequential mixed method design, in the current study the quantitative part was first conducted and 
this was followed by the stage of quantitative data collection.            

2.1. Participants 

The study group of the research consisted of university students who attend a preparatory school 
of a state university in İstanbul, Turkey during 2018-2019 academic year. The study group consisted 
of 2013 (813 female 40.3%; 1200 male, 59.7%) students, chosen randomly from different levels and 
classes so that they could represent the study population. The age group of the participants were as 
follows: 85.4% (n=1720) of the students were between the ages 17-19; 12.1% (n=243) of them were 
between 20-22, and 2.5% (n=50) of them were over 23 years old.    

2.2. Data Collection Tools 

In order to assess students’ class participation during the academic year, Course Participation 
Grade (CPG) criteria, the ultimate main of which is to assess students’ efforts in learning was taken 
into consideration. The English Proficiency Exam (EPE) scores for academic achievement, which is 
prepared and conducted by the institution, was assessed as another data collection tool for the 
quantitative part of the study. For the qualitative portion of the study, a focus group interview was 
conducted with seven voluntary students, four of whom (57%) were males and three were females 
(43%), that represented the sample. Selected from different classes, the participants were told the 



ISSN 2621-6485                        English Language Teaching Educational Journal 151 
 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

aim of the interview and the researcher attempted to form a comfortable atmosphere so that the 
participants could express their opinions and feelings with ease and in a detailed way. The interview 
took nearly an hour and the participants were encouraged to mention the influence of class 
participation on academic achievement and the factors that affect class participation. For the 
reliability of the questions, two English teachers and an expert in curriculum were consulted for their 
opinions about the questions to be asked during the interview.   

2.3. Course Participation Criteria (CPG) 

The criteria aimed to formulate the items by means of which the students are assessed by 
teachers are illustrated in Table 1.  

Table 1.  Course Participation Criteria 

0 The student… 
In class work Does not participate in most of the 

class activities 

• is withdrawn, unaware of 

what is going on in classes 
• hardly volunteers to answer 

the questions 

• does not listen to others 

1 – 4 • The student… 

In class work Rarely participates in almost no class 
activities 

• is generally withdrawn, only 
joins when called on 

• rarely volunteers to answer 

the questions 

• rarely listens to the instructor 
actively 

5 – 8 • The student… 

In class work Sometimes participates in some of the 

class activities actively 

• is sometimes engaged in 

classes 

• sometimes volunteers to 
answer the questions  

• sometimes cooperates with 

classmates 

• sometimes listens to the 
instructor actively 

9 – 12 • The student… 

In class work Often participates in most of the class 

activities actively 

• is often engaged in classes 

• often volunteers to answer 

the questions  

• often cooperates with much 
objection 

• often listens to the instructor 

actively 

13 – 16 • The student… 

In class work Generally participates in majority of 
the class activities 

• is usually engaged in classes 
• volunteers to answer the 

questions  

• usually cooperates with 

classmates 
• generally listens to the 

instructor actively 

17 – 20 • The student… 

In class work Almost always participates in all of 

the class activities and/or high quality 

• is almost always engaged in 

classes 
• volunteers to answer the 

questions  

• listens to the instructor 

actively 

OVERALL CPG GRADE 0 1 – 4 5 – 8 9 – 12 13 – 16 17 – 20 
 



152 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

CPG criteria, prepared by the institution, were arranged in a form of rubric ranging from “0” to 
“20”. Graded in three-week intervals by all teachers of the class five times in a term, CPG’s rubric is 
scaled in such a way that the ones who do not participate class activities, who are withdrawn and 
unaware of the goings-on in class, who hardly volunteer to answer the questions raised by the 
teacher, who use native language excessively and the ones who do not do outside class work are 
graded “0” point. 1-4 grade scale requires rarely participating in almost no activities, seldom 
volunteering to answer the question raised, rarely cooperating with classmates, switching to Turkish 
unnecessarily or not showing any effort to use English and rarely completing or doing poor quality 
outside class work. Students get 5-8 grades when they sometimes participate in some of the class 
activities actively, when they are sometimes engaged in activities, sometimes volunteers to answer 
the questions, sometimes listen to their classmates or teacher and switch to Turkish unnecessarily for 
the basic words or phrases. These students sometimes complete their assignments and these are 
average quality. The ones who often participate most of the class activities keenly, are often engaged 
in classes, often volunteer to answer the questions, often listen to peers or teachers, switch to 
Turkish when a word or complex structure is not known get 9-12 grades. These students often 
complete their assignments and these are satisfactorily quality.  

Generally participating in majority of activities keenly, often volunteering to answer the 
questions posed, usually cooperating with peers, and switching to Turkish when the word or phrase 
is not known and usually completing assignments are graded between 13-16 grades. When students 
almost always participate in all class activities and when they are regularly volunteers to answer the 
questions raised by their teachers get 17-20 grades. These students keenly cooperate with their peers, 
listen to their classmates and teachers, switch to Turkish when they do not know a specific term or a 
structure and their assignments are almost always complete and high quality. In the present study, 
CPG grades were analysed in a whole academic year, which connotes that the average of 10 CPG 
grades were taken into consideration.  

2.4. The English Proficiency Exam (EPE)  

The English Proficiency Exam (EPE), prepared by the institution, is held at the end of every 
academic year. It is a two-stage exam and designed in line with the Common European Framework 
of Reference (CEFR). It is aimed to identify whether the students have the proficiency level to 
follow the courses in their majors. In other words, the purpose of the test is to determine whether the 
students’ proficiency in English is at a level that will enable them to follow courses offered in their 
respective fields of study and fulfil their requirements with relative ease. Therefore, the English 
Proficiency Exam (EPE) aims to assess students’ ability to comprehend and respond to written and 
oral academic passages, to understand and follow lectures on semi-academic themes as well as to 
test their competency levels in producing written texts of various lengths. The exam consists of “Use 
of English”, “Reading”, “Listening” and “Writing” sections, which measure reading, listening and 
writing skills for academic purposes along with grammar and vocabulary. The level of the exam is 
equivalent to the language proficiency and language skills of a B1+ student according to CEFR. The 
academic achievement data of the present study were gathered from EPE scores which were held at 
the end of the academic year in the spring term in 2019. After analysing the items, the difficulty 
level of the exam was found to be .59, which shows that the exam was at the “moderately difficult” 
level. In addition, the reading texts of the EPE were analysed in accordance with Flesch-Kincaid 
Reading Ease Chart and it was found that they were at “difficult” level whereas the listening part 
was at “fairly easy” level.    

2.5. Focus Group Interview 

The focus group interview was conducted to interpret the data gained from the quantitative part 
of the study more thoroughly concerning students’ opinions on class participation and academic 
achievement. Focus group interviews are a method that is conducted within the framework of 
predetermined guidelines. This method can be defined as a qualitative data collection technique that 
prioritizes the subjectivity of the interviewees and which should pay attention to the discourse of the 
participants and the social context (Çokluk et al., 2011). Focus group interviews which aim at 
unearthing the participants’ views about a particular subject matter include questions formed by the 
interviewer to help the participants express their opinions (Creswell, 2012). The researcher in the 
present study arranged the interview with seven voluntary students and during the interview the 
researcher himself explained the aim of the interview comprehensively to make the objectives clear. 
As for the convenience and the reliability of the interview questions, the literature was reviewed and 



ISSN 2621-6485                        English Language Teaching Educational Journal 153 
 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

three field-experts were requested for their opinions. To improve and to reach a high level of the 
coding agreement as much as possible, the researcher and an expert compared the independently 
formed codes and mutually agreed codes were identified. Richards and Hemphill (2018) reliability 
formula was applied to provide reliability of analysis and the reliability value was found to be .74.       

2.6. Data Analysis 

The quantitative data of the study were analysed through SPSS 21.0 software program. To 
identify the relationship between class participation and academic achievement, correlational 
analysis was applied. Additionally, simple linear regression analysis was used to explore the 
predictive power of the independent variable on the dependent variable.  

For the quantitative part of the study, correlational survey design was applied. In this type of 
design, the types of relationships between two or more variables are investigated. In other words, it 
identifies whether the variables are related and in what way they are related (Karasar, 2003). 
Additionally, simple linear regression analysis was used to explore the predictive power of the 
independent variable on the dependent variable. In this kind of research design, it is aimed to 
determine the relationship level between two variables, one of which is determined as the 
independent variable and the other as the dependent (Büyüköztürk, 2011). 

As for the qualitative part of the study, content analysis was applied for the associated codes, 
categories, and themes. The content analysis focuses on what is uttered, written or recorded. With 
the help of systematic organization for the process of determining coding, categories and themes, 
content analysis is considered as a research method for the clarification and comment of the content 
(Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). Within this context, the students’ answers during the interview shed light 
on identifying the codes, categories and themes. After the transcription of the recorded interview, the 
transcript was first coded and the associated codes were analysed to determine categories and 
themes. The same steps were taken by another expert to ensure the reliability. The similarity of the 
codes, categories and themes were controlled through Richards and Hemphill (2018) reliability 
formula and the reliability of the analysis was found to be over 70%. 

3. Findings and Discussion  

3.1 Findings 

In the present study, the aim is to identify whether class participation is a significant predictor of 
English language achievement among university students and to explore students’ views in terms of 
class participation and academic achievement. To this end, the quantitative data obtained from the 
participants have been analysed and the range, minimum, maximum, medium along with standard 
error and standard deviation values have been calculated. The findings are illustrated in Table 2.   

Table 2.  The Range, Minimum, Maximum, Medium, Standard Error, Standard Deviation Values of 

the Variables 

 N Range Min. Max. X-Value SE SD 

Academic Achievement 2013 83.75 14.00 97.75 61.05 .31 13.73 

CPG 2013 75.00 25.00 100.00 91.33 .23 10.00 

 

As can be observed in Table 2, and the range, minimum, maximum, medium along with standard 
error and standard deviation values of academic achievement are 83.75; 14.00; 97.75; 61.05; .31 and 
13.73 respectively. The figures of CPG for range, minimum, maximum, medium, standard error, 
standard deviation values are found to be 75.00; 25.00; 100.00; 91.33; .23 and 10.00.   

To identify the regression figures, Pearson Correlation analysis has been applied to determine 
whether there is a relationship between the variables. The figures of the findings are illustrated in 
Table 3.  

 

 



154 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

Table 3.  The Values of the Correlation Analysis between the Variables 

 Academic Achievement CPG 

Academic Achievement 1 .28** 

CPG .28** 1 

a. ** significant at the level of p<0.01 

Table 3 demonstrates the correlation values between CPG and academic achievement. It can be 
observed that the relationship between academic achievement and CPG is positive and significant at 
the level of p<0.01. In Table 4, the findings after the regression analysis between academic 
achievement and CPG has been illustrated.  

Table 4.  The Results of Regression Analysis of Prediction Degree of Students’ Class Participation on 

Academic Achievement 

 B SE  t p 

Stable 33.12 3.18  8.13 .00** 

CPG .43 .04 .25 6.15 .00** 

b. Dependent Variable: Academic Achievement R2=.38  F=84.66  
c. ** Significant at the level of p<0.01 

In order to identify how much of the total variance in academic achievement is explained by the 
independent variable (CPG), the regression analysis has been applied. As it is illustrated in Table 4, 
38% (R2=.38) of the variance in academic achievement is explained by CPG grades. The prediction 
degree has been found to be F=84.66, which is significant at the level of p<0.01. As for the 
predictive level of the independent variable CPG, it is observed that the power of CPG (t=6.15, 
p<0.01) to predict academic achievement is meaningful. In other words, it can be concluded that 
independent variable, CPG is a significant predictor of the dependent variable, academic 
achievement.  

3.2 The Qualitative Data 

The students’ views on class participation and academic achievement along with the factors that 
affect students’ participation in the class-related activities were sought for an answer through the 
focus group interview. The students’ views on class participation and academic achievement along 
with the factors that affect students’ participation in the class.  

After transcription of the recorded interview, the transcript was first coded and the associated 
codes were analysed to determine categories and themes. The content analysis demonstrated that 
two themes emerged in terms of the class participation and academic achievement along with the 
factors that affect students’ participation in the class.  

As can be seen in Table 5, the participants’ views on class participation and academic 
achievement focused on two themes: internal and external factors. Nearly all of the students made it 
clear that class participation activities would in the end affect their performance and naturally their 
academic achievement: “It helps the teacher give me a high grade in CPG and I usually remember 
easily the subjects I talked about” (S4, Female, 18); I know I have to participate, because it increases 
my performance” (S3, Female, 18). In another word, common views were gathered around the idea 
that anything to do with participation both enhanced the participants’ motivation towards the class 
and, naturally, helped to improve their performance: “When I participate, this makes me feel more 
confident” (S2, Male, 19). Further, the from the participants’ views, in the theme of internal factors, 
two categories, respectively, gain and interest were formed. In the gain category, eagerness to learn 
and positive impression came to the fore. In the interest category, confidence, curiosity and having 
knowledge were marked. 

 

 



ISSN 2621-6485                        English Language Teaching Educational Journal 155 
 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

Table 5.  Class Participation and Academic Achievement as well as the Factors Affecting Students’ 

Participation in the Class 

Theme Category Sample Codes Quotation 

   Internal 

   Factors 

        Gain Eagerness to learn 

Positive 

impression 

“When I attempt to answer a question, firstly I always 

think that this is a good opportunity to show myself. It 

helps the teacher give me a high grade in CPG and I 
usually remember easily the subjects I talked about.”  

(S4, Female, 18) 

        Interest Confidence 

Curiosity 
Having knowledge 

“When the subject interests me, it is always easier for 

me to say something, because in these situations, I 
usually have something to say and participate the class 

like something about sports. When I participate, this 

makes me feel more confident.” (S2, Male, 19)   

External        

Factors 

        Respect Peer pressure 

Lack of confidence 
Criticism 

“… Sometimes, when I try to answer a question that 

the teacher asks, I am often afraid of making mistakes, 
because when I say something wrong, my friends 

behave like children. But I know I have to do it, 

because it increases my performance.” (S3, Female, 18) 

 

      Classroom  

       Climate 

Crowd 

Silence 

 

“If the class is too crowded and I am not sure about the 

answer, I never participate or attempt to participate. 

This makes me tense and I prefer only to listen to the 
teacher.” (S1, Male, 19) 

 

      Teacher Positive Feedback 

Mind 
Support 

“When I say something and if the teacher pays 

attention to my opinions, I feel relaxed and I begin to 
think about giving answers positively.” (S5, Female, 19)  

 

As for the theme external factors, respect from the teacher and the peers, classroom climate and 
the attitude of the teacher were highlighted by the participants. In the respect category the codes, 
peer pressure, lack of confidence and criticism attracted attention. The codes crowd and silence were 
found to be related to classroom climate category. The positive feedback from the teacher as well as 
the peers and support from them were the codes of the teacher category.  In other words, during the 
interview, they also highlighted some other points related to class participation. What they 
emphasized was that the participation activities were affected by some factors such as interests, 
gains, and respect from the teacher and peers as well as classroom climate. Another point that the 
students particularly emphasized was that the teacher’s attitudes towards them generally determine 
their desire for participation.    

3.2 Discussion 

What the present study has sought is to identify the relationship between class participation and 
academic achievement as well as the predictive level of the participation of on academic 
achievement. In an attempt to describe the kind of relationship, correlation and regression analysis 
were conducted and the findings of the present study illustrated that the relationship between class 
participation and academic achievement was positive and significant at the level of p<0.01 and that 
much of the variance in academic achievement could be explained by the notion of class 
performance. An important insight that CPG grades explain 38% of academic achievement has been 
obtained from the study. It is believed that by marking the significant and positive relationship 
between class participation and academic achievement, the present study will shed light on certain 
applications, particularly in terms of the importance of interactive classroom atmosphere.  The 
findings of the study support the views of Kuh et al. (2006), stating that class participation has 
positive and profound impacts on achievement in that participation and engagement have been 
assessed as the central theme since it connects learners’ behaviours and institutions’ objectives and 
conditions. Moreover, the positive effect of class participation, which is expressed as one of the 



156 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

primary elements for the learning process (Sarıtepeci, 2012; Syaveny & Johari, 2017) has also been 
highlighted by Permatasari (2016) who suggests that class participation is thought to enhance 
students’ cognitive abilities and naturally their academic performance. The findings of the current 
study highlight the mentioned assumptions and are in line with several studies conducted in different 
settings. Although the level of the aforementioned positive correlation varies from one study to 
another, the link between the variables has been well stated and determined. Studies conducted by 
Syaveny and Johari (2017), Gürer (2013), Marks (2000), Liu and Jackson (2009), and Fakeye (2013) 
have pointed that the more students participate, the higher grades they have in terms of academic 
achievement. Further, Mijatovic and Jednak (2011) in their study have suggested that the experience 
of class participation is a strong predictor of academic achievement. In Kelsen and Liyang’s (2012) 
study, it has been emphasized that participation in English-taught programs is one of most 
significant indicators of academic achievement. Furthermore, Ko et al., (2016), analysing over 
18.000 students’ replies, argue that class participation is one of the important variables that has 
strong influence on learning outcomes. On the other hand, in the study of Niia et al. (2015), it has 
been concluded that parents, teachers and students attribute different meanings to the notion of 
participation and its relationship to the academic achievement. For the students, in the study, class 
participation is a means of socializing while the teachers view it as an activity which is closely 
connected with academic achievement.   

The qualitative data gained through the present study have also yielded to important findings. 
First of all, the majority of students have underlined the fact that participating in class activities or 
learning-related activities affect their performance in the learning process positively. Said another 
way, the dominant views during the interview have been grounded on the idea that anything related 
to participation promotes motivation which, in the end, have reflections on the academic 
achievement in a positive way. From the qualitative portion of the study it has also been highlighted 
that there are some factors affecting class participation such as interests, gains, and respect from the 
teacher and peers as well as classroom climate. From the content analysis, it is possible to draw the 
conclusion that these factors are of almost equal importance with effect of participation over 
performance. It is observed that in some other studies too, the factors that have influence over 
performance have been stressed. A study conducted by Susak (2016) which examines the factors 
that affect class participation has underlined that logistics, student traits, classroom climate, and the 
teacher’s effect influence participation activities. Similarly, Ghalley and Rai (2019) have concluded 
that teachers, peers, the size of the classroom, preparation for the class and proficiency in language 
are the main factors that influence class participation. In another study conducted by Precourt and 
Gainor (2019), the featured factors in class participation have been sorted as class schedule, class 
duration and semester. In the same study, it is also concluded that the students who take part in class 
activities more in classroom discussions perform 25% better on exams than the ones who display 
lower participation activities. Further, Aziz et al. (2018) in their study have found that self-esteem 
and motivation as internal factors; teachers, parents, peers and curriculum as the external factors 
influence participation in classrooms. In the light of empirical findings and theoretical frames, it can 
be concluded that the factors affecting class participation vary from one context to another, thus 
requiring special consideration peculiar to a specific context. 

4. Conclusion  

As an overall conclusion, it can be concluded that class participation is a significant variable in 
terms of promoting motivation, self-confidence and thus academic achievement. It is also 
particularly helpful to identify and set forth the factors that affect achievement. From the current 
study, it has been found that class participation is an important variable that has a deep influence 
over the concept of achievement. The present study leads to some educational implications, as well. 
In the first place, what is to be highlighted regarding teachers’ role in classes is to create convenient 
atmospheres to promote participation as much as possible where students can feel themselves free 
and comfortable in joining. In this respect, it gains prominence that the students should be 
encouraged to engage in class activities by teachers. Secondly, teachers and policy makers have to 
make point of providing positive attitudes to students’ efforts towards participation as it has been 
emphasized as an important factor that leads to the frequency of participation. It is a known fact that 
the fear of being ridiculed by their peers, lack of self-confidence and lack of courage could prevent 
students from participating in the classroom activities. In the present study, the participants of the 



ISSN 2621-6485                        English Language Teaching Educational Journal 157 
 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

focus group mentioned similar points, which could hinder their eagerness to participate. At this 
point, getting to know the names of students, making them study in pairs, listening and responding 
them appropriately, giving importance to their ideas, creating a class atmosphere in which they can 
teach each other and using technological tools that help them express their ideas freely could 
contribute to create a non-threatening classroom climate in which their ideas and feelings are valued.         

It is to be made point of a couple of certain limitations of the present study. In the first place, the 
data that were analysed gained from the university students attending preparatory classes. Studying 
with the students from other nationalities, departments, sections and age groups may yield to 
different findings. In addition, although it might cause certain difficulties in the process of content-
analysis, the number of the focus-group members could be increased more to get more accurate 
results.  

 

REFERENCES: 
 

Albertson, B. P. (2020). Promoting Japanese university students' participation in English classroom 

discussions: Towards a culturally-informed bottom-up approach. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association 

of Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 45-66. 

Alzubaidi, E., Aldridge, J. M., & Khine, M. S. (2016). Learning English as a second language at the 

university level in Jordan: Motivation, self-regulation and learning environment perceptions. Learning 

Environments Research, 19(1), 133-152. 

Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J., & Pagani, L. S. (2009). Student engagement and its relationship with 

early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651 –  670. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007 

Aziz, F., Quraishi, U., & Kazi, A. S. (2018). Factors behind classroom participation of secondary school 

students (A gender based analysis). Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(2), 211-217. 

Baron, P., & Corbin, L. (2012). Student engagement: Rhetoric and reality. Higher Education Research & 

Development, 31(6), 759 - 772. 

Berman, E. A. (2017). An exploratory sequential mixed methods approach to understanding researchers’ data 

management practices at UVM: Integrated findings to develop  research data services. Journal of 

eScience Librarianship, 6(1): e1104.  https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2017.1104 

Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S. et al. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational 

technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational 

Technology in Higher Education 17, 2  https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8 

Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni,  SPSS 

uygulamaları ve yorum. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık 

Çelik, S.,Toraman, S. Ö., & Çelik, K. (2018). Öğrenci başarısının derse katılım ve öğretmen 

 yakınlığıyla ilişkisi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 26(1), 209 - 217.  

 https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.378129 

Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, 

Research & Evaluation, 8(13), 1 - 7. 

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating  quantitative and 

qualitative research. Boston: Pearson Education. 

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods 

approaches. Melbourne: Sage publications. 

Çokluk, Ö., Yılmaz, K., & Oğuz, E. (2011). Nitel bir görüşme yöntemi: Odak grup görüşmesi. Kuramsal 

Eğitimbilim, 4(1), 95 - 107. 

Crosthwaite, P. R., Bailey, D. R., &
 

Meeker, A. (2015). Assessing in-class participation for EFL: 

considerations of effectiveness and fairness for different learning styles. Language Testing in Asia, 

5(9), 1 - 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-015-0017-1 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
../../user/Google%20Drive/Reviewed%20Sage%20Open/%09https:/doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2017.1104
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.378129
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-015-0017-1


158 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

Dotterer, A. M., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2007). Implications of out-of school activities for school 

engagement in African American adolescents. J Youth Adolescence, 36, 391 - 401. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9161-3 

Engels, M. C., Spilt, J., Denies, K., & Verschueren, K. (2021). The role of affective teacher-student 

relationships in adolescents’ school engagement and achievement trajectories. Learning and 

Instruction, 75, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2021.101485 

Fakeye, D. O., & Amao, T. A. (2013). Classroom participation and study habit as predictors of achievement 

in literature-in-English. Cross-Cultural Communication, 9(3), 18 - 25. 

https://doi.org/10.3968/j.ccc.1923670020130903.2741 

Fredin, A., Fuchsteiner, P., & Portz, K. (2015). Working toward more engaged and successful accounting 

students: A balanced scorecard approach American Journal of Business Education, 8(1), 49 - 62. 

Frisby, B. N. (2015). Effective instructional practice: Facilitating student participation.  Retrieved from: 

https://www.natcom.org/sites/files/pages/EIP_Student_Participation 

Ghalley, L. R., & Rai, B. M. (2019). Factors influencing classroom participation: A case study  of 

Bhutanese higher secondary student. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 4(3), 1 - 14, 

https://doi.org/10.9734/AJESS/2019/v4i330118 

Ghasemi, M. R., Moonaghi, H. K., & Heydari, A. (2018). Student-related factors affecting  academic 

engagement: A qualitative study exploring the experiences of Iranian  undergraduate nursing 

students. Electronic Physician, 10(7), 7078 - 7085. http://dx.doi.org/10.19082/7078 

Gunuc, S. (2014). The relationships between student engagement and their academic  achievement.  

International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their  Implications, 5(4), 216 - 231.  

Gürer, M. D. (2013). Utilization of learning objects in social studies lesson: Achievement,  attitude 

and engagement. [Unpublished Master Thesis]. 

 https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12615348/index.pdf 

Hamouda, A. (2013). An exploration of causes of Saudi students’ reluctance to participate in the English 

Language classroom. International Journal of English Language Education, 1(1), 17 - 34. 

https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v1i1.2652 

Hopland, A. O., & Nyhus, O. H. (2016). Learning environment and student effort. International Journal of 

Educational Management,  30(2), pp.271-286.   

Hoyert, M. S., Ballard, K., & O’Dell, C. D. (2019). Increasing student success through a  cocktail of 

cognitive interventions. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and  Learning, 19(1), 128 - 134. 

https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v19i1.26778 

Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S.E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.  Qualitative Health 

Research, 15(9), 1277 - 1288. 

Karasar, N. (2003). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları. 

Karima, H. (2016). An investigation of the difficulties that prevent EFL learners from  participation. 

[Unpublished Master Thesis]. https://e-biblio.univ-mosta.dz 

Kelsen, B. A., & Liyang, H. (2012). Indicators of achievement in EFL classes at a Taiwanese University. 

Education Research International, 2012, 1 - 8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/635964 

Ko, J. W., Park, S., Yu, H. S., Kim, S-J., & Kim, D. M. (2016). The structural relationship  between 

student engagement and learning outcomes in Korea. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 

 25(1):147 - 157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0245-2 

Konold, T., Cornell, D., Jia, Y., & Malone, M. (2018). School climate, student engagement, and academic 

achievement: A latent variable, multilevel multi-informant examination. American Educational 

Research Association, 4(4), 1 - 17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858418815661 

Kreng, H. (2013). Factors influencing college students’ academic achievement in Cambodia: A case study. 

AJTLHE, 5(2), 34 - 49. 



ISSN 2621-6485                        English Language Teaching Educational Journal 159 
 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

Kuh, G. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical  foundations. New 

Directions for Institutional Research, 141, 5 - 20. 

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2006). What matters to student 

success: A review of the literature. Final report for the National Postsecondary Education Cooperative 

and National Center for Education Statistics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for 

Postsecondary Research. Retrieved from: http://nces.ed.gov/npec/papers.asp 

Lai, H. M. (2021). Understanding what determines university students’ behavioral engagement in a group-

based flipped learning context. Computers & Education, 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104290   

Lei, H., Cui, Y., & Zhou, W. (2018). Relationships between students’ engagement and academic 

achievement: A meta-analysis. Social Behaviour and Personality, 46(3), 517 - 528. 

https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7054 

Lim, CT.D., Fraser, B.J. (2018).  Learning environments research in English classrooms. Learning 

Environments Research 21, 433–449, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-018-9260-6 

Liu, M., & Jackson, J. (2009). Reticence in Chinese EFL students at varied proficiency levels. TESL Canada 

Journal, 26(2), 65 - 81. 

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and 

high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153 - 184  

Mijatovic, I., & Jednak, S. (2011). Attitudes toward active participation as predictors of student achievement 

- Exploratory research from Serbia. The New Educational Review, 24(2),  258 - 270. 

Mundelsee, L., & Jurkowski, S. (2021). Think and pair before share: Effects of collaboration on students' in-

class participation. Learning and Individual Differences, 88, 102015. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102015 

Niia, A., Almqvist, L., Brunnberg, E., & Granlund, M. (2014). Student participation and  parental 

involvement in relation to academic achievement. Scandinavian Journal of  Educational 

Research 59(3), 1 - 19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2014.904421 

Ozdemir, M. (2017). Examining the relations among social justice leadership, attitudes towards school and 

school engagement. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2017.6281 

Permatasari, R. (2016). What do the studies say about the factors obstructing EFL/ESL students’ 

participation? Paper presented at the 5th
 
English Language Teaching, Literature, and Translation 

International Conference 2016. Faculty of Languages & Arts State University of Semarang 

Pike, G. R., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (2012). The mediating effects of student engagement on the 

relationships between academic disciplines and learning outcomes: An extension of Holland’s Theory. 

Research in Higher Education, 53(5), 550 - 575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-011-9239-y 

  Precourt, E., & Gainor, M. (2019). Factors affecting classroom participation and how  participation leads 

to a better learning. Accounting Education, 28(1), 100 - 118. 

 https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2018.1505530 

Richards, K. A. R., & Hemphill, M. A. (2018). A practical guide to collaborative qualitative data 

analysis. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 37(2), 225-231. 

Sadoughi, M., & Hejazi, S. Y. (2021). Teacher support and academic engagement among EFL learners: The 

role of positive academic emotions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101060 

Sarıtepeci, M. (2012). The effect of blended learning environment on students' engagement, academic 

achievement, attitude and motivation to the course of social studies in seventh grade in primary 

education. [Unpublished Master’s Thesis]. 

https://kefad.ahievran.edu.tr/InstitutionArchiveFiles/f44778c7.pdf  

 



160 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021, pp. 148-160 

 Akpur, U.  (Does class participation predict academic achievement?) 

Sedláček, M., & Šeďova, K. (2020). Are student engagement and peer relationships connected to student 

participation in classroom talk?. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 26, 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100411 

Sirin, S. R., & Rogers-Sirin, L. (2004). Exploring school engagement of middle-class African American 

adolescents. Youth & Society, 35(3), 323 - 340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X03255006 

Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on  engagement and 

disaffection. Conceptualization and assessment of children’s  behavioural and emotional 

participation in academic activities in the classroom.  Educational and Psychological Measurement, 

69(3), 493 - 525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233 

Stefansson, K. K., Gestsdottir, S., Birgisdottir, F., & Lerner, R. M. (2018). School engagement and 

intentional self-regulation: A reciprocal relation in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 64, 23-33. 

Susak, M. (2016). Factors that affect classroom participation. [Unpublished Master’s Thesis]. 

https://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses 

Syaveny, N., & Johari, I. (2017). The correlation between class participation and students’ English learning 

achievement at SMA Negeri 12 Padang KEC. Naggalo West Sumatera. International Seminar on 

Language, Education, and Culture Proceeding, 208 - 211.  

Thararuedee, P., & Wette, R. (2020). Attending to learners’ affective needs: Teachers’ knowledge and 

practices. System, 95, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102375 

Voelkl, K. E. (1997). Identification with school. American Journal of Education, 105, 294 -  318.  

Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2011). Adolescent behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement 

trajectories in school and their differential relations to educational success. Journal of Research on 

Adolescence, 22(1), 31 - 39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00753.x  

Wang, Z., Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. A. (2014). Measuring engagement in fourth to twelfth grade 

 classrooms: The classroom engagement inventory. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(4), 517 - 535. 

https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000050 

 

 

 

 


