27 Journal of ICSAR ISSN (print): 2548-8619; ISSN (online): 2548-8600 Volume 4 Number 1, January 2020: 27-34 Involvement of Children with Special Needs in Learning in Inclusive Schools Dwitya Sobat Ady Dharma, Hermanto Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia Email: dwityasobatadydharma.2017@student.uny.ac.id, Abstract Children with Special Needs who process in Inclusive Education Organizing Schools (SPPI) often seem left out not to develop their best potential, are shackled with labels, and marginalized socially and academically. This negative impression can be minimized by increasing the involvement of children with special needs in learning. However, many schools still do not know the level of involvement of children with special needs in SPPI. This study aims to determine the level of involvement of children with special needs in learning by using an intrinsic case study approach to nine children with special needs with a variety of mental retardation, autistic, slow learner, disabled and low vision in semester 1 of 2018/2019 academic year at an SPPI. This article describes the level of student involvement in terms of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral aspects. The results showed that the level of involvement of children with special needs varied greatly depending on cognitive abilities and the environment’s role in creating creative learning. Keywords: student involvement; learning; Children with Special Needs; inclusive school INTRODUCTION Student engagement is said to be a meta-construct (Christenson, Reschly, & Wylie, 2012; Fredricks, Filsecker, & Lawson, 2016; Winstone et al, 2016) which consists of different types of engagement, such as motivation and self-regulation (Reschley & Christenson , 2012; Martin & Tores, 2016). This meta- construct of student engagement consists of behavioral, emotional, cognitive (Lester, 2013) and academic (Reschly & Christenson, 2012) aspects, each of which has a tendency to be positive or negative (Trowler, 2010). For children with special needs, positive involvement in class often does not occur because they have low self-regulation which has an impact on the ability to interact which affects the lack of involvement in inclusive classes. The low self-engagement ability of children with special needs must be improved by modifying the environment. This is supported by various reasons, namely that children’s disabilities affect their involvement in academics and behavior (Reschly & Christenson, 2012), children with special needs are unable to measure their own abilities (Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow, 2005), and the environment has a strong influence. shape student attitudes (Schunk, 2012). Increasing the involvement of children with special needs in inclusive classes can be done with various strategies, must be followed by creative initiatives, consider individual circumstances from the start, develop models with research, and need to be identified and practiced with various approaches. The involvement of children with special needs can be seen from the motivation and learning methods that try to conquer challenges (Woolfolk, 2017). Involvement in learning is also related to school and learning which is identified with academic involvement, motivation (intrinsic and extrinsic), and self-efficacy. According to Fredricks (2016), this engagement has two indicators, namely psychological investment in learning and the use of cognitive strategies. Emotional involvement during learning can be measured by asking questions related to emotional experiences experienced at school, such as feelings of pleasure or anxiety. Fredricks et.al (2011) also describes that emotional involvement has three indicators, namely emotional reactions at school, a sense of belonging, and values. These three indicators are interconnected so that the measurements taken must be carried out holistically. The involvement of children with special needs during learning in regular schools must be increased. Responding to this expectation, many regular schools have begun to design learning that accommodates all students by applying various learning methods with various strategies and media. These various efforts sometimes succeed in accelerating children with special needs to achieve learning goals, but the goals achieved are only fictitious because they do not have the nature of sustainability. This is because (1) schools do not know the level of involvement of children with special needs in the classroom, (2) many schools do not make and implement RPI, (3) the scaffolding is not systemized so that children with special needs depend on special education teachers, and (4) there is no continuous progressive plan for children with special 28 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 4, Number 1, January 2020: 27-34 needs so that the lessons learned have a lower level than children without special needs. The involvement of children with special needs is influenced by the acceptance of the school environment which will have an impact on the motivation to stay involved in the classroom. Schools can easily make plans to increase engagement if the authentic situation of children with special needs related to involvement in the classroom can be known. Motivation to stay involved will develop which will eventually lead to cognitive, emotional, and behavioral activity, so research is needed to describe the real conditions of children with special needs. Excavation of this information is the right strategy to determine and design scaffolding so that it can optimize potential, besides that it can also develop the independence of children with special needs, synergize and collaborate between teachers and students. Efforts to activate the involvement of children with special needs can be started from the beginning of learning. Class teachers must know the students’ ZPD areas by making initial observations, for example by looking at student portfolios (Impedovo, Ligorio & McLay, 2018), conducting questions and answers (Danish et.al, 2017), and making continuous observations (Guseva & Solomonovich, 2017). Knowing the ZPD area is important so that students do not find it too easy to learn the material and not so difficult that they feel frustrated. For children with special needs with cognitive barriers, activeness in learning must continue to be monitored because it affects the learning process which results in ZPD not being able to develop optimally. Vygotsky (2017) explains that at the point of development, there are certain circumstances where the child is able to do and there are parts that are too difficult to do. The part between this threshold area is then referred to as the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) which can be maximized with various supports (Danish et al, 2017; Impedovo, Ligorio & McLay 2018) in the form of instructions, reminders, encouragement, or examples (Woolfolk 2017). The support given to children with special needs is adjusted to the level of cognitive development, children’s limitations, and the child’s social environment so that the abilities developed are still within the child’s ZPD. Scaffolding in learning according to Fisher and Frey (2010) is divided into four parts, namely questioning, prompting, cueing, and explaining and modeling. The questioning section is used to check understanding, the prompting section to facilitate students’ cognitive and metacognitive processes, the cueing section to maintain student focus and avoid partial errors, and the explaining and modeling section which is intended for students who still cannot complete the task. These four sections are carried out sequentially with the hope of helping students complete learning tasks which in the end can work independently. Learning in inclusive classes provides many opportunities for children with special needs to be able to increase competitiveness according to their capacities. This has a logical consequence that the learning carried out must be oriented towards individual competencies that are built collectively. Lichtinger & Kaplan (2015) stated that the learning motivation of children with special needs will be built if they are in an inclusive environment. Student involvement has a very broad meaning, for example student involvement in social institutions, schools, classrooms (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012), involvement at home (Veiga et al, 2012), student involvement in curriculum, instruction, peers, and the school community. (Martin & Torres, 2016). Student involvement is seen as a multidimensional aspect that includes emotion, behavior, and cognitive (Lester, 2013; Fredricks, 2016). Based on this view, the involvement of students referred to in this discussion is in the context of a class called classroom engagement (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012) especially for students with special needs in inclusive classes. Cognitive involvement according to Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris (2004) consists of two aspects, namely child psychology and the use of cognitive abilities to determine the learning strategies used. Psychological aspects include student motivation and self-regulation in learning that are interrelated to solve learning challenges that require students to continue learning. Cognitive aspects are also related to self- regulation, metacognitive, and applicable strategies when children learn. This cognitive engagement is measured by asking students about these indicators (Fredrick, 2014). For children with special needs, measuring cognitive involvement can use scaffolding that is simple, interesting, and easy to understand. This engagement tool is in the form of simple pictures so that children with special needs are able to do self-assessment so that active learning can be achieved. The indicators should be separated between engagement and non- involvement items so that trends are visible. Students’ emotional involvement consists of attitudes, interests, and values, mainly related to positive or negative interactions with the school, other students, and teachers (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). Emotional engagement creates a connection with the school and builds students’ desire to be involved in learning and school activities. According to Woolfolk’s (2017), to create emotional involvement in learning can be done by fostering a connection in learning, increasing student interest, reducing anxiety, and making learning fun. Emotional involvement is 29Dwitya Sobat Ady Dharma, Hermanto, Involvement of Children with Special Needs in... related to self-perception and confidence that shows knowledge, attitudes, values, skills, and attributes that are characterized by emotional intelligence abilities. Behavioral involvement consists of positive behavior, involvement in learning, and participation in school activities (Fredricks Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). Students who are behaviorally involved will try to comply with applicable norms by acting positively, for example following class agreements (Woolfolk, 2017), completing assignments, and coming to class with the necessary equipment. Involvement in learning, for example concentrating, paying attention to instructions, asking questions, and contributing to class discussions. For children with special needs with learning difficulties, intrinsic motivation will emerge if the environment provides an impetus to develop in a massive system. During learning, various adjustments to instructions are needed, such as modifications and omissions that are adapted to the child’s condition. This adjustment must still provide space for children with special needs to develop optimally (Woolfolk, 2017) while still paying attention to the ZPD and characteristics of children. A pleasant learning environment will open students’ interest to a higher level so that it is likely that student activity will be maintained until the learning objectives are achieved. Learning that is designed must be creative and involve students and encourage students to develop their abilities to the fullest. To encourage and support the progress of involvement, it is very necessary to use scaffolding that is of the nature of recognition so that it is hoped that children with special needs will gradually be able to be actively involved as a result of habituation. METHOD The research method used is qualitative research with case study type. A case study is an intensive study that aims to understand a larger unit (Baskarada, 2014), interested in a phenomenon (Crowe et al, 2011) in a real-world setting (Yazan, 2015) that seeks to capture what happens without any environmental modification (Neale, Thapa & Boyce, 2006). The author chooses to use an intrinsic case study because the object is not accompanied by a theoretical development goal, but is limited to understanding a particular case because it is considered to attract interest in an inclusive school in Yogyakarta in the odd semester of the 2018/2019 academic year. This study uses three units of analysis, namely cognitive involvement, emotional involvement, and behavioral involvement during learning. The subjects of this study were nine children with variations of one low vision child in grade 12 being male, three mentally retarded children in grade 8 and 9 being male and female, three autistic children in grade 9 and multi 10-11 being male. -male and female, and two male slow learners in grade 9 who were all selected purposively. Data collection techniques using observation and interviews. Observations were made on nine children with special needs with the domains of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral involvement. Interviews with teachers were conducted with five teachers with questions about the results of observations to get reinforcement on observations. Document analysis is also carried out by analyzing student work and psychological notes. The data analysis technique uses quantitative data in the form of scores from observations with thematic analysis with coding which in the end will get a percentage score for each domain of involvement. This quantitative data is strengthened by qualitative data in the form of anecdotal records and the results of interviews with five teachers with the initials S, N, A, B, and F. The analysis will be explained in an explanatory descriptive manner designed to explore and clarify the involvement of children with special needs and then describe in detail. The description in question is to describe in detail the involvement of children with special needs in learning and explanations to get a deeper understanding of the symptoms that appear. The triangulation used is source triangulation which compares and double-checks information from different sources. The stages of this research are making a case study protocol, carrying out case studies, analyzing case study results, and drawing conclusions. FINDING AND DISCUSSION Student involvement has a very broad meaning, for example student involvement in social institutions, schools, classrooms (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012), involvement at home (Veiga et al, 2012), student involvement in curriculum, instruction, peers, and the school community. (Martin & Torres, 2016). Student involvement is seen as a multidimensional aspect that includes emotion, behavior, and cognitive (Lester, 2013; Fredricks, 2016). Based on this view, the involvement of students referred to in this discussion is in the context of a class called classroom engagement (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012) especially for students with special needs in inclusive classes. Children with special needs with cognitive barriers are often unable to blend in socially so that it will hinder their cognitive development. This condition requires “cultural tools” as cognitive development aids to solve higher problems such as reasoning and problem solving (Woolfolk, 2016). These cultural tools can be in the form of language that can be understood by ABK, either through writing (symbols) or other signs such as simple gestures. 30 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 4, Number 1, January 2020: 27-34 Table 1. Cognitive Engagement Indicators Cognitive Engagement Psychological in- vestment in learn- ing Readiness to learn. Like challenges Understanding mastery learning Use of cognitive strategies Using meta-cognitive abilities Using deep learning strategies Figure 1. Cognitive Engagement Score (in percent) Cognitive Engagement. Cognitive involvement according to Fredrick, Blumenfeld, & Paris (2004) consists of two aspects, namely child psychology and the use of cognitive abilities to determine the learning strategies used. Psychological aspects include student motivation and self-regulation in learning that are interrelated to solve learning challenges that require students to continue learning. Cognitive aspects are also related to self-regulation, metacognitive, and applicable strategies when children learn. Cognitive student involvement can be seen from motivation and learning methods that try to conquer challenges (Woolfolk, 2017). This cognitive engagement is also related to school and learning which is identified with academic involvement, motivation (intrinsic and extrinsic), and self-efficacy. According to Fredricks (2014), cognitive engagement has two indicators, namely psychological investment in learning and the use of cognitive strategies. This cognitive engagement is measured by observing students regarding these indicators (Fredricks, 2014). For children with special needs, the measurement of cognitive involvement can use a simple check list with indicators that are separated between engagement and non-involvement items so that tendencies are visible. Observations of cognitive engagement were carried out on nine children with varying needs. Observations on nine children were carried out in learning settings with different subjects so that authentic symptoms in children would appear Cognitive involvement in learning has a score that varies depending on the cognitive state of children with special needs. Children with special needs with cognitive barriers will tend not to be involved cognitively, for example, do not have the concept of learning readiness, do not like learning challenges, do not know the completeness of learning, are not able to do self-monitoring, and are not able to do elaboration. Children with special needs with cognitive barriers are often unable to blend in socially so that it will hamper their cognitive development. This condition requires “cultural tools” as cognitive development aids to solve higher problems such as reasoning and problem solving (Woolfolk, 2017). These cultural tools can be in the form of language that can be understood by children with special needs, either through writing (symbols) or other signs such as simple gestures. The involvement of children with special needs in the classroom is an important element to check whether students benefit from the learning community or not. According to Koka (2016), good cognitive abilities can maintain their involvement during activities. For children with special needs who have less cognitive development, self-monitoring is difficult because they have low self-esteem, limited memory skills (Alloway, 2013), lack of initiative (Goldin, 2013), and have limited attention (Tamm et al, 2013). Under these conditions, making tools that can increase engagement can be implemented in learning, especially for children with special needs who have cognitive barriers. For children with special needs who do not have cognitive barriers, they can be cognitively involved in class and compete with regular students. In order for regular students to be more involved in learning, Bae & Kokka (2016) explained that there are relevance (contextual), authenticity (real world problems), autonomy, higher order thinking skills, collaboration, and self-assessment. The relevance of learning can be helped by making connections with students’ lives and interests so that it will lead to active involvement when doing assignments. In the authentic aspect, it can be emphasized by making connections with real problems encountered so that the knowledge learned can be applied. In the aspect of autonomy, involvement will be built by providing opportunities for students to make decisions that can be collaborated with aspects of higher order thinking skills (analyzing, interpreting, and manipulating) and conducting self-assessments so that students can reflect on the learning done by revising the work. Emotional Involvement Of Mentally Disability Children. Students’ emotional involvement consists of attitudes, interests, and values, mainly related to positive or negative interactions with the school, other students, and teachers (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). 31Dwitya Sobat Ady Dharma, Hermanto, Involvement of Children with Special Needs in... happy, interested, anxious and know the concept of participating in activities. For children with special needs with cognitive disabilities, there is a tendency that they are always happy in any situation because they do not understand the concepts of joy and sadness, try to be involved in learning but do not understand group rules, and have pseudo-activity. In people with autism, the value of emotional involvement has a relatively low score because they are not able to discriminate emotions. Attracting the involvement of ABK emotionally can be done by providing a special stimulus at the beginning of learning that aims to grab the attention of students (Chatib, 2011). This stimulus in education is called apperception which creates alpha waves. The alpha wave condition is the most illuminating (brilliant) stage of a person’s creative process (Chatib, 2011). The alpha state is in a state of balance, namely when a person’s nerve cells shoot electrical impulses simultaneously and also rest simultaneously so that a balance arises which results in a person’s relaxation. By including students in their thoughts and emotions, it creates a network and shared ownership or the ability to understand each other so that student involvement can occur during the learning process.. Behavioral Engagement. Behavioral involvement consists of positive behavior, involvement in learning, and participation in school activities (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). Students who are behaviorally involved will try to comply with applicable norms by acting positively, for example following class agreements (Woolfolk, 2017), completing assignments, and coming to class with the necessary equipment. Involvement in learning, for example concentrating, paying attention to instructions, asking questions, and contributing to class discussions. The behavioral involvement of children with special needs in the inclusive class is closely related to the behavior of the teacher in the class. Proactive teacher relationships are expected to provide positive student engagement in the classroom. Teachers must have competence in communication, working cooperatively, managing conflict, giving and seeking help, and managing change. If teachers can manage the class well, ABK is expected to be involved by providing positive behavior, not behaving in a disruptive manner, being involved in learning, and being involved in broader activities such as extracurricular activities. Behavioral involvement of children with special needs in inclusive classes is strongly influenced by children’s motivation. For children with special needs with learning difficulties, intrinsic motivation will emerge if the environment provides an impetus to develop in a massive system. Table 2. Emotional Engagement Indicator Emotional Engagement Emotional reactions in the classroom, school, and teacher Joy, Interested, Bored, Anxiety, Sadness Opt-in Liked by other people Feel included Feeling respected at school Value Perceiving that work/school is important Perceiving that the task is useful for the future Perceives that the task is interest- ing. Figure 2. Emotional Engagement Score (in percent) Emotional engagement creates a connection with the school and builds students’ desire to be involved in learning and school activities. According to Woolfolk (2017), to create emotional involvement in learning can be done by fostering a connection in learning, increasing student interest, reducing anxiety, and making learning fun. This emotional involvement can be seen by observing related to emotional experiences experienced at school, such as feelings of pleasure or anxiety. According to Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris (2004), emotional involvement has three indicators, namely emotional reactions at school, a sense of belonging, and values. These three indicators are interconnected so that the measurements taken must be done holistically. Emotional involvement is related to self-perception and confidence that shows knowledge, attitudes, values, skills, and attributes that are characterized by emotional intelligence abilities. For crew members who have below average intelligence, this process will be difficult. Emotional involvement in learning for ABK students without cognitive barriers tends to be stable. ABK without cognitive barriers are able to respond to various kinds of emotions that occur such as sad, 32 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 4, Number 1, January 2020: 27-34 Table 3. Behavioral Engagement Indicators Behavioral Engagement Positive Behavior Following class rules Completing the task Come to class with the necessary equipment. No disruptive be- havior Not ditching Don’t mess up Engage in learning Participate Concentration Attention Participate in extra- curricular activities Engage in sports Get involved in the school club Get involved in school organization Figure 3. Behavioral Engagement Score (in Percent) During learning, various adjustments to instructions are needed, such as modifications and omissions that are adapted to the child’s condition. This adjustment must still provide space for ABK to develop optimally (Woolfolk, 2017) while still paying attention to the ZPD and the characteristics of the child. The behavioral involvement of children with special needs is influenced by the acceptance of the school environment which will have an impact on the motivation to stay involved in the classroom. If children with special needs are socially accepted, the motivation to stay involved will develop which will eventually lead to cognitive, emotional, and behavioral activity. Learning with fun situations is the right strategy regarding the interaction process between crew members and their environment so that activity can be maintained optimally. Activities that are designed as much as possible can encourage, activate, and allow children to learn in a fun way so that they can optimize their potential, besides that they can also develop and practice communication skills, need each other, synergize and collaborate between students. Of the two engagement domains previously observed, behavioral engagement has a relatively higher score. This is because the learning environment is designed to be fun and opens students’ interest to a higher level so that student activity will be raised. The learning designed is quite creative and involves students so as to encourage students to develop their abilities to the fullest. To encourage and support the progress of involvement, a recognition scaffolding can be added so that it is hoped that children with special needs will gradually be able to be actively involved as a result of habituation. This behavioral engagement can be enhanced by environmental modification. This is supported by various reasons, namely that children’s disabilities affect engagement in academics and behavior (Reschly & Christenson, 2012) and the environment has a strong influence on students’ attitudes (Schunk, 2012). Increasing the involvement of children with special needs in inclusive classes can be done with various strategies, must be followed by creative initiatives, consider individual circumstances from the start, develop models with research, and need to be identified and practiced with various approaches. Some of the challenges that can be observed when observing the involvement of children with special needs in the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral domains are, (1) the variations of children with special needs are very diverse, so researchers make focused observations so that the results obtained are accurate, (2) it takes a long time to observe to determine the accuracy of the results obtained. obtain the correct data, (3) to avoid researcher bias, the researcher conducts observations by withdrawing and does not make direct contact with children with special needs, (4) researchers feel that the findings obtained are too many so that they must be refocused on the research objective, namely wanting to know conditions of crew involvement in the three engagement domains. This is necessary to anticipate the development of new issues and issues that are important and support research, (5) when interpreting the data cross checking is required as an effort to avoid being trapped by researchers from one perspective. This is done to produce valid and accurate research. CONCLUSION Cognitive involvement in learning has a score that varies depending on the cognitive state of children with special needs. children with special needs with cognitive barriers do not know the concept of learning readiness, do not like learning challenges, do not know complete learning, are not able to do self-monitoring, and are not able to do elaboration so they will tend not to be cognitively involved. Emotional involvement in learning for children with special needs without cognitive barriers tends to be stable. Children with special needs without cognitive barriers are able to respond to various kinds of emotions that occur such as 33Dwitya Sobat Ady Dharma, Hermanto, Involvement of Children with Special Needs in... sad, happy, interested, anxious and know the concept of participating in activities. For children with special needs with cognitive barriers, there is a tendency that they are always happy in any situation because they do not understand the concepts of joy and sadness, try to be involved in learning but do not understand group rules, and have pseudo-activity. In people with autism, the value of emotional involvement has a relatively low score because they are not able to discriminate emotions. Of the two engagement domains previously observed, behavioral engagement has a relatively higher score. This is because the learning environment is designed to be fun and opens students’ interest to a higher level so that student activity will be raised. Learning is designed creatively and involves students so as to encourage students to develop their abilities to the fullest. REFERENCE Alloway, T. P., Bibile, V., & Lau, G. (2013). Computerized working memory training: Can it lead to gains in cognitive skills in students?. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 632–638. Bae, S., & Kokka, K. (2016). Student engagement in assessments: What students and teachers find engaging. Baskarada, S. (2014). Qualitative Case Study Guidelines. The Qualitative Report, 19 (40), 1-18. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/ vol19/iss40/3. Chatib, Munif. (2011). Gurunya Manusia [Human Master]. Bandung: Kaifa Learning. Christenson, S. L. & Reschly, A. L., (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–20). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978- 1-4614-2018-7_1. Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The case study approach. BMC medical research methodology, 11(1), 1-9. Danish, J., Saleh, A., Andrade, A., & Bryan, B. (2017). Observing complex systems thinking in the zone of proximal development. Instructional Science, 45(1), 5-24. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2010). Guided instruction: How to develop confident and successful learners. ASCD. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109. Fredricks, J. A. , Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016) Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. learninstruc.2016.02.002 0959-4752/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Fredricks, J., McColskey, W., Meli, J., Mordica, J., Montrosse, B., & Mooney, K. (2011). Measuring Student Engagement in Upper Elementary through High School: A Description of 21 Instruments. Issues & Answers. REL 2011-No. 098. Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast. Fredricks, J. A. (2014). Eight myths of student disengagement: Creating classrooms of deep learning. Corwin Press. Goldin, A. P., Segretin, M. S., Hermida, M. J., Paz, L., Lipina, S. J., & Sigman, M. (2013). Training planning and working memory in third graders. Mind Brain and Education, 7(2), 136–146. Guseva, L.G. & Solomonovich, M. (2017). Implementing the Zone of Proximal Development: From the Pedagogical Experiment to the Developmental Education System of Leonid Zankov. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(4), 775-786, June 2017. Impedovo, M. A., Ligorio, M. B., & McLay, K. F. (2018). The “friend of zone of proximal development” role: ePortfolios as boundary objects. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(6), 753-761. Koka, A. S. (2016). A critical analysis of the soft skills requirements of the IT industry and the soft skills training provided in Select Engineering Colleges of Andhra Pradesh. Lester, D. (2013). A review of the student engagement literature. Focus on colleges, universities, and schools, 7(1), 1-8. Lichtinger, E., & Kaplan, A. (2015). Employing a case study approach to capture motivation and self-regulation of young students with learning disabilities in authentic educational contexts. Metacognition and Learning, 10(1), 119-149. DOI 10.1007/s11409-014-9131-1 Martin, J & Torres, A. (2016). User’s Guide and Toolkit for the Surveys of Student Engagement: The High School Survey of Student Engagement (HSSSE) and the Middle Grades Survey of Student Engagement (MGSSE). Washington: National Association of Independent School. Neale, P., Thapa, S., &Boyce, C. (2006). Preparing A Case Study: A Guide for Designing and Conducting a Case Study for Evaluation Input. MA: Pathfinder International. 34 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 4, Number 1, January 2020: 27-34 Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3-19). Springer, Boston, MA. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_1 Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning Theories an Educational Perspective. Yogyakarta : Pustaka Pelajar. Sinclair, M. F., Christenson, S. L., & Thurlow, M. L. (2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 465–482. Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. L.Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). New York: Springer. Tamm, L., Epstein, J. N., Peugh, J. L., Nakonezny, P. A., & Hughes, C. W. (2013). Preliminary data suggesting the efficacy of attention training for school-aged children with ADHD. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 16–28. Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. The higher education academy, 11(1), 1-15. Veiga, F. H., Galvão, D., Almeida, A., Carvalho, C., Janeiro, I. N., Nogueira, J., ... & Pereira, T. (2012). Students’ engagement in school: A literature review. In 5th International Conference of Education, Research, and Innovation-ICERI 2012 (pp. 1336-1344). Woolfolk, A. (2017). Educational Psychology Thirteen Editin. Boston: Pearson Education. Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017). Supporting learners’ agentic engagement with feedback: A systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 17- 37. DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538. Vygotsky, L. S. (2017). The Problem of Teaching and Mental Development at School Age [Problema obuchenija i umstvennogo razvitija v shkol’nom vozraste]. Changing English, 24(4), 359-371. Yazan, B. (2015). Three Approaches to Case Study Methods in Education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 134-152. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol20/iss2/12