Measuring Teacher Engagement: Development of the Engaged Teachers Scale (ETS)

Main Article Content

Robert M. Klassen
Sündüs Yerdelen
Tracy L Durksen


The goal of this study was to create and validate a brief multi-dimension scale of teacher engagement—the Engaged Teachers Scale (ETS)—that reflects the particular characteristics of teachers’ work in schools. We collected data from four separate samples of teachers (total N = 823), and followed five steps in developing and validating the ETS.  The result of our five steps of analysis was a 16-item, 4-factor scale of teacher engagement that shows evidence of reliability, validity, and usability for further research. The four factors of the ETS consist of: cognitive engagement, emotional engagement, social engagement: students, and social engagement: colleagues. The ETS was found to correlate positively with a frequently used work engagement measure (the UWES) and to be positively related to, but empirically distinct, from a measure of teachers’ self-efficacy. Our key contribution to the measurement of teacher engagement is the novel inclusion of social engagement with students as a key component of overall engagement at work for teachers. We propose that social engagement should be considered in future iterations of work engagement measures in a range of settings.

Article Details

How to Cite
Klassen, R. M., Yerdelen, S., & Durksen, T. L. (2013). Measuring Teacher Engagement: Development of the Engaged Teachers Scale (ETS). Frontline Learning Research, 1(2), 33-52.
Author Biography

Robert M. Klassen, University of York

Robert Klassen is Professor and Chair in the Psychology in Education Research Centre at the University of York, UK.


Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H.

Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L., & Leiter, M. P. (2011). Key questions regarding
work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 4-28.

Bakker, A., & Bal, M. (2010). Weekly work engagement and performance: A
study among starting teachers. Journal Of Occupational And Organizational Psychology, 83, 189-206.

Bakker, A. B., Hakanen, J. J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job
resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 274–284.

Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A
quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89-136.

Chou, C. P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural
equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications (pp. 37-55), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003). A review and evaluation of exploratory
factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 147-168.

Dalal, R. S., Brummel, B. J., Wee, S., & Thomas, L. L. (2008). Defining
employee engagement for productive research and practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 52-55.

Durksen, T. L., & Klassen, R. M. (2012). Pre-service teachers’ weekly
commitment and engagement during a final training placement: A longitudinal mixed methods study. Educational and Child Psychology, 29, 32-46.

Economist Intelligence Unit (2012). The learning curve: lessons in country
performance in education. Retrieved from:

Field, A. (2005). (2007) Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). London:

Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2010).
Multivariate Data Analysis. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work
engagement among teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 495-513.

Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in
published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 393-416.

Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The Prosocial Classroom:
Teacher Social and Emotional Competence in Relation to Student and Classroom Outcomes. Review Of Educational Research, 79, 491-525. doi:10.2307/40071173

Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80 for Windows [Computer
Software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and
disengagement at work. Academy Of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.

Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be fully there: Psychological presence at work. Human
Relations, 45, 321-349.

Klassen, R. M., Al-Dhafri, S., Mansfield, C. F., Purwanto, E., Siu, A., Wong,
M. W., & Woods-McConney, A. (2012). Teachers’ engagement at work: An international validation study. Journal of Experimental Education, 80, 1-20.

Klassen, R. M., Bong, M., Usher, E. L., Chong, W. H., Huan, V. S., Wong, I.
Y., & Georgiou, T. (2009). Exploring the validity of the Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Scale in five countries. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 67-76.

Klassen, R. M., Perry, N. E., & Frenzel, A. C. (2012). Teachers’ relatedness
with students: An underemphasized component of teachers’ basic psychological needs. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 150-165. doi: 10.1037/a0026253

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling
(2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

Ledesma, R. D., & Valero-Mora, P. (2007). Determining the number of factors
to retain in EFA: An easy-to-use computer program for carrying out Parallel Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(2), 2-11. Retrieved from

Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee
engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3-30.

Matsunaga, M. (2010). How to factor-analyze your data right: Do’s, don’ts,
and how-to’s. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3, 97-110.

O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number
of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396-402.

Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., & Allen, J. P. (2012). Teacher-student
relationships and engagement: Conceptualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions (pp. 365-386). In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Rich, B. L. (2006). Job engagement: Construct validation and relationships
with job satisfaction, job involvement, and intrinsic motivation (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Florida). Retrieved from ECONIS, ProQuest UMI 3228825 Dissertation Publishing.

Rich, B. L., LePine, J. A., Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement:
Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617-635.

Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Hamre, B. K. (2010). The role of psychological and
developmental science in efforts to improve teacher quality. Teachers College Record, 112, 2988-3023.

Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The
influence of affective teacher-student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81, 493-529.

Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Kaplan, H. (2007). Autonomous
motivation for teaching: How self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 761-774. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.761

Saks, A. M. (2006). The meaning and bleeding of employee engagement:
How muddy is the water? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 40-43.

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of
work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701-716.

Schaufeli, W., & Salanova, M. (2011). Work engagement: On how to better
catch a slippery concept. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 39-46.

Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002).
The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two-sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92.

Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W.B., Kosugi, S., Suzuki, A., Nashiwa, H., Kato, A., et
al. (2008). Work engagement in Japan: Development and validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 510-523.

Shuck, M. B. (2010). Employee engagement: An examination of antecedent
and outcome variables (Doctoral Dissertation, Florida International University). Retrieved from

Shuck, M. B. (2011). Four emerging perspectives of employee engagement:
An integrative literature review. Human Resource Development Review, 10, 304-328. doi:10.1177/1534484311410840

Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior:
A new look at the interface between non-work and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 518-528.

Staiger, D. O., & Rockoff, J. E. (2010). Searching for effective teachers with
imperfect information. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24, 97-118.

Tabachnick, B. & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed.).
Boston: Pearson.

Thomas, C. H. (2006). Clarifying the concept of work engagement: Construct
validation and an empirical test. (Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Georgia). Retrieved from

Tschannen-Moran, M. & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing
an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.

Velicer, W. F., & Jackson, D. N. (1990). Component analysis versus common
factor analysis: Some further observations. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(1), 97-114.

Wang, Y., & Qin, J. (2011). The structure of preschool teachers’ work
engagement survey in China. International Conference on Social Science and Humanity, 5, 464-468.

Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, R. W. (2007). Motivational factors influencing
teaching as a career choice: Development and validation of the FIT-Choice Scale. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 167-202.

Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining
the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432-442.