Fredricks and McCloskey (2012) point out that studies into emotional engagement in schools consider emotional engagement to be positive and negative reactions or identification with the school, for example, belonging, feeling valued and appreciated.
Tosh (2011) considers whether or not the study of masculinity as a unit of historical analysis is still academically relevant.
(Author, Year, p./pp. Page number/s)
Author (Year, p./pp. Page number/s)
“Most current methods do not adequately capture the dynamic and interactive nature of engagement” (Fredricks & McCloskey, 2012, p. 779).
Despite this, Tosh (2011, p. 31) posits that “it is hard to identify in today’s scholarship anything which might be called the history of masculinity”.
Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (year). Title of chapter. In E. E. Editor (Ed.) Title of book (pp. x–xx). Publisher Name. http://doi.org/xxxx OR http://xxxx
Chapter in an edited book with DOI:
Fredricks, J., & McCloskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763 –782). Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7
Chapter in an edited book without DOI:
Colley, H. (2010). Time in learning transitions through the lifecourse: a feminist perspective. In K. Ecclestone, G. Biesta, & M. Hughes (Eds.), Transitions and learning through the lifecourse (pp. 130 –146). Routledge.