The aim of this research is to explore engagement and disengagement from a student perspective and its influence on school dropout among students of a vocational education and training centre in Portugal. It will not be claimed that these results represent this whole system of education, but the results can shed some light on something that has not yet been deeply addressed in Portugal. This issue has been widely researched in what regular school is concerned and it is a huge international concern, namely in Europe and reflected on Horizon 2020 which aims at decreasing dropout rates in European countries.

According to the latest data from the Portuguese National Institute for Statistics, in 2013 the total rate of school dropout of all educational systems was 19, 2%, in contrast with the EU28 average of 11, 9%. This means that Portugal is still far from achieving the commitment made to reduce the dropout rate to 10% until 2020.

Dropping out is more of a process rather than an event. However, first we need to understand what school dropout and disengagement really mean. School disengagement, according to Smyth (2006), is often constructed in terms of deficit and blaming views of students, their families and neighbourhoods, suggesting the need for recuperative activities by the teachers or school to solve the problem. However, Grønberg (2013) points to the need to understand disengagement as context dependent, rather than as a function of the individual's attributes. Therefore, we need to approach this matter taking into account the school context and the specific features of the courses they are enrolled in as well.

In order to understand students’ perspective, we need to address the concept of Student Voice. Thomson (2011) refers to “student voice” as the process through which schools ensure that children and young people, individually and collectively, are able to speak up about their education. It is argued that they have specific perspectives on education derived from their particular experiences as students. These insights are crucial in the process of change and improvement. The process can also be seen as empowering since it provides appropriate ways of listening to students’ concerns, needs and interests in order to develop educational experiences that may better suit their learning.

Further evidence supporting student voice may lie in the findings of Jean Rudduck whose work suggests that what students say about teaching and learning is not only worth listening to, but also provides important grounds for conceiving ways of improving schools. Student voice has many benefits to the education system and affords young people the opportunity to talk about what helps and what hinders their learning (Rudduck, 2005). Therefore, presenting a framework in which students are not merely subjects, but are seen as researchers allows to penetrate their life and experiences from a perspective that, otherwise, we wouldn’t be able to achieve by using traditional methods.

Building a research design on the work of Fielding (2001), he has developed “a four-fold model which distinguishes between students as sources of data, students as active respondents, students as co-researchers, and students as researchers”. This model provides a guideline to reflect on students’ involvement in research and the role and responsibilities given to conduct specific tasks. However, as Fielding suggests, initiatives and practices are likely to move in and out of the different modes, and different levels and modes will be appropriate at different times and in different contexts. Therefore, this study in particular applies two of Fielding’s models, students as active respondents and students as co-researchers.

Carrington, S., Bland, D. & Brady, K. (2009): “Training Young People as Researchers to Investigate Engagement and Disengagement in the Middle Years”. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 14:5, 449-462. Carrington, S., Bland, D., Spooner-Lane, R. & White, E. (2012): “Identifying engaging features of schooling: assessing the psychometric soundness of student-generated research”. International Journal of Inclusive Education. Chadderton, C. (2011). Not Capturing Voices: A Poststructural Critique of the Privileging of Voice in Research. The Student Voice Handbook: Bridging the Academic/Practitioner Divide. Emerald. Cook-Sather, A. (2002). “Authorizing Student’s Perspectives: Towards Trust, Dialogue, and Change in Education”. Educational Researcher, Vol. 31, No. 4, May 2002, pp. 3-14. Fielding, M. (2001). Students as Radical Agents of Change. Journal of Educational Change. 2: 123-141. González, M.T. (2014). “Absentismo Escolar: Posibles Respuestas desde el Centro Educativo”. REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 12(2), pp. 5-27. Grønberg, L. (2013). One of the Boys: constructions of Disengagement and Criteria for being a Successful Student. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, Vol.26, No.9, 1192-1209. Levin, B. (2000). “Putting Students at the Centre in Education Reform”. Journal of Education Change, 1: pp. 155-172. Martinez, Enguita & Gomez (2010). “Desengachados de la Educación: Procesos, Experiencias, Motivaciones y Estrategias del Abandono y del Fracaso Escolar”. Revista de Educación, número extraordinario, pp. 119-145. Messiou, K. (2014). Working with Students as Co-Researchers in schools: a Matter of Inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education. Vol. 18, No.6, 601-613. Rudduck, J. (2005). “Pupil Voice is here to stay!” for QCA futures. Retrieved from www.edugains.ca. Rudduck, J. and Flutter, J. (2000). “Pupil Participation and Pupil Perspective: ‘Carving a new order of experience’. Cambridge Journal of Education 30, no. 1: 75–89. Rumberger, R. (2001). “Why Students Drop out of School and what Can Be Done”. Paper prepared for the Conference, “Dropouts in America: How Severe is the Problem? What Do We Know about Intervention and Prevention?” Harvard University, January 13, 2001. Smyth, John (2006). “When Students Have the Power”: Student Engagement, Student Voice, and the Possibilities for School Reform around Dropping out” of School”. International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 9:4, 285-298. Thomson, P. (2011). “Coming to Terms with Voice”. The Student Voice Handbook: Bridging the Academic/Practitioner Divide. Emerald. Wang, C. (1999). “Photovoice: A Participatory Action Research Strategy Applied to Women’s Health”. Journal of Women’s Health. Vol 8, No. 2.