The study aims to investigate the importance of helicopter parenting and socialization perspective, hands-on learning and instilling emotional intelligence in maximizing student engagement. It postulates that modern learning and teaching process require positive engagement in the class and it proposes that the impact post-modern life, in terms of falling of ethical values and emerging of lots of social illnesses, creates sense of worries and scares among parents particularly in educational system. The study is based on surveyed public male secondary school students and structural equation modeling used to test the relations estimated in the theoretical model and its effects. The study concludes that helicopter parenting plays a seminal role in maximizing students’ engagement and achievement in English class, however, excessive over helicopter parenting affects the student’s personality negatively. Implementing hands-on learning maximizes student engagement in English class. The study recommends that helicopter parenting should be implemented reasonably without negative effect on children’s personality and self-esteem and emotional intelligence should be trained to the students to instill consideration of other emotions and feelings.

Keywords: Helicopter parenting, Hands-on learning, Emotional intelligence, Critical thinking, Problem-solving, Student engagement, Behavioral engagement, Emotional engagement, Cognitive engagement.

Barkley, E., & Howell, C. (2022). Engaged Teaching: A Handbook for College Faculty. Jossey-Bass.

Bauer, D. (2007). Failure in the classroom. Pedagogy, 7(2): 157–170.

Boyatzis, R., Batista, J., Fernández, X., & Truninger, M. (2015). EI competencies as a related but different characteristic than intelligence. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost.

Boyatzis, R., & Saatcioglu, A. (2008). A 20-year view of trying to develop emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies in graduate management education. Journal of Management Development, 27(1): 92. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1108/02621710810840785.

Caruso, D., Mayer, J., Bryan, V., Phillips, K., & Salovey, P. (2019). Measuring emotional and personal intelligence. In Positive Psychological Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures (2nd Ed.), Pages 233–245, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Bradley, J., & Buchanan, J. (2014). Helicopter parents: An examination of the correlates of over-parenting of college students. Education + Training, 56(4): 314–328.

Chapin, K. (2015). The effect of emotional intelligence on student success. Journal of Adult Education, 44(1): 25–31.

Clark, J., & White, G. (2010). Experiential Learning: A Definitive Edge in the Job Market. American Journal of Business Education, 3(2): 115–118.

Day, R., & Padilla, L. (2009). Mother and father connectedness and involvement during early adolescence. Journal of Family Psychology, 23: 900–904. doi: 10.1037/a0016438.

Dede, C., Richards, J., & Saxberg, B. (2019). Learning engineering for online education: theoretical contexts and design-based examples. New York, NY: Routledge.

Ellis (2015). What discourages Students from Engaging with Innovative Instructional Methods: Creating a Barrier Framework. Innovations in Higher Education, 40: 111–125. doi: 10.1007/s10755-014-9304-5.

Goleman, D., & Senge, P. (2014). The triple focus. Reflections, 14(1): 31–34.

Grolnick, W., Kurowski, C., Dunlap, K., & Hevey, C. (2000). Parental resources and the transition to junior high. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10: 465–488. doi: 10.1207/sjra1004_05.

Hawtrey, K. (2007). Using Experiential Learning Techniques. Journal of Economic Education, 38(2): 143–152. doi: 10.3200/jece.38.2.143-152.

Kaur, I., Shri, C., & Mital, K. (2019). The role of emotional intelligence competencies in effective teaching and teacher's performance in higher education. Higher Education for the Future, 6(2): 188–206.

Loo, R. (2002). A Meta-Analytic Examination of Kolb's Learning Style Preferences among Business Majors. Journal of Education for Business, 77(5): 252–256.

Lusuardi, C. (2009). Student Engagement with Peer Assessment: A Review of Pedagogical Design and Technologies. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Pages 367–375. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-03426-8_44.

Mayer, J. (2017). Section 1: what is emotional intelligence? HBR Guide to Emotional Intelligence (HBR Guide Series). Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, Pages 3–5.

McCarthy, P., & McCarthy, H. (2006). When Case Studies Are Not Enough: Integrating Experiential Learning into Business Curricula. Journal of Education for Business, 81(4): 201–204.

Manos, M. (2009). Helicopter parents: empathetic or pathetic?. Phi Kappi Phi Forum, 89(3): 21.

Nunn, L. (2019). Teaching the Whole Student: College Belonging is a Gift not an Accomplishment. Innovations in Teaching and Learning, 11. https://doi.org/10.13021/itlcp.2019.2487.

Schiffrin, H., Liss, M., Miles, H., Geary, K., Erchull, M., & Tashner, T. (2014). Helping or hovering? The effects of helicopter parenting on college students’ well-being. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23(3): 548–557.

Stavenga, J., Wierstra, R., & Hermanussen, J. (2006). An exploration of the relationship between academic and experiential learning approaches in vocational education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(1): 155–169.

Padilla, L., & Nelson, L. (2012). Black hawk down? Establishing helicopter parenting as a distinct construct from other forms of parental control during emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescence, 35: 1177–1190. doi: 10.1016/ j.adolescence.2012.03.007.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1): 67–78.

Zhoc, K., Chung, T., & King, R. (2018). Emotional intelligence (EI) and self‐directed learning: Examining their relation and contribution to better student learning outcomes in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 44(6):  982–1004.

Source of Funding:

This study did not receive any grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not–for–profit sectors.

Competing Interests Statement:

The authors declare no competing financial, professional, or personal interests.

Consent for publication:

The authors declare that they consented to the publication of this study.

Authors' contributions:

Both the authors took part in literature review, analysis, and manuscript writing equally.