Measuring academic resilience in quantitative research: A systematic review of the literature

Academic resilience research has the potential to improve the learning outcomes of students at risk of school failure, yet there is no standard approach to its measurement. This review aimed to provide an overview of the ways in which academic resilience has been measured and analysed within quantitative research over the last 20 years. Our findings extended upon those in existing reviews by focussing on how academic resilience has been operationalised as a specific construct. A systematic search of the literature returned 127 studies that drew conclusions about academic resilience based on quantitative data. Three distinct approaches to the measurement of academic resilience were identified using thematic analysis techniques: the definition-driven, process-driven, and latent construct approaches. Each of these approaches align with different types of analyses which, in turn, shape the inferences that researchers can make about academic resilience. The implications of these variations in measurement are discussed. At the macro-level, the utilisation of resilient characteristics and the omission of risk indicators within existing measures may undermine the validity of studies investigating the construct of academic resilience. At the micro-level, the purpose of the study, usability, and inclusivity of the measurement approach influence how researchers choose to operationalise academic resilience. This review emphasises the importance of considering the methodological decisions that researchers make and contributes to the ongoing refinement of academic resilience as a specific construct in resilience research. • Identifies three distinct approaches to the measurement of academic resilience. • Each identified approach strongly influences conclusions drawn about resilience. • Variation in measurement permits researchers to employ context-specific measures. • Absence of risk indicators may undermine the validity of some resilience measures. • Measurement of academic resilience not considering academic outcomes is problematic.