STUDENT ENGAGEMENTMary Ann Reilly

2012

SITUATING OUR WORK

Richard Elmore (2008) says there are only three ways to improve student learning at scale:

1. Raise the level of content that students are taught.

2. Increase the teachers’ skill & knowledge that they bring to teaching of that content.

3. Increase the level of students’ active learning (engagement) of the content.

OUR FOCUS

Richard Elmore (2008) says there are only three ways to improve student learning at scale:

1. Raise the level of content that students are taught.

2. Increase the teachers’ skill & knowledge that they bring to teaching of that content.

3. Increase the level of students’ active learning (engagement) of the content.

ELMORE…

What predicts performance is not what teachers do, but what the students are actually doing.

Students must know what they are expected to do, but also how they are expected to do it, and what knowledge and skills they need to learn how to do it well.

It is also vital to have students know why they should want to do the work. It should have value and meaning to the student.

WHAT IS STUDENT ENGAGEMENT? RESEARCH FROM 1983 - 2012

BEHAVIORAL ENGAGEMENT

Student Engagement initially defined by observable behaviors such as: participation, time on task, involvement in academic, social, or

extracurricular activities (Brophy 1983; Natriello 1984).

Crucial for achieving positive academic outcomes and preventing dropping out (Connell and Wellborn 1990; Finn 1989).

EMOTIONAL ENGAGEMENT

Emotional or affective aspects: feelings of belonging, enjoyment, and attachment (Connell 1990; Finn 1989).

Focuses on the extent of positive (and negative) reactions to teachers, classmates, academics, and school.

Creates student ties to the institution and influence students’ willingness to work (Connell and Wellborn 1990; Finn 1989).

COGNITIVE ENGAGEMENT

Student’s investment in learning:

being thoughtful and purposeful in the approach to school tasks,

being willing to exert the effort necessary to comprehend complex ideas or master difficult skills,

Using deep rather than superficial strategies (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris 2004)

Self-regulating (Miller et al. 1996).

FINDINGS FROM STEINBERG, BROWN & DORNBUSCH (1996)

50% of high school students reported that their classes were boring.

33% reported ‘surviving school’ by ‘goofing off’ with friends.

From Steinberg, L.D., Brown, B.B., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. NY: Simon & Schuster.

HOW HS STUDENTS SPEND TIME AT SCHOOL *

From Shernoff, D.J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, (2), 158-176.

Activity Percentage of Time

Doing Individual Work 23%

Listening to Lectures 21%

Taking Exams 13%

Taking Notes 10%

In Discussion 9%

Watching TV or Video 7%

Doing Homework or Studying 7%

Doing Group of Lab Work 6%

Other Activities (Watching demos, Giving presentations)

4%

Talking with Teacher Individually

Less than 1%

Simultaneously experiencing concentration, interest, and enjoyment in an activity leads to

Flow.

APATHY: LOW CHALLENGE AND LOW SKILLS

BOREDOM: LOW CHALLENGE AND HIGH SKILLS

ANXIETY: LOW SKILLS AND HIGH CHALLENGE

FLOW: HIGH CHALLENGE AND HIGH SKILLS

PRESENCE OF FLOW ON LEARNING

From Shernoff, D.J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, (2), 158-176.

Condition Percentage of Time Students Attended to Instruction

Flow 73%

Apathy 42%

Anxiety 70%

Relaxation/Boredom 58%

EFFECT OF CONTROL & RELEVANCE

From Shernoff, D.J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, (2), 158-176.

Students reported being significantly more engaged when:

• Experiencing high versus low control over situations

• When instruction is perceived as having high versus low relevance.

PAYING ATTENTION

Activity Percentage of Time Students Say they Pay Attention

Taking an Exam 83%

Doing Individual Work 78%

Participating in Group Work 75%

Listening to Teacher Lecture 65%

Watching TV/Video 57%

From Shernoff, D.J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, (2), 158-176.

HIGH ENGAGEMENT

From Shernoff, D.J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, (2), 158-176.

Low Engagement

HS STUDENT REPORT HIGHEST LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT

Courses

Art

Computers

Vocational Education

From Shernoff, D.J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, (2), 158-176.

WORKS CITED Brophy, J .(1983). Conceptualizing student motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 200–215.

Connell, J.P. (1990). Context ,self, and action: A Motivational analysis of self-system processes across life-span. In D. Cicchetto (ed.), The self in transition: Infancy to childhood. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117–142.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., Friedel, J., and Paris, A. (2005). School engagement. In K. A. Moore and L. Lippman (Eds.), What do children need to flourish?: conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.

Miller, R. B., Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B., and Nichols, J. D. (1996). Engagement in academic work: the role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others, and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 388–422.

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2004). Engaging schools: fostering high school students’ motivation to learn. Committee on Increasing High School Students’ Engagement and Motivation to Learn. Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Division of Behavioral and Social Science and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

Natriello, G. (1984). Problems in the evaluation of students and student disengagement for secondary schools. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 17, 14–24.

Shernoff, D.J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, (2), 158-176.

Steinberg, L.D., Brown, B.B., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. NY: Simon & Schuster.