Student engagement, a response to @ewilliams65

by | Sunday, January 27, 2013

In a couple of previous blog post (Student engagement in school, the tale of 2 graphs and Understanding student engagement) I wrote about  the findings of a recent Gallup Poll on student engagement. The first post was concerned with how the data were represented and the second focused on the actual items to measure student engagement.

@ewilliams65 (Eric Williams, a friend and a Superintendent in Virginia and one of the more innovative and forward-looking administrators I know) wrote a blog post (Gallup’s five questions regarding student engagement) in which he takes me to task (mildly, I must add) for questioning whether “the five items that Gallup used were the best measure of student engagement.” Now I respect Eric a great deal and when he questions me, I look inward, since I know he comes at his conclusions extremely thoughtfully — and also because his blog is titled Promoting Student Engagement, which makes him an expert on the topic, more than what I can say about myself :-).

In brief, Eric argues that (a) measuring student engagement is important in that “asking students about their level of engagement can provide rich information to guide our efforts to engage students in meaningful work.” and (b) that the items do measure what is important regarding student engagement.

As it turns out I strongly agree with point (a). I think it is great that Gallup has chosen to focus on student engagement. Just seeing my kids as they move through school, has highlighted for me just how important engagement is. So no disagreement there.

Also, I agree with all the points that Eric makes regarding the items. I see the five items as being necessary for student engagement. If the student does not feel safe in school or does not have a friend there, there is little chance of engagement. However, I doubt that these are sufficient. The other three items get at the complex issue of engagement a bit better – and Eric makes a good argument for each (with a pertinent caveat to the item on teacher recognition/praise could possibly being a double-edged sword) and somewhat agrees with me on the importance of valuing schoolwork but possibly asking students directly about it rather than in terms of “teachers making [them] feel that it is important.”

The item I feel most comfortable with, and one that gets to what I think is the core of engagement is the one that seeks to find out if students “have the opportunity to do what [they] do best every day.” This connects with intrinsic motivations as being drivers of engagement and as Eric rightly says, “we can build engagement with opportunities for students to experience a sense of mastery, a sense of being in the zone.”

So do Eric and I agree completely on everything. I think it is just a question of degree than substance. My criticism of the Gallup’s questions is really about my sense that the questions did not go far enough to probe student engagement. There were no questions about their engagement with learning, about forming deep-relationships with subject matter /content they were learning (which also connects with their developing identities), about being challenged but at the right level (the idea of Flow and being in the Zone, Eric mentioned) and so on.

So if I have any criticism of the study is that the 5 items used in the study, barely scratch the surface of a complex construct and that we need to do better if we have to truly get a measure of student engagement. I think that Eric would agree with me on the points I have made above. I say this with some confidence after reading some of the other blog posts he links to at the end of his posting which indicate a sophisticated and complex take on the idea. In particular I recommend these two:

Consider for instance these quotes, taken form the second link above

Engagement in learning “happens when students are passionately connected with the learning.”

When I think of engagement, I think of flow–completely losing yourself in what you are doing because it’s so engrossing or challenging.

Authentic engagement leads to deeper, longer-lasting understanding. This occurs because students are more likely to analyze, synthesize, and apply information rather than just memorize it. They ask better questions and make better connections. They persist when work is difficult, leading to greater understanding.

It is words like passion, flow, deeper longer-lasting understanding, persistence that I do not see reflected in the items currently. This in no way undermines the value of what Gallup has done here. This is a great first step and I would hope that with time we would develop better instruments that probe these issues a bit deeper.

Topics related to this post: Learning | Psychology | Research | Teaching | Worth Reading

A few randomly selected blog posts…

The hitchhiker’s guide to online doctoral programs, SITE2013

We finished our second symposium yesterday. Titled the The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Hybrid and Online Doctoral Programs the symposium included presentations by faculty members from Michigan State University and University of North Texas. Ann Thompson was our...

Praise-blame ambigram in 3D

Jon Good has been playing around with some new 3D printers we just bought and this is what he printed for me - a 3-D version of the "praise-blame" ambigram (click here for the 2-D version). How cool is that! So what you are seeing in the top half is the printed...

Limerick on Math & Beauty

Image credit: eoliene_pe_campii Mathematical Beauty: A limerick Punya Mishra, Jan 27, 2010 Doesn’t it just gladden your heart to see These games we can play with infinity? How can one stay aloof From the elegance of a proof And remain immune to mathematics’ subtle...

New course: Creativity in teaching & learning

Announcing a new online course for the fall semester 2008:Creativity in teaching and learning Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently… You can praise them, disagree...

TPACK handbook review

Matt Koehler just pointed out a hilarious review of the TPACK handbook on Amazon.com. It is short, pithy and completely unconnected to the book. The review, apparently written by Richard Delgado at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, in its entirety is: ...a...

My favorite Internet meme (and how it almost died)

I have been tracking the Hitler-Downfall parodies for over two years now and it seems that they keep getting better and better. But over the last few days comes the news that Constantin films, which owns the rights to the original movie asked YouTube to find and take...

Perspective Taking on creativity with Vlad Glaveanu

Perspective Taking on creativity with Vlad Glaveanu

Dr. Vlad Glaveanu, is Head of the Department of Psychology and Counseling at Webster University, Geneva; Associate Professor at Bergen University, and Director of the Webster Center for Creativity and Innovation. He co-edits the book series Palgrave Studies in...

On designing aesthetic educational experiences in science

On designing aesthetic educational experiences in science

What is the role of beauty (and aesthetics) in science in science education? This is something that I have been interested in for a long time, going back to highschool. Over the years I have built a small body of scholarship around this topic. Sadly, this work does...

TPACK at SITE, AERA & ISTE: Newsletter #36

TPACK at SITE, AERA & ISTE: Newsletter #36

Modification of the TPACK diagram to capture all the sessionsrelated to TPACK in three upcoming conferences. Here is a link to Issue #36 of the TPACK newsletter—a special spring conference issue that contains citations and abstracts for all of the TPACK-focused and...

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *