Redefining Engagement
by Martha Doennig, Coordinator, Professional Learning

Standard #1: Content knowledge aligned with appropriate instruction
Quality Indicator #2: Student engagement in subject matter

Have you engaged in a conversation around a topic in which you had little expertise, only to hear the words, “Let’s Google that”? On a daily basis, nearly 5.7 billion queries rely on Google for content expertise. Considering that Google is just one of many search engines, the internet has the potential to make educators feel obsolete. While we know that teachers are actually far from obsolete, we need to rethink engagement in the classroom since students have other outlets to find answers.

Why does student engagement matter?

In a recent edition of Education Week, a Gallup poll was referenced as finding that nearly 50% of students report that they are not engaged or are actively disengaged in school. This staggering statistic poses a problem for schools as disengagement is one of the largest factors leading to a student’s decision to drop out. While dropout rate has received much attention in recent years and has steadily declined nationwide, lack of engagement is becoming a growing concern as it comes with its own costly price tag.

So what is new about student engagement?
Many discussions about student engagement focus on behavioral indicators. This measure

certainly does not tell the whole story, as engagement includes the emotion and cognition of the student as well. When students make a cognitive, behavioral, and emotional investment, their personal ownership in learning increases (Sparks, 2013). Empowered to actively and constructively participate in learning, students will be beating down the doors to get in…not out.

What’s this about emotion and cognition?

Emotional engagement ties to the culture of the learning environment. To be emotionally engaged, one must feel accepted into the culture of the classroom while finding meaningful connections, interest, and relevance to the learning.

Cognitive engagement refers to the ability to manage and monitor one’s own learning. Providing choice and autonomy in learning allows students to navigate content, leading to deeper learning.

What does the research tell us?

Authors of The Highly Engaged Classroom explore the concept that information must be important for the working memory to maintain it for long. If students do not believe learning is relevant, the brain with eventually reject it. To successfully engage the mind, four questions must be considered: How do I feel? Am I interested? Is this important? Can I do this? (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2011).

Current research from Phillip Schlechty explains engagement as a connection between attention, persistence, and commitment, all of which tie to Marzano’s questions.  The “Levels of Engagement” infographic explores five ways in which students respond or adapt to school-related tasks and activities.

No longer can we look at ritual compliance, also known as demonstrating positive behavior, as engagement.  In ritual compliance, students are missing critical emotional and cognitive engagement, therefore leading to complacent, yet unfulfilling, learning.

Strategic compliance still misses the mark of authentic engagement since students miss the relevance of learning, causing low retention.

How might I make a difference in engagement?

When you think about times your students have shown authentic engagement in learning, what factors contributed to your success? Which of those factors might you want to emulate time and time again?

Suggestions for enhancing student engagement in the classroom include the following:

• Provide students with rich learning experiences signaling real purpose and relevance of content.
• Evoke student curiosity through lesson design and questioning opportunities.
• Trust students’ voice and choice as they take the reins of learning.
• Allow for student autonomy.
• Increase global interactions.
• Create meaningful fun.

Rethinking engagement will create an environment that is far beyond Google’s reach as emotional, cognitive, and behavioral factors of engagement are satisfied in all our students. 

References:

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Heflebower, T. (2011). The highly engaged classroom. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research Laboratory.

Schlechty Center on Engagement (2013). Retrieved from http://www.schlechtycenter.org/tools-for-change.

Sparks, Sarah. “Active Student Engagement Goes Beyond Class Behavior, Study Finds.” Education Week. N.p., 10 July 2013. 

Putting Down Roots
by Alicia Moore, Professional Learning Specialist

Standard #1: Content knowledge aligned with appropriate instruction
Quality Indicator #4: Interdisciplinary instruction

As a third grader, I was awed by a Weekly Reader article about the giant sequoias and redwoods of California. There was a picture of a car driving through a tunnel in the trunk of a redwood. Another tree was so big that my entire class would have barely been able to encircle it holding hands.

If we borrow an old analogy, teachers plant seeds of knowledge in young minds. And aren’t we all hoping to grow some metaphorical redwoods and sequoias? How exactly can we cultivate minds that reach such unbelievable heights?

One characteristic of those towering trees offers insight for educators. It turns out that they grow to such amazing heights not because of their innate strength, but because they depend upon each other. Each tree stretches out its roots, and the roots fuse with all the other trees in the area. The result is a forest of giants with the stability and resourcefulness to live thousands of years.

This idea relates to one especially helpful framework for thinking about student learning—the structure of observed learning outcomes, usually called the SOLO model (Hattie, 2012, p. 54). This model names four levels of learning:

• Uni-structural: one idea
• Multi-structural: many ideas
• Relational: relating ideas
• Extended abstract: extending ideas

The uni-structural and multi-structural levels encompass surface-level understanding, whereas the next two levels of learning go deeper. The message of this model is that when we connect concepts across content areas, we allow students to expand and fuse their academic root systems.

Learning surface level concepts is an important first step, of course. As John Hattie and Gregory Yates say, “you must have something to think about before you can relate, extend, critique, and enquire” (2014). Helping students to transfer their knowledge to new situations can be a daunting task, though, so deeper learning sometimes feels out-of-reach.

Project-based learning (PBL) includes an interdisciplinary teaching philosophy, and that’s one reason that it has generated a lot of excitement among educators. This approach to learning provides a template for bringing different content areas together so that students can find a relevant application for what they know. If you’re interested in learning more about PBL, check out this 4 minute video.

When we help our students apply their learning to various contexts, we help them cultivate a forest of knowledge. Their scientific reasoning skills lend clarity to writing; their writing skills give voice to their political stances. One idea supports and is supported by all others, creating students whose learning is as impressive as the redwood forests. 


References:

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hattie, J., & Yates, G. (2014). Visible learning and the science of how we learn. New York, NY: Routledge.