1. Drew Baker- HCPS ITRT and VCU School of Eduation- Summer` 2016
Student Engagement: What are we even talking about?
Drew Baker- HCPS ITRT and VCU School of Eduation- Summer` 2016

2. Mr. Baker/Drew Practitioner/Researcher 8 Years in Classroom
Instructional Technology Resource Teacher
Year 4! Doctoral Student
NBCT
Engagement, Technology, Professional Development

3. Log In Please go to Socrative.com
Select STUDENT LOG IN from the top right
Type “BAKERITRT” and click JOIN ROOM

4. Who are you as an educator? (Role, Place of Work Etc)

5. What IS Student Engagement?

6. In 2003, the National Research Council published a large scale work examining lack of student engagement in American schools, claiming that by the time of high school “student disengagement from course work and serious study is common.” (p. 4).   The language and implication in that statement are clear.  Many students are not just disengaged from time to time—disengagement is routine.  

7. Major Theoretical Framework
Various Theorhetical Frameworks
National Survey of School Engagement (NSSE)
Schlechty- 5 levels of engagement
Csikszentmihalyi and Shernoff- Flow Theory
Fredericks et al

8. National Survey of Student Engagement
Higher Order Learning
Reflective Learning
Quantitative Reasoning
Academic Challenge
Collaborative Learning
Discussion with Diverse Others
Learning with Peers
Student-Faculty Interaction
Effective Teaching
Experience with Faculty
Quality of Interactions
Supportive Environment
Campus Environment

9. Does a difference exist between “school” engagement and “student” engagement?

10. Major Theoretical Framework
Schlechty Model

11. Schlechty Theoretical Framework
Activity is meaningful.
Interest is high.
Task is challengeing.
Engagement
Student substitutes his own goals for goals of the work.
Substituted goals are instrumental.
Extrinsic Motivation.
Students won’t comply if the task doesn’t meet the goal
Strategic Compliance
The work has no meaning.
Superficial learning.
The student has no goals, either given or substituted.
Ritual Compliance

12. Schlechty Theoretical Framework
Student is disengaged from classroom activities
Students are withdrawn in thought and action.
Student rejects goals and ways to achieve them.
Does not see relevance.
Retreatism
Student is actively engaged in another, competing agenda.
May encourage others to rebel.
Student creates his own means and own goals.
Rebellion

13. Which form of engagement is most common in your school or context?
Strategic Compliance
Ritual Compliance
Retreatism
Rebellion

14. Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi
Early Studies
Mihalyi
Csikszentmihalyi

15. Flow Psychology- Development
Csikszentmihalyi and LeFevre’s 1989 study: Optimal Experience in Work and Leisure
First MAJOR application of the ESM Method
Results: Confirmed existence of a “flow state”- satisfaction occurred when challenge met skills (especially when both are high)
Adult participants carried pagers and survey booklets and recorded activities and perceived level of challenge, stimulation, enjoyment, and anxiety associated with the activity every time the pager went off. 
Participants reported being most happy when they possessed strong skills in an activity that was perceived as challenging.  It also revealed people were more engaged and satisfied at work as opposed to leisure time

16. Adult participants carried pagers and survey booklets and recorded activities and perceived level of challenge, stimulation, enjoyment, and anxiety associated with the activity every time the pager went off. 
Participants reported being most happy when they possessed strong skills in an activity that was perceived as challenging.  It also revealed people were more engaged and satisfied at work as opposed to leisure time
Original Model of Flow State (Csikszentmihalyi & LeFevre, 1989)
Revised Model of Flow (Nakamura, 2002)

17. Do you think students experience flow at school
Do you think students experience flow at school? If so, where/when might it occur?

18. Flow in Education
Hektner and Csikszentmihalyi’s 1996 study:
A Longitudinal Exploration of Flow and Intrinsic Motivation in Adolescents
281 adolescents in 6th grade, and then again in 8th and 10th grades  
Found flow experiences were rare in schools,
Benefits for learners
Self-Motivation
Moods
Self-Esteem
Concentration
Perceived Future Importance
but that students who experienced flow more regularly reported higher or improved self-motivation, moods, self esteem, concentration, and perception that their schoolwork would help them succeed in the future

19. Recent Studies
Shernoff, Csikszentmihalyi, Schneider, & Shernoff’s 2003 Student Engagement in High School Classrooms from the Perspective of Flow Theory
Most engaging classes: vocational education, computer science, art, and social studies classes.
Flow experiencing students have higher moods in these classes that fostered flow
Found that high school students in study experienced more flow in vocational education, computer science, art, and social studies classes.
Students also reported enjoying these classes more, and had higher moods in these classes that fostered flow

20. Shernoff, Csikszentmihalyi, Schneider, & Shernoff’s 2003 Student Engagement in High School Classrooms from the Perspective of Flow Theory
Found that high school students in study experienced more flow in vocational education, computer science, art, and social studies classes.
Students also reported enjoying these classes more, and had higher moods in these classes that fostered flow

21. Major Theoretical Framework
Fredricks, Bluemenfeld, and Paris (2004)
Reviewed Existing Literature
Found Big Discrepancies in Conceptualizations
Summarized field and suggested a more uniform framework
Affective
Behavioral
Cognitive

22. Fredricks et al. Framework
The Student has emotional connection to the content. He or she likes what she is learning (or at least the learning context).
Affective
The Student complies with required behaviors and completes tasks.
Behavioral
The student believes that the work is important to his or her life, and will help with his or her goals.
Cognitive

23. Which type of engagement (using the Fredricks Model) do you see most?

24. Connor and Pope, 2013

25. SO WHAT?

26. Commonalities DO exist
Schlechty
Flow Theory
Fredricks
Relevance X
On Task Behavior
Enjoyment
Student Interest
Supported by Learner Autonomy
Malleable

27. Do practice and/or policy regarding engagement seem to follow these frameworks?

28. What Can We Takeaway?
More research should be conducted on student engagement.
Define “engagement” before using it in decision making or justification.
Inform practitioners about different models.
Researchers should talk to practitioners.
Develop observation tools around specific theoretical frameworks.

29. What Can We Takeaway?
Design instruction that values and emphasizes
autonomy
relevance
rapport building
affective experiences of students

30. What will you take away from today’s presentation?

32. Major Theoretical Framework Cited
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & LeFevre, J. (1989). Optimal Experience in work and leisure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 56,
Conner, J., Pope, D. (2013). Not Just Robo-Students: Why Full Engagement Matters and How Schools Can Promote It. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 42,
Fredericks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research 74(1),
Schlechty, P. C. (2003). Inventing better schools: An action plan for educational reform. John Wiley & Sons.
Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Shneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158.