1. Drew Baker- HCPS ITRT and VCU School of Education- Summer 2017
Engaging Adolescent Learners: using theory to guide practice
Drew Baker- HCPS ITRT and VCU School of Education- Summer 2017

2. About Me Practitioner/Researcher 8 Years in Classroom
2 Years Instructional Technology Resource Teacher
PhD in Educational Psychology
NBCT
Engagement, Technology, Professional Development

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

4. What IS Student Engagement?

6. “Engagement is one of the hottest
“Engagement is one of the hottest research topics in the field of educational psychology.” (Sinatra et al., 2015)
“Engagement is one of the most widely misused and over-generalized constructs found in educational, learning, instructional, and psychological science.” (Azevedo., 2015)
“Engagement could be described as the holy grail of learning.” (Sinatra et al., 2015)

7. Major Theoretical Framework
Schlechty Model

8. Major Theoretical Framework
Schlechty Model

9. 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

10. 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Students are withdrawn in thought and action.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

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

12. 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

13. 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

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

15. Connor and Pope, 2013

16. Is anything missing from this model?

17. Additions to ABC Theory
Agentic (Reeve, 2013)
Social (Linnenbrick-Garcia et al., 2010; Fredricks et al., 2016)
Academic (Appleton et al., 2006)
Psychological (Appleton et al., 2006)

18. How Master Teachers in HCPS define engagement
1. Interest and Positive Emotions
“Highly engaged learning comes down to enthusiasm and then understanding the topic and being interested.” (Cook)
2. Engaged Behaviors
“I look for participation to see if they are engaged.” (Gray)
“Students are working on the assignment like they are supposed to” (Cook)
3. Social Interaction
“In a highly engaged class, I want to see them interacting with peers. I want to see them interacting with me.” (Dawson)
4. Application/ Relevance/Real World Connections (7)
“I think engagement is at another level where they want to know how this applies to their lives, or how this is relevant to everything else they are learning within the school or within their classes.” (Engle)

19. How Master Teachers in HCPS define engagement
5. Deep and Strategic Thinking
“engaged writing is messy. Their papers will have arrows. There are kids trying to figure out how to say something well.” (Gray)
6. Student-Teacher Rapport
“relationships are a big part of student engagement…. I think the kids have to trust you. They have to know you are genuine and that you are there for them and that you love what you do.” (Hart)
7. Control Over Learning Environment
“Student engagement is when students are in control of their own learning and actively pursuing their own answers.”(Cook)

20. How Master Teachers in HCPS define engagement
Name
Grade
Subject
1- Interest
2- Behaviors
3- Social Interaction
4- Application/ Relevance/ Real World Connections
5- Deep Thinking/ Understanding
6- Student- Teacher Rapport
7- Control Over Learning Environment
Anderson
8th
Math 
Brown
9th-12th
Business
Cook
9th
English
Dawson
7th & 8th
Science
Engle
10th
Frank
Gray
6th - 12th
Reading
Hart
11th
Ian
6th
Jackson
How Master Teachers in HCPS define engagement

21.  Name Grade Anderson 8th Brown 9th-12th Cook 9th Dawson 7th & 8th
Subject
Affective
Behavioral
Cognitive
All ABC
Social Engagement
Anderson
8th
Math 
Brown
9th-12th
Business
Cook
9th
English
Dawson
7th & 8th
Science
Engle
10th
Frank
Gray
6th - 12th
Reading
Hart
11th
Ian
6th
Jackson

22. The ABC+S Model of Engagement
Affective
Interest; enthusiasm; positive emotions (Theme 1)
Behavioral
Students on task; actively participating; paying attention (Theme 2)
Cognitive
Real World Connections (Theme 4)
Deep/Strategic Thinking (Theme 5)
Social
Peer-to-Peer Interactions (Theme 3)
Student-Teacher Rapport (Theme 6)

23. SO WHAT?

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

25. 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.

26. How should we design instruction?
Autonomy
Relevance
Social interaction
Clear and Observable Objectives

27. How should we implement instruction?
Make Learning Emotional
Peak Interest
Leverage Rapport
Connect to Other Knowledge/
Experiences
How should we implement instruction?

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

30. 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.