While I agree with the responsibility teachers have in creating lesson plans and class activities that aren't inherently boring, I also wonder whether we undercut our students' willingness to connect with less-than-adrenaline-producing subject matter when we do gymnastics and smoke-and-light-shows for the purpose of getting and holding their attention. When the teacher feels compelled to do more and more work at engaging students, the students may internalize the message that student engagement isn't really their job.
To me, that is getting the grammar of student engagement backwards: if students are going to engage in any part of their lives (whether it's in the context of relationships with family or friends, on the job, or in an educational setting), they must be given plenty of opportunities to perform the action of that verb. And those opportunities need to happen in a range of situations--sometimes when an experience is naturally interesting, but also (and even) when an experience isn't quite so fascinating.
Many students may wonder, though, exactly what student engagement means. It is, after all, a rather vague notion.
As a way of answering that question, I have decided in recent years to include engagement as a part of my students' overall grade for the classes they take with me. Adding the facet of engagement into the course grade creates an opportunity for me to help students understand what behaviors they can practice both in and out of class.
Here is a recent version of that information, which I distribute to students early in the semester:
The Quality of Engagement grade is determined by how consistently a student contributes to a class culture that is beneficial and supportive for all class members (students and faculty). Such positive contributions are made by practicing the following behaviors:
- attending the entirety of each class meeting
- bringing and using required materials
- listening attentively to others' observations and questions
- contributing relevantly and substantively to discussions (asking questions, offering observations, responding to the questions and comments of other class participants)
- taking notes when relevant
- actively participating in individual and group activities
- adhering to syllabus guidelines regarding cell phones, computer usage, etc.
- maintaining conduct that is professional and conveys respect for all class members (self, peers, instructor)
In addition to offering what I hope is a clear definition of these behaviors, I also provide information about how those behaviors are assessed.
Each Student's Quality of Engagement grade is based on the following scale:
A = excellent: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors on a consistent basis.
B = solid: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors most of the time.
C = acceptable: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors sometimes.
D = needs improvement: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors only occasionally.
F = poor: student does not demonstrate engagement behaviors.
After communication information about the Quality of Engagement portion of my classes, I then assess each student 3 times (every five weeks) over the course a 15-week semester. Doing so offers them the chance not only to improve their performance (because grades continue to be a huge motivator for many), but this practice also creates an opportunity for them to try behaviors with which they may not initially be comfortable--behaviors that (I believe) will serve them well in all of their relationships.
While it is difficult to quantify the impact that this teaching strategy makes on student engagement, I can say that it has created many opportunities for me to talk with students about how their actions contribute to the people with whom they interact every day. Just today I recorded the first round of Quality of Engagement grades, and I wrote a personal note to each student describing the helpful behaviors I am observing during class as well as offering specific suggestions for how they can make adjustments, should they choose to do so.
Hopefully, addressing student engagement in this way not only cultivates my students' growth in emotional intelligence, but also nurtures each student's sense of self-efficacy and agency.
A = excellent: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors on a consistent basis.
B = solid: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors most of the time.
C = acceptable: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors sometimes.
D = needs improvement: student demonstrates all engagement behaviors only occasionally.
F = poor: student does not demonstrate engagement behaviors.
After communication information about the Quality of Engagement portion of my classes, I then assess each student 3 times (every five weeks) over the course a 15-week semester. Doing so offers them the chance not only to improve their performance (because grades continue to be a huge motivator for many), but this practice also creates an opportunity for them to try behaviors with which they may not initially be comfortable--behaviors that (I believe) will serve them well in all of their relationships.
While it is difficult to quantify the impact that this teaching strategy makes on student engagement, I can say that it has created many opportunities for me to talk with students about how their actions contribute to the people with whom they interact every day. Just today I recorded the first round of Quality of Engagement grades, and I wrote a personal note to each student describing the helpful behaviors I am observing during class as well as offering specific suggestions for how they can make adjustments, should they choose to do so.
Hopefully, addressing student engagement in this way not only cultivates my students' growth in emotional intelligence, but also nurtures each student's sense of self-efficacy and agency.
No comments:
Post a Comment