Transcript Slide 1

Student engaging.
What’s that about?
Colin Bryson, Daniel Ashall
and Bethany Parker,
Newcastle University
[email protected]
Goals
A
shared understanding of the nature and
meaning of student engagement
 Look at the research and evidence
 Consider how this should guide practice
and policy and an example of that in action
Students engaging






To meet regularly to discuss SE.
An early goal is to develop a concept map and set of principles that underpin the
promotion of SE
To establish an annual conference drawing together leading edge work on SE - and
to feed into publication through journals and books. (Next conference– Sept 13/14th
2012, Southampton)
To gain funding to support these events and activities.
To create a bank of useful resources for us to share.
To facilitate communication between us (web, email network etc)
[email protected];
http://raise-network.ning.com/
Students engaging
Conceptions of engagement – the
dominant paradigm - NSSE

Roots (Becker, 1961: Pace, 1979: Astin, 1977: Chickering and
Gamson, 1987: Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991, 2005)

A focus in USA on active classroom behaviours - (National Student
Survey on Engagement) – George Kuh
http://nsse.iub.edu/index.cfm
Survey used very widely - Over 100 publications
Now revising survey into NSSE 2.0
Australia – the FYE…convergence with US thinking
Coates developed NSSE into the AUSSE (and now we have SASSE
etc)





Students engaging
Students engaging
NSSE used as a proxy of quality

Student engagement is defined as students’ involvement
in activities and conditions that are linked with highquality learning. A key assumption is that learning
outcomes are influenced by how much an individual
participates in educationally purposeful activities. While
students are seen to be responsible for constructing their
own knowledge, learning is also seen to depend on
institutions and staff generating conditions that stimulate
student involvement.

Is that better than the NSS?
Students engaging
Australian perspectives
Focus on first year experience – big
surveys in 1994, 1999, 2004 and 2009
 Connectedness (McInnis, 1995)
 Multi-dimensional engagement (Krause
and Coates, 2008) -7 scales transition;

academic; peer; staff; intellectual; online; beyond-class
Students engaging
Problems with that paradigm

SE is holistic and socially constructed

Every student is an individual and different (Haggis, 2004)
Engagement is a concept which encompasses the perceptions,
expectations and experience of being a student and the construction of
being a student in HE (Bryson and Hand, 2007).
Engagement underpins learning and is the glue that binds it together – both
located in being and becoming. (Fromm, 1977)








More than about doing/behaving and quantity
Method, validity and reliability issues
SE is dynamic and fluid
SE is multidimensional, includes student’s whole lives and it is the
interaction and pattern that matters not any specific variable – avoid
reductionism
SE needs to sensitive to the local context
Closed question surveys do not allow student voice
Students engaging
A different form of student
evidence….my own work
 Drawn
from seven studies since 2003,
mainly qualitative
 Includes two longitudinal studies
 And one of these was the staff perspective
on SE
 Identified both levels and influences – and
the dynamic nature and fragility of
engagement
Students engaging
Key influences on engagement
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Student expectations and perceptions – match to the
‘personal project’ and interest in subject
Balances between challenge and appropriate
workload
Degrees of choice, autonomy, risk, and opportunities
for growth and enjoyment
Trust relationships
Communication and discourse
A sense of belonging and community
Students engaging
A wider exploration of the lit

Strong evidence base and critical
perspective from schools SE research
(Fredricks et al; Zyngier; Gibbs & Posskitt; Harris)

Metaconstruct (includes emotional)

Pattern rather than variable centred

Critical take on SE
Students engaging
More perspectives
Professional formation and authentic
learning (identity projects) (Holmes; Reid and
Solomonides) – an ‘ontological turn’
 Inclusivity (Hockings)
 Ways of being a student (and SOMUL)

(Dubet; Brennan et al)
Students engaging
Engagement to (and for) what?
 Engagement
(Bryson and Hand)

to and with different levels
Collective SE – but also participation and
partnership
(Little et al: Bovill: Healey et al)

Integration, belonging and community (Tinto:
Kember: Wenger and several others)
 Intellectual development
(Perry: Baxter Magolda: Belenky)
Students engaging
The value of engagement after HE
(my most recent research)

Integrated development of the whole person
(and ‘disposition’)




Graduateness and graduate attributes (Barrie, 2007)
Graduate identity (Holmes, 2001) and USEM (Yorke and Knight,
2006)
The whole HE experience – thus the
extracurricular is vital – authentic experiences
The engaged student tends to take up more
opportunities AND is better able to join them up
in their thinking
Students engaging
The flipside of SE

Alienation, inertia/anomie and
disengagement (Mann: Krause)
 Performativity
 Being
‘other’
 Disciplinary power
 Inertia
 Battle
between cultures and values
Students engaging
A revised definition of SE

Student engagement is about what a student brings to
Higher Education in terms of goals, aspirations, value
and beliefs and how these are shaped and mediated by
their experience whilst a student. SE is constructed and
reconstructed through the lenses of the perceptions and
identities held by students and the meaning and sense a
student makes of their experiences and interactions. As
players and shapers of the educational context,
educators need to foster educational, purposeful SE to
support and enable students to learn in constructive and
powerful ways and realise their potential in education
and society.
Students engaging
To aid clarity -separate the dual

Engaging students

Students engaging
Students engaging
Engaging students - principles

1.
2.
3.
4.
We should:
Foster student’s willingness and readiness to engage by enhancing their
self-belief
Embrace the point that students have diverse backgrounds, expectations,
orientations and aspirations – thus different ‘ways of being a student’, and
to welcome, respect and accommodate all of these in an inclusive way
Enable and facilitate trust relationships (between staff:students and
students:students) in order to develop a discourse with each and all
students and to show solidarity with them
Create opportunities for learning (in its broadest sense) communities so
that students can develop a sense of competence and belonging within
these communities
Students engaging
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Teach in ways to make learning participatory, dialogic,
collaborative, authentic, active and critical
Foster autonomy and creativity, and offer choice and opportunities
for growth and enriching experiences in a low risk and safe setting
Recognise the impact on learning of non-institutional influences
and accommodate these
Design and implement assessment for learning with the aim to
enable students to develop their ability to evaluate critically the
quality and impact of their own work
Seek to negotiate and reach a mutual consensus with students on
managing workload, challenge, curriculum and assessment for
their educational enrichment – through a partnership model –
without diluting high expectations and educational attainment
Enable students to become active citizens and develop their social
and cultural capital
Students engaging
So what works? Kuh (2008)
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
x.
First year seminars (e.g. SI and PAL)
Learning communities – cross module
Service learning – experiential
Common intellectual experiences
Writing intensive courses
Collaborative projects
Undergraduate research
Diversity learning
Internships
Capstone coursesStudents engaging
A holistic approach to a degree
programme

Combined Honours at Newcastle
 Unique
degree
 Missing sense of identity/ belonging
 Curriculum opportunities
2008
73%
•
•
lowest of all programmes
at Newcastle
7/ 8 comparable courses
at other universities.
2011
96%
•
•
One of the best results at
Newcastle
1/8 comparable courses at
other institutions
Enhancing engagement in
Combined Honours

Student representation:




Empowerment- Student led, working groups
Partnership
Active agenda
Success stories



Combined Honours Week
Curriculum co-design
Redesign of transition
Students engaging
Enhancing engagement in
Combined Honours

Building community:



Facilities
shared spaces
social events
Students engaging
Enhancing engagement in
Combined Honours


Peer mentoring – social integration
PASS scheme – academic integration
Students engaging