What about school environment and participation?

Inquiry, Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

Way back in the fall, when I decided to base my inquiry around participation, I was inspired by the quiet students in classrooms. Kate Torgovinick May asks the same question I did when I first chose this topic: “What should we do with the quiet kids?” Torgovinick May interviews Susan Cain, who advocates for introverts of all ages. Their discussion focuses on the school and classroom environment, which for the introverted child, can be a “very over-stimulating experience”. One strategy Cain suggests for helping introverted students feel more comfortable is to “build quiet time into the school day”.

Caine also discusses what she envisions schools in the future could look like, and how rethinking school structure could help introverted students. Cain “imagin[es] spaces that are more flexible so at any given moment, you can choose: Do I want to be in a solo space? Do I want to be in a small group space? Do I want to be in a more crowded, lively space?”. In my observations, I have been able to view spaces like the one Cain describes. These less traditional spaces help promote community among grade groups and create open and flexible learning spaces, as opposed to typical classrooms. In these types of environments students exercise the exact type of choice that Cain mentions. As a Teacher Candidate, I have found these environments quite intimidating. It is the polar opposite of my own schooling. I do appreciate however, that these types of environments can allow for more seamless technology integration in schools. IPads and computers are easily integrated across all grades in an efficient and educational way. Technology is used to promote student participation and engagement with learning; it is a normalized tool for learning.

Cain also discusses using technology – more specifically, apps that promote discussion – for promoting class wide participation. Plickers, which I have mentioned in previous postings, accomplish Cain’s ideas regarding participation and technology.

Over the last few steps of my research into participation, I have been realizing that I am going in somewhat the opposite direction that I was expecting to. Initially, I came into this looking for strategies to promote active participation from the quieter students in a classroom. I am now starting to see how as long as student learning can be shown, how the learning is presented is not as important as I previously thought. Cain’s belief in student choice creates opportunities. Offering different platforms, whether it is through a class blog or working in small groups, creates opportunities for students who are more introverted to find their own right way for them to participate with their learning.

What about participation assessment?

Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

One area I have yet to look into, is assessing participation. I have seen some rubrics include a section for participation, and even in my own courses, a significant percentage of my grade is reserved for evaluating participation. In their exploration of participation, Klein and Riordan, who educate teacher candidates at Montclair State University, express their concern for evaluating student learning in terms of their active participation in class. They write that “including participation into a grade that is intended to reflect evidence of learning results in a murky understanding of students’ achievement”. Klein and Riordan advocate for keeping participation separate from learning assessment as it avoids “penalize[ing] the quite, introverted student, who might be listening and creating space for thinking and reflection”. If a student is doing his or her work, and doing it well, he or she should not be penalized for not expressing their learning in an outgoing, extroverted way.

Participation Penalizes Quiet Learners

Types of Goals and Participation

Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

Over the course of my inquiry research, different types of participation has been discussed. Turner and Patrick (2004) comment on participatory work habits and look beyond verbal and active participation. They acknowledge less obvious ways of being an active learner, which include “watching, listening, and thinking” (p. 1760).  The study only uses more obvious and measurable displays of participation, but Turner and Patrick acknowledge that participation extends beyond what can be easily measured.

Turner and Patrick discuss the difference between a classroom focused on mastery goals and one focused on performance goals and how they affect student participation. One interesting observation was “when students had difficulty, the teacher urged them to try harder, apparently not considering that lack of understanding, rather than effort, could be the reason” (p. 1771), which relates to learning the concepts to apply them as opposed to learning how to do well on a test. They found that structuring pedagogy to support mastery goals proves to have a stronger, more positive impact on student participation.

Source: Turner, J.C. & Patrick, H. (2004). Motivational influences on student participation in classroom learning activities. Teachers College Record, 106, 1759-1785.

Engagement and Game-based Play: Is there a relationship?

Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

impact_of_game_based_learning

Games are a key component of a classroom. Whether they are used in centres for imaginative play, or as a tool for learning math concepts, calling something a game makes the learning objective less obvious and increases the fun factor.  Hsieh, Lin, and Hou (2015) examined engagement patterns in game-based learning environments, which were defined as “provid[ing] sufficient challenges, immediate and clear feedback, and playable experiences to increase students’ engagement in the learning process” (p. 336). The authors looked at gender differences in the relationship between engagement and game-based learning. This study focused on electronic games as tools for learning. Students’s engagement and participation was evaluated through verbal and non-verbal cues, such as body language and facial expression.

The study found that “males were more involved in the game task and had greater engagement in exploratory behaviours than females” (Hsieh, Lin, and Hou, 2014, p. 345). They also made inferences in regards to females comfort with technology. This study offers and interesting cultural perspective, as it takes place in Taiwan. Students were not interviewed, which could potentially have yielded contradictory results, such as in Skinner, Kindermann, and Furrer’s 2009 study where “students reported that they were more behaviorally engaged than teachers judged them to be” (p. 517).

Hsieh, Y., Lin, Y., & Hou, H. (2015). Exploring elementary-school students’ engagement patterns in a game-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 336-348.

Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525.

What strategies help participation?

Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

As students, we have all lived in fear that our teacher would randomly call on us to participate. Random participation can create fear and anxiety for many students in a classroom. Maddie Witter created a list of strategies for teachers to help promote student participation that are more democratic, stress-free, and promote a comfortable classroom environment. Listed below are summaries of her six suggestions. It is also important to note that her suggestions are influenced from educational research as well as her own practice.

  1. Three seconds – wait longer to allow more time for students to come up with answers to questions.
  2. Pre-planned questions – give students the tools they need before whole class discussion. Group students with the same question together to build a collaborative understanding.
  3. Anonymous questioning – Witter uses online assessment and participation tools here. Unfortunately one of her links (Infuse Learning) is shutting down – which is unfortunate as it looks quite interesting, but I think Fresh Grade and Plickers would apply here as well.
  4. Choice questions – Witter comments how broad, open-ended questions can sometimes be intimidating for students. She suggests incorporating either/or questions as well, which offer choice but aren’t too intimidating.
  5. Snowball to Avalanche – this is a great idea for how to incorporate kinaesthetic learning into a classroom. One student’s comment starts off as a “snowflake”, if students find they agree with the “snowflake” they move over and become a “snowball”. Eventually – if the initial question was intriguing enough, there will be more “snowballs” that can try and persuade more people to join them, thus creating an “avalanche”.
  6. Estimation line-up – give students a scale and when you ask a question have them place themselves on the scale (agree → disagree). Then when the students have found their place, fold the line in half and have the students discuss with each other why they put themselves in that spot. 

These strategies for participation are intriguing. They could be modified and adapted to fit the needs of different classes. They aren’t one size fits all tools to throw in a teacher’s back pocket, but foundation of inspiration for how to mix it up in a class to increase participation in learning.

Source: Beyond Q + A: Six Strategies That Motivate ALL Students to Participate

“Participation-as-learning”

Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

One of the recurring themes in research regarding classroom participation is group work and group dialogue. Kovalainen and Kumpulainen (2005) examine a single class that strongly emphasizes “learning-as-participation” (p. 214). They examined interactions in math, science, and a philosophy based lessons. Teacher-student interactions were broken down into Teacher Initiated (TI), and then Student Initiated (SI). These were then further broken down into how the student or teacher was participating, such as defining, information seeking, and sharing evidence.

It was found that TI was more common than SI interactions, but SI interactions still made up a large portion of classroom communication. One interesting finding was how “the sharing of personal experiences was not salient in whole-class interaction sequences in which the teacher also participated” (p. 236). It would make sense that students would be more reluctant to share personal details or stories about themselves in front of the whole class. When the class does bring the groups back together, whole class participation is supported in a meaningful way. When students are not paying attention when another student is speaking, the teacher asked the one student to “hold on for a while and asks the other students themselves to recall the rules of participating in the joint discussion” (p. 229), instead of just telling the students to be quiet. This practice reinforces proper group participation skills.

Kovalainen and Kumpulainen’s work shows where different types of participation are present and how it is important for classrooms to be social learning spaces . Learning does not need to be “a purely individual endeavour” (p. 214).

Source: Kovalainen, M., & Kumpulainen, K. (2005). The discursive practice of participation in an elementary classroom community. Instructional Science, 33, 213-250.

How do you measure engagement?

Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

One of the most common discussions around engagement in the research I have encountered is: How do you measure engagement? Goldspink and Foster (2013) explored this issue in their research. Their goal was to come up with a comprehensive and valid scale for measuring student engagement. They broke down measuring engagement into three categories:

  1. Student behaviour – measured through observation.
  2. Affect: reasons for observed behaviour – measured by answers to questionnaires*.
  3. Cognition: what the learner thinks about the situation and how deeply the student feels he or engaged with their learning – measured by answers to questionnaires*.

Goldspink and Foster also incorporated the idea of flow into their research, which they defined as “the experience of total immersion in an activity because of the intrinsic rewards it offers” (2013, p. 293).  This idea of flow strongly ties to their points on how engagement and well-being, which they defined as “happiness and satisfaction… and social functioning” (p. 302) are closely related. They found strong relationships between certain variables and levels of engagement, such as prior knowledge and relatedness.

It is important to note that in their work, Goldspink and Foster allowed students to reflect on their own engagement. Other studies that I have examined relied entirely on observable behaviour, which led to discrepant conclusions where students felt they were more engaged than the teachers perceived them to be. Using student reflection as a measure of engagement offers more concrete, inclusive results.

*Questionnaires consisted of multiple choice and open-ended questions.

Source: Goldspink, C., & Foster, M. (2013). A conceptual model and set of instruments for measuring student engagement in learning. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 291-311.

Do students believe they are engaged?

Inquiry, Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

As I continue to explore the literature on engaged and participatory learning in elementary schools, I am continuously finding new ways to elaborate and deepen my understanding of these concepts. Skinner, Kindermann, and Furrer (2009) highlighted and explained the difference between emotional engagement and behavioral engagement. Until this point, I have been more focused on physical engagement with learning, such as having the confidence to raise one’s hand, asking for help in class, and body language. Engagement with learning can be shown in much subtler ways. How do students respond to the statements “I try hard to do well in school,” concerning behavioural engagement, or “I enjoy learning new things in class,” which relates to emotional engagement (Skinner, Kindermann, & Furrer, 2009, p. 519-520). These are two very different to examine engagement than what I have previously been exploring. Differentiating between these two types of engagement is important because, although they are distinct from one another, they are also quite dependent on one another.

At the other end of the engagement spectrum is what Skinner, Kindermann, and Furrer (2009) describe as “disaffection” (p. 495). A student demonstrating behavioural disaffection would identify with the statement “In class, I do just enough to get by” and a student displaying emotional disaffection would relate to the statement “When I’m in class I feel bad” (Skinner, Kindermann, and Furrer, 2009, p. 520). Their research presented two very interesting findings in regards to the types of engagement and disaffection. “Students reported that they were more behaviourally engaged than teachers judged them to be, and teachers underestimated student emotional disaffection relative to students’ actual feelings” (Skinner, Kindermann, and Furrer, 2009, p. 517). I find the first conclusion regarding behavioural engagement quite interesting. I feel that this applies to those quiet participants in a classroom. It also goes against what I was expecting to uncover in throughout my inquiry process in regards to participatory learning. Until this point, I had been looking for ways to break students out of their shells so that I, as the teacher, can see that they are actively participating in their learning, but what if the student believes he or she is participating and is enjoying the work, but it is not blatantly obvious. Is it the teacher’s responsibility to create extroverted, outgoing, and active learners? Active, yes. Extroverted and outgoing? Maybe not. The students mentioned in the study believed themselves to be more engaged than the teachers were perceiving them to be. I do think educators should push students to be their best possible selves, but after reading this article, it is clear that that is different for each student. Ultimately, learning is the goal, and if a student chooses to do that quietly and more independently, maybe that is okay too. Students need to feel safe with their learning environment and also aware that the support will be there when they begin to reach new and unfamiliar territory. Being engaged and participating in learning looks different from student to student, and students should feel safe and comfortable with how they choose to learn.

Source: Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009;2008;). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525.

How do we measure participation and engagement?

Inquiry, Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

Looking back to my time in elementary school, I was fairly involved and actively participated in my learning. I was strongly motivated by a desire to do well. I also really loved to read, which I think was the starting point for my educational journey. My motivation in younger grades definitely inspired my inquiry on how to increase participation. As I continue in my education, it is interesting to look at motivation and participation from a teacher perspective. Stephen, Cope, Oberski, and Shand examined engagement from both the teachers and the students’ perspective. One interesting finding from their work was how teachers “responses suggest more concern with evaluating the ways in which the children are carrying out the tasks or the intensity of their work than their connection with the substantive content” (Stephen, Cope, Oberski, & Shand, 2008, p. 21-22). The teachers questioned in the study were “rely[ing] on body language to make relatively high level inferences about the nature of children’s participation in pedagogical activities” (Stephen, Cope, Oberski, & Shand, 2008, p. 21). Looking back on my time in classrooms, that is how I have gaged a class’s involvement with an activity or lesson. Body language is a very accessible way to gage a classes participation with an activity.

Another interesting point from the research is how “teachers judged children to be engaged in learning when they were looking at, talking to or listening to the adult, [or] working on a task given to them by the adult” (Stephen, Cope, Oberski, & Shand, 2008, p. 21). This is a very teacher-focused way of looking at student engagement. I wonder how this lens can be turned around to become more student or learning centred? Instead of focusing on whether or not the student is paying attention to “ME” – the “ME” being the teacher – maybe we should be asking, “Are the students focusing on what they need to be learning?” I feel that is a more inclusive approach to have when evaluating a class’s engagement and participation. Although teacher directed learning is an important part of teaching, perhaps measuring engagement another way could be more inclusive to learning.

Stephen, Cope, Oberski, and Shand’s research also highlights the importance of fun and enjoyment in a classroom. When reflecting on their own engagement, students gave “teachers a much less central place than the responses from the adults” (Stephen, Cope, Oberski, and Shand, 2008, p. 23). They found that children were much more interested in activities that they perceived as play. In my observations I have seen math become a more engaged lesson through math games – the students are learning the concepts through a fun and different way. I am really starting to see the importance of play in a classroom, especially in primary grades. If you’re enjoying yourself, you become more involved – that goes for anyone, anywhere. As I move forward in my own educational journey, I am looking forward to learning how to create opportunities that allow students to explore choices and have some realm of freedom with their learning.

Source: Stephen C, Cope P, Oberski I & Shand P (2008) ‘They should try to find out what the children like’: Exploring Engagement in Learning, Scottish Educational Review, 40 (2), pp. 17-28.

What about small steps? Tools for scaffolding participation.

Inquiry, Inquiry Resources Leave a comment

Scaffolding

As our extended practicum gets closer and closer, I am starting to look at strategies for participation. In Morcom and MacCallum’s 2012 article, they examine how to increase participation through scaffolding. There are many reasons for a student’s lack of participation. The strategies suggested by Morcom and MacCallum provide support for students whether their participation is halted due to social, emotional, or developmental reasons.

One issue that Morcom and MacCallum’s work emphasizes is classroom safety. The teacher they observed “provided the scaffolds for boundaries for behavior that established the classroom climate and created psychological safety for participation” (Morcom & MacCallum, 2012, p. 1328). “Psychological safety” was created through routine communication in the form of a “daily social circle” that was centered around a class talking-stick (Morcom & MacCallum, 2012, p. 1329). I think talking circles are an excellent tool that teachers can use to create respectful, participatory spaces where students feel safe. One way to scaffold participation in talking circles is to allow students to pass when it is his or her turn. During my time so far in the BEd program at UBC, I have participated in my fair share of talking circles and I still continuously became nervous as the talking stick gets closer and closer to my turn. Being able to pass the talking stick takes some of the pressure off and makes participating active and selective as opposed to forced. Reinforcing that there is nothing wrong with passing is also important. Making these talking circles routine in a class also allows for more opportunities to try again. Morcom and MacCallum comment on how the “predictability of the [talking circles] allowed students to feel at ease participating to the level they desired” (2011, p. 1329).

Morcom and MacCallum also discussed group work and participation. Looing back at my time spent in classrooms, I have not yet facilitated much group work. I imagine, for some students, participating in a small group would be easier than participating in front of the class as a whole. Some fantastic and inclusive group activities were suggested such as “creating an animal or imaginary creature to reflect group interests, decorating a group shoe box, [and] choosing a group name and creating a logo” (Morcom & MacCallum, 2011, p. 1329). All of these activities have great potential for inspiring pride within the students. I am looking forward to experimenting with group dynamics in the future and hope to see its effects on participation.

As I have engaged more and more with literature on classroom participation, an underlying theme is starting to become clear: safety. In order to make the effort to actively participate, whether its by answering a question in front of the class, going above and beyond on a project, or just staying focused when other are not, students have to feel that they are safe. I consider a classroom a safe place when students are not worried about judgement, ridicule, and are free from anxiety. When these values are in place, participation can grow and develop and improve classroom community. I will end with one final quote from Morcom and MacCallum that I feel eloquently summarizes the process of scaffolding classroom community and participation…

“The process of raising awareness and a group consciousness to teach students how to care and support each other took time and a personal investment and commitment for all, including the teacher, who positioned herself as a learner.” (Morocco & MacCallum, 2011, p. 1332).

Source: Morcom, V. E., & MacCallum, J. A. (2012;2011;). Getting personal about values: Scaffolding student participation towards an inclusive classroom community. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(12), 1323-1334.