Exploring Instructors’ Practices in Student Engagement: A Collective Case Study
Main Article Content
Abstract
Instructors use various strategies to improve learning. To explore what instructors perceived as critical aspects of engaging instruction, we conducted a qualitative case study with seven instructors in the United States. Data was collected through individual face-to-face interviews. The conversations were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. The analyses of the transcriptions were conducted using the constant comparative method. Findings from the study varied. Yet, participants agreed that an engaging instructor must focus on learning; consider various aspects of students’ personal development including their cognitive, social, and emotional development; and take care of different student learning styles, for example, visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. Participants stressed the importance of student engagement. Body language, verbal and non-verbal cues, and eye contact were the main parameters used by the participants to evaluate student engagement. Participants also emphasized the importance of asking questions and assessing instructional effectiveness by evaluating the questions asked by students.
Downloads
Article Details
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Agbetsiafa, D. (2010). Evaluating effective teaching in college level economics using student ratings of instruction: A factor analytic approach. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(5), 57-66.
Anderson, H. M., Moore, D. L., Anaya, G., & Bird, E. (2005). Student learning outcomes assessment: A component of program assessment. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 69(1-5), 256-268. doi.org/10.5688/aj690239
Arghode (2012). Role of empathy in instruction. Global Education Journal, 2012(3), 128-143.
Arghode (2013). Emotional and social intelligence competence: Implications for instruction. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 8(2), 66-77. doi.org/10.5172/ijpl.2013.8.2.66.
Arghode, Yalvac, B., & Liew, J. (2013). Teacher empathy and science education: A collective case study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 9(2), 89-99. doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.921a
Arghode, V., & Wang, J. (2016). Exploring trainers’ engaging instructional practices: A collective Case study. European Journal of Training and Development, 40(2), 111 – 127. doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-04-2015-0033
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.
Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Burke, L. A., & Rau, B. (2010). The research-teaching gap in management. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(1), 132-143. doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2010.48661196
Cashin, W. E., & Downey, R. G. (1995). ‘Disciplinary differences in what is taught and in student’s perceptions of what they learn and of how they are taught. In M. Theall & J. Franklin (Eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, (no. 64). San Francisco. Jossey-Bass.
Cook-Sather, A. (2010). Making spaces to learn. Curriculum Inquiry, 40(2), 281-294. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2010.00482.x
Cotgrave, A. J., & Kokkarinen, N. (2011). Promoting sustainability literacy in construction students. Structural Survey, 29(3), 197-212. doi.org/10.1108/02630801111148185
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007005
Dunlap, J. C., & Lowental, P. R. (2010). What's your best learning experience? What students' stories tell us about engaging teaching and learning. American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.
Efstathiou, N., & Bailey, C. (2012). Promoting active learning using audience response system in large bioscience classes. Nurse Education Today, 32(1), 91-95. doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2011.01.017
Eljamal, M. B., Sharp, S., Stark, J. S., Arnold, G. L., & Lowther, M. A. (1998). Listening for disciplinary differences in faculty goals for effective thinking. Journal of General Education, 47(2), 117-148.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72. doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00605.x
Farag, D. M., Park, S., & Kaupins, G. (2015). Faculty perceptions of the adoption and use of clickers in the legal studies in business classroom. Journal of Education for Business, 90(4), 208216. doi:10.1080/08832323.2015.1014459
Fernandes, S., Mesquita, D., Flores, M. A., & Lima, R. M. (2014). Engaging students in learning: Findings from a study of project-led education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 39(1), 55–67. doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2013.833170
Fink, L. D. (2007). The power of course design to increase student engagement and learning. Peer Review, 9(1), 13-17.
Frederick, P. (2004). The power of student stories: Connections that enhance learning. Teaching Excellence: Toward the Best in the Academy, 16(2), 1-2.
Fried, J. (2013). Engaged learning: Why feelings matter. About Campus, 18(1), 2–8. doi.org/10.1002/abc.21105
Gasiewski, J. A., Eagan, M. K., Garcia, G. A., Hurtado, S., & Chang, M. J. (2012). From gatekeeping to engagement: A multicontextual, mixed method study of student academic engagement in introductory STEM courses. Research in Higher Education, 53(12), 1-33. doi.org/10.1007/s11162-011-9247-y
Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436-445. doi.org/10.2307/798843
Goldstein, G. S., & Benassi, V. A. (2006). Students’ and professors’ beliefs about excellent lecturers and discussion leaders. Research in Higher Education, 47(6), 685-707. doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9011-x
Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2002). What is instructional design? In R. A. Reiser, & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 17-25). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184-192. doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192
Hativa, N., & Birenbaum, M. (2000). Who prefers what? Disciplinary differences in students' preferred approaches to teaching and learning styles. Research in Higher Education, 41(2), 209236. doi.org/10.1023/A:1007095205308
Hudson, B. (2002). Holding complexity and searching for meaning: Teaching as reflective practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(1), 43-57. doi.org/10.1080/00220270110086975
Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214-222. doi.org/10.5014/ajot.45.3.214
Kuh, G. D. (2007). What student engagement data tell us about college readiness. Peer Review, 9(1), 4-8.
Laird, T. F. N., Chen, D., & Kuh, G. D. (2008). Classroom practices at institutions with higher‐ than‐expected persistence rates: What student engagement data tell us. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2008(115), 85-99. doi.org/10.1002/tl.327
LeCouteur, A., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2001). Repertoires of teaching and learning: A comparison of university teachers and students using Q methodology. Higher Education, 42(2), 205-235. doi.org/10.1023/A:1017583516646
Lillie, R. E., Ed D., Liu, X., & Kang, G. (2011). Creating and maintaining Instructor/Student connection between class meetings: The use of eyejot-A video messaging technology. American Journal of Business Education, 4(10), 11-16. doi.org/10.19030/ajbe.v4i10.6058
Lindblom-Ylanne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A., & Ashwin, P. (2006). How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 285-298. doi.org/10.1080/03075070600680539
Lucas, A. (2009). Using peer instruction and I-clickers to enhance student participation in calculus. Primus: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 19(3), 219-231. doi.org/10.1080/10511970701643970
Lueddeke, G. R. (2003). Professionalizing teaching practice in higher education: A study of disciplinary variation and 'teaching-scholarship'. Studies in Higher Education, 28(2), 213-228. doi.org/10.1080/0307507032000058082
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153-184. doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153
Martin, E., Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., Ramsden, P., & Benjamin, J. (2000). What university teachers teach and how they teach it. Instructional Science, 28(5), 387-412. doi.org/10.1023/A:1026559912774
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 187-198. doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.187
McCuddy, M. K. (2008). Using student feedback in designing student-focused curricula. The International Journal of Educational Management, 22(7), 611-637. doi.org/10.1108/09513540810908548
Merriam, S. B. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2012). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2006). Re-conceptualizing emotion and motivation to learn in classroom contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 377–390. doi.org/10.1007/s10648006-9032-1
Minor, L. C., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Witcher, A. E., & James, T. L. (2002). Preservice teachers' educational beliefs and their perceptions of characteristics of effective teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 96(2), 116-127. doi.org/10.1080/00220670209598798
Neuman, G. A., Edwards, J. E., & Raju, N. S. (1989). Organizational development interventions: A Meta‐Analysis of their effects on satisfaction and other attitudes. Personnel Psychology, 42(3), 461-489. doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1989.tb00665.x
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). A typology of student engagement for American colleges and universities. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 185-209. doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-1599-0
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Ranson, S., Martin, J., Nixon, J., & McKeown, P. (1996). Towards a theory of learning. British Journal of Educational Studies, 44(1), 9-26. doi.org/10.1080/00071005.1996.9974055
Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101-109. doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.2.101-109
Rocca, K. A. (2010). Student participation in the college classroom: An extended multidisciplinary literature review. Communication Education, 59(2), 185-213. doi.org/10.1080/03634520903505936
Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. The American Economic Review, 94(2), 247-252. doi.org/10.1257/0002828041302244
Smeby, J. (1996). Disciplinary differences in university teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 21(1), 69-79. doi.org/10.1080/03075079612331381467
Smimou, K., & Dahl, D. W. (2012). On the relationship between students' perceptions of teaching quality, methods of assessment, and satisfaction. Journal of Education for Business, 87(1), 22-35. doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2010.550339
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 443-467). Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage.
Stark, J. S. (1990). Disciplinary differences in course planning. Review of Higher Education, 13(2), 141-165. doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1990.0025
Sutton, R. E., & Wheatley, K. F. (2003). Teachers' emotions and teaching: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 15(4), 327-358. doi.org/10.1023/A:1026131715856
Swanson, B. L., Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (2005). Qualitative research methods. Doing action research in your own organization (2nd ed., pp. 88-113). London: Sage.
Swanson, R. A. (2001). In Giley J. W. (Ed.), Assessing the financial benefits of human resource development [New perspectives in organizational learning, performance, and change]. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.
Swap, R. J., & Walter, J. A. (2015). An approach to engaging students in a large-enrollment, introductory STEM college course. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 15(5), 1–21. doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v15i5.18910
Thalheimer, W. (2003). The learning benefits of questions. Somerville, MA: Work Learning Research.
Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37(1), 57-70. doi.org/10.1023/A:1003548313194
Umbach, P. D., & Wawrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 153-184. doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1
Wang, J. & Roulston, K. J. (2007). An alternative approach to conceptualizing interviews in HRD research. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 18(2), 179-210. doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1199
Wolk, S. (2008). Joy in school. Educational Leadership, 66(1), 8-15.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (1997). The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17(508), 191-210.