Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom-Based Practices

Journal of Engineering Education, Jan 2005 by Smith, Karl A, Sheppard, Sheri D, Johnson, David W, Johnson, Roger T

ABSTRACT

Educators, researchers, and policy makers have advocated student involvement for some time as an essential aspect of meaningful learning. In the past twenty years engineering educators have implemented several means of better engaging their undergraduate students, including active and cooperative learning, learning communities, service learning, cooperative education, inquiry and problem-based learning, and team projects. This paper focuses on classroom-based pedagogies of engagement, particularly cooperative and problem-based learning. It includes a brief history, theoretical roots, research support, summary of practices, and suggestions for redesigning engineering classes and programs to include more student engagement. The paper also lays out the research ahead for advancing pedagogies aimed at more fully enhancing students' involvement in their learning.

Keywords: cooperative learning, problem-based learning, student engagement

I. INTRODUCTION TO THE PEDAGOGIES OF ENGAGEMENT

Russ Edgerton introduced the term "pedagogies of engagement" in his 2001 Education White Paper [1], in which he reflected on the projects on higher education funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts. He wrote:

"Throughout the whole enterprise, the core issue, in my view, is the mode of teaching and learning that is practiced. Learning 'about' things does not enable students to acquire the abilities and understanding they will need for the twenty-first century. We need new pedagogies of engagement that will turn out the kinds of resourceful, engaged workers and citizens that America now requires."

Prior to Edgerton's paper, the widely distributed and influential publication called The Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education [2] stressed pedagogies of engagement in concept. Three of the principles speak directly to pedagogies of engagement, namely, that good practice encourages student-faculty contact, cooperation among students, and active learning.

More recently, the project titled The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) [3] deepens our understanding of how students perceive classroom-based learning, in all its forms, as an element in the bigger issue of student engagement in their college education. The NSSE project conceives that student engagement is not just a single course in a student's academic career, but rather a pattern of his or her involvement in a variety of activities. As such, NSSE findings are a valuable assessment tool for colleges and universities to track how successful their academic practices are in engaging their student bodies. The NSSE project is grounded in the proposition that student engagement, the frequency with which students participate in activities that represent effective educational practice, is a meaningful proxy for collegiate quality and, therefore, by extension, quality of education. The annual survey of freshmen and seniors asks students how often they have, for example, participated in projects that required integrating ideas or information from various sources, used e-mail to communicate with an instructor, asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions, received prompt feedback from faculty on their academic performance, participated in community-based projects, or tutored or taught other students. Student responses are organized around five benchmarks:

1. Level of academic challenge: Schools encourage achievement by setting high expectations and emphasizing importance of student effort.

2. Active and collaborative learning: Students learn more when intensely involved in educational process and are encouraged to apply their knowledge in many situations.

3. Student-faculty interaction: Students able to learn from experts and faculty serve as role models and mentors.

4. Enriching educational experiences: Learning opportunities inside and outside classroom (diversity, technology, collaboration, internships, community service, capstones) enhance learning.

5. Supportive campus environment: Students are motivated and satisfied at schools that actively promote learning and stimulate social interaction.

Astin's [4] large-scale correlational study of what matters in college (involving 27,064 students at 309 baccalaureate-granting institutions) found that two environmental factors were by far the most predictive of positive change in college students' academic development, personal development, and satisfaction. These two factors-interaction among students and interaction between faculty and students-carried by far the largest weights and affected more general education outcomes than any other environmental variables studied, including the curriculum content factors. This result indicates that how students approach their general education and how the faculty actually deliver the curriculum is more important than the formal curriculum, that is, the content, collection, and sequence of courses.

The assessment study by Light [5, 6] of Harvard students indicates that one of the crucial factors in the educational development of the undergraduate is the degree to which the student is actively engaged or involved in the undergraduate experience; this is consistent with Astin's work [4]. Astin and Light's research studies suggest that curricular planning efforts will reap much greater payoffs in terms of student outcomes if more emphasis is placed on pedagogy and other features of the delivery system, as well as on the broader interpersonal and institutional context in which learning takes place.