1. Webinar: What Is Student Engagement and How Do We Measure It? March 27, 2014

2. WebEx Instructions 2

3. WebEx instructions Attendees can provide non- verbal feedback to presenters utilizing the Feedback tool. 3

4. WebEx instructions Feedback options: 4

5. WebEx instructions Responses to poll questions can be entered in the Polling Panel. Remember to click “Submit” once you have selected your answer(s). 5

6. WebEx instructions Attendees should utilize the “Q&A” feature to pose questions to the speaker, panelists, and/or host. The host will hold all questions directed toward the speaker or panelists, and they will be answered during a Q&A session at the end of each discussion. 6

7. Welcome and Overview Lydotta M. Taylor, Ed.D. Research Alliance Lead, REL Appalachia The EdVenture Group

8. Agenda 1.Welcome and Overview What is a REL? REL Appalachia’s Mission Introductions and Webinar Goals 2.What Is Student Engagement? 3.Measuring Student Engagement 4.Using Student Engagement Data 5.Q&A 6.Wrap-up 7.Stakeholder Feedback Survey 8

9. What is a REL? A REL is a Regional Educational Laboratory. There are 10 RELs across the country. The REL program is administered by the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (IES). A REL serves the education needs of a designated region. The REL works in partnership with the region’s school districts, state departments of education, and others to use data and research to improve academic outcomes for students. 9

10. What is a REL? 10

11. REL Appalachia’s mission Meet the applied research and technical assistance needs of Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Conduct empirical research and analysis. Bring evidence-based information to policy makers and practitioners: – Inform policy and practice – for states, districts, schools, and other stakeholders. – Focus on high-priority, discrete issues and build a body of knowledge over time. http://www.RELAppalachia.org Follow us! @REL_Appalachia 11

12. Introductions and Webinar Goals Lydotta M. Taylor, Ed.D. Research Alliance Lead, REL Appalachia The EdVenture Group 12

13. Speaker Jerry Johnson, Ed.D. Associate Professor College of Education and Human Services University of North Florida 13

14. Webinar goals Introduce participants to the construct of student engagement. Increase participants’ understanding of the research around student engagement, and how it can be measured. Provide participants with best practices and tools that can increase student engagement in their schools and classrooms. 14

15. What Is Student Engagement and How Do We Measure It? Jerry Johnson, Ed.D. Associate Professor, University of North Florida

16. What is student engagement? Student engagement has been defined variously by different researchers and theorists, but there is consistency around key ideas. A broad conceptual definition that reflects those varied perspectives: Student engagement is a measure of the extent to which a student willingly participates in schooling activities. There is consensus among researchers and theorists that student engagement is a multidimensional construct with four elements: – Academic engagement. – Affective engagement. – Behavioral engagement. – Cognitive engagement. 16

17. What does existing research say about student engagement? Student engagement is closely associated with desirable schooling outcomes (higher attendance, higher academic achievement, fewer disciplinary incidents, lower dropout and retention rates, higher graduation rates). (Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008; Finn, 1989, 1993; Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004; Jimerson, Campos, & Grief, 2003; Jimerson, Renshaw, Stewart, Hart, & O’Malley, 2009; Shernoff & Schmidt, 2008) Student engagement is closely associated with general measures of well- being (lower rates of health problems, lower rates of high-risk behaviors). (Carter, McGee, Taylor, & Williams, 2007; McNeely, Nonnemaker, & Blum, 2002; Patton et al., 2006) Student engagement levels can be effectively influenced through school- based interventions. (Appleton, Christenson, Kim, & Reschly, 2006; Christenson et al., 2008; Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004) 17

18. Poll: Familiarity with measures of student engagement Please take a moment to answer this poll question. Check your response and then click on “Submit.” 18

19. Report on 21 instruments to measure student engagement Measuring student engagement in upper elementary through high school: a description of 21 instruments 19

20. Overview of the report Stated purpose of the report Content and structure Definitions, instrument types, psychometric properties Instrument abstracts Tables for comparing instrument attributes (e.g., developer/availability, engagement dimensions assessed, intended purposes/uses) Potential uses for stakeholders Accessing the report http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southeast/pdf/REL_2011098.pdf http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southeast/pdf/REL_2011098.pdf 20

21. How is student engagement measured? Three primary data collection strategies are available for measuring student engagement: Student self-reports. Teacher reports. Observational measures. Three dimensions of engagement are assessed via available instruments: Behavioral (i.e., the student’s involvement in academic, social, and extracurricular activities). Affective/emotional (i.e., extent of the student’s positive [and negative] reactions to teachers, classmates, academics, and school). Cognitive (i.e., the student’s level of investment in his/her learning). Note: Academic engagement is measured using traditional outcome data, such as student achievement results. (Fredericks et al., 2011) 21

22. What are the intended uses of these measures? Research purposes: Research on motivation and cognition. Research on dropping out. Evaluation of interventions. Diagnosis and monitoring: Teachers, school, or district level. Student level. Needs assessment. (Fredericks et al., 2011) 22

23. Highlighting three measures of student engagement The three measures of student engagement we are about to discuss were selected for this session because they: – Represent the three types of student self-report instruments available (unidimensional, bidimensional, and multidimensional). – Demonstrate strong psychometric properties. – Are explicitly linked to the extant research on factors associated with student success. – Are designed for use in reporting school and/or district level results. 23

24. Highlighting three measures of student engagement 1.Identification with School Questionnaire (ISQ): Student self-report survey; developed using a sample from grade 8. Measures affective/emotional engagement (unidimensional). Designed for use with research on dropping out; evaluation of class size interventions; and evaluation of magnet school interventions. 16 items; approximately 15 minutes to complete. 24

25. Highlighting three measures of student engagement 2.Student Engagement Instrument (SEI): Student self-report survey; designed for grades 6‒12. Measures affective/emotional and cognitive engagement (bidimensional). Designed for use with research on dropping out; evaluation of dropout prevention interventions; monitoring engagement levels at the teacher, school, or district level; and diagnosing/monitoring at the student level. 33 items; approximately 15 minutes to complete. 25

26. Highlighting three measures of student engagement 3.High School Survey of Student Engagement (HSSE): Student self-report survey; designed for grades 9‒12. Measures behavioral, affective/emotional, and cognitive engagement (multidimensional). Designed for use in monitoring engagement levels at the teacher, school, or district level. 121 items; approximately 30 minutes to complete. 26

27. How are these measures used by school districts? Background: Understanding engagement as a continuum: Dropping out of school is not an event but a process. Engagement can be understood as a marker for where a student is on the continuum from dropping out to being fully engaged/successful (including measures of college and career readiness). (Appleton et al., 2008; Jimerson et al., 2009; Sinclair, Christenson, Evelo, & Hurley, 1998; Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow, 2005) Applied use of student engagement measures by schools and school districts: Needs assessment and targeting of interventions at the classroom, school, and district levels. Needs assessment and targeting of interventions at the student level. (Christenson et al., 2008) 27

28. REL AP work with stakeholders on student engagement Proposed REL Appalachia technical assistance project: Using Student Engagement Survey Data to Inform School-wide Programs and Strategies. Kentucky: Participating school districts will attend a one-day workshop to identify an appropriate instrument (from those described in Measuring student engagement in upper elementary through high school: a description of 21 instruments) and to build capacity with regard to survey administration. School district will collect data and submit to REL Appalachia. REL Appalachia staff will analyze the data and prepare school data memos. REL Appalachia will then host a debriefing workshop to share/discuss results, help identify appropriate interventions, and assist in planning next steps. West Virginia: The state will be using its own survey instrument, with REL Appalachia staff conducting analyses, preparing data memos, and facilitating the debriefing workshop. 28

29. Wrap-up and Closing Remarks Stakeholder Feedback Survey Lydotta M. Taylor, Ed.D. Research Alliance Lead, REL Appalachia The EdVenture Group

30. Stakeholder Feedback Survey access information Please visit https://checkbox.cna.org/StudentEngagement.aspx to provide feedback on today’s webinar event. 30