Studying Triggers for Interest and Engagement Using Observational Methods

Abstract

In this article, we discuss the contribution of observational methods to understanding the processes involved in triggering interest and establishing engagement. We begin by reviewing the literatures on interest and engagement, noting their similarities, differences, and the utility to each of better understanding the triggering process. We then provide background information about observational methods and a case illustration of their use in a post hoc analysis of observation records collected during an out-of-school biology workshop.In conclusion, we consider the advantages and limitations of observational methods. We suggest that they can offer unique insight into the triggering process. In the post hoc analysis, this includes information about multiple, co-occurring triggers for interest and variation in responses to triggers based on learner characteristics. It is acknowledged that observational methods are not sufficient, but they are necessary; they provide essential detail, especially for understanding the triggering process.

Advanced, Analytic, Automated (AAA) Measurement of Engagement During Learning

“…Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris (2004) proposed three components of engagement. Emotional engagement encompasses feelings and attitudes about the learning task or learning context, such as feelings of interest towards a particular subject, teacher (Renninger & Bachrach, 2015), or general satisfaction about school. Behavioral engagement broadly refers to learners’ participation in learning, including effort, persistence, and concentration.…”

“…Observational methods are an attractive alternative to self- and informer-reports because they are arguably more objective (Nystrand & Gamoran, 1991; Pianta, Hamre, & Allen, 2012; Renninger & Bachrach, 2015; Ryu & Lombardi, 2015; Volpe, DiPerna, Hintze, & Shapiro, 2005). Unfortunately, these methods entail considerable human effort, which might not be a major limitation for small scale studies, but poses a significant challenge for repeated long-term measurement at scale.…”

Daily interest, engagement, and autonomy support in the high school science classroom

“…Indeed, interest has long been argued to be an important predictor of students' engagement, learning, and achievement (e.g. Dewey, 1913;Hidi & Harackiwicz, 2000;Schiefele, 2009;Renninger & Bachrach, 2015).…”

A person‐in‐context approach to student engagement in science: Examining learning activities and choice

“…While the dimensions are not completely independent from one another, certain dimensions may be activated to a greater extent than others for certain students or in certain learning situations. Multiple researchers have discussed, for example, that it is possible for a student to be behaviorally engaged in learning without being engaged affectively and/or cognitively (Renninger & Bachrach, 2015;Sinatra et al, 2015). The various ways in which these dimensions of engagement combine in science learning has not been systematically explored.…”

“…This speaks to the notion that certain learning conditions in science will be more likely to trigger engagement in particular domains (Renninger & Bachrach, 2015). It is useful for educators to understand these conditions as they represent concrete ways they might be able to influence their students' engagement in science.…”