Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Engagement in a Disengaged Age


Published on

The popular media tells us that we live in an age of disengagement. 21st century professors are told they need to design curriculum to support student success and create an engaging classroom whether it is face-to-face, online, or in a blended learning environment. Creating engaging learning environments with technology will be essential to embrace 21st century learners and their ever evolving learning styles. Information Technology is dedicated to this philosophy and embraces varying technologies and learning concepts with other institutions and with our own faculty to generate innovation with technology and learning engagement in tandem. Information Technology invites the Stevens community to explore how educators can use some of the tools such as apps, clickers, open education resources, mobile learning, collaborative learning platforms from Google Hangouts to Massive Open Online Courses, and embrace the engagement strategies of social media

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Engagement in a Disengaged Age

  1. 1. Engaging Studentsin an Age of DisengagementKen Ronkowitz
  2. 2. Dis/Engagement ResearchSocial Media EngagementDesign ToolsStudentExpectationsMOOC
  3. 3. en·gage /enˈgāj/ verbTo occupy, attract, or involve (someones interest orattention); Cause someone to become involved (in aconversation or discussion)
  4. 4. Gallup: As students age, they disengageExplanations for theburn out:- focus on standardizedtesting- standardized curricula- lack of experientialand project-basedlearning- lack of pathways forstudents who do notwant to go on to college
  5. 5. Gallup’s research suggests that America’s currentpublic system of education & workforce preparationfalls short of college and career readiness targets.Only 3% of Americans “strongly agree” that today’shigh school dropout is ready for the working world.With a high school diploma, that number onlyincreases to 4%. And in colleges…Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll : Public Attitudes Toward the Public Schools
  6. 6. Beginning College Survey of StudentEngagement and the Faculty Surveyof Student Engagement 2012
  7. 7. • First-year college students spent an average of 15 hoursper week preparing for class; seniors averaged 15.5 hours.– Those earning grades of A or A- studied about 4 hours moreper week compared to their first-year peers with grades of C+or lower.• In most fields, full-time seniors devoted about one to twohours less to class preparation than faculty expected.• When asked how much they believe students actuallystudy, faculty estimates in all fields fellshort of student accounts by five to eighthours per week.
  8. 8. • On average, distance education students spent about onehour more per week preparing for class than their on-campuscounterparts.• Attitudes toward seeing benefits from college werecomparable regardless of how engaged students had been inhigh school.• Job opportunities were cited by the majority of seniorsamong the factors motivating their choice of major, but thisvaried by racial/ethnic background and field of study.– Seniors majoring inscience, technology, engineering, and math were morelikely than others to cite job opportunities as a motivatingfactor.
  9. 9. And at work…
  10. 10. Gallup Daily tracking seriesconducted since 2010 to exploreAmerican workers engagement levelsshows majority of American workersnot engaged in their jobs• Highly educated andmiddle-agedemployees among theleast likely to beengaged• 71% of Americanworkers are "notengaged" or "activelydisengaged" in theirworkFaculty are employees too, so…
  11. 11. And yet…
  12. 12. The Social Media FunnelActionTrustEngage
  13. 13. Social Media Engagement InequalitySource: Jakob Nielsen
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16. MOOC Engagement Inequality90% read content but complete < 2 assignments/tests10-15% complete coursework & are engaged in discussionsDo we need toredefine “lurkers” andengagement in theMOOC environment?
  17. 17. Disruption: MOOC Massive Open Online Courses have been getting substantialrecent attention. But future histories of education will likelyonly note them as a harbinger of change or transitional stepinto an educational model that is organized around learning. In most cases, MOOCs operate on a grand scale but use atraditional format in which a faculty member (or two) isresponsible for most aspects of course design, delivery, andassessment. (known as xMOOC) The real threat to traditional higher education embraces amore radical vision that removes faculty from theorganizational center and uses cognitive science to organizethe learning around the learner. And such models exist
  18. 18. design toolsfor ENGAGEMENT
  19. 19. Whatknowledge andcontent isshareableand/or open toinput?1Determineappropriateonline spacesand channelsAssess uniqueattributes andculture of eachsocial mediaspace2Developparticipationopportunities3Designing Online Engagement – Social MediaCreate anengagementcalendarAdaptable toeducation?
  20. 20. 6 learning designsthat encourage engagement
  21. 21. Begin with objectives, goals, desired results (more under TOOLS)Beginning with the end - backwards design
  22. 22. backwardsdesigncan be helpfulfor technologyadoption
  23. 23. project-based learningproblem-based learningteam-based learning
  24. 24. real-worldassignmentschallenges
  25. 25. A focus on problem solving
  26. 26. inquiry
  27. 27. a studio environment
  28. 28. National Programs
  29. 29. NGTM.netSince 1969, faculty seminars for a rationalanalysis of instructional problems and todevelop realistic, creative approaches andsolutions that address those specific problems.For example:moving F2F classes  hybrid online  MOOC
  30. 30. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation• Completion by Design works with community collegesin 5 states to increase completion and graduationrates for low-income students under 26 years old.• The Next Generation Learning Challenges providesinvestment capital totechnologists, institutions, educators, andentrepreneurs to bring promising technologysolutions to pre-college students for college andcareer readiness through college and secondaryschool partnerships.
  31. 31.
  32. 32. tools tech & teacher
  33. 33. At its best, curriculum drives technology useNot curriculum driven by technology
  34. 34. Embedded technology
  35. 35. Wikis for collaborationBlogs for real audiencesClickers for interactionGoogle (Apps, Plus, Hangouts) andSocial Networks for all of the above
  36. 36. Teachers embracing digital toolsIn (and out) of the classroom
  37. 37. Less C More NIn curriculum design by teachers…
  38. 38. Teachers providinga global audienceAnd connected(networked) learning
  39. 39. teachers as facilitators of learning
  40. 40. providing authentic (real world) assessments
  41. 41. and, when possible, a customizedlearning experience (not out of the publisher’s box)
  42. 42. mobileAs tool of engagementrather than method of disengagement
  43. 43. F2F , Online, HybridHow do the tools vary?
  44. 44. Student[employer?]Expectationsbased on atechnologyrich lifestyle
  45. 45. always on these expectations tend to overlap others
  46. 46. alwaysconnected
  47. 47. global collaboration and
  48. 48. an authentic audience (beyond faculty &classmates)
  49. 49. interaction is expectedfaculty:student student:student student:world
  50. 50. Social learning elements
  51. 51. customizable learning experiences instruction versus learning options
  52. 52.
  53. 53. so…• Can educators hijack social mediaengagement design and tools foracademic engagement?• Can we meet studentexpectations withinacademic objectives?• Can we (re)designcurriculum usingpedagogy thatencourages engagement?• How does engagementdiffer F2F, online, in hybridand MOOC settings.
  54. 54. Ken on Twitter