1 of 46

Theme 2, Session 1:�Student engagement, participation, and attendance

BMES CoC Educational Summit 2024

​

Round 1�Joshua Kays & Sarah I. Rooney

2 of 46

Goals

  1. Define “participation” and “engagement” in the context of biomedical engineering education.
  2. Identify what barriers instructors experience when trying to engage biomedical engineering students in the classroom.
  3. Identify how instructor strategies to promote student participation and attendance vary by the type of biomedical engineering course.
  4. Discuss how the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impacts their engagement and participation.
  5. Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering.

3 of 46

Goals

  1. Define “participation” and “engagement” in the context of biomedical engineering education.
  2. Identify what barriers instructors experience when trying to engage biomedical engineering students in the classroom.
  3. Identify how instructor strategies to promote student participation and attendance vary by the type of biomedical engineering course.
  4. Discuss how the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impacts their engagement and participation.
  5. Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering.

4 of 46

BMES CoC Educational Summit 2024 Pre-Survey

5 of 46

Poll Everywhere

What does it look like when students are “extremely” engaged in your course? 

​

6 of 46

Table Discussions & Google Doc

How do you 

define “engagement” and “participation” 

in the context of biomedical engineering education? 

Are there aspects unique/specific to BME?

​

Answer here:

https://tinyurl.com/BMEengage1

7 of 46

Classroom engagement & participation

  • Often described in three dimensions

Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004

Redmond et al, Online Learning, 2018

Buechele, S. 2020

8 of 46

Classroom engagement & participation

  • Often described in three dimensions

Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004

Redmond et al, Online Learning, 2018

Buechele, S. 2020

Cognitive

​

  • Thinking critically
  • Metacognitive reflection
  • Justifying decisions
  • Self-regulation

9 of 46

Classroom engagement & participation

  • Often described in three dimensions

Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004

Redmond et al, Online Learning, 2018

Buechele, S. 2020

Cognitive

​

  • Thinking critically
  • Metacognitive reflection
  • Justifying decisions
  • Self-regulation

Behavioral

​

  • Attention and effort in tasks
  • Asking questions, contributing to discussion
  • Expressing agency

​

​

10 of 46

Classroom engagement & participation

  • Often described in three dimensions

Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004

Redmond et al, Online Learning, 2018

Buechele, S. 2020

Cognitive

​

  • Thinking critically
  • Metacognitive reflection
  • Justifying decisions
  • Self-regulation

Behavioral

​

  • Attention and effort in tasks
  • Asking questions, contributing to discussion
  • Expressing agency

​

​

Emotional

​

  • Interest in topic
  • Enjoyment of challenge
  • Sense of belonging
  • Self-confidence
  • Managing expectations

11 of 46

Defining engagement & participation

  • Engagement is “theoretically messy”1,2 and “conceptually hazy”3

1) Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004 2) Wong and Liem, Educational Psychology Review, 2021

3) Reschly and Christenson. Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolutions and future directions of the engagement construct. 2012

4) Krouse K.L Keynote Address 2005 5) Kuh, G. D. ‘Afterword’, Student Engagement in Higher Education, 2008

12 of 46

Defining engagement & participation

  • Engagement is “theoretically messy”1,2 and “conceptually hazy”3
    • Krause (2005): “time, energy, and resources students devote to activities designed to enhance learning at university”
    • Kuh (2008): “participation in educationally effective practices that lead to a range of measurable outcomes”

1) Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004 2) Wong and Liem, Educational Psychology Review, 2021

3) Reschly and Christenson. Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolutions and future directions of the engagement construct. 2012

4) Krouse K.L Keynote Address 2005 5) Kuh, G. D. ‘Afterword’, Student Engagement in Higher Education, 2008

13 of 46

Defining engagement & participation

  • Engagement is “theoretically messy”1,2 and “conceptually hazy”3
    • Krause (2005): “time, energy, and resources students devote to activities designed to enhance learning at university”
    • Kuh (2008): “participation in educationally effective practices that lead to a range of measurable outcomes”
  • Wong and Liem (2021): “students’ psychological state of activity that affords them to feel activated, exert effort, and be absorbed during learning activities”

1) Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004 2) Wong and Liem, Educational Psychology Review, 2021

3) Reschly and Christenson. Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolutions and future directions of the engagement construct. 2012

4) Krouse K.L Keynote Address 2005 5) Kuh, G. D. ‘Afterword’, Student Engagement in Higher Education, 2008

14 of 46

Defining engagement & participation

  • Engagement is “theoretically messy”1,2 and “conceptually hazy”3
    • Krause (2005): “time, energy, and resources students devote to activities designed to enhance learning at university”
    • Kuh (2008): “participation in educationally effective practices that lead to a range of measurable outcomes”
  • Wong and Liem (2021): “students’ psychological state of activity that affords them to feel activated, exert effort, and be absorbed during learning activities”
    • Includes three dimensions of emotional, behavioral, and cognitive

​

​

What about participation?

1) Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004 2) Wong and Liem, Educational Psychology Review, 2021

3) Reschly and Christenson. Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolutions and future directions of the engagement construct. 2012

4) Krouse K.L Keynote Address 2005 5) Kuh, G. D. ‘Afterword’, Student Engagement in Higher Education, 2008

15 of 46

Defining engagement & participation

1) Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004 2) Wong and Liem, Educational Psychology Review, 2021

3) Reschly and Christenson. Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolutions and future directions of the engagement construct. 2012

4) Krouse K.L Keynote Address 2005 5) Kuh, G. D. ‘Afterword’, Student Engagement in Higher Education, 2008

Engagement

​

​

​

Participation

“behavioral”

​

Engagement

​

​

Participation

​

​

Engagement

​

​

Participation

​

16 of 46

Table Discussions

Do our definitions of “engagement” and “participation” consider the diversity of the student population (cultural norms, disabilities, personalities, etc.)? 

​

​

17 of 46

Table Discussions & Google Doc

Review and update if needed your

definitions of “engagement” and “participation” 

in the context of biomedical engineering education, based on literature & considerations of a diverse student population.  

​

​

(Same doc as earlier)

https://tinyurl.com/BMEengage1

18 of 46

Group Brainstorm & Flip Chart

What barriers have you (instructor) experienced when trying to engage biomedical engineering students in the classroom?

​

  • Please share either student-facing barriers or instructor-facing barriers (see right). 
    •  we'll vote on top 3 for each by hand

Instructor 1: lack of training in best practices

Student 1: distracted by phone

Instructor 2: pressure to cover content in lecture-format

Student 2: anxiety in sharing opinion in group setting

Instructor 3: lack of time

Student 3: fear of failure

19 of 46

Theme 2, Session 1:�Student engagement, participation, and attendance

BMES CoC Educational Summit 2024

​

Round 2�Joshua Kays & Sarah I. Rooney

20 of 46

Session 2 Outline

  1. Summarize definitions of “engagement” and “participation” based on last session & lit review
  2. Lit review: attendance
  3. Show survey data attendance/participation policies by course
  4. Q1: Identify how instructor strategies to promote student attendance, participation and engagement vary by the type of biomedical engineering course. [relate to dimensions of engagement]
    1. Provide list of courses in Google doc- work with neighbor to fill in strategies
  5. Q2: Reverse brainstorm: Come up with as many strategies as you can to eliminate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering. [relate to dimensions of engagement]
    • Then flip to recommend strategies to promote student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering. Are there strategies unique to BME?
    • Each table uses flip charts for brainstorm, then document reverse in Google doc?
    • 1 scribe/moderator on flip chart, 1 scribe on Google doc
  6. Q3: Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering. Are there strategies unique to BME? Relate to the dimensions of engagement.
    • Table discussions with assigned roles: notetaker, discussion lead/time keeper? Add notes to shared Google doc? Create 3 columns with dimensions [add definitions/summaries to doc as reminder]
  7. Q4: How/Do our evaluation strategies consider the diversity of the student population (cultural norms, disabilities, personalities, etc.)? -- no time for this?
    • Table discussions with assigned roles: notetaker, discussion lead/time keeper? Add notes to shared Google doc?

21 of 46

Goals

  1. Define “participation” and “engagement” in the context of biomedical engineering education.
  2. Identify what barriers instructors experience when trying to engage biomedical engineering students in the classroom.
  3. Identify how instructor strategies to promote student participation and attendance vary by the type of biomedical engineering course.
  4. Discuss how the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impacts their engagement and participation.
  5. Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering.

22 of 46

Goals

  1. Define “participation” and “engagement” in the context of biomedical engineering education.
  2. Identify what barriers instructors experience when trying to engage biomedical engineering students in the classroom.
  3. Identify how instructor strategies to promote student participation and attendance vary by the type of biomedical engineering course.
  4. Discuss how the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impacts their engagement and participation.
  5. Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering.

23 of 46

Classroom engagement & participation

  • Often described in three dimensions

Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004

Redmond et al, Online Learning, 2018

Buechele, S. 2020

Cognitive

​

  • Thinking critically
  • Metacognitive reflection
  • Justifying decisions
  • Self-regulation

Behavioral

​

  • Attention and effort in tasks
  • Asking questions, contributing to discussion
  • Expressing agency

​

​

Emotional

​

  • Interest in topic
  • Enjoyment of challenge
  • Sense of belonging
  • Self-confidence
  • Managing expectations

24 of 46

Defining engagement & participation

  • Engagement is “theoretically messy”1,2 and “conceptually hazy”3
  • Wong and Liem (2021): “students’ psychological state of activity that affords them to feel activated, exert effort, and be absorbed during learning activities”
    • Includes three dimensions of emotional, behavioral, and cognitive

​

​

​

1) Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004 2) Wong and Liem, Educational Psychology Review, 2021

3) Reschly and Christenson. Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolutions and future directions of the engagement construct. 2012

4) Krouse K.L Keynote Address 2005 5) Kuh, G. D. ‘Afterword’, Student Engagement in Higher Education, 2008

​

Engagement

​

​

Participation

​

25 of 46

Individual Review & Poll EV

Review last session's

definitions of “engagement” and “participation” 

in the context of biomedical engineering education. 

Vote on your favorite definitions in PollEV.

​

https://tinyurl.com/BMEengage1

Read definitions here

26 of 46

Attendance linked to outcomes

  • True across disciplines
    • Psychology1, engineering2 (see right), and meta-analysis3 (below)

​

​

​

​

Overall GPA across >1000 eng. students. Data from Durfee et al 2012 ASEE

  1. Chenneville and Jordan, Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2008
  2. Durfee et al, ASEE 2012 3) Crede et al, Review of Educational Research, 2010

27 of 46

Attendance linked to outcomes

  • True across disciplines
    • Psychology1, engineering2, and meta-analysis3

​

  • However, effect size often relatively weak
    • Mandatory attendance policies show weak effect (Cohen’s d ~ 0.2)3
    • Few studies control for student motivation and engagement
  1. Chenneville and Jordan, Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2008
  2. Durfee et al, ASEE 2012 3) Crede et al, Review of Educational Research, 2010

4) Elmore, M.A. ASEE 2013

Data adapted from a large intro to engineering class, Elmore 2013

28 of 46

Attendance linked to outcomes

  • True across disciplines
    • Psychology1, engineering2, and meta-analysis3

​

  • However, effect size often relatively weak
    • Mandatory attendance policies show weak effect (Cohen’s d ~ 0.2)3
    • Few studies control for student motivation and engagement

​

  • Effect moderated by engagement5
  1. Chenneville and Jordan, Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2008
  2. Durfee et al, ASEE 2012 3) Crede et al, Review of Educational Research, 2010

4) Elmore, M.A. ASEE 2013 5) Buechele, S. 2020

Data adapted from a large intro to engineering class, Elmore 2013

29 of 46

BMES CoC Educational Summit 2024 Pre-Survey

30 of 46

Partner Work & Google Doc

Identify how instructor strategies to promote student attendance, participation, and engagement vary by the type of biomedical engineering course.

​

https://tinyurl.com/BMEengage1

(Same doc as before �- scroll to part B)

31 of 46

Table Discussions & Google Doc

Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in BME, related to the dimensions of engagement.

[1 notetaker & 1 discussion lead/time keeper]

Tables 1-2 focus on cognitive

Tables 3-4 on behavioral

Remaining tables focus on emotional

​

​

​

​

https://tinyurl.com/BMEengage2

New document – scan here or use link

32 of 46

Please sit at numbered tables

33 of 46

Theme 2, Session 1:�Student engagement, participation, and attendance

BMES CoC Educational Summit 2024

​

Round 3�Joshua Kays & Sarah I. Rooney

34 of 46

Session 3 Outline

  1. Show survey data on whether instructors assess their students’ motivations
  2. Lit review: motivation (and its impacts on engagement? With particular emphasis on BME if available)
  3. Q1: How might the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impact their engagement and participation? (break down into separate questions of what their motivations might be and then their impacts?)
    1. Could do rolestorming? Define archetypes and brainstorm from that perspective?
  4. Summarize definitions of “engagement” and “participation” based on first session & lit review
  5. Q2: Provide participants with brainstormed lists of strategies to evaluate [and/or promote?] participation & engagement in BME from Session 2. Have tables review lists and add anything missing. Are there strategies unique to BME?
    • Table discussions adding to existing shared Google doc
  6. Q3: How/Do our evaluation strategies consider the diversity of the student population (cultural norms, disabilities, personalities, etc.)? What biases should be considered?
    • Table discussions with assigned roles: notetaker, discussion lead/time keeper? Add notes to shared Google doc?
    • Could do rolestorming? Define archetypes and brainstorm from that perspective?
  7. Q4: Prioritize the strategies to evaluate [and/or promote?] engagement based on their time commitment/ease of implementation & efficacy.
    • PollEv priority matrix? (individual responses)
    • Josh take stab at Likert-type questions on policy and engagement training
  1. Discuss how the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impacts their engagement and participation.
  2. Recommend strategies to promote and evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering.

35 of 46

Goals

  1. Define “participation” and “engagement” in the context of biomedical engineering education.
  2. Identify what barriers instructors experience when trying to engage biomedical engineering students in the classroom.
  3. Identify how instructor strategies to promote student participation and attendance vary by the type of biomedical engineering course.
  4. Discuss how the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impacts their engagement and participation.
  5. Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering.

36 of 46

Goals

  1. Define “participation” and “engagement” in the context of biomedical engineering education.
  2. Identify what barriers instructors experience when trying to engage biomedical engineering students in the classroom.
  3. Identify how instructor strategies to promote student participation and attendance vary by the type of biomedical engineering course.
  4. Discuss how the diversity of students' motivations for entering the field of biomedical engineering impacts their engagement and participation.
  5. Recommend strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering.

37 of 46

Classroom engagement & participation

  • Often described in three dimensions

​

​

​

​

​

  • Hard to define, but a popular one: “students’ psychological state of activity that affords them to feel activated, exert effort, and be absorbed during learning activities”  (Wong and Liem, 2021)

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Fredricks et al, Review of Educational Research, 2004

Redmond et al, Online Learning, 2018

Buechele, S. 2020

Cognitive

​

  • Thinking critically
  • Metacognitive reflection
  • Justifying decisions
  • Self-regulation

Behavioral

​

  • Attention and effort in tasks
  • Asking questions, contributing to discussion
  • Expressing agency

​

​

Emotional

​

  • Interest in topic
  • Enjoyment of challenge
  • Sense of belonging
  • Self-confidence
  • Managing expectations

38 of 46

Review last session's #1 definitions of “engagement” and “participation” in the context of BME education.  

​

Engagement: Commitment to the learning outcomes and purpose of the course. Commitment to the team. Going above and beyond what is required of the course. Demonstrate curiosity (maybe the unique part of BME). It may look like helping others to understand the content. Engagement requires more back and forth between student and instructor. Requires a level of care. Students who are engaged in teams take ownership over the decision-making.

​

Participation: A measure of student involvement, both inside and outside the classroom, with the material and other students

39 of 46

Students’ motivation influences their engagement.

1) Ambrose et al. How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, 2010

2) Wong and Liem, Educational Psychology Review, 2021

What we might see as “engagement”

How do we align students’ and instructors’ goals?

40 of 46

Students are motivated when they see value, believe they can succeed, and have a supportive environment.

Ambrose et al. How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, 2010

41 of 46

BMES CoC Educational Summit 2024 Pre-Survey

42 of 46

Table Discussions & Google Doc

  1. What are some of the different student motivations for entering the biomedical engineering field? 

​

  1. How does the diversity of students' motivations impact their engagement and participation? 

​

​

​

https://tinyurl.com/BMEengage3

43 of 46

Table Discussions & Google Doc

Review last session's strategies to evaluate student participation and engagement in biomedical engineering. Add anything that's missing. 

Also consider: Do our evaluation strategies consider the diversity of the student population (cultural norms, disabilities, personalities, etc.)? What biases should be considered?

[1 notetaker & 1 discussion lead/time keeper]

​

​

​

https://tinyurl.com/BMEengage2

44 of 46

Final task: survey

Take this 3-question survey about your background with student engagement strategies.

​

​

​

http://www.udel.edu/0012139

45 of 46

Potential difficulties

  • Shallow response
    • Example: “I dont have time to work on engagement strategies”
      • Ask for examples
      • Challenge assumptions: “so I’m hearing that you feel this would take more time, BUT….”
      • Redirect
  • Cyclical conversations
    • Response: steering the convo/orienting the space

​

46 of 46

Two-tiered

  • Proposed by Wong and Liem, 2021 Educational Psychology Review