This document discusses engagement in the L2 classroom. It begins by defining engagement as the active involvement of students in learning activities according to Reeve (2012). There are four types of engagement: behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic. Engagement is important because it is tied to academic achievement, well-being, success, and flourishing. The document then discusses various instructional approaches and frameworks that can be used to investigate practices, teacher characteristics, and contextual features that promote or hamper student engagement.

1. Engaging Ideas for the
L2 Classroom
Brent A. Jones
Konan University, Hirao School of Management

2. Where are we going?
Defining Engagement
Types of Engagement
So what?
How do we get there?
My Study (IF we have time)

4. Recognizing Engagement
How many examples of engagement were there?

5. Defining Engagement
Go ahead . . .
Write down your definition and share with a
partner

6. Defining Engagement
Reeve (2012) borrows from Wellborn (1991) to
describe engagement as, ‘the extent of a student’s
active involvement in a learning activity.’
The three most-commonly cited dimensions of
engagement are behavioural, emotional and
cognitive engagement.

7. Defining Engagement
Reeve (2012) proposes adding agentic engagement (i.e.
the extent to which a learner tries to enrich a learning
experience rather than passively receiving it as is).
Conceptually, this type of engagement is a process where
learners, ‘proactively try to create, enhance, and
personalize the conditions and circumstances under which
they learn.’
Together, these four perspectives provide a more
complete framework for judging how actively involved
a learner is in a learning activity (Reeve, 2012).

8. Types of Engagement
Nystrand and Gamoran (1991) distinguish
Procedural engagement (roughly corresponding to
behavioral) from Substantive engagement
(including both psychological and cognitive), the
later describing students committed to academic
study.

9. Types Engagement
Behaving (participating in classroom activities and following
school rules),
Enjoying (being interested in and enjoying participation in what
happens at school),
Being Motivated (being motivated and confident in participation in
what happens at school),
Thinking (being involved in thinking),
Seeing Purpose (purposefully learning to reach life goals), and
Owning (owning and valuing learning).
Harris, 2008

10. So what?
Go ahead . . .
Write down why you think learner engagement is
important and share with a partner

11. So what?
Learner engagement is now recognized as being
closely tied to both academic achievement and
overall well-being (e.g., self-esteem & sense of
belonging). Increased or deeper levels of
engagement lead to greater success at school and
can help learners flourish in their various
endeavours.

12. So what?
Today, knowledge forms a major component of all human activity,
and human (intellectual and social) "capital" has become the
foundation for accessing and being able to make genuine
personal choices about social, political and economic
opportunities. In this context, all young people need to learn to use
their minds well through deep engagement in learning that reflects
skills, knowledge and dispositions fit for their present lives as well
as the ones they aspire to in the future. More than ever, their
health and well being, success in the workplace, ability to
construct identities and thrive in a pluralistic society, as well as
their sense of agency as active citizens, depend on it.(Dunleavy
and Milton, 2009, pg. 10)

13. How do we get there?
Instructional Design Organiser (Bopry, 2005)
Mantle of the Expert approach (Zeeman & Lotriet)
Three-level approach to design (Bahji, Lefdaoui &
El Alami, 2013)
Online, problem-based, science inquiry (Harmer &
Cates, 2007)

15. My Study
What instructional practices promote or hamper
learner engagement?
What teacher characteristics promote or hamper
learner engagement?
What contextual features work in favour or against
teachers’ efforts to engage learners?

16. Framework for my investigation
Reeve, 2012 (extension of Ryan & Deci)

17. References
Appleton, J., Christenson, S. & Furlong, M. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and
methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369-386.
Baert, P. (2002). Pragmatism versus sociological hermeneutics. In J. Lehmann (Ed.) Critical theory: Diverse
objects, diverse subjects (pp. 349-365). Bingly, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Bahji, S. E., Lefdaoui, Y. Y., & El Alami, J. J. (2013). Enhancing motivation and engagement: A top-down
approach for the design of a learning experience according to the S2P-LM. International Journal Of Emerging
Technologies In Learning, 8(6), 35-41.
Bopry, J. (2005). Levels of experience: An exploration for learning design. Educational Media International,
42(1), 83-89.
Bopry, J. & Hedberg, J. G. (2005). Designing encounters for meaningful experience, with lessons from J.K.
Rowling. Educational Media International, 42(1), 91-105.
Dunleavy, J. & Milton, P. (2009). What did you do in school today? Exploring the concept of student
engagement and its implications for teaching and learning in Canada. Toronto: Canadian Education
Association (CEA), 1-22.
Fredericks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C. & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state
of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.
Harmer, A. & Cates, W. (2007). Designing for learner engagement in middle school science: Technology,
inquiry, and the hierarchies of engagement. Computers in the Schools, 24(1-2), 105-124.

18. References
Harris, L. R. (2008). A phenomenographic investigation of teacher conceptions of student engagement
in learning. The Australian Educational Researcher, 5(1), 57-79.
Nystrand, M. & Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional discourse, student engagement, and literature
achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(3), 261-290.
Parsons, J. & Taylor, L. (2011). Student Engagement: What do we know and what should we do? AISI
University Partners, Edmonton: Alberta Education. Retrieved May, 2015 from
http://education.alberta.ca/media/6459431/student_engagement_literature_review_2011.pdf
Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. Christenson,
A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149-172). New
York: Springer.
Wellborn, J. (1991). Engaged and disaffected action: The conceptualization and measurement of
motivation in the academic domain (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Rochester,
Rochester.
Wimpenny, K., & Savin-Baden, M. (2013). Alienation, agency and authenticity: A synthesis of the
literature on student engagement. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 311-326.
Zeeman, E., & Lotriet, M. (2013). Beyond the expected: An enriched learning experience through
learner engagement and participation. Teaching In Higher Education, 18(2), 179-191.