Capstone Final Report

Running head: STUDENT ENGAGEMENT ONLINE LEARNING MODULE 1
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

MONTEREY BAY
Student Engagement Online Learning Module for EPI, LLC Consulting
CAPSTONE Report
Submitted in partial satisfaction of requirements of the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE in
Instructional Science and Technology
Bobbie Kirkpatrick
December 6, 2017
Capstone Approvals: (At least one advisor and capstone instructor should approve)
______________________________ _____________
Advisor Name Signature Date
______________________________ _____________
Capstone Instructor Name Signature Date
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT ONLINE LEARNING MODULE 2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Background............................................................................................................................................... 4
Problem..................................................................................................................................................... 4
Target Audience ....................................................................................................................................... 6
Environmental/Literature Scan ................................................................................................................. 7
Solution Description ....................................................................................................................... 9

Goals/Objectives/Solutions ...................................................................................................................... 9
Learning Theories and Instructional Principles ...................................................................................... 12
Instructional Strategies ........................................................................................................................... 15
Media Components ................................................................................................................................. 17
Challenges .............................................................................................................................................. 17
Methods......................................................................................................................................... 18
Instructional Process Model ................................................................................................................... 18
Procedures .............................................................................................................................................. 20
Resources ...................................................................................................................................... 21
Materials ................................................................................................................................................. 21
Instructional Materials and Strategies Developed .................................................................................. 22
Technical Skills Required ....................................................................................................................... 23
Timeline ........................................................................................................................................ 23
Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................... 24
Participants ............................................................................................................................................. 24
Formative Evaluation ............................................................................................................................. 26
Summative Evaluation............................................................................................................................ 32
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 36
References ..................................................................................................................................... 38
Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 39
A: Caseys 2015 Student Engagement Advanced Organizer for Live Seminar ..................................... 39
B: Usability Survey ................................................................................................................................ 50
Executive Summary
Roy Casey of EPI, LLC is a cognitive coach that provides professional development
opportunities to a range of different schools. Casey currently holds a contract with Winters Joint
Unified School District, where there is a substantial need for effective teaching practices. The
school is consistently scoring below the standards and scores have not been increasing.
Multiple different staff members at this school, as well as other schools, to provide his
professional development in online platform, have approached Casey. Casey realized that
teachers are not able to always attend live professional development seminars due to time
constraints. In the conversations Casey has had with a host of different teachers, most of them
would like an opportunity to go back through the seminar on their own time and pace. Casey has
not previously created an online learning module, though, his consulting company has received
an increasing demand for online content.
As part of the California State University, Monterey Bay, Masters in Instructional
Science and Technologys Capstone Project, the instructional designer developed an online
professional development module utilizing a learning management system. This online learning
module concentrated on student engagement to meet the needs of Winters Joint Unified School
District and EPI, LLC. This online module centered on defining student engagement and the
three attributes of student engagement.
The content of this module was delivered via Canvas Instructure to six participants.
Formative assessments were employed to assess the projects usability. The usability survey also
provided insight to suggestions for improvement of the course. A summative assessment was
utilized to ensure effectiveness of the course. The summative assessment results were compared
to the participants pre-assessment scores at the start of the course. After data analysis, it was
determined that the Student Engagement Online Learning Module was successful in a learning
occurrence.
This module is considered the trial run for the remainder of Caseys professional
development modules. By developing and implementing this online student module, Winters
Joint Unified School District should experience an increase of student engagement. Additionally,
EPI, LLC should experience an increase of demand of professional development services,
concentrating on student engagement.
Introduction
Background
Academic scores at Winters Joint Unified School District show that students
(stakeholders) are consistently scoring below grade level in English language arts and
mathematics. Teachers, instructional coaches, and administrators (all target audience) have
shown interest in changing their teaching strategies to meet the needs of their students. The Local
Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) for Winters Joint Unified School District for the 2016-2017
school year includes a goal to provide high quality instruction for their students. Access to
Winters Joint Unified School Districts LCAP report can be found through the districts website,
http://www.wintersjusd.org/. The first step in providing high quality instruction is to provide
professional development centered around high quality instruction, such as student engagement.
In Caseys observations of teachers at three different schools under Winters Joint Unified School
District, it is clear that teachers are lacking the skills they need to effectively engage students.
Roy Casey of EPI, LLC was hired by Winters Joint Unified School District for the 2016
2017 and 2017 2018 school years to provide professional development. This professional
development will improve teachers effectiveness, which will improve academic scores. This
professional development will also increase the instructional coaches understanding of student
engagement for more effective coaching. Due to the time constraints of teachers, instructional
coaches, and administration, it has been requested by multiple different customers of EPI, LLC
that the content of at least student engagement be available via internet.
Problem
Roy Casey, owner of EPI, LLC, has been providing his consulting services to a number
of schools for the last 10 years. In the 2015 2016 and 2016 2017 school years, Casey was
contracted with six different schools district throughout Northern California and Nevada. Staff
from all six of the schools requested that content be made available online. Prior to 2015, Casey
had also received multiple requests for content to be made available online. Casey reports that
many of the staff members that he has worked with, love the opportunity to learn, practice in
the classroom and school, and then to revisit their original learning online, (Casey, 2016). All of
the schools that Casey was previously and currently contracted to have requested this content to
be made available online.
There is a need for professional development centered around student engagement
strategies. Research clearly states those students who are engaged in their learning are more apt
to make more connections to the content and learning process. Student engagement directly
affects student achievement levels. According to Heather Voke of ASCD.org, student
engagement also affects students motivation levels and can promote a higher quality of learning
(Voke, 2002). Without teachers fully knowing and understanding the implications of student
engagement, they are doing a disservice to the students and themselves. According to Casey,
without teachers knowing and implementing this highly effective practice, teachers cannot move
forward with student learning. Furthermore, teachers will not rate above satisfactory on their
yearly performance evaluations (Casey, 2016). The performance gap is ascribed to the teachers,
administrators, and coaches lack of knowledge and skill in this content area. Once teachers,
administrators, and coaches are informed and provided examples of effective student
engagement, there will be an increase of student engagement and achievement in Winters Joint
Unified School District.
Casey is currently working with Winters Joint Unified School District in Winters,
California. There are four schools within this district: two Winters Elementary Schools, Winters
Middle School, and Winters High School. While observing teachers at these schools in 2016,
teachers were not using student engagement strategies or making engagement mandatory in their
classroom (Casey, 2016). In turn, their student achievement scores are suffering. Winters Joint
Unified School District performs below state average on the California Assessment of Student
Performance and Progress (CAASPP) state assessment. The following data has been provided by
the California Department of Education CAASPP website.
Table 1
2015 and 2016 CASSPP Test Results
*Percents represent percent of students performing at standard or exceeding standard
ELA Math
2015 2016 2015 2016
State Average 44% 49% 33% 37%
District 29% 35% 21% 25%
Elementary 28% 37% 26% 34%

Middle 23% 31% 16% 19%
High 56% 58% 23% 25%
Source: California Department of Education: caaspp.cde.ca.gov
Winters Elementary School and Middle School are clearly below the state average on the
CAASPP English language arts assessment. All four schools are performing below the state
average on the CAASPP mathematics assessment. Casey reported that the school district board
was not pleased with the schools performance and sought out professional development around
effective teacher practices at the beginning of the 2016-2017 school year (Casey, 2016).
By implementing an online seminar centered on student engagement, the level of student
engagement strategies would increase at Winters Joint Unified School District. Student
engagement strategies would be observable on walk-throughs by Casey and the instructional
coaching staff. With an increase in student engagement strategies, the number of students
meeting or exceeding standards on the CAASPP assessment would increase. The percentage of
students that are performing at or above grade level standards should continue to grow in the
2017-2018 school year and be observable in the CAASPP assessment scores.
Presently, EPI, LLC charges $1,500 to $2,500 per day, which typically includes beginner
and advanced seminars. For one seminar session, the cost is $350 per hour. According to Casey,
there is an increasing demand for professional development focused on effective teaching
practices. In creating an online seminar, Casey noted that initially the costs are extensive (Casey,
2016). As the online seminar becomes available, there will be more availability and accessibility
for clients to contract with EPI, LLC. This would result in more customers, with a higher
monetary return that would offset the initial costs. Casey decided to start with a single online
seminar, focused on one specific content area, student engagement. This project is the trial for
the remainder of the effective practices.
Target Audience
Winters Joint Unified School District is located in Winters, California, west of
Sacramento. This school district serves approximately 1,500 students between four different
schools. Casey is working with 89 teachers, five instructional coaches, six site administrators,
and two district office administrators (Casey, 2016). The entire staff currently holds a Bachelors
degree or higher. As of September 2017, there are 37 teachers that have taught for five years or
less, eight teachers that have taught six to ten years, 17 teachers that have taught for 11 to 15
years, 13 teachers that have taught 16 to 20 years, and 19 teachers that have taught over 21 years.
It should be noted that instructional coaches are included as part of the teaching staff. According
to Caseys initial observations and seminars, learners are eager and willing to learn. Casey
reports that all of the teachers at this school site are computer literate and interested in learning
about effective teaching practices. In an informal survey, over half of the teachers surveyed said
they would be interested in an online seminar. As noted in the Problem section, it is clear that
teachers in Winters Joint Unified School are lacking effective practices, specifically with student
engagement strategies. There is a deficit of knowledge. According to Caseys observations, not
one teacher used an effective engagement strategy and teachers did not make engagement
mandatory for the students.
The target audience for this online seminar are learners who are computer literate and
willing to learn about student engagement. This course is best fit for a new teacher, who has
taught five years or less, as the content provided is based off of a beginner level seminar. The
online seminar is applicable to any teacher from kindergarten to twelfth grade. Specific grade
levels and content areas are not limited. No prerequisite skills or knowledge are required before
accessing this course as it is presented at beginner level, based on the needs of Winters Joint
Unified School District.
Environmental/Literature Scan
EPI, LLC consulting firm is owned and operated by Roy Casey. Casey has held a variety
of different educational positions including teacher, instructional coach, principal, and
superintendent. Casey holds a Masters in Education and has been trained by WestEd,
specifically in the Teach4Success Effective Teacher Practices curriculum. He is well versed in
using technology as an educational tool. In addition, Casey hosts a variety of resources. In
designing and creating an online seminar, Casey was the subject matter expert (SME) and
provided a vast majority of the curriculum used in the online seminar. Casey provided a
supportive and reflective environment.
Casey resides in Carson City, Nevada, which is approximately two hours away from the
instructional designers location. This was a small obstacle for face-to-face collaboration. Both
sides, client and instructional designer, worked together and kept effective communication via
phone, email, and text messages. There was only one time in which travel was required to meet
face-to-face to design the online seminar. Another obstacle arose was the fact that the
instructional designer had to rely heavily on Caseys information. Thankfully, the instructional
designer had previously taken Caseys Student Engagement live seminar and was able to access
background knowledge. The instructional designer was not able to observe Winters Joint Unified
School District teaching practices. Therefore, clear, open communication was key for the design
of this project.
In doing a search of the internet, there are a variety of articles, books, and blogs that
promote the use of student engagement, particularly in the K-12 classroom. Edutopia, a website
and an online community, hosts a large portion of these articles and blogs regarding student
engagement. In one particular article, New Study: Engage Kids with 7x the Effect by Todd
Finely, there are five major benefits to student engagement. These benefits include increased
academic achievement, perseverance through challenges, higher scores on standardized tests,
improved social skills, and students are less likely to drop out of school (Finely, 2015). Another
website that is of value to the content of this online seminar is ASCD.org. There are an
assortment of articles and professionals that have provided information regarding student
engagement. With these websites and others, there was an abundance of literature available to
provide evidence and content regarding student engagement. However, there are minimal
articles, websites, and online professional development that supports promoting and maintaining
effective student engagement in the classroom.
A search for importance of student engagement in Google Scholar resulted in
approximately 82,400 results, after the year 2015. A search for increase student engagement
performed using Google Scholar resulted in approximately 71,900 results, after 2015. In
searching for specific strategies such as think-pair-share, wait time, and group management, a
variety of articles also surface. Particular articles like, Using Think-Time Behaviors to
Promote Students Information Processing, by Robert Stahl and The 80/20 Principle, The
Secret to Achieving More with Less, by Richard Koch appear. A plethora of articles are offered.
Not one specific article or document was pulled from, but rather pieces from multiple different
articles and documents were complied. Along with Caseys resources, their information was
utilized in the development of this online seminar.
The search for an online seminar focused solely on student engagement produced
minimal results. In the first five pages of the Google search results, no online seminars stand out
that focus specifically on student engagement. There is a wide selection of online professional
development courses that educators can use, but none that are immediately apparent that
concentrate specifically on three attributes of student engagement. Online modules are found that
concentrate on online student engagement: boosting student engagement with eLearning.
However, not one website or module was found that provides an online seminar or professional
development that concentrates on student engagement in a classroom setting. Based upon prior
observations, participants at Winters Joint Unified School District need to start at the basics of
effective teaching: student engagement.
Casey had already developed a majority of the instructional content that was used for the
online seminar. The content was based on research proven methods and from Caseys training
through WestEd. For the live seminars that Casey already provides, he created an advanced
graphic organizer for participants to use. This advanced graphic organizer was integrated into the
online seminar. Casey also uses the advanced graphic organizer as a way to check for
participants understanding as well. Portions of this 18-page advanced graphic organizer were
used in the creation of the online module (Appendices: A). In Caseys live seminars, he teaches
using the effective teaching practices and models using engagement strategies with the
participants. Due to the content being in an online environment, the use and modeling of
strategies were supplemented with a variety of videos. Videos were created to demonstrate and
model the use of student engagement and engagement strategies. Casey did not have videos
available. Videos were developed that specifically address content areas. Additionally, a Google
Slides presentation was created as a resource to the module.
Solution Description
Goals/Objectives/Solutions
Roy Casey of EPI, LLC provides face-to-face seminars focusing on instructional
strategies that support teachers to be proficient and effective in the classroom setting. An online
learning module was needed to meet the needs of the teachers who are unavailable during the
school hours to attend professional development and those that would like to review the course
again. Additionally, having an online learning module provides content to more customers.
The online module focuses solely on student engagement for this project, specifically the
three attributes of student engagement. A variety of instructional strategies are used to ensure
engagement of the online learner. Videos, forums, discussion postings, check for understandings,
as well as a variety of articles are utilized during this seminar. At the end of this online seminar,
the learner would be able to list the three attributes that must be present in order to ensure that
students are engaged in their learning. The learner would be able to recognize each of these
three attributes when given a written scenario and a classroom video. There are on-going
formative assessments that allow the learner the opportunity to assess their newly acquired
knowledge and skill sets. Finally, the online module includes a summative assessment. The
summative assessment was compared to the pre-assessment performed at the beginning of the
course. Data from the pre- and post-assessment were compared. The results of the online seminar
will be measured by classroom observations during informal and formal evaluations. However,
due to time constraints of the project, the classroom observations are outside of the scope of this
project.
Table 2
Student Engagement Online Module Objectives
Topic/Task Objective
Lesson 1
What is student engagement? Objective 1
From memory, participants will select
the three attributes of student
engagement from a list.
Objective 2
Given a question stem, participants
will identify whose responsibility it is
to elicit student engagement from
memory.
Objective 3
Given four options, participants will
specify the "standard" of measure of
engagement in the classroom.
Lesson 2
First attribute of student Objective 1
engagement: directing students When given ten different examples,
to be engaged in the academic participants will classify between
learning activity. overt and covert engagement
strategies with 80% accuracy.
Objective 2
After viewing a video demonstrating
the first attribute of student
engagement, participants will identify
three out of the five actions the teacher
did that directed all students to be
engaged in academic learning.
Lesson 3
Second attribute of student Objective 1
engagement: directs all student When given seven scenarios of teacher
to participate in the academic statements, participants will determine
learning activity at the same if all students have been directed to be
time. engaged in academic learning at the
same time with 85% accuracy.
Objective 2
After viewing a video demonstrating
the second attribute of student
engagement, participants will select at
least two teacher behaviors that direct
all students to be engaged at the same
time, selecting from a list of teacher
behaviors.
Lesson 4
Third attribute of student Objective 1
engagement: make student When given five scenarios,
engagement mandatory. participants will analyze the scenarios
to determine if student engagement
has been made mandatory for all
students with 80% accuracy.
Objective 2
Given 13 scenarios, participants will
determine if student engagement was
made mandatory and all students were
directed with 80% accuracy.
Assessment
Summative assessment of Objective 1
student engagement. After completing four lessons of the
online module, participants will
determine which attribute of student
engagement is being used when given
a scenario.
Objective 2
From memory, participants will select
the three attributes of student
engagement from a list.
Objective 3
Given a question stem, participants
will identify whose responsibility it is
to elicit student engagement from
memory.
Objective 4
Given four options, participants will
specify the "standard" of measure of
engagement in the classroom.
Learning Theories and Instructional Principles

Cognitive learning theory supports the instructional design of the online learning module
and lessons. For each teacher, instructional coach, and administrator to participate in this
professional development, they must access their schema and experiences with classroom
settings. Frederick Bartless, as cited in Learning and Instruction: Theory into Practice, defined
schema as an active organization of past reactions that is assumed always to be operating in an
individuals response, (Bartless, as cited in Gredler, 2009). In order for the participant to create
meaning, connections to their schema must be made. New learning should be meaningful to the
participants in order to transfer new knowledge from short-term memory to long-term memory,
(Mergel, 1998). Throughout the module, various tasks ask the learner to reflect on their own
teaching and consider ways to implement aspects of student engagement in their own classroom.
By prompting the participant to apply their new learning in their current environment, the
likelihood of retention and application of new skills would increase.
Behavioral models support the instructional design as well. This instructional design does
not just focus on imitating behaviors that use the effective student engagement strategies. In
regards to the social-cognitive learning theory, Gredler states participants can abstract a range
of information from observing the behavior of others, and make decisions about the behaviors to
adopt and enact, (Gredler, 2009). Multiple videos are included as part of this instructional
design. These videos give the learners an opportunity to observe behaviors, then to make
decisions about which aspects and behaviors they would like to use for their own teaching and
student engagement. B. F. Skinner explains, Learning is not doing, it is changing what we do,
(Gredler, 2009). Initially, imitating behaviors that elicit student engagement would be beneficial,
but then the behaviors should start coming from within the participants based on their personal
decisions. An effective online module prompts participants to change their behaviors in their
classrooms with regard to student engagement strategies. To encourage the change in behaviors,
reinforcement must be given throughout the online module, as well as in informal observations
performed by Casey, instructional coaches, and administrators. As noted in Gredlers book,
Skinner heeds that reinforcement will strengthen and increase the frequency of the behavior
change (Gredler, 2009).
Robert Gagn published Conditions of Learning that must be achieved in order for
learning to take place. Greg Kearsly from InstructionalDesign.org, with regards to Gagns
Conditions of Learning, states, For cognitive strategies to be learned, there must be a chance to
practice developing new solutions to problems; to learn attitudes, the learner must be exposed to
a credible role model or persuasive arguments, (Kearsly, 2015). Gagn mentions that human
learning is complex and the learners are diverse, (Gredler, 2009). To promote the participants
diverse learning and necessity for practice, a variation of practice problems were implemented
throughout the online module. Additionally, Gagns research promotes the use of prerequisite
knowledge in order to progress into higher learning (Gredler, 2009). In connection to Gagns
research, David Ausubel supports direction instruction that supports and fosters meaningful
learning. In order to do this, instruction should link new ideas and concepts to the students
existing knowledge through advance organizers, (Gredler, 2009). Participants must have prior
knowledge in classroom environments and providing instruction to students. To promote the
connection of their prior knowledge, various tasks in the course ask the participants to reflect on
the teaching demonstrated on their own teaching. Referencing their prior knowledge in the online
module benefits the outcome of the participants. Gagns Conditions of Learning is an influence
to the design of the online learning module.
Lev Vygotskys research of cognitive development has a considerable impact on the
course. Vygotskys Zone of Proximal Development must be kept in mind throughout the course.
Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is the distance between the learners actual developmental
level and the level of potential development with assistance from peers or an instructor
(Vygotsky, 1978). The instruction of this course must fall within the ZPD of the target audience.
The course is not over simplified, but it is also not above the learners developmental level. As
noted previously, though this course is not withheld from any participants, the course is targeted
to those who have been teaching for five years or less. The ZPD and experience level of these
participants must be reached. Pre-assessments are implemented prior to the course to determine
the ZPD. In addition to the various other theories that mention the significance of imitation,
Vygotsky notes that the behavior to be imitated should fall within the ZPD. The basic path in
the individuals mastery of his or her behavior is imitation, (Gredler, 2009). In the creation of
the various videos used in this course, the instructional designer was focused the ZPD level of
the participants (teaching for five years or less). Also, in filming scenes for the videos, to
promote imitation, the skill or strategy being implemented was presented to be attainable to the
participants.
Albert Banduras social-cognitive theory continues to promote imitation and reproduction
of the observable characteristics. According to Gredler, Banduras social-cognitive theory
consists of three assumptions: 1) the learning process requires both cognitive processing and
decision-making skills, 2) learning is a three-way interlocking relationship with the
environment, personal factors, and behavior, and 3) learning results in the acquisition of verbal
and visual codes of behavior that may or may not be performed later, (Gredler, 2009).
Throughout the online module, learners are able to practice the content and strategies that are
being presented and determine which engagement strategy would be best for implementing in
that setting. An assortment of scenarios is offered to participants to allow them to determine the
different attributes of student engagement being implemented or best to be implemented.
Further, the environment online, as well as the environment at school, must be one to foster
putting student engagement strategies into practice. Online, the environment is presented just as
an instructor is talking to the participant. At the school, instructional coaches and administrators
must support the use of the online module and allow teachers time to practice and receive
feedback. Bandura notes the importance of feedback and consequences. The consequences of
behavior are essential to learning in social-cognitive theory, (Gredler, 2009). Constructive
feedback is given throughout the online module. Additionally, participants must understand the
benefits of student engagement and the importance in the long run of implementation. New
behaviors cannot be acquired unless the observer attends to and accurately perceives them,
(Gredler, 2009). After showing a video or given a scenario, feedback is given to the participants
to either confirm or refute their thoughts and connections.
All of the previously stated learning theories lead us to, andragogy, commonly referred to
as the adult learning theory. All of the learners participating in this online module are adult
learners. There are five assumptions of andragogy: the learner is self-directed, has life
experiences to pull from, has determined they have learning needs related to changing social
roles, is problem-centered, and is motivated to learn by internal factors (Merriam, 2001). These
learners have different incentives for participating in the module. Some may feel more motivated
by the incentives than others, which can affect the attitudes of the surrounding learners. The
online learning module takes into consideration andragogy. Special attention is paid to
application of skills and providing opportunities to practice. Being an online module, self-
directedness is key to a successful online module experience.
Edwin Guthries Contiguity theory is utilized as part of the instructional strategies. The
Contiguity theory can be defined by, a combination of stimuli which has accompanied a
movement will on its recurrence tend to be followed by that movement, (Culatta, 2015). In
order to be an effective online module, participants have to respond to interactive stimuli in order
to move through the module. Participants must be engaged and actively responding with the
interactivity of the online learning environment. Guthrie also emphasizes that learning must
occur correctly the first time, in order to avoid having to relearn the content (Culatta, 2015). An
effort was made to have the content be presented clearly and to provide practice opportunities to
ensure the participants understanding.
Instructional Strategies
The presentation of the learning module is presented through an online learning
management system (LMS). Organization and sequencing was key to the course of learning. The
Analysis, Design, Develop, Implementation, and Evaluation (ADDIE) model was used as a guide
to the instructional design process. The Analysis phase is included as part of this report. Portions
of the Design phase are also included as part of this report. Furthermore, Robert Gagns Nine
Instructional Events are utilized to address the need of organization and sequencing. The Nine
Instructional Events include gaining attention, stating objectives, activating background
knowledge, presenting a stimulus, giving learning guidance, performing, providing feedback,
assessing performance, and generalizing learning (Gredler, 2009). These Nine Instructional
Events correspond to Gagns Conditions of Learning, providing a connection between learning
theory and instructional strategies. At the beginning of the course, activation of background
knowledge and a stimulus was initiated. Scaffolding can be seen throughout the module. The
later skills that participants learn are based upon the previously learned skills. The module is
constantly built upon each concept. Immediate feedback is provided as participants answer
questions and take quizzes at the end of each lesson.
Dr. Richard Mayers book Multimedia Learning was a valuable tool in the designing of
this online module. Mayer encourages the use of twelve multimedia principles. These principles
include coherence principle, signaling principle, redundancy principle, spatial contiguity
principle, temporal contiguity principle, segmenting principle, pre-training principle, modality
principle, multimedia principle, personalization principle, voice principle, and image principle
(Mayer, n.d.). All twelve principles were implemented during the development of the online
module. For example, the online module is presented in a conversational style text and narration
(personalization principle) and images and narration were utilized (modality principle). Using
Mayers principles ensured that there are no extraneous distractions or obstructions from the
learning.
Instructional strategies that support the social-cognitive learning theory are included as
well. Opportunities for online discussions and blog postings was afforded. Videos are
implemented to provided examples of effective use of engagement strategies. Though this
module was created as an online course, there would also be opportunities to meet with the
cognitive coaches and Casey to discuss any disparities the participants may have. In future
implementation at Winters Joint Unified School District, opportunities will be presented for the
participants to complete this module in a group setting. With this, live discussions between the
participants may occur. Other instructional strategies include, notetaking, checks for
understanding, self-reflections, and as a summative assessment, employing student engagement

in their classroom.
Media Components
The media incorporated in this instructional design is web-based. Computers, tablets, and
smartphones with an internet connection are able to access the content of this module.
Participants can choose to use their own devices or use the school districts devices.
The student engagement module was created in a learning management system (LMS). In
order to minimize costs, the LMS that the SME and instructional designer selected was Canvas
Instructure. Canvas Instructure is a free learning management system that allows instructors to
build their course material. Within the LMS, a variety of other media components are utilized.
Required readings of the module are provided as plain text in the module. Check for
understandings, quizzes, and other feedback are also added to Canvas Instructure. Videos were
created using an iPhone and video editing software. The videos were uploaded to YouTube, then
embedded in Canvas. Interactive tasks, such as answering question during a video, are embedded
in the LMS utilizing PlayPosit. A student engagement checklist was provided as a PDF resource.
Challenges
For many teachers, time is always an issue. This online seminar cannot feel like a burden
to the teaching staff, instructional coaches, or administrators. The online seminar must be a
valued and respected tool to benefit the staff and the school. At Winters Joint Unified School
District, there are a limited number of professional development days throughout the school year.
Due to the continued work to implement effective teaching practices, an additional number of
professional development days may be needed. Teachers would need to be compensated for the
time that this professional development is performed outside of the regularly contracted school
day. The online seminar must be seen as a useful service, rather than a stressful inconvenience.
Finding a learning management system that is affordable, yet effective was a constraint.
The learning management system needed to meet the needs of this online seminar, but also be
cost effective. If the cost of purchasing a learning management system was overwhelmingly
expensive, there would not be a financial benefit to providing this online seminar. Providing this
online seminar through a learning management system must be affordable in order to have
returns on investment. Two prior LMS systems were tested. One did not provide the capabilities
needed for each task that the participants had to complete. The second LMS was far too complex
for the requirements needed. It was more focused on larger, higher education school. The second
LMS also offered a limited time trial before it would cost. Canvas Instructure solved this
challenge. Canvas Instructure was selected as the LMS attributable to there being no additional
cost. However, Canvas did meet all of the needs of this student engagement seminar.
An additional constraint was maintaining participant engagement throughout the online
seminar. This was a challenge due to the fact that the environment for online learning and the
environment for live learning are very different. When this seminar is taught live, the instructor
utilizes and demonstrates the engagement strategies with the participants. The instructor can also
ensure engagement within a seminar. It was discovered in the development of the course,
ensuring participant engagement through an online seminar requires a very organized, succinct,
interactive, and well-written plan. A variety of videos are used to demonstrate the engagement
strategies.
Finally, gaining access to participants to test the course proved to be a challenge. Caseys
schedule and contract with Winters Joint Unified School District is limited. Due to the
instructional designers location and Caseys limited availability, Winters Joint Unified School
District participants were inaccessible. Casey and the instructional designer then decided that it
was best to perform a trial-test before implementation of the module at Winters Joint Unified
School District. Participants had to be volunteers that were unfamiliar with Caseys course on
Student Engagement. Participants were selected from five different schools in Northern
California.
Methods
Instructional Process Model
Gagns Events of Instruction will be implemented as follows:
1. Gaining attention: Invitations to the course were emailed out to participants. As
participants signed on, they were welcomed and the overall goals of the course were
displayed. Next, a pre-assessment was provided. The pre-assessment was used as part of
data collection on the effectiveness of the course. A video then opened the course
showing a classroom with low student engagement comparing to a classroom with high
student engagement. A welcome video, greeting the participants to the course, then starts
the first lesson.
2. Objectives: The goal for the entire course was presented as part of the introduction and
gaining attention. The objectives are presented at the beginning of the individual lessons.
3. Access to Prior Learning: All participants have previous experience in teaching.
Throughout the lessons, checkpoints asked the participants to reflect back to their own
teaching and classroom.
4. Presentation of Content: All content related to the student engagement module was made
available through the LMS. All links, PDFs, text, videos, and assessments are accessible
through the LMS. The module was set up in an organized, sequential manner.
5. Guided Practice: Participants watched videos to identify engagement strategies and
attributes of engagement. After the participants watched the video, feedback was
provided, explaining the correct descriptions of each aspect of student engagement.
Participants are asked to practice what they have learned in their classrooms. With the
availability of instructional coaches on campus, reinforcements should be provided for
future implementation.
6. Individual Practice: A variety of different tasks throughout each lesson prompted
individual practice. Participants are encouraged to continue to practice implementing
different aspects of student engagement in their classroom.
7. Provide Feedback: Feedback was automatically provided on check for understandings
and quizzes. When individual, specific feedback is required in future implementations,
Casey will provide feedback within 24 hours. If participants are not meeting objectives,
Casey will provide more scaffolding to those specific participants.
8. Assessment: Multiple checks for understanding are utilized throughout this module. As a
summative assessment, participants took a final post-assessment at the end of the
module. The post-assessment data was compared to the pre-assessment data. As part of
the final assessment, participants were able to practice identifying the three attributes of
student engagement after watching a short lesson.
9. Enhance Retention: A summative assessment occurs at the end of the module, along with
an application assessment. Casey will still provide his services to this school, regardless
of implementation of the online module, so continuous feedback on application of

student engagement will be provided to participants.
Procedures
In conjunction with Casey, an LMS was selected. A Canvas Instructure account was
activated. Email addresses of the participants were collected. Users were invited to the course via
an email sent though Canvas Instructure. This email provided participants with the course
website and directions for setting up a Canvas Instructure account if they did not have one. Once
participants were logged into the course, they were prompted to start at the Welcome! module.
After being introduced to the course, participants were prompted to take a pre-assessment,
followed by watching a video to gain attention. Objectives and goals are presented at the
beginning of the course, as well as at the beginning of each lesson.
Five lessons were produced:
Lesson 1: What is student engagement? This lesson provided the foundations of
student engagement and the three attributes of student engagement.
Lesson 2: First attribute of student engagement. This lesson informed the
participants that teachers are to direct students to be engaged in the academic learning
activity.
Lesson 3: Second attribute of student engagement. Instruction informed the
participants that teachers are to direct all students to be engaged in the learning at the
same time.
Lesson 4: Third attribute of student engagement. This lesson informed the reader
that teachers are to make student engagement mandatory in a respectful manner.
Closure: The section reviewed the three attributes of student engagement and
provides practice for participants to apply their newly acquired knowledge. This
section also included the summative assessment of the course.
The summative assessment and usability test concluded the module. The summative
assessment scores were compared to the pre-assessment to determine the growth that occurred
with the participants. A reflective written piece allowed the participants to reflect on their
learning throughout the module. This written piece also allowed participants to plan a lesson to
implement the three attributes of student engagement. The usability questionnaire was given for
suggestions and future improvement. The module concluded with a list of resources and
references.
Resources
Materials
According to TD.org, in order to develop one-hour of training, much time is needed to
develop the content. For a highly interactive e-learning course, the low average number of hours
required is approximately 154 hours; the high average number of hours required is
approximately 243 hours (Kapp & Defelice, 2009). These averages were based upon data in
2009. Approximately 175 hours were needed to design and develop this online e-learning
course.
Materials required to produce this project:
Learning management system (LMS): Canvas Instructure (1)
Participant email addresses (1)
iPhone Camera (1)
Students (17: 7th graders)
Teacher to record (1)
Permission slips to record students (17)
Video editing software (2 Filmora/Camtasia)
Google Drive account (1)
PlayPosit account (1)
Personal computer (1)
Devices for participants (1 per participant)
Table 3 provides the costs, as well as the timeline to complete the development of this
project.
Table 3
Development Process Costs and Timeline
Time Frame Step in Development Process EPI, LLCs Costs
September 2017 Finalized and submitted Capstone Proposal No cost to EPI
September 2017 Finalized and submitted Storyboard No cost to EPI

October 2017 Selected and signed up for learning No cost to EPI

management software.
October 2017 Started building the online seminar through the No cost to EPI
LMS.
Began recording videos for online seminar.
November 2017 Continued recording and editing videos for No cost to EPI
online seminar.
November 2017 Finished development of online seminar. $144 to Bobbie

Kirkpatrick (designer)
for PlayPosit account
November At least five users participate in training No cost to EPI
December 2017
December 2017 Data analysis performed to determine No cost to EPI
effectiveness of course.
Project presented to EPI, LLC for review.
January 2018 Implementation of the online training with District cost for
teachers release time with
(Outside of project scope) substitutes or cost for
compensation for
completion of module.
Instructional Materials and Strategies Developed

Casey of EPI, LLC has conducted student engagement seminars previously in live form.
The content for the live seminar has already been created and modified to fit Caseys objectives
for the seminar. The content that has been used in the live seminars was imported into the
learning management system (LMS), Canvas Instructure. To be a truly interactive online course,
the advanced graphic organizer that Casey uses in the live seminars could not just be given to the
participants to read through. This would not have been best practice. Modifications were made to
the live seminar content, such as changing how the content was presented to participants and
adding more discussions and videos for written responses, rather than verbal. The assessments
for each lesson were produced to a quiz format, where immediate feedback was given. Also, for
written answers, the LMS was set up to provide written feedback immediately after submission.
For future implementation, the trainer and SME, Casey, can go through and add specific
feedback. The online session included a variety of videos and examples for the learners to
visualize and internalize what the attributes of student engagement look like, sound like, and feel
like.
Technical Skills Required

The online module is highly interactive, so multiple skills were required of the instructional
designer:
Learning Management System
o Basic functions of LMS
o Quiz creation
o Video embedding
o Creating video interactivity
o Uploading of text
o Activity tools
Filming
Video editing software Camtasia and Filmora
Logo Adobe Photoshop
YouTube
PlayPosit
Timeline
Table 4 provides a timeline for the major deliverables and milestones of the online
module.
Table 4
Timeline for Major Deliverables/Milestones
September 12, 2017 Secured learning management system (LMS)
September 26, 2017 Storyboard finalized
October 30, 2017 Half of the lessons developed on LMS
November 15, 2017 Filming of videos completed
November 10, 2017 All lessons developed
November 20, 2017 Finalize project for use
November 20, 2017 Capstone project completed
December 2, 2017 All assessment results and usability testing complete

December 6, 2017 Capstone final results and project finalized
December 15, 2017 Capstone presentation
Evaluation
Kirkpatricks Four Levels of Evaluation were considered in development of the online
module. Level one and two evaluations of the participants reaction to the course and
understanding of the objectives consist of a survey provided at the end of the course. This survey
can be found in Appendices: B. Data was collected to determine the participants attitude toward
the training, as well as their basic understanding of the content that was covered in the online
seminar. The summative assessment was compared to the participants pre-assessment. Level
three evaluation will be done in the form of an observation. This observation will be performed
after the conclusion of the online seminar. During the observation, the observer will be looking
for how the content has been applied to the learner in their classroom. As mentioned previously,
level three evaluation is outside of the extent of this project due to time constraints and SME
availability. Finally, level four evaluation will be performed in the school years to come. Student
engagement strategies can be implemented and observed in a matter of weeks. However, the
effects of student engagement in the entire Winters Joint Unified School District will take many
months, if not multiple school years. State assessments are only performed in the spring of
school years, so to see how student engagement has effected student test scores will be a matter
of multiple school years. Both formative and summative evaluation was necessary for the
production of the Student Engagement online seminar.
Participants
As aforementioned, the final product could not be piloted with the teaching staff at
Winters Joint Unified School District. For testing of the online seminar, nine educators from
various schools were selected to complete the Student Engagement course. These nine educators
were volunteers and not associated with Winters Joint Unified School District. Of the nine
educators that were invited to complete the course, six were able to fully complete the course
from beginning to end. Three of the educators that were invited were unable to finish the course
due to personal time constraints. These educators came from various levels of experience; four
with classroom experience and two with little to no classroom experience. Of the six participants,
two held Masters degrees, while the remainder of the participants held Bachelors degrees. Ages
ranged from 18 44 years old. Two of the participants identified as males, as four participants
identified as females. Four of the six participants stated that they had not previously completed a
course on student engagement before. Figures 1 3 provide visuals for the demographics of the
participants.
Figure 1: Participant Age Range
Figure 2: Participant Level of Education

Figure 3: Participant Credential Type
Formative Evaluation
In order to view an accurate representation of the participants understanding of the
content, various forms of assessment were used throughout the course. Initially, a pre-assessment
was provided to participants. The pre-assessment was used as a baseline for the participants
understanding of student engagement. Within each lesson, the participants understanding was
assessed in discussion forums, check for understandings, and various practice assignments. All
of these tasks allowed for the course monitor and instructional designer to see the progression of
their understanding. Each of these formative assessments build up to the final summative
assessment.
At the end of the module, participants were asked to completed a short, usability survey.
The usability survey consisted of 12 multiple choice questions and two written response
questions. The survey was presented through Google Forms and embedded into Canvas
Instructure, so participants would not have to leave the current webpage or open another tab.
Google Forms was selected to host the survey to ensure data could be tabulated and organized
properly within a spreadsheet.
All six participants were able to complete the usability survey after completing the
course. Figure 4 presents the questions and results from the usability survey:
Figure 4: Usability Survey Results
Overall, the participants considered the course effective to their learning. As noted in
Figure 4, all participants selected that they would implement student engagement strategies in
their classroom. All but one of the questions, the six participants either strongly agreed or agreed.
The one question that not all participants strongly agreed or agreed to was, The module moved
at an acceptable pace. One participant selected neutral as the response. In reaching out to this
participant, he expressed that some portions of the module felt redundant and the lessons dragged
on. He felt the pace of the module could have moved more swiftly. Though this course was
developed to be an hour-long seminar, three participants spent two hours or more on this module.
Only one participant selected that they had spent under 90 minutes on the course. In speaking to
four of the participants directly, they described the course as more intensive than what it
appeared. For the full implementation of this online module, Casey may want to consider giving
at least two, one-hour periods for the participants to work through the course. If the participants
are working on it outside of contract hours, the school district may want to consider
compensation for at least two hours.
The end of the usability survey invited participants to leave more specific feedback, such
as changes they would make or additional training they might need. Five out of six participants
noted that the fill in the blank portion of the assessments were very specific and particular about
the characters that are entered. For example, a fill in the blank question prompts, It is
the ________ responsibility to plan for and elicit student engagement. The correct response is
teachers. However, if participants input teacher or teachers, the response was automatically
marked incorrect. With this information, the instructional designer will add more options to
accommodate for variation of written responses throughout the course.
Secondly, three of the participants mentioned the navigation of the course. Participants
stated that it was difficult to stop the course and resume. There was not a way for participants to
bookmark. Also, there was no indication of the progress or the lessons that they had
accomplished. For future implementation, this issue needs to be addressed. The instructional
designer was not able to find any settings to modify that would allow participants to see their
progress or indicate where they left off at. This may be a Canvas Instructure (LMS) issue. The
instructional designer should reach out for technical support before the next implementation.
Four of the six participants noted that being observed and having access to observing
more classrooms would be additional training they might need. The participants noted that they
need specific feedback to how they are implementing the student engagement strategies in their
classroom. One participant said that as teachers, they may view themselves teaching and
implementing strategies one way, but to an observer, it may not be seen as effective. Two of the
participants noted that seeing more of a wide variety of classroom examples in the module would
be beneficial. Before implementing the module at Winters Joint Unified School District, the
instructional designer will consider adding additional videos that display more of a variety of
teachers and grade levels to the module. The feedback demonstrates that observations are going
to be a need for the next set of participants. Casey should consider implementing the online
seminar at least a week prior to his arrival at Winters Joint Unified School District. This will
allow Casey to do walk-throughs of the participants that have completed the course. He would
then be able to give those participants specific feedback.
The usability survey was able to provide insight to how the participants viewed the
course and the effectiveness of the course. Suggestions were made by the participants and
considered by the instructional designer. The survey informed the instructional designer to
modifications that needed to be made to the module. Allowing participants to write suggestions
on what could be added to the online seminar proved to be especially important due to the fact
that an online seminar is much different than a live seminar, as addressed in the constraints.
Summative Evaluation
In addition to the on-going, formative assessments, a final summative (post) assessment
was presented to the participants. As mentioned previously, a pre-assessment was presented at
the very start of the module. The pre- and post-assessment consist of the same 15 questions. The
instructional designer chose to have the pre- and post-assessment identical to certify that the
same objectives were being measured, at the same level of difficulty in both assessments.
Additionally, this ensures that the comparison data between the pre- and post-assessments are
less likely to have discrepancies. Participants were assigned letters A F. Figures 5 and 6 display
the comparison results of the pre- and post-assessment.
Pre and Post Assessment Comparison

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
A B C D E F
Pre-Assessment Post-Assessment
Figure 5: Pre-and post-assessment comparison
Figure 6: Pre- and post-assessment scores
As shown in Figures 5 and 6, all participants scores improved from pre- to post-assessment. The
largest improvement score was participant B. Participant B score 8.33 on the pre-assessment and
a perfect score of 15 on the post-assessment. This was a 6.67-point improvement. Five out of the
six participants scored the full 15 points on their final assessment. The mean of the pre-
assessment data was 70.3% of problems correct. The mean of the post-assessment data was
98.5% of problems correct. Figure 7 offers a visualization of the growth of mean scores.
Mean of Pre- and Post-Assessment Data
Post-Assessment
Pre-Assessment
0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00%
Figure 7: Mean of Pre- and Post-Assessment Data
Comparing the pre- and post-assessments, questions five and seven were the most frequently
missed problems. Question five asks, Think time should be no longer than: a) 2-4 seconds, b) 1
minute, c) 8-10 seconds, or d) 3-5 seconds. The correct response was 3-5 seconds. Question
seven asks, The standard measure for student engagement in the classroom is: a) 85%, b) 80%,
c) 100%, or d) 75%. The correct answer was 85%. In the final assessment, all participants
selected the correct answer for both questions five and seven.
Furthermore, data for the pre- and post-assessment were compiled into Microsoft Excel.
The Data Analysis Tool was used to run a descriptive statistics report. Figure 8 offers the
descriptive statistics of the pre- and post-assessment.
Figure 8: Descriptive Statistics of Pre-Assessment & Post-Assessment
As shown in figure 8, the mean score of the assessments increases from pre- to post-assessment.
The standard deviation also is shown to decrease on the post-assessment. The instructional
designer can infer from this data that there was a change of learning from pre- and post-
assessment. The post-assessment shows that the assessment scores were less spread out,
indicating that the course provided the content needed by the learners to demonstrate learning on
the assessment.
The null hypothesis of this project states that there would not be a significant change
between the pre-assessment and the post-assessment; H0: P1 > P2 where P1 is the pre-assessment
and P2 is the post-assessment. The research hypothesis used was H1: P2 > P1; the post-assessment
scores would be higher than the pre-assessment scores, indicating a significant change. In order
to determine if the null hypothesis should be accepted or rejected, a t-Test: Paired Two Sample
for Means was performed in Microsoft Excel. Figure 9 displays the results of this data.
Figure 9: t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means
According to the t-Test, the P(T<=t) one-tail value is approximately 0.00136. According to P-
value guidelines, if the p value is less than or equal to 0.01, it is considered highly significant
for change. Therefore, the null hypothesis should be rejected. Moreover, if the t Stat absolute
value is greater than the t Critical one-tail value, the null hypothesis should be rejected. For this
project, the t Stat absolute value is 5.4935, which is greater than the t Critical one-tail value of
2.0150. This also suggests that the null hypothesis should be rejected. When a null hypothesis is
rejected, that means there was significant statistical improvement in assessment scores. Based on
the findings of the t-Test, the null hypothesis was rejected and the research hypothesis was
accepted. There was a significant statistical improvement between the pre-assessment and the
post-assessment, indicating the Student Engagement Online Learning Module was effective.
Conclusion
Roy Casey of EPI, LLC was approached by several of his clients to offer his professional
development trainings online. This need was also confirmed by one of Caseys current clients:
Winters Joint Unified School District. The current client noted that teachers needed a resource
they could review at their availability online. Additionally, there is not enough time within the
school year to provide all of the professional development as needed. An environmental scan and
literature review was performed. It was found that there were no available modules that focused
on the three attributes of student engagement and process to implement student engagement in
the classroom setting. A feasible solution was developed: create an online learning module
constructed from the most requested professional development, student engagement. The
creation and development of the online learning module was performed as part of the California
State University, Masters in Instructional Science and Technology.
Though the online learning module could not be assessed with Caseys most current
client due to a variety of restrictions, the course was able to be piloted with six educators at
varying levels of experience. The usability survey provided the instructional designer with
recommendations to improve the course. These recommendations will be executed prior to
implementing the online learning module at Winters Joint Unified School District. Additionally,
summative assessment was used to determine if the projects effectiveness. This summative
assessment was compared to the participants pre-assessment results that was performed at the
beginning of the module. After analyzing the data, it was determined that the course was
conducive to participant learning. There was a significant change between the participants pre-
and post-assessments.
The recommendations that were received in the usability survey will be addressed prior
to implementing the Student Engagement Online Module at Winters Joint Unified School
District. Casey will assume the ownership role of the course. This will allow him to provide
specific feedback to participants and receive course notifications. Additional studies and data
analysis will be required as the product is implemented at Winters Joint Unified School District.
Though the first goal of the project is to educate participants on student engagement, the end
goal would be to see participants implementing student engagement strategies in their
classrooms. To assess the effectiveness of this aspect of the course, Casey will have to observe
participants prior to implementing the course and again after the course is complete. Casey will
then be able to check for the transfer and application of knowledge. Unfortunately, due to
constraints, this was outside of the scope of the course. It is highly recommended to be
considered as the course implementation progresses.
Overall, the Student Engagement Online Learning Module met the goals and objectives
set forth in this project. An effective course was produced.
References
Casey, R. (2016, November 7). Personal Interview. (B. Kirkpatrick, Interviewer)
Culatta, R. (2015). Contiguity Theory (Edwin Guthrie) . Retrieved from InstructionalDesign.org:
http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/contiguity-theory.html
Finley, T. (2015). New Study: Engage Kids With 7x the Effect. Retrieved from Edutopia.org:
https://www.edutopia.org/blog/engage-with-7x-the-effect-todd-finley
Gagn's 9 Events of Instruction. (2016). Retrieved from UF Center for Instructional Technology
and Training: http://citt.ufl.edu/tools/gagnes-9-events-of-instruction/
Gredler, M. (2009). Learning and Instruction: Theory into Practice . Columbus: Merrill.
Kapp, K., & Defelice, R. (2009, August ). Time to Develop One Hour of Training. Learning
Circuits .
Kearsly, G. (2015). Conditions of Learning (Robert Gagn). Retrieved from
InstructionalDesign.org: http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/conditions-
learning.html
Kirkpatrick, D. (n.d.). The Kirkpatrick Model. Retrieved from Kirkpatrick Partners:
http://www.kirkpatrickpartners.com/OurPhilosophy/TheKirkpatrickModel
Local Control Accountability Plan. (2016). Retrieved from Winters Joint Unified School
District: https://winsterjusd.org/LCAP
Mayer, R. E. (n.d.). 12 Multimedia Principles. Retrieved from University of Hartford: Faculty
Center for Learning and Development:
http://hartford.edu/academics/faculty/fcld/data/documentation/technology/presentation/po
werpoint/12_principles_multimedia.pdf
Mergel, B. (1998, May). Instructional Design & Learning Theory. University of Saskatchewan.
Merriam, S. (2001). Andragogy and Self-Directed Learning: Pillars of Adult Learning Theory.
New Directions for Adult & Continuing Education (89).
Voke, H. (2002, February). Motivating Students to Learn. InfoBrief(28).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction Between Learning and Development. Readings on the
Development of Children, 34-40.
Appendices
A: Caseys 2015 Student Engagement Advanced Organizer for Live Seminar
Student Engagement
Ensuring Student Engagement Throughout the Learning
Brief Review of the Research

Learning is not a spectator sport. Teachers who engage students in the learning find that students
respond positively to learning situations and are able to understand the content or skill at a deeper
level. Voke tells us, A growing body of research points to the essential role that student
engagement plays in the learning process . . . engaged students experience greater satisfaction with
school experiences, which may in turn lead to greater school completion and student attendance
rates, as well as lower incidences of acting out behaviors.
Students need to be active participants in their learning and teachers need to insist on their
involvement. Too often, students are relegated to a passive role, listening and observing to glean
the main lesson points . . . According to Algozzine Effective teachers make use of instructional
strategies that engage students throughout the entire lesson. The purpose of the engagement
strategies is to facilitate the mastery of the content or skills. According . . . there is a direct
relationship between the amount of time students are actively engaged in learning and their
achievement levels. The extent to which students profit from instruction is directly related to the
degree to which they are actively engaged in the learning.
Engagement or a lack of it involves and affects both students and teachers. According to Danielson
. . . Successful instruction requires the active and invested participation of all parties. Teachers
also suffer when students are disengaged. Intrator characterizes classrooms as dynamic settings
that launch dreams and delight minds, or arid places that diminish hope and deplete energy. To
create a dynamic setting and engage all students throughout the academic learning, the
classroom teacher must maintain a high level of accountability and structure.
WestEd emphasizes that student engagement the continuous involvement of students in the
academic learning that the teacher plans and facilitates is the teachers responsibility. This
is important because as Newman points out the engagement is the students psychological
investment in learning, comprehending, and mastering knowledge or skills. Marzano asserts that
learning requires engagement in tasks that are structured and are sufficiently similar to allow for
effective transfer of knowledge. He finds that students are more likely to learn when teachers plan
and include the following techniques: identifying similarities and differences, summarizing, note
taking, using nonlinguistic representations, and developing advance organizers.
The Teacher Demonstrates All of the Following Attributes
Directs student(s) to be engaged in the academic learning
Directs all the students to participate in the academic learning at the same time.
Makes student engagement mandatory by ensuring that all of the students are engaged
throughout the academic learning.
When determining the percentage of students being engaged in their learning the standard is set at
85% engagement. It is believed that 80% of student participation comes from only 20 percent of
the students (80/20 Principle).
The Teacher Can Direct Students to be Involved by Engaging Them in the Following
Activities
Responding orally through conversing, summarizing, sharing similarities and differences,
or responding chorally as a whole group.
Producing something on paper or a white board through note taking, completing an
advance organizer, completing or drawing a nonlinguistic representation, writing a
summary, or explaining in writing the similarities or differences of a topic.
Signaling through a common gesture or displaying the white board or response cards.
Demonstrating a response through movement.
Mentally processing information and sharing that processing through a choral or written
response or conversing with another student.
Additional Research
Newman points out that, Engagement is the students psychological investment in learning,
comprehending, and mastering knowledge or skills . . . Therefore, all teachers must:
Plan in advance the student engagement strategies to engage all students in all activities
and how they will ask questions to ensure every student will answer the questions, and
Implement the plan to engage all students during the lesson.
Student Engagement is the responsibility of the ___________________ to make sure that the
80/20 Principle is not a reality in the classroom.
Students cannot have responsibility until we assure that they are provided with learning
opportunities that develop their abilities to respond.
First Attribute of Student Engagement

Directs student(s) to be engaged in the academic learning activity
This means the teacher: __________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Covert Strategies Overt Strategies
Covert Examples Overt Examples

Take a moment to remember the steps of the In your journal, write down the steps of the
process we learned yesterday. process we learned yesterday.
Think, what is the answer to the problem On your white board, solve the problem being
displayed? displayed.
Read the first two lines of the poem silently. Class, lets read the first two lines of the
poem together using a choral read.
Activity: Put a C if the teacher is directing students to be engaged covertly and an O if

the teacher is directing students to be engaged overtly. Change every identified covert
strategy to an over strategy.
__ Everyone point to the example in your textbook.
__ I want you to listen to your partner and be ready to share what he/she said.
__ Students, write the answer to this question in a complete sentence.
__ Everyone take 10 seconds to think of the parts of an atom.
__ In your notes, draw and label the parts of a plant.
__ With your fingers, show me if the answer is 1, 2, 3, or 4.
__ Class think, is this statement true or false?
Second Attribute of Student Engagement

Directs all of the students to participate in the academic learning at the same time.
This means the teacher: __________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Group Alert Definition
Instead of . . . Engage ALL Students at the Same Name the Strategy

Time
Students raising their Direct all students to write the answer to

hands if they know the the question on a white board
answer to the question
One student going to the Direct all students to create a picture of
board to create a picture their learning in one minute
of the learning
One student repeating the Directs all students to chorally repeat the
answer answer
Students sitting and The teacher directs all students to
waiting for the teacher to complete a task that is displayed as she
perform a management performs a management function
function
Students shouting out the Directs all students to think of an answer
answer to the question to the question and after five seconds of
think time have them pair and share their
answers
Students sitting listening Directs all student to take notes during the
to the teachers lecture lecture and specifically tells them what to
and/or reading write in their notes
Activity: Put a check by the following teacher statements that indicate the teacher is
directing all students to engaged at the same time. For any teacher statement that is not
directing all students to be engaged at the same time, rewrite the statement so all student
would be engaged at the same time.
__ Jose, what is the answer to number 4?
__ Everyone look at number five. Think of an answer. After 3-5 seconds of silence the teacher
directs all students to write their answers on their white boards.
__ Lets see, who hasnt answered yet?
__ Raise your hand if you know the answer to the next question
__ Everyone write a solution to the problem on your white board.

__ We will transition in about 5 minutes. You can sit and talk with your neighbor or clean out
your desk if you please.
__ With your fingers, everyone show me if the answer is 1, 2, 3, or 4.
__ Everyone think, is this statement true or false? Show me your red card if it is false and your
green card if it is true.
Benefits of Think Time

The benefits of think time are document by Row and Stahl. If think time lasts at least 3 -5
seconds, the following benefits occur:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Activity: Read and discuss with a partner the following alternatives to Round Robin (or
Popcorn) Reading adapted from Opitz and Rasinski. Select which strategies you will
implement and write how you will use them in your classroom.
Alternatives to Round Robin Reading Classroom Implementation
Echo Reading: The teacher reads first, then
students echo matching the fluency and emphasis.
Usually one sentence is read at a time.
Choral Reading: Students read a portion of the
text together. This approach gives less able readers
a chance to imitate and practice appropriate oral
reading.
Impress Reading: This is similar to choral reading

except the teacher reads a passage aloud with the
students. The students are simultaneously hearing a
good model and mimicking that model. This direct,
guided practice helps with impression, pacing and
fluency.
Everyone Reads to: The teachers tells students we
are going to read a portion of text to look for
specific information. The teacher states what
information to look for and how much text to read.
After reading individually, students share and
discuss with a partner specific information they
found while reading.
Whisper Reading: While one student is reading
aloud, the other students whisper read the same text.
Partner Reading: Partner #1 reads a portion of
text. Partner #2 listens and underlines or highlights
what they think is important. After the partner #1
has read, partner #2 shares what he/she highlighted
or underlines. Partners reverse roles and continue
reading in the same manner.
Triad Reading: the teacher states a question
students are to answer after reading a portion of
text. Partner #1 reads and partners #2 and #3 listen
and underline or highlight what they think is the
answer to the question. After reading, partners #2
and #3 share the answer to the questions. Partners
rotate the roles for the next questions.
Two Read, Then One Reads: Partners read a
passage chorally. Then one partner rereads the
passage.
Break-In Reading: the teacher starts reading orally

while all other students read silently. The teacher
then asks all students to chorally read a portion of
the text. The teacher then asks a small group of
student (boys, first row, etc.) to orally read a portion
of the text and then asks all students to chorally
read. Pattern continues.
Readers Theater: When reading a story or play,
students, pairs or triads are assigned different parts
to read aloud.
Three Ring Circus: The teacher assigns a variety
of reading arrangements. Some students read in
pairs, some individually, and some in triads.
Third Attribute of Student Engagement

Makes student engagement mandatory by ensuring that all of the students are
engaged throughout the academic learning.
This means the teacher: _________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Maintaining Group Focus
What is the Difference Between Being Mean and Making Engagement Mandatory?
Being Mean Making It Mandatory
Respectful Ways to Make It Mandatory

1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7.
Activity: Read the following lesson and highlight the words or phrases the teacher uses to
direct all students to be engaged in the learning at the same time and circle where the teacher
is making student engagement mandatory.
While teaching the b sound, the teacher shows the students the letter card Bb and says the
sound repeatedly. She then asks all students to say the sound this letter makes with her. During
the choral response, the teacher notices that five students did not respond. The teacher says, I did
not hear everyone. Lets do it again. Everyone look at the letter card Bb, and tell me the sound
it makes. All students chorally respond with the teacher while she monitors their participation.
Following the choral responses the teacher says, Thank you. That was much better. Now I am
going to say some words, and if the word begins with the b sound, put your hands on your head.
The teacher says the word bat and all students put their hands on their heads. She continues saying
other words and the students continue to put their hands on their heads when they hear a word that
begins with the sound of b. The teacher gives all students a blank piece of paper and tells them
to draw a picture of something that begins with the b sound. As the students are drawing, the
teacher approaches two students who are talking and reminds them of the task they are to complete.
The teacher continues to walk around the classroom and monitor students participation and
responses.
Check for Understanding (CFU)

In which one of the two examples below is the teacher engaging all students at the same time?
How does the teacher make it mandatory?
Classroom Example #1:
Yesterday we were talking about Hitlers rise to power. Angel, tell me, in your opinion what was
the main reason Hitler was able to assume power? The student responds, Because he was a good
speaker. The teacher asks, Who can help Angel out? Tara? Tara responds, Because of the
depression that hit Germany in 1930. The teacher says, Good. Brian, add to that. What do you
think? The student answers, Hitler appealed to the workingman who was out of work and
experiencing runaway inflation.
Classroom Example #2:
Yesterday we were talking about Hitlers rise to power. In your opinion, what was the main
reason Hitler was able to assume power? I want you to do a quick write. You have two minutes
to write. If you were absent read pp. 136-137 in your text and jot down some ideas. Teacher
takes roll and walks around looking at students papers. Okay wrap up our last thoughts and read
what you wrote to your partner.
Review the Three Attribute of Student Engagement

Attribute #1 Attribute #2 Attribute #3
Looks Like
Sounds Like
Feels Like
What is the
teacher doing?
What are the
students doing?
Define: Overt and Covert:
What is the standard (%) of Engagement?
Student Engagement is when you direct and maintain

ALL students engagement
in the academic learning
YOU
succeed!
B: Usability Survey
Section 1 of 3
Usability Survey for Student Engagement eModule
Enter your name:
Continue to next section
Section 2 of 3
Demographics
Age range:
o 18 - 24 years old
o 25- 34 years old
o 35 - 44 years old
o 45 - 54 years old
o 55 - 64 years old
o 65 - 74 years old
o 75 years old +
Sex:
o Female
o Male
o Prefer not to say
o Other
Ethnicity:
o White
o Hispanic or Latino
o Black or African American
o Native American or American Indian

o Asian or Pacific Islander
Highest degree or level of school you have completed:

o High school diploma
o Associates
o Bachelors
o Masters
o Doctorate
Credential type:
o No credential
o Multiple subject credential
o Single subject credential
o Multiple AND Single subject credential
o SPED credential
o Other
Have you completed a course on "student engagement" before?

o Yes
o No
Continue to next section
Section 3 of 3
Usability Check
1. Learning objectives were stated clearly.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
2. Instructions for the module were easy to understand.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
3. The learning module was easy to navigate.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
4. The layout of the module was appealing.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
5. The design of the module was appealing.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
6. The module moved at an acceptable pace.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
7. The media included was helpful to my learning experience.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
8. The overall lesson was enjoyable.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
9. The lesson increased my understanding of student engagement.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
10. The lesson provided me with knowledge that can be applied in the classroom.
o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
11. I will implement student engagement strategies in my classroom.

o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Neutral
o Agree
o Strongly agree
12. How long did it take you to complete this course?

o 30 - 44 minutes
o 45 - 59 minutes
o 60 - 74 minutes
o 75 - 90 minutes
o 90 minutes or more
13. What change(s) could be made to most improve this learning module.
14. What additional training do you require for student engagement in the future?

Capstone Final Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Capstone Final Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Capstone Final Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: STUDENT ENGAGEMENT ONLINE LEARNING MODULE 1

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Student Engagement Online Learning Module for EPI, LLC Consulting

Submitted in partial satisfaction of requirements of the degree of

Instructional Science and Technology

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3

Solution Description ....................................................................................................................... 9

Elementary 28% 37% 26% 34%

Learning Theories and Instructional Principles

understanding, self-reflections, and as a summative assessment, employing student engagement

of implementation of the online module, so continuous feedback on application of

September 2017 Finalized and submitted Storyboard No cost to EPI

October 2017 Selected and signed up for learning No cost to EPI

November 2017 Finished development of online seminar. $144 to Bobbie

Instructional Materials and Strategies Developed

Technical Skills Required

December 2, 2017 All assessment results and usability testing complete

Figure 1: Participant Age Range

Figure 2: Participant Level of Education

Figure 3: Participant Credential Type

Figure 4: Usability Survey Results

Pre and Post Assessment Comparison

Figure 5: Pre-and post-assessment comparison

Figure 6: Pre- and post-assessment scores

Mean of Pre- and Post-Assessment Data

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00%

Figure 7: Mean of Pre- and Post-Assessment Data

Figure 8: Descriptive Statistics of Pre-Assessment & Post-Assessment

Figure 9: t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means

Ensuring Student Engagement Throughout the Learning

Brief Review of the Research

First Attribute of Student Engagement

Covert Strategies Overt Strategies

Covert Examples Overt Examples

Activity: Put a C if the teacher is directing students to be engaged covertly and an O if

Second Attribute of Student Engagement

Instead of . . . Engage ALL Students at the Same Name the Strategy

Students raising their Direct all students to write the answer to

__ Everyone write a solution to the problem on your white board.

Benefits of Think Time

Impress Reading: This is similar to choral reading

Break-In Reading: the teacher starts reading orally

Third Attribute of Student Engagement

Respectful Ways to Make It Mandatory

Check for Understanding (CFU)

Review the Three Attribute of Student Engagement

Define: Overt and Covert:

What is the standard (%) of Engagement?

Student Engagement is when you direct and maintain

Enter your name:

Continue to next section

o Native American or American Indian

Highest degree or level of school you have completed:

Have you completed a course on "student engagement" before?

Continue to next section

1. Learning objectives were stated clearly.

2. Instructions for the module were easy to understand.

3. The learning module was easy to navigate.

4. The layout of the module was appealing.