Search News


Browse Archives

News

'Engagement' and the Underprepared

August 1, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

By now, it is widely accepted that curricular efforts to "engage" students -- to involve them deeply in the process of learning and in the actual material they study -- pays off. But as the number and proportion of underrepresented minority students and academically underprepared students of all races in college grows, educators and policy makers have lacked hard evidence that "engagement" practices work for those students, too.

Two new studies, however, suggest that not only does "engagement" work for minority and academically underprepared students, but such practices make a bigger difference for such students than for students in general.

The studies come from two of the biggest and best-known names in the learning assessment world: George D. Kuh, Chancellor's Professor and director of the Center for Postsecondary Research at Indiana University, and Ernest T. Pascarella, Mary Louise Petersen Chair in Higher Education and co-director of the Center for Research on Undergraduate Education at the University of Iowa. Both measured the effects of participating in certain kinds of educational activities -- collaboration with other students, significant faculty-student contact, etc. -- that are generally thought to "engage" students in the learning process.

The first study, "Connecting the Dots," financed by the Lumina Foundation for Education and Wabash College's Center for Inquiry in the Liberal Arts, examines the performance of about 11,000 freshmen and seniors (not sophomores, as an earlier version of this article suggested) at 18 four-year institutions that have used the National Survey of Student Engagement, which Kuh founded, to measure how engaged their students are in learning.

By matching the colleges' NSSE results against never-before-collected data about the students' academic preparation and demographic results, and against the students' first-year grades and persistence to the second year, the new study offers a look at how academic "engagement" affects different sorts of students. And the study's most significant finding on that score is that "historically underserved students benefit more from engaging in [educationally effective practices] than white students in terms of earning higher grades and persisting to the second year of college."

For example, says Kuh, students who came into college with lower ACT scores (those who scored 20 or under) and participated in "educationally purposeful activities" saw a greater increase in their grade point averages as freshmen than did similarly engaged students with higher ACT scores (28 and above). And as Hispanic students grew more engaged academically, their first-year academic performance grew much more sharply than did that of white students -- so much so that at higher levels of engagement, Hispanic students outperformed their white peers.

Similarly, at the highest levels of academic engagement, African-American students in the study became likelier to return for their sophomore year than were similarly engaged white students.

"The bottom line is that everybody benefits from these activities, but that there are certain activities that are more beneficial for certain groups," says Kuh, whose co-authors on the study were Jillian Kinzie, Ty Cruce, Rick Shoup, and Robert M. Gonyea. "So these activities have what we call "compensatory effects" -- engagement compensates for a lower level" of academic preparation coming in to college.

The other study, which Pascarella co-wrote with Cruce, Gregory C. Wolniak, and Tricia A. Seifert, was done as part of the National Study of Student Learning, financed by the U.S. Education Department. (It is in the current issue of the Journal of College Student Development, but is not available online.) It examined students who entered a representative mix of 18 four-year colleges and five community colleges in 1992, and found that virtually across the board, using a set of "principles for good practices in undergraduate education" has "a significant positive impact on the cognitive development, learning orientations, and educational aspirations of students" in their first year in college.

And like the Kuh study, the Pascarella report found a "compensatory effect" for students who enter college academically underprepared. "Thus, although the focus of attention has typically been on the general impact of good practices for all students, our findings suggest that good practices may be particularly important for those students who enter postsecondary education with the least educational capital," the authors write. 

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on 'Engagement' and the Underprepared

  • Quality of teaching
  • Posted by Betty Medsger , Emerita professor at San Francisco State University on August 1, 2006 at 7:30am EDT
  • These studies suggest strongly that the quality of teaching -- teaching in ways that engage students -- are helpful in improving the quality of learning of previously underachieving students. I wonder if one could reasonably conclude that this suggests that these students' earlier weak academic achievement is a product not of their own weak intellectual skills but of teaching that was not engaging. The results of the studies you reported may suggest other studies should be done that compare the quality of teaching by prior teachers of currently high-achieving and under-achieving students.

  • Engaging disadvantaged students
  • Posted by Stephen Taylor on August 1, 2006 at 10:55am EDT
  • I teach mostly first-generation college students. I've found that many times these "disadvantaged" students are more difficult to engage. They often don't know that it's OK to ask questions, or to seek help during office hours. I'm pretty sure that some of these students were told to "stop asking so many questions" when they were about four years old, and haven't regained that skill yet. Things we might be inclined to take for granted (such as the purpose of "office hours," or the process of forming an informed opinion) are often unfamiliar to these students. I think the key to unlocking the potential of these students is learning to listen to them, figuring out what false assumptions they are carrying with them, and then helping them to see the implications of changing those assumptions.

  • Posted by math prof on August 1, 2006 at 10:55am EDT
  • One thing that is completely missing from this article is a definition of what engagement is. (How can we judge these partices if we don't know what they are?) But I can't fault the author of this article too much for that.
    I scanned the 91-page survey "Connecting the Dots" and a definition of engagement is hard to find there. It goes on at length about statistical studies of the value of engagement, but the only thing close to a definition I could find was in an apppendix(!) on page 80 of the report where it listed 19 items. I find this list underwhelming--not that the items on it are bad but rather that many of them reflect common sense or standard practice. Also, the
    report goes on at length about the statistical value of "time on task" without defining it, but here I can guess what that means.

    So my reading on this report is that it concludes that students who are interested and work hard do better. This is not news.

  • Posted by mythbuster on August 1, 2006 at 11:00am EDT
  • Might we not be seeing a ceiling effect here? Underprepared students have more room to move up in predicted grades than do better prepared students.

  • Posted by Cultural Diversity Alliance on August 1, 2006 at 12:50pm EDT
  • This is nothing new. We all know that the students who participate and "engage" in school activites including clubs, fraternities, sororities and even Federal Work Study job will most likely be the students that will matriculate successfully. However, it is clear that the trends in Higher Education Admissions recruitment is those underepresented are being shut out of the opportunity to engage because they are not selected for admission to begin with. Why are they not selected? The secondary institutions historically do a poor job of educating these students form the word go. How can you "engage" someone when they are not present on your campus to being with. We can not put the horse before the cart.

  • Engagement defition
  • Posted by Mike , Math Prof on August 1, 2006 at 2:45pm EDT
  • I share math prof's concerns. The first of the 19 engagement criteria in Appendix C Section II is: "Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions". It would be much more helpful if the criteria was "The institution had a training program for English T.A.s that emphasized ways to draw students into class discussions." It is obvious that students who spontaneously speak up in class are likely to do better. But, would a program to encourage this make a difference? Maybe yes, maybe no.

    I am also worried that only measuring persistence to the sophomore year can misrepresent what is really happening. At my university we have a program for low preforming or at risk freshmen. The center piece of the program is that they are advised to only take courses where the average GPA is high during their first year. They take no math or science classes. Sure enough, student persistence goes up, matching that of the general freshman class. But, no one has ever looked beyond the sophomore year even though this program has been in place for many years.

    Another part of the program is that students take a special course called University 101. Various studies have shown U101 courses improve persistence. An obvious factor, that the studies ignore, is that U101 is an easy A. If this factor where separated out and U101 courses still had a benefit, that would be interesting. But, it seems education researchers rarely probe beyond the surface.

  • Engagement
  • Posted by Scott on August 1, 2006 at 3:15pm EDT
  • Here we go again; the reason "culturally diverse" learners don't succeed is either we don't let them in, or we don't engage them when they get there. When do we assign some significant measure of accountability squarely where it belongs - on the student, and at every level? Go to class, pay attention, spend time in the library not the basketball court. In short, do the work and you'll get in, and once in, take responsibility for your own actions and quit blaming everyone else for your failures!

  • Posted by dee on August 1, 2006 at 4:20pm EDT
  • Do the work.
    Study.
    Ask Questions.
    Pull yourself up by the bootstraps.
    and... still get crashed by the glass ceiling. The end usually appears the same - nothing will change and I'll get a raw deal anyway.

    Have any of you ever tried to get somewhere running backwards with no help and that annoying buzz in your ear "you won't make it anyway?"

    Empathy folks empathy!

  • Assumptions/Language
  • Posted by Joe Viscomi at Syracuse University on August 1, 2006 at 4:20pm EDT
  • Scott (at 3:15 pm EDT);
    I find some of your language troubling as well as some of your assumptions. Let me give you an example - last night I was talking w/my daughter (Sr. in college) about these types of ideas. I asked her, “was there any time in your life that you didn’t assume you were going to college?” I.e., her up-bringing was such that my daughter never really believed there was a choice, she was going to college, period. She was prepared by her family and herself for that experience. I, on the other hand, grew up in an environment that did NOT value education; I was actively discouraged from attending college. College was, especially in the beginning, a challenge, financially and learning/knowing “the ropes”.
    My point to you is, as to my daughter, don’t be so quick to judge the culture, actions, etc. of everyone else through only your lens. What we sometimes take for granted as trivial, is sometimes a daunting obstacle for some folks - so if we sometimes have to un-level the playing field, so be it. Every one of us benefits by and from a more educated society.

  • empathy? Oh, please
  • Posted by juco math teacher on August 1, 2006 at 4:45pm EDT
  • Students in "underrepresented groups" have every advantage. They have scholarship opporunities not available to middle class white students, they have free tutoring at many schools, access to research programs and preferential admission to almost any program. If there is a glass ceiling, they aren't the people hitting it. Minority students who put in a halfway decent effort will earn money and recognition with ease.

  • Posted by Scott on August 1, 2006 at 5:30pm EDT
  • Joe:

    And on what assumption do you base the allegation that I was quick to judgement? It may surprise you to know that my background was poverty, failure, and exceedingly low expectations. I have the "distinction" of have both a letter of academic dismissal from my freshman year of college and a Ph.D. And I would point out that I had no advocates supporting my efforts. The language and tone of my note to which you object, while politically incorrect, is simply a call for appropriate initiative on the part of those who all-too-often ask for and expect special consideration. The issue isn't gender, race, class, or culture-specific, except to the extent that the data suggest otherwise. Those individuals of all races and classes who have successfully risen above their modest origins are the ones to whom we do the greatest disservice when making accommodations for others who do not put forth the effort and expect to be rewarded anyway. Your daughter may be wiser than you think.

  • Engagement and Achievement of the Underprepared, or Unprepared
  • Posted by Guiyou Huang , Dean of Undergraduate Studies & Programs at St. Thomas University, Miami, Floria on August 1, 2006 at 6:00pm EDT
  • Engagement was the hot topic of the recent Summer Academy of BEAMS--Building Engagement and Attainment of Minority Students, in Puerto Rico. At this Academy, it seemed, engagement was believed to be an effective remedy for retention and overall student success, especially the success of minority students, with whom terms such as "underprepared," "underachieving," or "at-risk" are often associated (we can only hope that these labels will not become stereotypes or stigmas). In other words, a huge perception seems to loom large that the "underprepared" are mostly minority students, regardless of their economic status or immigration status.

    And minority students are the targeted population for admissions at almost every university as a good-faith effort to diversify the student body. The university is thus fast becoming the uDiversity. We want diversity and we also need quality. To achieve quality, the university must engage its learners, in the classroom, and perhaps just as importantly, on the playground, in the cafeteria, and in the faculty office.

    Engagement of the student by the professor, or by campus student services is a valuable effort, but it seems awfully passive on the part of the student: it suggests that the university, or any of its representatives, needs to reach out to the student for "engagement," while the student waits to be engaged. The student really needs to have motivattion and be proactive, thus enabling the change from the passive voice to the active voice--be an active learner. So we need to teach "motivation."

    For the underprepared students, their academic deficiencies need to be dealt with first and foremost, preferrably in the freshman year. So rigorous coursework, library assignments, academic advising can all contribute to a correction of these deficiencies. Engagement on all fronts becomes necessary. Just "involving them in the process of learning" is not enough. That was why one of the colleges present at the Puerto Rico BEAMS Summer Academy was proposing faculty-led extra-curriculum engagement actitivities for students. The pedagogy of learning or learner-centeredness requres the instructor to design learning activities around the student; it can also be understood as a push of the student to take more initiative to learn.

    In a "retention-challenged environment" (for lack of a better word), keeping the student on can often be a priority and so all engagement activities should be built around that theme. But if there is any secret to a student academically succeeding
    --white, black, Asian, Hispanic, Native American, etc.--it's the desire to learn in order to succeed: to go to college with a purpose. That purposiveness makes a lof of difference!

  • Ignorance
  • Posted by Bryce Bunting , Freshman Year Mentor at Brigham Young University on August 1, 2006 at 6:00pm EDT
  • In response to the comments made by "juco math teacher," how would you know if in fact "underrepresented groups have every advantage." Are you speaking from personal experience? It is easy for those of us who have had "every advantage" to sit back and pass judgment on what life might be like for "underrepresented groups"; however, until we've lived it we really don't understand. It seems overly simplistic & naive to assume that a few additional scholarship opportunities, free tutoring, or "preferential" (what does this really mean?) admission can make up for an entire lifetime of cultural, social, & economic deficits. Let's think a little deeper in the future please.

  • Engagement
  • Posted by Martin Blank , Director at Coalition for Community Schools on August 2, 2006 at 6:55pm EDT
  • At the Coalition for Community Schools, we know that engagement comes when students learn and problem solve in the context of their lives nad communities in the real world. Resaerch is clear that students want more learning in the real world. There are lots of excellent examples of engaging community-based curriculua from the placed-baed education and servlce learnng worlds. Se eour erport on Community-Based Learning: Engaging Students for Success and Citizenship.

  • Academic Underperformance
  • Posted by Eugene Cota-Robles , Professor Emeritus at UCSC on August 3, 2006 at 4:45am EDT
  • The authors report that such things as studying more and being active in campus activities can improve outcomes as measured by GPA and retention. However, they have no information on how to get more students to engage in those ways.

    Second, they report that, all other things equal, Black students have lower GPAs than Whites, i.e., they report an overprediction problem. Moreover, the all other things equal business takes academic preparation measures into account. Thus, they "controlled" for the SAT/ACT and high school GPA differences and for the related differences in college GPA and retention.

    Third, they don't say whether the more engaged Black kids get a big enough positive bump up in college grades to eliminate the over prediction problem. Certainly, they don't really quantify how much of the over all college GPA and retention gaps (which are heavily related to academic preparation) are eliminated by greater engagement.

  • Lack of control variables
  • Posted by Serge Herzog , Director, Institutional Analysis at University of Nevada, Reno on August 29, 2006 at 2:20pm EDT
  • "Connecting the Dots," the report examining the impact of student engagement on first-year and fourth-year college grades does not control for type of college courses taken during the first and fourth year. Indeed, the study does not include any covariates that reflect on students' specific curricular experience associated with their program major. This omission in model specification casts serious doubt on the study's conclusion that engagement has differential effects on students from different ethnic/racial (or preparation) backgrounds. Using GPA as the key metric for student success, as this study does, calls for at least some control over the academic rigor of courses students take that make up the GPA. A well prepared student, regardless of race, who embarks on an engineering program with advanced calculus in the first year, may wind up with a lower GPA than a marginal student who is advised to enroll in general ed courses of introductory nature. Gauging the impact of faculty-student engagement is important; being able to statistically isolate that effect is even more so.