Managing Engagement, Compliance, and Dependence
Disengaged, Non-Compliant, and Dependent Students
Teachers encounter various challenges in the classroom, particularly with students who are disengaged, non-compliant, and overly dependent on adults. These students present unique obstacles that require careful consideration and effective classroom practices. This section explores the challenges associated with disengagement, non-compliance, and dependence, alongside strategies to increase student engagement, compliance, and independence.
Examples of Typical Students in Terms of Dependence, Engagement, and Compliance:
Teacher Pleasers:
These students display high compliance, low engagement, and high dependence on the teacher. They strive to please authority figures and are eager to follow instructions. Such students may lack independent thinking skills and rely heavily on guidance from the teacher. For instance, a Teacher Pleaser might wait for the teacher’s instructions before acting, constantly seeking reassurance even for routine tasks. Research indicates that this dependency can hinder the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Black & Wiliam, 1998).
Mark Chasers:
Mark Chasers are characterized by high dependence, compliance, and engagement. They seek constant validation and are driven by performance metrics, often excelling on tests and assignments due to their adherence to rubrics and clarification requests. A music assignment might see them creating a detailed poster of Beethoven’s life, inquiring why they received an “A” when they believed they deserved more. Studies emphasize that this performance-driven mindset can lead to extrinsic motivation, which may limit deeper learning (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Smart Creatives:
Coined by Google, this term describes students who exhibit high engagement, varying compliance, and low dependence. Smart Creatives thrive in environments that promote critical thinking and independence. They actively seek challenging projects beyond the curriculum and demonstrate innovative ideas. For example, when tasked with a music assignment, they might explore creating music independently, much like Beethoven did. Research shows that fostering creativity in education can lead to enhanced problem-solving skills and a greater capacity for innovation (Sawyer, 2006).
Class Disruptors
These students exhibit low compliance, high engagement, and low dependence. They often resist traditional classroom structures and seek alternative channels for their creativity. Similar to Ferris Bueller, Class Disruptors challenge authority and question norms. While they demonstrate high engagement, their non-conformity can be a double-edged sword, as their curiosity needs constructive management. Their approach to the music assignment may devolve into the acquisition of the copyright to Beethoven’s music. Effective classroom strategies can harness this energy positively, enabling these students to channel their engagement into productive learning activities (Hattie, 2009).
Engagement:
The Importance of Perseverance, Effort, and Seeking New Challenges:
To enhance student engagement, it is essential to emphasize perseverance, effort, and challenging activities. A growth mindset—valuing effort and persistence over inherent ability—can significantly boost intrinsic motivation (Dweck, 2006). Encouraging students to view challenges as opportunities for growth fosters an environment where they appreciate learning as a process.
Practices that Increase Engagement:
Meaningful Feedback: Providing constructive feedback that emphasizes effort, progress, and improvement can motivate students to explore learning further (Nicol & Macfarlane‐Dick, 2006).
Promoting Self-Reflection: Encouraging self-assessment allows students to become more autonomous and engaged in their learning journey (Zimmerman, 2002).
Encouraging Exploration: Teachers should offer opportunities for deeper exploration of topics, moving beyond superficial coverage to promote engagement with subjects of interest.
Practices that Decrease Engagement:
Praise for Quick Answers: Constantly praising students for being "smart" can create a fear of failure and discourage risk-taking (Dweck, 2006).
Surface-Level Curriculum: An "inch deep, mile wide" approach can lead to disengagement as students struggle to find meaning in their work (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
Compliance:
The Significance of High Standards, Collaboration, and Personal Accountability for Compliance:
To enhance compliance, teachers must cultivate high expectations and a structured environment where students feel responsible for their actions. Studies illustrate that a clear framework of behavioral expectations provides students with the information they need to succeed (Emmer & Evertson, 2013).
Practices that Increase Compliance:
Clear Expectations: Consistent communication of behavioral and academic expectations fosters an understanding of boundaries (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968).
Collaborative Learning: Peer engagement in collaborative projects can enhance accountability and promote compliance through shared responsibility (Johnson & Johnson, 2009).
Practices that Decrease Compliance:
Modifying Standards: Lowering expectations to conform to perceived community norms can diminish student motivation (Hattie, 2009). Students may perceive a lack of challenge, resulting in decreased compliance because they lose a sense of purpose in their coursework.
Group Assessments: Providing single group marks can diminish individual accountability. When assessments are group-focused, some students may rely on their peers to carry the workload, leading to diminished effort and compliance (Michaels et al., 2008).
Dependence
Increasing and Decreasing Dependence:
Addressing student dependence requires practices that foster independence and reduce reliance on constant adult support.
Practices that Increase Dependence:
Extensive Feedback: Over-reliance on detailed feedback can create dependency on teacher validation, hindering students' willingness to take risks (Sadler, 1989).
Step-by-Step Instructions: Providing overly structured tasks can limit students' abilities to think critically and solve problems independently (Bransford et al., 2000).
Practices that Decrease Dependence:
Process-Oriented Feedback: Providing feedback focused on thinking, logic, and reasoning encourages critical thinking and nurtures independence (Black & Wiliam, 1998).
Gradual Scaffolding: Offering frameworks initially provides necessary support, while gradually reducing assistance encourages student ownership and independence in learning (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976).
Dependence:
Increasing and Decreasing Dependence:
Addressing student dependence requires practices that foster independence and reduce reliance on constant adult support
Practices that Increase Dependence:
Extensive Feedback: Over-reliance on detailed feedback can create dependency on teacher validation, hindering students' willingness to take risks (Sadler, 1989).
Step-by-Step Instructions: Providing overly structured tasks can limit students' abilities to think critically and solve problems independently (Bransford et al., 2000).
Practices that Decrease Dependence:
Process-Oriented Feedback: Providing feedback focused on thinking, logic, and reasoning encourages critical thinking and nurtures independence (Black & Wiliam, 1998).
Gradual Scaffolding: Offering frameworks initially provides necessary support, while gradually reducing assistance encourages student ownership and independence in learning (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976)..
Conclusion:
Teachers face numerous challenges when addressing disengaged, non-compliant, and dependent students. By implementing practices that prioritize perseverance, effort, seeking new challenges, high standards, collaboration, personal accountability, and thoughtful feedback, educators can cultivate an environment conducive to student engagement, compliance, and independence.
Understanding the varying student profiles based on their dependence, engagement, and compliance empowers educators to tailor their instructional strategies. Teacher Pleasers may require support for developing independence, while Smart Creatives thrive in autonomy. Class Disruptors benefit from a balanced approach that channels their enthusiasm in constructive ways. By recognizing and addressing these diverse profiles, educators can foster inclusive and supportive learning environments catering to all students' needs.
References
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.
Emmer, E. T., & Evertson, C. M. (2013). Classroom Management for Middle and High School Teachers. Pearson Higher Ed.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning. Educational Psychologist, 44(4), 215-227.
Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Accountable Talk: Classroom Conversation that Works. University of Pittsburgh, Institute for Learning.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated Learning: A Model and Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144.
Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for Innovation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 41-48.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. ASCD.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.
