Dewey wrote about engagement:
>Our problem is that the engagement we _really_ desire is something we take to
>be internal. It appears that there is not always observable behavior
>indicative of engagement at the time of engagement. Thus, there is no
>observable behavior which automatically indicates this engagement. . . Now I'm
>not arguing that we just "give up," but I am suggesting that insisting on
>"measuring" engagement at the time of class is a distracting and mis-leading
>remnant of "logical-positivist/behaviorist" views of education.
.
First, I posted my question about active engagement before reading Dewey's
comments. So I apologize if the timing of my question appeared a little odd.
In fact, I feel caught in a sort of time warp, reading messages that were
written a week ago, skipping to other messages with the same thread, wondering
where the conversation has gone while I have been busy replying to old
messages.
However, to get back on topic, I think perhaps what we take to be indicators
of active engagement may be different for adults in a lecture than they are for
young children in a classroom activity. What I'm talking about here is not
verbal participation. It's more a quality of activity. I recognize it
when I see it, but I can't seem to put my finger on exactly what it is that I
see. But Im not ready to give up on trying to assess it.
>As teachers our job is to create settings conducive for and inducive of this
>state in the learners.
I absolutely agree, Dewey. However, often young children engage in
activities, not out of their genuine interests and passions, but because the
teacher told them to do it. What I want to be able to demonstrate is that
there is a real difference in the quality of the activity when children engage
in them freely, out of their interests and passions, rather than from a place
of coercion. And also, I want somehow to show that they are "learning"--that
they are constructing knowledge, figuring out relationships, etc.
Jay wrote:
>Call me Emile, but I really do believe that efforts to coerce this
>learning/change
>dynamic into the fixed and precharted courses of mass education curricula is
>what produces the misery in our present system. When you coerce people, the
>main thing (often the only thing) they
>learn is how to cope with coercion.
This is exactly what I am talking about, and I want to show how it happens with
little kids. Thats why I am so interested in somehow capturing this elusive
animal that I am calling, for lack of a better term, engagement.
Betty Zan