Ali Hasna, 17730554 RTL2, 2H, 2017

Assignment 2 Literature Review

Main topic - Improving Student Engagement

Sub topic - Impact of Socio Economic Status (SES)

Part A - Literature Review

This literature review intends to examine the degree to which a students Socio Economic Status (SES)
can impact their level of engagement in class. Across several scholarly-articles the themes of student-
effort, relationship and hope were reoccurring, hence the varying perspectives amongst authors were
also noted. The teaching-approach of applying Project Based Learning (PBL) was also found to improve
student engagement and thus academic success.

The SES of a student is a contributing factor towards influencing the amount of effort and motivation
such have regarding their education, thus resulting in low levels of student engagement. Jensen, E.
(2013) provides further context in-that low SES learners often witness the financial-hardships of their
parents, resulting in them developing low intrinsic-efforts towards schooling. Shernoff, D. J.,
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., and Shernoff, E. S. (2014) record low SES students as having high
levels of repeated failure, absenteeism, suspensions and transitions amongst schools, all indicators of
low student motivation. In-addition, the findings of Rubin, M., Denson, N., Kilpatrick, S., Mathews, K.,
Stehlik, T. and Zyngier, D. (2013), correlate to such whereby SES is a contributing factor in determining
the school-participation and performance of students. Consequently this is due to the variations in
parental-income, affecting study-time and quality of resources made available to pupils, hence factors
connecting to student engagement.

English, M. C., & Kitsantas, A. (2013), articulate how the PBL teaching-approach can improve student-
outcomes through the initiation of student self-directed learning. In context of student motivation, PBL
enables pupils to engage with, and become active participants of their learning, employ critical-thinking,
apply problem-solving skills to real-life scenarios as well as team collaboration. Stefanou, C., Stolk, J.,
Prince, M., Chen, J. & Lord, S. (2013) extend beyond these listed benefits, via linking them directly back
to motivating low SES learners. Consequently they explain how such practice by the teacher enables
student-learning experiences that allow pupils to regulate their own thoughts, emotions, behaviors and
possibly environment. This is necessary in order to demonstrate to students that they can become
empowered through education, developing resistance to the ramifications of their SES. Palardy, G. J.
(2013) describes how schools mostly populated by low SES students tend to have less academically-
orientated curricula, and thus low student-expectations. Jensen, E. (2013) compliments such, in-that
student motivation increases when practitioners set high learning-goals. Shernoff, D. J., et al. (2014)

1
Ali Hasna, 17730554 RTL2, 2H, 2017

further iterates this perspective, whereby student-efforts increase when set activities require them to
apply and develop their skills through the completion of challenging tasks.

The establishment and maintenance of relationships amongst students is another theme influence by
SES, which also contributes to their in-class engagement as highlighted by research. Jensen, E. (2013)
outlines the trust-issues associated with low SES learners due to their unstable home-lives, where they
are repeatedly reprimanded by adults. Such justifies why pupils from a low SES tend to be highly erratic,
disrespectful and regularly use inappropriate language. The findings of Palardy, G. J. (2013) align with
this view-point, noting that low SES schools interpret such behaviors as disengagement, and hence
enforce stricter disciplinary policies. The article of Palardy, G. J. (2013), also contrasts others through
identifying how low SES students can only form peer groups amongst themselves which in-turn create
the social norms and educational values of the entire school. Buck, R., and Deutsch, J. (2014) view this
same scenario from an alternate perspective, that of the teachers. Educators in low SES schools are
often highly rigid and stressed, compromising their ability to create positive and constructive
relationships with pupils necessary to build rapport and hence increase student engagement.

In order to increase student-outcomes, pupils must attain positive-relationships with both other peers
and educators, thus increasing their engagement with the environment. Jensen, E. (2013) describes how
teachers must show genuine interest and concern in their students via promptly learning individual
student names and hobbies. Educators must also shift in mindset away from telling student what to do,
towards how to do. Such enables positive and caring relationships to flourish, hence increasing student
engagement. The Shernoff, D. J., et al. (2014) article agrees with such an approach, identifying how good
teachers extend beyond class activities and are effective communicators who motivate pupils through
offering rewards and social support. Buck, R., & Deutsch, J. (2014) view the teacher-student relationship
building process from an alternate perspective, and obtain student engagement through increasing
parental and community involvement. The added support from these stakeholders boosts learner-
confidence and provides the ambition necessary to reverse the ramifications of a low SES. PBL is yet an
additional measure which can be employed by teacher according to English, M. C., & Kitsantas, A.
(2013). PBL can be used to promote positive student-relations through the designing of team-projects
were pupils must collaborate and evaluate each others ideas in order to develop solutions, thus an
additional teaching strategy used to increase student engagement.

The SES of a student directly corresponds to the amount of hope one attains towards obtaining a
successful education. The research of Shernoff, D. J., et al. (2014) highlights such, whereby the amount
of control students posses over learning-activities and positive classrooms-attitudes, determines the
degree of their engagement. Jensen, E. (2013) explains why low SES learners desire such, as they often
feel helpless and have a negative-outlook towards their future-prospects. Buck, R., and Deutsch, J.
(2014) provide additional context, via identifying how a low SES students own family background and
personal skill-set, such as occupation, can results in the passing of disadvantage and social-immobility,
thus forming a cycle amongst future generations. Rubin, M., et.al. (2013) agree with such, describing
how a students age, gender, ethnicity or religious-belief can influence their attitudes-towards and
value-of schooling. Furthermore, such clarifies why pupils of a low SES generally perform poorly in
academia as well less likely to pursue higher-education due to feeling less socially-integrated. Ibrahim,

2
Ali Hasna, 17730554 RTL2, 2H, 2017

A., Kelly, S. & Glazebrook, C. (2013) articulate how such self-perception increases the prevalence of
depression in low SES individuals, accounting for low-levels of optimism and interest in schooling, thus
ultimately a decrease in their engagement.

Shernoff, D. J., et al. (2014) communicate how a PBL approach will increase the confidence of low SES
learners, hence improving student-outcomes. Furthermore, such is achieved through teachers providing
clear and detailed behavioral-expectations, as well as the establishment of learning-objectives, all
intending to challenge students through providing them with ambition. The findings of English, M. C., &
Kitsantas, A. (2013), state low-levels of student engagement are often connected to a pupils inability to
self-regulate, hence further iterating the need for explicit instructions. Jensen, E. (2013) further outlines
the importance for teachers to provide on-going constructive feedback throughout the learning-
experience, which focus on extending the aptitudes of learners thus increasing engagement and life-
long academic success. Shernoff, D. J., et al. (2014) view the benefits of PBL from a differed perspective
in that students connect with learning activities that stimulates meaningful inquiry due to solving real-
life problems relevant to their context, thus a skill-set extending beyond the use of the classroom.

From the above, it can be concluded that a students effort, relationships and level of hope can be
influenced by their SES. The application of PBL was found to successfully increase pupil engagement and
hence positively impact their education.

3
 Ali Hasna, 17730554 RTL2, 2H, 2017

Part B - Data Collection Protocol and Participant Consent Form

Observation Protocol
Date: _______________

Period: ______________ Year group: ______________ Number of students: _______________

Subject & Lesson Topic: _____________________________________________________________

Main focus: Student Engagement (also measured through Disengagement)

Sub focuses: Students Socio Economic Status (SES) and Project-Based Learning (PBL)

Notes: Describe one single behavior per entry, only fill applicable areas

Student Engagement OR Student Disengagement

Describe how Describe Describe how Describe how Describe Describe how
observed possible PBL has observed possible PBL could
student contributing supported this student behavior contributing obtain student
behavior SES factors student demonstrates SES factors engagement
demonstrates engagement disengagement
engagement

e.g. Lack of resources Group work,

Non completion (pen) allocation of a
of worksheet note-taker

4
Ali Hasna, 17730554 RTL2, 2H, 2017

Dear Potential Participant:

I am working on a project titled Data Collection Protocol for the class, Researching Teaching and Learning 2,
at Western Sydney University. As part of the project, I am collecting information to help inform the design of
a teacher research proposal.

The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between in-class Student Engagement and their Socio
Economic Status (SES). Data collection is to be obtained through the means of observations.

By signing this form, I acknowledge that:

I have had read to me the project information and have been given the opportunity to discuss the
information and my involvement in the project with the researcher/s.
The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained to me, and any
questions I have about the project have been answered to my satisfaction.
I consent to my in-class conduct being noted (written) by an observer.
I understand that my involvement is confidential and that the information gained during this data
collection experience will only be reported within the confines of the Researching Teaching and
Learning 2 unit, and that all personal details will be de-identified from the data.
I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my relationship with
the researcher/s, now or in the future.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time university student who
is 17 years old.

Signed: __________________________________

Name: __________________________________

Date: __________________________________

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17 years old, and
provide my consent for the persons participation.

Signed: __________________________________

Name: __________________________________

Date: __________________________________

5
Ali Hasna, 17730554 RTL2, 2H, 2017

Part C - Data Collection Protocol Explanation

i)

A series of three observations are to be conducted on high-school students, of varying demographics

(SES), within their natural classroom environment. In order to ensure the validity and reliability of the
results, these observations are to occur across three different schools however, the subject and year
group must remain the same. The reason for doing so includes the need to observe how the varied SES
across different organizations can impact on individual student engagement. If the observations were to
be conducted in a singular school, it would narrow the context to that particular school only, which may
not be an accurate reflection of other educational settings. The need to keep the subject and cohort
consist are necessary to ensure student age/maturity and preferences towards particular subjects are
not influencing their engagement, as our study intends to sole focus on the impacts of SES. Furthermore
different schools apply PBL varyingly (if so at all), these observations intend to identify how this teaching
strategy may or may not be contributing to enhancing student engagement.

ii)

According to Richards, J. C., and Farrell, S. C. (2011), observation is the best protocol to view people live,
allowing the identification of their stimulus, interests and learning styles. Furthermore such justifies the
chosen method, as it permits the observer to gauge student engagement whilst making connections to
their SES. Additionally Richards, J. C., and Farrell, S. C. (2011), articulate the observation should focus on
up-to two aspects of the lesson, as well as include an organized recording process to facilitate effective
note-taking. This is rationale as to why the designed protocol houses both engagement and
disengagement columns, with the additional headings intending to organize the thoughts of the
observer in brief written-description under the categories of SES and PBL. Moreover this illustrates the
link to information gathered in the literature review, whereby student engagement is influenced by an
individuals SES, and hence PBL is a proven holistic teaching approach which promotes inclusion
amongst all students. Upon completion of the observation an analysis of results is to follow, whilst
establishing how obtained practical data does or does not correlate to the theory of the literature
review.

6
Ali Hasna, 17730554 RTL2, 2H, 2017

References

Buck, R., & Deutsch, J. (2014). Effects of poverty on education. Journal of Human Sciences, 11(2), 1139-

1148.

English, M. C., & Kitsantas, A. (2013). Supporting student self-regulated learning in problem-and project-

based learning. Interdisciplinary journal of problem-based learning, 7(2), 6.

Ibrahim, A., Kelly, S. & Glazebrook, C. (2013). Socioeconomic status and the risk of depression among UK

higher education students, 48(9), 1492-1500.

Jensen, E. (2013). How poverty affects classroom engagement. Educational Leadership, 70(8), 24-30.

Palardy, G. J. (2013). High school socioeconomic segregation and student attainment. American

Educational Research Journal, 50(4), 714-754.

Richards, J. C., & Farrell, S. C. (2011). Practice teaching: A reflective approach. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Rubin, M., Denson, N., Kilpatrick, S., Mathews, K., Stehlik, T. & Zyngier, D. (2013). I am working class.

Subjective self-definition as a missing measure of social class and socioeconomic status in higher

education, 196-199.

Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2014). Student engagement in high

school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. In Applications of Flow in Human

Development and Education (pp. 475-494). Springer Netherlands.

Stefanou, C., Stolk, J., Prince, M., Chen, J. & Lord, S. (2013). Self-regulation and autonomy in problem-

and project-based learning environments, 14(2), 109-122.