Strategies for building and facilitating supportive classrooms that can foster a sense of belonging and increase student motivation and engagement in their education.
Introduction
In the article "Support, belonging, motivation, and Engagement in the College Classroom: A Mixed Method Study," Zumbrunn, McKim, Buhs & Hawley confirm and extend a now widely accepted model that elaborates the relationship between classroom environments and student academic success (see Figure 1). Their model consists of six elements:
Revised Model of Student Motivation (Zumbrunn, McKim, Buhs & Hawley 2014)
Supportive classroom environment — The environment in which students feel safe, supported, and valued throughout the learning process. This can include an instructor’s investment in the class, the degree to which learning and teaching are described positively, respect for student opinions, flexibility, the availability of instructors and peers, the approachable instructors and peers, and many other factors.
Belonging — Belonging in the classroom can be a ‘feeling that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be met through their commitment to be together’ (McMillan and Chavi, 1986).
Self-efficacy — The students’ beliefs about their academic capabilities for a specific task (Bandura 1986).
Task value — A student’s beliefs about an academic task's potential importance, usefulness, and enjoyment (Wigfield and Eccles 2002).
Engagement — The time and energy students invest in educationally purposeful activities (Kuh 2003). This includes things like attendance and instructor ratings of student course engagement (Betts and Rotenberg 2007). Engagement, as Kuh defined it, has two components: the time and effort that students invest in activities that lead to success (what the student does); the resources institutions use to encourage students to participate in and benefit from activities that lead to success (what the institution does).
Achievement — A student's performance in the class, including grade, completion, success with defined course learning outcomes or competencies, or independent/personal goals for the course.
This model outlines the role of building and facilitating supportive classrooms to foster students’ sense of belonging and, in turn, increase their sense of self-efficacy and engagement and, ultimately, achievement. This KB draws from research on students’ sense of belonging to supportive educational practices and behaviors and suggests strategies for making classrooms more supportive and assessing supportive classroom environments.
|
Background
The research behind this model challenges a common model of classroom support that has found “belonging, self-efficacy, and task value are directly predicted by a supportive classroom environment” (Zumbrunn, McKim, Buhs & Hawley 2014). In their study of undergraduates at a large Midwestern university, Zumbrunn et al. (2014) confirmed a model that suggests "a supportive classroom environment predicts belonging and that belonging likely predicts self-efficacy and task value. These motivational beliefs, in turn, independently predict engagement, and engagement predicts achievement” (Zumbrunn, McKim, Buhs & Hawley 2014). This new model suggests a potential change in emphasis for instructors and academic staff, especially as they teach and support large lecture courses. Much of the emphasis on course design for large lecture classes has focused on designing activities through which students will be engaged and learn. While engaging and rigorous activities are critical, Zumbrunn et al.’s model suggests that instructors will get even better results from those same activities if they have designed supportive classrooms in which students develop a greater sense of belonging.
The model guides “how” and “why” to frame a college class as spaces where students belong and have agency. Belonging, self-efficacy, and task value serve as precursors to greater engagement and achievement are achieved. Designing and teaching supportive classes is worth the investment.
Adaptation of the Model
While the model confirmed by Zumbrunn and associates identifies several elements (belonging, self-efficacy, task value, engagement) that affect student achievement, this model asserts that the path to improved achievement begins with building a supportive classroom environment. Picking up on this finding, a group of CTLM developers explored four classroom support instruments that have been used in studies of students’ sense of belonging:
The Classroom Community Scale. Rovai, A. P. (2002). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. Internet and Higher Education, 5, 197–211.
The Student Perceptions of Learning and Teaching Questionnaire. McKeachie, W. J. (1994). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (9th ed.). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath & Co.
The Teacher Behavior Checklist. Keeley, J., Smith, D., & Buskist, W. (2006). The Teacher Behaviors Checklist: Factor analysis of its utility for evaluating teaching. Teaching of Psychology, 33(2), 84–91.
Each of these validated instruments measures dimensions of the classroom believed to support or undermine student learning. The items in these surveys were entered into a data set. The items in these surveys (132) were entered into a data set. The items went through three rounds of coding, as described below. The result is an inventory of behaviors and practices that instructors may cultivate and assessment tools that instructors can use to understand how their classrooms are supportive.
Round 1
Attribute Coding (reference) was used to identify items that described instructor behaviors (99), student behaviors (5), or student perceptions (39 or 88). Simultaneous coding was allowed, and all five items were coded as student behaviors and were also coded as student perceptions. Duplicates were not removed.
Round 2
Items coded instructor behavior and student perceptions underwent a second round of structural coding (reference) to label each with a focal teaching and learning activity. Duplicates were not removed. Three labels emerged in both categories:
Classroom management. The item asked how the course was structured and administered but did not focus directly on day-to-day instruction (instructor behavior = 34; student perceptions = 17).
Teaching techniques. The item asked about the teacher's actions during class (instructor behavior = 41; student perceptions = 25).
Interpersonal interactions. The item asked how the instructor facilitated interpersonal interactions with and among students (instructor behavior = 26; student perceptions = 23).
Two other labels emerged in the student perceptions category:
Community (17) — The item asked students about their perception of the qualities of the classroom community (all of the items from the Classroom Community Scale were given this label).
Agency (6) — The item asked students their perception of students’ voluntary actions in the classroom.
Round 3
Given the number of items in the teacher behavior category, a round of sub-coding was completed for each label from the second coding round. The goal of this round of coding was to identify particular practices called out in the inventories. 12 practice codes emerged:
Classroom management
Context-creating practices (teacher behavior 8; student perception 8). Practices that establish a supportive course setting.
Design practices (teacher behavior 6; student perception 2). Practices that lead to support instructional materials.
Communication practices (teacher behavior 8; student perception 4). Supportive communication practices.
Presence practices (teacher behavior 4; student perception 1). Practices that make the instructor available to students.
Community-building practices (teacher behavior 8; student perception 2). Practices that promote connection and caring. The round-two label community identifies additional items that measure students' perceptions of the classroom community.
Teaching techniques
Coherence practices (instructor behavior 8; student perception 7). Classroom practices that make instruction more transparent for students.
Feedback practices (instructor behavior 6; student perception 3). Classroom practices that provide students and the instructor with information about student learning and experience.
Content practices (instructor behavior 17; student perception 15). Practices that make content more accessible for students.
Instructor identity practices (12) — Practices that identify an instructor as a supportive teacher.
Recognition practices (8) — Practices that signal that students matter.
Application
Instructors can create the conditions for greater degrees of belonging, self-efficacy, and task value by designing and facilitating supportive classroom environments. The analysis of three widely accepted measures of supportive classroom environments led to the development of three practical tools:
Instructor Behaviors Inventory
Measurements of Student Experience Survey
Observation Protocols (both self-reporting and externally reported)
Instructors can use these tools to guide course design, self-assess their teaching strategies, elicit feedback on their classroom environments, and reflect on how they might establish a more supportive classroom. Because they are based on validated measures of classroom environments, each tool covers a broad range of behaviors. Instructors often review the inventory, survey, or protocol and then zero in on two or three specific practices to observe, adopt, or refine during a semester.
Instructor Behavior Inventory
The inventory lists behaviors related to higher levels of students' sense of belonging, self-efficacy, and task value. In turn, instructors can use the inventory to identify educational practices they wish to cultivate to foster a more supportive classroom environment. The inventory is organized into three sections, each including multiple practices:
Class management — ways course structure builds a more supportive classroom.
Context-creating practices — Practices that establish a supportive course setting.
Communication practices — Supportive communication practices.
Community-building practices — Practices that promote connection and caring.
Design practices — Practices that lead to support instructional materials.
Presence practices — Practices that make the instructor available to students.
Teaching techniques — ways an instructor can facilitate class sessions to build a more supportive classroom.
Coherence practices — Classroom practices that make instruction more transparent for students.
Feedback practices — Classroom practices that provide students and the instructor with information about student learning and experience.
Content practices — Practices that make content more accessible for students.
Interpersonal skills — ways an instructor can interact with students to build a more supportive classroom.
Instructor identity practices — Practices that identify an instructor as a supportive teacher.
Recognition practices — Practices that signal that students matter.
The inventory is offered as a point of entry to designing and teaching supportive classrooms rather than a checklist. Most instructors review the inventory and select two or three to focus their efforts for the semester.
As instructors work at cultivating supportive classrooms (before and after making any changes to their educational practices), they may want to survey students on their perspectives on the degree to which they feel they are learning in a supportive environment. The items in this tool are meant to measure students' experience of support. As with selecting educational practices from the Instructor Behavior Inventory, most instructors select a few questions from this tool and build a survey instrument that targets specific aspects of their classroom environment. Items in the Measurement of Student Experience are organized in the following categories:
Class management — ways the course structure contributes a more supportive classroom.
Context-creating practices — Practices that establish a supportive course setting.
Communication practices — Supportive communication practices.
Community-building practices — Practices that promote connection and caring.
Design practices — Practices that lead to support instructional materials.
Teaching techniques — ways an instructor can facilitate class meetings to build a more supportive classroom.
Coherence practices — Classroom practices that make instruction more transparent for students.
Content-creating practices — Practices that make content more accessible for students.
Feedback practices — Classroom practices that provide students and the instructor with information about student learning and experience.
Interpersonal skills — ways an instructor can interact with students to build a more supportive classroom.
Instructor identity practices — Practices that identify an instructor as a supportive teacher.
Recognition practices — Practices that signal that students matter.
Another tool instructors can use to develop more supportive classroom environments is feedback through classroom observation. Feedback can include an instructor’s private observations and reflection on their teaching or a more formal classroom observation completed by a colleague or consultant. The Observation Protocol offers practices on which an observation might focus. The following categories organize the protocol:
Classroom management
Coherence practices — Classroom practices that make instruction more transparent for students.
Community-building practices — Practices that promote connection and caring.
Community-building practices — Practices that promote connection and caring.
Context-creating practices — Practices that establish a supportive course setting.
Design practices — Practices that lead to support instructional materials.
Presence practices — Practices that make the instructor available to students.
Teaching techniques
Coherence practices — Classroom practices that make instruction more transparent for students.
Context-creating practices — Practices that establish a supportive course setting.
Feedback practices
Instructor identity practices
Interpersonal skills — ways an instructor can interact with students to build a more supportive classroom.
Instructor identity practices — Practices that identify an instructor as a supportive teacher.
Recognition practices — Practices that signal that students matter.
