An observation tool for instructor and student behaviors to measure in-class learner engagement: a validation study

Abstract

Background

Efforts are made to enhance in-class learner engagement because it stimulates and enhances learning. However, it is not easy to quantify learner engagement. This study aimed to develop and validate an observation tool for instructor and student behaviors to determine and compare in-class learner engagement levels in four different class types delivered by the same instructor.

Methods

Observer pairs observed instructor and student behaviors during lectures in large class (LLC, n=2) with third-year medical students, lectures in small class (LSC, n=6) and case-based teaching sessions (CBT, n=4) with fifth-year students, and problem-based learning (PBL) sessions (~7 hours) with second-year students. The observation tool was a revised form of STROBE, an instrument for recording behaviors of an instructor and four randomly selected students as snapshots for 5-min cycles. Instructor and student behaviors were scored 1–5 on this tool named ‘in-class engagement measure (IEM)’. The IEM scores were parallel to the degree of behavior's contribution to active student engagement, so higher scores were associated with more in-class learner engagement. Additionally, the number of questions asked by the instructor and students were recorded. A total of 203 5-min observations were performed (LLC 20, LSC 85, CBT 50, and PBL 48).

Results

Interobserver agreement on instructor and student behaviors was 93.7% (κ=0.87) and 80.6% (κ=0.71), respectively. Higher median IEM scores were found in student-centered and problem-oriented methods such as CBT and PBL. A moderate correlation was found between instructor and student behaviors (r=0.689).

Conclusions

This study provides some evidence for validity of the IEM scores as a measure of student engagement in different class types.

• student involvement
• quantity
• teaching methods

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank to Akdeniz University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit for funding.

Authors’ contributions

MKA and AAK designed and managed the study. DBS and DA drafted the manuscript. LA performed the statistical analyses. All authors contributed to the interpretation or the study findings. All authors contributed to the manuscript revisions. All of the authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Conflict of interest and funding

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.