Engagement is Not a Unicorn (It's a Narwhal)

By Heather Lyon

Despite the fact that unicorns are not real, you undoubtedly know what a unicorn is. Despite the fact that narwhals ARE real, you may not know what a narwhal is. In schools, we think that engagement at the highest level like it's a unicorn-something we've heard of, but know isn't real. We should be thinking of engagement in schools as a narwhal-

• Language: English
• Publisher: EduMatch
• Release date: Sep 9, 2020
• ISBN: 9781970133974

Book preview

Introduction

Narwhals Are Real

Unicorns are ubiquitous. They are also completely mythical. They never have and never will exist. Nevertheless, when I say the word unicorn, you can envision a beautiful, white horse with flowing locks of (maybe rainbow) hair bestowed with a gleaming horn in the center of the majestic forehead.

Yet, when I say the word narwhal, many people do not know what I’m talking about, and some who do don’t think that they’re real. Narwhals, for those who don’t know, are a horned whale that looks like a dolphin and a unicorn had a baby (there is one pictured on the back cover of this book). Narwhals have recently increased in popularity. If you have ever seen the Will Farrell movie, Elf, it's the animal that Buddy talks to when he sets off to find his dad. In this movie, some people may find the narwhal is just as fantastical as a man who thinks he’s an elf. Nevertheless, unlike unicorns, narwhals are real animals that exist, but are uncommon and unusual.

There was a point in time when I was writing this book that I began to wonder if the highest form of engagement (what I call absorption) was an educational unicorn. Something everyone knew about but didn’t actually exist in real life. In other words, I wondered if absorption in schools was mythical—a beautiful idea that anyone would desire to see in real life, but imaginary. That’s not to say that absorption doesn’t happen outside of school because I know it does. However, when I ask people to think of a time when they were absorbed in school, more often than not, they struggle to come up with an answer. So, if most people cannot think of a time when they were absorbed in school, then it might be possible that absorption in school is impossible. Hence, absorption in school is education’s form of a unicorn.

Then, I realized that absorption is not a unicorn, it’s a narwhal. Engagement in school at the highest level is possible, but it is unfortunately uncommon and unusual. It does exist, but many people have never seen it, and some don't even believe it's possible because they can't even imagine it. Absorption in school would look like student-driven environments where students initiate the learning and are intrinsically compelled to learn. They want to keep at it after the bell rings. After the lesson is over. After the unit is done. Even if they weren’t getting graded. It’s out there, but it’s a narwhal. This book aims to shine light on the mysterious educational narwhal by explaining what engagement is and is not in order to spawn as many narwhals in your school as possible!

Speaking the Same Language

Engagement has become a buzzword in the education profession. We see this term in teacher evaluation tools like the Danielson Framework, where in Domain 3, Instruction, there is a component called Engaging Students in Learning.  This, for many, is considered a power component, or a component that is one of the most important of all of the 22 components in the Framework. This prioritization is due to modern thinking about learning, which recognizes that people who learn the most are those who are most invested in their own learning.

The challenge is that it is not easy to design lessons about things that students have to learn in ways that students want to learn. Indeed, there seems to be a paradox that suggests that if students have to learn X, they won't want to learn it AND what they want to learn about is Y. In other words, the things students want to learn about are not a part of the curriculum and so what is a teacher to do? This is an inverse relationship. As a result, with the ever-growing focus on common and rigorous standards, teachers have reduced the frills from their lessons, like projects and choice, in favor of teacher-directed, whole-group instruction. Why bother getting to know your students' interests, learning styles, or preferences if you are handcuffed to curriculum? It's not like you can be responsive or inclusive to this knowledge of your students' differences or needs anyway, right? Ironically, this establishes a mindset that is the exact opposite of what research says are best-practices in terms of having students learn because they want to know more. Thus, we know we’re supposed to have engaging lessons, but there is not a shared understanding of what this means.

Filling a Need

Several years ago when I was a Director of Elementary Education, I was responsible for working with the Office of Instruction to design professional development for the principals. We knew we wanted to offer a book study, and at least one of the books should be focused on engagement because, as a district, we identified engagement as a focus for the year. With the theme identified, the challenge became which books? The members of the Office of Instruction did some research, bought some books, and then started reading in a quest to identify which books would be offered to the principals as a choice.

I anticipated that the hard part was going to be narrowing down the books because there would be so many great options to choose from. I was wrong. Though many great books addressed student engagement strategies, they did not define what engagement actually is. This is the problem. How can there be so many books about and expectations around engagement when there does not seem to be a common understanding of what engagement is? A lack of a common understanding leads to conflicts between teachers as practitioners and principals as evaluators. This also leads to conflicts between principals when Principal A says, The students in this class were engaged, but Principal B says, I don't think those students were engaged. 

This reminds me of the movie The Princess Bride, where the character Vizzini kidnaps the princess and the Man in Black pursues them. No matter where they go, the Man in Black isn’t far behind. Vizzini repeatedly proclaims that the success of the Man in Black is inconceivable. After several times of making this proclamation, Vizzini’s colleague, Inigo, turns to Vizzini and says, You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. I feel like this is what we’re doing with the word engagement in our profession. We use it, but I do not think it means what you think it means.

This book is designed to create a common understanding of what engagement looks and sounds like so that we can jointly design and gauge instruction against this understanding. For many, this will be a welcomed new starting point. For others, this will be confrontational in the truest definition of the word because it will challenge the way you have always thought about engagement. No matter which one of these descriptions feels more you right now, I challenge you to be open. Take what you think you know and either add to, revise, or unlearn your previous thinking.

The perspective you take on my Engagement Framework is dependent both on what your work is and who you work with. Put differently, if you're a teacher reading this, you might be thinking primarily about students. If you're an instructional leader reading this, you might be thinking simultaneously about teachers and students. Parents might be thinking about their children. The point here is that my goal is to demonstrate that this Framework is not limited to a classroom and extends to all people at all times in all situations.

Theory and Practice

I have been interested in the intersection of knowing and doing for years. In fact, my dissertation, A Case Study of the Impact of a University-Based Preparation Program on the Reported Thinking and/or Practices of PreK-12 Principals, explored how theory and practice come together. I wanted to know if the study of educational leadership made a difference in the work of educational administrators. I was especially interested in this because, at the time, I was a teacher-turned-staff-developer, and I felt like getting my administrative certification was an expensive hoop I had to jump through. I also wondered why good teachers could not be promoted to administrative positions without the costly piece of paper.

What I realized through my research was that the best practitioners are those whose actions are informed by research. On one hand, this finding was disappointing because when I started, I wanted to say that training for leadership was unnecessary. On the other hand, learning that the training for leadership improved the practice of leadership was reassuring—it meant that the time and money I spent getting the piece of paper was not a hoop, it was a launching pad.

What does this have to do with The Engagement Framework? Everything. Assuming that you have chosen on your own to read this book, you are doing so with a desire to deepen your knowledge of engagement. Even if you have been assigned this book, there is still the possibility that you will walk away with knowledge after reading that you did not consider before you started. While I am honored that you would use my work to do this, reading this book is just beginning. It will always remain theoretical if you do not put it into practice.

It reminds me of the difference between planning for a wedding versus planning for a marriage. Thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours are spent planning for a wedding to make sure that it is perfect. Yet, how much money and time do we spend planning for the marriage? In many cases, not much (if any) despite the fact that the wedding is the least important part of a marriage.

This book, I hope, will be just the beginning for you. There will be ideas presented in Engagement is Not a Unicorn (It’s a Narwhal) that will validate beliefs you already have but may not have been able to articulate. There will also be ideas that will be new to you and will push your thinking. The question is, what will you do with these ideas? Hopefully, reading will be the first of many actions you will take in this journey towards improved understanding of engagement.

Choose Your Own Adventure

This book begins with Section I, which has three chapters. The first chapter explains The Engagement Framework, chapter two explains why The Engagement Framework matters, and chapter three invites the reader to take action. The remaining chapters of the book are categorized into sections that answer three important questions:

What

So What

Now What

Section II begins with the question, What and addresses the theory and definition of the four engagement levels. In other words, it creates a common answer to the question, what does this mean? It’s important to create a common understanding regarding what engagement is because this understanding builds the foundation for Section III (So What).

Section III, So What, explains why engagement matters by answering the question, so why is this important anyway?  In other words, as long as someone is at least compliant, then s/he will be doing what was assigned. Thus, why does it matter if someone is compliant or interested—both are doing what they were told? In So What, I will explain that it does matter and why.

Section IV, Now What, provides the reader with ideas, suggestions, strategies, and additional resources to move from one engagement level to the next by answering the question of how do I take this into my own practice? Though resources abound regarding how to create engagement, this section provides ideas on how to bridge people from low levels of engagement to higher levels.

Finally, Section V, the last section of Engagement is Not a Unicorn (It’s a Narwhal), summarizes the book and invites you, the reader, to reflect on your learning, your actions to date, and your next steps to continue to put into action what you have read.

As you know, Engagement is Not a Unicorn (It’s a Narwhal) is non-fiction, meaning you do not have to read it from start to finish. Though I have organized it into specific sections, it is possible to read through it according to the points on the Engagement Continuum. In this way, you can choose to read the chapters on non-compliance as a cluster (chapters 4, 8, and 12) and then move on to compliance (chapters 5, 9, and 13), etc. You might choose to skip Sections II (What) and III (So What) and just read Section IV (Now What) because you’re curious about applications more than you’re curious about the background information regarding engagement. The point is that this book is designed for choice because I know that choice leads to greater engagement.

With this in mind, each chapter in the book begins with a handful of questions to identify your thinking before you read. I encourage you to take a couple of moments before starting the chapter to write down your reflections on your beliefs prior to reading. This provides you with a baseline regarding your thinking. You may want to revisit these questions after you finish each chapter to see what changes, if any, have occurred based on what you read. At the end of each chapter is a brief chapter summary and reflection questions based on the chapter. These questions are easily answered independently, but would also be helpful if you read this with others.

As a former staff developer and a current administrator, I have seen and read a great deal about the challenges of measuring the impact of professional development (PD). If attending PD was enough, then all we would have to do was go to a session, and our work would magically change. Clearly, that doesn’t happen. In my experience, even when I go to a great PD session, I struggle to apply what I have learned right away. Then, as time passes, the daily routines overshadow the intention to change. Though the message of the PD was important and powerful, the impact was minor. Reading a book is also PD, and though your intent right now is to read this to make changes, it will likely be difficult to change your habits. To safeguard against this, I challenge you to do the following:

THREE: Before you read, identify at least three people with whom you will share the ideas you’re having as a result of your reading. It doesn’t matter with whom or how you will share your ideas, it just matters that you will share.

TWO: As you’re reading, find at least two ideas that change you…it may be because you are surprised or unsure or intrigued. It doesn’t matter why you change; you’re just noting the change.

ONE: When you’re done reading, apply at least one idea. Don’t limit yourself to a professional application; it could just as easily be a personal one. The point is that you do more than just read and think about engagement—it’s that you take what you’ve read and thought and do something with it.

Each person reads and digests their reading differently. So, if you haven’t already done so, grab a pack of Post-Its, a highlighter, and/or a pen and get ready to make this book truly yours! The margins are big so you can write in them. After all, this book is yours. Your own it. More importantly, I want you to own the learning and make it personal.

Finally, I chose to include this call to action here, at the introduction, so that you can mindfully read this book with the persistent, even nagging, question, what am I learning and how will I use it? While I will celebrate if this book impacts your thinking, for me, this book is the most meaningful if your actions change.

Section I: The Engagement Framework

he next three chapters will address the What, So What, and Now What regarding The Engagement Framework. These chapters set the stage for the rest of the book because this Framework is the foundation on which the rest of the book builds. By the end of Section I, you will understand how The Engagement Continuum and Matrix work together to create The Engagement Framework. The ultimate goal of Section I is to try out in your own school/district what you’ve read about here.

Chapter 1

The Engagement Framework: What

"Don't be mad that I don't care anymore.

Be mad that I once did and you were too blind to see it."

~ Anonymous

Recognizing Your Thinking Before You Read…

How do you define engagement? Disengagement?

Is there a difference between being on-task and being engaged?

What factors influence whether or not someone is engaged?

The Engagement Continuum

Though odd, if I'm being honest, the first time I really started thinking about engagement was in a faculty bathroom at a school I visited. Hanging on to the wall was a poster that outlined Phillip Schlechty's five Levels of Engagement¹ (see Figure 1.1). While I certainly wasn't there expecting to learn about engagement—let alone to begin a quest to expand my understanding of engagement that I would ultimately share in this book—that is what happened.

Though Schlechty saw five levels of engagement, there appeared to me to be three major categories: (1) non-compliance, (2) compliance, and finally (3) engagement. Within each of the five levels, Schlechty identifies the parallel threads of attention and commitment with the highest level as engagement characterized by high attention and high commitment. Though I cannot disagree with this assessment, the more I thought about his work, the more I felt that something was missing.

Finally, I came to see engagement with four distinct but related markers, which I placed into what I call the Engagement Continuum shown in Figure 1.2. The Engagement Continuum ranges from highly disengaged on the far left to highly engaged on the far right. Since each of these markers is explained in detail in subsequent chapters, I will not dive into each deeply here. The important piece to note for this section is that this continuum is the foundation on which the rest of this book is built.

Figure 1.1 Schlechty’s Levels of Engagement

Figure 1.2: The Engagement Continuum

While the terms non-compliant and compliant are likely self-evident, for the sake of explanation, below are brief definitions for the purposes of The Engagement Continuum.

Non-Compliant: Actively or passively refusing to do what was expected; insubordinate.

Compliant: Doing the minimum of what was expected but only because there is a consequence (positive or negative) if it wasn’t completed.

Interested: Going beyond the minimum expectations because the task is stimulating and has temporary value. Generally speaking, the task is enjoyable but not something that would be done unless it was required, and there was a consequence for (not) doing it.

Absorbed: Getting so involved in a challenging task that the person doing it intrinsically wants to continue even s/he doesn’t have to.

The Engagement Matrix

I wasn't done thinking about this continuum, which is a linear progression. This additional thinking was likely influenced by several books that I've read, including Leadership and the One Minute Manager: Increasing Effectiveness Through Situational Leadership II, where Blanchard, Zigarmi, and Zigarmi create a matrix that contrasts leadership behaviors against the behaviors of the leader’s direct reports. This is similar to Max Langsberg's matrix in The Tao of Coaching that contrasts skill versus will. Thus, upon continued contemplation, I came to see The Engagement Continuum as bending with both of the poles coming to the middle so that The Engagement Continuum morphs into the 2x2 Engagement Matrix shown in Figure 1.3. The Engagement Matrix shows that there are two common features between each of the markers on The Engagement Continuum. These features are (1) the relationship you have with the external person and/or consequence² and (2) the relationship you have with the task you are doing. The Engagement Continuum shows the linear progression of engagement, and The Engagement Matrix shows the variables that impact the levels of engagement. Ultimately, I encapsulate The Engagement Continuum and The Engagement Matrix under the comprehensive umbrella I refer to as The Engagement Framework.

Figure 1.3: The Engagement Matrix

Relationship to the Task

So that you understand how this matrix works, I want to explain the differences between the four quadrants. The left side of The Engagement Matrix shows that the quadrants of Non-Compliant and Compliant share the commonality of having a low relationship to the task. The difference between the two quadrants is that even though both types of people would not want to do the task they are being asked to do, those who are compliant either care about the person who is assigning the task enough to do the work or they care about the consequence (e.g., grade, money, lack of negative attention, etc.) to do it. Non-compliant people don't care about the person who has assigned the task or are willing to pay the price, so they opt-out.

The right side of The Matrix shows that the quadrants of Interested and Absorbed share the commonality of having a high relationship to the task. The difference between the two quadrants is that even though both types of people would want to do the task they are being asked to do, those who are absorbed are doing so because they are intrinsically motivated to do what was asked; they do not need to be asked to do the work—they would need to be asked to stop doing the work. Interested people will do the work when asked, but when it's over, it's over—even though they did enjoy and maybe even found temporary value in what they were doing.

Relationship to the Person Assigning the Task or to the Consequence for Completing the Task

The bottom of The Engagement Matrix shows that the quadrants of Non-Compliant and Absorbed share the commonality of having a low or irrelevant relationship to the person assigning the task or to the consequence for doing the task. The difference between the two quadrants is that even though both types of people are not concerned about the external relationship to the person or consequence, those who are absorbed care deeply about the task and are doing it because they are intrinsically motivated to do it. In fact, to them, it is not a task they have to do, it's something they get to do. Non-compliant people are intrinsically motivated not to do what is assigned. What's more, because they do not care about the person who is asking them to do the task, nor do they care about consequences in terms of payment, they will not do what is assigned.

The top of The Engagement Matrix shows that the quadrants of Compliant and Interested share the commonality of having a high relationship to the person assigning the task or to the consequence of doing the task. The difference between the two quadrants is that even though both types of people are concerned about the external relationship to the person or consequence, those who are merely compliant are doing it to get it done since they don't really want to do the assignment. They are willing to do it because of their concern for the person assigning the task and/or the consequence associated with (not) completing the task. The mirrored quadrant of Interested is characterized by people who are doing the assignment because it holds their attention in the moment and they have a concern for the person assigning the task or the consequence associated with (not) completing the task.

Chapter Summary

This chapter provided the what of The Engagement Framework, which serves as the foundation on which the remainder of the chapter, and ultimately the book, rests. This Framework was inspired by a poster that outlined the work of Phillip Schlechty.

There are four markers on the Engagement Continuum. From left to right, these are: (1) Non-Compliance, (2) Compliance, (3) Interested, and (4) Absorbed.

When the poles are bent towards the middle, The Engagement Continuum becomes The Engagement Matrix.

The horizontal rows in The Engagement Matrix demonstrate a person's relationship with the task that is assigned; the left side has a low relationship with the assigned task, and the right side has a high relationship.

The vertical columns in The Engagement Matrix demonstrate a person's relationship with the person assigning the task or the consequence for (not) completing the task. The bottom row has a low or irrelevant relationship with the person or consequence, and the top row has a high relationship.

The Engagement Framework is the umbrella term for The Engagement Continuum and The Engagement Matrix.

Reflection Questions

1. When in your life have you been non-compliant or compliant? What was your relationship like with the person who assigned the task? If the relationship with the person assigning the task didn't matter, did you care about the consequences (grade, money, etc.) for not doing it?

2. When in your life have you been interested or absorbed? What about the task interested you for that moment but didn't spur you to want to do more after you were done? Why are you so compelled to continue working on those things that