Classroom activities and off-task behavior in elementary school children

Classroom activities and off-task behavior in elementary school children Karrie E. Godwin (kegodwin@andrew.cmu.edu) Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Psychology, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA Ma. V. Almeda (mqa2000@tc.columbia.edu) Teachers College Columbia University, Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, 525 W. 120th St., Box 118 New York, NY 10027 USA Megan Petroccia (petrocm@andrew.cmu.edu) Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Psychology, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA Ryan S. Baker (baker2@exchange.tc.columbia.edu ) Teachers College Columbia University, Department of Human Development, 525 W. 120th St., Box 118 New York, NY 10027 USA Anna V. Fisher (fisher49@andrew.cmu.edu) Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Psychology, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA Abstract Maintaining focused attention in the classroom is considered an important factor for successful learning. Loss of instructional time due to off-task behavior is recognized as a significant challenge by both researchers and practitioners. However, there has been little research into the factors contributing to off-task behavior. This paper reports results from the first large-scale study investigating how elementary school children allocate their attention in classroom environments and how patterns of attention allocation change as a function of gender, grade level, and instructional format. The findings indicate that instructional format is related to off-task behavior in elementary school students. These findings can begin to form a foundation for development of research-based guidelines for instructional design aimed to optimize focused attention in classroom settings. Keywords: Off-Task Behavior; Attention Introduction Loss of instructional time due to off-task behavior is a well-established problem in educational settings, recognized both by researchers (e.g., Baker, 2007; Karweit & Slavin, 1981; Lee et al., 1999) and practitioners (e.g., Lemov, 2010) for over a hundred years (cf. Currie, 1884 as cited in Berliner, 1990). The link between the quality of attention and performance has been demonstrated in the cognitive psychology literature (e.g., Choudhury & Gorman, 2000; Dixon & Salley, 2007; DeMarie-Dreblow & Miller, 1988). It has also been documented that off-task behavior has a negative impact on performance and learning outcomes in school settings (for reviews see Frederick & Walberg, 1980; Goodman, 1990). Despite considerable prior research on off-task behavior, designing effective, easy to implement, and scalable interventions to reduce off-task behavior has been challenging. Roberts (2001) suggests that many existing interventions may be unsuccessful because they do not take into sufficient account the conditions that lead to off-task behavior. The goal of the present study was to expand upon prior research on off-task behavior in elementary school students to begin to elucidate the factors involved in off-task behavior, particularly the factors which are related to classroom activities and thus are malleable. Off-task Behavior There is a variety of reasons why loss of instructional time occurs in schools; these reasons include but are not limited to: weather (e.g., snow days), sudden onset interruptions (e.g., announcements over the loudspeakers), and special events. However, it has been shown that student inattentiveness (i.e., engagement in off-task behavior during instructional time) is the biggest factor that accounts for loss of instructional time (Karweit & Slavin, 1981). Prior research examining the frequency of off-task behavior has estimated that children spend between 10% and 50% of their time off-task in regular education classrooms (Lee et al., 1999; Karweit & Slavin, 1981). Classrooms employing cognitive tutors report similar results with estimates of off- task behavior constituting 15% to 25% of instructional time (e.g., Baker, Corbett, & Koedinger, 2004; Baker, 2007). However, there has been limited research examining the factors associated with off-task behavior. Recently researchers have begun to explore the role of classroom design on children’s off-task behavior. Godwin and Fisher (2011) found that classroom environments that contained relatively large amounts of visual displays (e.g., charts, posters, manipulatives) elicited more off-task behavior in kindergarten children compared to visual environments that were more streamlined. These design choices were found to hinder children’s ability to attend to the content of the lesson and reduced learning outcomes. Related findings were obtained by Barrett et al. (2012). Barrett and

[1]  M. Just,et al.  Eye fixations and cognitive processes , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  Albert T. Corbett,et al.  Human Classification of Low-Fidelity Replays of Student Actions , 2006 .

[3]  J. Carroll A Model of School Learning , 1963, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[4]  J. Lloyd,et al.  Measurement and Evaluation of Task-Related Learning Behaviors: Attention to Task and Metacognition. , 1986 .

[5]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Better to be frustrated than bored: The incidence, persistence, and impact of learners' cognitive-affective states during interactions with three different computer-based learning environments , 2010, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[6]  G. Duncan,et al.  School readiness and later achievement. , 2007, Developmental psychology.

[7]  B. Efron,et al.  A Leisurely Look at the Bootstrap, the Jackknife, and , 1983 .

[8]  M. Rothbart,et al.  Attention in early development , 1996 .

[9]  David Hough,et al.  The Effects of Full-Day Kindergarten on Student Achievement and Affect. , 1996 .

[10]  Brian Knightley,et al.  The first R , 1968 .

[11]  Ingo Mierswa,et al.  YALE: rapid prototyping for complex data mining tasks , 2006, KDD '06.

[12]  Maura Roberts Research in Practice: Practical Approaches to Conducting Functional Analyses That All Educators Can Use , 2002 .

[13]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Detecting Student Misuse of Intelligent Tutoring Systems , 2004, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[14]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Measurement and Modeling Choices in Studies of Time and Learning , 1981 .

[15]  B. Bloom Human Characteristics and School Learning , 1979 .

[16]  Joseph A. Cobb,et al.  Relationship of Discrete Classroom Behaviors to Fourth-Grade Academic Achievement. , 1972 .

[17]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Modeling and understanding students' off-task behavior in intelligent tutoring systems , 2007, CHI.

[18]  L. Goodman,et al.  Time and Learning in the Special Education Classroom , 1990 .

[19]  Gaea Leinhardt,et al.  Program Evaluation: An Empirical Study of Individualized Instruction , 1977 .

[20]  Naseem Choudhury,et al.  The relationship between sustained attention and cognitive performance in 17–24‐month old toddlers , 2000 .

[21]  Karrie E. Godwin,et al.  Allocation of Attention in Classroom Environments: Consequences for Learning , 2011, CogSci.

[22]  L. Pagani,et al.  School readiness and later achievement: a French Canadian replication and extension. , 2010, Developmental psychology.

[23]  OU Wei-hua,et al.  Linear Model Selection by Cross-validation , 2009 .

[24]  Zenzi M. Griffin,et al.  Why Look? Reasons for Eye Movements Related to Language Production. , 2004 .

[25]  อนิรุธ สืบสิงห์,et al.  Data Mining Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques , 2014 .

[26]  Joseph A. Fusaro,et al.  The Effect of Full-Day Kindergarten on Student Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. , 1997 .

[27]  Khairy A.H. Kobbacy,et al.  A holistic, multi-level analysis identifying the impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning , 2013 .

[28]  P. H. Miller,et al.  The development of children's strategies for selective attention: evidence for a transitional period. , 1988, Child development.

[29]  Doug Lemov,et al.  Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college / Doug Lemov , 2010 .

[30]  Wallace E. Dixon Jr.,et al.  "Shhh! We're Tryin' to Concentrate": Attention and Environmental Distracters in Novel Word Learning , 2006, The Journal of genetic psychology.

[31]  H. Lahaderne Attitudinal and intellectual correlates of attention: a study of four sixth-grade classrooms. , 1968, Journal of educational psychology.

[32]  K. E. Kelly,et al.  Preliminary Report on the Relation of Students' on-Task Behavior with Completion of School Work , 1999 .

[33]  Herbert J. Walberg,et al.  Time, Teacher Comments, and Achievement in Urban High Schools. , 1979 .