1

Module 5 Reflection: Reflection on Learning

Erinn L. Reed

American College of Education

CI 5333: Student Engagement

Dr. Angila DeJong

June 18, 2025

Module 5 Reflection: Reflection on Learning

As an instructional coach, I work daily to support teachers in their pursuit of deeper

student learning and more engaging classroom environments. Over the duration of CI 5333, I

have significantly expanded my understanding of how motivation and engagement influence

academic outcomes and how these factors can be intentionally designed for in both curriculum

and instructional practice. This course has equipped me with both theoretical frameworks and

practical strategies that I will apply in my work with teachers across grade levels. In this

reflection, I examine the connections between motivation, engagement, and learning; explore

ways to re-engage disengaged learners; analyze the balance between mastery and performance

goal orientations; and reflect on how this learning will influence my future practice. Each section

highlights both personal insights and key research learned throughout the course.

Connections Among Motivation, Engagement, and Learning

Student engagement presents itself in multiple forms—behavioral, emotional, and

cognitive. Behaviorally engaged students follow classroom routines, participate actively, and

complete tasks. Emotionally engaged students express curiosity, enjoyment, and a sense of

belonging. Cognitive engagement is evident when students apply strategies, reflect on their

learning, and persist through challenges (Reeve, 2012). As an instructional coach, I observe these

behaviors during walkthroughs and help teachers refine instruction to strengthen each type of

engagement. Genuine engagement is not simply about compliance—it’s about ownership and

investment in learning.

Motivation acts as a precursor to engagement. According to expectancy-value theory

(Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), students are more likely to engage when they believe they can

succeed and when they value the content. I help teachers understand that if students lack
 3

confidence (expectancy) or see no relevance in the task (value), engagement will wane.

Motivation drives the "why" behind engagement. When students perceive learning as both

meaningful and achievable, they are far more likely to invest cognitively and emotionally.

Engagement directly influences learning outcomes. When students are fully engaged,

they persist through challenges, use effective learning strategies, and process content more

deeply. Engagement fuels higher-order thinking and retention (Reeve, 2012). I have witnessed

classrooms where students working on real-world, relevant projects exhibit deeper understanding

and better long-term outcomes. In contrast, low-engagement environments often produce

surface-level learning and higher discipline referrals. Teachers must intentionally design for

engagement to promote lasting academic achievement.

How to Engage the Disengaged Learner

My first piece of advice is to approach the situation with empathy and curiosity rather

than frustration. A disengaged student in an otherwise engaged class is sending a signal that

something isn’t aligned—whether emotionally, academically, or socially. I coach teachers to

reflect on potential barriers: Does the student understand the content? Do they feel seen? Do they

have unmet emotional or behavioral needs? Building a relationship with the student is a crucial

first step. Once the teacher better understands the root cause of disengagement, they can respond

more effectively.

I recommend interest-based learning, increased student choice, small group scaffolding,

and culturally responsive teaching practices. For instance, integrating a student’s personal

interests into a reading assignment or offering options for how they demonstrate understanding

can reignite curiosity. Incorporating elements from the ARCS model—such as gaining attention
 4

and establishing relevance (Keller, 2010)—can be particularly helpful. I’ve seen success when

teachers use goal-setting conferences, peer mentors, or collaborative tasks that make students

feel both capable and connected.

Before choosing a strategy, a teacher should consider the student’s motivational profile,

past experiences, learning style, and emotional needs. I encourage educators to collect data

through formative assessments, classroom observations, and informal conversations with the

student. Using the TARGET framework (Ames, 1992), teachers can evaluate whether classroom

structures—like tasks, authority, and evaluation—might be unintentionally contributing to

disengagement. Understanding the “why” behind disengagement allows teachers to choose

strategies that are responsive and likely to be effective.

Mastery Goal and Performance Goal Practices

As an instructional coach, I’ve supported mastery goal practices by helping teachers

develop student learning objectives that focus on growth. I facilitate goal-setting conferences,

encourage descriptive feedback instead of grades, and promote the use of progress tracking tools.

One of my favorite practices is helping teachers design reflection routines where students

identify what strategies helped them succeed and what they would do differently next time.

These activities help students develop metacognition and intrinsic motivation.

I would like to try embedding more structured peer feedback opportunities within content

areas. Research shows that students benefit from giving and receiving feedback focused on

learning progress. I would also like to pilot a schoolwide “growth portfolio” initiative where

students reflect on long-term progress across subjects. This would help normalize mistakes and
 5

emphasize mastery over performance. These strategies align with the broader goal of creating a

supportive, mastery-focused school culture.

Establishing a mastery orientation in a performance-driven environment requires

intentional shifts in mindset and practice. Teachers can start by focusing feedback on effort and

process rather than outcomes. They can also reframe assessments as opportunities to improve

rather than final judgments. As a coach, I help educators integrate reflection, goal-setting, and

multiple chances for success into their routines. Systemic change requires administrative support,

but individual teachers can begin by making changes within their classrooms that prioritize

learning over competition (Midgley et al., 2000).

Conclusion

This course has equipped me with powerful tools and perspectives that will significantly

shape my work as an instructional coach. I now see motivation and engagement as central—not

peripheral—to student success, and I have learned how to support teachers in designing

instruction that promotes both. With frameworks like ARCS, TARGET, and expectancy-value

theory, I can help educators design responsive, inclusive, and engaging learning environments.

Moving forward, I will use this knowledge to support teacher growth, implement schoolwide

engagement strategies, and advocate for learning environments where all students can thrive.
 6

References

Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 84(3), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261

Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model

approach. Springer.

Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., & Middleton, M. (1998). Performance-approach goals: Good for what,

for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost? 90(1). Journal of Educational

Psychology, 90(1), 77–86.

Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S.

Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student

engagement (pp. 149–172). Springer.

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-Value Theory of Acheivement Motivation.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.

https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015