If I was asked to name a pressing issue in Higher Education (HE) student education it would be engagement – lowering or lack thereof.  Speaking to colleagues both internally and externally it became clear that the issue of engagement was just my own personal issue, it was an issue across the higher education sector and it has even reached mainstream media.  The student voice suggests that financial circumstances mean that many are securing employment during teaching hours.  There is also the role of inclusivity, meaning that lectures are now frequently recorded for students to view in their own time. This has led many students to conclude that they can simply watch a recording rather than attend the live lecture. On the other hand, the educator voice has frequently suggested the impact of the pandemic and the resulting ‘COVID generation’ as the cause of a change in learner attitude. Whatever the cause, the issue remains as to how we as educators can regain that engagement and provide students with a quality learning experience.  Whilst we may be unable to influence student choices over employment, we can impact what goes on in the classroom.  There needs to be something within our lectures, seminars or other teaching input which students would feel merit attendance. We cannot remove any key content from teaching sessions in the interest of inclusivity, but we can provide additional learning opportunities within these sessions which students value.  I propose that taking a humanistic approach to teaching has potential to address student engagement, in which we value and nurture the individual learner and their self-development by using the thoughts of four humanistic protagonists.

Carl Rogers’ work on individual centred psychology is one example which has successfully translated into mainstream teaching through student centred learning.  But the question is are there any others whose work could also impact on student engagement in HE?  I would answer ‘yes’ and highlight the works of Maria Montessori, Abraham Maslow and Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi as some which can help use to re-engage students. Maria Montessori’s work focused on young learners, yet there are aspects of it which can be applied to HE. Firstly, she advocated for a physical classroom environment which is suitable for the learner; in her case this was providing young children with furniture and tools designed to suit their needs.  In higher education we could use this approach in choosing or adapting environments for the learning experiences of our students. Additionally, Montessori’s philosophy was to teach children when they are curious. Activities that arouse curiosity for adult learners can prove beneficial and increase intrinsic motivation levels (Gruber et al. 2014).

Curiosity links with the work of Abraham Maslow, who promoted intrinsic motivation and ‘peak experiences’ for learners to have successful outcomes. He argued that mainstream education was designed for teachers rather than students and that students are molded to conform rather than nurtured. To counteract this and promote the individual he advocated for ‘peak experiences’ in which the learner is allowed to use their own creativity and self-regulation to manage their own learning process (Feigenbaum 2024). Finally, linking with all three of the above is Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi’s theory of flow. The theory of flow is what Csikszentmihalyi terms as the theory of happiness. Flow is a positive psychological state and occurs when a human is fully engaged and immersed in a task and does not experience negative emotions, resulting in high levels of intrinsic motivation. It is at such a point that students will have high levels of satisfaction in carrying out tasks (Keller et al. 2011).

So, based upon the above, it can be said that what we as HE practitioners could do to re-engage learners is:

• Take a student-centred approach to teaching and learning;
• Create an environment conducive to learning;
• Create an experience in which the learner is fully immersed in order to create a ‘peak experience’.

When I have applied this approach in my own teaching I have definitely noticed increased levels of student engagement. The key caveat being that this of course only applies to those learners who do attend. Furthermore, given HE workloads and curriculum requirements it is unlikely that entire courses could be rewritten to take this humanistic approach. Additionally, a humanistic approach might not be suitable for all students or educators. Nevertheless, given that we were able to adapt during the pandemic, we do have the potential to address engagement in teaching and learning and re-engage the student cohort, either through humanistic approaches or other ways.

References

Gruber, M.J., Gelman, B.D. and Ranganath, C. (2014) ‘States of curiosity modulate hippocampus-dependent learning via the dopaminergic circuit.’ Neuron 84(2). 486–496. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.08.060

Feigenbaum, K.D. (2024) ‘A critique of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers as educators.’ Journal of Humanistic Psychology 64(1). 44-63. DOI: 10.1177/00221678231154819 

Keller, J., Ringelhan, S. and Blomann, F. (2011) ‘Does skills–demands compatibility result in intrinsic motivation? Experimental test of a basic notion proposed in the theory of flow-experiences.’ The Journal of Positive Psychology 6(5). 408-417. DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2011.604041