ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

Engaging Reluctant Students with the Poetry:

Spoken Word Poetry about Social Justice Issues and Identity
Amber Dornan
August 8, 2016
Bridgewater State University

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

2
Abstract

This paper analyzes whether or not a spoken word poetry unit focusing on social justice and
identity will increase student engagement in the reading, analyzing, and writing of poetry. In a
mixed methods study, a convenience sample of 50 eighth grade students (two classes of 25) will
be the control group receiving the current poetry curriculum while the other 50 eighth grade
students (two classes of twenty 25) will be the experimental group and will receive the spoken
word poetry unit. Students level of engagement in each respective group will be measured by
pre and post engagement surveys, interviews, observation of in-class engagement, and the
quality of student work production in and out of class. The results of this study will have
implications for the inclusion of spoken word poetry in English Language Arts curriculums even
though the small sample size limits generalizability.
Keywords: poetry instruction, spoken word poetry, student engagement

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

Contents
Abstract............................................................................................................................................2
Chapter One: Introduction...............................................................................................................4
Importance of Study.....................................................................................................................4
Background..................................................................................................................................5
Description of Program................................................................................................................6
Statement of the Problem.............................................................................................................8
Research Question........................................................................................................................8
Definitions....................................................................................................................................8
Summary of Research Design......................................................................................................9
Assumptions.................................................................................................................................9
Chapter Two: Review of Literature...............................................................................................10
Teachers Perceptions of Poetry and the Teaching of Poetry.....................................................10
Trends in Poetry Instruction.......................................................................................................11
Spoken Word Poetry in the Classroom......................................................................................15
Conclusion.................................................................................................................................17
Chapter Three: Research Design/Methodology.............................................................................18
Population..................................................................................................................................19
Sample........................................................................................................................................19
Materials.....................................................................................................................................19
Data Collection/Procedure.........................................................................................................20
Analysis of Data.........................................................................................................................21
Limitations of Study...................................................................................................................22

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

References......................................................................................................................................23
Appendices....................................................................................................................................25
Appendix A: Pre-Poetry Unit and Post-Poetry Unit Survey......................................................25
Appendix B: Student Engagement Observation Recording Form.............................................26
Appendix C: Writing Sample Rubric.........................................................................................28
Appendix D: Student Interview Questions................................................................................29

Chapter One: Introduction

Importance of Study

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

The ability to read, analyze, and write poetry is an essential skill and art that students
must master in the English Language Arts Curriculum. However, many students find the form to
be intimidating because the structure is not consistent and the language and meaning are often
abstract. As a result, many students become reluctant to participate in poetry units. My own
students have said to me that they do not like poetry and are uncomfortable with and intimidated
by it because of poets use of non-literal language, the seemingly hidden meaning, and the
unfamiliar, changing structure. In addition to my own observations, many articles (AlexanderSmith, 2004; Welch, 1991; Welsh & Danielson, 2014) comment on students (and sometimes
teachers) discomfort with poetry because of the abstract language and inconsistent structure.
Welsh and Danielson (2014) acknowledge that poetry can be intimidating, which translates into
a dislike so strong, the students will not even attempt to interact with a poem. Many teachers in
my school, myself included, see this problem all the time. It is important that we find a way to
engage students in poetry units so that they can interact with the poems, be engaged, and learn
the essential skills that they need in order to master the English Language Arts curriculum.
In the Andover Bread Loaf summer session (a three week spoken word poetry writing
workshop for students grades three through twelve) that I observed this July, I saw many students
actively participating in and enjoying the reading, listening, writing, and speaking of poetry. I
began to question whether or not a spoken word poetry could be implemented into a poetry unit
during the school year and whether or not it would be effective in engaging students who are
reluctant with poetry.
Background
Traditionally, poetry curriculums feature a number of poems that may have the same
poet, styles, or thematic ideas. Students read and analyze the written poems for their poetic

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

elements and style. Students are then instructed to create their own poetry using the same poetic
(often figurative) language, structure, or style. Typically these curriculums stay in written forms
and are read as texts. While poetry may be read aloud during these units, that is usually not the
purpose of the curriculum.
Spoken word poetry is designed for verbal performance and finds its origins in the Black
Arts Movement of the 1960s and 1970s, [and] hip hop of the 1980s and early 1990s (Fiore,
2015, p. 813). It is often closely associated with rap. The topics typically surround social justice
issues, oppression, and identity. While spoken word poetry still has much of the same figurative
language and structure of poems studied in the traditional classroom, they are designed to
include vocal and performance dimensions and effects. Sometimes singing, gestures, or acting
are featured in order to help enhance the presentation of the piece. Spoken word poetry has
recently grown in popularity, especially among urban areas, and many competitions have been
started in the past decade. These competitions are often called poetry slams. The movie Louder
than a Bomb (2012), follows four high school students as they prepare with their teams for a
poetry slam in Chicago, Illinois. This film demonstrates the power of spoken word poetry and the
level of engagement that those students had with it. Spoken word poetry was not part of their
English curriculum as they were members of spoken word poetry teams that met after school.
While there are many newspaper articles about poetry slams, little research has been done on the
effects that a spoken word poetry curriculum would have in a classroom. The research that has
been done (Fisher, 2005; Desai & Marsh, 2005; Jocson, 2006; Scarbrough & Allen, 2014) is
within the past decade and focuses on urban schools. Those sources also emphasize social justice
and the development of student voice rather than directly addressing student engagement.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

Description of Program
The site location is a small suburban/urban middle school in Massachusetts that serves
around 600 students from sixth grade to eighth grade. In the eighth grade, the 200 students are
split between two teams of teachers. The schedule features six periods that are each 55 minutes
long. The blocks rotate every day on a six day schedule. All classes are heterogeneous, inclusion
classes. Depending on the support students need, there may be a special education teacher in
certain sections of classes.
Currently, in the eighth grade English Language Arts (ELA) curriculum of this school,
poetry is not its own separate unit. Instead, it is embedded in the unit on Sandra Cisneross The
House on Mango Street. The novel contains vignettes which are short writing pieces meant to
capture a snap shot of life or create a word picture. These vignettes are not poems, but they
include a lot of poetic elements such as short lines and figurative and sensory language. Poems
from Sandra Cisneros and Tupac Shakur are also used in the unit. These poems use a lot of
figurative language, are largely narrative, and include many different styles. In the unit the focus
in on developing students skills in reading and analyzing poems for their meaning, and use of
figurative language, word choice, and poetic structure. The writing of poetry and vignettes are
emphasized. The thematic ideas of identity, family, racism, prejudice, and environment that come
largely from The House on Mango Street are used as topics for discussion and students writing.
While students may read each others poems, they are rarely read aloud in class.
In the new spoken word poetry unit, Sandra Cisneross The House on Mango Street will
still be used because of its poetic language. While students will still write a vignette, spoken
word poetry will be incorporated and emphasized. The poems for this unit will come largely
from the collection of poems titled Poetry of Resistance: Voices for Social Justice (2016). In

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

addition, students will also listen to and watch performances by high school poets from Louder
than a Bomb (2012). Students will write a poem every day dealing with the topics of identity or
social justice issues (which closely align with The House on Mango Street as well). In addition to
writing poetry, students will also workshop their poems and perform at least one poem for their
classmates. At the end of the unit there will be a spoken word poetry competition (poetry slam).
Statement of the Problem
While poetry is an important form of literature that children must learn, many teachers
struggle with teaching poetry units because many students are intimidated by poetry. Students
often state that they do not like poetry because of its varying structure and abstract language and
meaning. They are more comfortable with prose which is more commonly used, has a set
structure, and most often has an obvious meaning. Because of the complexities of poetry as a
literary form, some students do not even begin reading, analyzing, or writing a poem.
Consequently, many teachers struggle to motivate reluctant students to engage with poetry.
Research Question
Will a spoken word poetry unit increase student engagement with poetry?
Definitions
Student engagement is defined by edglossary as the degree of attention, curiosity,
interest, optimism, and passion that students show when they are learning or being taught
(Student Engagement Definition, 2014). Within this term, there are many words that represent
intrinsic values which are difficult to measure, but can be observed through the amount of time
that the student is on task, listening to the speaker, following directions, providing written or
spoken comments, showing positive facial expressions, and the amount of questions they ask and
work they complete.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

Spoken word poetry is poetry that is meant to be verbally delivered, acted out, and
received visually and by hearing. By tradition, spoken word poetry also focuses on topics of
identity and social justice issues such as racism, discrimination, prejudice, poverty, etc.
Poetry slam is a spoken word poetry competition. There is no specific rubric for judging
speakers and audience members are randomly selected to be the judges of said competitions.
Summary of Research Design
The population of my study is two hundred eighth grade students. My convenience
sample will consist of the 100 eighth graders that are taught by the same English teacher. Of the
100 eighth graders that are heterogeneously grouped in inclusion classes, 50 of the students (two
classes of 25) will be the control group that will receive the current poetry curriculum. The other
50 students (two classes of 25) will be the experimental group and receive the spoken word
poetry curriculum with a social justice and identity focus. I will measure the level of student
engagement in both groups through a mixed-method approach. I will begin with a pre-poetry unit
survey which will ask students questions about their level of engagement with poetry. At the end
of the unit, students will receive the same survey to see whether their answers stayed the same or
whether they changed positively or negatively. I will interview the students from both groups
throughout the unit to track their own sense of engagement. I will measure the level of the
students engagement through class observations of the classes and the quality of work they
produce. At the end, the results of the surveys, interviews, observations, and quality of work
production will be analyzed to determine if a spoken word poetry unit increased student
engagement with poetry.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

10

Assumptions
This study assumes that teachers have been trained in spoken word poetry curriculum
through a college course or professional development. It assumes that teachers have the ability to
modify their curriculum and have time to implement this spoken word poetry method.
Chapter Two: Review of Literature
In the English classroom, getting reluctant students to read and write poetry is
challenging. The focus of this research study is to determine whether or not a spoken word
poetry unit will increase student engagement with poetry. After reviewing the research available
on poetry in the English classroom and spoken word poetry, three topic areas are obvious:
Teachers Perceptions of Poetry and the Teaching of Poetry, Trends in Poetry Instruction,
and Spoken Word Poetry in the Classroom. The first subtopic, Teachers Perceptions of
Poetry and the Teaching of Poetry, presents teachers views on their own experiences with
poetry as a student and their ideas about the teaching of poetry. The second sub-topic, Trends in
Poetry Instruction summarizes the research done on past and current practices and techniques
involved with teaching poetry. The third sub-topic, Spoken Word Poetry in the Classroom
presents the current research on spoken word poetry techniques and curriculum in schools.
Teachers Perceptions of Poetry and the Teaching of Poetry
At a college in Lancaster, Britain, Ray (1999) conducted a survey of 48 pre-service
teachers to determine how trainee teachers view poetry and how that impacts their attitude
toward the teaching of poetry. The results of the survey showed that a large percentage of the
teachers had negative recollections of poetry at school. The survey also found that 100% of the
respondents believed that poetry should be taught in schools largely due to cognitive
development as opposed to motivational or affective reasons. The survey also found that 83.5%

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

11

of respondents did not see any good models/examples of poetry teaching in school and that
58.5% of participants felt that the poetry they taught in school was either unenjoyable or
unsuccessful (Ray, 1999, p. 415). Based on the results of this study, a correlation is drawn
between the teachers own perception of poetry and their attitude of teaching poetry. Ray (1999)
states that the data from this study points to the need for more college-level education in teaching
poetry and better poetry instruction in elementary and secondary schools.
Based on their own research of many studies, Hughes and Dymoke (2011) understand
that teachers shy away from teaching poetry for a variety of reasons (p. 46). Consequently,
they take on this year-long qualitative research study to try to better understand and potentially
help alleviate the discomfort teachers might feel about teaching poetry through a wiki page
including pre-service teachers from Canada and England in their education classes (Hughes &
Dymoke, 2011, p. 46). Through the study, Hughes and Dymoke (2011) discovered that the seven
preconceptions about teaching poetry were: Poetry is boring student resistance to poetry,
Poetry is for the elite, Poetry is inaccessible, Poetry is frill, Student poetry is too difficult
to evaluate, Analysis is at the heart of understanding poetry, and Poetry is a solitary art (p.
49, 50, 51, 53). Their research confirms much of what theyve seen in other studies as well. They
also state that this study has implications for better pre-service preparation for teachers teaching
poetry.
Trends in Poetry Instruction
Smith and Connolly (2005) design this study to determine the effects that different levels
of teacher interpretive authority have on classroom discussions involving poetry (p. 271). The
three authority levels that are established include: a condition in which the teacher taught a
poem he had written, a condition in which the teacher taught a poem he had taught any times

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

12

previously, and a condition in which the teacher taught a poem that he saw for the first time
along with his students (Smith & Connolly, 2005, p. 272). The research was done in two honors
level 9th grade classes and discussions were evaluated for the number of times teachers and
students participated and the quality of their responses. The results of their study show that
students participated more and there was more authentic and quality thinking happening when
the teacher and students were encountering the poem for the first time together. Smith and
Connolly (2005) state that their study indicates that teachers might be able to foster more
dialogic discussions by reducing their authority over the texts their classes discuss (p. 285).
At a university in Turkey, English teachers are required to take a course called Poetry:
Analysis and Teaching. In this course they are taught the traditional way to read and analyze
poetry in which poems are analyzed line by line for stylistic purposes and there is one correct
analysis and interpretation of meaning. Sara-Szer (2006) designs this study to determine
whether the basics of the reader response approach to literature (oftentimes prose) could be
applied successfully to poetry analysis. After five weeks of the traditional poetry analysis in their
college course, thirty five undergraduate students in the poetry course were given a lesson
incorporating the elements of the reader response approach (RRA) which lets learners speak out
their own interpretations and feelings evoked, learners do not feel intimidated with the pressure
of decoding the poem with correct identifications (p. 98). The survey results showed that most
students had a positive impression of poetry taught through RRA as 93% of participants
indicated that they preferred it to the traditional approach (Sara-Szer, 2006, p. 103). The
participants reasons for the success of the RRA include that it increases participation, learners
have fun, teaches different language skills, [and] students express ideas freely (Sara-Szer,
2006, p. 102).

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

13

In his study, Gordon (2009) seeks to answer the question: How do children respond to
poetry they hear? (p. 162). Gordon (2009) prefaces his study by explaining that the UK
National Curriculum for English was print based and that the new revised curriculum for English
opens opportunities for other modes of learning especially around critical thinking, listening, and
speaking. In his year long, qualitative study of the high school English class he teaches, he found
that at first, students did not have the skills necessary to critically listen to and make meaning out
of texts because it is not a medium that is typically used. At the end of the study, Gordon (2009)
concluded that hearing poems without corresponding printed texts seemed to engage pupils and
stimulate diverse interpretations as well as that they were willing to tolerate ambiguity and
unresolved meanings in the aural mode more than when looking for a concise, closed meaning
in text form (p. 164).
Peskin, Allen, and Wells-Jopling (2010) acknowledge that although there is a lot of
psychological research on how students learn in scientific, mathematical, and historical ways,
there is little research on the application to literary thinking in general, and ways to teach poetry
in particular (p. 498). The goal of their research was to determine the effectiveness of a poetry
unit emphasizing symbolic interpretations of poems. The curriculum was designed by a professor
of applied cognitive science, a doctoral student in cognitive psychology, and an experienced high
school English teacher. In a Canadian high school, two classes of fourteen to fifteen year olds
were participants in the study. One class (the control group) received the typical curriculum and
the other received the symbolism curriculum (experimental group). The difference in the
curriculums is that the experimental group received explicit symbolism instruction and three
scaffolds. Peskin, Allen, and Wells-Jopling (2010) found that the experimental group
demonstrated more symbolic-level poetry interpretations on an unfamiliar, and somewhat

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

14

difficult, poem and enjoyed it slightly more than the control group (p. 506). Peskin, Allen,
and Wells-Jopling (2010) state that an implication that results from this research is that, contrary
to popular opinion, students are engaged even when using a formalist approach to poetry
(emphasizes stylistic devices, rhyme, meter, and literary allusion) (p. 506).
In a nine month (October-June) ethnographic study of an urban fifth grade classroom in
California, Christianakis (2011), a participant-observer, seeks to answer the following questions:
(a) How does Mr. Mitchells writing pedagogy differentiate rap from literacy? (b) How did his
fifth-grade students attempt to incorporate rap into classroom writing? (p. 1133). In her critical
literature review, she quickly describes how there are four ways to incorporate rap into an
English classroom: bridge, scaffold, hybrid, and critical text (p. 1141). The differences
in the approaches being the degree to which rap is used and given authority in the classroom as
opposed to other canonical texts where bridge is the lowest degree of rap inclusion and
critical text is the highest. Canoniocal texts are those that are part of the English cannon or
the traditional, classical, required texts of the English curriculum which are often European in
origin. Christianakis (2011) found that Mr. Mitchell used bridge and scaffold forms of rap
inclusion because of the curricular demands of the school which does not recognize rap as part of
the acceptable standards-based curriculum. In response to her second question Christianakis
(2011) concluded that even though a bridge was used by the teacher, the students sought for a
hybrid method in which rap was given more of a place in the classroom and considered equal, in
critical authority, to the canonical texts.
Hennessy and McNamara (2012) want to answer the question: what makes an effective
poetry teacher? Both researchers value the input students have on the effectiveness of curricula.
As a result, they design and implement a phenomenographic study incorporating 23 seniors

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

15

perception of effective poetry teachers at a high school in Ireland (Hennessy & McNamara,
2012, p. 379). As a result of these interviews, Hennessy and McNamara (2012) find that an
effective poetry teacher: reflects a mature epistemological position; encourages critical thinking
and understanding; holds a positive attitude towards poetry; encourages poetic composition;
[and] reflects and promotes creativity (p. 384).
Spoken Word Poetry in the Classroom
Curious about spoken word poetry and its place in education, Fisher (2005) conducts a
qualitative study of two urban high schools in New York City during the 2003-2004 school year.
She sets out to answer two questions: How are high school English teachers and their students
integrating out-of-school literacy practices such as spoken word poetry in urban school settings?
and What are the ways in which these teachers and their students are redefining literacy and
what it means to be literate? (p. 115). In both of these schools students chose to be part of this
class; it was not required. Fisher (2005) refers to these classes as Participatory Literacy
Communities (PLCs) which are organized around aspects of literacy such as spoken word
poetry, open mic events, bookstore events, writers collectives, and book clubs (p. 117). The
curriculum of these classes incorporates spoken word poetry in order to create interventions that
help students use prior skills and knowledge as a tool for academic literacies (p. 116). The way
the teachers do this is by focusing on students prior knowledge which can take the form of hiphop culture, their identities, or their own cultures. The format of both classrooms that were
studied used an open mic format that encouraged a culture of listening and valuing of words
(p. 128). As a result of this curriculum, Fisher found, through student interviews and class
observations, that this class was sometimes the reason that students came to school. Others, she
learned, felt encouraged because they felt heard and understood by those in the class.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

16

Desai and Marsh (2005) conduct a study to determine whether or not a spoken word
poetry class would help students develop a voice in writing, a critical consciousness and [a]
commitment to social justice (p. 78). The two researchers, who are also teachers at LAX high
school, started a PEACE Class (Political Education, Art, and Critical Expression) at their
school. Twenty students attended this class to varying degrees due to their schedules. The poetry
and discussions from that class were about themselves and their world. Based on this class, Desai
and Marsh (2005) conclude that spoken word poetry helps to develop students voices. So often,
they say, these voices are muted by academic priorities (e.g., tests, standards, homework)
(Desai & Marsh, 2005, p. 72). Desai and Marsh (2005) also conclude that spoken word poetry
helps teachers to acknowledge the realities and lived experiences of students in order to
connect with the students and critically examine the world (p. 88).
Jocson (2006) questions if hybrid literacy learning that includes spoken word poetry,
music, and other forms of popular culture with urban youth is effective. Over a 30 month period,
Jocson (2006) conducted a mixed-method study at a high school in California in which he began
with an initial survey and then purposefully selected seven focal students. All of these students
were students of color. He observed them in the writing workshop hosted by staff from a
university program called Poetry for the People (P4P) which promotes artistic and political
empowerment through poetry (p. 233). He uses a framework to analyze and organize his results
called PPP poetry as practice, process, and product (p. 238). Based on student work
produced, student interviews, and scores on their poetry writing, Jocson (2006) concludes that
hybrid literacy learning not only helped to sustain [student] interest in poetry and performance
but also increasedpotential for learning (p. 252). He finds that the program is successful with

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

17

these seven students because spoken word poetry requires the development of student voice and
a critical view of the world and social justice.
Scarbrough and Allen (2014) perform a qualitative study of the effectiveness of spoken
word poetry in secondary schools. The study took place in one midsized Northeastern U.S. city
high school class. Two teachers work closely together in one classroom to conduct a four-week
spoken word poetry unit in the form of a writing workshop. The theme of the unit was poet as
agent of social change and focused on performance poetry for 90 minute blocks every other
school day (Scarbrough & Allen, 2014, p. 480). Through class observations, student work
observation, and student interviews, Scarbrough and Allen (2014) conclude that these workshops
are effective in that they created an authentic audience for students and had critical discussions
about word choice, style, and other poetic elements. Scarbrough and Allen (2014) state that
classes like the one they observed carry enormous potential for engaging youth and helping
them do the complicated work of developing as writers (p. 502). They encourage educational
researchers to continue researching this topic as their study was limited and more should be
learned about the topic.
Conclusion
The research points out a need for more teacher preparation in teaching poetry (Ray,
1999; Hughes & Dymoke, 2011). The trend in the instruction of poetry is moving away from
traditional instruction that incorporates canonical texts exclusively and emphasizes stylistic
analysis through dissection to discover a specific interpretation and meaning of a poem. Other
various approaches and changes to teaching poetry are being explored. One of the major changes
is the idea that there is not a single, correct interpretation of a poem. Reader response approach
(Sara-Szer, 2006) and minimal authoritative teaching (Smith & Connolly, 2005) of a poem

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

18

help to foster student engagement and conversations surrounding a poem. Another major shift is
the inclusion of other texts besides the canonical texts. Many of the research studies show that
hybrid techniques that incorporate other mediums such as music, popular culture, and the
students experience increase student engagement and word production with poetry. The idea of
poetry as a written text is also shifting as curriculum is beginning to include standards for critical
speaking and listening. Poetry is increasingly seen not only as a physical text, but as a
performance piece as is demonstrated through spoken word poetry. The trending position away
from tradition poetry instruction has made space for the inclusion of spoken word poetry. In
many case studies, spoken word poetry curriculum is successful with developing student voice
and a critical view of their world. However, the research is limited in the amount of studies, the
number of students involved, and the fact that for the majority of the studies it was a voluntary
class and not part of the required English curriculum. My research is needed because it adds to
the investigation on the effectiveness of spoken word poetry curriculum. It focuses specifically
on student engagement instead of the development of voice and a critical worldview. It is
especially important because it would not be a unit or class that students chose to take, but part
of the required English curriculum.
Chapter Three: Research Design/Methodology
My study seeks to answer the question: will a spoken word poetry unit increase student
engagement with poetry? The research design that I will use in order to answer this question is a
mixed-method study. I will give a pre and post unit survey to determine the students level of
engagement with poetry before and after instruction. I will measure student engagement through
student interviews, observations of students in class, and the quality of student work production
in and out of class. A mixed-method study is an appropriate choice for the research question

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

19

because measuring student engagement is complex and requires the use of both qualitative and
quantitative research methods.
Population
The population selected for this study will be eighth grade students from a public
urban/suburban middle school in Massachusetts. The students are divided in eight classes. There
are 25 students in each class for a total population of 200 hundred students.
Sample
A convenience sample will be selected from the population. One English teacher teaches
half of the 200 eighth graders because of general scheduling purposes. Those 100 students will
be divided into four classes. In order to become participants in this study, those 100 students will
be given an informed consent form that both they and their parents or guardians must read. The
sample will consist of those students who return the consent form and agree to participate in the
study. All students will be participating in the study as it is the curriculum that I will be changing.
However, only the data from those who gave their consent to participate will be considered for
the results of the study. Information from and identity of the school and participants will be kept
confidential.
Materials
In addition to the typical English classroom supplies, the following materials will also be
used for the study:
-

25 copies of The House on Mango Street novel by Sandra Cisneros

25 copies of The Rose that Grew from Concrete collection of poems by Tupac Shakur
25 copies of Poetry of Resistance: Voices for Social Justice (2016) book
Louder than a Bomb (2012) movie
Pre-poetry unit student engagement survey
Post-poetry unit student engagement survey
Interview questions for student interviews
Observation recording form

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

-

20

Rubric for quality of completed poetry assignments

Recording device for interviews

Data Collection/Procedure
This is a mixed-methods study in which both qualitative and quantitative research design
and data will be implemented and collected to determine whether a spoken word poetry unit will
increase student engagement with poetry. After receiving permission from the Institutional
Review Board and the principal of the school and signed informed consent forms from the
students and their parents or guardians, the study will begin. This will be an eight week study.
The students will first take a pre-poetry unit survey to determine the students self-perception of
their engagement with poetry (see appendix A). This will be a benchmark assessment to
determine what level of interest and engagement with poetry they are entering the unit with.
After the survey, the poetry units will begin. Two of the classes (50 students) will be the
control group and will receive the poetry curriculum as it is currently taught in the eighth grade
English classrooms at this school. This current unit features the use of the text The House on
Mango Street by Sandra Cisneros and poems from The Rose that Grew from Concrete by Tupac
Shakur. Students will read, analyze, and write poetry surrounding the themes in those two texts:
identity, family, racism, prejudice, and environment. The other two classes (50 students) will be
the experimental group and receive the spoken word poetry unit. They will still read The House
on Mango Street by Sandra Cisneros, but they will also read poems from Poetry of Resistance:
Voices for Social Justice (2016) and watch Louder than a Bomb (2012). In addition to reading,
analyzing, and writing poems, students will also listen to and speak poems. They will participate
in a poetry slam which is a performance of poetry.
During this eight week poetry unit, I will also use an observation recording form (see
appendix B) once a week in all classes in order to measure student engagement during class. I

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

21

will measure the amount and quality of work that each student is producing in and out of class. I
will interview all participants individually during weeks five and six to measure their level of
engagement with poetry as the unit is going on. In the eighth week, the students will take a postpoetry unit engagement survey to determine their level of interest and engagement with poetry
after taking part in the class.
Analysis of Data
The pre-poetry and post-poetry unit survey (see appendix A) will be given to all students
and their responses will be written. The questions are scaled based on the Likert scale survey: 5 =
strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = undecided, 2 = disagree, and 1 = strongly disagree. The statements
are written in a negative way so a high score would mean that students are not interested in or
engaged with poetry. The average of an individual students score on the pre-unit survey and
post-unit survey will tell me the level to which the student finds poetry interesting and engaging
before and after the unit. The average of the class scores will tell me their level of interest and
engagement with poetry before and after the unit. I will use the results of the pre-unit survey in
comparison of the post-unit survey to measure whether or not their level of interest and
engagement increased. I will compare the results of the control group with the experimental
group to determine whether or not the spoken word poetry unit increases student engagement
with poetry as compared to the current curriculum.
Once a week, I will fill out an observation recording form (see appendix B) for all four
classes on the same day. I will look for signs of student engagement in the class such as: number
of students who are on task (participating in the assigned classroom activity), actively listening
to the speaker (listening and concentrating on what is being said), asking questions, and
participating in class discussions. I will use the results to compare the level of engagement of the

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

22

control and experimental groups. The eight surveys that will be collected for each class will also
measure whether or not the level of engagement increases, decreases, or stays the same over the
unit.
The amount and quality of work that each student produces will be measured throughout
the unit. The purpose of keeping track of the amount of work turned in is that when students are
engaged in a unit they will do the work in the unit. The quality is also measured to account for
students who may be so engaged in mastering one activity that they may ignore others. I will
measure the quality of the writing samples by the rubric (see appendix C). I will use this data in
addition to the other measures being used to see if there are any patterns in the level of
engagement in each student and class.
The student interviews (see appendix D) will be digitally recorded for the audio and later
transcribed. These interviews will provide further information about the level of engagement
students are experiencing with the poetry units. This data will be triangulated with the data from
the pre and post engagement survey and teacher observations to gain further insight into the
reasons for an increase, decrease, or no change in the level of student engagement with poetry.
Limitations of Study
Generalizability is limited to sample size.

References
Alarcon, F. X., & Rodrigue, O. G. (Eds.). (2016). Poetry of Resistance: Voices for Social Justice.
Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press.
Alexander-Smith, A. C. (2004). Feeling the Rhythm of the Critically Conscious Mind. The
English Journal, 93(3), 58-63.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

23

Christianakis, M. (2011). Hybrid Texts: Fifth Graders, Rap Music, and Writing. Urban
Education, 46(5), 1131-1168.
Cisneros, S. (1994). The House on Mango Street. New York, NY: Knopf, A. A.
Desai, S. R., & Marsh, T. (2005). Weaving Multiple Dialects in the Classroom Discourse: Poetry
and Spoken Word as a Critical Teaching Tool. Taboo: The Journal Of Culture And
Education, 9(2), 71-90.
Fiore, M. (2015). Pedagogy for Liberation: Spoken Word Poetry in Urban Schools. Education
And Urban Society, 47(7), 813-829.
Fisher, M. T. (2005). From the Coffee House to the School House: The Promise and Potential of
Spoken Word Poetry in School Contexts. English Education, 37(2), 115-131.
Gordon, J. (2009). Sound[']s Right: Pupils' Responses to Heard Poetry and the Revised National
Curriculum for English. Curriculum Journal, 20(2), 161-175.
Hennessy, J., & Mannix McNamara, P. (2012). What Rough Beast? Conceptualising the Poetry
Teacher in Ireland Through the Eyes of the Pupil. Asia-Pacific Journal Of Teacher
Education, 40(4), 379-394.
Hughes, J., & Dymoke, S. (2011). 'Wiki-Ed Poetry': Transforming Preservice Teachers'
Preconceptions About Poetry and Poetry Teaching. Journal Of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 55(1), 46-56.
Jocson, K. M. (2006). "Bob Dylan and Hip Hop": Intersecting Literacy Practices in Youth Poetry
Communities. Written Communication, 23(3), 231-259.
Peskin, J., Allen, G., & Wells-Jopling, R. (2010). "The Educated Imagination": Applying
Instructional Research to the Teaching of Symbolic Interpretation of Poetry. Journal Of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(6), 498-507.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

24

Ray, R. (1999). The diversity of poetry: How Trainee Teachers' Perceptions Affect Their
Attitudes to Poetry Teaching. Curriculum Journal, 10(3), 403-418.
Sara-Szer, H. S. (2006). Reader Response Approach to Teaching Poetry. Hacettepe University
Journal Of Education, (31), 96-105.
Scarbrough, B., & Allen, A. (2014). Writing Workshop Revisited: Confronting Communicative
Dilemmas through Spoken Word Poetry in a High School English Classroom. Journal Of
Literacy Research, 46(4), 475-505.
Siskel, J. (Producer), & Jacobs, G. (Director). (2012). Louder than a Bomb [Motion picture].
United States: Virgil Films.
Smith, M. W., & Connolly, W. (2005). The Effects of Interpretive Authority on Classroom
Discussions of Poetry: Lessons from One Teacher. Communication Education, 54(4),
271-288.
Student Engagement Definition (2014). In S. Abbott (Ed.), The Glossary of Education Reform.
Retrieved July, 18, 2016 from http://edglossary.org/student-engagement/
Welch, L. (1991). Back-door teaching of poetry. College Teaching, 39(4), 149.
Welsh, K. A., & Danielson, K. E. (2014). Embracing Poetry: Ten Mentor Text Poetry Books to
Entice Middle and High School Students. California Reader, 48(1), 29-37.

Appendices
Appendix A: Pre-Poetry Unit and Post-Poetry Unit Survey
Pre-Poetry Unit and Post-Poetry Unit Survey
Please rate each of the following statements: strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, or
strongly agree by putting a check in one box per question.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

Questions

Strongly
Disagree

25
Disagree

Undecided

Agree

I find poetry boring

I struggle to understand
poetry
I dont like writing poetry
Poetry is my least favorite
unit in English class
I dont read poetry on my
own time
I dont write poetry on my
own time
I dont talk about poetry
with others in school
I dont talk about poetry
with others outside of
school
I dont like analyzing poems
I dont like using figurative
language (e.g. simile,
metaphor, personification,
allusion, etc.)

Appendix B: Student Engagement Observation Recording Form

Student Engagement Observation Recording Form

Week #: 1

Class #: 1

Strongly
Agree

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

26

Number of Students
Criteria
Students on task
- Student is actively
completing a class activity
- Students conversation is
on-topic with peers or
teachers

Actively listening to the

speaker (teacher or student)
- Student is looking at the
speaker
- Student is not engaging in
other off-task activity
(talking, drawing, etc.)
while the speaker is
talking
- Students track the
conversation by either
verbally responding or
writing notes in their
notebook
Asking questions
- Students ask questions
whether in a large group,
small group, or in studentteacher interactions

Participating in class
discussions
- Student participates in class
discussions by either
verbally participating or
by writing notes about the
conversation and what

Less than 25%

25%<x>50%

50%<x>75%

More than
75%

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

27

thoughts that brings up for

them.
No
Engagement

Low
Engagement

Average
Engagement

High
Engagement

Appendix C: Writing Sample Rubric

Writing Sample Rubric
Category
Voice

4
Exemplary
The writer
seems to be
writing from

3
2
Satisfactory
Needs Improvement
The writer seems The writer relates
to be drawing on some of his/her
knowledge or
knowledge or

1
Unsatisfactory
The writer has
not tried to
transform

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

knowledge or
experience. The
author has taken
the ideas and
made them
his/her own

experience, but
there is some
lack of
ownership of the
topic

Word
Choice

The writer uses

vivid words and
phrases (such as
figurative or
sensory
language) that
linger or draw
pictures in the
readers mind.

Flow &
Rhythm

All words and

lines have a
purposeful flow
and rhythm that
enhances the
meaning of the
poem

The writer
mostly uses
words and
phrases (such as
figurative or
sensory
language) that
linger or draw
pictures in the
readers mind,
but occasionally
the words are
used
inaccurately
Almost all words
and lines have a
purposeful flow
and rhythm
meant to help
with the meaning
of the poem. But
occasionally
they are
awkward or
difficult to
understand

28
experience, but it
adds nothing to the
discussion of the
topic

information in a
personal way.
The ideas and
the way they are
expressed seem
to belong to
someone else
The writer uses words The writer uses a
that communicate
limited
clearly, but the
vocabulary that
writing lacks visual
does not
components.
communicate
Figurative and
strongly or
sensory language are capture the
rarely used.
readers interest.
Figurative and
sensory
language are not
used.

Some words and lines

attempt to have
rhythmic quality and
flow, but there does
not seem to be a
reason for it and it
doesnt help to
enhance the meaning
of the poem.

Appendix D: Student Interview Questions

Student Interview Questions
1. Do you like poetry? Why or why not?

The words and

lines of the
poem do not
have a
purposeful flow
or rhythm.

ENGAGING RELUCTANT STUDENTS

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

What has been your worst experience with poetry? What made it so bad?
What has been your best experience with poetry? What made it so great?
Which do you like better: prose or poetry? Why?
Do you write poetry on your own outside of class? If so, what type?
What do you think would make poetry more interesting for students in class?
Has this poetry unit changed the way you think and feel about poetry? Why or why not?

29