Motivation to Learn Keys to Increasing Student Engagement

Motivation to Learn Cognitive Apprenticeships review Chapter 14 Group Presentation Factors Influencing Motivation For Tuesday: start studying for your Quiz #3 (Chapters 11-14) - For Tuesday: start studying for your Quiz #3 (Chapters 11-14) - Tuesday, Dec. 14th 10:00- 11:50 Classroom Management-Working with Parents

Factors Influencing Motivation InterestAttributionsSelf-efficacy Goal Orientation

Motivation to Learn The role of Attribution Theory and Task Engagement

Attribution Theory Weiner, 1974 –Attribution theory assumes that people try to determine why people do what they do. –As “naïve psychologists” we come up with explanations of why things happen. –I.e., attribute causes to behavior

The Chain of Events According to Attribution theory, the type of attributions we make determine future acts The Chain of Events 1. A certain outcome occurs 2. I ask the question "Why?" 3. I provide an attribution. 4. My future behavior depends on the type of attribution I make.

Example You are taking a class and you get test results back. You take a peek and see, aarrgghh, a 65%. You think about these disappointing results for a minute and realize… you have a lousy teacher, a terrible textbook and the test was completely unfair

Example On the next test you take a peek and see, ahhhh, a 95%. After seeing this results you think….. When you're hot, you're hot. If you've got it, flaunt it. Some people are born great.

Three Causal Dimension (Weiner, 1974; 1986) Locus of control ControllabilityStability

Making Attributions – Locus of Control External (“it was the lousy teacher”) –assigns causality to an outside agent or force Internal (“if you’re hot, you’re hot”) –assigns causality to factors within the person

Three Causal Dimension (Weiner, 1974; 1986) Locus of control –External v. Internal Controllability –Causes one can control, I.e., skill/efficacy Versus –causes one cannot control, I.e., aptitude, mood, others' actions, and luck Stability –Change over time? Yes- (unstable) No - (stable)

Attributions Affect Future Behavior You are taking a class and you get test results back. You take a peek and see, aarrrgh, a 65%. You think about these disappointing results for a minute and realize… You have a lousy teacher, a terrible textbook and the test was completely unfair –External, uncontrollable, stable Future behavior- unlikely to change You missed several days of class and only reviewed half of the material on the study guide –Internal, controllable, unstable Future behavior – more likely to change

Attributions Affect Future Behavior You are taking a class and you get test results back. You take a peek and see, aarrrgh, a 65%. You think about these disappointing results for a minute and realize… You stink at this subject, no matter what you do it doesn’t make a difference. You’ll never be good at it. Why even try? –Internal, stable, and uncontrollable

Learned Helplessness (Seligman, 1965) When cause is viewed as internal, stable and uncontrollable –A psychological condition in which a human (or animal) has learned that it is helpless. It feels that it has no control over its situation and that whatever it does is futile. As a result it will stay passive when the situation is unpleasant or harmful.

Influencing Behavior How does this have implications for the classroom? If we can direct/control the attributions people make, then we can influence their future behavior.

Four factors affecting attributions for achievement (Weiner, 1974) Four factors affecting attributions for achievement (Weiner, 1974) AbilityEffort Task difficulty Luck Luck

Alternative Example You are taking a class and you get test results back. You take a peek and see, ahhhhh, a 65%. You think about these disappointing results for a minute and realize… You missed several days of class and only reviewed half of the material on the study guide.

Alternative Example On the next test you take a peek and see, ahhhh, a 95%. After seeing this results you think….. Wow, what a score! The teacher must have been asleep when he graded my paper because I didn’t have a clue.

Combining 4 Factors with 3 Dimensions to examine Reactions to Failure AttributionExampleLocusControllableStable Effort “I didn’t study enough” InternalYesunstable Ability “I’m not good at math” InternalNo(Yes?)stable(unstable?) Task Difficulty “The test was hard” ExternalNostable Luck “I had bad luck” ExternalNounstable

Our View of Ability- Effects on attributions Theories of Intelligence  Fixed/Entity view: Intelligence is static; what you’re born with is what you’ve got  Malleable/Incremental view: Intelligence can grow through practice, effort and improved strategies

Reactions to Success and Failure Fixed/Entity –tend to make external attributions in the face of failure to protect self from negative attributions. You make internal attributions when successful. Malleable/Incremental –can make internal attributions when successful and in the face of failure.

Reactions to Failure ( Malleable View of Intelligence) AttributionExampleLocusControllableStable Effort “I didn’t study enough” InternalYesunstable Ability “I’m not good at math” Internal Yes- I need new strategies Unstable - I can improve Task Difficulty “The test was hard” ExternalNostable Luck “I guessed wrong” ExternalNounstable

Self-Efficacy A Key to Improving Motivation

Self-efficacy Defined People’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performance (Bandura, 1986) An individual’s judgment of his or her capabilities to perform given actions (Schunk, 1991)

Self-efficacy v. Self-concept Self-efficacy –View of one’s abilities in a specific domain Self-concept or self-esteem –Global view of one’s self across domains

Self- Efficacy… Influences task choice, effort persistence and achievement. Compared with students who doubt their learning capacities, those who have a sense of efficacy for [particular tasks] participate more readily, work harder, persist longer when they encounter difficulties, and achieve at a higher level… Student do not engage in activities they believe will lead to negative outcomes. -Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997

4 Factors of Influence Past Performance –Past success in solving algebra equations increases individual’s beliefs in their capability to solve future problems Modeling –Observing others successfully solve algebra equations increase observers belief that they can be solved

4 Factors of Influence (cont.) Verbal Persuasion –Teacher comments “I know you will be able to solve these equations,” increases the likelihood that individuals will engage in a demanding task, and if successful, belief in their capabilities Psychological State –Thoughts such as, “I cant do this”, uses working memory space that could be devoted to solving the problems, success is reduced and efficacy decreases.

High Self-efficacyLow Self-efficacy Task OrientationAccept challenging tasks Avoid challenging tasks EffortHigh effort with challenging tasks Low effort with challenging tasks PersistencePersist when goals aren’t initially reached Give up when goals aren’t reached BeliefsWill succeed In control Incompetence Not in control Strategy UseDiscard unproductive strategies Keep unproductive strategies PerformancePerform higher than low S-E with equal ability Perform lower than high S-E with equal ability Influence on Behavior and Cognition

Creating Successful Classroom Experiences (Culyer, 1996; Lipson& Wixson, 1997; Margolis & McCabe, 2004) Work should challenge but not frustrate –Classwork at students’ instructional level –Homework at students’ independent level Explicitly and systematically teach learning strategies that produce success.

Ways Teachers can strengthen self-efficacy in students (Margolis & McCabe, 2004) Linking new work to recent successes Stressing peer modeling Reinforcing effort and persistence Teaching learners to make facilitative attributions Helping to identify and make personally important goals

Effective Goals (Margolis & McCabe, 2004) Personally important –Relevant and needed Immediate (v. distant) –Short term Specific (v. Broad and General) Achievable –Moderately difficult (not too hard, not too easy) Focus on Learning/Mastery (v. Performance)

Goal Orientation The Final Key to Improving Motivation

Learning/Mastery Goals Focus on challenge and mastery of a task Deep processing used to accomplish understanding Lead to –Attempting to understand –Not worrying about failure –Not comparing oneself with others

Performance Goals Focus on demonstrating high ability and avoiding failure –“Getting an A on the test” –“I just don’t want to fail and have to take the class over” Lead to –“Getting by” rather than true understanding of concepts –Feelings of anxiety about success and failure –Comparison and competition with others

Learning v. Performance Focused Classrooms (Maehr, 1992) Learning-FocusedPerformance-Focused Definition of Success Improvement, progress, mastery High grades, performance comparisons Reasons for effort Learn something new High grades, demonstrate ability Basis for satisfaction Progress, challenge, mastery Doing better than others, Success with min. effort Evaluation criteria Evidence of progress Social comparisons Interpretation of errors Information, part of the learning process Failure, lack of ability Concept of Ability Incremental, improves with effort Entity, fixed

Goal Orientation and Learner Outcomes (Wolters, 2004) Mastery Orientation –Higher Levels of Motivational Engagement –Effective Learning Strategies Performance Approach Orientation –Higher Grades Performance Avoidance –Negative relation to motivation and learning strategies

Why Help Students Set Learning Goals? Use goals to motivate and increase feelings of self-efficacy –Gives a standard by which to measure progress and success –Increase effort and persistence –Encourages the use of new strategies when the old ones do not work as well