The Reciprocal Relationship between Value, Interest, and Learning over Time

• In Event: Interest Development and Its Relation to Academic Motivation

Abstract

The Self-Regulation of Motivation (SRM) model (Sansone & Thoman, 2005) suggests that goals-defined motivation (i.e., value and expectancy of learning) and experience-defined motivation (i.e., whether the experience is interesting) are distinct but reciprocally related over time. This reciprocal process can lead to experiencing interest in a novel topic, as well as guide development of initial interest into sustained or well-developed individual interests (Hidi & Renninger, 2006). The relationship between this process and academic achievement is not linear, however, because actions that help to develop interest may or may not contribute positively to performance assessments.

The RMAPO project created a paradigm for examining this proposed regulatory process, implemented via an online HTML lesson. The initial lesson description either simply described the skills to be learned (control), or further added how these skills could be used when creating personal or organizational web pages (added utility value). Initial results from this larger project suggested that adding utility value did not directly affect motivation (interest) and performance (quiz on HTML knowledge) outcomes. Rather, the added utility value was associated with more manipulating and modeling of sample HTML codes in optional examples and exercises. Mid-level engagement predicted higher quiz scores, and higher-level engagement predicted greater interest at the end of the 1½-hour session. For about 20%, these positive outcomes came at a cost of failing to submit an assignment during the timed session (Sansone, Fraughton, Butner, & Zachary, 2011).

We use data from this project to examine the proposed reciprocal nature of this process by examining whether the initial added utility value information directly predicted value at lesson conclusion, or depended on the experience students created during the lesson via engagement behaviors. We also compared Competence Value (valuing doing well) and Lesson Value (valuing lesson content).

Participants were undergraduates (n=108; 67% female) who came into the lab and worked on the online HTML programming lesson for 1½ hours. During the lesson, we assessed engagement behaviors and whether students submitted the assignment. At lesson conclusion, learning was assessed via a quiz of HTML knowledge. Students also rated on 1 to 5 scales: Competence Value (4 items), Lesson Value (3 items), and Lesson Interest (5 items). Finally, students could request an access code for the full online programming course.

Results from a series of hierarchical regression analyses suggest that the initial added utility value directly contributed to competence value, and indirectly contributed to lesson value by motivating higher levels of engagement during the lesson. Competence value was related to finding the lesson interesting. In contrast, seeing the lesson content as valuable was associated with greater interest AND learning, and with requesting the access code to the full online programming class. However, it was also associated with being less likely to have submitted the assignment. We will use these results to discuss the symposium questions, noting that the relationships among value, interest and competence are complex, depend on which aspects of each construct are measured, and are reciprocal over time.

Author

• Carol Sansone, University of Utah