The Effect of Interest on the Use of Learning Strategies and Knowledge Acquisition During School Class Museum Visits

• In Event: 61.032 - When Rubber Meets the Road: How Interest Shapes Learners' Interactions With Content

Abstract

Purpose and Theoretical Framework
Beyond the general assumption that learning benefits from the presence of interest (e.g. Prenzel & Krapp, 2011) it is an open question under which specific conditions this positive relation actually occurs. One aspect which is assumed to have an impact on the effectiveness of interest on learning is the instructional design and with this, the degree of freedom for students to act interest-based. We therefore compared cognitivist instructional approaches, which are supposed to offer less room for students’ interest to influence their learning process, with constructivist instructional approaches, which are supposed to offer more room for students to act according to their interest (Reinmann & Mandl, 2006).

By using the example of school class museum visits we focus on the effects of different visit formats on the relation between interest (Mitchell, 1993; Renninger & Su, 2012) and learning.

More precisely, we investigated the predictive power of individual interest and both phases of situational interest (catch and hold; Lewalter & Knogler, 2014) on the use of learning strategies (surface and deep level strategies; Weinstein & Mayer, 1986) and learning outcomes (factual knowledge and transfer). In two studies with school students, we focus on typical visit formats by comparing guided tours which represent a cognitivist instructional design with a jigsaw puzzle and guided exploration which represent a constructivist instructional design (Reinmann & Mandl, 2006).

Method and Sources of Data
Study 1 was conducted with 133 high school students (mean age 14.84 years; 40.6 % female) in a science museum. Study 2 was conducted in a cultural history museum with 237 middle school and high school students (mean age 13.41 years; 58.6 % female). Both studies had a pre-post-design. In the pre-test, individual interest and prior knowledge (as a control variable) were assessed. In the post-test, situational interest, the use of learning strategies and the learning outcome were assessed.

Results and Scholarly Significance
Results of multiple regression analyses under consideration of prior knowledge indicated in both studies that individual interest had nearly no predictive power for the use of learning strategies and the learning outcome regardless of the instructional design. Concerning situational interest, the findings showed that catch was a relevant predictor for the use of surface and deep level strategies (βs=.17 to .76) in both studies. Catch especially predicted the use of surface level strategies during guided tours (βs=.42 to .76). In contrast, hold predicted the use of deep level strategies only (βs=.30 to .43), especially in more constructivist learning situations in both studies. Results were inconsistent concerning the learning outcomes. In study 1 catch predicted factual knowledge during all three visit formats (βs=.25 to .48) while hold has this function especially during guided tours (βs=.26 to .48). In study 2, catch was relevant for factual knowledge (β=.24), while hold was important for transfer (β=.19). The importance of these findings for the necessity of further motivation research in this area and for educational practice is discussed in this contribution.

Authors

• Doris Lewalter, Technical University of Munich

• Katrin Neubauer, Technical University Munich

• Anja Mayle

• Maximilian Knogler, Technische Universität München