Current Theories, Constructs, and Interventions Within an Expectancy-Value Framework

• In Event: Psychosocial Skills in the 21st Century: Theory, Research, and Applications

Abstract

Understanding student motivation, and its relationship to learning outcomes, is a central task for both researchers and practitioners. The expectancy-value framework (Eccles et al., 1983) offers a multidimensional approach to describing student motivation within educational contexts. Both expectancy and value have their own rich, independent bodies of literature. In an effort to help organize existing knowledge of this research area, the first purpose of our talk is to offer separate, historical reviews of expectancy and value constructs. The second purpose of our talk is to consider integrative approaches that combine expectancy and value constructs within the same model. The final purpose of our talk is to highlight an emerging body of intervention work designed to influence and improve students’ expectancies and values. By identifying the sources of expectancy and value that are amenable to change, we can help teachers and schools diagnose why students struggle and what practitioners can proactively do to enhance student motivation.

Theories concerned with expectancy-related constructs attempt to address the first critical question about motivation: “Do students think they can do the task?” There are numerous theoretical conceptualizations (e.g., self-efficacy theory, expectancy-value theory, locus of control theories, attribution theories, and implicit theories of intelligence) and specific constructs (e.g., self-efficacy beliefs, expectancies for success, perceived control, perceptions of task difficulty, and growth mindsets) linked to addressing this motivational question (see Pajares, 1996; Pintrich, 2003). Theories concerned with value-related constructs attempt to address the second critical question about motivation: “Do students want to do the task?” Once again, numerous theoretical conceptualizations (e.g., expectancy-value theory, self-determination theory, and self-worth theory) and specific constructs (e.g., intrinsic value, attainment value, utility value, and extrinsic value) have been proposed (see Pintrich, 2003). Although there are similarities among these theories and proposed constructs, there are also substantive, theoretical differences that distinguish each. In our talk we will briefly outline some of the common themes as well as differences across theoretical conceptualizations of expectancy-related and value-related constructs.

In addition, we have recently proposed a revised expectancy-value-cost framework that includes cost as a separate, third component (Barron & Hulleman, 2015). Even when students have expectancy and value, they still might not be motivated if they experience significant negative aspects to task engagement (i.e., cost) preventing them from engaging in that task. Thus, as teachers encounter motivation problems with their students, deciding if the problem is an expectancy, value, or cost problem is a critical first step in determining how to intervene.
Using expectancy-value-cost as a conceptual umbrella under which other motivation theories and constructs fit, we have identified research-based sources of expectancy, value, and cost that are potentially amenable to interventions. Importantly, these sources can serve as the targets or drivers of interventions aimed at enhancing student outcomes by boosting students’ expectancies and values, and reducing their costs. We will close with a brief introduction to the growing body of intervention work (see also Lazowski & Hulleman, 2015; Yeager & Walton, 2011) that target sources of students’ expectancy, value, and costs for their schoolwork.

Authors

• Chris S. Hulleman, University of Virginia

• Kenn E. Barron, James Madison University

• Jeffery John Kosovich, University of Virginia

• Rory Lazowski, The College Board