Learning Enhancers and Detractors and the Value Aspect of Motivation in Finnish and American Classrooms

• In Event: Crafting Engagement in Science Environments Through Project-Based Learning

Abstract

Objectives and Purpose
Recent educational research highlights the importance of examining students’ situational learning, how often students are engaged, and what kind of learning experiences students have in science and other academic classes. These studies have identified different positive and negative subjective learning experiences which can either promote or hinder learning (e.g. Schneider et al., 2016). However, less is known about the extent to which perceived level of challenge and motivational value of a task promote/hinder students’ subjective learning experiences in different learning situations. This analysis uses Finnish and US data to examine experiences of challenge, motivation, intrinsic value, education attainment, and utility value—importance to self—to predict social and emotional experiences when engaged in science lessons.

Methods
Data on students’ situational subjective experiences were collected using the experience sampling method (ESM) via smartphones. 180 US and 173 Finnish students answered moment-level measures of their enjoyment, success, happiness, confidence, and feeling active (learning enhancers) as well as feelings of stress, anxiety, and being confused (learning detractors). To examine the value aspect of motivation, students answered questions concerning their interest, importance to self, and future importance. Students rated all answers on a four-point scale.
ESM data were analyzed using multilevel structural equation modeling (SEM). We calculated intraclass correlations (ICC) to determine what proportion of the variance in the observed variables was due to the student-level variation (between-level variation) and moment-level variation (within-level variation). Next, we ran multilevel SEM models for students’ subjective learning experiences (e.g., learning enhancers and learning detractors), perceptions of challenge, and value aspect of motivation. All the models were estimated separately for the three motivational value aspects and for science/other academic classes.

Results
20 - 45% of the variability in the observed variables was due to differences between students (between-level variation) in science and 9 – 32% was due to differences between students out of science.
High challenge positively predicted experiences of learning detractors both at the within- and between-levels, and negatively predicted moment-to-moment experiences of learning enhancers (e.g., within-level). Experiences of learning enhancers were predicted by high intrinsic value. The interaction between challenge and intrinsic value also negatively predicted experiences of learning detractors.
Attainment value negatively predicted learning detractors and positively predicted learning enhancers. The between-level results further showed that high attainment value positively predicted learning enhancers.
Both high challenge and utility value positively predicted learning enhancers. However, the interaction term between challenge and utility value negatively predicted learning enhancers, suggesting that the more challenge the students experienced, the less utility value predicted learning enhancers (and vice versa).

Conclusion
If students are highly challenged, feelings that the task at hand is important to their future are lowered. However, when students feel that the task is important to their future, they also experience positive emotions including feeling joyful, successful, happy, confident, and active. Overall, we continue to find that positive social and emotional feelings enhance learning conditions, contributing to our understanding of how momentary experiences affect engagement in academic courses.

Authors

• Katja Upadyaya, University of Helsinki

• Katariina Salmela-Aro, Cicero Learning, University of Helsinki

• Christopher R Klager, Michigan State University

• Barbara Schneider, Michigan State University

• Joseph S. Krajcik, Michigan State University

• Jari Lavonen, University of Helsinki