Examining How Adolescents from Racially Marginalized Backgrounds Weigh Competing Expectancy-Value Motivational Concerns for Studying Mathematics/Science

• In Event: Is This Worth It? Examining How Students Weigh Competing Motivational Beliefs Through an Expectancy-Value Lens

Abstract

Introduction and Theoretical Framework

When considering how to promote adolescents’ motivation to engage with STEM learning opportunities, researchers working within situated expectancy-value theory (SEVT; Eccles & Wigfield, 2020), have shown that competence-related beliefs and task values are key predictors of STEM performance and course taking (e.g., Guo et al., 2016; Jiang et al., 2020). However, less is known about how students weigh multiple motivational concerns when making academic choices. This is especially true for racially marginalized students, whose unique motivational concerns are often discussed as deficits rather than in terms of how they negotiate complex positive motivational beliefs against unique challenges (Decuir-Gunby & Schutz, 2014). The goal of this study was to examine how adolescent students from racially marginalized backgrounds weighed the benefits and challenges of engaging with mathematics and science coursework, by coding open-ended responses. Specifically, we evaluated (a) what SEVT factors students most often reported considering as the benefits and challenges of engaging with mathematics and science coursework, (b) how students reported weighing benefits against challenges, and (c) how different types of weighing were associated with STEM grades, future course-taking intentions, and future career intentions.

Methods

Students in twelve public U.S. high schools completed an online study (N = 428; 57.2% girls, 42.8% boys; 67.9% Black or African American, 24.5% Hispanic or Latine, 7.4% other racial and ethnic identities; M age = 14.6, SD = 0.75) administered through the Character Lab Research Network. Students answered open-ended questions about their perceived benefits and challenges for engaging in mathematics and science coursework, and about how they weighed benefits against challenges. Trained researchers coded all open-ended responses using thematic analysis, then the codes were analyzed quantitatively (see Tables 4.1-4.2). We also ran using regression models predicting academic outcomes from the different codes reported in students’ open-ended responses.

Results and Significance

Students most often reported considering benefits of math and science coursework in terms of utility value and challenges in terms of competence-related beliefs or effort cost (see Tables 1-2). Students were divided in terms of whether they thought the benefits of mathematics/science coursework outweighed challenges, with only about half of students thinking they did (see Table 3). Compared to those who thought challenges outweighed benefits, students who thought that benefits outweighed challenges reported higher future STEM course-taking and career intentions at the time of the survey and earned higher science course grades at the end of the academic year (βs > .216, ps < .05); these effects held even controlling for the specific motivational concerns that students reported considering and students’ initial grades. Together, findings illustrate students’ key motivational concerns as they weigh whether math and science coursework is “worth it”, pointing to distinct SEVT beliefs that are salient in motivating students towards and away from math and science activities. Findings also illustrate that how students weigh motivational concerns against one another is important to consider, above and beyond the specific motivational concerns students have on their minds, if researchers want to learn how motivation affects academic choices.

Authors

• Emily Quinn Rosenzweig, Teachers College, Columbia University

• Xiao-Yin Chen, University of Tennessee

• Yichi Zhang, University of Georgia

• Xinyu Liu, Florida State University

• Patrick N. Beymer, University of Cincinnati