Motivating Students to Engage With Motivation Interventions: Case Study of Large-Scale Utility Value Intervention Implementation

• In Event: 30.032 - Opening the File Drawer for Innovation in Task Value Intervention

Abstract

Utility value is the perceived usefulness of a task to some future goal (Eccles et al., 1983). The benefits of fostering utility value have been discussed by expectancy-value theories (e.g., Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009), self-determination theory (e.g., Vansteenkiste et al., 2004), and future time perspective research (e.g., Simons, Dewitte, & Lens, 2003). Despite extensive theorizing and correlational research, few studies have investigated classroom-based utility value interventions aimed at promoting students’ academic success. We present two iterative studies—one unsuccessful and one successful—that highlight implementation issues relevant to developing effective utility value interventions.
The intervention was designed to foster perceptions of value via an online reflection activity. Students were asked to consider the relevance of their math class to their everyday lives, their work or potential careers, and their interests. In each instance, they then wrote a brief essay detailing potential relevance. Students in the control condition were asked to summarize class material. The first study was conducted with 1361 students in two-year college developmental math courses. Students were randomly assigned to a treatment or control at the time of the intervention. Forty-seven percent of the students in the total possible sample participated in the first study at the time of the intervention and were randomized to a condition. The second study was conducted with approximately 416 students from the same institution but limited to intermediate algebra rather than all of developmental math. Forty-three percent of students participated at the time of the intervention and were randomized.
Intervention effects were assessed by way of multi-level logistic regression models predicting student pass rates in both studies. Qualitative analyses were used to assess the quality of student responses and implementation of the interventions. Based on the qualitative analyses, design-based methods were used to revise the intervention from study one to study two. In study one, the control group displayed higher pass-rates than the utility value group. Comparing the pass rates to historical pass rates and unassigned student pass rates suggested that individuals in the treatment group passed at a slightly higher rate than prior years (Figure 1). Qualitative investigation suggested that students did not interpret the research activities as a part of their course and reacted negatively in their written prompts. The implementation plan was revised by including the activity in the course syllabus and changing the framing of the activities during the intervention delivery. The second study demonstrated greater student engagement with the intervention prompts, a main effect of the intervention (d = .32), and a marginal interaction (Figure 2) that showed the intervention worked for men (d =.54) but not women (d = -.15).
This study highlights the fact that student perceptions of the intervention activities may be a culprit for low-quality intervention uptake. Although both studies were similar in response rate, study two elicited higher quality engagement with the activity. Both the main effect and the interaction effect in the second study replicate prior work; the intervention was primarily effective for the lowest-achieving students (men in this particular setting).

Authors

• Jeff John Kosovich, University of Virginia

• Chris S. Hulleman, University of Virginia