Intersections of Challenge, Stress, and Anxiety: When Is the Challenge Too Much?

• In Event: Investigating Optimal Learning Moment to Enhance Student Engagement and Social Emotional Leaning

Abstract

Objectives
The objective of this paper is to understand the relationship between other key emotional outcomes (such as determination) and challenge, stress, anxiety and their combinations?

Theoretical Framework
Previous work on the ESM data has established that engagement flourishes under the intersection of three states: challenge, skill, and interest (Schneider et al., 2016; Shernoff et al., 2003). Challenge here follows the challenge-hindrance stress model where challenge causes strain but provides opportunities for feeling accomplished and growth; on the other hand, hindrance stressors cause harm and have no benefits (Cavanaugh et al., 2000). In the context of the ESM data, hindrance stressors could be stress, anxiety, boredom, and confusion (also referred to as detractors and/or accelerants; Schneider et al., 2016) of the students. Previously, in the context of testing, test anxiety has shown been to have a negative relationship to academic outcome (McDonald, 2001).
Given this complex relationship between the importance of challenge, but also the concerns around the context of anxiety and stress, there should be a sweet spot of amount of challenge, anxiety and stress that is the best for student outcomes. Previously, Schneider et al. have looked at the co-occurrence of these emotions, but not directly the combination of them in regard to other social and emotional outcomes (2016).

Methods
For the objective, a series of two-level hierarchical linear model was estimated. Level 1 was the individual beep and level 2 was the student. To understand the relationship between other key emotional outcomes and challenge, stress, and anxiety, the following model was estimated.
Outcome_{ij}=\delta_{00}+\delta_{10}challenge+\delta_{20}stress+\delta_{30}anxiety+\delta_{40}challenge\times stress+\delta_{50}challenge\times anxiety+\delta_{60}stress\times anxiety+\delta_{70}challenge\times anxiety\times stress+\upsilon_{0j}
Data Sources
From 2013-2019, cellphones which included the software for the ESM data were distributed to students in Michigan (and in California in 2018-2019). These students kept these cellphones for a week and were beeped throughout the day in various different contexts. In total, there are 1957 students from 96 different classrooms taught by 74 different teachers.

Results
Stress, Anxiety, and Challenge are all positively correlated with determination, giving up, and confusion. The interaction of the three is positively (but small) correlated too determination and giving up and negatively correlated with confusion. While holding challenge constant, the interaction of stress and anxiety is negatively correlated with determination. While holding anxiety constant, the interaction of stress and challenge is also negatively correlated with determination, and while holding stress constant, the interaction of anxiety and challenge is also negatively correlated with determination.

Significance
Challenge is a key variable in student determination by itself. A student with stress and anxiety with no challenge will have less determination. Additionally, when stress and anxiety are paired with more challenge but not with each other, students are less determined, but when all three are in place, students are more determined. Stress and anxiety paired with challenge leads to stronger determination as opposed to trying to lower stress and anxiety while still encouraging challenge.

Authors

• Lydia Bradford, Michigan State University

• Kayla Bartz, Michigan State University