Describe how the teacher and/or school motivate students. Give specific examples of both extrinsic and intrinsic motivators. Include vocabulary from specific motivational theories (e.g., Self-determination Theory, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, etc.) and be sure to underline the concept's vocabulary in your response. (Use your study guide as you go!)
Motivating students can be tricky, especially in a subject like history where many students believe they're not interested or that history isn't relevant to them.
The first type of motivation that I've observed the teacher using is extrinsic motivation. One of my first days in her classroom involved a game that rewarded the group who could list the most terms, concepts, or ideas from the chapter and include a brief description to explain it. This was like big brainstorming session that allowed the groups to review the chapter and piece together different bits and pieces. This offered a few forms of extrinsic motivation. First, the winning team was rewarded with a small piece of candy. But I think the little bit of competition and claiming the "win" was just as rewarding for many of the students. Most of the groups were eager to participate and put in a good effort. I think this can be explained by the Expectancy X-Value Theory. This theory states that students will spend effort on a task if they expect to be successful and if they value the outcomes. In this situation, the chances of a group of 5-6 kids being able to come up with a competitive and decent list of terms/concepts were pretty good. I think each group believed that they could be successful and complete the task. I also think that the rewards of treats, participation points, and teacher approval were of value to the students. They seemed to genuinely enjoy the game and interacting with the teacher over their answers (often trying to convince her why their answers should count, which was requiring them to do more explaining and recall more information). One thing I did notice was that group work like this could contribute to learned helplessness. Each group seemed to have one or two that preferred to do most the talking and a few that didn't participate. It was difficult to tell if the quiet students were actively helping with the first "brainstorming" part of the game or not. If they were just passive bystanders they sort of got away without contributing much and without any accountability. I think the teacher could have required that the group members take turns presenting their brainstorming ideas so that one or two students didn't do the work for the whole group.
Another type of motivation I've observed if from the Self Determination Theory. This teacher is really good at relatedness or making the students feel a sense of belonging and connectedness. She talks to them individually as they enter and leave the classroom. She asks about their weekend plans, allows the class to fill her in on the weekend football games, they talk about what's going on in the news, etc. I noticed one football player piped up to tell her about a funny thing that happened at the game, someone from the drama club was announcing their upcoming auditions, and another kid mentioned that his family sold their house. It seemed like a random conversation, and it only took about 3 minutes at the beginning of class. I feel like she genuinely enjoys being with her students, and they seem to enjoy her as a teacher, even if they don't love history. This also relates to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Love & belonging fall under the "d-needs," or deficiency needs that arise from deprivation. I feel like she's doing a good job at meeting those needs in her classroom.
I believe that some of the students are having a difficult time being motivated through relevance. Sometimes it can be hard to help students understand why history is important to them, especially when they're still learning the fundamentals. I feel like this teacher is making connections and giving examples, but some of the students don't seem too inclined to really master the relevance or connections which in turn, disconnects them from the mastery goals (goal theory), and keeps them motivated by performance or performance avoidance. So many of the students want a good grade and so they'll try to ask exactly what will be on the test. But they're not doing the reading, or not really taking control of their own learning. I think some of this relates to self-efficacy. They're not used to learning this way. They're used to having the specific answer listed in the text. They want boxes to check and blanks to fill in. I think some of this feels beyond their ability because it's never been required of them before. This course is new for this teacher (concurrent enrollment), so she's really trying to focus on appropriate learning conditions for these students. This is difficult for the teacher because she feels accountability to UVU to college-level content, but feels that the school opened up this course to too many students who aren't ready for this level of academic rigor. When she taught AP classes her students tended to be more serious about their efforts and homework, and more committed to their own role in their learning. (This year the school dropped their AP program in history and instead opened a CE program through UVU). She feels that many of these students want college credit because it sounds like the smart thing to do, but aren't really invested or committed to putting in the extra effort required for a higher level course. She's trying to find ways to help them understand things like controlability-- that they can control their learning.
One thing that I've noticed this school doing to improve motivation relates to the self-determination theory and relatedness. Every Friday the students wear their school t-shirts. These shirts were given to students at registration, so everyone has one. I was surprised that so many students were wearing their t-shirts on Friday. Really, every teacher, faculty, and probably 90% of these students. It wasn't just something that a certain group was doing. It really created a culture and an identity that brought a real connection to the student body. It gives the students a sense of belonging when they have a connection to people that they normally don't have much in common with. Even the principal wore his matching t-shirt. I think this helps make school a more welcoming and inclusive place because if at no other time, students can find common ground on Fridays. I think this is a great example of an extrinsic reward that becomes intrinsic. The t-shirt is a freebie. Fitting in is the reward you get. But also, once relatedness and connection are established, this t-shirt has led to school being an intrinsic reward. It feels good to go to school. You begin enjoying it. It feels like a safe place, somewhere you want to be. And then you feel good about contributing and adding to that sense of community and friendship.
This has me thinking a lot about how I want to make sure my class is a place where everyone feels welcome. I've been paying attention to how this teacher engages with students, particularly those who are quite different from her or those who would otherwise be marginalized. One thing that I've noticed is that this genuine connection also seems to help with classroom management. Because she respects them, they respect her. And they want her approval. If someone is out of line, all it takes is a disapproving glance or a finger to the lips and the students quickly get back on track. Because they feel loved an accepted they're more likely to contribute to a good learning environment. And if that's not a beneficial consequence of meeting student's needs then I don't know what is.
Another aspect of motivation that I've been thinking about is arousal. The website Arousal, Learning, and Performance gave me a lot to think about (http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/arousal.html). I like how it emphasized that not all stress (or arousal) is bad. In fact, it leads us to try harder and really engage in the activity. But too much or too little can have the wrong effect. This made me reflect on the game that the teacher recently played, and I can definitely recognize that for some students it may not have been the right amount/type of arousal. Some were not engaged at all, although most of the students seemed to be having fun. For some kids, the presentation/sharing aspect almost made them hyper (they really loved the spotlight). Also, perhaps it was a lack of arousal that made a few not participate rather than learned helplessness. This made me realize that it's important to vary the activities so that students get the chance to be more engaged (aroused) by the learning process. This might give them a chance to experience flow. And that leads to fun, and everyone loves learning when it's fun.
Motivating students can be tricky, especially in a subject like history where many students believe they're not interested or that history isn't relevant to them.
The first type of motivation that I've observed the teacher using is extrinsic motivation. One of my first days in her classroom involved a game that rewarded the group who could list the most terms, concepts, or ideas from the chapter and include a brief description to explain it. This was like big brainstorming session that allowed the groups to review the chapter and piece together different bits and pieces. This offered a few forms of extrinsic motivation. First, the winning team was rewarded with a small piece of candy. But I think the little bit of competition and claiming the "win" was just as rewarding for many of the students. Most of the groups were eager to participate and put in a good effort. I think this can be explained by the Expectancy X-Value Theory. This theory states that students will spend effort on a task if they expect to be successful and if they value the outcomes. In this situation, the chances of a group of 5-6 kids being able to come up with a competitive and decent list of terms/concepts were pretty good. I think each group believed that they could be successful and complete the task. I also think that the rewards of treats, participation points, and teacher approval were of value to the students. They seemed to genuinely enjoy the game and interacting with the teacher over their answers (often trying to convince her why their answers should count, which was requiring them to do more explaining and recall more information). One thing I did notice was that group work like this could contribute to learned helplessness. Each group seemed to have one or two that preferred to do most the talking and a few that didn't participate. It was difficult to tell if the quiet students were actively helping with the first "brainstorming" part of the game or not. If they were just passive bystanders they sort of got away without contributing much and without any accountability. I think the teacher could have required that the group members take turns presenting their brainstorming ideas so that one or two students didn't do the work for the whole group.
Another type of motivation I've observed if from the Self Determination Theory. This teacher is really good at relatedness or making the students feel a sense of belonging and connectedness. She talks to them individually as they enter and leave the classroom. She asks about their weekend plans, allows the class to fill her in on the weekend football games, they talk about what's going on in the news, etc. I noticed one football player piped up to tell her about a funny thing that happened at the game, someone from the drama club was announcing their upcoming auditions, and another kid mentioned that his family sold their house. It seemed like a random conversation, and it only took about 3 minutes at the beginning of class. I feel like she genuinely enjoys being with her students, and they seem to enjoy her as a teacher, even if they don't love history. This also relates to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Love & belonging fall under the "d-needs," or deficiency needs that arise from deprivation. I feel like she's doing a good job at meeting those needs in her classroom.
I believe that some of the students are having a difficult time being motivated through relevance. Sometimes it can be hard to help students understand why history is important to them, especially when they're still learning the fundamentals. I feel like this teacher is making connections and giving examples, but some of the students don't seem too inclined to really master the relevance or connections which in turn, disconnects them from the mastery goals (goal theory), and keeps them motivated by performance or performance avoidance. So many of the students want a good grade and so they'll try to ask exactly what will be on the test. But they're not doing the reading, or not really taking control of their own learning. I think some of this relates to self-efficacy. They're not used to learning this way. They're used to having the specific answer listed in the text. They want boxes to check and blanks to fill in. I think some of this feels beyond their ability because it's never been required of them before. This course is new for this teacher (concurrent enrollment), so she's really trying to focus on appropriate learning conditions for these students. This is difficult for the teacher because she feels accountability to UVU to college-level content, but feels that the school opened up this course to too many students who aren't ready for this level of academic rigor. When she taught AP classes her students tended to be more serious about their efforts and homework, and more committed to their own role in their learning. (This year the school dropped their AP program in history and instead opened a CE program through UVU). She feels that many of these students want college credit because it sounds like the smart thing to do, but aren't really invested or committed to putting in the extra effort required for a higher level course. She's trying to find ways to help them understand things like controlability-- that they can control their learning.
One thing that I've noticed this school doing to improve motivation relates to the self-determination theory and relatedness. Every Friday the students wear their school t-shirts. These shirts were given to students at registration, so everyone has one. I was surprised that so many students were wearing their t-shirts on Friday. Really, every teacher, faculty, and probably 90% of these students. It wasn't just something that a certain group was doing. It really created a culture and an identity that brought a real connection to the student body. It gives the students a sense of belonging when they have a connection to people that they normally don't have much in common with. Even the principal wore his matching t-shirt. I think this helps make school a more welcoming and inclusive place because if at no other time, students can find common ground on Fridays. I think this is a great example of an extrinsic reward that becomes intrinsic. The t-shirt is a freebie. Fitting in is the reward you get. But also, once relatedness and connection are established, this t-shirt has led to school being an intrinsic reward. It feels good to go to school. You begin enjoying it. It feels like a safe place, somewhere you want to be. And then you feel good about contributing and adding to that sense of community and friendship.
This has me thinking a lot about how I want to make sure my class is a place where everyone feels welcome. I've been paying attention to how this teacher engages with students, particularly those who are quite different from her or those who would otherwise be marginalized. One thing that I've noticed is that this genuine connection also seems to help with classroom management. Because she respects them, they respect her. And they want her approval. If someone is out of line, all it takes is a disapproving glance or a finger to the lips and the students quickly get back on track. Because they feel loved an accepted they're more likely to contribute to a good learning environment. And if that's not a beneficial consequence of meeting student's needs then I don't know what is.
Another aspect of motivation that I've been thinking about is arousal. The website Arousal, Learning, and Performance gave me a lot to think about (http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/arousal.html). I like how it emphasized that not all stress (or arousal) is bad. In fact, it leads us to try harder and really engage in the activity. But too much or too little can have the wrong effect. This made me reflect on the game that the teacher recently played, and I can definitely recognize that for some students it may not have been the right amount/type of arousal. Some were not engaged at all, although most of the students seemed to be having fun. For some kids, the presentation/sharing aspect almost made them hyper (they really loved the spotlight). Also, perhaps it was a lack of arousal that made a few not participate rather than learned helplessness. This made me realize that it's important to vary the activities so that students get the chance to be more engaged (aroused) by the learning process. This might give them a chance to experience flow. And that leads to fun, and everyone loves learning when it's fun.
Comments
Post a Comment