Goals, values, and affect: influences on student motivation classroom goal structures

1. Goals, values, and affect: influences on student motivationclassroom goal structures Miguel Llovera Da CortePsychology of Adult Learning_EPSY5473

2. Table of Contents • Carole Ames’ Short Biography • Classroom Goal Structures • Achievement Goals • Classroom Structures and Achievement Goals • Tasks • Evaluation • Recognition • Authority • Grouping • Applicability of Classroom Goal Structures: Teaching Academic Strategies • Summary of Classroom Goal Structures • Carol Ames’ Recognition as an MSU Honorary Alumni • References

3. CAROLE AMES:A pioneer in the area of classroom goal structures QUICK FACTS • Carole Ames is dean of the College of Education and a professor of educational psychology at Michigan State University • She served as professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Illinois and director of the Institute for Research on Human Development • Her research focuses on: • Effects of classroom structure • Competition and teaching practices on children’s motivation to learn • Strategies for increasing parental involvement in children’s learning

4. Classroom Goal Structures • WHAT IS A GOAL? It is a strategy, an action plan or statement that is originated by individuals when they examine their own motivations, needs and wants • WHAT ARE CLASSROOM GOAL STRUCTURES? CGS are “goal-related messages that are made salient in the achievement setting that are related to, and most likely influence, the personal goals that individuals pursue in those settings” (Kaplan, Middleton, Urdan, & Midgley, 2002.) CGS are affected by: • The positive or negative impact a classroom facilitator has on students • A good classroom facilitator has the ability to shape students’ perceptions in a positive way: achievement goals

5. But, what is an ACHIEVEMENT GOAL? • An ACHIEVEMENT GOAL involves a program of cognitive processes that have cognitive, affective, and behavioral consequences(Ames, 1992) • COGNITIVE CONSEQUENCES • Maximization of learning by helping learners find valuable lessons in nearly every experience they have • AFFECTIVE CONSEQUENCES • Actively create a positive experience of life characterized by optimism, happiness, peace of mind, and feeling of fulfillment • BEHAVIORAL CONSEQUENCES • Discovering a motivating purpose, characterized by personally meaningful goals

6. Classroom Structures and Achievement Goals from Ames’ Perspective • Classroom structure allows individuals to develop cognitive and affective skills • Invitation to engage actively in the learning process • Classroom structure is shaped by instructional demands and situational constraints • Learning objectives versus learning outcomes • What are the structures of the classroom environment that lead to a mastery goal orientation? • Design of tasks and/or learning activities, evaluation practices, motivation and use of rewards, distribution of authority, and acceptance of responsibilities

7. STRUCTURE 1: TASKSThe work assigned to students should be… • MEANINGFUL • Need/desire for developing new skills and learning new information • Information can be applied in different ways and in different areas of the student’s personal life • If students perceive the value/meaning of the material being learned, they are likely to exhibit active engagement • CHALLENGING • Opportunity for students to make judgments about the way they perform certain tasks • METACOGNITIVE APPRAISALS: recognition of deficiencies and possible learning disabilities • Challenges allow students to remain engaged with learning while making the most out of their learning style • Sense of control about what is learned and how it is learned

8. “TASKS have social components, as they are embedded in the social organization of the classroom. Student engagement, therefore, is shaped by the structure of the task, as well as by how the task is delivered by the teacher and how it interacts with other structures in the classroom” (Ames, 1992)

9. STRUCTURE 2: EVALUATION • EVALUATIONSare standards and methods used to measure students’ academic performance / cognitive abilities • Evaluation methods and techniques have a directly proportional impact on student’s motivation • Students’ goals can change depending on the evaluation method and the desired outcome expected by the classroom facilitator • Based on Ames’ approach, learning is performance oriented • NORMATIVE APPROACH: quality of work and correctness will allow student to have a higher grade on his/her academic performance

10. STRUCTURE 2: EVALUATION Ames asserts that students’ self-evaluations of their ability and self-directed affect are decidedly more negative when they are focused on winning, outperforming another, or surpassing some normative standard than when they are focused on trying hard, improving their performance, or just participating (Ames, 1992) • Students may feel unmotivated if his/her scores are not high enough compared to other students’ scores • Students will be hesitant to learn new information • Poor performance could be evident in other assignments, tests, and group reports

11. “Covington and Beery (1976) pointed out that the pervasiveness of EVALUATION in schools makes it difficult for children to focus on learning, and as a result, they quickly learn that what is not evaluated is not worth learning” (Ames, 1992)

13. STRUCTURE 3: RECOGNITION • RECOGNITION is part of the classroom goal structure mechanism that allows classroom facilitators to reward students’ efforts • Incentives, such as bonus points, can be used to motivate students to engage in certain behaviors • Incentives serve as a motivation ONLY to those who receive them • Students, particularly those with learning disabilities, will feel discouraged if they are not rewarded after attempting to at least engage in new learning

14. “Moreover, because rewards are often public and given on a differential basis, they can render ability salient. Nevertheless, when made contingent on student effort, on progress in relation to short-term goals, or on meaningful aspects of performance rewards can enhance achievement-directed behavior” (Ames, 1992)

16. STRUCTURE 4: AUTHORITY • Authority refers to the level of autonomy an instructor has in his/her classroom setting • As a classroom leader, how much do I want my students to be involved/engaged in the decision making process? • Students set goals • Establishing priorities and task completion • Students are responsible for their actions and inactions • Respect for rules and acceptance of responsibilities • Students have to meet high levels of expectation • Students are expected to be independent thinkers; however, coaching is required from the classroom facilitator (sense of direction) • Searching beyond right and wrong • Individual method and pace of learning

17. STRUCTURE 5: GROUPING • Students have different classroom experiences because they also bring different prior experiences with them (Ames, 1992) • Groups should have students that exhibit different talents and abilities • Motivated cognitions, affect, and behavior of students • GROUPING should focus on how students change with regards to their perceptions and progress providing a meaningful approach to evaluation (Ames, 1992)

18. Many factors come into play with regards to substantive engagement (GROUPING): • Students’ personal factors: motivational beliefs and metacognitive strategies • Goal Orientation • Contextual factors, such as the instructional practices and course procedures around which a course is structured and implemented (Lyke, 2006) • Classroom environments appear to be structured toward different goals • Instructors are primarily focused on the learning process (task oriented), or focused on the learning outcome (performance oriented) (Lyke, 2006)

19. MODEL OF CLASSROOM GOAL STRUCTURE

20. Applicability of Classroom Goal Structures • In 2004, Achieving the Dream was conceived by the Lumina Foundation—a national non-profit organization. The process of participating in Achieving the Dream includes: • Examining quantitative data • Determining educational barriers by conducting focus groups • Designing interventions to address barriers • Assessing the impact of interventions • Revising interventions based on assessments to continue the cycle  • Tulsa Community College is participating in the national Achieving the Dream initiative to increase the number of students who earn degrees and certificates

21. Since 2006, TCC teams have conducted a series of focus groups involving TCC students, faculty and staff. This information has been used to design interventions to increase student graduation rates across the College • Interventions that have been established at TCC are: • MathPath, Course redesign of Beginning Algebra, African American Male Student Success Team, and Academic Strategies • Since 2009, I have been given the opportunity to teach Academic Strategies. The design of this class follows Dr. Ames’ approach of classroom goal structure • My instructional strategies rely heavily on the TASK structure: focus on the meaningful aspects of learning activities

22. INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES USED IN TEACHING ACADEMIC STRATEGIES CLASSES AT TULSA COMMUNITY COLLEGE

26. Summary of Classroom Goal Structures – Ames’ Model

27. Dr. Carole Ames was the recipient of the 2011 MSU Alumni Excellence Award http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78f-2kSdXBk

28. References • Anderman, E. (2006). Goal, values, and affect: influences on student motivation. Handbook of Educational Psychology, 17(2), 369. • Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal Of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261. • Koskey, K. K., Karabenick, S. A., Woolley, M. E., Bonney, C. R., & Dever, B. V. (2010). Cognitive validity of students’ self-reports of classroom mastery goal structure: What students are thinking and why it matters. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(4), 254-263. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.05.004 • Lyke, J., & Kelaher Young, A. (2006). Cognition in Context: Students’ Perceptions of Classroom Goal Structures and Reported Cognitive Strategy Use in the College Classroom. Research In Higher Education, 47(4), 477-490. doi:10.1007/s11162-005-9004-1 • Patrick, H., & Ryan, A. M. (2009). What Do Students Think About When Evaluating Their Classroom's Mastery Goal Structure? An Examination of Young Adolescents' Explanations. Journal Of Experimental Education, 77(2), 99-124. • Polychroni, F., Hatzichristou, C., & Sideridis, G. (2012). The role of goal orientations and goal structures in explaining classroom social and affective characteristics. Learning & Individual Differences, 22(2), 207-217. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.10.005 • Shun, L., & Youyan, N. (2008). Interplay Between Personal Goals and Classroom Goal Structures in Predicting Student Outcomes: A Multilevel Analysis of Person--Context Interactions. Journal Of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 15-29.