Using Digital Resources for Motivation and Engagement in Learning Mathematics: Reflections from Teachers and Students
Tóm tắt
Students’ motivation to learn mathematics often declines during the middle grades. How do we keep students engaged with learning mathematics as it gets more complex? One way is through the use of technology, such as computer games, interactive lessons, or on-line videos. Yet evidence from creating technology-based tasks and resources to motivate students to learn mathematics is mixed, partially because most interventions only loosely incorporate motivational constructs. This article is part of a larger research project examining the impact of three digital resources on students’ motivation and learning in mathematics. In it, we provided resources tightly aligned to motivational constructs from research: self-efficacy, implicit theories of ability, and interest and enjoyment. Students then engaged with these resources before and after a 2-day mathematical patterns lesson. We present results from interviews and observations with eighty-eight fifth- to eighth-grade students and their ten teachers. Findings suggest that, even with a minimal encounter over 1 or 2 days, students were able to notice the motivational constructs present within these digital resources.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Adelman, C. (2006). The toolbox revisited: paths to degree completion from high school through college. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.
Archambault, I., Eccles, J., & Vida, M. (2010). Ability self-concepts and subjective value in literacy: joint trajectories from grades 1 through 12. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 804–816.
Ashcraft, M., & Krause, J. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 243–248.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory for personal and social change by enabling media. In A. Singhal, M. Cody, E. Rogers, & M. Sabido (Eds.), Entertainment-education and social change: history, research, and practice (pp. 75–96). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Barab, S., Dodge, T., Jackson, C., & Arici, A. (2003). Technical report on quest Atlantis (Vol. 1). Bloomington: Indiana University Center for Research on Learning and Technology.
Blackwell, L., Trzesniewski, K., & Dweck, C. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263.
Brown, S., & Lent, R. (2006). Preparing adolescents to make career decisions. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (Vol. 5, pp. 201–223). Greenwich: Information Age.
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Chen, J., Zap, N., & Dede, C. (2012). Using virtual environments to motivate students to pursue STEM careers: an expectancy-value model. In S. D’Agustino (Ed.), Immersive environments, augmented realities, and virtual worlds: assessing future trends in education (pp. 42–56). Hershey: IGI Global.
Chen, J., Metcalf, S., & Tutwiler, S. (2014). Motivation and beliefs about the nature of scientific knowledge within an immersive virtual ecosystems environment. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(2), 112–123.
Chen, J., Tutwiler, S., Metcalf, S., Kamarainen, A., Grotzer, T., & Dede, C. (2016). A multi-user virtual environment to support students’ self-efficacy and interest in science: a latent growth model analysis. Learning and Instruction, 41, 11–22.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Cury, F., Elliot, A., Da Fonseca, D., & Moller, A. (2006). The social-cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 666–679.
Donohoe, C., Topping, K., & Hannah, E. (2012). The impact of an online intervention (Brainology) on the mindset and resiliency of secondary school pupils: a preliminary mixed methods study. Educational Psychology, 32(5), 641–655.
Dweck, C. (2000). Self-theories: their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
Dweck, C. (2007). Is math a gift? beliefs that put females at risk. In S. Ceci & W. Williams (Eds.), Why aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 47–55). Washington: American Psychological Association.
Dweck, C., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273.
Dweck, C., & Master, A. (2009). Self-theories and motivation: Students’ beliefs about intelligence. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 123–140). New York: Routledge.
Eccles-Parsons, J., Adler, T., Futterman, R., Goff, S., Kaczala, C., Meece, J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75–146). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. (2012). Why do women opt out? sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700–717.
Grant, H., & Dweck, C. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 541–553.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127.
Hoffer, T., Venkataraman, L., Hedberg, E., & Shagle, S. (2007). Final report on the national survey of algebra teachers for the national math panel. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago (http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/final-report-algebra-teachers.pdf ).
Ketelhut, D., Nelson, B., Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2010). A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 56–68.
Liu, M., Hsieh, P., Cho, Y., & Schallert, D. (2006). Middle school students’ self-efficacy, attitudes, and achievement in a computer-enhanced problem-based learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(3), 225–242.
Ma, X. (1999). A meta-analysis of the relationship between anxiety toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(5), 520–540.
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moos, D., & Marroquin, E. (2010). Multimedia, hypermedia, and hypertext: motivation considered and reconsidered. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 265–276.
Moses, R., & Cobb, C. (2001). Radical equations: math literacy and civil rights. Boston: Beacon Press.
Noddings, N. (1991). Stories in dialogue: caring and interpersonal reasoning. In C. Witherell & N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: narrative and dialogue in education (pp. 157–170). New York: Teachers College Press.
NRC. (2001). Adding it up: helping children learn mathematics. Washington: National Research Council.
Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. (2006). Adolescence and education: Vol. 5 self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich: Information Age.
Przybylski, A., Rigby, S., & Ryan, R. (2010). A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 154–166.
Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. (2012). “It’s OK – not everyone can be good at math”: instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 731–737.
Schwarz, M., & Jersey, B. (2009). Fractals: hunting the hidden dimension (NOVA). Arlington: Public Broadcasting Service (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/hunting-hidden-dimension.html ).
Sinclair, N., Healy, L., & Sales, C. (2009). Time for telling stories: narrative thinking with dynamic geometry. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(4), 441–452.
Star, J., Chen, J., Taylor, M., Durkin, K., Dede, C., & Chao, T. (2014). Studying technology-based strategies for enhancing motivation in mathematics. International Journal of STEM Education, 1, 7.
Stein, M., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: an analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50–80.