Week 4 reflection

Aother interesting week of readings. I was particularly struct by the locus of control and the self-efficacy articles because it frames what an ideal situation looks like in motivation and learning. Bandura's discussion of mastery left me thinking that if a child grows up in a supportive environment where he/she is encouraged to try new things and failure is part of learning, encouraged to take risks as part of that learning, and is praised for the effort, not necessarily the outcome, then you end up with a model student. Of course I am a realist though and I know this does not happen very often! The problem is that there are so many other variables that can contribute to the learning. I do believe that if a child has had that type of supportive environment that they do have a better chance (because of their toolkit) of shrugging off whatever negative messages they receive later on but if the positive reinforcement isn't consistent, then I also believe that a child can easily come undone, or the work that has been done can come undone. This scenario does not seem to work so well backwards though. There is a group of students in my daughter's school who, as a whole, are struggling and this whole motivation issue has me thinking about ways to undo what has, for years, been done. The students are Native Americans from the Oneida reservation and they are in an independent school through an agreement between the school and the Oneida Chiefs. The students can easily attend their home school on the reservation but if their parents choose, they can attend the independent school tuition-free (the Nation pays the bill so meaning tuition-free for the parents). The school has roughly 35 Native American students in preK-12 currently. The problem is that the majority of the students are struggling academically, such that a few have been asked to leave because of it. Socially, they are faring little better. They keep to themselves much of the time which doesn't seem to be alarming to some who see it as self-selection but to others (like me), we see it as a problem of alientation. They are not feeling welcomed within the school community and are seen as the outsiders, which is strange to me because we also have large population of international students who would be thought of as the outsiders, generally speaking. Anyway, some of these Native American students have other issues surrounding their lack of success as well. Some have less than supportive parents in the way that the independent school expects parents to be very involved and the parents think they should be minimally involved. This could be a cultural difference, remains to be determined. Some NA parents have said that it is the school's job to educate their child, not the parents. Some of the NA students also receive their fair share of criticism from their NA peers who attend their home school on the reservation (you think you're better than us, we're not good enough for you, etc). There is also the fact that the students spend an hour on the bus each way which does not leave a lot of time to spend doing the expected 2 hours of homework per class each day. So there are several issues plaguing these students at some point or another. My issue is that the students come in to the school able to pass the entrance exam (otherwise they would not be allowed in) and somewhere along the way, they get lost. Generally, they have all come in in lower school (preK-5) so the test is very basic for the age groups but that still means that they have the basic knowledge for their grade. It's as if all their enthusiasm leaves them once they get there. Like I said, there are numerous variables contributing to the problem but  think one major factor is the motivation. In reading about the Locus of Control, I can visibly see in these students that they feel they have no control over what happens to them. They are waiting for  others to make the decisions about their lives. Obviously I am not talking about the younger ones but the middle and upper school kids have actually said thngs like "it's out of my hands" and "we don't make those decisions". It just seems like such a waste. Here is the offering of a perfectly good education and the majority of the NA kids don't make it to graduation. There have been countless meetings between the board of trustees, teachers, Chiefs to discuss the issues and attempt to come up with solutions. We have made learning about their culture a part of the curriculum, having NA Chiefs and others from the reservation come in for lessons on the culture, including storytelling as a way of learning, field trips to their Native land, essay contests for all students about NA topics, etc. Nothing seems to work, or it only works in small increments, and temporarily. So I am wondering what is going on in the classrooms and if the teachers are sending positive messages and how they can "convince" these students that they are worthy of doiing the work and worthy of this education. It is a college prep school so the expectation is that one graduates and goes to college. There is never discussion of there being any other option actually, which may seem daunting to some who aren't taught that from the very beginning but the majority of the kids come in in lower school so they are hearing it steadily from a young age.
Basically I am using this week's blog to think outloud and I don't have any answers, only more questions. I am thinking about the low sense of efficacy we read about this week, the LOC, expectancy-value theory, learning vs performance goals, all of it applies here. I am tinking abut what Bandura says about self-efficacy and peer influences (p. 9). The issue here is that if the peers you hang around with (whether through self-selection or alientation) all see the world through the same lens as you, what prompts change? Is change even possible? Do we split the kids up from each other when that may certainly be their comfort zone? Work on them all together in a group? It's really frustrating to see a whole group of kids fail and when you can almost put your finger on some of the issues contributing to it but can't lick the problem, it's even more worrisome.

Week 3 Reflection

LOVED this week's readings! The article that stood out the most for me was Covington's (Goal Theory, Motivation, and School Achievement: An Integrative Review). This article hit home for me because I saw so many similarities between this and Jewish education. This idea that students learn "for the sake of curiosity, exploration, and self-improvement" (p. 173) is one that is ingrained in Jewish kids from the time they begin in Hebrew school (Hebrew school is all-emcompassing elementary school, not just the language) and it continues into adulthood. It becomes all we know because everyone we go through school with is the same way. We are taught to question everything, even authority, to argue our point if we truly believe it to be valid, and that everything can be turned into a lesson. Inquiry is life. (There's a joke that Jews will beat something to death, then resurrect it just so we can beat it to death again!). Covington states that these conditions were thought to be almost "trait-like" and for the Jews, that is certainly the point of instilling it in us while we are young. It is a trait but not one that we are born with (at least most of us I would gather), rather one that has been drilled into us repeatedly throughout our youngest years, soon becoming part of our everyday lives as if it were borne to us. This need for knowledge causes us to learn about things in a way that requires us to examine everything. We are aso taught that just because a teacher says it is so, does not mean it is true so it is our responsibility to investigate it from other angles. The whole point to learnng is not to one-up your fellow man but instead, as Covington suggests, to increase "one's competency, understanding, and appreciation for what is being learned" (p. 174). It's about your personal best and when you fail, you have failed yourself, not as a comparison to others. A lot of this teaching comes from our parents and Rabbi but most of it comes directly from our teachers. I have seen it undone though once kids get to public school. Not that I am against public school (well, let's just say I am not for it) but with standardized testing and traking, it is difficult to allow students to be self-directed in their learning. Granted, if teachers are willing, and able, to allow students to take charge of their learning by allowing them to lead a class or work in groups and learn from each other, most often times, the students flourish. Comraderie in the classroom is key I think. Covington mentions this key concept as well: "the willingness of students to form a consensus around the goals of doing well and helping peers academically depends on their perceptions that teachers care about them bot as persons and students" (p. 180). So if teachers treat students with respect and show them that their opinions count for something, again, students can flourish. I guess the big question is: how is this balance of teacher/student learning/teaching/comraderie achieved when there are 30 kids in a class period for 40 minutes, all working at different levels?
Covington also discusses Self-Worth Theory and states that there are "individuals who tie their sense of worth to grades and as a result are dominated by performance goals" (p. 181). Hw can they not tie their sense of worth to their grades? That is the American school sytem in a nutshell! It is all about the grades for us. That is the society we live in here. Good grades means being tracked in better classes, means getting into better colleges, means getting the better jobs, means being more successful than the next guy. Am I a little cynical? Yep. I know there are dedicated teachers out there. I believe those teachers taking this course are dedicated just by the sheer fact that they are taking this course, meaning they care about their students. But that's a handful in an overwhelming sea of bad education. So I will move on out of frustration. All this being said...the goal for this week's reflection was to discuss how the theories we read about would help to influence our instruction. For me personally, I think I will continue to do what I know (the 'Jewish way' I will call it for lack of a better word or explanation) because that is what makes sense to me. Not that it is the right way or the only way but it is my way. Much of what we read this week goes hand in hand with what is already being done in independent and private schools and although I do not believe this statement is possible, I would like public schools to adapt independent school mentality. I know, dreamer, right. I understand the education system in our country is seriously flawed and everyone thinks they have the magic bullet so who am I to propose such preposterous ideas? I don't know, I'm just saying...

On another note...Dweck was mentioned in the articles several times so I wanted to mention that she has a book called Mindset that is very helpful in identifying why some students think/act/behave the way they do in classes. There are two mindsets, fixed and growth. The person with the fixed mindset believes that their "qualities are carved in stone". The owner of the growth mindset believes that their "basic qualities are things they can cultivate through their efforts, that everyone can change and grow through application and experience". There is a chapter for teachers as well (What makes a great teacher?) and a chapter dedicatedd to changing mindsets (not just your own but your children's/student's as well).

Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success: How we can learn to fulfill our potential. New York: Ballantine.
Enjoy!

Week 2 reflection

Sorry for the delay in posting! I am in New Jersey at my daughter's college orientation. Exciting.
On to the reflection...so much to say! First off, I was glad to see that in Chapter 2 (Expectancy-Value Models of Motivation), the relation of race and value constructs was mentioned. I was thinking of the same thing while reading Chapters2 and 3. I have done a bit of research on stereotype threat (Claude Steele is the pioneer in that field) and the issues that arise when students are asked to identify as a specific race or ethnicity (such as questions on a fill-in-the-bubble type test). The actual definition: "The experience of anxiety or concern in a situation where a person has to potential to confirm a negative stereotype about their social group" (Steele, 2003). Once they are identified, many students automatically revert to the common stereotype for that race/ethnicity and a self-defeatest attitude takes hold. So for example, a student who identifies as black/African American may have some knowledge of the statistics showing that, in general, African American students perform well below that of their white peers. Possessing this information, then identifying as such, brings forth feelings of inadequacy before the testing even begins, oftentimes leading the student to confirm that stereotype. Stereotype threat came readily to mind in Chapter 3 (Attribution Theory) as well, page 100, second paragraph, that states "teachers are more likely to make attributions for a student's behavior that are consistent with prior beliefs about that individual student". So what is interesting to me is that the teacher forms an opinion and if the student is aware on that on some level, the student may act to confirm that attribution made by the teacher. This is where that brown-eye/blue-eye classroom study comes into play as well. I find it so interesting how they are all intertwined and lead to student performance issues. So again, in chapter 3 when the authors discuss 'effort'. While it is always easy to change the behavior and say "study harder", as in Roy's case, it is not always easy to change the mindset and the way of thinking. I wonder how many students attempt to turn over a new leaf but are put right back in their place by teachers passing judgments on them based on old information? As usual, these articles bring forth many questions for me!

On another note...I have this ongoing disagreement with my daughter who insists that I compare her to myself when it comes to grades. I tell her constantly that I hold myself to a different standard than she does. She is satisfied with an 85, whereas I am not. My point here is that the Expectancy-Value Models really resonated with me personally (low level of aspiration). It's as if a student goes in to a test or an assignment with a negative attitude that he/she may fail or do poorly on, and they confirm that attitude by not doing well. It's a vicious cycle.
My daughter (Ally) has this self-defeatest attitude with certain subjects, like math. She is "not a math person", "sucks at math", etc, which seems to justify her doing poorly on tests. Attribution Theory abound here! So here I sit, at Ally's college orientation, lecturing her on turning over a new leaf! Stay tuned!

On yet another note...I thought the study on the effects of test anxiety was informative but I wish Hancock would have asked personal questions of the participants (or if he did ask questions, I wish he would have published the results and compared them to the results of the TAI). I also wonder if one can accurately measure test anxiety through a questionnaire. One can claim to not suffer from test anxiety when there is no threat of testing. There are also issues that arise about the accuracy and validity of self-reporting by participants. I understand that validity and reliability for the TAI have both been established but there are still issues that arise when not conducting an actual test to check for test anxiety.

Week 1 reflection

I thought each one of the articles was interesting and informative in its own way but the two that stuck out the most for me were Strategies for Stimulating the Motivation to Learn (SSMtL) (Keller, 1987) because it was like a prescription of sorts, and Motivational Design of Instruction (MDoI) (Keller, 1983) because the Concept of Interest really resonated with me personally. Many times in my own life I have trouble being motivated because I am simply not interested in the content and that's where I begin to stray. Maw & Maw's (p, 399; MDoI) definitions of the qualities of a curious person were interesting to me because I think that is what motivation is all about. Keeping people interested is the key and understanding what peaks others' curiosity seems to be the defining factor in how to keep the interest flowing when designing instruction. I think the instruction can seem interesting to the designer when in fact, the audience finds it entirely boring. Having a deep understanding of your audience but also how to peak their curiosities is important. So I don't really know if motivation is the actual problem, or if a facet of motivation is the problem (curiosity). It would seem to me that the concept of interest Keller describes would be the main objective here. I know from my own personal situation in watching my daughter perform in school that when she is bored, forget it! Not much learning is taking place there. When she is interested, she learns. BUT, even when she is not interested in the beginning, if she receives a nugget that peaks her curiosity, she's hooked. The curiosity leads to the interest, which leads to the motivation.
In the SSMtL article, I was grateful for the tables and the major process questions. I was very interested in the Components of Attention and it seems that using this article for guidance may make it easier to better facilitate instruction that motivates. This article seems to provide the WOW! factor for me. The idea of motive matching made me think back to 6th grade when we were learning about the Greeks and Romans and we had to do some kind of project that reflected life in the particular era. The teacher let us choose the projects with final approval from her, and my partner and I chose to build an Olympic arena using Barbie Dolls (WE WERE LIKE 12 OKAY!). The teacher allowed us to be creative and we learned. She set limits but we were able to follow them easily because we were also allowed to create the project using things that interested us. I think that experience also ties in to Keller's familiarity component as well. I think this article should be required reading for instructional designers and teachers alike!

Day one

Well here we are. Day one of class and I am already blogging!! You have to understand this is quite exciting for me! I am technologically stunted so this is a real accomplishment as far as I am concerned.