AARE 2008 Lillemyr OF. Sobstad F. Marder K.

Students’ relatedness – a neglected aspect of motivation and learning?

Abstract

According to theory and research social aspects like friendship and sense of relatedness are

fundamental in the development of children’s cultural identity and achievement outcomes

(Deci & Ryan, 1995; Maehr & Midgley, 1999; Wentzel, 2005; Ladd, 2007). It is argued that

this is a motivational aspect often neglected in research studies focusing students’ motivation

and learning. Theory and research on motivation and learning show interesting relations exist

between students’ self-concept, motivation and preference of learning (McInerney, 2003;

Maehr & McInerney, 2004; Reeve, Deci & Ryan, 2004). In any culture, motivation and

preference of learning are founded in values and sets of knowledge. For Indigenous people in

particular, cultural values, sense of relatedness and self-determination are important elements

in school motivation (Duncan & Greymorning, 1999; The Sami, 2000; McCathy, 2002).

In this paper we discuss results from two comparative cross-cultural studies within the

research project “The Socio-Cultural Perspective on Play and Learning”. The aim was to

compare attitudes and beliefs among Indigenous students of Aboriginal Australian, Navajo

Indian, and Norwegian Sámi descent as opposed to students of Anglo Australian, Anglo

American and Ethnic Norwegian background. Methodological issues of importance in cross-

cultural research studies like this are discussed. Our research indicates friendship and sense of

competence are important to students’ motivation to participate and achieve in school, partly

confirming results from other research studies (Craven 1999; Hirvonen, 2004; Wentzel 2005;

Ladd, 2007). Results regarding interests in play, preference of learning, self-concept aspects

and school motivation are also presented and discussed.

We find sense of relatedness to be a quintessence in this concern, for which reason

social learning through social motivation (cf. Lillemyr, 2007) has to be taken more seriously

than often is done, in preschool and school alike. In these matters we think different cultures

may be inspired by each other.

Introduction

In recent years theory and research have increasingly argued that social aspects like friendship

and sense of relatedness are fundamental in the development of cultural identity and learning

(Deci & Ryan, 1995; Maehr & Midgley, 1999; Wentzel, 2005; Ladd, 2007). These

perspectives have to be taken into account in early childhood education and care institutions

(ECECs) as well as schools, to obtain quality learning environments (Urdan & Maehr, 1995).

2

Since learning has now become the number one task both in early childhood education

institutions as well as in primary schools, a broader perspective on learning seems reasonable,

not least to attend to the concept of life long learning starting in children’s first year of life

(Schoenfeld, 1999; Lillemyr, Fagerli & Søbstad, 2001). In Norway in the last decades there

have been reforms and changes in Acts and frameworks for ECEC institutions, including

preschools and the first years of primary school addressing these trends (Knowledge

Promotion, 2006; Framework Plan, 2006). In some cases a reform was first of all considered a

reform focusing motivation (Lillemyr, 2002). In this perspective the inclusion of play has

become natural, although recently somewhat less emphasized in school. The same tendencies

including play can be seen in other countries (Broström, 1999; Dockett & Fleer, 1999;

Lindqvist, 2002; Samuelsson & Carlsson, 2003). Play is considered an important arena for

children in any culture (Huizinga, 1955) and a crucial component to children’s cognitive and

social development. For social learning to take place social motivation is often needed, the

most advantageous contributing to intrinsic motivation. Play is an essential component in the

socio-cultural theory of Vygotsky (1986), who argued play is a vital element especially

contributing to the acquisition of language and conceptual meaning. What a child is capable to

do with help from the teacher or a more experienced peer will in the next run be important to

the child’s sense of relatedness. However, the relevance of play is claimed by others as well

(White, 1959; Bateson, 1973; Levy, 1978; Csikszentmihalyi, 1985). On this basis it seems

reasonable to assume there would be a close relationship between children’s interests in play,

interests in learning and self-concept, motivation and achievement outcomes. Furthermore,

close relationships have been underlined between aspects of play, experimentation, creativity,

and effective learning (Lillemyr, 2001b; Søbstad, 1990; 2006). It seems social aspects, like

sense of relatedness often is a neglected aspect of motivation and learning, even if theory and

research emphasizes this aspect as a major component contributing to intrinsic motivation and

self-determined extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Recent research on preschool and

school indicate that aspects of social motivation often are underestimated, presumably more

often in school than in preschool.

For young children social learning concerns relationships to friends and to what

extent they feel competent and related in social contexts, in relation to peers and significant

others. As Wentzel said some years ago (1996:1)

The social worlds of children are pervasive and influential part of their lives at school.

Each day in class, children work to maintain and establish interpersonal relationships, they

strive to develop social identities and a sense of belongingness, they observe and model social

3

skills and standards of performance displayed by others and they are rewarded for behaving

in ways that are valued by teachers and peers. We also know that children who display

socially competent behaviour in elementary school are more likely to excel academically

throughout their middle and high school years than those who do not.

As Wentzel has continually emphasized, research has paid surprisingly little attention

to the social aspects of motivation, and we also know that humour can be a facilitator of social

competence (Søbstad, 2006; Bergen, 2007).

A Socio-cultural Perspective on Play and Learning

The concept of learning is important in all cultures, although, research has pointed out that the

extent of importance of preschool and school, vary from one culture to the other. However, it

is a well-known fact that the attitudes towards and interests in school learning vary a lot

between cultural groups. “A Socio-cultural Perspective on Play and Learning” has been an

ongoing study which started in 2001. In the study we compare characteristic cultural profiles

among Indigenous students (Aboriginal Australian, Navajo Indian, Sámi) and Western

students (Anglo Australian, Anglo American, Ethnic Norwegian) regarding interests in free

and directed learning, free and directed play, aspects of self-concept, and motivational

orientations. Do various cultural groups have different attitudes towards school learning? And

to what extent is play as a central element of culture important in this regard? In this concern

students’ endorsement of choice and sense of relatedness and cultural belonging were

assumed to be essential, as well as the aspect of language were presumed to play an important

role in their sense of cultural identity in relation to learning and development in school.

Of course Australia, Norway and Arizona (USA) represent three different parts of the

world, although they all have Indigenous people as a minority group, a fact that provide

certain educational challenges to these countries/states (Craven, 1999; The Sámi, 2000;

McCarty, 2002; Flood, 2006). Besides, it has been argued they all represent a global

perspective with a common struggle for recognition and self-determination as central

Indigenous issues in their respective nation-states (Duncan & Greymorning, 1999: 173). The

Sámi people in Norway count around 1.3 % of the country’s inhabitants. They live in

Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia; Norway having the largest population of Sami people,

around 50-60.000 people. The only Sámi university college, Sámi Allaskuvla, in this region

was established in Kautokeino, Norway in 1989. The Aborigines count around 2.3 % of the

inhabitants of Australia. At the start of the 21st century, fewer than 200 different Aboriginal

Australian languages remain and all except roughly 20 are highly endangered. Of those that

4

survive, only 10%, usually located in the most isolated areas, are being learned by children.

The Navajo people today count close to 300.000 inhabitants or 1 % of the inhabitants of USA.

However, the Native Americans (Indians) in USA in total count approximately 1.5 % of its

inhabitants, if Part Indigenous people are counted. The Norwegian samples were chosen as we

expected that there might be different preferences for play and learning amongst these two

groups relative to the Australian and American groups, among other things, owing to the

inclusion of play in the Norwegian curriculum. Compared to the other two minorities, it has to

be kept in mind that the Norwegian Sámi students from 1997 have their own Sámi curriculum

guidelines and are taught in the Sámi language by Sámi teachers (Sámi Curriculum

Guidelines, 1997). We also anticipated there may be differences between the Indigenous

students, as well as between Indigenous and Western students, on learning preferences, self-

concepts and motivational orientations, as well as differences between the sexes. However,

the Indigenous groups in all these countries have been found to underachieve in school and

having a majority of students not much interested in further education after school graduation

(Commonwealth of Australia, 1995; Eckermann, 1999; McInerney, 2003; Nystad, 2003).

Even if these groups have rather different conditions of schooling, they still have common

educational challenges, for which reason it is interesting to make comparisons in terms of

interests in learning, self-concept and motivation.

Research questions

The research questions for the studies were:

1 What are the similarities and differences between Indigenous vs. Western

students’ learning preference (directed or free), interests in play (directed or

free), motivational orientation (mastery, social, performance), and self-concept

(cognitive, social, and general self) in Australia, Norway and USA?

2 What gender similarities and differences exist within the Australian,

Norwegian, and American student groups?

3 Are there significant differences between the Indigenous students’ endorsement

of teacher-directed activities (learning, play, local cultural activities) compared

to free activities? Are there gender differences within the Indigenous student

groups’ endorsement of teacher-directed activities compared to free activities?

5

Method

General approach

In this comparative study a combined approach was chosen. In Study 1 a selection of

scales in a questionnaire were applied to collect third and fourth grade students’ self reported

expression of interests, aspects of self-concept and aspects of motivation. In Study 2, follow-

up qualitative interviews were administered to samples of the same categories of students as

in Study 1, in addition to interviews with their teachers. A cross-sectional approach was

chosen, as the students participating in interviews were not the same ones as those who had

answered the questionnaire a few years earlier. Methods of analyses were cross tabulations, t-

tests, correlations and Manova analyses, in addition to analyses of qualitative interviews. The

questionnaire was administered in 2002-2004, and interviews run in 2006-2007.

Methodological challenges in cross-cultural studies

A major challenge in cross-cultural studies is getting access to the field. Through the

history of research in social anthropology, sociology and other subjects, researchers have met

serious problems when trying to collect data in cultures different from their own culture.

William Foote Whyte (1965) presents his struggle and tactical solutions in the sociological

classic Street Corner Society when he was studying youth culture and gang activities in one of

the big cities in the US. His access to the group was facilitated by the gang leader, Doc. He

became Whyte's gate opener to the field. In our study we were helped to get access to the

schools by researchers that previously had done research in the schools where Indigenous

students were attending. Studies like ours are dependent on accept and support from people

with formal or informal power to let a researcher into the field. The question in some cross-

cultural studies are not who your are going to get information from, but if there are people

willing to share their attitudes, experiences and values with the researcher (Gran 2007: 31).

Many years of conflicts between a white majority and Indigenous groups and long-

lasting distrust to all representatives of the majority culture in general, and may be white

researchers in particular. In carrying out our research, we were grateful to the cooperation

from experienced colleagues having done research among Indigenous groups previously and

for their support in opening gates for us. On a wall in a museum in Sydney we can read a text

claiming that the Aboriginal Australians are one of the most studied Indigenous groups in the

world, but possibly the group least understood. This means that many Aboriginals are

sceptical to meet more white researchers.

6

Another challenge was of course to communicate with Indigenous students and

interpret their answers. To exchange views with a person with a different mother tongue and

cultural identity were a special challenge to us and therefore our interpretations must be

evaluated with caution. In general, we claim that all the students we interviewed understood

our questions, but still we assume a weakly developed majority language (Norwegian or

English) among a few of the Indigenous students could have affected the quality of the

interview. If so, this will of course affect the reliability of our research, illustrating the

challenges we met in this cross-cultural study. Then there is the use of interpreters

(translators). Other studies report there are problems when using interpreters. Asymmetry and

cultural control over the answers can be a problem in relation to the respondents’ feelings of

freedom and control in the situation (Gran 2007:33, 41f). In our studies we met this challenge

with using Indigenous teachers or teacher assistants to compensate for this. Still, we could not

be sure mistakes or translation nuances were not taking place. Despite the challenges, we are

convinced that we as a general picture obtained reliable and valid data, not least because of

the interest and openness we met among students, teachers and school leaders from the

different cultures.

Participants

Participants (Indigenous students) for study 1 were drawn from four Australian Primary

Schools, six Norwegian Primary Schools and one Navajo elementary school, and one Anglo

American (urban) school. The total sample size of Indigenous (minority) group students was

331: 130 Aboriginal Australian, 144 Sámi Norwegian, and 57 Navajo American. In all cases

students were drawn from grade 3 and 4, aged 8, 9 and 10, except for Navajo students that

were drawn from grade 3, 4 and 5, aged 8, 9, 10 and 11. In total 49.5 % of the students in

Indigenous groups were male and 51.6 % of Western groups were male. In Norway Sami

Norwegian students are taught in the Sami language and have their own national Sami

curriculum guidelines. The Navajo students are taught in both English and Navajo. This is

different in Australia where the Australian Aboriginal students go to mainstream schools

together with Anglo Australian students, are taught in English, and follow regular school

curricula. An urban school of mainly Anglo Australian students were included as well.

Furthermore, in the case of Norway and Australia, data from Western (majority) groups

were collected as well; encompassing Anglo Australian students in Sydney, N=496, and

ethnic Norwegian students in the city of Trondheim, N=223, in addition to Anglo Australian

and ethnic Norwegian students in the above mentioned rural schools, and in addition to N= 26

7

Anglo American students in New Mexico. In study 1 Western group students and Indigenous

group students in total included 1076 students, altogether.

In the interview study (study two) 10 Aboriginal students, 32 Sámi students, and 15

Navajo students were interviewed; a total of 57 Indigenous students. The Western students

interviewed encompassed 20 Anglo Australian (rural and urban) and 36 ethnic Norwegian (5

rural + 31 urban), and 30 Anglo American students, altogether 86 Western students.

In addition these students’ teachers were interviewed. In Australia all teachers

interviewed were Anglo Australian (N=9). In Norway there were 8 Sámi teachers and 8 ethnic

Norwegian teachers interviewed (a total of N=16), all interviewed in Norwegian. In Arizona,

the 3 teachers in the Navajo school interviewed, were two of Navajo background and one of

Anglo American background; and in the Anglo American school 3 Anglo American teachers

were interviewed. Teachers in Australia and USA were interviewed in English. This

constituted a total of 31 third and fourth grade teachers interviewed.

Instruments applied in Study 1

1 Choice and interest

To collect information about students’ choice of free or directed activities in learning,

play and local cultural activities, a revised version of an instrument developed for an earlier

study (Lillemyr et al., 1998), was used, focusing on choice (interests) in learning, play and

local cultural activities. This is a Norwegian one item rating scale revised and translated into

English and Sámi, and Navajo. Students’ choice of free or directed learning was set in the

school context, whereas students’ choice of free or directed play targeted play in school, at

home or elsewhere. Students’ knowledge of and interest in local cultural activities was

indicated through their interest in typical activities of their local community or among

relatives. The activities can be special handicraft like making baskets, playing special games,

singing songs, saying rhymes, and training special skills like playing the didgeridoo

(Aboriginal Australians) or doing duodji or Sámi handicraft (Sámi Norwegians).

The dimension of students’ choice in learning, play, and local cultural activities, was

examined according to three conditions: student chosen, teacher directed, or shared choice

between student and teacher/adult. From this nine conditions were inferred.

Students were asked about their interest when the activities are free (student chosen),

directed (adult or teacher chosen), or guided or shared (a combination of both). Student

answers varied between the categories “not at all”, “somewhat”, “much”, and “very much”.

8

There are nine items altogether, tapping different kinds of choice/interest.

2 Self-Concept

To collect data about Self-Concept we used the Self Perception Profile for Children (SPPC,

Harter, 1979). This scale was designed to measure students’ self perceptions of competence

across four domains: cognitive competence reflects primarily academic performance (“some

kids feel they are very good at their schoolwork”), social competence reflects popularity with

peers (“some kids find it hard to make friends”), physical competence (not used in our study),

and general self-esteem or feelings of worth (“some kids are pretty sure of themselves”).

Harter added this scale to shed light on the relationship between a child’s feelings of

competence and his or her feelings of personal worth. Each scale consists of seven items and

is measured on a four point Likert scale. For our study we only included three dimensions

most relevant to school work, namely, cognitive competence, social competence and general

self-esteem.

3 Intrinsic motivation

To collect data on intrinsic motivation, we used the Scale of Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic

Orientation in the Classroom (Harter, 1980; 1981). These scales (Harter, 1980) were designed

to examine the degree to which a child’s motivation for classroom learning is determined by

his or her intrinsic interest in learning or extrinsic motivational orientation, such as seeking

teacher approval or good grades. Of the five dimensions of classroom orientation included in

the scale, three were applied in this study: preference for challenge versus preference for easy

work (“some kids like hard work because it is a challenge”); independent mastery versus

dependence on the teacher (if some kids get stuck on a problem they ask the teacher for

help”); curiosity and interest versus pleasing the teacher and getting grades (“some kids ask

questions in class because they want to learn new things”). Each scale consists of six items,

with answers on a four point Likert scale.

4 School motivation

Information about general school motivation was collected with three subscales from

The General Achievement Goal Orientation Scale (McInerney, 2000; McInerney, Marsh,

Yeung, 2003). This scale (GAGOS) includes sets of items that reflect general motivation in

three targeted areas, namely, general mastery (“I am most motivated when I see my work

improving”), general performance (“I am most motivated when I am doing better than

others”), and general social (“I am most motivated when I work with others”). This

9

instrument has also been analyzed according to socio-cultural groups like this before

(McInerney, Yeung & McInerney, 2001).

Appropriate ethical clearances were obtained prior to administering the survey and the

interviews to the students. Information regarding students’ ethnic background was collected

from the teachers after the completion of the survey and before doing interview. The scales

were analyzed for reliability, in addition to exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses

(Lillemyr, McInerney, Søbstad & Valaas, 2004; McInerney, Lillemyr & Søbstad, 2004).

The study 2 approach

Study 2 was designed as a qualitative study. In this study qualitative semi-structured

interviews were chosen as the method of data collection. Appropriate interview guides and

questions were developed for students and for their 3rd and 4th grade teachers respectively.

The interview guides and questions were developed in English and Norwegian versions. In

Australia and USA the English versions were used. In Norway the Norwegian versions were

used both to Sámi and ethnic Norwegian students; however, for 3rd grade Sámi students Sámi

teachers were advised to use Sámi teachers as translators. For 3rd grade Sámi students the

questions were read in Norwegian by the researcher and then translated into Sámi to make

sure they understood all the questions properly. Interviews of teachers were taped, and then

transcribed and systematized. Interviews of students were taken down with pen and paper by

the researcher, and then transcribed and systematized, because school leaders was afraid some

parents would not accept electronic taping of their child’s responses.

Interview guides and questions are enclosed. There were developed 20 questions for

students and 16 questions for teachers. The questions also included background factors like

sex, age (or age group), grade (or number of years of teaching) and ethnicity.

Results

In this presentation based upon several types of analyses, we focus on four major components

of results from both Study 1 and Study 2. We have in several papers and articles presented

preliminary analyses from the two studies (cf. Lillemyr, McInerney, Søbstad & Valaas, 2004;

Lillemyr, McInerney, Flowerday, 2005; Lillemyr, Søbstad, Marder, Flowerday and Bang,

2007; Lillemyr, Søbstad, Marder, Flowerday and Bang, 2008).

10

In general, stronger differences were documented between Indigenous students and

Western students, than between the different Indigenous groups. This is a fact in support of

the legitimacy of including Indigenous students from three different countries located in three

different parts of the world in the very same study (cf. Duncan & Greymorning, 1999).

The main results from the studies will in the following be presented in relation to four

areas.

1 Self-Concept

In general we found clear indications of Indigenous students holding lower self-

concept values than Western group students.

• For Australian students: Aboriginal students were lower in General Self-Esteem

• For Norwegian students: Sámi students were lower in Social Self

• For American students: Navajo Indian male students were lower in General Self-

esteem

Insert Figure 1 about here

These results were confirmed with Manova analyses for all six groups and for

Indigenous groups, only, and Western groups only, respectively (Lillemyr, McInerney,

Søbstad & Valaas, 2004; Lillemyr, McInerney & Flowerday, 2005).

In this concern it is important to state the school conditions of the Indigenous students

in the three countries were markedly different. In Australia Indigenous students included in

this study went to main stream schools and were taught in English together with Anglo

Australian students. I USA Indigenous students participating in this study went to a Navajo

school, established and driven by Navajo authorities and taught in Navajo and English, with

mostly Navajo teachers. In Norway Sámi students included in this study go to Sámi schools

with mostly Sámi students and are taught in Sámi by Sámi teachers and according to a

specific Sámi Curriculum Guidelines. We consider the teaching language to be a fundamental

school condition aspect, as we assume the opportunity to speak their own culture’s language

is important to develop a sense of relatedness to the culture as well as to the school’s learning

environment. Despite these differences in school conditions, we found clear similarities

between the groups in terms of low Self Concept. We interpret this a consequence of

Indigenous students to a lesser degree have their need of self-determination satisfied,

compared to Western students, and consequently will have a lower sense of relatedness to the

11

school culture. However, this does not mean they have a lower social and cultural sense of

relatedness in general (Nystad, 2003).

These results to some extent confirm what has been found with older students

(McInerney, 2003), even if our results with younger students clearly pointed to more

differences than have often been found with older students. We find this reasonable, as for

older students the process of school socialisation has been going on for several more years. In

addition there is in some countries a rather high drop-out percent among Indigenous students.

Interestingly, we did not find significant differences in terms of Academic Self between

Indigenous and Western students.

2 Interest in Play

In this study we found differences between socio-cultural groups of students in

regard to interest in free activities, as opposed to interest in teacher-directed activities, as we

found differences between the cultures on learning, play and local cultural activities.

However, more differences were found between the two student groups in Norway and in

Arizona/New Mexico, than between the two Australian groups.

Insert Table 1

From Study 1 we found interest in free play to be strong in all groups, independent of

cultural background. This suggests that play represents a great potential for motivation in

school, as intrinsic motivation is a main characteristic of play (Levy, 1978). All cultural

groups turned out to have a high interest in free play, confirming that play is important to

young children in all cultures, as claimed by several (Huizinga, 1955; Bateson, 1973). In total,

all students in the three countries have an active attitude towards play, in particular at home

and in recess time. However, play in class is most representative among ethnic Norwegian

students, than among Sámi students; among students in USA and Australia it seems that play

in class seldom occur. The exception seems to be the use of games in mathematics. In

conclusion, this indicates the inclusion of play and a substantial extent of free choice in

activities seem adequate to promote involvement in learning in a broad sense of the word. Not

least, this also suggest for the inclusion of the social aspects of learning (cf. Schoenfeld, 1999;

Wentzel, 2005). Indigenous students’ higher interest in directed play, compared to non-

Indigenous students can be caused by different factors. We assume one reason for this might

be that adult-directed play for Indigenous children is more closely tied to cultural traditions,

12

than in non-Indigenous societies, because of their stronger tradition of respect for adults and

relatives.

Interestingly, the importance of interest in play to students’ interest in learning

differed substantially according to group. To Indigenous students the relation play-learning

seemed first of all to be a relation through directed activities. For ethnic Norwegian students,

a moderately high significant correlation was found between interest in free learning and

interest in free play (r= .31), a result found for these students only. We believe this might be

caused by the heavy emphasis on play as an integral element and a broad concept of learning

in Norwegian schools according to ‘Reform 97’, emphasizing free activities and play in the

curriculum, to promote students’ interests in experimentation, creativity, and initiatives to

seek various solutions. This supports a concept of learning drawing heavily on autonomy,

choice and mastery orientation (cf. Maehr & Braskamp, 1986; Deci & Ryan, 1995). This does

not seem to have affected the Sámi students to the same extent yet (cf. The Sámi Curriculum

Guidelines 1997). The results from this study confirmed the results of other studies carried out

in Norway as evaluation of ‘Reform 97’ at Saami schools (Hirvonen, 2004; Lauhamaa, 2004).

Interviews of Indigenous students clearly indicate that play is an important and

dominating activity in recess time at school (see interview form, version Australia enclosed).

Among the Sámi students play with snow, a merry go round machine in the school yard and

play with friends are mentioned in particular. In Arizona all students tell they are playing in

the recess time. All Indigenous students seem often to play “tag” (Arizona) or “tips”

(Australia) or “sura” (Norway), and hide and seek. Playing with a ball is popular, especially

football (soccer) in Norway, but also jumping with elastic cord. The students say they are

playing a lot both in school and at home. As far as play in class is concerned, the answers

from Sámi students in Norway vary a lot. Some say they are allowed to play in class, others

say they are not, some says some times. Half of the Sámi students think they learn better with

play. This attitude towards play in class was clearly more positive among ethnic Norwegian

students. In Arizona most Navajo students say there are never play in class, although a few

says it can happen in mathematics and writing. However, a majority of the Navajo students

think they would learn better with play. Anglo American students say they play in the

playground at school, and some times have games in mathematics. Some say they never play

in class. In Australia a few says they are having play in class, some says they don’t and some

says it happens some times. However, a majority of Australian students (Aboriginal and

Anglo) indicated that they thought learning would be better with play. A few are more

13

reluctant. Those having a positive attitude in this area, argued that they would enjoy learning

more “because you can have fun at the same time as learning and achieving”.

3 Preference of learning

The higher interest in directed learning for Indigenous groups in Norway and Australia

was to some degree confirmed among the Navajo students. Most Indigenous students

endorsed directed learning more than free learning (Lillemyr, McInerney & Flowerday,

2005). However, female Navajo students were found to be more strongly interested in free

learning than any of the other Indigenous groups. The tendencies among Indigenous students

were rather contrary to the profiles found among non-Indigenous students in the countries.

(See tables from t-tests of means. Manova analyses were also run, not presented here. See

Lillemyr, McInerney & Flowerday, 2005.)

Insert table 2, 3 and 4 about here

In a way it seems that Indigenous students prefer teacher directed learning more than

free learning where they can take initiative, be creative and experimental and therefore

influence stronger on their learning activities. With a few exceptions we found that

Indigenous students endorsed a traditional concept of learning at school, directed by the

teacher. More recently, the availability of children’s co-decision in preschool and school is

emphasized in some countries’ recent curriculum guidelines (Knowledge promotion, 2006;

Framework Plan, 2006). However, there is evidence that the concept of learning within

Indigenous cultures traditionally have been more like free learning, although they are also in

favor of learning from an adults or a relatives (Nystad, 2003). For this reason their beliefs

about school learning seems to reflect their perceptions of the concept of learning in the

majority culture. Anyway, it is not easy to state the one kind of learning concept is better or

more advantageous than the other.

As far as interest in free learning is concerned; learning where students typically can

make choices, take initiatives, experiment with solutions and be creative; interesting gender

differences were found between the three Indigenous groups. Whereas girls are higher

interested than boys in free learning in the Aboriginal group, boys are higher interested than

girls in free learning in the Sámi group. Here the Navajo group seemed to follow the

Aboriginal group. However, in the Navajo group a considerable difference was found

between boys and girls both on Interest in free learning and interest in directed learning, in

both cases in favor of the girls (Lillemyr, McInerney & Flowerday, 2005). In regard to

14

interest in free learning this result is similar to what we found in the Aboriginal group, but not

so for interest in directed learning. In the case of Sámi students the gender difference is for

both types of interest in learning the other way around.

Insert figures 1b and 1c about here

This is what we have come to call an opposite kind of gender difference. Sámi boys

being clearly more interested in free learning coincides with what has been found in other

research on Sámi students (Nystad 2003; Hirvonen 2004), indicating that Sámi boys, although

not much interested in further education, typically favor experimenting, finding creative

solutions and being autonomous in their learning. Some Sámi boys want to end up as reindeer

owners staying in their local district, others wish to take on other occupations related to the

Sámi culture and tradition. The Sámi girls on the other hand have higher educational

ambitions, but adapt to school by being teacher directed in their approach. (See figure 3.)

Insert figure 3 here

As no significant differences on interest in free or directed learning were found in

Manova analysis with the Indigenous student groups (Lillemyr, McInerney & Flowerday,

2005), a rerun of a Manova analysis for the three Indigenous groups with two fixed factors,

sex and socio-cultural background (and the interaction between them) was done (see table 5).

Insert table 5 about here

A significant difference for the interaction sex by socio-cultural background was found

for interests in free learning (table 5). (Mean Navajo: male=3.00, female=3.60; mean Sámi,

male= 3.26, female= 2.85; mean Abor: male=2.95, female= 3.19, 2/309 degrees of freedom,

p= .002). This confirms that an interaction effect does exist. This seems to indicate all

Indigenous students function in their countries as minority groups, but in diverse ways,

probably caused, among other things, by the fact that different school conditions are provided.

It is interesting to see from the interview study (Study 2) that most students like it a lot

at school, maybe because they have pleasant experiences there and not least because they

have the welcome opportunity to play with friends. This was the case for Indigenous students

as well as for non-Indigenous students. Obviously, play is an important factor for them, both

in school and at home. They no doubt thrive at school, except for a few who don’t like to be

harassed by other students, also pointing to the importance of relatedness. Assumedly, this

clearly reflects students’ need for social and cultural relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 1995,

Wentzel, 2005). Indigenous students’ answers on questions if students should have something

15

to say on what is going on in the classroom, most Sámi students say no. A few think they

should. Most would not like to decide about methods. In Australia some Aboriginal students

think they should have something to say, others do not. But most of them don’t think they

should have a saying in selecting methods. This confirms most Indigenous students’

endorsement of teacher directed learning at school. Answers on these questions of non-

Indigenous students were different from this, as they more tended to like to have a saying on

what is going on in the classroom.

In conclusion, Indigenous students seem to strongly endorse teacher-directed learning,

and not so much favor free learning activities; contrary to the non-Indigenous students, in

particular ethnic Norwegian students.

4 School Motivation

In relation to school motivation orientation, we found different profiles in the different

countries. In general, Indigenous students were found to be more strongly oriented towards

social motivation. Furthermore they showed somewhat stronger orientation towards

performance motivation. As can be seen in table 6, analyses of all six socio-cultural samples

disclosed a clear tendency of differences between the socio-cultural groups on all three types

of school motivation. The strongest tendency of difference was found on social motivation

and performance motivation. For example, both Australian groups and both American groups

were more strongly performance oriented than the two Norwegian groups, and particularly the

Anglo American group was less strongly mastery oriented than the other groups. In Norway,

Sámi students were stronger oriented towards social motivation compared to ethnic

Norwegian students. In Australia, the Anglo Australian students were more strongly social

oriented than the Aboriginal students.

Manova analyses across the three types of motivation in school indicated an overall

main effect by cultural group (Pillais = .000). The follow – up F tests show there is a

significant difference between the six groups on performance motivation, and a significant

difference between the groups on social motivation. The significant difference on

performance motivation was also found between the two Australian and the two Norwegian

groups in preliminary analyses (Lillemyr, McInerney, Søbstad & Valaas, 2004). The

significance for the difference between cultural groups on performance motivation was found

with F= 17.66 (3/1041 degrees of freedom, and p< .000) and a significance for the difference

on social motivation was found with F= 4.90 (3/1041 degrees of freedom, and p< .000). A

16

significant difference between sex groups was found on social motivation only with F = 8.35

(p< .004). As can be seen from table 6, a significant interaction effect between socio-cultural

background and sex was found on mastery motivation (p< .002).

Insert table 6 here

Manova analyses with the three Indigenous and the three non-Indigenous groups respectively,

tables not enclosed here, disclosed the following tendencies:

• Among Indigenous students, significant differences were found on social motivation

and performance motivation, in particular among the boys.

• Among non-Indigenous students, significant differences were found on mastery,

social and performance motivation, in particular Anglo American students were less

mastery and socially oriented in their school motivation.

This is a clear indication that non-Indigenous students did have different profiles of

motivation, as well as Indigenous students. Both Norwegian groups were less performance

oriented than the other groups, probably partly caused by the recent school reforms in

Norway.

In conclusion this seems to indicate social motivation is an important area for

developmental efforts in school. For both groups an interaction effect was found between

cultural background and sex, so maybe different strategies have to be applied to boys and girls

in terms of enhancing motivation in school.

In USA, Navajo students showed stronger orientation towards mastery motivation and

social motivation, than Anglo American students, as far as girls were concerned. In Australia,

on the other hand there was not found any differences, however Indigenous girls were lower

mastery oriented than Anglo Australian girls. One reason for not finding as many differences

in Australia could be caused by the fact that both the participating student groups go to

mainstream schools, contrary to the participating Indigenous students in USA and Norway

who go to specific Indigenous schools and are taught in their own culture’s language.

Discussion

A strength of this study is its combination of applying quantitative and qualitative data from

Indigenous groups of remote and difficult to access areas and languages (Aboriginal

Australian, Sámi Norwegian and Navajo Indian), as well as data from non-Indigenous

mainstream groups. A challenge, on the other hand has been the different school conditions

17

for these Indigenous groups in terms of teaching language, type of school, and the relation to

the majority culture’s language and school policy. Studies among such groups are typically

small scale qualitative studies. In some parts of the research we were dependent on

interpreters. To collect data in these schools therefore has been a real challenge

methodologically. Then we also had to attend to the ongoing recent reforms in the countries.

Because of these factors, we chose an approach with different methods of data collection and

data analyses.

In a life long learning perspective, it is essential to see the importance of learning and

development in preschool as fundamental for children’s learning and achievement in primary

and secondary school. Results from this study have indicated social aspects and sense of

relatedness to be fundamental to students’ self-concept and motivation. In the cultural profiles

indicated this seems to be elements of special importance for Indigenous students, in

particular on background of their struggle for respect and self-determination through the

years. According to self-determination theory, sense of relatedness and competence, in

addition to having influence on their learning in school, is a momentous value. Indigenous

students were found to be lower in Self-Concept aspects, especially on self-esteem and social

self. We have also seen that all children, even 8 to 10 year olds, have a need for free play,

showing clearly the potential of play to school learning, not least when taking into account

play’s main dimension of intrinsic motivation. Play is more than any activity relying on social

aspects and relatedness. In play children interact with others and build social competence,

which will in the next run provide them with useful experiences and a potential for creativity,

experimentation and learning strategies. However, applying play in class does represent

challenges for the teacher (Lillemyr, 2003). In terms of interest in learning, we argue for the

potential of free learning, in particular among Indigenous students. However, a broad and

useful concept of learning might have to include some aspects of directed learning as well. An

exchange between play and learning, and a variation between free learning and directed

learning can be interesting to explore, even if it is also challenging. The documentation of

interaction effect between cultural background and gender in interest in free learning has to be

more thoroughly examined. AS it is argued, gender differences in relation to competence and

motivation have to be more thoroughly examined in future research (Hyde & Durik, 2005).

In regard of motivational orientation, we found some student groups to be too heavily

performance oriented. Our results indicate social motivation should be a target perspective for

teachers to enhance students’ motivation for school learning and interest in future education,

based on students’ sense of relatedness. It is a provocative thought that motivation for school

18

learning seems to be an even bigger challenge to Indigenous students, than to non-Indigenous

students.

Research has documented that how well children thrive in preschool and school and to

what extent they are motivated, is dependent on their satisfaction of fundamental

psychological needs. This is the case for all children, however, of special importance for

Indigenous students (Reeve, Deci & Ryan, 2004; Ladd, 2007). This is well illustrated in the

strong history of how the Navajo Indians built their own school in Rough Rock in 1966,

which is but one such history (McCarty, 2002). Satisfaction of the need for belongingness,

self-determination and competence, will provide a base for well-being, acknowledgment,

respect, interest and engagement. On this background, we find sense of relatedness to be a

quintessence in this concern, and we see several of our results as an indication of this.

Research has indicated there are still challenges to be met in regard of obtaining equality in

education in all three countries, regardless of socio-cultural background, gender, etc. One

issue concerns students’ influence in the classroom. (Cf. UN’s Convention on the Rights of

the Child 1989) It is clear that further research with larger samples as well as more small scale

studies will be needed to confirm the results.

References

Bateson, G. (1973) “A Theory of play and fantasy” In Bateson, G. (1973) Steps to an Ecology

of Mind. N.Y.: Paladin

Bennett, N.; Wood, L. & Rogers, S. (1997) Teaching through Play: Teachers’ thinking and

classroom practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Bergen, D. (2007) Humor as a Facilitator of Social Competence in Early Childhood In

Spodek, B. & Saracho, O.N. (Eds.) Contemporary Perspectives on Research in

Socialization and Social Development, pp. 19-38. Charlotte, NC: Information Age

Publishing.

Broström, S. (1996) Frame play with 6-year-old children European Early Childhood

Research Journal, 4 (1), 89-102.

Broström, S. (1999) En god skolestart - fælles ansvar og fælles udvikling (A Good School

Start - Common Responsibility and Common Development) Copenhagen: Systime

Forlag.

19

Commonwealth of Australia (1995) The Commonwealth government’s response to the review

of education for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples Canberra, AUS:

Australian Government Publishing Service.

Craven, R. (1999) (Ed.) Teaching Aboriginal Studies Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1985) Emergent Motivation and the Evolution of the Self. In: D.A.

Kleiber & M.L. Maehr (Eds.) Motivation and Adulthood, l4, pp. 93 -120.

Deci,E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in Personality.

In I.R.Dienstbier (Ed.) Nebraska symposium on motivation: Perspectives on

motivation. 38, 237-288. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1995). Human Autonomy: The Basis for a True Self-Esteem. In

Kernis, M.H. (ed.) Efficacy, Agency, and Self-Esteem, 31-49. N.Y./London: Plenum

Press.

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (2000) The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and

the Self-Determination of Behavior Psychological Inquiry, vol 11, no.4, pp 227-268

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (2002) (Eds.) Handbook of Self-Determination Research Rochester,

NY: The University of Rochester Press

Dockett,S. & Fleer,M. (1999). Play and pedagogy in early childhood: Bending the rules

Marickville, Australia: Harcourt Brace & Comp.

Duncan, A. & Greymorning, S. (1999). Comparative studies In R. Craven (Ed.) Teaching

Aboriginal Studies, Sydney, NSW: Allen & Unwin Ltd.

Eckermann, A.-K. (1999) Aboriginal education in rural Australia: A case study in frustration

and hope Australian Journal of Education, 43: 5-23.

Flood, J. (2006). The Original Australians: Story of the Aboriginal People Crows Nest, NSW:

Allen & Unwin.

Framework Plan (2006) Framework Plan for the Content and Tasks of Kindergartens (early

childhood education institutions) Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Education and

Research.

Gran, H.M. (2007) Hvor norsk skal man bli? Danning mellom to kulturer. Et møte med noen

somaliske foreldre (How Norwegian do we ought to be? Development/liberal

education between two cultures: Meeting Somalian parents) Oslo: The University

College of Oslo.

20

Harter, S. (1979). Perceived Competence Scale for Children Manual Denver, Colorado:

University of Denver.

Harter, S. (1980). A Scale of Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Orientation in the Classrooom Manual

Denver, Colorado: University of Denver.

Harter, S. (1981). A New Self-Report Scale of Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Orientation in the

Classroom: Motivational and Informational Components. Developmental Psychology,

17, 300-312.

Hirvonen, V. (2004). Samisk skole – starten på en ny opplæringspolitikk. (The Sámi school –

starting a new curriculum policy.) In V. Hirvonen (ed.) Samisk skole i plan og praksis.

Hvordan møte utfordringene i L97S? Evaluering av Reform 97. (The Sámi school in

curriculum and practice. How to meet the challenges of The Curriculum Guidelines of

1997, the Sámi version? The Evaluation of Reform 97) Kautokeino: The Sámi College

Publications.

Huizinga, J. (1955) Homo ludens A study of the play element in culture London/Boston:

Beacon Press.

Hyde, J.S. & Durik, A.M. (2005) Gender, Competence, and Motivation In Elliot, A.J. &

Dweck, C.S. (Eds.) Handbook of Competence and Motivation N.Y./London: Guilford

Press.

Knowledge Promotion (2006) Information for pupils and parents/guardians: What is new in

the 10-year compulsory school and upper secondary schools from the autumn of 2006?

Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research.

Ladd, G.W. (2007) Social Learning in the Peer Context In Saracho, O.N. & Spodek, B. (eds.)

Contemporary Perspectives on Research in Socialization and Social Development, pp.

133-164. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Ladd, G.W.; Herald, S.L. & Andrews, R.K. (2006) Young children’s peer relations and social

competence In B. Spodek & O.N. Saracho (Eds.) Handbook of Research on the

Education of Young Children 2nd ed. pp. 23-54

Lauhamaa, P. (2004) Fra undervisning til læring – en studie av organisering av læring i

samisk skole på grunnlag av arbeidsmetoder (From teaching to learning – a study of

the organizing of learning based upon working methods) In V. Hirvonen (ed.) Samisk

skole i plan og praksis. Hvordan møte utfordringene i L97S? Evaluering av Reform

21

97. (The Sámi school in curriculum and practice: How to meet the challenges of The

Curriculum Guidelines of 1997, the Sámi version? The Evaluation of Reform 97)

Kautokeino: The Sámi College Publications.

Levy, J. (1978) Play Behavior New York: Wiley.

Lillemyr,O.F. (2001a). Play and Learning in School: A Motivational Approach. In

D.McInerney & S.Van Etten (Eds.) Research on Sociocultural Influences on

Motivation and Learning, 363-385. Greewich,Connecticut: Information Age

Publishing.

Lillemyr,O.F. (2001b). Lek på alvor. (Play Seriously.) 2. ed. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Lillemyr,O.F. (2002). ‘Reform 97’ in Norway. A new perspective on motivation and

learning? Nordisk Pedagogik, 22, 38 – 52.

Lillemyr, O.F. (2003). Play in school – the teacher’s role: Reforms and Recent Research. In

O.N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.) Contemporary Perspectives on Play in Early

Childhood Education, 53-73. Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.

Lillemyr, O.F. (2007) Social Learning Through Social Motivation In Spodek, B. & Saracho,

O.N. (Eds.) Contemporary Perspectives on Research in Socialization and Social

Development, pp. 99-132. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Lillemyr, O.F. et al. (1998). Overgangen barnehage – småskole. Et forsknings- og

utviklingsprosjekt I Nord-Trøndelag (The Transition Preschool – School. A research

and development project in North Troendelag) Steinkjer: Nord-Trøndelagsforskning.

Report 5a and 5b.

Lillemyr, O.F.; Fagerli, O. & Søbstad, F. (2001) A Global Perspective on Early Childhood

Care and Education: A Proposed Model monograph no 17/2001. Paris: UNESCO

Education Sector.

Lillemyr, O.F.; McInerney, D.M.; Søbstad, F. & Valaas, H. (2004) Play, Learning and Self-

Concept in Primary School: A Multicultural Perspective. Paper published in

Conference Proceedings of The 3rd International Biennial SELF Research Conference

in Berlin, Germany, July 2004.Sydney: University of Western Sydney, The Self

Research Centre. ISBN 174108 073 8.

Lillemyr, O.F.; McInerney, D.M. & Flowerday, T. (2005) Play, Learning and Self-Concept in

Minority and Majority Groups: A Multicultural Perspective on Motivation Paper

22

presented at the annual meeting at American Educational Research Association,

Montreal, Canada, April, 2005.

Lillemyr, O.F.; Søbstad, F.; Marder, K.; Flowerday, T. & Bang, C. (2007) A Comparative

Persepctive on Learning among Indigenous and Western Students in primary School,

A paper presented at 17th Conference of European Early Childhood Education

Research Association, Prague, 29th August - 1st September.

Lillemyr, O.F.; Søbstad, F.; Marder, K.; Flowerday, T. & Bang, C. (2008) Play and Learning

at School: Focus on Indigenous Students in New South Wales, Arizona and Norway,

A paper presented at 17th Conference of European Early Childhood Education

Research Association, Prague, 29th August - 1st September. In Conference

Proceedings, ISSN 1324-9320-WWW version ISSN 1324-9339.

Lindqvist, G. (2002) Lek i skolan (Play in school.) Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur

Maehr, M.L. & Midgley, C. (1996) Transforming School Cultures In the series “Lives in

Context” (Ed. Csikszentmihalyi, M.) Boulder, CO/Oxford, UK: Westview

Maehr, M.L. & Midgley, C. (1999) Creating optimum environments for students of diverse

sociocultural backgrounds In Block, J.; Everson,, S.T. & Guskey, T.R. (Eds.)

Comprehensive School Reform: A program Perspective Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt

Publishing Co.

Maehr, M.L. & McInerney, D.M. (2004) Motivation as Personal Investment In McInerney,

D.M. & Van Etten, S. (Eds.) Big Theories Revisited Volume 4 in Research on

Sociocultural Influences on Motivation and Learning Greenwich, CT: Information Age

Publishing.

McCarty, T.L. (2002) A Place to be Navajo: Rough Rock and the Struggle for Self-

Determination in Indigenous Schooling Mahwah, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.

McInerney, D. (2003). Motivational Goals, Self-Concept, and Sense of Self – What predicts

Academic Achievement? Similarities and Differences between Aboriginal and Anglo

Australians in High School Settings In H.W. Marsh; R.G. Craven & D.M. McInerney

(Eds.) International Advances in Self Research, 315-346. Greenwich, Connecticut:

Information Age Publications.

McInerney, D.M.; Yeung, A.S. & McInerney, V. (2001). Cross-cultural validation of the

Inventory of School Motivation (ISM): Motivation orientations of Navajo and Anglo

students. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2, 135-153.

23

McInerney, D.M.; Lillemyr, O.F. and Søbstad, F. (2004). Self-concept in cultural context:

Harter’s Perceived Competence Scale for Children. Paper presented at The 3rd

International Biennial SELF Research Conference in Berlin, Germany, July 2004.

Nystad, I.M.K. (2003) Mannen mellom myte og modernitet (The Man between Myth and

Modernity) Nesbru, Norway: Vett & Viten Publ.

Reeve, J.; Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (2004) Self-Determination Theory: A Dialectical

Framework for Understanding Sociocultural Influences on Student Motivation In

McInerney, D.M. & Van Etten, S. (Eds.) Big Theories Revisited Volume 4 In the series

Research on Sociocultural Influences on Motivation and Learning Greenwich, CT:

Information Age Publishing.

Sámi Curriculum Guidelines (1997) Det samiske læreplanverket (The Sámi Curriculum

Guidelines) Oslo: Ministry of Education, Research and Church Affairs

Samuelsson, I. P. & Carlsson, M. A. (2003) Det lekande lärande barnet i en

utvecklingspedagogisk teori (The playing learning child in a developmental

educational theory) Stockholm: Liber

Schoenfeld, A. H. (2000) Looking Toward the 21st Century: Challenges of Educational

Theory and Practice. Educational Researcher, 28 (7) 4-14.

Søbstad,F. (1990). Førskolebarn og humor. (Preschool children and humor) Doctoral

dissertation (dr. polit.), University of Trondheim, Department of Education.

Søbstad, F. (2006) Glede og humor i barnehagen (Joy and Humor in Preschool) Oslo:

Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.

The Sámi (2000). The Sámi: People of the Sun and Wind (2000) Luleå, Sweden: Ájtte,

Swedish mountain- and Sámi museum “Duottar-ja Sámemusea”.

UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) General Assembly resolution 44/25, 20th

November, 1989 N.Y.: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Urdan, T.C. & Maehr, M.L. (1995) Beyond a Two-Goal Theory of Motivation and

Achievement: A Case for Social Goals Review of Educational Research, vol 65, no. 3,

pp.- 213-243.

Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Published in Russian in 1930)

Vygotsky, L. (1986) Thought and Language Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press.

24

Wentzel, K. R. (1996) Social goals and social relationships as motivators of school

adjustment In: Juvonen, J. & Wentzel, K.R. (Eds.) Social motivation: Understanding

children’s school adjustment, pp. 226-247. NY: Cambridge University Press

Wentzel, K. R. (2005) Peer Relationships, Motivation, and Academic Performance at School

In: A.J. Elliot & C.S. Dweck (Eds.) Handbook of Competence and Motivation, pp.

279-296. N.Y./London: The Guilford Press.

White, R. W. (1959) Motivation reconsidered: The Concept of Competence Psychological

Review, 66, 5: 297-333.

Whyte, W.F. (1965) Street corner society Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

25

Tables Table 1 Interest in Learning, Play, and Local Cultural Activities, According to Gender (Answers ‘Very Much’

and ‘Much’ in Percentage) – Indigenous and Western groups in Norway and Australia ________________________________________________________________________________________________

A N G L O* A B O R* NOR* S Á M I* ANGLOA* NAVAJO*

___________ ___________ __________ ___________ _________ _________

Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Int free learn** 82.3* 80.8 65.7 81.8 79.5 72.3* 76.1 61.2 90.0 53.3 63.0 90.0

Int dir learn** 55.3 58.1 73.5* 73.9* 52.2 58.9 86.6* 74.6* 33.4 20.0 76.7 55.5

Int free play** 95.8 95.7 90.6 89.4 86.5 88.9 82.3 85.1 100.0 93.3 92.6 90.0

Int dir play** 36.3 44.3 61.9* 54.6* 34.5 33.3 53.8* 50.7 26.7 0.0 66.7 62.9

Int free l c a** 80.0 82.7 82.8 89.2 74.1 81.5 83.8 88.0 60.0 86.6 88.9 93.4

Int dir l c a** 47.1 53.4 65.6* 55.4 29.7 30.8 60.8* 53.8* 46.7 50.0 73.3 59.3

The corresponding chi-squares’ sign AUS The corresponding chi-squares’ sign Norway Boys Girls Boys Girls

Free learn .029 ns ns .041 Dir learn .047 .025 .000 .023 Free play ns ns ns ns Dir play .000 .023 .015 ns Free l c a ns ns ns ns Dir l c a .002 ns .000 .001

The corresponding chi-squares’ sign USA Boys Girls

Free learn ns .031 Dir learn .096 .066 Free play ns .013 Dir play .003 .013 Free l c a ns ns Dir l c a .076 ns Abbreviations: *Anglo=Anglo-Australian students, Abor= Aboriginal-Australian students, Nor= Ethnic Norwegian students, Sámi= Sámi students, ANGLOA= Anglo American students, Navajo= Navajo Indian students **Free/dir learn= interest in free vs. directed learning activities, Free/dir play= interest in free vs. directed play activities, Free/dir l c a= interest in free vs. directed local cultural activities

26

Table 2 Interests in Learning, Play, and Local Cultural Activities, results of t-tests – Indigenous and Western groups in Australia

_________________________________________________________________________ N Mean t Sig _________________________________________________________________________ Int free learn 495* 3.25 1.73 ns 130* 3.09 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir learn 494 2.70 -2.28 .023 129 2.93 _________________________________________________________________________ Int free play 495 3.77 2.00 .046 130 3.65 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir play 492 2.21 -3.51 .000 129 2.58 _________________________________________________________________________ Int free l c a 491 3.23 -2.24 .026 129 3.42 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir l c a 491 2.53 -2.14 .033 129 2.74 _________________________________________________________________________ * Anglo Australian students: N = 495, 494, etc.; Aboriginal students: N = 130, 129, etc. Table 3 Interests in Learning, Play, and Local Cultural Activities, results of t-tests –Indigenous and Western

groups in Norway _________________________________________________________________________ N Mean t Sig _________________________________________________________________________ Int free learn 222* 3.11 1.17 ns 141* 3.00 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir learn 220 2.68 -5.30 .000 141 3.18 _________________________________________________________________________ Int free play 221 3.51 1.39 ns 142 3.39 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir play 220 2.20 -3.55 .000 139 2.58 _________________________________________________________________________ Int free l c a 222 3.21 -1.63 ns

27

142 3.36 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir l c a 220 2.20 -6.20 .000 143 2.79 _________________________________________________________________________ * Ethnic Norwegian students: N = 222, etc. Sámi students: N = 142, etc. Table 4 Interests in Learning, Play, and Local Cultural Activities, results of t-tests –Indigenous and Western

groups in Arizona _________________________________________________________________________ N Mean t Sig _________________________________________________________________________ Int free learn 57* 3.32 1.05 ns 25* 3.04 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir learn 57 3.11 3.79 .000 25 2.20 _________________________________________________________________________ Int free play 57 3.63 -1.55 ns 25 3.88 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir play 57 2.93 5.39 .000 25 1.56 _________________________________________________________________________ Int free l c a 57 3.58 1.32 ns 25 3.32 _________________________________________________________________________ Int dir l c a 57 3.11 2.02 .047 25 2.56 _________________________________________________________________________ * Anglo American students: N = 25 Navajo students: N = 57

28

Table 5 Manova analysis (tests of between-subjects effects) with the three Indigenous groups as a sample, six types of interest (dependent variables) and socio-cultural background and sex as fixed variables

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Dependent variable Df Df Error Mean sq F Sig

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Soscult Int free learn 2 309 1.34 1.35 .260

Int dir learmn 2 309 2.22 2.54 .081

Int free play 2 309 1.80 2.69 .069

Int dir play 2 309 2.70 2.08 .126

Int free l c a 2 309 0.82 1.38 .252

Int dir lca 2 309 2.67 2.54 .081

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Sex Int free learn 1 309 1.36 1.37 .244

Int dir learmn 1 309 .85 .97 .326

Int free play 1 309 .13 .20 .655

Int dir play 1 309 .17 .13 .721

Int free l c a 1 309 .40 .67 .414

Int dir lca 1 309 .11 .10 .753

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Soscult x Sex Int free learn 2 309 6.17 6.21 .002

Int dir learmn 2 309 2.56 2.92 .055

Int free play 2 309 .03 .04 .962

Int dir play 2 309 .59 .46 .635

Int free l c a 2 309 .03 .05 .956

Int dir lca 2 309 1.34 1.28 .280

29

Table 6 Manova analysis (tests of between-subjects effects) with the whole sample, three types of

general school motivation (dependent variables) and socio-cultural background and sex as fixed variables

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Dependent variable Df Df Error Mean sq F Sig

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Soscult Ma 5 1041 1.00 2.33 .041

Social 5 1041 2.48 4.90 .000

Perf 5 1041 9.11 17.66 .000

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Sex Ma 1 1041 .11 .26 .613

Social 1 1041 4.22 8.35 .004

Perf 1 1041 .42 .82 .366

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Soscult x Sex Ma 5 1041 1.60 3.72 .002

Social 5 1041 .89 1.75 .120

Perf 5 1041 .98 1.90 .092

30

Figures

Figure 1: Self-concept scales (Cognitive,Social, General Self-esteem) by culturalbackground - means

2,5

2,6

2,7

2,8

2,9

3

3,1

3,2

Cog Soc Gse

AngloAborNorSamAngAmNav

31

0102030405060708090

Ang Abor Nor Sam AngAm Nav

Int free lInt dir l

Figure 2a: Interest in learning for boys (free and dir) according to socio-cultural gr (answers very much/much in precent)

Figure 2b: Interest in learning for girls (free and dir) according to socio-cultural gr (answers very much/much in precent)

0102030405060708090

Ang Indig Nor Sam AngAm Nav

Int free lInt dir l

32

00,5

11,5

22,5

33,5

4

Boys Girls

AborSámiNavajo

Figure 3 Interest in free learning, boys and girls, by cultural backgrounds - means

33

The socio-cultural perspective on play and learning project, 2006 Interview form, Australia INTERVIEW GUIDE – STUDENTS I am now going to ask you some questions about how you think of school and about how you feel you are doing at school. For all students to like school as much as possible, we are going to ask you and other students from your school and other schools what you think is good about school. We will ask you other questions also. For example, what do you like to do at school? What do you like to do at home? We will also ask you to tell us what you think about your teachers. Everything you tell me will be kept private and no one else will know the answers you give to me questions – not the principal, not your teachers, no-one outside of this room. I will write down what you say or we can tape the interview if you don’t mind being taped. If you want me to turn off the tape recorder at any point just let me know. If you want to stop the interview for any reason, just let me know. If you don’t want to continue answering my questions after we start, just let me know. Your participation in this interview is voluntary, and you can change your mind about being interviewed at any time. You don’t have to do the interview if you don’t want to. If you don’t understand any of the questions, or you find them difficult to answer, just let me know. Take your time. This is not a test. There is no right or wrong answers. You are simply giving me your opinion about things. I am interested to know what you think about things like school, learning, and playing. Are you ready to answer? Here is the first one.

34

The socio-cultural perspective on play and learning project, 2006 Questions for students in Australia ( ) Boy ( ) Girl Age:__________ Grade:______ Cultural/Ethnic background:____________ (E.g. Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander or English-Australian)

1. a) What do you like/dislike about school? Tell me about it. b) Do you think school is fun? c) What would you like to do more of in your lessons to make school more fun?

2. What subjects in school do you like best? 3. What do you like to do during recess and lunchtime? 4. At home, what do you prefer do to in your spare time? 5. a) After school and on weekends do you spend much time with your parents or other

adult family members? b) What kinds of things do you do with your parents or other adult family members/community/neighbourhood members?

6. Do you spend much time with friends of your own age in your spare time? 7. Do you get along well with the other students at school? 8. a) Do you do well at school? (Very well? Average? Not so well?)

b) How do you think girls do at school? c) How do you think boys do at school? d) Why do you think this way?

9. Are you interested in what is going on at school? 10. Do you plan to go to college or university after finishing school? 11. Do you prefer to do things by yourself, or do you prefer to be

instructed/directed/guided by teachers or other relevant adults when doing school work or when you are learning?

12. Is getting good grades/doing well at school important for you? 13. Do you play a lot? At home? At school? Where do you play? 14. a) Does your teacher make learning fun?

b) Do you play during lessons? c) Do you think being able to play makes learning better for you/helps you enjoy learning/school more? d) Describe a good teacher for me.

15. Do you like teachers to always instruct/direct you or would you prefer teachers to let you work on your own more and make more decisions for yourself? 16. Do you think students should influence what is going on in the classroom? 17. Would you like students to have influence on how to work in school? 18. Do you speak a different language at home compared to what you speak at school? 19. Do you think it is important to do well in school? Why do you think so? 20. Do you feel that your background and traditions are respected at school (by class mates, teachers, and leaders)?

35

INTERVIEW GUIDE – TEACHERS I am now going to ask you some questions about how you think your Year 3 or 4 students feel about themselves at school; their sense of self, their interests in play, their motivation, their experience with school learning. To obtain information about how much students like school, we will ask/have asked them certain questions. However, we would like to discover what you know, or believe, your students think about school, what they like to do at school, and what they like to do when they are not at school. We would also like you to reflect on what you think students like about teachers, and what you think the challenges are facing 8-10 year olds at school and at home. Everything you tell me will be confidential. Your participation will remain anonymous. We will write down your responses, or tape them, if you have no objections. Your participation is of course voluntary. Should you find any of the questions difficult to answer or you choose not to answer any question, please let me know. It is hoped, however, that you will try to answer all questions so as to ensure we are able to maximise the volume, scope and quality of the data we are collecting. Are you ready? Here is the first one. Thank you very much for your cooperation

36

The socio-cultural perspective on play and learning project, 2006

Questions for teachers in Australia ( ) Male ( ) Female Age group 25-30 yrs, 30-35yrs, 35-40 yrs, etc..:………. Number of years of teaching experience: Cultural/Ethnic Background:................................................................

1. In general, do you think that your students are motivated and engaged in the teaching and learning process? Could you explain this?

2. What school subjects do they appear to like best? Are there differences between boys and girls?

3. How do they spend their time outside school? For example, watching TV, playing, sports, etc.?

4. Are the students close to their parents and the rest of the family? Do they engage in activities with parents, other adults in the family and in the neighbourhood?

5. Do you believe that your students get on well with each other at school? 6. Do you think girls or boys, in general, perform better educationally? Why? 7. What is your estimate of the percentage of your students you believe may go on to

do further study? 8. a) To what extent do your students work independently, that is, with minimal

supervision/instruction, during lessons? b) Do your students demonstrate a preference to be assisted/directed/ instructed by you or other relevant personnel during lessons or during extra-curricula activities? c) Do you think there are differences between boys and girls in this concern?

9. Do you feel that obtaining good grades/results is important to your students? 10. Do they engage in free play a lot? At home? In school? Where do they play? 11. Do you use play related to school subjects to make learning more interesting?

How? 12. To what extent do your students influence what teaching/learning activities take

place during lessons? Do they have choices offered to them? If so, please exemplify.

13. Do you find that your students are interested in having influence on how they can work in the classroom? Please explain.

14. a) What language/s do your students speak at home? b) Do any of your students speak a language other than Standard English at school? If so, please provide details.

15. Are the students' background and traditions respected (by fellow students and teachers) at school? Which cultural backgrounds are represented?

16. What do you believe is the biggest challenge confronting Aboriginal children at your school?

Thank you for your cooperation!