autonomy support and academic emotions

Autonomy and Emotions Design Results References

Autonomy support and Academic Emotions inForeign Language Classes

False friends or right ones?

Christian Beermann & Hanna [email protected]

Fachbereich Erziehungswissenschaft, Didaktik der romanischen SprachenUniversitat Hamburg

IATEFL / LASIG, November 26th, 2010

1 / 21

http://epb.uni-hamburg.de


Outline

Autonomy and EmotionsDefinitionsRelation between autonomy and emotions

DesignResearch QuestionsParticipantsPopulationMeasuresMethod

ResultsDescriptiveCorrelationsModel resultsResults (Resume)

2 / 21



Definitions of autonomy and academic emotions

”Autonomy is essentially a matter of the learner’s psychologicalrelation to the process and content of learning [. . . ] a capacity fordetachment, critical reflection, decision-making, and independentaction.”

(Little, 1999, p. 4)

The multi-component approach to define emotions.Emotions are defined by four distinct components (Izard, 1994;Scherer, 1984):

affectivecognitivephysiologicalmotivational

3 / 21



The control value theory of academic emotionsIn the control-value theory (Pekrun, 2000) autonomy is seen asan important antecedent of academic emotions.

Environment Appraisals Emotions

Competence Supportinstructional quality,teacher engagement etc.

Autonomy supportvs. control

Achievementexpectancies

Feedback andconsequencesof achievement

Social relatedness

Controlcausal attribution,self-concepts etc.

Valuesinterest, goals etc.

Academicemotions

Figure: Social Cognitive Control-Value Theory of academic emotionsGotzet al., 2006

4 / 21



Research Questions

With this study we want to explore the relation between autonomysupport and academic emotions in foreign language classroom.Research questions are:

I (How) does autonomy support influence academic emotions infrench foreign language classroom?

I (How) does the class level of perceived autonomy supportinfluence academic emotions?

I Is there a difference in the influence on distinct emotions?

5 / 21



Description of the participants

We asked

I N = 547 pupils (individual level, within)

I N = 31 German 9th grade classes (class level, between)

I (schools N = 18)

on their perception of autonomy support and emotions in Frenchforeign language classroom.

6 / 21



Design

Students were asked to complete a standardized questionnaire attwo occasions in 9th grade.

I first occasion (December): perception of autonomy support

I second occasion (July): emotional experiences in French class

7 / 21



How to measure autonomy?

In french class . . .

I I can organize my time independently.

I I feel that I can make my own decisions.

I I can try to solve tasks in my own way.

I We are encouraged by the teacher to find our own solutions.

I We are taught to work independently.

Im Franzosischunterricht . . .

I ist es mir moglich, meine Zeit selbst einzuteilen.I habe ich das Gefuhl, dass ich eigene Entscheidungen treffen kann.I kann ich versuchen, Aufgaben auf meine Art zu erledigen.I werden wir vom Lehrer/ von der Lehrerin ermuntert, eigene Losungen zu

finden.I wird uns beigebracht, selbststandig zu arbeiten.

8 / 21



How to measure emotions?

I Emotions are measured as construct.

I Scales make use of the multi-component approach describedabove.

I Four-item short scales, one item per component / dimension.

All scales:5-point rating scale, from 1=none to 5=very strong

9 / 21



”Autonomy is essentially a matter of the learner’s psychologicalrelation to the process and content of learning [. . . ] a capacityfor detachment, critical reflection, decision-making, andindependent action.

(Little, 1999, p. 4)

10 / 21



Parceling

Parceling of variables: Subsuming of items by computing theirmean.

Personal Dimension, Parcel 1I can organize my time independently.I feel that I can make my own decisions.

Task Dimension, Parcel 2I can try to solve tasks in my way.

Instructional Dimension, Parcel 3We are encouraged by the teacher to find our own solutions.We are taught to work independently

11 / 21



Internal Consistencies

Autonomy

Autonomy Support (α = .78)Source of the scales: Kunter, 2005, PISA2003

Emotions:Joy (α = .83)Boredom (α = .87)Anger (α = .75)Anxiety (α = .75)Source of the scales: Cronjager, 2009

12 / 21



Method

I Structural Equation Modeling – allows for modeling theoutcome and the predictor als latent variable, considersmeasurement error

I Multilevel Analysis – by using the Type = COMPLEX option,accounts for clustered data

I One model for each emotion

13 / 21



Boxplots of the examined variables

auto autocm joy bor ang anx

12

34

5

Bold Lines = MedianBox = inter-quartile range= 50 % of dataCircles = Outliers

14 / 21



Descriptives and Intraclasscorrelation Coefficient (ICC)

M (SD) ICC

auto 2.45 (0.77) 0.20autocm 2.44 (0.39) —

joy 1.99 (0.77) 0.14bor 2.75 (1.02) 0.15ang 2.18 (0.88) 0.15anx 1.49 (0.62) 0.01

15 / 21



Correlations between autonomy and emotion

auto5 auto5cm joy bor ang

auto5auto5cm 0.49∗∗∗

joy 0.46∗∗∗ 0.27∗∗∗

bor −0.39∗∗∗ −0.29∗∗∗ −0.65∗∗∗

ang −0.37∗∗∗ −0.27∗∗∗ −0.53∗∗∗ 0.69∗∗∗

anx −0.21∗∗∗ −0.06 −0.28∗∗∗ 0.37∗∗∗ 0.61∗∗∗

Note: level of significance:∗∗∗p < .001; ∗∗p < .01; ∗p < .05.; BivariatePearson product-moment correlations

16 / 21


Model Results: Joy

Within (individual level)

Between (class level)

autonomy0.79∗∗∗

autop1 autop2 autop3 joy1 joy2 joy3 joy4

joy

1 1.01 1.17 0.911 0.29 0.84

1 0.91 0.20ns 0.77

joyautonomy0.22ns

joy1 joy2 joy3 joy4

Figure: Model for joy

Model Results: Boredom



autonomy−0.43∗∗∗

autop1 autop2 autop3 bor1 bor2 bor3 bor4

boredom

1 1.02 1.21 1.381 1.48 1.53

1 0.23ns 0.69 0.77

boredomautonomy−0.53∗

bor1 bor2 bor3 bor4

Figure: Model for boredom

Model Results: Anger



autonomy−0.67∗∗∗

autop1 autop2 autop3 ang1 ang2 ang3 ang4

anger

1 1.04 1.20 0.821 0.52 0.60

1 0.97 0.02ns 0.65

angerautonomy−0.42ns

ang1 ang2 ang3 ang4

Figure: Model for anger

Model Results: Anxiety



autonomy−0.30ns

autop1 autop2 autop3 anx1 anx2 anx3 anx4

anxiety

1 1.01 1.17ns 0.61ns1 0.96 0.86

1 0.70ns 0.83ns 0.59ns

anxietyautonomy0.09ns

anx1 anx2 anx3 anx4

Figure: Model for anxiety


Model Results

Joy Boredom Anger Anxiety

autonomywithin 0.79∗∗∗(0.11) −0.43∗∗∗(0.08) −0.67∗∗∗(0.09) −0.30ns (2.81)autonomybetween 0.22ns (0.19) −0.53∗ (0.25) −0.42ns (0.24) 0.09ns (0.12)

Fit-Statisticsχ2 27.15ns 41.44∗ 71.49∗∗∗ 34.93∗

CFI 1 0.99 0.96 0.98RMSEA 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.03SRMRwithin 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.03SRMRbetween 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.25

Note: level of significance:∗∗∗p < .001; ∗∗p < .01; ∗p < .05;ns =not significant .N = 547

18 / 21



Results

Autonomy support influences on individual level

I joyI boredomI anger

On class level

I boredom

19 / 21



Thank you for your attention !Merci beaucoup pour votre attention!

Download slides at

www.christian-beermann.deor contact: [email protected]

20 / 21


http://www.christian-beermann.de


References

Cronjager, H. (2009). “Emotionen im schulischen Fremdsprachenunterricht: Bedingungen, Wirkungen undVeranderungen im ersten Lernjahr Franzosisch”. Unveroffentlichte Dissertation. Jena: Universitat Jena.

Gotz, T. et al. (2006). “Academic emotions from a social-cognitive perspective: antecedents and domain specificityof students’ affect in the context of Latin instruction.” In: The British journal of educational psychology 76.Pt2, pp. 289–308.

Izard, C. (1994). Die Emotionen des Menschen [Human emotions]. Weinheim: Beltz.Kunter, M. (2005). Multiple Ziele im Mathematikunterricht. Munster: Waxmann.Little, D. (1999). Learner autonomy. Definitions, issues and problems. Reprinted. Dublin: Authentik.Pekrun, R. (2000). “A Social-Cognitive, Control-Value Theory of Achievement Emotions”. In: Motivational

psychology of human development: developing motivation and motivating development. Ed. by J. Heckhausen.Oxford: North Holland, pp. 143–163.

Scherer, K. R. (1984). “On the nature and function of emotion: A component process approach”. In: Approaches toemotion. Ed. by K. R. Scherer and P. Ekman. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Chap. 14,pp. 293–317.

21 / 21


autonomy support and academic emotions

Education

autonomy supportvs

academic emotionsautonomy

controlvalue theory

teacher engagement

critical reflection

learners psychologicalrelation

capacity fordetachment

distinct components