promoting achievement, motivation, and strategic learning in math contexts timothy j. cleary...
TRANSCRIPT
Promoting Achievement, Motivation, and Strategic Learning in Math Contexts
Timothy J. ClearyAssociate Professor
University of [email protected]
414-229-4053
West Texas Middle School Math PartnershipSpring 2010
Dan, a 12 year old student in the 6th grade at an urban middle school, has been reported by his teachers to exhibit academic and motivational difficulties. More specifically a few of his teachers expressed concern about his poor test performance and inconsistent homework completion, his tendency to give up easily when attempting to complete topics, and his overall negative attitudes about school. Math is particularly difficult for Dan as he fails most tests and rarely participates in class activities. His parents revealed that Dan is a “poor studier” and over the past couple of years has developed a sense of helplessness about his school because he does not really understand why things are so difficult.
Maladaptive Maladaptive beliefs behaviors and attitudes
Poor academic performance
Baseline Intervention
- Lookedover stuff-Readmy notes
Same
-Index-cards- Study plan- Graphicorganizer
- Indexcards- Study plan
Readnotes
- Study plan- Graphicorganizer- Motherquizzed him
Strategy Plan
Strategy Plan
Strategy Plan Strategy
Plan Strategy Plan
Strategy Plan
Link between self-regulation and math performance
Poor performance in math could be attributed toineffective prior math instruction, but also often involves:deficiencies in SRL skills such as:
- overestimating their math proficiency, which may result in “under” preparation for exams
- failing to self-evaluate their efforts to learn accurately
- failing to attribute errors to shortcomings in strategy
- failing to adapt their maladaptive approaches to subsequent math problems
…how we can cultivate adaptive regulatory thoughts and actions that promote motivation and achievement in math
Primary Objectives of Lecture
1. To briefly describe a three-phase cyclical model of self-regulation
2. To highlight a couple of instructional tactics to enhance student motivation and math achievement
- type of feedback - graphing/progress monitoring- attribution training - forethought training- error analysis - cognitive modeling - self-monitor - guided practice
Thinking in the language of strategies
Characteristics of a self-regulated learner? 1,2
• Highly self-motivated, proactive
• Monitoring strategies and performance
ADJUST or CHANGE strategies and goals
• Set goals and develop/use strategic plans
• Frequent self-reflection and analysis
To optimize future performance
Cycle of Self-Regulatory Thought and Action 1
Forethought Phase
Task AnalysisGoal Setting
Strategic Planning
Self-Motivational BeliefsSelf-efficacy
Outcome expectationsIntrinsic InterestGoal Orientation
Performance Phase
Self-Control Self-Instruction
Imagery Attention Focusing
Task Strategies
Self-ObservationSelf-recording
Metacognitive Monitoring Self-Reflection Phase
Self-JudgmentSelf-Evaluation
Causal Attributions
Self-ReactionSelf-satisfaction/affect
Adaptive Inferences
1. Attributions following failure 3
Developing strategic reflective thinkers
Can be categorized across three broad dimensions:
a)Internal/External - is the cause a personal or environmental phenomenon?
b) Controllable/Uncontrollable- is the cause under a person’s control or not?
c) Stable/Unstable- is the cause easily modified or changeable?
Has there been any activity or experience which proved to be especially challenging or difficult for you? (something you were not very good at doing). What types of thoughts did you have immediately following poor performance? What did you think was the reason for your performance and how did you feel?
What is the mainreason why you failed your last math test?
Uncontrollable Now what???
Attribution Adaptive Inference
What do you need todo to improve yournext test grade?
Types of attributions we make following failure impacts our subsequent behaviors and affect
“The Cowboys lost again last night”“Test was too hard”“The teacher is not any good”“The teacher does not like me” “I don’t know”
Attributions not under student control
Strategy
Under student control/internal/unstable
“I did not try hard enough”
“I did not use the correct STRATEGY”
What is the mainreason why you failed your last math test?
What do you need to do to improve your next test score?
Attribution Adaptive Inference
Change my strategy
I forgot how to do the step for getting all variables on one side of the equation
Ask the teacher or classmates about this method
I did not think about the type of problem before trying to solve it
Use the math strategy thatmy teacher taught me
Forethought Phase
Task AnalysisGoal Setting
Strategic Planning
Self-Motivational BeliefsSelf-efficacy
Outcome expectationsIntrinsic InterestGoal Orientation
Cycle of Self-Regulatory Thought and Action 2
Performance Phase
Self-Control Self-Instruction
Imagery Attention Focusing
Task Strategies
Self-ObservationSelf-recording
Metacognitive Monitoring Self-Reflection Phase
Self-JudgmentSelf-Evaluation
Causal Attributions
Self-ReactionSelf-satisfaction/affect
Adaptive Inferences
• Problem solving errors are not signs of imperfection but rather are essential sources of guidance for SRL
• Students should be taught to reflect carefully upon the errors they
make because such errors reveal alternative ways to solve math problems
• Enhanced efficacy and SRL behaviors occur when students make
successful adaptations from errors
• Students should be praised and graded favorably for recognizing and overcoming errors rather than criticized and penalized for making them.
2) Error Analysis – A self-regulation perspective
Zimmerman, Hudesman, Flugman & Moylan (2010)
• The goal of this project was to prepare students to respond to their academic grades as sources of self-regulated learning rather than as indices of personal limitation.
• Examine the efficacy of an SRL intervention involving strategic instruction (classroom level) and self-reflection training (individuals) on student motivation, self-regulation and math achievement
What was the nature of the SRL intervention?
Classroom-based strategy instruction• strategic instruction in error analysis
• coping modeling techniques and guided practice
Focus on self-reflection following quiz performance• frequent math quizzes (every 2-3 days)
• an SRL Math Self-Assessment Form designed to guide students’ self-reflection processes during math problem corrections
A. Strategic Instruction
• Teacher models specific strategies at each step of the problem – use of think alouds
– teacher makes deliberate errors during presentation
– teacher models identifying errors and coping tactics
– math solution errors are used as a departure point for analysis, i.e. teachers don’t just start over or quickly correcting errors themselves
• Teacher writes down strategies clearly on the board in
words
Classroom-based strategy instruction
B. Increased Practice and Feedback
• Teacher sets aside time for students to engage in individual practice of strategies for problem solving and error detection
• Teacher asks students to verbalize error detection/ problem solving strategies while reviewing or working through practice problems
• Teacher asks students to check their understanding (discuss answers to problems and errors) with peers in pairs or groups
Self-regulation instruction following performance
a) Math quizzes (4-5 problems) every 2 to 3classes (returned that day or the following day)
b) Following each quiz, students were instructed to complete a Self-assessment Form
a) Compare self-efficacy and self-evaluation estimates with actual quiz performance (calibration accuracy)
b) Explain their ineffectual strategies (attributions)
c) Establish new effective strategies (adaptive inferences)
Quiz Reflection Form: Error Analysis
PLAN IT
1 a. How much time did you spend studying for this quiz? _______
b. How many practice problems did you do in this topic area __________in preparation for this quiz? (circle one) 0 – 5 / 5 – 10 / 10+
c. What did you do to prepare for this quiz? (use study strategy list to answer this question)
2. After you solved this problem, was your confidence rating too high (i.e. 4 or 5)? Yes/no
3. Explain what strategies or processes went wrong on the quiz
problem.
Quiz Reflection Form: Strategic Practice
PRACTICE IT
4. Now re-do the original quiz problem and write the strategy you are using on the right.
2
972 2
x
xx
Quiz Reflection Form: Transfer of Knowledge
5. How confident are you now that you can correctly solve this similar item?
6. Now use the strategy to solve the alternative problem.
7. How confident are you now that you can correctly solve a similar problem on a quiz or test in the future?
3
842
x
xx
• Student population 13,370 - 37.1% Black (non-Hispanic)- 28.6% Hispanic- 15.9% Asian/Pacific Islander- 11.6% White (non-Hispanic)- 0.3% Native American- 7% Other
• 80% of incoming freshmen receive need-based aid
• Graduation rate for associate degree students averages 21% after six years
• Only 38% of entering freshmen pass the entrance exam in mathematics
Who was the target population?
Research Design
• This study involves a developmental math course and an introductory college-level math course. In both course levels, students are randomly assigned to either the SRL or control classroom.
• Control classrooms received traditional remedial or college-level math instruction plus the quizzes.
• The two groups were compared using multiple examination measures and course-related self- regulatory measures.
Math Achievement Measures
• Math periodic exams. Three uniform, cumulative math tests that were administered during the semester were used as problem-solving performance measures.
• Math final exam. Comprehensive, department-wide final exam scores were used as another achievement measure.
Self-Evaluation Measures
• Self-evaluation. To measure post-performance self-evaluative judgments, students rated their confidence that their responses were correct using the same scale as for the self-efficacy measure.
• Self-evaluation bias. Bias calibration of post-performance self-evaluative judgments was assessed similarly to self-efficacy bias.
Math Exam Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Periodic Math Exam Final Math Exam
Types of Math Exams
Mat
h G
rade
s Intervention
Control
Self-Regulation Results
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Self-Efficacy Self-Evaluation Self-EfficacyBias
Self-EvaluationBias
Self_Regulation Measures
Sel
f-R
atin
gs
Intervention
Control
Self-Reflectors’ Math Exam Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Periodic Final
Type of Math Exams
Exam
Gra
des
High Self-Reflectors
Low Self-Reflectors
Self-Reflectors’ Self-Regulation Results
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Self-Regulation Measures
Sel
f-R
atin
gs
High Self-Reflectors
Low Self-Reflectors
Conclusions• SRL students surpassed control students on periodic exams as well
final exams – greater reflection opportunities and strategic liearning led to higher performance
• SRL students reported less over-confidence than control students in both their math self-efficacy beliefs and self-evaluative judgments
• SRL students who engaged in greater error correction and self-reflection displayed higher math exam grades and calibration than students who were low in error correction
• Although self-efficacy and self-evaluation measures were correlated positively with periodic and final math exam performance, the SRL intervention did not influence these self- beliefs