Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Motivated Strategies for Learning (MSLQ)
Transcript of Motivated Strategies for Learning (MSLQ)
to describe the influence of constructivist classroom contextual factors in a life science laboratory and a traditional science classroom on elementary students’ motivation and learning strategy use. 5 questions for you to ponder on :-) 1. What does MSLQ stand for?
2. What does MSLQ measure?
3. How can you apply the MSLQ to support your classroom teaching ?
4. How can your students use the MSLQ to improve their learning?
5. In your view, what are the limitation/challenges in using the MSLQ? What is MSLQ? Two instruments used:
The Constructivist Teaching Inventory was used to examine classroom contextual factors.
The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire was used to examine student motivation and learning strategies. Xtown Elementary School (grades K-5)
Participants: Four fifth grade classes
Students become zookeepers rotated every day so that each student performs these duties approximately twice each month throughout the entire school year. triangulated mixed method design: quantitative and qualitative were collected
1) 4 teachers and 67 students
2) 12 individual student interviews Research Questions:
1. In what ways and to what extent do regular classrooms differ from the XELL in constructivist classroom contextual factors over time?
2. In what ways and to what extent does Xtown 5th grade science students’ motivation differ when studying science in their regular classroom compared to when studying science in the XELL over time?
3. In what ways and to what extent do Xtown 5th grade science students’ learning strategy use differ when studying science in their regular classroom compared to when studying science in the XELL over time? Self Regulated Learning
3 aspects of self-regulated learning.
2. Individual motivation
3. Goal directed behaviour The term self-regulated can be used to describe learning that is guided by metacognition , strategic action (planning, monitoring, and evaluating personal progress against a standard), and motivation to learn. There are 4 phases of self regulated learning.
1.Task perception-->During the task perception phase, students gather information about the task at hand and personalize their perception of it. This stage involves determining motivational states, self-efficacy, and information about the environment around them
2. Goal setting and planning-->Depends on how students perceive the task
3.Enacting-->Enact the plan that have come up with using skills that they have acquired.
4. Adaptation -->Adaptation, wherein students evaluate their performance and determine how to modify their strategy in order to achieve higher performance in the future. paired-sample t test was conducted to compare the mean scores of the regular classroom MSLQ results to the mean scores of the XELL MSLQ results at the pre- test, post-1 test, post-2 test as well as the overall results. Student motivation and learning strategy use were found to be statistically significantly higher in the XELL than in the regular classroom overall as well as each survey time except for post-1 learning strategy use (p \ .10). The MSLQ was developed using a social-cognitive view of motivation and learning strategies, with the student represented as an active processor of information whose beliefs and cognition mediated important instructional input and task characteristics.
The social-cognitive theoretical framework on which the MSLQ was founded assumes that motivation and learning strategies are not traits of the learner, but rather that motivation is dynamic and contextually bound and that learning strategies can be learned and brought under the control of the student.
That is, that students’motivation varies for different courses and that their strategy use might vary as well depending on the nature of the academic tasks Consists 81-items
- 6 Motivation subscales --> 31 items to assess students' goals and beliefs in a particular course
- 9 Learning Strategies subscales --> 31 items (assess students' use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies
--> 19 items (concerning student management of different resources) Developers:
Pintrich, Smith, Garcia & Mckeachie (1993)
Bill McKeachie and Paul Pintrich (University of Michigan) began developing a tool for assessing students’ motivation and learning strategies with the ultimate goal of helping students improve learning. Regular classroom- motivation
Regular classroom- learning strategy
XELL- learning strategy The Questionnaire is based on two types of scales, Learning Strategy Scales and Motivation Scales.
Learning Strategy Scales include: rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, meta-cognitive self-regulation, time and study environment, effort, regulation, peer learning, and help seeking.
Motivation scales include: intrinsic goal orientation, extrinsic goal orientation, task value, control beliefs, self- efficacy for learning and performance, and test anxiety Self-regulated learning, or self-regulation, is an active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual features in the environment (Pintrich, 2000b, p. 453). One of the reason for studying academic self-regulated learning came from research showing that learners’ skills and abilities did not fully explain student achievement (Zimmerman, 2001), which suggested that factors such as self-regulation and motivation were important. Paul R. Pintrich was a leading theorist, researcher, and advocate of self-regulated learning in education
Self-regulated learning is seen as a mechanism to help explain achievement differences among students and as a means to improve achievement. Motivational procosses are important to self-regulation.
Motivation is a key factor of self-regulation and it is infused throughout all phases.
Motivational variables interact with cognitive, behavioral, and contextual factors to affect self-regulation In general, the motivational variables highlighted by Pintrich have been shown to be critical for self-regulation. Interest and value also relate to self-regulation.
Students’ goal orientations play a key role in Pintrich’s model of self-regulation.
Students who adopt mastery goals are more likely to report monitoring and attempting to control their cognition with various learning and cognitive strategies, and to seek ways to increase their awareness of their understanding and learning. The Pintrich model shows that there are links between learning, motivation, and self-regulation (Pintrich & Schrauben, 1992).
The general conclusion is that students who display more adaptive self-regulatory strategies demonstrate better learning and higher motivation for learning (Pintrich, 2000b) Positive motivational beliefs related to higher levels of self-regulated learning.
Self-efficacy, cognitive strategy use, and self-regulation related positively to classroom experience. The results support the idea that motivation and self-regulated learning bear a complex reciprocal relation to each other.
Pintrich, Roeser, and De Groot (1994). Another contribution of Paul Pintrich to self-regulated learning was his emphasis on testing predictions of theories and exploring relations among variables in actual classroom contexts. This emphasis derives from his belief that school contexts contained many complexities, the effects of which had to be determined to know how self-regulation occurred. Schools with children are complex places and much different from controlled laboratory settings with adults. These differences affect self-regulatory processes. Cognitive factors play a role in the development of self-regulatory competence in two ways (Pintrich & Zusho, 2002) Self-regulation also is affected by developmental influences on epistemological and motivational factors. The MSLQ reflects the central thrust of Pintrich’s work on self-regulation—the interaction of cognitive, motivational, and behavioral–contextual elements. The scales have good internal reliability and demonstrate moderate correlations with academic performance Adventure Learning:Motivating Students in a Minnesota Middle School Moos D.C, Honkomp B. 2011 Pedagogical approach: emphasizes active learning and the teacher to support the students’ process of discovering knowledge A modification of distance learning is adventure learning, which has been described as “a hybrid distance education approach that provides students with opportunities to explore real-world issues through authentic learning experiences within collaborative learning environments” (Doering, 2006, p. 197). Who: Christian Gilbert
When: 5- 24August 2009
Where: spent three days on a service project related to orphans, two days on Safari, and seven days climbing Mt. Kilimanjaro.
What: Gilbert e-mailed his students a daily lesson. These daily e-mails included a “lesson of the day,” latitude and longitude coordinates of his position linked to Google Maps, a spotlighted “animal of the day,” and an audio update recorded using a satellite phone.
After the trip, Gilbert posted all of the lessons, pictures, and videos to the website Go4thesummit.com, a site dedicated to documenting the AL expeditions that strives to provide students with unique opportunities to learn about outdoor experiences.
How: e-mailed GPS coordinates, PDF lessons about Africa, and podcasts via satellite phone, provided students with an opportunity to follow his adventures and experience geography lessons in an authentic context. Research Questions: To what extent does adventure learning enhance learning in the area of social studies?To what extent does adventure learning enhance motivation as it relates to learning in the area of social studies?To what extent does the SDT explain students’ perceptions of adventure learning? An exploratory mixed-method design
(1) Quantitative measure using MSLQ,
(2) pretest/ post-test and
(3) semi-structured interviews measure to examine how adventure learning affects seventh and eighth grade student learning The average overall mean for the motivation 26 questions on the MSLQ was relatively high before students started the AL experience (M = 5.79,SD = 1.05). A paired t-test indicated that the students’ overall motivation significantly increased following the use of AL (M = 5.83, SD = 1.07), t(181) = -1.45, p < .01. Separate paired tests also indicated significant increases in the following motivation subscales: Control Beliefs (M = 5.02, SD = 2.34), t(181) = -3.46, p = .001, Self-Efficacy (M = 5.64, SD = 2.34), t(181) = -2.15, p = .05, and Task Value (M = 5.04, SD = 2.34), t(181) = -2.05, p = .05. Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation did not significantly increase (p > .05). Quiz-zy Time! Overall, it is a sound instrument to use. It is a practical means of assessing student motivation and use of self-regulated learning strategies
However, student motivation change from course to course and their learning strategies may vary as well depending on the nature of the course, so we can't generalise the results
7 point likert scale: is it too much for primary school pupils? MSLQ