Loading...

Introduction

Students and teachers commonly differ when judging student motivation (meta-analytic: r = .18; Urhahne & Wijnia, 2021). Different judgments occur among others due to different perceptions of student motivation. The lens model (Brunswik, 1956) can help identify how students and teachers perceive motivation when jduging it. The perception is characterized by the degree to which teachers and students utilize cues in motivation judgments. If both students and teachers show similar cue utilizations in motivation judgments high agreement results. However, for students it was shown that they perceive themselves motivated when being intrinsically motivated (Dutke & Hinnersmann, 2015). There are only tiny differences between boys and girls as well as between students with and without migration background (Brandmiller et al., 2020). Academic achievement is associated to motivation but causal influence is rather mediated by students' causal attributions (cf. Weiner, 1985). Opposingly, teachers were shown to consider extrinsic motivations (Dutke & Hinnersmann, 2015), gender, migration background (Brandmiller et al., 2020), and academic achievement (Kaiser et al., 2013) to judge motivation. Low student-teacher agreement is thus likely due to different cue utilization in motivation judgments.

Research Aims

Examination of the degree to which students and teachers utilize cues in motivation judgments.

  1. H1: Student-teacher-agreement is rather low
  2. H2: Students base their judgments on goal orientations (learning goals, performance-approach goals, performance-avoidance goals, work avoidance).
  3. H3: Teachers base their judgments on academic achievement, gender, and migration background

 

Figure 1. Example of a Lens Model for Motivation Judgments (We Examined This Lens Model in Our Study)
OPEN

Results

Figure 3. Lens Model Parameters of Students' and Teachers' Perception

 

View the results in an interactive way in a shinyapp: https://singlspeed.shinyapps.io/app_aera2023

 

Student-Teacher Agreement:

The correlation of teachers' and students' judgements of student motivation revealed low agreement (r = .32, p < .001). 

 

Cue Utilizations:

Both multilevel models showed that goal orientations:

  • are utilized by students (learning goals: β = -.18; performance-approach goals: β = .19; work avoidance: β = -.18) despite performance-avoidance goals (β = -.07).
  • are neglected by teachers (learning goals: β = .1; performance-approach goals: β = .06; performance-avoidance goals: β = -.06; work avoidance: β = -.09).

However, the tendency of students' and teachers' utilization of goal orientation is the same. Learning goals and performance-approach goals are positively associated with judgments; performance-avoidance goals and work avoidance negatively.

Analyses further showed that:

  • Grades are utilized stronger by teachers (German: β = -.26; mathematics: β = -.21) than by students (German: β = -.06; mathematics: β = -.09) indicating a positive relation between academic achievement and judgments of motivation.
  • Teachers utilize gender stronger (z = -0.26)  than students (z = 0.04) favoring girls over boys.
  • Migration background is utilized almost equally (students: z = 0.09; teachers: z = 0.11).

 

Lens Model Parameters:

Regarding the characteristics of the lens models (i.e., the combination of both Model 2), the linear predicted values (G) correlated with r = .73; their errors (C) correlated with r = .20. The fixed slopes of predictors explained R = .49 of total variance in students’ self-rated motivation (Re) and R = .50 of total variance in teacher judgments (Rs).

OPEN

Method

Participants

N = 2,056 students (Mage = 14.3, SDage = 4.2, 53.4% female, 30.2% with an immigration background) and 63 of their teachers (Mage = 42.0 years, SDage = 11.4, 55.6% female)

Measures
  • Teachers' motivation judgments: Single item “How motivated do you rate the following student in school?” on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from “low motivation” to “high motivation”.
  • Students' motivation judgments: Single item “How motivated are you in school?” on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from “low motivation” to “high motivation”.
  • Students' goal orientations: 31 items (measurement scales for learning and performance motivation; Spinath et al., 2012) on a 5-point Likert scale from “does not apply at all” to “fully applies” measuring learning goals (Cronbach's α = .81) performance-approach goals (Cronbach's α = .79), performance-avoidance goals (Cronbach's α = .86), and work avoidance (Cronbach's α = .83).
  • Students' gender: Gender was assessed with the options male (1) and female (0).
  • Students' migration background: We assessed students with the item “I have an immigration background.” and the options “yes” and “no”.
  • Students' grades in German/mathematics: Grades in German and mathematics of the last report: “On my last report I had the following grades: German/mathematics.” Answers could range from 1 to 6 with 1 being the best grade.
Procedure

Students filled in the questionnaire via pencil. Subsequently, teachers received a questionnaire with items concerning students from two of their classes. Teachers were requested to rate their students’ motivation based on their individual impression without using formal diagnostic procedures.

Statistical Analyses

All variables were grand-mean centered and standardized except gender and migration background for ease of interpretation. In Figure 2 it is shown which statistical analyses were employed.

Figure 2. Employed Statistical Procedures (Highlighted in Blue)

 

OPEN

Discussion

  • Student-teacher agreement was indeed rather low (r = .28) implying teachers and students could have different perceptions of what motivates students.
  • Lens model analyses showed that students rather associated their goal orientations with motivation. This is in line with previous research on goal orientation theory (Elliot & Church, 1997; Elliot & Dweck, 1988; Spinath et al., 2012).
  • Opposingly, teachers rather neglected goal orientations in their judgments. This stresses:
    • Difficulties in perceiving motivational variables (low availability, Dicke et al., 2012)
    • Insufficient teacher knowledge of motivation (Glogger-Frey et al., 2018)
    • Insufficient communication which studfent behavior indicates which motivational quality
  • Students unsystematically associate gender and immigration background with their motivation. Grades in German and mathematics explain only little variation in students' self-rated motivation. These results are in line with previous findings (Brandmiller et al., 2020; Kaiser et al., 2013).
  • Teachers on the other hand, favor girls over boys in motivation judgments and overemphasize grades. Students' migration background is rather neglected and utilized to the same degree as students did. Cues could be utilized due to:
    • High availability of academic achievement due to regular assessments and high availability of gender
    • Stereotypical beliefs that girls are more motivated than boys due to their social behaviors in school (cf. Duckworth & Seligman, 2006; Salisbury et al., 1999)
    • Insufficient differentation between academic achievement and motivational orientations

 

The linear models of students' and teachers' judgments could only lowly be explained by cues (cf. Re, Rs). Previous lens model studies showed considerably higher Rs but were conducted in laboratory settings (Karelaia & Hogarth, 2008). Adding further motivational variables could have led to higher predictability of the models. This also could have reduced the high residual correlation (C) that indicated students and teachers utilized cues not integrated in our analyses.

OPEN

DESIGN YOUR iPOSTER

Background color or image
Required image size 1920x1080px

Add BACKGROUND Fill Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

Add BACKGROUND Gradient Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

MAIN TITLE Text Font

MAIN TITLE Text Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

SUBTITLES Text Font

SUBTITLES Text Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

OPEN Arrow Color

Textbox Title Font

Textbox Title Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

Textbox Title Background Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

Textbox Text Font

Textbox Text Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

Textbox Background Color

Pick Color(Current Color is blank)

Notice!

Your iPoster has now been unpublished and will not be displayed on the iPoster Gallery.

You need to publish it again if you want to be displayed.

You are not registered!

Your have to register before you can publish your iPoster.

If you have recently registered it may take up to 10 min before your registration status is updated in our system.

Sorry but time is up!

Because of maintenance we have just saved your content and will within a few minutes logout all users and restart our server. We will be back in a moment.

Sorry for the inconvenience!

Because of maintenance we will within a few minutes restart our server. We will be back in a moment.

Sorry for the inconvenience!

Thank you for contributing to the success of the AERA 2023 Annual Meeting.

Editing has been turned off but you can still access a number of communication and networking functions on your i-Presentation:

• Add a Narration
• Add a Video Presentation
• Set up a Text or Video Chat in When I'm Available
• Print your i-Presentation to a PDF document
• Share your i-Presentation
• View and respond to Comments in My Settings
• Change your Display setting in My Settings
• View Your Statistics in My Settings

As of August 30, 2023 the i-Presentation Gallery will be Open Access and you are welcome to freely share the link with your peers so that they can explore the research.

If you have any questions, please contact [email protected]

Transcript

Transcript

Load more

Abstract

The lens model allows examination of rater-rater agreement due to raters’ cue utilization. Students’ and teachers’ different judgments of motivation (Urhahne & Wijnia, 2021), thus, can be better understood in identifying indicators that students and teachers utilize for motivation judgments. N = 63 teachers (mean age = 42.0) and their 2,056 (mean age = 14.3) students both rated student motivation on 1-item scales. Goal orientations, gender, immigration background, and school grades served as cues. Two-level mixed-effects lens models indicate that students prioritize motivational qualities in their judgments. In contrast, teachers primarily relied on gender and school grades. We will discuss why teachers and students differ in their utilizations and present ways to minimize differences in educational practice.

The lens model allows examination of rater-rater agreement due to raters’ cue utilization. Students’ and teachers’ different judgments of motivation (Urhahne & Wijnia, 2021), thus, can be better understood in identifying indicators that students and teachers utilize for motivation judgments. N = 63 teachers (mean age = 42.0) and their 2,056 (mean age = 14.3) students both rated student motivation on 1-item scales. Goal orientations, gender, immigration background, and school grades served as cues. Two-level mixed-effects lens models indicate that students prioritize motivational qualities in their judgments. In contrast, teachers primarily relied on gender and school grades. We will discuss why teachers and students differ in their utilizations and present ways to minimize differences in educational practice.

SHARE POSTER

SHARE LINK:

LINK TO A SURVEY

Use this feature to add a survey URL to your iPoster using any web-based survey platform. A survey button will appear in your poster and participants can click it to take the survey.

Reviewer Survey

00:00

Contact Author

Get iPoster

CONTACT AUTHOR


GET IPOSTER

Please enter your email address in the field below and a link to this iPoster will be sent to you.
Use the text box to add a personal note to yourself.

NOTE: Your email address will be shared with the author, but your personal notes will not.


My settings

You can choose to give co-authors "read only" rights or "edit" rights. You can also remove their editing rights.

Editors will receive a mail with a user name and a password.

PLEASE NOTE: Only one person can edit an iPoster at any one time. As main author, it is important that you manage access to the editor.

Manage co-authors

First Name Last Name Email address

If you have permission to transfer ownership of your iPoster presentation to another author, please fill out the Transfer information below. Once you do this, you will no longer be able to edit your iPoster presentation.

 
 
 
 

Any inquiries regarding your presentation are automatically sent to the email address you used at registration. If you would like to receive inquires at a different email address, please add it below.


Do you want your iPoster to be displayed in the online iPoster Gallery at all times?




Choose photo rules







Do you want a "Get iPoster" button to be displayed at the bottom of your presentation?




Statistics


12
80
download list
download list



Notifications Archive


0