January 2012 Volume 15 Number 1 - Educational Technology ...

constructs that measure students’ interest (i.e., IGO, EGO, and TV) account for 75.8 percent of the variation in
students’ expectancy for success. In fact, there are other factors that might contribute to expectancy for success, such
as student’s anxiety and maladaptive behavior, which may include tardiness and unrealistic aspirations.
D. Common themes of students’ motivation
Of the 113 students, a total of 104 responded to the two open-ended questions in the survey instrument. Students
were asked to share their thoughts about the most and least motivating factors they experienced during their design
activities. Common themes were categorized according to the five motivational constructs used in this study (i.e.,
EGO, IGO, TV, SELP, and CLB; see Tables 5 and 6). No relevant theme was found for control of learning beliefs.
From the collected themes, it is clear that some themes were perceived as both most and least motivating factors. For
instance, a task that was challenging was perceived as the most motivating factor for some students, while it was
perceived as the least motivating for others. Similarly, for the time allotted to complete the design task, limited
supporting materials available for students to use during design process was perceived differently.
The most motivating themes illustrated how the students responded positively to hands-on experience, task
challenge, time challenge, and mastery. Students were also motivated because of their successful performance in
solving the design task and interest in the design task itself. The least motivating themes showed that some students
were concerned with failure or poor performance, task challenge, and lack of interest. It is clear the students were
aware of how the design task was presented to them and how they related the task to their abilities. Difficult or
complex design tasks tended to decrease their overall motivation. In other words, unmanageable design tasks may
lead students to failure or poor performance.
Interest
Expectancy
for success
Interest
Expectancy
for success
Conclusion
IGO
Table 5. Most motivating common themes
Hands-on experience, mastery, task challenge, time challenge, plenty of time available
EGO Successful performance, getting a good grade, comparison and competition, good
teamwork, evaluation by others, teacher assistance, supporting materials
TV Interest in the content or project
CLB (no relevant theme was found)
SELP Ability to master, self-confidence to perform
IGO
EGO
Table 6. Least motivating common themes
Task challenge, time challenge, administrative challenge, lack of challenge
Supporting materials, failure or poor performance, bad teamwork, lack of instruction
and teacher assistance, getting an unsatisfactory grade, competition
TV Lack of interest, lack of opportunity to engage in similar project
CLB
SELP
(no relevant theme was found)
Lack of ability to master, lack of self-confidence to perform
The significant correlations between all the three interest constructs (IGO, EGO, and TV) and the two expectancy
constructs (CLB and SELP) clearly indicated a strong relationship between students’ interest in design activities and
their expectancy for success in completing the design task. These findings conform to modern expectancy-value
theories, which suggest that expectancies and values are positively and not inversely related (Eccles & Wigfield,
2002). Strong correlation coefficients between IGO and SELP (r = .804, p = .000), IGO and CLB (r = .721, p =
.000), TV and CLB (r = .704, p = .000), and between TV and SELP (r = .874, p = .000) imply a more dominant role
of intrinsic and task value in the increase of students’ expectancy for success. The results conform to high beta
values for IGO (β = .339, p = .000) and TV (β = .547, p = .000) in the regression test results. This suggests that
students with high self-belief in their effectiveness or confidence are more likely to believe they will perform better
in design tasks.
158