1. Effects of a Lab Course on Motivation By Cassiopeia Hagan, Thomas Listopadzki & Monica Perrone
INTRODUCTION
As teachers, we take great interest in new and better ways to promote students’ engagement in the material we present. Student motivation is an extremely important factor in their engagement, and there are many theories which seek to explain motivation in general. In one such theory, known as Self-Determination Theory, Ryan and Deci categorize motivation into two categories: intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsically-motivated acts are done because the act itself is inherently enjoyable, whereas extrinsically-motivated acts are performed as a means to an end. SDT proposes that a person is intrinsically motivated to the extent that three basic psychological needs – autonomy, competence, and relatedness – are satisfied.  Autonomy refers to self-endorsement of one’s actions, competence refers to self-efficacy, and relatedness refers to the formation of mutual, meaningful connections with others (Ryan and Deci, 57).
It has been shown that “active instructional method influences the learning experience of students”, where “data from (concept Advancement through chemistry Lab-Lecture) students showed higher (exam) means than the conventional section” (Oliver-Hoyo, 447). The lab 210 course should therefore help students to learn the lecture material more effectively, because of their direct involvement in the lab work. This increased learning could make them feel more competent, which in turn might make them more motivated to learn the content in CHM 210. The positive effects of applicability on student motivation have also been demonstrated by Dr. John H. Woodburn, who noted that, “ Facts, principles, and concepts must relate meaningfully to larger relationships” (Woodburn) in order for students to be motivated to learn.
In a study that we conducted last semester, we found that students were more motivated by lecture than lab. We thought that this was likely due to the fact that lecture was worth 4 times more to their overall grade than lab was. We also believed that, because lab was mandatory, students lost a significant amount of intrinsic motivation. We were curious as to whether students who elected to take CHM 210 would be more motivated by lab than lecture. If the students believe that their work might make them more competent in the future, then they might feel more intrinsically motivated to succeed. Furthermore, if they decided to take the course, then their sense of autonomy may also be greater, causing them to feel more intrinsically motivated.
HYPOTHESIS
Lab courses provide students with the opportunity to apply lecture material in a real world setting, causing students enrolled in both CHM 172/204 and 210 to be more motivated to learn the content for the laboratory course (CHM 210).
METHODS
CHM 172/204 (general lecture) and 210 (lab and lecture) instructors were asked for their top three motivating strategies. Students were then asked to rate the extent to which these different methods led them to favor that course. This served as a control measure to account for the fact that students may favor a course due to instructor approach rather than the extent to which the course provides them with a sense of autonomy and competence.
A questionnaire based on a 5-point scale (1 strongly disagree, 5 strongly agree) was developed by and issued to students via Google Forms. Averages and standard deviations were taken for all of the responses, and their statistical significance analyzed through t-tests. Questions were grouped into three categories: questions addressing different instructor approaches to motivating students, questions regarding perceived locus of causality of student motivation in CHM 172/204; and questions regarding perceived causality of student motivation in CHM 210.The same questions regarding students attitudes toward the course were asked for both CHM 172/204 and CHM 210 to collect information regarding:
Conceptuality vs. practicality of each lecture
Motivation to learn the class material
Interest in the class material
Potential ability to use class material in the future
Ability to succeed in class
Sense of support in class
Discussion
If the p-value was ever greater than .05, the difference between the averages of the two questions being considered was statistically insignificant. While there was a slight difference in average responses between the motivation methods of each of the professors, they were not statistically significant. Therefore, it is impossible to say that the students felt more motivated by one teaching style over the other.
Discussion Cont.
Initial differences in averages suggested that there might have been differences in each of the question topics from the 172/204 and 210 sections. However, t-tests revealed that of the 6 topics tested, only two had significant differences. The results suggested that the students believed that CHM 172/204 was more conceptual than practical, and that CHM 210 was more applicable to their future careers. There was no statistical significance in the difference between motivation in each class, interest in each class, sense of an ability to succeed in each class, interest in material taught in each class, or the support given in each class.
Questions 5-12 in the General Questions section were not analyzed because they were asked as anecdotal questions. They were not designed to be analyzed statistically, but rather to be discussed at face value if no conclusions could be drawn from the other questions. The lack of statistical significance for the difference in the averages of questions 1 and 2 (pertaining to potential interest in how lecture material could be incorporated into the real world or how lecture material could be incorporated into other theories) demonstrated that the students might not have an overall preference for knowing how their lecture material could be applied to real life or to other theories.
The lack of statistical significance for the difference in the averages of questions 3 and 4 (pertaining to the potential difference in student interest between theories and practical application) demonstrated that the students may not have had an overall preference for learning conceptual, theoretical information or for learning about real world examples and applications.
These results seem to disprove our hypothesis. Students believe that CHM 210 is more applicable to their future careers, but are not more motivated by either class. However, these results do differ from our previous research, where students were more motivated by their lecture class. This indicates that some aspect of CHM 210 increased their motivation.
Conclusion
The surveys showed that the students were not more motivated by any one of the teaching styles of the lab or lecture professors. When looking at these results without taking into consideration our previous research, it appears that the applicability of lab did not have a strong motivating effect on the students. They did not feel more able to succeed in lab, nor did they feel more supported. They were also not more motivated in their lab course than in the lecture courses, despite the fact that they elected to take the lab course. Each of these three categories relate to competence, relatedness, and autonomy, respectively, in Ryan and Deci’s aspects of self determination theory. Because each of these categories were not greater for CHM 210, the student’s needs to feel intrinsically motivated were likely not met. At the same time, the students acknowledged that lecture work was more conceptual, and that lab work was more applicable to their future careers. In this way, the students acknowledged the value of lab, but were still not more motivated.
However, when these results are compared to our previous research, some major changes can be seen. Firstly, students felt equally likely to succeed in CHM 172/204 and 210, while students felt much more likely to succeed in CHM 173 than 171. This is most likely due to the fact that CHM 210 is a much more rigorous lab course. Additionally, students felt that CHM 210 was more applicable to their future careers than CHM 173 when compared to their complementary lecture courses. This is likely due to the large amount of hypothesis--testing present in CHM 210, compared to the large amount of “cookbook chemistry” in CHM 173. Finally, students felt equally motivated by CHM 210 and CHM 172/204, while previously students were more motivated by CHM 171 than CHM 173. This change in motivation may be due to the student’s increased sense of autonomy, derived from their ability to select to be in CHM 210. In this way, changing from CHM 173 to CHM 210 did have an effect on student motivation. However, whether this change was due to the increased perceived applicability of the lab or the increased sense of autonomy was unclear. Therefore, we were unable to determine definitively whether our hypothesis was proven or not.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank Dr. Barone for her help in guiding us through our research and helping us to create an effective survey. We would like to thank Dr. Weix , Dr. Goodman and Dr. Haffensteiner for their input on their various motivation methods. We would like to thank the entire CHM 172, CHM 204 and CHM 210 classes for their time taken to answer our survey.
SOURCES
Hagan, Cassiopeia, and Thomas Listopadzki. Effects of a Lab Course on Student Motivation. University
of Rochester, n.d. Web. 18 Apr
Oliver-Hoyo, Maria T., Deedee Allen, William F. Hunt, Joy Hutson, and Angela Pitts. "Effects
of an Active Learning Environment: Teaching Innovations at a Research I Institution." J. Chem. Educ. Journal of Chemical Education 81.3 (2004): 441. Web. 5 Dec
Ryan, Richard M., and Edward L. Deci. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions." Contemporary Educational Psychology 25.1 (2000): Web. 5 Dec
Woodburn, John H. "Using Applied Chemistry to Tackle Motivation Problems." J. Chem. Educ. Journal of Chemical Education (1977): 763. Web. 5 Dec
Figure 1. Side-by-side bar plot of average scores of students in response to six questions comparing CHM 172/204 and CHM 210.
CHM 172/204
CHM 210
Question Topic
Average
Standard Deviation
P Ranges
Conceptuality
3.72
1.05
2.53
1.15
0 < p <
Motivation
3.86
0.915
4.25
0.96
0.04 < p < 0.05
Interest
4.08
0.865
4.33
0.82
0.10 < p < 0.25
Applicability
1.07
4.39
0.93
0.01 < p < 0.02
Success 4
0.939
0.025 < p < 0.04
Support
3.81
0.996
4.19
0.789
Professor Motivation
3.93
4.38
0.993
Table 1. Averages, standard deviations and p-value ranges for the responses to six questions comparing CHM 172 & 204 and CHM 210.
QUESTION NUMBER
AVERAGE
STANDARD DEVIATION
P RANGE 1
4.17
0.845
0.20 < p < 0.25 2
4.03
N/A 3
3.89
0.887
0.25 < p < 1.0 4
4.40
0.901
Table 2. Averages, standard deviations and p-value ranges for the responses to four questions regarding practicality and applicability of lab versus lecture courses.
Table 3. Averages, standard deviations and p-value ranges for the responses to six questions comparing CHM 171 and CHM 173 from the previous study