Action Research - Impact of choice on motivation and performance.

1. Andreas Christodoulou, Jill Duncan, Gail Nelmes
May, 2012

2. INTRODUCTION
Research Question :
What is the effect of choice on student
performance and motivation?

3. Why is this important?
 We have observed that some of our students have a low level of classroom
engagement. We believe this may contribute to poor performance and we feel that
their interest and level of motivation needs to be sparked. We believe that this is an
area that needs addressing because as IB students, our children are expected to be
self- motivated learners. Our school mission states that our students are expected
to be “independent critical thinkers, lifelong learners, responsible citizens, (who)
gain entrance to elite universities and colleges.”
 We wondered if the level of engagement, independence and motivation of our
students could be improved, if they were given more individual choice over content
and presentation options for project work.
 We hoped that by fostering an environment that supports independent student
project choice, our students would demonstrate heightened motivation that would
in turn enhance performance.

4. Review of Literature
Research results are mixed regarding the impact
of providing choice.
The “evidence on choice effects has not been
ubiquitously positive.” (Patall et al. 2010)

5. Review of Literature
Some researchers suggest that motivation increases when
there is choice, but they make no mention of
improved performance:
 “…a greater amount of choices available for the student promotes a
greater sense of ownership and, consequently, higher levels of motivation
and commitment.” Stone and Madigan (2008) cite Becker
 “…students who are deprived of choice are also likely deprived of
motivation.” Kohn (1993)

6. Review of Literature
Some researchers suggest that choice can overwhelm
students and lessen motivation and performance:
 “...too many options seemed to produce paralysis rather than liberation…If
one overcomes paralysis and choose, evidence suggests that the quality of
performance deteriorates with increases in the number of options.” Barry
Schwartz (2009), referring to Iyenger and Lepper (2000) and Iyenger et al .
(2004)
 “.... choice may not always be effective or that there are more effective
strategies to support motivation.”Patall et al. (2010)

7. Review of Literature
Some researchers assert that when there is
choice, both motivation and performance increase:
 Results “clearly show that more choice equates to greater enjoyment, and
presumably more engagement” and that a number of previous researchers
“found that student enjoyment is closely linked to engagement, which in
turn is linked to levels of performance.” Helen Moran (n.d )
 “Whenever you can link the classroom curriculum to student interest, you
tap into internalized achievement motivation - where goals are
personal, motivation comes from within, and achievement is deeply
meaningful.” Powell and Powell (2011)

8. Method
 Research Design : We used a three group post and post test design
for motivation, assessing with a Likert Scale. We used a post and post test
design for performance, using a Common Performance Rubric.
 Sample : Convenience Sample made up of 65 children:
21 Grade 1 (6-8yrs), 10 boys, 12 girls, 50% Qatari, 50% others
22 Grade 5 (10-11yrs), 10 boys, 12 girls, 100% Qatari
22 Grade 9 & 10 (15-16yrs), 11 boys, 11 girls, 80% Qatari

9. Intervention
Treatment
 Using a Likert Scalesurvey and a Common Performance
Rubric, studentsratedthemselveson a previousproject.
 Students completed a Learning My WayAssessment.
 Grade Onestudentswereintroducedtosixpresentationoptions.
 Grade Fivestudentsreviewedpresentationoptionstheyknew.
 Upper Middle Years students conducted a discussion on an online forum
evaluating the merits of one presentation option against another.

10. Intervention
Treatment
 Studentswereintroducedtotheproject and
tothefactthattheycouldchoosetheprojectcontent and form of final
presentation. TheywerealsointroducedtotheCommon Performance Rubric.
 Students were directed back to their Learning My Wayassessmentto think
about areas of personal strength and interest and areas of possible
development. Theywereencouragedtoconsiderthese as
theymadetheirchoicesaboutcontent and form of presentation.
 Studentsweregiventheopportunitytodiscusstheir ideas
withtheirpeers, toreflectontheirchoices and
tochangetheirmindsiftheywanted.

11. Data Collection
 Three group post control and post treatment test designed to measure
change in motivation toward classroom activities. (Likert Scale)
 Three group post control and post treatment test designed to measure
performance in a class project. (Common Performance Rubric)
 Anecdotal records.

12. Threats to Validity
Motivation
 Instrumentation: By inadvertently stressing the importance of the test, the
researchers may have influenced the students prior to them taking the
Likert Scale surveys.
 Hawthorn Effect / Researcher Bias: Some students may have suspected
they were part of a research project and so skewed their answers to the
questions.
 Subject Characteristics (Age): In the Early Years, the students are eager to
please their teacher and might give false positive responses.
 Testing: The subjects might have been influenced by what they had
answered in the initial test.

13. Threats to Validity
Performance
 Intervention / Location / TechnologyFacilitatorResources
A threat to validity where performance was concerned in the Upper
Grades, was the ‘snowball effect’. In the excitement of having choices, the
students shared ideas and in this way they influenced each other’s choices. In
the Early Years, it was noted that while the groups were completing their
projects, two of the groups had different teachers and were confronted with
not only a new environment but also with new and novel presentation
options.

14. Data Analysis: Motivation
 The results from the post treatment phase suggested an extremely significant increase in
motivation compared to the post control phase, across the whole sample.
Grade t df p Mean Gain SD Decrease Significance
1 2.6947 20 0.0139 1.67 1.12 Significant
5 0.7245 21 0.4768 0.41 0.27 Not
9+10 3.2262 21 0.0040 2.14 1.12 Very
All Grades 3.8658 64 0.0003 1.40 0.7 Extremely

15. Data Analysis: Performance
• The results from the post treatment phase suggested a significant increase in motivation
compared to the post control phase.
Grade t df p Mean Gain SD Decrease Significance
1 4.2604 20 0.0004 4.81 2.17 Extremely
5 4.1890 21 0.0004 2.36 - 0.16 Extremely
9+10 4.7503 21 0.0001 3.18 - 1.08 Extremely
All Grades 7.1569 64 0.0001 3.43 0.03 Extremely

16. Discussion
 The results of this study showed that our hypothesis was correct. We
observed improvement in both student motivation and performance
during the project.
 Using the Learning My Wayassessmentencouraged the students to think
about the choices they were making in relation to their learning styles and
goals.
 By discussing the Common Performance Rubric, an environment was
created where students felt they could take risks and try new things and
that these efforts would be recognized.
 During the process of choice, the students were excited to discuss and
explore their options with peers.
 Once choice was made, an opportunity to reflect on their choice was given
as was the chance to change. Students appreciated these options.

17. Discussion
 Studentscouldgivevalidreasonsforwhytheyhadmadetheirchoices, manystati
ngitwasbecausetheywantedtoextendonaninterestwithintheir personal
learningstylestrengthsorbecausetheywantedto explore
anoptionthatwaseither new tothemorwhichhadchallengedthemon a
previousoccasion.
 Once involved in theproject, interest, excitement, independence and
ownershipwasobvious in thestudents, as wastheirhighlevel of on-
goingmotivation.
 Motivationwasfurtherenhancedby students’ developing sense of purpose
as they recognized that their product was not just to gather grades but
would be used in real life contexts that would influence others.
 Students took independent action in many ways. They worked on their
projects in their own time, developed and applied their skills, practiced to
enhance their level of performance and taught their peers.

18. Discussion
 Generally, the quality of the final projects were higher than they had been
on previous occasions.
 Where projects showed little or no improvement, it could possibly be
because the student had had the confidence to take a risk and try skills and
strategies that were new to them but were unsuited to their personal
learning styles or skill level.
 Most of the students suggested that this had been an empowering and
enjoyable experience and one that they would like to repeat.

19. Action
 We intend to routinely provide choices, opportunities for students to have
discussions about their choices and to review their choices.
 We will explore how to apply this strategy for learning across other areas of
the curriculum.
 We plan to make time to fully reflect on this experience and develop an
implementation plan for applying refined elements of this project into our
teaching programmes next year.
 We intend to use the Learning My Wayassessmentnear the beginning of
the academic year and also administer Likert scales at times throughout
the year.
 We will review and refine our Common Performance Rubric with a view to
using it at all levels of the school as well as other educational platforms.
 We will share what we have learned with our colleagues.

20. References
Baum, S., &Nicols, H. (2009). Your child's style. Retrieved from
http://www.internationalcenterfortalentdevelopment.com/uploads/9/3/2/8/9328117/prototypes_by_baum_and_nic
ols.pdf
Kohn, A. (1993, September). Choices for children: why and how to let students decide. Kappan, Retrieved from
http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:Wc1A9-8y29IJ:scholar.google.com/ giving elementary
students choices&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
Moran , H. (n.d.). Personalised learning- engaging students by providing choice in the classroom. Retrieved from
http://kidspeak.wikispaces.com/Personalised Learning - Engaging Students by Providing Choice in the Classroom
Napoleon Hill. (n.d.). BrainyQuote.com. Retrieved February 19, 2012, from BrainyQuote.com Web site:
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/napoleonhi152835.html
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Wynn, S. R. (2010). The effectiveness and relative importance of choice in the classroom.
Journal of Educational Psychology , 102(4), 896-915. doi:
10.1037/a0019545,http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/edu/102/4/896/
Powell, P., &Kusuma-Powell, O. (2011). How to teach now:five keys to personalized learning in the global classroom.
Alexandria, VA, USA: ASCD. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/111011/chapters/Knowing-
Our-Students-as-Learners.aspx
Schwartz, B. (2009). Incentives, choice, education and.well-being Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 391-403.
Starnes, B., & Paris, C. (2000). Choosing to learn. Kappan, 81(5), 392. Retrieved from
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/
Stone, J. A., & Madigan, E. M. (2008). The impact of providing project choices in cs1. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin
, 40(2), 65-68, Retrieved from
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1383637&dl=ACM&coll=DL