This award was provided as part of NSF's Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences Postdoctoral Research Fellowships (SPRF) program. The goal of the SPRF program is to prepare promising, early career doctoral-level scientists for scientific careers in academia, industry or private sector, and government. SPRF awards involve two years of training under the sponsorship of established scientists and encourage Postdoctoral Fellows to perform independent research. NSF seeks to promote the participation of scientists from all segments of the scientific community, including those from underrepresented groups, in its research programs and activities; the postdoctoral period is considered to be an important level of professional development in attaining this goal. Each Postdoctoral Fellow must address important scientific questions that advance their respective disciplinary fields. This postdoctoral fellowship provides an opportunity for an emerging scholar to extend innovative research in educational psychology in order to improve students' motivation and achievement in science. There is a shortage of qualified professionals with skills in advanced science and mathematics, and one critical factor that impacts students' performance in these fields is their motivation to learn. Two particular motivational issues are students not believing they are capable to succeed in their courses (i.e., having low perceived competence) and students not thinking that what they are learning is useful (i.e., having low utility value). Researchers have addressed these issues by developing educational intervention activities in which students write reflectively about topics related to their perceived competence and utility value. These interventions have improved students' motivation and achievement in many college math and science courses, and they require few resources to implement. Thus they are efficient ways to target academic outcomes at critical transition points in students? pursuit of mathematics and science careers. However, research on reflective writing motivation interventions is somewhat novel and it is possible that these interventions can be even more impactful than they are currently. One way to make them more impactful might be to give students choices while they are completing the interventions. Prior research has found that students show higher motivation and achievement if they are given choices about what to learn. The purpose of this postdoctoral fellowship is to explore whether adding choices during reflective writing motivation interventions strengthens the effectiveness of the interventions with respect to college students' motivation and achievement in biology.
The fellowship provides support to assess this objective in three studies, which utilize different types of choices. Study 1 uses secondary data analysis to assess the effects of giving students a choice of task during an intervention. Data analysis is based on a previously conducted intervention that aimed to improve students? perceptions of utility value. Some students were assigned to write a letter intended to increase utility value, other students were assigned to write a personal essay intended to increase utility value, and a third group of students chose between the two tasks. Study 2 examines the effects of giving students a choice of type of reflective writing motivation intervention, using a laboratory experiment. Some students are assigned to write an essay intended to increase their utility value, other students are assigned to write an essay intended to increase their perceived competence, and a third group of students choose between the two types of writing exercises. Study 3 replicates the Study 2 design in a classroom setting. The objectives of all three studies are: (1) To examine the effects of the intervention conditions compared to a control group, as well as to compare the effects of the choice versus non-choice intervention conditions, on students? perceived competence, utility value, and science achievement; (2) To examine whether the different conditions benefit students more who start the intervention with lower motivation to learn or lower prior achievement; (3) To test whether three mechanisms (engagement, perceptions of autonomy, or likelihood of choosing tasks that correspond to students' motivational deficits) explain any beneficial effects of choice. These studies contribute to prior literature by demonstrating whether different types of choice strengthen the impact of motivation interventions, and by shedding light on mechanisms and factors that might moderate the effects of these interventions. More broadly, this work is important because it aims to improve low-cost programs that can encourage more students towards careers in science and mathematics.
