Same Classroom, Different Affordances? Demographic Differences in Perceptions of Motivational Climate in Five STEM Courses

IF 2.2 4区 教育学 Q1 Social Sciences
Kristy A. Robinson, So Yeon Lee
{"title":"Same Classroom, Different Affordances? Demographic Differences in Perceptions of Motivational Climate in Five STEM Courses","authors":"Kristy A. Robinson, So Yeon Lee","doi":"10.1080/00220973.2023.2267006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractStudents vary in their perceptions of teachers’ motivational supports, even within the same classroom, but it is unclear why this is the case. To enable the design of equitable environments and understand the theoretical nature of motivational climate, this study explored demographic differences in university students’ perceptions of instruction across five large, introductory STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) courses (N = 2,486), along with end-of-semester outcomes. Results indicated that women and students from traditionally underrepresented racial or ethnic groups (Black, Hispanic/Latino/a, or Indigenous students) tended to perceive slightly higher motivational support in their courses compared to men and traditionally overrepresented (White or Asian) students, respectively. However, patterns were not uniform across all courses or variables. Men and women did not significantly differ on end-of-semester interest in any course, but women tended to have lower self-efficacy in some courses and significantly higher grades in programming compared to men. Implications include a caution for researchers against interpreting sample-specific or aggregated evidence of demographic differences as generalizing to broader populations or specific settings.Keywords: classroom environmentmotivational climateSTEM educationstudent perceptions Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1 Of the 2,486 students who consented to participate in the study, all but 3 completed at least one survey item used in the present study. The 3 students who consented but did not complete specific survey items (1 in General Chemistry, 2 in Calculus) were included in our analyses when possible to aid in full information maximum likelihood estimation, because their grades were still obtained from the instructors at the end of the semester (see missing data analyses below).2 We assume that this scale functioned poorly in our sample due to the lecture-style format of the courses. Although at least some of the course instructors typically use group discussions and activities when teaching in person, online instruction in 2020 introduced additional barriers to facilitating opportunities for students to interact with each other.3 To characterize descriptive statistics, we relied on guidelines developed by (Wormington and Linnenbrink-Garcia, Citation2017) and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2017), in which means are considered high if they are closer to the high end of the scale than to the midpoint (e.g., above 4 on a 5-point scale). A similar cutoff is used for characterizing means as low (e.g., below 2 on a 5-point scale). Values falling between these cutoffs are characterized as moderate when falling close to the midpoint of the scale or moderately high if falling more than halfway between the midpoint and the next higher increment (i.e., higher than 3.5 but lower than 4 on a 5-point scale).Additional informationFundingThe research reported in this article was supported by the Fonds de recherche du Québec (FRQ; PI: KAR). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views McGill University or the FRQ.","PeriodicalId":47911,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Education","volume":"3 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2023.2267006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

AbstractStudents vary in their perceptions of teachers’ motivational supports, even within the same classroom, but it is unclear why this is the case. To enable the design of equitable environments and understand the theoretical nature of motivational climate, this study explored demographic differences in university students’ perceptions of instruction across five large, introductory STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) courses (N = 2,486), along with end-of-semester outcomes. Results indicated that women and students from traditionally underrepresented racial or ethnic groups (Black, Hispanic/Latino/a, or Indigenous students) tended to perceive slightly higher motivational support in their courses compared to men and traditionally overrepresented (White or Asian) students, respectively. However, patterns were not uniform across all courses or variables. Men and women did not significantly differ on end-of-semester interest in any course, but women tended to have lower self-efficacy in some courses and significantly higher grades in programming compared to men. Implications include a caution for researchers against interpreting sample-specific or aggregated evidence of demographic differences as generalizing to broader populations or specific settings.Keywords: classroom environmentmotivational climateSTEM educationstudent perceptions Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1 Of the 2,486 students who consented to participate in the study, all but 3 completed at least one survey item used in the present study. The 3 students who consented but did not complete specific survey items (1 in General Chemistry, 2 in Calculus) were included in our analyses when possible to aid in full information maximum likelihood estimation, because their grades were still obtained from the instructors at the end of the semester (see missing data analyses below).2 We assume that this scale functioned poorly in our sample due to the lecture-style format of the courses. Although at least some of the course instructors typically use group discussions and activities when teaching in person, online instruction in 2020 introduced additional barriers to facilitating opportunities for students to interact with each other.3 To characterize descriptive statistics, we relied on guidelines developed by (Wormington and Linnenbrink-Garcia, Citation2017) and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2017), in which means are considered high if they are closer to the high end of the scale than to the midpoint (e.g., above 4 on a 5-point scale). A similar cutoff is used for characterizing means as low (e.g., below 2 on a 5-point scale). Values falling between these cutoffs are characterized as moderate when falling close to the midpoint of the scale or moderately high if falling more than halfway between the midpoint and the next higher increment (i.e., higher than 3.5 but lower than 4 on a 5-point scale).Additional informationFundingThe research reported in this article was supported by the Fonds de recherche du Québec (FRQ; PI: KAR). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views McGill University or the FRQ.
同样的教室,不同的环境?五门STEM课程中动机气候感知的人口统计学差异
摘要即使在同一个教室里,学生对教师激励支持的看法也各不相同,但目前尚不清楚为什么会这样。为了设计公平的环境并理解动机气候的理论本质,本研究探讨了大学生对五门大型入门STEM(科学、技术、工程和数学)课程(N = 2,486)的教学感知的人口统计学差异,以及学期末的结果。结果表明,女性和来自传统上代表性不足的种族或族裔群体的学生(黑人、西班牙裔/拉丁裔/美洲裔或土著学生)在他们的课程中,分别比男性和传统上代表性过高的学生(白人或亚洲人)更容易感受到更高的激励支持。然而,模式并非在所有课程或变量中都是统一的。男性和女性在学期末对任何课程的兴趣上没有显著差异,但女性在某些课程上的自我效能感往往较低,而在编程方面的成绩则明显高于男性。影响包括对研究人员的警告,不要将特定样本或人口统计学差异的汇总证据解释为推广到更广泛的人群或特定环境。关键词:课堂环境动机气候系统教育学生认知披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。注1在2,486名同意参与研究的学生中,除3人外,其余学生均完成了至少一项用于本研究的调查项目。同意但没有完成具体调查项目的3名学生(1名普通化学,2名微积分)在可能的情况下被纳入我们的分析,以帮助充分的信息最大似然估计,因为他们的成绩仍然是在学期结束时从教师那里获得的(见下面的缺失数据分析)我们假设,由于课程的讲课式格式,该量表在我们的样本中功能不佳。尽管至少有一些课程教师在亲自授课时通常使用小组讨论和活动,但2020年的在线教学为促进学生相互交流带来了额外的障碍为了描述描述性统计的特征,我们依赖于(Wormington和Linnenbrink-Garcia, Citation2017)和Linnenbrink-Garcia(2017)制定的指导方针,其中如果平均值更接近于量表的高端而不是中点(例如,在5分制中高于4分),则认为平均值高。类似的截止值也用于表示平均数较低(例如,在5分制中低于2分)。落在这些截止点之间的值在接近中点时被描述为中等,如果落在中点和下一个更高的增量之间的一半以上,则被描述为中等高(即,在5分制中高于3.5但低于4)。本文所报道的研究得到了quimac基金会(FRQ;PI:冰斗)。内容完全是作者的责任,并不一定代表麦吉尔大学或FRQ的官方观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Education publishes theoretical, laboratory, and classroom research studies that use the range of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Recent articles have explored the correlation between test preparation and performance, enhancing students" self-efficacy, the effects of peer collaboration among students, and arguments about statistical significance and effect size reporting. In recent issues, JXE has published examinations of statistical methodologies and editorial practices used in several educational research journals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信