Motivational Processes in CSILE-Based Learning Posted by Margith A Strand/ July 26, 2011

Motivational Processes in CSILE-Based Learning
Marjaana Rahikainen1, Sanna Järvelä2 & Hanna Salovaara2
1Centre for Learning Research, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland
2Department of Teacher Education, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 2000, 90401 Oulu, Finland
Tel: +358 50 331 4173, Fax: +358 2 333 8497

Email: marahi@utu.fi, sjarvela@ktk.oulu.fi, hsalovaa@ktk.oulu.fi

Abstract: The purpose of the present study was to describe motivational processes in a situation
of computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL). The study focused on examining whether
students representing different motivational orientations would be able to productively function in
a CSCL environment in which self-regulation and collaborative inquiry were encouraged. Coping
with the new learning environments may be very demanding for a student because he or she has a
new cognitive relationship with tasks as well as with the teacher. Two case studies are described
and analyzed in order to demonstrate students' motivational interpretations in a CSILE-based
progressive inquiry project. The results of these case studies indicate that there were no
considerable changes in students' motivational orientations, but students self-reported orientations
corresponded to their actual engagement.
Keywords: motivation, distributed learning environments, computer-mediated communication
Introduction
The purpose of the present study was to describe motivational processes in situation of computer supported
collaborative learning (CSCL). Many promises have been made for optimizing student motivation and interest in
learning in novel environments being proposed. However, there are not many studies reporting what it really means
to engage in computer supported collaborative activities which do not follow the traditional teacher-centred schema
of goal setting and classroom activities (Järvelä, Niemivirta & Hakkarainen, 1999). Further, several recent research
projects indicate that in order to facilitate purposeful and in-depth learning, it is important to foster research-like
processes of inquiry in education (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1993; Brown & Campione, 1996). Characteristic of this
kind of learning is that new knowledge is not assimilated as such, but constructed through solving problems of
understanding (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1993, Hakkarainen & Lipponen, 1998). Engagement in progressive inquiry
presupposes very strong self-regulative efforts and provides a significant motivational challenges for students.
The Systemic Approach on Learning and Motivation
On the basis of goal theories (Ames, 1992; Dweck & Leggett, 1988) this study broadens existing
perspectives and moves toward to a systemic approach (Lehtinen et al., 1995). A systemic approach sees an
individual student's learning situation as a phenomenon where not only goals, but also learner's prior learning
experiences and teacher-student-interaction affect the long-term development of learning activities. A model of
students' adaptation and motivational orientation to learning and performance situation has been constructed in order
to analyze parallel motivational, affective and cognitive aspects of students' adaptation in instructional settings. The
different orientations describe those universal motivational tendencies, which dominate what kind of goals a student
tries to reach at in a learning situation as well as what kind of situation specific coping strategies he or she will use
to accomplish those goals. (Lehtinen et al., 1995).
Process-Oriented Methods for Motivation Research
Earlier studies have shown how motivation can be improved by classroom changes, such as using
meaningful and differentiated tasks, building on students' interests, and using collaborative learning activities (e.g.,
Ames, 1992). However, these studies were based on a very conventional model of instruction, and as such the
embedded principles may not work in new, constructivist learning environments. It is important to clarify what kind
of motivational presuppositions and optimal conditions the new learning environments have. Innovative learning
environments provide not only challenges but new possibilities for sociocognitive and socioemotional goal
reconstructing (Järvelä, Niemivirta, & Hakkarainen, 1999). Thus research methods are needed that focus on how
goals are transformed into action -- that is, which gather interpret data on the dynamic interplay of personal beliefs,
situational interpretations and subsequent actions.
ICLS 2000 50
Rahikainen, M., Jarvela, S., & Salovaara, H. (2000). Motivational Processes in
CSILE-Based Learning. In B. Fishman & S. O'Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.),
Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 50-51). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Participants and Methods
The aim of this study was to describe motivational processes of groups of students in CSCL. This poster
describes two, case studies of a three-year follow-up series of investigations concerning primary and secondary
school students' motivational orientations in CSCL in which they were conducting a progressive inquiry project. In
the first case study 18, seventh grade secondary school students (mostly aged 12) used CSILE (Computer-Supported
Intentional Learning Environments; see Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1993) to study the theme of "racism". The project
lasted for six weeks and the students had project lessons (each lasting for 75 minutes) three times a week. The
participants of the second study were 21 primary school students (mostly aged 10), who conducted a four-week
progressive inquiry project (total 24 hours) supported by CSILE. The domain of the project was biology ("How a
mammal adapts to its environment").
In the both studies the students were administered self-report questionnaires to identify their motivational
tendencies and learning strategies at the beginning of the learning project (Niemivirta, 1998). In order to compare
the students' general motivational tendencies with their actual engagement, the lessons were videotaped in Study 2,
to collect data on the students' learning and social interaction processes. In Study 1, process interviews were
conducted in order to identify the students' interpretations of the learning processes. For detailed descriptions of the
methods and analysis see Järvelä, Rahikainen, Salovaara, Lipponen and Niemivirta, 2000.
Outcomes
The results of these case studies indicated that there were not considerable changes in students'
motivational orientations, but students' self-reported orientations corresponded to their actual engagement.
Qualitative data, especially interviews, showed how individual and contextual information is necessary to
understand how to support students' engagement in challenging academic work. The process-oriented methods used
in these studies made it possible for investigators to get a holistic picture of the motivational processes. Further, the
studies revealed that the students with non-learning orientation had difficulties coping with the new learning
situation. These non-learning-oriented students adapted quite slowly the working procedure of progressive inquiry.
One possible reason could be the unstructured nature of the learning situation and lack of obvious goals posed by the
teacher. The results support the assumption that important information for developing new learning environments
and pedagogical solutions is obtained if research goes beyond survey results to use observational data to examine
specifically and directly how students' interpret situations that affect learning.
References
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: goals, structures, and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
Brown, A. L. & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments:
On procedures, principles , and systems. In L. Schauble. & R. Glaser (Eds.) Innovations in learning. New
environments for education. (pp. 289-325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dweck, C. & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review,
95, 256-273.
Hakkarainen, K. & Lipponen, L. (1998). Epistemology of inquiry and computer supported collaborative learning. A
paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Research Association (AERA), San Diego, April,
1998.
Järvelä, S., Niemivirta, M.& Hakkarainen, K. (1999). The interaction of students' self-reported motivation and
strategies and situational motivation and action during a computer supported collaborative learning project.
Submitted.
Järvelä, S., Rahikainen, M., Salovaara, H., Lipponen, L. & Niemivirta, M. (2000). Students’ motivation in CSCL:
How different students cope with knowledge building challenges and possibilities. An unpublished
manuscript.
Lehtinen, E., Vauras, M., Salonen, P., Olkinuora, E., & Kinnunen, R. (1995). Long-term development of learning
activity: Motivational, cognitive and social interaction. Educational Psychologist, 30, 21-35.
Niemivirta, M. J. (1998). Individual differences in motivational and cognitive factors affecting self-regulated
learning — A pattern-oriented approach. In P. Nenniger, R. S. Jäger, A. Frey, & M. Wosnitza (Eds.)
Advances in motivation (pp. 23-42). Landau: Verlag Empirische Pädagogik.
Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1993). Computer-support for knowledge building communities. Journal of the
Learning Sciences, 3, 265-283.
51 ICLS 2000