1. To gather students’ perceptions, including an exploration of the underlying experiences and ideas informing their perceptions regarding:
a. the quality of the teacher-student relationship through a focus upon key teacher relational behaviours;
b. the mechanisms that the teacher and student use to affirm self-attributes such as perceived competence and self-efficacy, and;
c. their autonomous motivation and desire for autonomy during learning activities such as science investigations.
2. To explore if and how students’ perceptions of the quality of the teacher-student relationship differ with the varying methods and behaviours of individual science teachers, and:
a. where differences are reported, to identify which teacher behaviours and methods impact upon the changes in the teacher-student relationship, perceived ompetence, and the perceived desire to be autonomous and to exercise autonomy where opportunities are perceived to exist.
3. To determine, further to the conclusions drawn within the MER, the extent to which the quality of the teacher-student relationship influences students’ perceived
competence, and if these have a corresponding influence upon the motivation to be autonomous and to exercise autonomy where opportunities are perceived to exist.
104 3.5 The retrospective research design
The two parts of the main study (Chapters 3 and 4) build upon the conceptual
framework that was developed for the MER, further to the Literature Review (Chapter 2) (see Figure 3.2), and the common influential motivational patterns within the MER (Table 2.4). Thia framework predicts the influential motivational pathways between different SDT constructs and their translation into an overall perceptions and types of engagement during learning activities. In addition to correlations (r), the results of the questionnaires are presented as descriptive statistics to show the changes by percentage between March and June, and then, finally, with a change of science teacher in September 2013 (Appendices 3.1 and 3.3 to 3.10). This data was collated under the headings of relatedness, autonomy support and competence. Where there were positive or negative changes in variables over the course of the three data waves, the data was scrutinised for corresponding changes in other
associated engagement-enhancing variables. Clearly, these changes are not asserted as having a causal relationship within this non-experimental research design. However, similar changes across associated variables have been analysed in the light of the conclusions formed within the MER and the conceptual framework (Figure 3.2) as the evidence-informed basis of proposed probabilistic associations between engagement-mediating variables (Morrison, 2009).
A retrospective research design was developed, enabling the collection of data across four student cohorts. The longitudinal timeframe for the research involved three data
collection points and seven focus group interviews. The design was based upon the multicohort-multioccasion approach developed by Marsh et al. (1998). A mixed method approach combining quantitative and qualitative methods (Cresswell, 2009; Gorard and Taylor, 2004; Robson, 2011) collected students’ self-reported perceptions of the mediating influence of science teacher behaviours and methods upon students’ engagement with learning activities in a science learning environment. The two research methods were questionnaires and focus group interviews (to cross-check and explore the responses in greater depth).
The research design pathway is summarised in Figure 3.1 (below). Three data waves were scheduled: baseline measures within the pilot study (March 2013), mid-point measures (June 2013), and terminal measures following a change of science teacher (September 2013). Five questionnaires were administered across the three data waves, with each exploring students’ perceptions regarding the key factors that influence their engagement with learning
105
in science. The first were of the kinds of experience that inform the perceived quality of the students’ interpersonal relationship with their science teacher (relatedness), including any changes in response that, in the students’ views, were due to the different interpersonal motivating style of, where applicable, their new science teachers from September 2013. Secondly, the questionnaires harvested the students’ perceived competence within science and the teacher behaviours that have an influence upon such perceptions. The final set of perceptions collected related to the degree of autonomy that students perceived they are able to exercise within their science lessons and science investigations: that is, their autonomous motivation.
The questionnaire responses were collated using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, version 21) under the headings of relatedness (TSRQ: Teacher-Student Relationship Quality, Hughes et al., 2008), autonomy support and competence. These were used to calculate Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficients (r) for the correlative relationships between the three SDT constructs for the sample group as a whole. The analysis of the questionnaire responses during the first two data waves (March and June 2013)
generated the questions to be asked during the focus group interviews. These were utilised to enable the in-depth exploration of the students’ perceptions of their competence, experiences that enhanced their motivated engagement with learning activities, and their interpretations of their teachers’ key motivating behaviours.
Figure 3.1 The Research Design Pathway for the Main Study
Academic Year 2012 – 2013 With Science teacher for 7 – 10 months
Start of Academic Year 2013 – 2014
Following change of Science teacher Baseline 1 March 2013 Baseline 2 April 2013 Mid June 2013 Terminal September 2013 Questionnaires SQ1 and SQ2 40 – 50 mins. Children in Years 4 to 8 Total sample = 92 children Questionnaire SQ3 40 – 50 mins. Children in Years 4 to 8 Total sample = 92 children Questionnaires SQ1, SQ6 and SQ7 40 – 50 mins. Children in Years 4 to 7 Total sample = 70 children (Year 8 taking examinations) Questionnaires - SQ1, SQ6 and SQ7 40 – 50 mins.
Focus Groups Interviews Years 5 to 8; between 6 and 8 children per FGI (n=49)
45 mins. maximum
Children now in Years 5 to 8 Total sample = 70 children
106
The focus group interviews were chosen as a research method based upon three oft- cited limitations when using questionnaires, the third being especially pertinent within this study. The first is that questionnaires can only give a superficial insight into the experiences and perceptions that the student draws upon for their responses to each statement within the questionnaires (Cohen et al., 2007; Mertens, 1997; Robson, 2011). The second limitation of questionnaires is that how students respond to a statement is often dependent upon how the statement is interpreted, even under circumstances where questionnaires are administered with the researcher being in the room, and the students are able to ask for clarification of the meaning or intention of a statement (Mertens, 1997). The third limitation was the sample size which was unavoidably small as the research was undertaken with the teacher-researcher’s students. This was due to convenience sampling, in that, by focusing upon enhancement of teachers’ understanding of the motivational dynamics informing students’ engagement with learning within the teacher-researcher’s school setting, “A sample of convenience is … a sample in which elements have been selected from the target population on the basis of their accessibility or convenience to the researcher” (Ross, 2005, p. 7). With convenience
sampling, it was noted that “It is always wise to treat research results arising from these types of sample design as suggesting statistical characteristics about the population – rather than as providing population estimates with specifiable confidence limits” (Ross, 2005, p. 6).
Therefore, although questionnaires were used and correlations gained, the implications of the sample size were such that a second research method was needed in order to form a more in- depth understanding of the students’ reasoning behind their responses.
With this need in mind, seven focus group interviews were conducted (see Chapter 4). These were used to explore the perceptions informing each group’s experiences of their relationship with their science teacher, the teacher’s influence upon the students’ feelings of competence, and the impact upon both autonomous motivation and their desire to capitalise upon teacher-afforded opportunities to exercise their autonomy during science lessons and investigations upon their motivation for and engagement with learning.