Regímenes de viento y masas de aire superficiales

While Study 1 was concerned with the question of how mathematics teachers convey relevance in their everyday instructional practices and the role students’ classmates play in this context, Studies 2 and 3 were about the effectiveness of two scientific relevance interventions implemented in the classroom. Previous studies of American samples revealed the motivating potential of classroom-based interventions during which students identified the personal relevance of learning STEM topics (e.g., Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009, see 2.2.3). Drawing on findings from such field studies (for a review, see e.g., Rosenzweig & Wigfield, 2016) and from laboratory-based experiments (e.g., on the interaction between competence beliefs and utility value beliefs; Durik et al., 2015), this dissertation aimed at comparing the effectiveness of two relevance intervention approaches with a German sample (MoMa project, see 3.2). Both interventions consisted of two parts: (a) a classroom presentation with a confidence booster and examples of the usefulness of mathematics for students’ current and future lives and (b) an individual writing assignment which differed according to condition. In a writing assignment based on social learning theories (e.g., Bandura, 1977b), students in the “quotations” condition commented on young adults’ arguments about the relevance of mathematics; in a writing assignment adapted from prior classroom interventions (e.g., Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009), students in the “text” condition generated their own arguments about the relevance of mathematics. The interventions were implemented at the class level in a randomized controlled study design. Studies 2 and 3 add to previous research on classroom-based relevance interventions not only by broadly evaluating the effectiveness of the MoMa interventions but also by investigating the mechanisms underlying the intervention effects.

7.2.1 Fostering students’ motivation, behavior, and achievement through quotations conveying the relevance of mathematics

Previous classroom-based relevance intervention studies focused mainly on students’ value beliefs and interest as short-term outcomes and grades as long-term outcomes (Hulleman et al., 2010; Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009; Woolley et al., 2013). To learn more about the breadth and sustainability of the effectiveness of relevance interventions, in Study 2 motivational, behavioral, and achievement outcomes were included at two points in time after the implementation of the interventions. Both subject- and task-specific competence beliefs (mathematics-related self-concept and homework-related self-efficacy) were investigated, as well as effort and test scores, thus covering a broad range of previously neglected outcomes. Results of prior research within the MoMa project indicated that the quotations condition had stronger and broader effects on students’ short- and long-term value beliefs than the text condition (Gaspard, Dicke, Flunger, Brisson et al., 2015). In line with this, results of Study 2

DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS FROM THE EMPIRICAL STUDIES

157 indicate that the quotations condition promoted students’ mathematics-related self-concept, homework-related self-efficacy, effort, and achievement in the short term and long term, whereas the text condition fostered students’ long-term homework-related self-efficacy but no other variables under investigation. A summary of the main effects of the MoMa interventions is provided in Table 1.

Together with research by Gaspard et al. (2015; 2016), Study 2 thus gives a unique account of the potential of a newly developed intervention combining researcher-communicated utility value (in-class presentation) and peer-communicated utility value (writing task with statements from secondary school graduates, college students, etc.) to foster long-term outcomes over and above the target variable: students’ utility value beliefs. Most interestingly, the quotations condition “outperformed” a condition adapted from an established relevance intervention approach (e.g., Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009) in its effectiveness: The effects of the text condition were less broad, less sustained, and—as shown in the following paragraph— depended more on the degree of students’ responsiveness to the writing activity. As recent classroom interventions requiring students to generate arguments in writing about the relevance of a topic were not as effective as expected (Husman et al., 2017; Karabenick et al., 2017), future researchers developing relevance interventions could try to focus more on approaches similar to the MoMa quotations condition (see 7.6).

Table 1

Summary of significant main effectsa _{of the MoMa relevance interventions}

Quotations Text

ß_T2 ß_T3 ß_T2 ß_T3

Mathematics-related value beliefsb

Utility value .30 .29 .14 .16

Attainment value .12 .15 — —

Intrinsic value .08 .14 — —

Cost -.08 — — —

Mathematics-related competence beliefsc

Self-concept .10 .09 — — Homework self-efficacy .16 .20 .08 .16 Mathematics-related effortc, d Teacher-rated effort .14 .12 — — Self-reported effort .13 — — — Achievement in mathematicsc

Test scores n/a .18 n/a —

Notes.a _{The coefficients are not fully comparable across publications due to their}

dependency on the modeling strategy and covariates used in the analyses.

b _{Gaspard et al., 2015;} c _{Brisson et al., 2017;} d _{Gaspard et al., 2017;}

ß = standardized regression coefficient; T2 = six weeks after the intervention; T3 = five months after the intervention; p < .05 (one-tailed p-value); coefficients in italics p < .10 (one-tailed p-value); — = nonsignificant effect; n/a = not applicable.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

158

7.2.2 Towards a more refined knowledge about the intervention processes triggering changes in relevance beliefs

Assessing and analyzing students’ responsiveness to the intervention activities is one way to learn about how relevance interventions work and why they work for some students but not for others (e.g., Murrah et al., 2017). Prior research has identified the quality and quantity of students’ personal connections with the learning material and cognitive involvement in the task as central elements contributing to the effectiveness of relevance interventions (e.g., Haracki- ewicz et al., 2016; Hulleman & Cordray, 2009, see 2.2.4). The aim of Study 3 was to shed more light on the differences in the effectiveness of the two MoMa intervention conditions. In Study 3 descriptive and causal analytical approaches were combined to determine whether the degree of students’ responsiveness to the writing assignment (measured through the indicators “positive argumentation”, “personal connections”, and “in-depth reflections”) affected the intervention effects on students’ utility value beliefs. In addition, the characteristics of highly responsive and minimally responsive students were identified.

Overall, students’ responsiveness to the writing activities was high in both intervention conditions. Furthermore, the intervention effects on students’ utility value beliefs differed between responsive and nonresponsive students. The size of this difference depended on the degree of students’ responsiveness to the assignment and on the condition. In the quotations condition, the most responsive students (i.e., those who had the highest values on all indicators) reported the most positive utility value beliefs after the intervention. However, even the least responsive students perceived mathematics to be more useful after the intervention than comparable students in the control group. In the text condition, utility value beliefs were improved for students with higher levels of responsiveness, whereas the least responsive students (i.e., a small minority of students who argued mainly against the usefulness of learning mathematics in their essays) did not profit from the intervention: On the contrary, their utility value beliefs were significantly lower after the intervention than those of comparable students in the control group. The students who were minimally responsive tended to be male, to lack conscientiousness, and to have negative mathematics-related utility value beliefs prior to the intervention. The results of Study 3 thus not only indicate that in the text condition the quality of students’ relevance essays was more important for the intervention effects than in the quotations condition. They also suggest that boys, unconscientious students, and students with negative initial utility value beliefs should receive particular attention when implementing relevance interventions involving activities similar to that of the text condition in Study 3.