Self-determination theory
In Learning for Academic Choice, Paula Denton (2005) uses Self-Determination Theory to explain why choice is motivating for students. Developed and outlined by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan (2000, 2008), self-determination theory seeks to provide a framework for explaining and contextualizing research surrounding human motivation.
Deci and Ryan (2008) support Dewey's (1990) perspective that curiosity and a desire for growth are inherent in each of us but further postulate three fundamental psychological needs of competence, relatedness, and autonomy must to be met to sustain those aspects of humanity.
Relatedness - feeling of being cared for, belonging, and being a contributing part of a community
Competence - feeling capable of accomplishing a task, being good at what you care about
Autonomy - feeling that what you're doing is valuable and consistent with who you are
As you continue to read, keep in mind that these needs apply to you as well. There are discussion sections at the bottom of most pages so you may contribute to your competence need by asking questions, engage with others to contribute to your relatedness, and share your own version of a choice-focused curriculum for your specific students, school, and community.
Constraints are a well established and necessary element for teaching students how to direct their own learning (Castro, 2007; Davis et al., 2008; Thomas & Brown, 2011). However, the connection between them and how to enact a curriculum that both supports autonomy and provides the needed structure is often unclear (Jang et al., 2010).
So, how do we as art educators contend with the interplay between a student's need for autonomy, the functional constraints of a school classroom, and the curricular constraints we have established are necessary?
Deci and Ryan (2008) explain that intrinsic motivation is only achieved when one is self-directing their experiences. However, they also outline a continuum of multiple types of extrinsic motivations and categorizes them as either controlled or autonomous. The difference between being controlled or autonomous is the degree to which the participant understands and internalizes the need for the control (Deci & Ryan 2008). For example, when playing a game, one doesn't question the need for the rules. We understand that the rules are a needed control to ensure that everyone playing is treated fairly. However, school rules like the dress-code are often questioned and challenged by students because they don't always understand the reasoning behind the rule. Therefore, a certain amount of control is acceptable and expected, but the amount of control a person tolerates will change with the environment they're in.
When teachers "believe it is important for students to initiate behaviors, to learn from both their successes and failures, and try to solve problems for themselves rather than relying on the teacher to tell them what to do" they are being "autonomy supportive" (Deci & Ryan, 2008, p. 18).
Curiosity, risk-taking, and higher self-esteem were among the many beneficial qualities exhibited by students in autonomy supportive classrooms (Deci & Ryan, 2008).
Relatedness Thwarted -
Secluded
Students whose relatedness need isn't being met will avoid interaction with classmates and/or the teacher because they do not feel connected to or accepted by the group.
They may:
express anxiety when faced with collaborative work
have experienced instances of the teacher or classmates expressing through verbal or non-verbal cues that they are unwelcome.
seek frequent help from the teacher for issues that a classmate could help with
refuse to ask the teacher for help
seek frequent affirmation from the teacher
refuse to speak to the teacher
make more frequent mistakes due to a disconnect from classmates who will freely help/correct them when they are seen to be struggling
Relatedness Supported -
Sociable
Students whose relatedness need is being met will feel connected to and accepted by the whole group. They will freely ask for help when needed and provide help to others unprompted. They will discuss their work openly and provide constructive feedback to others.
To support relatedness:
allow students to freely move around the room and sit where they like, so they can discuss their work with whoever they feel most comfortable (except when unacceptable behavior makes this impossible)
encourage students to get to know one another at the beginning of the year with icebreakers and community-building games.
Introduce students to classmates that have previously worked with a technique or material that they are struggling with
hold regular critiques, so students can see what others are working on and receive encouragement from classmates
provide more frequent checks for understanding to those who are withdrawn from the group by asking specific questions and waiting patiently for an answer
Chat with disconnected students about life beyond the course content and attempt to connect them with classmates that have similar interests
use non-verbal cues to correct behavior whenever possible
Competence Thwarted -
Task Avoidance
Students whose competence need isn't being met will avoid participating in coursework because they feel unable to complete it successfully.
They may:
spend the majority of their time on task-avoidance by talking with classmates, playing games on a device, or texting
spend inordinate amounts of time accessing the assignment or gathering the materials needed
refuse or be unable to answer questions about why they aren't completing work
consistently turn work in late
express that they don't know what to do even when the instructions are explicit and simple
avoid sharing their work
Competence Supported -
Exceeds Expectations
Students whose competence need is being met will feel capable of completing assignments successfully. They will have a healthy view of failure that leads them to revise their work or process for future success.
To support competence:
encourage students with a compliment on what they're doing well before giving constructive criticism
give compliments without criticism
provide opportunities for classmates to give compliments on others' work
avoid comparing students' work when supporting the competency of one student thwarts the competency of the other
avoid expressing to a struggling student that the assignment is easy
provide struggling students with their next step and stay with them until you can congratulate them on completing it
ask struggling students to verbalize their next step
acknowledge when tasks are difficult or complex while reassuring students that they can do it
connect failure with opportunities (ex: "Your shading needs a bit or work, so that would be a great choice for your next goal.")
Autonomy Thwarted -
Lack of Student Voice
Students whose autonomy need isn't being met will not see value in the course assignments and experiences (Deci and Ryan, 2008).
They may:
frequently ask "why" they must do something
express that they won't ever use the specific content or don't need the class for graduation
appear bored
express frustration
turn in work only to maintain eligibility for after-school programs or athletics
complete work for teacher or parent approval
turn in only the minimum required to meet a benchmark set by the school, teacher, parent, or coach
Autonomy Supported -
Confident Student Voice
Students whose autonomy need is being met will engage actively with coursework because they understand the applicability of applied constraints and may go so far as to include them in their self-directed learning (Deci and Ryan, 2008).
To support autonomy:
provide ample opportunities to connect coursework to students' interests, feelings, and experiences
make "whys" explicit and experiential (ex: After students practice a skill, ask them to reflect on how the practice was beneficial.)
freely explain why particular constraints are in place even as far as apologizing for your lack of ability to control them (ex: "I'm sorry you can't eat in class It's a school-wide rule, and I'm responsible for enforcing it.")
encourage students to problem-solve around constraints (ex: "I'm sorry you can't eat in class. It's a school-wide rule. Is there something you could do to attempt to change the rule or another time you could eat your snack?")
provide as much choice as possible without thwarting the students' competence
Amotivation -
Need Substitutes
Amotivation according to Deci and Ryan (2000) occurs when all needs are thwarted and a person lacks any extrinsic or intrinsic motivation. They go on to explain that, "in situations in which need satisfaction cannot be achieved, people's inherent tendency toward activity and organization will lead to protective responses - that is, to the best accommodation possible" (Deci and Ryan, 2000, p. 249).
Deci (1980) calls these accommodations "need substitutes' (p. 160). He describes these as responses generated to attempt to fill an unmet need. When a need is unable to be met, need substitutes provide an alternate comfort, but may have the side-effect of continuing to thwart the need (Deci, 1980; Deci and Ryan, 2000).
Deci and Ryan (2000) use two studies (Hodgins & Liebeskind, 1998; Hodgins, Liebeskind, & Schwartz, 1996) to provide an excellent example of how need substitutes can play out. These studies found that when autonomy and relatedness are thwarted, participants often attempted "trying to save face, blaming the others, and aggravating the distress rather than trying to mitigate the awkwardness" (p. 251). Unfortunately, saving face continues to thwart the relatedness need because the disturbance makes others uncomfortable, and it thwarts the autonomy need because their ego has taken control of their actions (Deci and Ryan, 2000).
Examples of Need Substitutes:
disruptive behavior may be an attempt to meet the relatedness and/or autonomy need
disruptive behavior may also be a consequence of an unmet competence need
making excuses for not meeting expectations may be a consequence of an unmet competence or autonomy need
Amotivation -
Addressing Need Substitutes
Students may suffer from more than one unmet need and the challenging task of the teacher is to see through the need substitutes to discover and attempt to meet the need of the student. Many students come to our classrooms with unmet needs in other areas of their lives, whether they be physiological or psychological. These need substitutes can become normal responses for them, so even if you've provided an autonomy supportive environment, mitigating these need substitutes may be a continual process (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Potential Mitigating Responses to Need Substitutes:
avoid addressing behavior concerns in a way that singles the student out in front of the group
offer assistance on the task at hand as opposed to simply re-directing the student (ex: I see you're wandering around the room a lot today. What can I help you with?")
apologize for any behaviors the student may find objectionable regardless of whether you acted inappropriately (ex: "I'm sorry I didn't make it over to your table to talk to you. There were a lot of students who needed my help today.")
discussion
You may view comments on the various sections of the site here. To participate in the discussion, please join the Plug and Play Group. You can set the frequency of notifications by changing your subscription setting, so you won't receive any messages you don't want.
references
Castro, J. C. (2007). Constraints that enable: Creating spaces for artistic inquiry. Proceedings from the 2007 Complexity Science and Educational Research Conference, 75-86.
Davis, B., Sumara, D. J., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2008). Engaging minds: Changing teaching in complex times. United Kingdom: Routledge. (Original work published 2000).
Deci, E. L. (1980). The psychology of self-determination. United States: Lexington Books.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449618
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life's domains. Canadian Psychology, 49(1), 14-34. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.libproxy.library.unt.edu/scholarly-journals/facilitating-optimal-motivation-psychological/docview/220818810/se-2?accountid=7113
Denton, P. (2005). Learning through academic choice. United States: Northeast Foundation for Children.
Dewey, J. (1990). The school and society and the child and the curriculum. United States: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1900,1902).
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588–600. https://doi-org.libproxy.library.unt.edu/10.1037/a0019682
Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. United Kingdom: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.