Running Head: INTERNAL MOTIVATION AND INTRINSIC



Running head: INTERNAL MOTIVATORS AND CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR

Comparing the Use of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivators in Classroom Discipline

Research Proposal

Betty Krygsheld

Seattle Pacific University

Edu 6975 Interpreting and Applying Educational Research I

Summer Online, 2006

I. Purpose of the Study

A. The purpose of this study is to compare the use of an extrinsic reward system to an intrinsic motivational system for classroom discipline, as well as examining if either system is more effective with a specific gender or socioeconomic group.

B. Grade 4 students will exhibit fewer reported disciplinary problems when a discipline system uses internal motivators rather than external motivators. The correlation between fewer disciplinary problems and the use of intrinsic motivators will be greater for the boys than the girls. There will be no correlation between any specific socioeconomic group and the use of internal motivators for discipline. There will be no correlation between any specific socioeconomic group and the use of extrinsic motivators for discipline.

C. The reward/punishment system of discipline, which leans on Skinner’s ideas

on extrinsic motivation, is being debated. Some suggest that we are influencing

children to adopt a “we want what we want” attitude. Others suggest that

extrinsic motivators remove the focus from learning and put the focus on the motivator. Using an action plan to test techniques based on internal motivation such as Marvin Marshall’s “Raising Responsibility System” should give validity to the use of internal motivation techniques in the classroom.

II. Previous research related to this study

A. This study is based on the study by Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F., &

Holt, K. (1984) called Setting limits on children's behavior: The differential

effects of controlling versus informational styles on children's intrinsic

motivation and creativity, and further study on promoting intrinsic motivation by

Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. (1994) called Facilitating

internalization: The self-determination theory perspective.

B. Ryan and Deci formed the Theory of Self –Determination. The study, Setting

limits on children's behavior: The differential effects of controlling versus

informational styles on children's intrinsic motivation and creativity is an attempt

to prove that theory by using a number of single subject investigations and

comparing the data. My study will attempt to test the Theory of Self-

Determinations through the use of intact classroom groups. By using intact classrooms, the theory can be tested in light of the effect that a true classroom environment will have on self –determination. Further, in the study Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective the authors tried to show that specific contextual supports led to greater integration of behavioral regulation. Again this study used a number of single subjects. My study hopes to use Marshall’s idea of “Responsibility-Raising” to provide contextual supports, however the study will use an intact classroom to see if classroom dynamics will causes the same effects as single subject studies.

C. This research is based on Deci and Ryan’s theory of Self- Determination. Deci and Ryan suggest that people have an inherent need of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Optimal function of a human depends on the extent to which these needs are met. William Glasser also spoke of these inherent needs in his Choice Theory. Glasser suggests that all humans have 5 basic needs: survival, power, love, fun, and freedom. Further, he stated that no matter what teachers use as an extrinsic motivator, some students will exert their need for power and simply not learn if they do not agree with the reason for learning. (Glaser 1986) The classroom management technique called the “Raising Responsibility System” as described in Marvin Marshall’s book, Discipline Without Stress, Punishment, or Rewards will be used as a context for providing the student’s inherent needs within the classroom Marshall believes that directly teaching children about levels of social behavior and the resulting relationships that each level of social behavior brings is key to this system. That instruction, along with reflective thinking by the children, will enable them to make good decisions about their behavior without the use of external motivators.

III. Literature search:

Brophy, J.E. (1998). Motivating students to learn. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Cameron, J. & Pierce, W.D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation. A

Meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 64 (3), 363-423.

Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119-142

Deci E.L., Koestne, R. & Ryan R.M. (1999). A Meta-analysis review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125 no.6, 627-668.

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1995). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human

Behavior. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination

perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119-142.

Glasser, W. (1990). The quality school. New York: Harper Row.

Karsenti, T. and Thibert, G. (1996). With Motivation Scale for Elementary-School Children: Refining the Extrinsic/Intrinsic Dichotomy. ERIC Publications (ED397139), 16 p.

Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F., & Holt, K. (1984). Setting limits on children's behavior: The differential effects of controlling versus informational styles on children's intrinsic motivation and creativity. Journal of Personality, 54, 233-248.

Marshall, M. (2000). Discipline without stress, punishment, or rewards. Piper Press.

Psychology dictionary. 2006 Retrieved August 17. 2006 from

dictionary/dictionary2.html .

Ryan R.M. & Deci E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: Classic definitions

and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.

Ryan R.M. & Deci E.L. (2000). Self –determination theory and facilitation of intrinsic

motivation, social development, and well being. American Psychologist, 5 (1).

68-78.

Simons J., DeWitte S. & Lens W. (2000). Wanting to have vs wanting to be: the effect of

perceived instrumentality on goal orientation. British Journal of Psychology,

91 (3), 335-351.

Vansteenkiste, M. Simon, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., Matos, L., Lacante, M. (2004).

Less is sometimes more: Goal content matters. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 96 (4), 755-764.

White R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered. Psychological Review. 66. 297-333.

IV Sampling

A. The population being studied is upper primary grade students enrolled

in Christian Schools International (CSI) schools in Washington State.

B.CSI schools in Washington State have an ethnic mix of 90.2% white, 4.4%

Asian/Pacific Islander, 2.5% Hispanic, 2.1% Black, and .2% American Indian.

Males make up 51.6 % of the population while 48.4 % is female. There are 17 CSI schools in Washington with a total population of 3361 students.

C. I will use convenience sampling for this study. I will select four of the larger CSI Schools. ---Each school must have a large enough population so that the grade level can be divided into two or more sections with at least twenty students in each section. Using eight teachers, one pair from each school, I will randomly choose one teacher from each pair to use system 1,which emphasizes external motivations as outlined in the Monroe Christian School teacher handbook for grades 3-5, and one teacher to use system 2, which emphasizes internal motivation as outlined by Marvin Marshall in his “Raising Responsibility System.” This will be a two-year study. In an effort to control the variable of teaching style, at the end of the first year, each teaching pair will trade behavior systems. Because convenience sampling is used, the results will not be widely generalizable, however since measures were taken to control variables, the results should be conclusive enough to initiate a more random study at a later date.

D. The sampling units will be intact classes.

E. Students from eight different classrooms will be studied. Two fourth grade classrooms will be used from each of the target schools. The number of students will be 228 the first year and 224 the second year, to tallying 352 student in all. This number reflects eight classrooms of 28 students on average. Since this is a two-year study, we will in essence be studying sixteen classrooms with and average of 28 students in each. A sixteen-classroom sample should be a large enough sampling to provide input on a comparative research study.

F. Stratified sampling will be used. Only grade four students from the chosen schools will be used. Those students will be randomly divided into grade level sections of 28 students per section.

G. This study involves no risk to the student, however arbitrary numbers to preserve confidentiality will identify students in the data. No permanent records of student names will be kept.

V. Variables

A. The dependent variable in this study is discipline interruptions. A discipline interruption can be defined as the student’s decisions to ignore classroom procedure, thus leading to one-on-one teacher intervention.

B. The independent variable in this study is the system of behavior management used for each class. Gender and socioeconomic status will also be independent variables. Data will be interpreted by tallying number of students who show discipline interruptions. Further that data will be broken down to indicate gender and socioeconomic group.

C. Some confounding variables exist. I will attempt to control the teaching style variable by having a two-year study in which the teacher pairs switch systems after 1 year. I will attempt to control the school atmosphere variable by using more than one school. Training on the use of the “Raising-Responsibility system” and the use of the discipline system used in Monroe Christian School will be provided to ensure consistent laboratory conditions. Individual class personality is yet another confounding variable. Since data will come from 16 different classes, this variable should be controlled. Teacher perception of what constitutes a discipline problem will vary from teacher to teacher. Having a two-year study in which the teacher pairs switch systems after 1 year however, will control this.

VI. Instruments/Measures

A. The Motivational Scale for Elementary-School Children will be administered at the beginning of the school year and again at the end of the school year in each of the sample classrooms. This measure will assess whether internal or external motivators motivate the student’s behavior.

Behavior interruptions will be measured using a tally system. Since each teacher will be trained on the used of tallies to mark behavior interruptions, researchers should be able to ascertain if there are more behavior interruptions in one system as compared to the other.

B. The Motivation Scale for Elementary-School Children measures the extent to which the child’s behavior is extrinsic or intrinsic motivated. Using the scale as a pretest will give a baseline for how the students function prior to treatment. Using it as a posttest will give researcher insight as to whether the student has moved toward one style of motivation during the year. If a difference in behavior interruptions is noted in one management style as compared to the other, information from the pre and posttest of the scale should be able to speak to causation.

The Behavior Interruption Tally simply records the number of times a teacher has to meet one-on-one with students who choose to make decisions that do not follow classroom procedures.

C. Content related validity for the Motivation Scale for Elementary-School Children (ESMS) was assessed by asking two professors and four graduate students of social psychology and education and four elementary school teachers to review the items. The content was judged to be valid. Construct validity of the ESMS appears to be high. The data obtained by using the scale replicated the results obtained with similar scales for high school and junior high students. Internal structure was also assessed and the scale was found to be valid. Closely related types of motivations show a more positive correlation, while unrelated concepts such as amotivation and intrinsic motivation exhibit a negative correlation (Karsenti and Thibert 1996)

The ESMS appears to be reliable based on the replication of results obtained with similar scales.

The Behavior Interruption tally should prove valid and reliable, since the same teachers will be using the same scale on while using different behavior management systems in subsequent years.

VII. Research Design

A. This study will be an experimental study. It will use a randomized factorial design.

B. The most serious threat to internal validity of this study is selection. Using the

ESMS as a pretest should shed light as to any significant differences between the

groups. Because the study will be carried on in several different classrooms

simultaneously, and the data will be combined, this threat should be minimized.

C. Generalizability of the results will be limited to private Christian schools in

the state of Washington since the population is similar to the study sample. The nature of the tool, behavior interruptions tally, will only be valid if the sample teachers take part in and follow training suggestions for use of the tool.

D. Operational Definitions

Internal motivation-- doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable. The results of doing the action result in no external rewards or punishment. (Psychology dictionary 2006)

External motivation—taking part in an action in which the primary focus is to obtain external rewards or avoid punishment. (Psychology dictionary 2006)

Raising Responsibility system—A method of behavior management in which students are instructed on social levels of behavior, and that instruction, along with reflective thinking by the children, will enable them to make good decisions about their behavior without the use of external motivators. (Marshall 2000)

Monroe Christian School behavior system--. A method of behavior management based on external motivation. When one-on-one intervention with a student is needed his name is check marked. After three checkmarks, he receives a detention.

Behavior disruption—This term has no specific definition. Scholars such as Skinner and Glasser have wrestled with operational definitions, leading Glasser to comment that the determination of what constitutes maladaptive behavior remains problematic. (Glasser 1990). For this study it will be operationally defined as the student’s consistent decisions to ignore classroom procedure thus leading to one-on-one teacher intervention. (This then excludes normal classroom reminders to ‘raise you hand’ etc.) This includes intervention by other teachers in the school as well as the principal. This definition will vary from teacher to teacher, but the variable will be controlled since this is a two-year study, and each teacher will use both behavior systems.

Behavior interruption tally--- The teacher marks down student name each time the student’s decisions to ignore class room procedure leads to one-on-one teacher intervention. This includes intervention by other teachers in the school as well as the principal.

E. Treatments -- In each school the teachers of the sample classrooms will work in pairs. Classroom A in each school will follow a behavior managements system based on the “Raising Responsibility” system. Classroom B will follow the behavior system spelled out in the Monroe Christian School teacher handbook for grades 3-5.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download