How K-12 teachers can put self-determination theory principles into practice

Discusses how K-12 teachers can put motivational principles from selfdetermination theory into practice. To explain the ‘how to’ of autonomy-supportive teaching, they answer eight frequently asked questions from teachers: What is the goal of autonomy-supportive teaching? How is autonomy-supportive teaching unique? Does autonomy support mean permissiveness? How would I encourage students’ initial engagement in learning activities? How could I help students maintain their engagement? What would I say/How might I talk? How would I solve motivational and behavioral problems? How do I know if I provided instruction in an autonomy-supportive way? To answer these questions, we recommend the following classroom practices: take the students’ perspective, display patience to allow time for learning, nurture inner motivational resources, provide explanatory rationales, rely on noncontrolling language, and acknowledge and accept expressions of negative effect. >Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice by C. P., Niemiec & R.M. Ryan – http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/documents/2009_NiemiecRyan_TRE.pdf Abstract: Self-determination theory (SDT) assumes that inherent in human nature is the propensity to be curious about one’s environment and interested in learning and developing one’s knowledge. All too often, however, educators introduce external controls into learning climates, which can undermine the sense of relatedness between teachers and students, and stifle the natural, volitional processes involved in high-quality Self-determination theory (SDT) assumes that inherent in human nature is the propensity to be curious about one’s environment and interested in learning and developing one’s knowledge. All too often, however, educators introduce external controls into learning climates, which can undermine the sense of relatedness between teachers and students, and stifle the natural, volitional processes involved in high-quality learning. This article presents an overview of SDT and reviews its applications to educational practice. A large corpus of empirical evidence based on SDT suggests that both intrinsic motivation and autonomous types of extrinsic motivation are conducive to engagement and optimal learning in educational con texts. In addition, evidence suggests that teachers’ support of students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness facilitates students’ autonomous self-regulation for learning, academic performance, and wellbeing. Accordingly, SDT has strong implications for both classroom practice and educational reform policies. >Undermining quality teaching and learning: A self-determination theory perspective on high-stakes testing by R.M. Ryan & N. Weinstein – http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/documents/2009_RyanWeinstein_TRE.pdf Abstract: Using tests to compare nations, states, school districts, schools, teachers, and students has increasingly become a basis for educational reform around the globe. Although tests can be informative, high-stakes testing (HST) is an approach to reform that applies rewards and sanctions contingent on test outcomes. Results of HST reforms indicate a plethora of unintended negative consequences, leading some to suggest that HST corrupts educational practices in schools. Although there are many accounts of these negative results, SDT supplies the only systematic theory of motivation that explains these effects. In what follows we describe the motivational principles underlying the undermining effects of HST on teachers and learners alike. Using tests to compare nations, states, school districts, schools, teachers, and students has increasingly become a basis for educational reform around the globe. Although tests can be informative, high-stakes testing (HST) is an approach to reform that applies rewards and sanctions contingent on test outcomes. Results of HST reforms indicate a plethora of unintended negative consequences, leading some to suggest that HST corrupts educational practices in schools. Although there are many accounts of these negative results, SDT supplies the only systematic theory of motivation that explains these effects. In what follows we describe the motivational principles underlying the undermining effects of HST on teachers and learners alike. (3) The Journal of Educational Psychology increasingly is reporting findings relevant to student engagement and re-engagement that further show the impact of Deci and Ryan’s work. Here are two recent examples: >The effectiveness and relative importance of choice in the classroom (2010) by E.A., Patall, H. Cooper, & S.R. Wynn. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 896-915. Abstract: Examined the effects of providing choices among homework assignments on motivation and subsequent academic performance. Students were randomly assigned within classrooms either to receive a choice of homework options or to be assigned an option for all homework in one instructional unit. Conditions were reversed for a second instructional unit. Results revealed that when students received a choice of homework they reported higher intrinsic motivation to do homework, felt more competent regarding the homework, and performed better on the unit test compared with when they did not have a choice. In addition, a trend suggested that having choices enhanced homework completion rates compared with when no choices were given. In a second analysis involving the same students, the importance of perceived provision of choice was examined in the context of student perceptions of their teachers' support for autonomy more broadly defined. Survey data showed that the relationship between perceptions of receiving autonomy support from teachers and intrinsic motivation for schoolwork could be fully accounted for by students' perceptions of receiving choices from their teachers. The limitations and implications of the study for research and practice are discussed. Examined the effects of providing choices among homework assignments on motivation and subsequent academic performance. Students were randomly assigned within classrooms either to receive a choice of homework options or to be assigned an option for all homework in one instructional unit. Conditions were reversed for a second instructional unit. Results revealed that when students received a choice of homework they reported higher intrinsic motivation to do homework, felt more competent regarding the homework, and performed better on the unit test compared with when they did not have a choice. In addition, a trend suggested that having choices enhanced homework completion rates compared with when no choices were given. In a second analysis involving the same students, the importance of perceived provision of choice was examined in the context of student perceptions of their teachers' support for autonomy more broadly defined. Survey data showed that the relationship between perceptions of receiving autonomy support from teachers and intrinsic motivation for schoolwork could be fully accounted for by students' perceptions of receiving choices from their teachers. The limitations and implications of the study for research and practice are discussed. >Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure (2010) by Jang, H., Reeve, J.M., & Deci, E.L. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 588-600. Abstract: Investigated 2 engagement-fostering aspects of teachers' instructional styles – autonomy support and structure – and hypothesized that students' engagement would be highest when teachers provided high levels of both. Trained observers rated teachers' instructional styles and students' behavioral engagement in 133 public high school classrooms in the Midwest, and 1,584 students in Grades 9-11 reported their subjective engagement. Correlational and hierarchical linear modeling analyses showed 3 results: (a) Autonomy support and structure were positively correlated, (b) autonomy support and Investigated 2 engagement-fostering aspects of teachers' instructional styles – autonomy support and structure – and hypothesized that students' engagement would be highest when teachers provided high levels of both. Trained observers rated teachers' instructional styles and students' behavioral engagement in 133 public high school classrooms in the Midwest, and 1,584 students in Grades 9-11 reported their subjective engagement. Correlational and hierarchical linear modeling analyses showed 3 results: (a) Autonomy support and structure were positively correlated, (b) autonomy support and structure both predicted students' behavioral engagement, and (c) only autonomy support was a unique predictor of students' self-reported engagement. Discusses, first, how these findings help illuminate the relations between autonomy support and structure as 2 complementary, rather than antagonistic or curvilinear, engagement-fostering aspects of teachers' instructional styles and, second, the somewhat different results obtained for the behavioral versus self-report measures of students' classroom engagement. (4) Deci and Ryan’s work also has implications for understanding stakeholder engagement in school transformation. For example: > Large-scale school reform as viewed from the self-determination theory perspective (2009) by E.L. Deci. Theory and Research in Education, 7, 244–253. http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/documents/2009_Deci_TRE.pdf Abstract: Successful school reform requires that administrators, teachers, and students internalize the value of improved teaching and learning and of the policies, structures, procedures, and behaviors implicit in the reform. This is most likely to happen when school personnel and students experience satisfaction of their basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness while planning and implementing the