RUNNING HEAD: MOTIVATION IN PROJECT-BASED LEARNING Teacher and Student Intrinsic Motivation in Project-Based Learning

This study examined the relationship between teacher and student intrinsic motivation in project-based learning. Participants were 126 Hong Kong secondary school teachers and their 631 students who completed evaluation questionnaires after a semester-long project-based learning program. Both teachers and students were asked to indicate their motivation in the program. In addition, students were asked to report the instructional support they received from their teachers. The results of hierarchical linear modeling analyses showed that teacher intrinsic motivation predicted student intrinsic motivation directly as well as indirectly through the mediation of instructional support. When teachers reported higher intrinsic motivation in the program, their students tended to perceive getting more support from them and to report higher intrinsic motivation in the learning experience. MOTIVATION IN PROJECT-BASED LEARNING 3 Teacher and Student Intrinsic Motivation in Project-Based Learning At the turn of the millennium the Hong Kong government initiated a large-scale education reform concerning all stages of education from early childhood to continuing adult education (Education Commission, 2000). Like the large-scale education reforms that have been launched since the 1990s in western countries (Fullan, 2000), the education reform in Hong Kong has been propelled by a strong demand from society that students learn how to meet the challenges of a knowledge-based and fast-changing society. Schools are required to promote not only subject area knowledge but also generic skills such as collaboration, communication, and problem-solving skills. To equip students with these skills, teachers are encouraged to use more student-centered approaches in teaching. Project-based learning is one of these student-centered approaches that have been recommended highly in the reform. Project-based learning is a part of the instructional approaches originating from Dewey (1938), who argued for the importance of practical experience in learning. In project-based learning, students work in small groups on academic tasks. The task can be in the form of investigation and research on a particular topic. The topic being studied usually integrates concepts from a number of disciplines or fields of study (Blumenfeld, et al., 1991). Students in a small group collaborate with one another to reach a collective outcome over a period of time. They pursue solutions to a problem by asking and refining questions, debating ideas, making predictions, collecting and analyzing data, drawing conclusions, and communicating their findings to others. This approach is widely believed to be a powerful teaching strategy that can enhance student motivation and promote self-directed learning because the learning issues usually arise from the problems in which students are interested (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). According to MOTIVATION IN PROJECT-BASED LEARNING 4 the Hong Kong curriculum reform proposal (Curriculum Development Council, 2001), project-based learning is described as a teaching strategy that will “enable students to connect knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes and to construct knowledge through a variety of learning experiences” (p. 87). Despite its popularity among education reformers, project-based learning is not readily accepted by all teachers in Hong Kong. Watkins and Biggs (2001) have poignantly commented that many innovations imported from overseas to Hong Kong are like organ transplants that are rejected. Project-based learning, as a new teaching approach from western countries, is expected to encounter skepticism and even resistance from local teachers whose cultural background is different from that of their western counterparts. A recent study (Tse, Lam, Lam & Loh, 2005) showed that, although student-centered teaching practices are officially recommended, most Hong Kong Chinese language teachers still employ teacher-led approaches to explain teaching materials to students. Their reluctance is understandable. The new practices bear little resemblance to either their current practices or to the methods they had learned and experienced as student themselves. While the benefits of project-based learning for students remain to be seen, few would argue that a key factor contributing to its successful implementation in the local setting hinges on teacher motivation in using this new teaching approach. Project-based learning will have a better chance to bring about the desired benefits, such as improved motivation for students, if teachers themselves have a strong motivation to experiment with and improve it in the classroom. According to the self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 1991), intrinsic motivation involves the highest degree of self-determination. It refers to having inherent enjoyment in doing the task. In the present study, we focused on intrinsic MOTIVATION IN PROJECT-BASED LEARNING 5 motivation because it is desirable to enhance intrinsic motivation in both teachers and students. Previous studies have demonstrated consistently the positive effects of intrinsic motivation on performance, self-esteem, persistence, and emotional outcomes (Deci & Ryan, 1995; Grolnick & Ryan, 1987; Patrick, Skinner, & Connell, 1993). The purpose of the current research was to investigate how teacher intrinsic motivation was related to student intrinsic motivation in project-based learning. Is the association between the two variables an indirect relationship that involves mediators such as instructional practices? Or is this association a direct relationship that does not involve mediators but simply reflects infection or modeling? Understanding of the underlying mechanisms that contribute to such an association will be helpful to educators who are concerned about enhancing student learning motivation in project-based learning. Instructional Practices as Mediator Instructional practices may be a possible mechanism that mediates the correspondence between teacher and student motivation. Previous research has shown that intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors of teachers may affect their instructional practices and, in turn, enhance or diminish student motivation. Several studies have indicated how contextual factors may affect teachers’ instructional practices. In an early study, Garbarino (1975) found that externally constrained (i.e., rewarded) teachers had a more critical and controlling instructional style than unconstrained (i.e., volunteer) teachers. Similarly, Deci, Spiegel, Ryan, Koestner, and Kauffman (1982) found that teachers who were led to feel responsible for their students’ performing up to standard were more controlling than teachers who were not. Teachers in the former condition were more critical of the students, talked more, gave more commands, and allowed less choice and autonomy. In a more recent study, Pelletier, Séguin-Lévesque, and Legault MOTIVATION IN PROJECT-BASED LEARNING 6 (2002) found that the more teachers perceived pressure from above (i.e., they had to comply with curriculum, with colleagues, and with performance standards) and pressure from below (i.e., they perceived their students to be unmotivated), the less their teaching was motivated intrinsically. Consequently, they became more controlling and less supportive of autonomy in their students. Different instructional practices are known to have different outcomes in student intrinsic motivation. For example, Ryan and Grolnick (1986) found that the more students perceived autonomy support in the classroom, the higher they reported self-worth, cognitive competence, internal control, and mastery motivation. In another study, Grolnick and Ryan (1987) found that non-controlling instruction resulted in greater interest and conceptual learning in students when compared with controlling instruction. Similarly, Cordova and Lepper (1996) found that a teaching strategy providing choices could produce dramatic increases in students’ intrinsic motivation and engagement in learning. In a recent study, Assor, Kaplan, Kanant-Maymon, and Roth (2005) also reported that children’s perceptions of their teachers as controlling aroused their anger and anxiety. These negative emotions would, in turn, enhance extrinsic motivation in children and eventually diminish their academic engagement. The studies reviewed above focused on the relation between autonomy-supportive instruction and student intrinsic motivation. Nevertheless, student intrinsic motivation is not only subject to autonomy-supportive instruction; it is also subject to a myriad of teaching practices, such as presenting challenging work to students, integrating real-life significance to their learning activities, stimulating their curiosity in the learning tasks, acknowledging their efforts or improvement, and providing them with useful feedback (see Stipek, 1996, for a review). These teaching practices are aimed at increasing the value and probability of success in learning activities so as to enhance students’ MOTIVATION IN PROJECT-BASED LEARNING 7 intrinsic motivation. They are based primarily on the major social-cognitive theories of motivation that have generated numerous studies in the past three decades (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). These social-cognitive theories include value-expectancy theory (Atkinson, 1964), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), attribution theory (Weiner, 1986), and goal orientation theory (Dweck, 1986). The teaching practices derived from these social-cognitive theories can be categorized as cognitive support for student intrinsic motivation because of their relevance to social cognition (e.g., self-efficacy, attribution, and goal orientation) and its impact on student intrinsic motivation. In recent years, however, researchers have argued that in addition to cognitive support, affective support also plays a decisive role in student motivation. For example, Meyer and Turner (2002) point out that e