GATEways to Teacher Education A journal of the Georgia Association of Teacher Educators
pre-service teachers adopted different perspectives within a similar domain based on the focus of the question. Further insights into these distinctions follow below. Table 2 Responses to Items 2, 3, and 4 by Domain and Sub-Code
Total Expectancy a. Expectancy: affective b. Expectancy: cognitive c. Expectancy: affective/ cognitive d. Expectancy: will, drive, force Total Value a. Value: interest b. Value: enjoyment/ passion c. Value: application/ relevance Total Belonging Instructional Quality Peers Personal/ Social Factors
Definition of Motivation 46
Apply to Teaching 25
15
18
13
12
7
7 5
Obstacles
3
21
Discussion 2
18
14
1
8
4
6
2
4
8
1
7
3 13 7 6
For the second step of our analysis, regarding internal consistency, we looked across responses to see if individual pre-service teachers referred to the same domain when answering different items. Only four pre-service teachers maintained the same domain across responses to Questions 1-4: three with expectancy and one with value. Rather than advocate the same domain from question to question, pre-service teachers’ responses shifted perspective as the focus of each question shifted. In the third step of the analysis, we tried to determine motivational profiles, or patterns of response. When the general domains were coded, 41 distinct profiles were discovered for 48 participating pre-service teachers. When subcategories were used, a separate unique profile
VOLUME 28, ISSUE 1
existed for each respondent: pre-service teachers varied their understanding of each dimension across questions with one quarter of them drawing on all three of the motivational domains at least once. In sum, when asked to look at motivation from a variety of perspectives, pre-service teachers shifted focus depending on the nature of the question. When changing focus, their responses included a variety of perspectives, resulting in minimal consistency across responses, both within individual pre-service teachers’ responses and across all responses. Further, when looking for patterns within responses, we discovered almost as many profiles as there were pre-service teachers. They subtly altered their perspectives based on the context of the question. What pre-service teachers thought about motivation shifted based on what they were asked; how they responded varied according to whether they were defining motivation or identifying obstacles to motivation. Moreover, their responses to the different questions spanned two if not three domains of motivation. Perhaps their thoughts about motivation are not yet structured (cf. Kagan, 1992), or their thoughts are more complex than a single measure could reflect. Pre-service teachers, as shown by the variety of responses, have nascent thoughts and theories concerning motivation. As teacher educators, we need to build on these beginning thoughts about motivation. Pre-service teachers’ thoughts about motivation need to be supported, challenged, and developed throughout their teacher education programs both in courses and in field experiences. Instruction related to various theories of motivation such as goal theory (Ames, 1992) or self-determination theory (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991) could help pre-service teachers develop their evolving thoughts about motivation. Instructors and pre-service teachers also could discuss expectancy, value, and belonging within specific disciplines such as math (Middleton, 1995) or literacy (Oldfather & Thomas, 1998), as recommended by Turner and colleagues (2011, 2014).
PAGE 40