Abstract
Control-value theory suggests that students’ control and value appraisals mediate the relation between contextual supports and student emotions in formal learning settings; however, this theory has not been tested in informal learning contexts. Understanding mechanisms for instructional support in informal learning contexts can inform the design of effective instruction both in and out of school. In this study, we tested control-value theory by examining whether youths’ momentary appraisals of control and value for activities mediate the relation between program quality indicators and state emotions in summer STEM programs focused on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics for middle- and high-school youth. Participants were 203 youth aged 10–16 years attending nine summer STEM programs in the US. Youth ranged in age from 10 to 16. Data were collected via the experience sampling method and video recordings. Trained coders reviewed video footage and coded for program quality. Structural equation modeling demonstrated that most program quality variables explored were not predictive of youths’ appraisals of control and value, but state emotions varied based on program quality. Youth reported lower boredom when active participation and higher-order thinking were rated as high by trained observers. Youth also reported high excitement when activities involved high levels of higher-order thinking. High appraisals of control were associated with high levels of happiness and excitement and low levels of frustration, whereas high appraisals of value predicted high levels of frustration. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Youth reported their interest on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all true) to 4 (really true) assessing their interest in STEM domains (e.g. I am interested in science; Vandell et al., 2008).
References
Adams, J. D., & Gupta, P. (2013). I learn more here than I do in school. Honestly, I wouldn’t lie about that: Creating space for agency and identity around science. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 4(2), 87–104.
Becker, E. S., Goetz, T., Morger, V., & Ranellucci, J. (2014). The importance of teachers’ emotions and instructional behavior for their students’ emotions—an experience sampling analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 43, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.05.002
Beymer, P. N., Rosenberg, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Naftzger, N. J. (2018). Examining relationships among choice, affect, and engagement in summer stem programs. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 1178–1191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0814-9
Bieg, M., Goetz, T., Sticca, F., Brunner, E., Becker, E., Morger, V., & Hubbard, K. (2017). Teaching methods and their impact on students’ emotions in mathematics: An experience-sampling approach. The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 49(3), 411–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0840-1
Bohnert, A. M., Richards, M. H., Kolmodin, K. E., & Lakin, B. L. (2008). Young urban African American adolescents’ experience of discretionary time activities. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18(3), 517–539. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00569.x
Dabney, K. P., Tai, R. H., Almarode, J. T., Miller-Friedman, J. L., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Hazari, Z. (2012). Out-of-school time science activities and their association with career interest in stem. International Journal of Science Education, 2(1), 63–79.
DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., & Schutz, P. A. (2014). Researching race within educational psychology contexts. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.957828
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of after-school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3–4), 294–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9300-6
Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Institute of Medicine (NAS) * National Academy of Sciences National Research Council.
Fong, C. J., Alejandro, A. J., Krou, M. R., Segovia, J., & Johnston-Ashton, K. (2019). Ya’at’eeh: Race-reimaged belongingness factors, academic outcomes, and goal pursuits among indigenous community college students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 59, 101805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101805
Forum for Youth Investment. (2012). Youth program quality assessment. In: David P (Ed.), Weikart center for youth program quality.
Frenzel, A. C., Becker-Kurz, B., Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., & Lüdtke, O. (2018). Emotion transmission in the classroom revisited: A reciprocal effects model of teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(5), 628–639. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000228
Goetz, T., Bieg, M., & Hall, N. C. (2016). Assessing academic emotions via the experience sampling method. In M. Zembylas & P. A. Schutz (Eds.), Methodological advances in research on emotion and education. Springer.
Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Stoeger, H., & Hall, N. C. (2010). Antecedents of everyday positive emotions: An experience sampling analysis. Motivation and Emotion, 34(1), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-009-9152-2
Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., Hall, N., & Haag, L. (2006). Academic emotions from a social-cognitive perspective: Antecedents and domain specificity of students’ affect in the context of latin instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(2), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905x42860
Greene, K. M., Lee, B., Constance, N., & Hynes, K. (2013). Examining youth and program predictors of engagement in out-of-school time programs. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(10), 1557–1572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9814-3
Hektner, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2007). Experience sampling method: Measuring the quality of everyday life. Sage Publications.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Larson, R. W., & Angus, R. M. (2011). Adolescents’ development of skills for agency in youth programs: Learning to think strategically. Child Development, 82(1), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01555.x
Larson, R. W., & Dawes, N. P. (2015). Cultivating adolescents’ motivation. In S. Joseph (Ed.), Positive psychology in practice: Promoting human flourishing in work, health, education, and everyday life. Wiley.
Larson, R. W., McGovern, G., & Orson, C. (2019). Youth development programs: Supporting self-motivation in project-based learning. In K. A. Renninger & S. E. Hidi (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of motivation and learning. Cambridge University Press.
Linnenbrink, E. A. (2006). Emotion research in education: Theoretical and methodological perspectives on the integration of affect, motivation, and cognition. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9028-x
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Patall, E. A., & Pekrun, R. (2016a). Adaptive motivation and emotion in education: Research and principles for instructional design. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732216644450
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Wormington, S. V., & Ranellucci, J. (2016). Measuring affect in educational contexts: A circumplex approach. In M. Zembylas & P. Schutz (Eds.), Methodological advances in research on emotion and education. Springer.
Mahoney, J. L., Schweder, A. E., & Stattin, H. (2002). Structured after-school activities as a moderator of depressed mood for adolescents with detached relations to their parents. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(1), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.1051
Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Jackson, C., Miller, M., Walcott, B., Little, D. L., Speler, L., Schooler, W., & Schroeder, D. C. (2014). Developing middle school students’ interests in stem via summer learning experiences: See blue stem camp. School Science and Mathematics, 114(6), 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12079
Naftzger, N., Devaney, E., & Newman, J. (2015). National scan of 21st CCLC data, impact, and quality improvement systems project—findings report. American Institutes for Research.
Naftzger, N., Moroney, D., Schmidt, J., & Shumow, L. (2014). STEM interest and engagement study (National Science Foundation Grant No: DRL-1421198). National Science Foundation.
Parrisius, C., Gaspard, H., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2020). The transmission of values from math teachers to their ninth-grade students: Different mechanisms for different value dimensions. Contemporary Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101891
Payton, J., Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., Schellinger, K. B., & Pachan, M. (2008). The positive impact of social and emotional learning for kindergarten to eighth-grade students: Findings from three scientific reviews. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341.
Pekrun, R., Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2007). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: An integrative approach to emotions in education. In P. A. Schutz & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 13–36). Academic Press.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4
Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2014). International handbook of emotion in education. Routledge.
Pugh, K., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Phillips, M., & Perez, A. C. (2015). Supporting the development of transformative experience and interest. In K. A. Renninger, M. Nieswandt, & S. Hidi (Eds.), Interest, the self, and K-16 mathematics and science learning (pp. 369–384). AERA.
Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding the sociocultural influences on student motivation. In D. M. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning: Big theories revisited. Information Age Press.
Renninger, K. A. (2017). Interest and motivation in informal science learning. National Research Council.
Robinson, K. A., Beymer, P. N., Ranellucci, J., & Schmidt, J. A. (2020). Momentary emotion profiles in high school science and their relations to control, value, achievement, and science career intentions. Motivation Science. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000174
Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An r package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Schmidt, J. A., Rosenberg, J. M., & Beymer, P. N. (2018). A person-in-context approach to student engagement in science: Examining learning activities and choice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21409
Shah, A. M., Wylie, C. E., Gitomer, D., & Noam, G. (2014). Development of the dimensions of success (DoS) observation tool for the out of school time STEM field: Refinement, field-testing and establishment of psychometric properties. PEAR–Program in Education, Afterschool, and Resiliency.
Shernoff, D. J., & Vandell, D. L. (2007). Engagement in after-school program activities: Quality of experience from the perspective of participants. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(7), 891–903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-007-9183-5
Simonton, K. L., & Garn, A. C. (2020). Control–value theory of achievement emotions: A closer look at student value appraisals and enjoyment. Learning and Individual Differences, 81, 101910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101910
Smith, C., & Hohmann, C. (2005). High/scope youth PQA technical report: Full findings from the Youth PQA validation study. High/Scope Press.
Thomas, C. L., & Cassady, J. C. (2019). The influence of personality factors, value appraisals, and control appraisals on cognitive test anxiety. Psychology in the Schools, 56(10), 1568–1582. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22303
Vandell, D. L., Shernoff, D. J., Pierce, K. M., Bolt, D. M., Dadisman, K., & Brown, B. B. (2005). Activities, engagement, and emotion in after-school programs (and elsewhere). In H. B. Weiss, P. M. D. Little, & S. M. Bouffard (Eds.), New directions for youth development: No. 105 participation in youth programs: Enrollment, attendance, and engagement. Jossey-Bass.
Vandell, D. L., Warschauer, M., O’Cadiz, M. P., & Hall, V. (2008). Two year evaluation study of the Tiger Woods Learning Center: Volume I, II, III. Tiger Woods Foundation.
Yohalem, N., Wilson-Ahlstrom, A., Fischer, S., & Shinn, M. (2009). Measuring youth program quality: A guide to assessment tools (2nd ed.). The Forum for Youth Investment.
Zirkel, S., Garcia, J. A., & Murphy, M. C. (2015). Experience-sampling research methods and their potential for education research. Educational Researcher, 44(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14566879
Acknowledgements
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Grant DRL-1421198. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix:Youth program quality assessment items
Appendix:Youth program quality assessment items
Measure | Items |
|---|---|
Active participation | 1. The activity involves concrete experiences involving materials, people, and projects (e.g. field trips, experiments, practicing dance routines, etc.) 2. The activity involves abstract learning of concepts (e.g. talking about a topic, lectures, staff providing formulas, etc.) Examples from program observation: Youth took water samples and performed calculations based on their measurements to learn about water quality in their local bay |
Higher order thinking | 1. Staff encourage youth to deepen or extend knowledge (e.g. staff asks youth questions that encourage youth to analyze, define a problem, make comparisons, predictions, applications, inferences, generate alternate solution, etc.) 2. Staff has youth make connections between session activities and other knowledge or experience (e.g. youth's prior knowledge; personal interest; hobbies; goals; related careers; real world applications or issues, etc.) 3. Staff encourage youth in using their creativity, curiosity, or imagination (e.g. staff encourage youth to think outside the box; to use knowledge and skills in new ways; encourages wonder) Examples from program observation: Youth learned various construction skills, drew on that knowledge during a project design phase, and then employed those skills in the actual construction of an outdoor learning space |
Collaboration | 1. Youth work toward shared goals (in a group or individually) 2. Youth share their ideas and opinions about the content/structure of the activity Examples from program observation: Youth worked on ongoing group projects designed to create products oriented at communicating the importance of preserving marine ecosystems based on what they had learned during the summer program to their peers attending other summer activities |
Agency | 1. Staff shares control of activities with youth, providing guidance and facilitation while retaining overall responsibility 2. Youth are participating in activities that will eventually lead to the creation of a tangible product or culminating event 3. Youth are participating in activities that allow them to explore and discover new things on their own 4. Youth are making plans for projects or activities Examples from program observation: Youth planned and designed how to construct an outdoor classroom space |
STEM skill building | 1. Staff ask youth to make predictions, conjectures, or hypotheses (e.g. "if you …, then what will happen?") 2. Staff support youth in using a simulation, experiment, or model to answer questions, explore solutions, or test hypotheses (e.g. Youth run a robotics program to determine whether it does what they expect it to; Youth try an alternate way to solve an equation) Continued. 3. Staff support youth in analyzing data to draw conclusions (e.g. after an experiment, youth are asked to use results to make a generalization like "Your heartbeat increases when you exercise", etc.) 4. Staff support youth in collecting data or measuring (e.g. Youth use rulers or yardsticks to measure length; Youth count the number of different species of birds observed in a specific location, etc.) 5. Staff support youth in using tools of the field (e.g. youth use calculators for mathematics, ph-tests for biology, etc.) 6. Staff highlight value of precision and accuracy in measuring, observing, recording, or calculating (e.g. measurement error can impact an experiment or conclusion; measure twice, cut once, etc.) 7. Staff model use of STEM vocabulary terms (e.g. SCIENCE – chlorophyll, density, atomic, nuclear, geologic, light year; ENGINEERING – torque, currents, force; MATH – rate of change, slope, percent, etc.) 8. Staff support youth in using classification and abstraction, linking concrete examples to principles, laws, categories, and formulas (e.g. Mice, porcupines, and squirrels are all rodents, rodents are all mammals, etc.) 9. Staff support youth in conveying STEM concepts through symbols, models, or other nonverbal language (e.g. youth use diagrams, equations, flowcharts, etc.) Examples from program observation: Instructors led a discussion on the composition of salt marsh soil and how it forms over time |
Intra-class correlations of all outcomes.
Variable | Correlations | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | Value | Excited | Happy | Frustrated | Bored | |
Situation | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.06 |
Individual | 0.42 | 0.48 | 0.38 | 0.40 | 0.41 | 0.37 |
Program | < 0.001 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 |
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Beymer, P.N., Robinson, K.A., Naftzger, N. et al. Program quality, control, value, and emotions in summer STEM programs: an examination of control-value theory in an informal learning context. Learning Environ Res 26, 595–615 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-022-09439-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-022-09439-5