Advertisement

ZDM

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 367–378 | Cite as

Does students’ interest in a mathematical problem depend on the problem’s connection to reality? An analysis of students’ interest and pre-service teachers’ judgments of students’ interest in problems with and without a connection to reality

  • Johanna Rellensmann
  • Stanislaw Schukajlow
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

Students’ interest in mathematics is important for their learning of mathematics, and the ability to accurately judge students’ motivational orientation is important for mathematics teachers. The aim of this study was to answer the following research questions: (1) Is there a difference in students’ interest in solving problems with and without a connection to reality? (2) Is there a difference in pre-service teachers’ judgments of students’ interest in problems with and without a connection to reality? (3) Can pre-service teachers accurately judge students’ interest in solving problems with and without a connection to reality? To answer these research questions, we administered a questionnaire in which we asked 100 ninth graders about their task-specific interest after they solved problems with and without a connection to reality. We additionally asked 163 pre-service teachers to judge fictitious ninth graders’ interest in solving the same problems. Contrary to our expectations, students’ interest in real-world problems was lower than their interest in problems without a connection to reality when task difficulty was controlled for. Further, our findings indicate an important discrepancy between students’ interest and pre-service teachers’ judgments of students’ interest. Pre-service teachers overrated students’ interest in solving real-world problems, and they underrated students’ interest in solving intra-mathematical problems. Moreover, the accuracy of pre-service teachers’ judgments of students’ interest was low and ranged widely across pre-service teachers. Implications for teacher education and classroom practice are discussed.

Keywords

Interest Students Pre-service teachers Diagnostic competence Real-world problems 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1998). Profiling the differences in students’ knowledge, interest, and strategic processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arkes, H. R. (1979). Competence and the overjustification effect. Motivation and Emotion, 3(2), 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Behrmann, L., & Souvignier, E. (2013). The relation between teachers’ diagnostic sensitivity, their instructional activities, and their students’ achievement gains in reading. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 27, 283–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beswick, K. (2011). Putting context in context: An examination of the evidence for the benefits of ‘contextualised’ tasks. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(2), 367–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bikner-Ahsbahs, A. (2004). Interest-dense situations and their mathematical valences. Copenhagen: Paper presented at the tenth international congress in mathematics education.Google Scholar
  7. Blum, W., Galbraith, P. L., Henn, H. W., & Niss, M. (2007). Modelling and applications in mathematics education. The 14th ICMI study. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blum, W., & Leiss, D. (2007). How do students and teachers deal with mathematical modelling problems? The example sugarloaf and the DISUM project. In C. Haines, P. L. Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling (ICTMA 12): education, engineering and economics (pp. 222–231). Chichester: Horwood.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boaler, J. (1993). The role of contexts in the mathematics classroom: Do they make mathematics more “real”? For the Learning of Mathematics, 13(2), 12–17.Google Scholar
  10. Borromeo Ferri, R. (2006). Theoretical and empirical differentiations of the phases in the modelling process. ZDM, 38(2), 86–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bürgermeister, A. (2014). Leistungsbeurteilung im Mathematikunterricht: Bedingungen und Effekte von Beurteilungspraxis und Beurteilungsgenauigkeit [Classroom assessment practices: Conditions and consequences of assessment practices and judgment accuracy]. Münster: Waxmann Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. Campbell, P. F., Nishio, M., Smith, T. M., Clark, L. M., Conant, D. L., Rust, A. H., et al. (2014). The relationship between teachers mathematical content and pedagogical knowledge, teachers’ perceptions, and student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(4), 419–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carmichael, C., Callingham, R., Watson, J., & Hay, I. (2009). Factors influencing the development of middle school students’ interest in statistical literacy. Statistics Education Research Journal, 8(1), 62–81.Google Scholar
  14. Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Evens, M., Elen, J., & Depaepe, F. (2015). Developing pedagogical content knowledge: Lessons learned from intervention studies. Education Research International, 2015, 1–23. doi: 10.1155/2015/790417.
  17. Galbraith, P. L., & Stillman, G. (2006). A framework for identifying student blockages during transitions in the modelling process. ZDM, 38(2), 143–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Givvin, K. B., Stipek, D. J., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). In the eyes of the beholder: Students’ and teachers’ judgments of students’ motivation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(3), 321–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Carter, S. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harackiewicz, J. M., Tibbetts, Y., Canning, E., & Hyde, J. S. (2014). Harnessing values to promote motivation in education. Motivational Interventions, 18, 71–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hattie, J. (2013). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Helmke, A., & Schrader, F.-W. (1987). Interactional effects of instructional quality and teacher judgement accuracy on achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hidi, S., Renninger, K. A., & Krapp, A. (2004). Interest, a motivational variable that combines affective and cognitive functioning. In D. Y. Dai & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J., et al. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries. Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Washington, DC: NCES.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kaiser-Meßmer, G. (1986). Anwendungen im Mathematikunterricht [Applications in mathematics classrooms]. Bad Salzdetfurth: Franzbecker.Google Scholar
  28. Karing, C. (2009). Diagnostische Kompetenz von Grundschul- und Gymnasiallehrkräften im Leistungsbereich und im Bereich Interessen [Diagnostic competence of elementary and secondary school teachers in the domains of competence and interests]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 23(34), 197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karing, C., Dörfler, T., & Artelt, C. (2013). How accurate are teacher and parent judgements of lower secondary school children’s test anxiety? Educational Psychology, 1–17.Google Scholar
  30. Köller, O., Baumert, J., & Schnabel, K. (2001). Does interest matter? The relationship between academic interest and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(5), 448–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Krapp, A. (2000). Interest and human development during adolescence: An educational–psychological approach. In J. Heckhausen (Ed.), Motivational psychology of human development (pp. 109–128). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  32. Krug, A., & Schukajlow, S. (2013). Problems with and without connection to reality and students’ task-specific interest. In A. M. Lindmeier & A. Heinze (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 209–216). Kiel: PME.Google Scholar
  33. López, C. L., & Sullivan, H. J. (1992). Effect of personalization of instructional context on the achievement and attitudes of Hispanic students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(4), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McMillan, J. H., & Hearn, J. (2008). Student self-assessment: The key to stronger student motivation and higher achievement. Educational Horizons, 87(1), 40–49.Google Scholar
  35. Meyer, M. R., Dekker, T., & Querelle, N. (2001). Context in mathematics curricula. Mathematics teaching in the middle school, 6(9), 522.Google Scholar
  36. Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 424–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Murayama, K., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., & vom Hofe, R. (2013). Predicting long-term growth in students’ mathematics achievement: The unique contributions of motivation and cognitive strategies. Child Development, 84(4), 1475–1490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Muthén, B. O., & Satorra, A. (1995). Complex sample data in structural equation modeling. Sociological Methodology, 25, 267–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  40. Niss, M., Blum, W., & Galbraith, P. L. (2007). Introduction. In W. Blum, P. L. Galbraith, H.-W. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study (pp. 1–32). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Ostermann, A., Leuders, T., & Nückles, M. (2015). Wissen, was Schülerinnen und Schülern schwer fällt. Welche Faktoren beeinflussen die Schwierigkeitseinschätzung von Mathematikaufgaben? [Knowing what students know. Which factors influence teachers’ estimation of task difficulty?]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 36(1), 45–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rellensmann, J., & Schukajlow, S. (2016). Are mathematical problems boring? Boredom while solving problems with and without a connection to reality from students’ and pre-service teachers’ perspectives. In C. Csíkos, A. Rausch, & J. Szitányi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 40th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 131–138). Szeged: PME.Google Scholar
  43. Renninger, K. A. (1998). What are the roles of individual interest, task difficulty, and gender in student comprehension? In L. Hoffmann, J. Baumert, A. Krapp, & K. A. Renninger (Eds.), Interest and learning: Proceedings of the Seeon Conference on interest and gender (pp. 228–238). Kiel, Germany: IPN.Google Scholar
  44. Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2016). The power of interest for motivation and engagement. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Salkind, N. J. (2006). Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  46. Schiefele, U. (2001). The role of interest in motivation and learning. In J. M. Collis & S. Messick (Eds.), Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement (pp. 163–194). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  47. Schukajlow, S. (2011). Mathematisches Modellieren. Schwierigkeiten und Strategien von Lernenden als Bausteine einer lernprozessorientierten Didaktik der neuen Aufgabenkultur [Mathematical Modelling. Difficulties and strategies of learners as a means for a learning process-oriented didactic of problem posing]. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  48. Schukajlow, S. (2015). Is boredom important for students’ performance? In K. Krainer & N. Vondrová (Eds.), Proceedings of the ninth congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1273–1279). Prague: Charles University.Google Scholar
  49. Schukajlow, S., & Krug, A. (2014a). Are interest and enjoyment important for students’ performance? In C. Nicol, S. Oesterle, P. Liljedahl, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the joint meeting of PME 38 and PME-NA 36 (Vol. 5, pp. 129–136). Vancouver: PME.Google Scholar
  50. Schukajlow, S., & Krug, A. (2014b). Do multiple solutions matter? Prompting multiple solutions, interest, competence, and autonomy. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(4), 497–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schukajlow, S., Krug, A., & Rakoczy, K. (2015). Effects of prompting multiple solutions for modelling problems on students’ performance. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(3), 393-417.Google Scholar
  52. Schukajlow, S., & Leiss, D. (2011). Selbstberichtete Strategienutzung und mathematische Modellierungskompetenz [Self-reported use of strategies and mathematical modelling]. Journal für Mathematikdidaktik, 32(1), 53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schukajlow, S., Leiss, D., Pekrun, R., Blum, W., Müller, M., & Messner, R. (2012). Teaching methods for modelling problems and students’ task-specific enjoyment, value, interest and self-efficacy expectations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(2), 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stender, P., & Kaiser, G. (2015). Scaffolding in complex modelling situations. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(7), 1255–1267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Südkamp, A., Kaiser, J., & Möller, J. (2012). Accuracy of teachers’ judgments of students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Südkamp, A., Möller, J., & Pohlmann, B. (2008). Der Simulierte Klassenraum: Eine experimentelle Untersuchung zur diagnostischen Kompetenz [The simulated classroom: An experimental study on diagnostic competence]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 22(34), 261–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tanaka, A., & Murayama, K. (2014). Within-person analyses of situational interest and boredom: Interactions between task-specific perceptions and achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 1122–1134.Google Scholar
  58. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  59. Vorhölter, K. (2009). Sinn im Mathematikunterricht: Zur Rolle von mathematischen Modellierungsaufgaben bei der Sinnkonstruktion von Schülerinnen und Schülern [Personal meaning in the mathematics instruction: On the role of mathematical modelling problems for students’ construction of meaning] (Vol. 27). Opladen: Budrich.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© FIZ Karlsruhe 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options