Advertisement

ZDM

, Volume 50, Issue 1–2, pp 143–157 | Cite as

Do students value modelling problems, and are they confident they can solve such problems? Value and self-efficacy for modelling, word, and intra-mathematical problems

  • Janina Krawitz
  • Stanislaw Schukajlow
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

Posing modelling problems in class is supposed to increase students’ motivation. As motivation is assumed to emerge from task value and self-efficacy expectations, the present study considered both constructs with the aims to examine (1) whether students have different values and self-efficacy expectations concerning modelling problems versus dressed up word problems and intra-mathematical problems and (2) whether mathematical content influences task value and self-efficacy concerning different types of problems. We asked 90 high- and middle-track students (ninth- and tenth-graders) how much they valued modelling problems, dressed up word problems, and intra-mathematical problems and if they were confident they could solve these types of problems. All of the problems that we used could be solved by applying mathematical procedures from two different mathematical content areas (Pythagorean theorem or linear functions). The results indicated that there were significant differences in students’ task values and self-efficacy depending on the type of problem. Students reported the lowest task values and self-efficacy expectations for modelling problems compared with the other types of problems. Moreover, the differences between students’ task values (but not between students’ self-efficacy expectations) within the three types of problems seemed to depend on the mathematical content area. Intra-mathematical problems that could be solved by applying the Pythagorean theorem were valued higher than problems involving linear functions, whereas for modelling and dressed up word problems, it was the other way around. Implications for future research and classroom practice are discussed.

Keywords

Motivation Task value Self-efficacy Modelling Word problems Content area 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 191–215.Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, J.-L., & Karabenick, S. A. (2011). Motivation and students’ use of learning strategies: Evidence of unidirectional effects in mathematics classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 416–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blum, W. (2011). Can modelling be taught and learnt? Some answers from empirical research. In G. Kaiser, W. Blum, R. Borromeo Ferri & G. Stillman (Eds.), Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling: ICTMA14 (pp. 15–30). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blum, W., & Ferri, R. B. (2009). Mathematical modelling: Can it be taught and learnt? Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Application, 1(1), 45–58.Google Scholar
  6. Blum, W., & Leiß, D. (2007). How do students and teachers deal with mathematical modeling problems? The example of Sugerloaf. In C. Haines, P. Galbraith, W. Blum & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling: education, engineering and economics—ICTMA12 (pp. 222–231). Chichester: Horwood.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blum, W., & Niss, M. (1991). Applied mathematical problem solving, modelling, applications, and links to other subjects-state, trends and issues in mathematics instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 37–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bong, M. (1997). Generality of academic self-efficacy judgments: Evidence of hierarchical relations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 696–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bong, M. (2001). Role of self-efficacy and task-value in predicting college students’ course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(4), 553–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Butz, A. R., & Usher, E. L. (2015). Salient sources of early adolescents’ self-efficacy in two domains. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 49–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cooper, B., & Dunne, M. (2000). Assessing children’s mathematical knowledge: social class, sex, and problem-solving. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., & Meece, J. L., et al. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75–146). San Francisco, CA: Freeman.Google Scholar
  14. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 21(3), 215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) and N. Eisenberg (Vol, Ed.) Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (Vol. 3, 5th ed, pp. 1017–1095). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Galbraith, P. L., & Stillman, G. (2001). Assumptions and context: Pursuing their role in modelling activity. In J. Matos, W. Blum, K. Houston & S. Carreira (Eds.), Modelling and mathematics education: ICTMA 9: Applications in Science and Technology (pp. 300–310). Chicester: Horwood.Google Scholar
  18. 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
  19. Greer, B., Verschaffel, L., Van Dooren, W., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2009). Making sense of word problems: Past, present, and future. In L. Verschaffel, B. Greer, W. Van Dooren & S. Mukhopadhyay (Eds.), Words and worlds modelling verbal descriptions of situations (pp. xi–xxviii). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Harks, B., Klieme, E., Hartig, J., & Leiss, D. (2014). Separating cognitive and content domains in mathematical competence. Educational Assessment, 19(4), 243–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hulleman, C. S., Durik, A. M., Schweigert, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2008). Task values, achievement goals, and interest: An Integrative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 398–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jordan, A., Krauss, S., Löwen, K., Blum, W., Neubrand, M., & Brunner, M., et al. (2008). Aufgaben im COACTIV-Projekt: Zeugnisse des kognitiven Aktivierungspotentials im deutschen Mathematikunterricht [Tasks in the COACTIV project: evidence of the potential for cognitive activation in German mathematics instruction]. Journal für Mathematikdidaktik, 29(2), 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kaiser, G. (1985). Realitätsbezüge im Mathematikunterricht—Ein Überblicküber die aktuelle und historische Diskussion [Connections to reality in mathematics class—Survey of actual and historical discussion]. In G. Graumann, T. Jahnke, G. Kaiser & J. Meyer (Eds.), Materialien für einen realitätsbezogenen Mathematikunterricht (Vol. 2, pp. 66–84). Hildesheim: Franzbecker.Google Scholar
  24. Kaiser, G., & Sriraman, B. (2006). A global survey of international perspectives on modelling in mathematics education. ZDM, 38(3), 302–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A., Harks, B., Blum, W., Leiß, D., & Rakoczy, K. (2010). Leistungsbeurteilung und Kompetenzmodellierung im Mathematikunterricht [Performance assessment and competence modelling in mathematics instruction]. In E. Klieme, D. Leutner & M. Kenk (Eds.), Kompetenzmodellierung. Zwischenbilanz des DFG-Schwerpunktprogramms und Perspektiven des Forschungsansatzes (pp. 64–74). Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  26. Krawitz, J., Schukajlow, S., & Van Dooren, W. (2016). Effects of short-term practicing on realisitic responses to missing data problems. In C. Csíkos, A. Rausch, & J. Szitányi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 40th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 131–138). Szeged, Hungary: PME.Google Scholar
  27. 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, Germany: PME.Google Scholar
  28. Kultusministerkonferenz, (KMK). (2004). Bildungsstandards im Fach Mathematik für den mittleren Schulabschluss [Intermediate-level education standards for mathematics]. Munich: Wolters Kluwer.Google Scholar
  29. Lopez, F., Lent, R., Brown, S. D., & Gore, P. A. (1997). Role of social–cognitive expectations in high school students’ mathematics-related interest and performance. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(1), 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maaß, K. (2010). Classification scheme for modelling tasks. Journal für Mathematikdidaktik, 31(2), 285–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mac Iver, D. J., Stipek, D. J., & Daniels, D. H. (1991). Explaining within-semester changes in student effort in junior high school and senior high school courses. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meece, J. L., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1990). Predictors of math anxiety and its influence on young adolescents’ course enrollment intentions and performance in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Middleton, J. A., & Spanias, P. A. (1999). Motivation for achievement in mathematics: Findings, generalizations, and criticisms of the research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 65–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: a meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(1), 30–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  36. Niss, M. (2015). Mathematical competencies and PISA. In K. Stacey & R. Turner (Eds.), Assessing mathematical literacy: The PISA experience (pp. 35–55). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. 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
  38. OECD. (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework: Mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowledge and skills. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2).Google Scholar
  40. Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1995). Mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics performances: The need for specificity of assessment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42(2), 190–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Palm, T. (2008). Impact of authenticity on sense making in word problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(1), 37–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pietsch, J., Walker, R., & Chapman, E. (2003). The relationship among self-concept, self-efficacy, and performance in mathematics during secondary school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 589–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 459–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pintrich, P. R., & de Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schukajlow, S., Kolter, J., & Blum, W. (2015a). Scaffolding mathematical modelling with a solution plan. ZDM, 47(7), 1241–1254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schukajlow, S., & Krug, A. (2014). Do multiple solutions matter? Prompting multiple solutions, interest, competence, and autonomy. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(4), 497–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schukajlow, S., Krug, A., & Rakoczy, K. (2015b). Effects of prompting multiple solutions for modelling problems on students’ performance. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(3), 393–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 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
  50. 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
  51. Schukajlow, S., & Rakoczy, K. (2016). The power of emotions: Can enjoyment and boredom explain the impact of individual preconditions and teaching methods on interest and performance in mathematics? Learning and Instruction, 44, 117–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: A validation study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Verschaffel, L., & Greer, B. (Eds.) (2000). Making sense of word problems (Contexts of Learning). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & ZeitlingerGoogle Scholar
  54. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhu, Y., & Fan, L. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in intended curriculum: A comparison of selected mathematics textbooks from Mainland China and the United States. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(4), 609–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© FIZ Karlsruhe 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options