Linking Perceptions of Control and Signs of Engagement in
the Process and Content of Collaborative E-Learning
Rachel Harris1, Klara Bolander2, Marcel
Lebrun3, Françoise Docq3 and Marie-Thérèse Bouvy3
University
of Glasgow1, Karolinska
Institutet2, Université
Catholique de Louvain3
r.harris@udcf.gla.ac.uk,
Klara.Bolander@lime.ki.se, lebrun@ipm.ucl.ac.be, Docq@ipm.ucl.ac.be,
Bouvy@ipm.ucl.ac.be
ABSTRACT
This paper explores various
theoretical models relating to control and motivation. Following this, we
propose that perception of control is one of the crucial factors influencing
motivation and thus engagement with learning. We have focused on individual
learners’ perceptions of control and how this might be related to their engagement
with collaborative e-learning in terms of process and content. To assess this,
we have developed a questionnaire that draws on the many factors that could
influence control and motivation. Some preliminary descriptive results from a
trial of the questionnaire are briefly outlined.
Keywords
Control, Motivation, Engagement, Collaborative elearning, Self-efficacy;
Locus of control
INTRODUCTION
For e-learning to be effective,
we need learners to engage with the proposed learning activities. To do this,
it seems likely that learners will need to be motivated. We propose that
perception of control is one of the crucial factors influencing motivation and
thus engagement with learning. Within the EQUEL SIG on communication and
control, we have focused on individual learners’ perceptions of control and how
this might be related to their engagement with the learning in terms of process
and content. In this case, process is seen as including the use of tools for
collaboration to achieve a learning task.
Theoretical Background
Control and motivation
Drawing from authors such as
Deci and Ryan (1991) and Viau (1994), we identify ‘control’ as ‘being in
control’. This can be described as individuals feeling that:
- their behaviours are self-determined,
that they have mastery over what they do, and that they can make the
choices needed to succeed;
- the consequences of their behaviours
are dependent on them, there are no other external factors that will
interfere with their behaviours to influence the consequences of their
actions.
It can
thus be seen that synonymous with control are perceptions of autonomy,
self-determination, and self-judgement. Ryan and Powelson (1991) see these as
the “fundamental needs that energized learning prior to compulsory schooling”
along with ‘relatedness’, or the emotional and personal bonds that exist
between individuals in the learning setting and at home. Thus there seems to be
a clear link between the feeling of autonomy and motivation. Having autonomy
over one’s actions and control of the consequences of those actions influences
motivation.
Motivation
exists in many different forms and at different levels. Thus, while teachers
may aim to encourage the development of intrinsic motivation as it reflects the
“natural human propensity to learn and assimilate”, extrinsic motivation is
also likely to be a significant driver in the formal learning setting (Ryan
& Deci, 2000). It is therefore important to review whether learners feel
that tasks have been forced on them, or if they perform learning tasks with “an
attitude of willingness that reflects an inner acceptance of the value or
utility of a task” (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Ryan and Deci (2000) also highlight the importance of perceived
competence, or self-efficacy, particularly in relation to intrinsic motivation.
Referring to Cognitive Evaluation
Theory (CET) they argue “interpersonal events and structures (e.g., rewards,
communications, feedback) that conduce toward feelings of competence during action can enhance intrinsic
motivation for that action because they allow satisfaction of the basic
psychological need for competence”. (Although they stress that to enhance
intrinsic motivation, individuals must perceive both competence and autonomy.)
These elements or factors are also seen in the work of Viau (1994), whose
vision of motivation is based
on three factors that are grounded in learners’ perceptions of themselves and
their context. Viau highlights the
importance of individuals’ perceptions of:
- activity worth (utility, meaning of the
activity),
- their own competence to achieve this
activity,
- their control over the activity.
Motivation
and engagement
As stated by Viau (1994), control is a factor of
motivation, and motivation is indicated by engagement. Studies related to
engagement are grounded in earlier work that has focused on ‘dropout’ –
considered to be the ultimate state of non or dis-engagement (Tinto, 1975).
This highlights the importance of taking into account the problem of
disengagement in distance education and collaborative elearning. Developing
this area, Willis (1993) proposes to distinguish between institutional
engagement (integration of the student in ‘campus’ life) and academic
engagement (connected to factors directly linked with learning). He also picks
up on, as Viau did, studies of student perceptions about the nature of academic
involvement in learning (and not only observable behaviours). Academic
engagement is defined as engaging in the activities of a course program with
thoroughness and seriousness. Indicators of academic engagement are
cognitive (organising and planning his/her own work, entering deeply into
learning on his/her own), affective (being motivated, persevering,
taking pleasure in the course, being interested), conative (giving the
necessary energy and time) and relational.
Control
within collaborative e-learning
The above
informed the choice of categories used in the development of a questionnaire to
investigate the relationships between control and engagement. Early discussion
amongst the authors also highlighted that the underlying tendencies of
individuals to take control might be of significance. It was thus decided to
apply the concept of locus of control to the collaborative e-learning setting
(Rotter, 1966). Locus of control ranges on a scale from internal to external,
and varies according to context rather than being a stable personality trait.
An internal locus of control attribution is a sign that the individual has
internalised the reasons of his actions: the ‘why’ of his actions are situated
in his own needs. An internal locus of control attribution for a given task
means that the subject has either an intrinsic motivation or an internalised
extrinsic motivation.
The
context of collaborative e-learning directed the development of the questions
themselves. Thus, the focus of questions related to control and:
- the process of collaborative learning
activities, e.g. whether learners could make choices about what to do, how
to do it.
- the learning context, e.g. the extent
of direction and support from tutors, and the influence of their learning
group.
- the collaborative tools, e.g. whether
learners could choose to use what appeared to them as the best tools.
- any external factors, e.g. the
influence of their home environment.
MEthodology
Course context
In the first instance, the researchers investigated
a large group of subjects following an on-line course, with a broad range of
ages, background disciplines, social situations and computer skills. It was
hoped that this would reduce the influence of such context factors within the
relatively small set of respondents. Also, since the main interests were to
find out about links between engagement, motivation, and control in the context
of collaborative e-learning, there would need to be aspects of collaborative
work on-line.
The course under study took place between February
and June 2003. This is an obligatory course within a programme for
individuals training to become secondary school teachers in Belgium. The course
was considered appropriate because of the large number of students involved
(approximately 200), and the composition of people. The course is intended for
students coming from ten faculties with a background in anything from
literature to chemistry. This gives a broad range of age, studies, objectives,
cultures, occupations and also a very scattered population.
The course is designed in two parts, where the
first part (seven weeks) is lecture based, and the second part, which runs in
parallel with the lecture component for the first seven weeks, but continues
for a further seven weeks, is computer supported collaborative work. This gives
students the opportunity to use ICT and to get familiar with online
collaboration. There are aspects of deciding on a common theme, producing a
collaborative paper and cross-evaluation involved in the 7-week course. The
platform is iCampus, which is based on the Claroline eLearning tool developed
in Louvain, see Figure 1. The general pedagogical set up is presented to the
students during the first week: themes to be worked on, methods, planning,
evaluation criteria, etc.
Figure 1 – The opening screen for the
‘aggregation’ course, using the iCampus platform, incorporating a schema of the
course timetable. Available at http://www.icampus.ucl.ac.be/AGRE2221/
The questionnaire
A questionnaire was developed to assess students’
perceptions of control and provide an indication of level of engagement. The
design was based on the theoretical framework explored above; with the
hypothesis that “Sense of Control” may be one crucial factor among others that
influences student engagement in learning. A number of scales were created to
address the constructs identified above. The scales consisted of: Computer Ease
(3 questions); Self-efficacy (3 questions); Motivation (8 questions);
Perseverance and Engagement (5 questions); Control over Learning (4 questions);
Locus of Control (4 questions); Control and Collaboration (8 questions);
External Factors (3 questions) and Value (5 questions). Background demographics
were also collected, including variables such as sex, year of birth etc. The
questionnaire was developed and piloted in English, since that was the common
language of the researchers involved.
The questionnaire mainly consisted of structured
questions where subjects were asked to rate their agreement with a number of
statements from fully disagree (1) to fully agree (4) on a 4-point scale. There
was also an option of ticking an “X” for “does not apply”. At the end of the
questionnaire, three open-ended questions were asked about their feelings of
control, their engagement with learning, and other comments.
The questionnaire was posted on the web in December
2003, when students were sent an email invitation, asking them to complete the
questionnaire.
Analysis
At the time of writing, the data has been analysed
only by looking at frequencies of different aspects of engagement and
perception of control from the questionnaire. In a later paper the authors will
look at correlations between the different themes by grouping the questions to
get a value for each theme and then run statistical analysis in order to
examine the interactions across the themes.
Results
Background information
Sixty three completed questionnaires were returned.
Of these, 73% were from women. Only half of the respondents were full-time
students. Almost half (47%) had studied their course work at home, while 35%
studied on campus, 5% at the library, and 13% at work or in some other
location.
The following represents a selection of the results
relating to the factors described above. Percentage responses are given against
the original statements in the questionnaire, where 1 is “fully disagree”, 2 “rather disagree”, 3 “rather agree”, 4 “fully
agree” and X is when the statement does not apply.
Computer Ease – Competence
|
In general |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
X |
|
I feel confident using
computers. |
0% |
6% |
37% |
57% |
0% |
|
I feel confident using computers as a learning tool. |
5% |
21% |
38% |
36% |
0% |
Generally, respondents felt competent in using
computers, though this picture was less strong when using computers for
learning.
Self-efficacy
Before I
started the course
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
X |
|
|
I felt confident about the topics to be covered.
|
8% |
22% |
48% |
21% |
1% |
|
I thought it
would be difficult doing it over the Web. |
21% |
28% |
29% |
22% |
0% |
Compared to computer ease, there is a slightly less
positive feeling, though respondents still indicate that their perceptions of self-efficacy
in relation to the course content are high. There is, however, a wider spread
of perceptions regarding potential difficulties of learning over the web.
Motivation – before, during and after the course
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
X |
|
|
Before I
started the course, I did not think I would enjoy it. |
26% |
39% |
25% |
8% |
2% |
|
|
During this
course, I enjoyed the process of learning
- it was fun. |
19% |
21% |
39% |
19% |
2% |
|
|
After the
course, I wanted to learn more. |
22% |
30% |
26% |
22% |
0% |
From these descriptive data, the overall impression
is that respondent motivation levels fell slightly from before to during to
after the course.
Perseverance and engagement
(Percentage responses are given against the
original statements in the questionnaire, where 1 is “fully disagree”, 2 “rather disagree”, 3 “rather agree”, 4 “fully
agree” and X is when the statement does not apply.)
|
During this course |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
X |
|
I often gave up when I did not understand
something |
38% |
32% |
8% |
1% |
21% |
|
It was
important to me to do my best. |
3% |
24% |
43% |
24% |
6% |
From the above statements, it appears that
perseverance and engagement among those who responded was high.
Locus of control
|
After the course, I feel that |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
X |
|
Being in
control of my learning is important to me. |
2% |
3% |
42% |
47% |
6% |
|
I expected the tutor (teacher)
to lead the course more. |
8% |
35% |
26% |
18% |
13% |
There is a strong indication that respondents felt
that being in control of their learning is significant. Yet, how this occurs in
the course may be perceived differently among students. The second statement,
which suggests that some students expected more direction from the tutor, i.e.
that the tutor would take control more, demonstrates this.
Value
It was
important to me to take this course because
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
X |
|
Working in groups is a good initiation for team work in society |