Methodological reflections

Ten years ago Simone Volet wrote about emerging trends in recent research on motivation (Volet, 2001). The shifts were related to the need for more variable research methods. Interest research, focusing on a multi-componential, dynamic and context-specific concept, seems to follow these shifts (see Renninger & Hidi, 2011). That said, measuring general interest with traditional one-off Likert scale questionnaires is not enough, and it is important to find more dynamic instruments and research settings.

Current research on interest has applied longitudinal settings and mixed methods (e.g. Krapp & Lewalter, 2001; Lipstein & Renninger, 2007). In addi- tion, research has recently been directed at integrating interest with different theoretical perspectives (Harackiewicz et al. 2008; Hulleman et al. 2008; 2010; Senko and Miles, 2008). However, the studies have often been correlative in nature and students’ interest has been operationalised to items in questionnaires (e.g. Tracey & Robbins, 2006; van der Veen et al., 2005). This kind of approach neither reveals students’ spontaneous expressions of interest nor the ideas and strategies behind their answers. Thus, instead of applying previously used ques- tionnaires or concentrating on developing new ones, mainly qualitative methods were applied in this work, with the exception of Study 4 which included the Likert scale questionnaire as a background to the diaries. The original studies follow the trend of longitudinal settings (Study 3, Study 2) and mixed methods (Study 2, Study 4; in addition, in Study 3 qualitative data were connected with GPA). Study 2 also aimed at integrating different theoretical perspectives, that is, individual interest and future goals.

Studies 1 and 3 utilised material which was not primarily collected for research purposes. Study 1 showed that even from the short, open-ended, written explanations of disciplinary choices some aspects of individual interest could be identified. The veterinary students’ portfolios in Study 3 offered rich data for analysing the students’ ideas of their three-year Bachelor studies. Material from both studies allowed us to explore how the students spontaneously used the con- cept of interest. Study 1 was a one-off study with a single data collection point, whereas the portfolios offered an opportunity to follow the veterinary students longitudinally. In addition, the portfolios of the veterinary students could be connected to the data of their grade point averages.

Study 2 was based on retrospective interviews. Interviewing was a suitable method to analyse the role of individual interest because interest could be approached both directly and indirectly by discussing with the students different aspects of learning and studying. Semi-structured interviews made it possible to

flexibly deepen and check the students’ answers when needed. In addition, the interview settings were designed to encourage free, open-ended responses. Study 2 was not a follow-up study in the sense of several repeated measures. However, the interviewees were selected on the basis of Study 1 (i.e. on their answers to the question why did they choose their major), and the material of Study 1 was a starting point of the interviews and a basis for further analyses of interest devel- opment.

Retrospective interviews have an inherent limitation that answers referring to the past may be slanted by the present (Silverman, 2006), which should be taken into account in Study 2. In addition, in Study 3 the veterinary students’ pre- assignments were based on expectations and the summaries on retrospection, the summaries then having similar limitations as the interviews. Because of the limi- tations of the data in the previous studies, Study 4 focused on a method which could have some benefits over prospective or retrospective designs. The diary method seemed promising both in measuring everyday studying and in unfold- ing dynamic phenomena such as interest. On the other hand, because diaries usually demand frequent reporting, they may place an extra burden on partici- pants (Bolger et al., 2003). The awareness of this burden set limits to the length of the diaries and to the number of data collection points.

The studies in this thesis were explorative in nature without any strong hypotheses. However, the chosen definitions of interest directed the planning of the interview protocol in Study 2, and the design of the diary in Study 4. In addi- tion, the theoretical frame of reference was behind the qualitative content analy- ses. In order to check reliability, myself and my fellow researchers first inde- pendently read the material, and the final categorisation of the data was always based on negotiations after the independent round. In addition, unclear cases were negotiated together until an agreement was found. A specific feature that can be argued to increase reliability is that the first coder was a psychologist and the second coder a veterinarian and, hence, they brought different perspectives to the data. In addition, in Studies 2 and 4, which were based on instruments designed particularly for this work, a third coder was used.

The data of the interviews conducted in Study 2 were especially rich. There- fore, the qualitative content analysis was conducted in various stages and con- sisted of several cyclic processes. However, as Silverman (2006) points out, qualitative interviewing is a “seductive” approach. It is always based on the in- teraction between the interviewer and the interviewees, and the context of the interview influences this interaction. The interviews were conducted within the university context familiar both to the interviewers and the interviewees, and this familiarity added to the probability of mutual understanding. However, the re- sults of the interviews are never mirror reflections of reality (Hirsjärvi & Hurme, 2001; Miller & Glassner, 2004). In addition, in all its richness the interview data

offered several alternatives for exploring the points of view of the interviewees, and for selecting and categorising the most important results.

Some of the methodological limitations were common to all of the measures. They all represent self-reports, which are always dependent on the respondents’ motivation to participate. Qualitative self-reports may also reflect respondents’ conceptual competence or ideas of what are acceptable answers. In addition, the samples especially in Studies 2 and 4 were small. Therefore, one should be care- ful not to draw too firm conclusions or generalisations from the results. How- ever, this is not the basic aim of qualitative research anyhow (Silverman, 2006). Instead, the data reveal the differences between the students and the uniqueness of their motivation in a way that is not possible to reach with quantitative self- reports.

It seems impossible to measure interest completely without self-reports because of its experiential nature. However, methods that do not rely on self- reports, for example observation of group work, analysis of students’ essays or their distribution of time, might complement self-reports. In addition, experience sampling method, which enables one to explore students’ activities within their context of occurrence, is possibly not as sensitive to the problems of the self- reports as more traditional interviews or questionnaires (Bolger et al., 2003).

All in all, the four original studies comprise a whole in which the parts com- plement each other. The setting in Study 1 is cross-sectional, consisting of rela- tively large questionnaire data from three different faculties. In Study 2, a sam- ple of the students from the first study participated in the interviews, which aimed at deepening the results of the first study in two different faculties. Study 3 concentrated on the single faculty in order to follow the same students even further and in more detail. Study 4 aimed at exploring interest on a daily basis to add to the previous studies. Even though the original studies were explorative in nature, as a whole they serve a many-sided picture of interest in university studies, and open up several directions for future research.

3.5 Conclusions

The present work explored interest mainly in two different learning environ- ments. The Faculty of Veterinary Medicine is professionally oriented, and in this sense resembles the Faculty of Law, whose students were among the subjects of Study 1. The Faculty of Arts provides more general academic competence. The curricula and instruction differ accordingly. These differences appeared to have a clear effect on the role interest currently plays in these study fields. However, the original studies indicate that interest should have an important role in both fields. Situational interest can be maintained by captivating instruction and col- laboration and, at the same time, support development of individual interest. When individual interest develops, students are more able to self-regulate their

learning and to find their own ways to explore their interests. Well-developed individual interest helps students maintain engagement in their studies over time. Halliwell (2006) argues that graduate veterinary students should be omni- potential rather than omnicompetent. They should have questioning minds, the ability to critically assess literature, and good problem-solving skills. As its worst, an ever increasing factual material and heavy workload may hinder the growth of individually interested experts who are committed to lifelong learning. At the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine several reforms have been carried out over the last few years which may lessen workload and enable more interest- based learning. Because these reforms are new, their effects on students’ motiva- tion could be studied further. In addition, it is still important to stress the multi- dimensionality of students’ motivation, and to search the means to support it by developing curriculum, instruction and counselling.

At the Faculty of Arts well-developed individual interest is the essential strength which should be nurtured. It can be argued that this applies in any study field which educates students for a wide area of academic professions. When nurtured, well-developed individual interest helps students maintain engagement even in spite of a somewhat uncertain future. Further, a high level of interest characterises experts who not only have a broad and deep knowledge base but who are able to create new knowledge and push the boundaries of their domain (Alexander, 2003).

The study of veterinary students hinted that interest may be a part of studying and, still, studies may progress well. Thus, interest-based studying does not necessarily mean slower progress, much less long pauses or delays. It may mean, though, that individual variation in study pace should be allowed. Students should also be able to make choices based on their own interests, and get both time and support for these choices when necessary. This emphasis on interest could enhance students’ self-regulation skills and feelings of competence.

All in all, this thesis shows that it would be worth supporting interest in uni- versity and there is no reason to believe that this need is diminishing with reforms designed to increase efficient studying. Because individual interest is attached to personal values, interest is important not only because of high- quality learning but because of meaningful studying and, therefore, students’ well-being. Thus, by supporting interest-based studying it is possible to prevent students’ stress and exhaustion as well.

The original studies in this work were restricted to Bachelor studies. Hence, one of the future directions would be to continue the present work to the Mas- ter’s phase or even further to the future. For example, the veterinary students could be further followed to compare those students whose studying appeared to be based on external motivation to those students who seemed more independent and personally interested. If the future curriculum in veterinary medicine includes more freedom to choose, the relation between this freedom and

students’ motivation could be worth further studying. At the Faculty of Arts it would be interesting to study the relation between interest and efficiency further: to find out how far individual interest could bear, and how it is linked to other important motivational variables when completing a degree in a reasonable time. The reverse sides of interest could be involved in future studies as well. This far, most research has been devoted to academic interest but university students’ interests are not restricted to the academic world. These non-academic interests could be part of the search for an optimal motivational basis for qualitative and yet effective university studying.

REFERENCES

Ainley, M., & Hidi, S. (2002). Dynamic measures for studying interest and learning. In P. R. Pintrich, & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), New directions in measures and methods.

Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol.12, pp. 43–76). Oxford: Elsevier

Science Ltd.

Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 545–560.

Alexander, P. A. (1997). Mapping the multidimensional nature of domain learning: The interplay of cognitive, motivational, and strategic forces. In M. L. Maehr, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 213–250). Greenwich: Jai Press.

Alexander, P. A. (2004). A model of domain learning: Reinterpreting expertise as a multidimensional, multistage process. In D. Y. Dai, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.),

Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual func- tioning and development (pp. 273–298). Mahwah: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Alexander, P. A. (2003). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency. Educational Researcher, 32, 10–14.

Alexander, P. A., Jetton, T. L., & Kulikowich, J. M. (1995). Interrelationship of know- ledge, interest, and recall: Assessing a model of domain learning. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 87, 559–575.

Anderson, R. C. (1982). Allocation of attention during reading. In A. Flammer, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Discourse processing (pp. 287–299). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy. The exercise of control. NY: W. H. Freeman and company.

Barrett, L., Mesquita, B., Ochsner, K., & Gross, J. (2007). The experience of emotion.

Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 373–403.

van Beukelen, P. (2004). Curriculum development in the Netherlands: Introduction of tracks in the 2001 curriculum of Utrecht University, the Netherlands. Journal of

Veterinary Medical Education, 31, 227–233.

Biggs, J. B. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd Ed.), Buckingham: Open University Press/Society for Research into Higher Education.

Blumberg, P. (2005). Why self-directed learning is not learned and practiced in veteri- nary education. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 32, 290–295.

Boekaerts, M., & Boscolo, P. (2002). Interest in learning, learning to be interested.

Learning and Instruction, 12, 375–382.

Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived.

Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students to learn (2nd Ed.), New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Byrne, M., & Flood, B. (2005). A study of accounting students’ motives, expectations and preparedness for higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education,

29, 111–124.

Cavalieri, J. (2009a). Curriculum integration within the context of veterinary education.

Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 36, 388–396.

Cavalieri, J. (2009b). Veterinary student attitudes toward curriculum integration at James Cook University. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 36, 305–316.

Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: a practical guide.

Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271–315.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. (1988, Eds.). Optimal experience. Psycho-

logical studies of flow in consciousness. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Delle Fave, A., & Massimini, F. (2005). The investigation of optimal experience and apathy. European Psychologist, 4, 264–274.

Deci, E. L. (1992). The relation of interest to the motivation of behaviour: A self- determination theory perspective. In A. K. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.),

The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 43–70). New Jersey: Law-

rence Erlbaum.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human

behaviour. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002, Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research. New York: University of Rochester Press.

Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), Essays on

philosophy and psychology 1912–1914. The middle works of John Dewey: 1899– 1914 (Vol. 7, pp. 151–197). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1985.

Durik, A. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2007). Different strokes for different folks: How individual interest moderates the effects of situational factors on task interest.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 597–610.

Dweck, C. S., & Master, A. (2008). Self-theories motivate self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning.

Theory, research, and applications (pp. 31–52). New York: Taylor & Francis.

Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual

Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.

Fernandes, T. H. (2004). General panorama of European veterinary education. Journal of

Veterinary Medical Education, 31, 204–206.

Fernandes, T. H. (2005). European veterinary education: A bridge to quality. The Veteri-

nary Journal, 169, 210–215.

Frenzel, A. C., Dicke, A.-L., Goetz, T., & Pekrun, R. (2009, August). Quantitative and

qualitative insights into the development of interest in adolescence. Paper

presented at the 13th International Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Amsterdam.

Halliwell, R. (2006). Whither veterinary education – Have we lost our direction? Journal

of Veterinary Medical Education, 33, 309–316.

Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., & Carter, M. C., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 316–330. Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2002). Predicting suc-

cess in college: A longitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors of interest and performance from freshman year through graduation.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 562–575.

Harackiewicz, J. M., Durik, A., Barron, K. E., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & Tauer, J. M. (2008). The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations

between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 100, 105–121.

Heath, T. J., Lynch-Blosse, M., & Lanyon, A. (1996). A longitudinal study of veterinary students and recent graduates. 1. Backgrounds, plans and subsequent employ- ment. Australian Veterinary Journal, 74, 291–296.

Hidi, S. (2000). An interest researcher’s perspective: The effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on motivation. In C. Sansone, & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.),

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation (pp. 309–339). San Diego: Academic Press.

Hidi, S. (2006). Interest: A unique motivational variable. Educational Research Review,

1, 69–82.

Hidi, S., & Ainley, M. (2008). Interest and self-regulation: Relationships between variables that influence learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.),

Motivation and self-regulated learning (pp. 77–110). Theory, research, and appli-

cations. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development.

Educational Psychologist, 41, 111–127.

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 intellec-

tual functioning and development (pp. 89–118). Mahwah: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Hirsjärvi, S., & Hurme, H. (2001). Tutkimushaastattelu. [Research interview, in Fin- nish]. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.

Hofer, M. (2010). Adolescents’ development of individual interests: A product of mul- tiple goal regulation? Educational Psychologist, 45, 149–166.

Hoffmann, L. (2002). Promoting girls’ interest and achievement in psychics classes for beginners. Learning and instruction, 12, 447–465.

Hulleman, C., Durik, A., Schweigert, S., & Harackiewicz, J. (2008). Task values, achievement goals, and interest: An integrative analysis. Journal of Educational

Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B. L., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Enhancing interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 102, 880–895.

Hunter, J. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). The positive psychology of interested adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32, 27–35.

Jaarsma, D., Scherpbier, A., & van Beukelen, P. (2009). A retrospective analysis of veterinary medical curriculum development in the Netherlands. Journal of Vete-

rinary Medical Education, 36, 232–240.

Kauffman, D. F., & Husman, J. (2004). Effects of time perspective on student motiva- tion: Introduction to a special issue. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 1–7. Kember, D. (2004). Interpreting student workload and the factors which shape students'

perceptions of their workload. Studies in Higher Education, 29, 165–184. Krapp, A. (2005). Basic needs and the development of interest and intrinsic motivational

orientations. Learning and Instruction 15, 381–395.

Krapp, A. (2002). Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: Theoretical considerations from an ontogenetic perspective. Learning and Instruction, 12, 383–409.

Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, A. K. (1992). Interest, learning and development. In A. K. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and

development (pp. 3–26). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Krapp, A., & Lewalter, D. (2001). Development of interests and interest-based motiva- tional orientations: A longitudinal study in vocational school and work settings. In S.Volet, & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical

advances and methodological implications (pp. 209–232). London: Elsevier.

Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 27–50.

Lahelma, E., Broms, U., & Karisto, A. (2003). Lääketieteen opiskelijoiden tausta ja suuntautuminen [Vocational orientations of medical students, in Finnish]. Suomen

Lääkärilehti, 44.

Lens, W., Simons, J., & DeWitte, S. (2001). Student motivation and self-regulation as a function of future time perspective and perceived instrumentality. In S. Volet, & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and

methodological implications (pp. 233–250). London: Elsevier.

Lipstein, R. L., & Renninger, A. (2007). “Putting things into words”: The development of 12–15-year-old students’ interest for writing. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.)