Learning processes can be divided into external and internal learning processes.
External learning activities are the observable actions students engage in, like problem solving on a worksheet or text discussions in small groups. Research has found, however, that it is not general activity that is connected with learning outcomes, but meaningful engagement within the activities (Graham & Golan, 1991; Chi, 2009). This phenomenon of meaningful engagement is described by internal learning processes. Hence, internal learning processes are the parts of students’ learning that take place in students’ heads during instruction, the students’ internal use of instruction. These processes have cognitive and motivational-affective aspects.
4.2. Internal Learning for Disposition Development 43
4.2.1 Motivational Internal Learning Processes
Motivational internal learning processes have been found to have profound impact on learning outcomes (Schiefele & Schaffner, 2015). At the same time, these motivational learning processes are connected to effective teaching (Seidel, 2015). In Study II of this dissertation, motivational internal learning processes are described by students’ intrinsic learning motivation as well as their perceived fulfillment of their basic psychological needs.
Intrinsic Learning Motivation
This dissertation characterizes intrinsic motivation by the fact that a learning activity creates joy and satisfaction and thus the action itself is a sufficient incentive for action (Seidel & Reiss, 2014). Intrinsic motivation is strongly connected to both, cognitive and motivational-affective learning outcomes. For instance, intrinsic motivation can further cognitive outcomes like conceptual learning (Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon, & Deci, 2004). Moreover, intrinsic learning motivation is found to be connected with students’ self-esteem (Pajares & Valiante, 1999; Praetorius, Greb, Lipowsky, &
Gollwitzer, 2010). The effect to outcomes might go through other parts of the learning process, (e.g. external learning activities that spark new internal learning activities).
Niemiec & Ryan (2009) conjecture that more intrinsically motivated students are more willing to engage in less interesting tasks and place more value on academic activities.
This added commitment translates into deeper learning and higher outcomes.
Several aspects of teaching are connected to students’ intrinsic learning motivation.
More stimulating tasks, for instance, are connected to higher intrinsic motivation (Guthrie et al., 2006). Also, the way tasks are introduced make a difference for students’
intrinsic motivation (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009).
Basic Psychological Needs
According to self-determination theory, three basic psychological needs underlie human’s motivation: social relatedness, support of competence, support of autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 2002). The theory of self-determination, in general, investigates the conditions supporting or hindering “the natural processes of self-motivation and healthy psychological development” (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Regarding the field of education,
44 Chapter 4. Individual Students’ Learning Processes and Development their important role in the learning process has been studied in various settings and for various cultural backgrounds (Chirkov, 2009).
Looking at learning outcomes, for adolescents, a sense of autonomy and related-ness is shown to promote their self-esteem (Allen, Hauser, Bell, & O’Connor, 1994) and influence their general self-perception (Diseth et al., 2012). Additionally, a fulfillment of the basic motivational needs is strongly connected to students’ sense of self and personality development (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Krapp, 2005). Tsai et al. (2008) connected the satisfaction of these needs to the development of students’ interest. Overall, the fulfillment of basic psychological needs and experience of intrinsic learning motivation during instruction can lead to positive affective learning outcomes in students (Kortha-gen, Attema-Noordewier, & Zwart, 2014). But it has effects also on the cognitive side:
Students that feel more supported in their autonomy, achieve better on long-term and short-term tests of conceptual understanding (Vansteenkiste et al., 2004). Jang et al.
(2009) also found that the satisfaction of the three basic psychological needs led to higher overall achievement in students.
These aspects of internal learning, again, affect other parts of the learning process. Research finds that the satisfaction of basic psychological needs is connected to a pattern of increasing classroom engagement in students over a school year (Jang, Kim,
& Reeve, 2016). Since it also enhances students’ willingness to communicate in class (Joe, Hiver, & Al-Hoorie, 2017), it shapes their learning opportunities during
teacher-student interactions in the widely used classroom talk. In addition, it is connected to students’ overall learning engagement (Zhen et al., 2017) which might translate into the pursuit of more challenging tasks or problems.
Furthermore, the satisfaction of students’ basic needs is also connected to teaching actions. Defering the learning process and considering the impact of teaching on development directly, teaching which addresses the three psychological needs has more impact on students’ motivational characteristics (Pritchard, 2009; Rakoczy, Klieme, &
Pauli, 2008). Regarding the learning processes’ connection to teaching, the satisfaction of students’ basic psychological needs has been connected to teachers supportive activities in class (Reeve & Jang, 2006). Moreover, the way in which teacher instruct and set tasks is connected to students’ satisfaction of all three basic needs (Niemiec & Ryan,
4.2. Internal Learning for Disposition Development 45 2009). Recent studies additionally indicate that it might be emotionally supportive teacher-student interactions that initiate the positive perceptions of autonomy support and social relatedness (Ruzek et al., 2016). Moreover, an overall positive learning climate can impact the satisfaction of basic psychological needs in students (Joe et al., 2017).
4.2.2 Cognitive Internal Learning Processes
Besides motivation, students’ cognitive learning processes are crucial for learning and development (Helmke, 2012). This thesis refers to students’ self-reported cognitive learning activity as “the kind of activity that really promotes meaningful learning”
(Mayer, 2004, p. 17), i.e. students’ reported information processing in terms of basic elaborations, meaning to be able to follow the instructions of the teacher and to connect information to pre-experiences. Other terminology in research includes higher order thinking, challenging tasks, or thoughtful discourse from the student perspective. At the same time, from the teachers’ side, the term cognitive activation is prominently used. Teachers who use cognitive activation support their students’ cognitive learning activities.
Regarding students’ learning outcomes, cognitive internal learning processes are in a cognitive-constructivist understanding useful for deeper understanding and processing and as such connected to better learning outcomes (Lipowski, 2015). Regarding cognitive learning outcomes, research shows that there is a link between students’ basic cognitive activation and students’ achievement (Baumert et al., 2010). More generally, cognitive learning activities are connected with cognitive development (Bransford, Brown, &
Cocking, 1999). On the motivational-affective side, studies also find effects of cognitive internal learning processes. For instance, when regarding so-called deep learning activities, D’Mello & Graesser (2012) find that learner’s affective states are not only activated, but continuously transformed.
In the connection to teaching, cognitive activation of students is seen as an important aspect of high-quality instruction (Klieme, Lipowsky, Rakoczy, & Ratzka, 2006). Cognitive activation includes shaping targeted cognitive activities for learners, in particular cognitive conflicts (Kunter et al., 2011). This means teachers must not only
46 Chapter 4. Individual Students’ Learning Processes and Development activate basic concepts and beliefs in the learner, they must also create perturbation of the same (Minnameier, Hermkes, & Mach, 2015).
4.2.3 Domain Differences in Learning Processes
Like student dispositions and teacher judgments, learning processes must be considered domain-specific, since they depend on the subjects’ knowledge domain (Seidel & Shavelson, 2007). On the one hand, external learning activities can vary considerably depending on the subject domain. For instance, while critical text analysis is a prominent activity in language arts (Schuster, 2003), scientific experiments are a fundamental part of student learning in science (Willer, 2003).
On the other hand, for all subjects, different external activities aim at similar motivational and cognitive internal learning processes as the ones presented above.
Studies find that science field trips can trigger students’ intrinsic motivation (Holmes, 2011), just as certain reading activities evoke intrinsic motivation (Wigfield, Guthrie, Tonks, & Perencevich, 2004). Likewise, an experiment can elicit meaningful cognitive activity (Minnameier et al., 2015), and so can teacher-student interaction (Baumert et al., 2010) – both if constructed appropriately.
Moreover, despite even young childrens’ measured differentiation of internal learning processes, like their intrinsic motivations, across subject domains (Gottfried, 1990), the effects of learning processes on learning outcomes are assumed to be com-parable across domains. For instance, Tsai et al. (2008) found that a satisfaction of students’ need for autonomy had comparable beneficial effects on students’ interest for mathematics as well as first and second language instruction. Likewise, cognitive internal learning processes across domains aim to build conceptual and procedural knowledge that is elaborated and organized (Lipowski, 2015; Seidel & Shavelson, 2007).