Article summary with Need supportive teaching in practice: a narrative analysis in schools with contrasting educational approaches by Stroet a.o. - 2015

Introduction

According to the self-determination theory, curiosity and a will to learn are part of human nature. The characteristics of the classroom and education can, however, stimulate or undermine these motivational processes. Research has already shown that when students' needs with regard to autonomy, competence and kinship are supported, there are positive effects on academic performance. However, less is known about the effects of need supportive teaching (NST). 

Need Supportive Teaching

If the needs of students for autonomy, competence and kinship are supported in the classroom, this has positive consequences for learning. Research into what this need supportive teaching constructs exactly in practice is scarce. This study looks at the positive and negative dimensions of NST, by looking at different educational approaches. Positive dimensions are autonomy support, structure and involvement. Negative dimensions are opposing autonomy, chaos and rejection.

Self-determination theory

The self-determination theory is a macro theory about human motivation. The theory is based on two assumptions.

• The first assumption is that people have an active tendency towards psychological growth. Based on this tendency, people strive to expand their interests and look for challenges. This extends their skills.

• The second assumption is that people have an active tendency to integrate the self. Because of this, people do not only strive to be an autonomous person, but also to integrate themselves with others. They internalize the knowledge, habits and values ​​around them with their sense of self.

The theory states that there are three basic human needs, namely a need for autonomy, a need for competence and a need for kinship. When people can act on the basis of the above assumptions, they will function optimally to satisfy their basic needs. They will be motivated to learn, improve their skills, expand their personal interests and / or achieve the goals they are personally driven to. This form of motivation is autonomous and contrasts with the motivation that is exerted when people experience pressure to perform a certain action.

Positive and negative dimensions of NST

There are three dimensions within the NST that have an effect on student satisfaction.

Dimension of autonomy

The positive dimension of autonomy is autonomy support. Teaching is autonomous when the students have the opportunity to express their feelings, thoughts and perspectives. It is also autonomous to offer the students choices, or when it is not possible for them to choose, to make relevant connections with the learning activity and personal goals of the students. Some authors distinguish between cognitive and non-cognitive autonomy support. By offering choices for tasks, task material or organizational matters, their autonomy is supported with regard to form, media and presentation, but not so much the cognitive learning process. To support autonomy in the cognitive learning process, cognitive choices must be offered. This can for example be done by offering problems that do not have a clear solution, or by stimulating asking questions. This would stimulate independent thinking and an intrinsic desire to learn. The opposite of autonomy support is called autonomy thwart .

Dimension of structure

Structure can be offered by communicating clear and consistent guidelines. Teachers must be available when the students have questions. Students can be encouraged to believe that success depends on internal controllable factors and is not congenital. Constructive, non-comparative feedback must also be given. The offering of help must take place step by step, with the teacher adapting to the speed of the student. The opposite of structure, the negative dimension, is called chaos.

Dimension of involvement

Teachers can demonstrate their involvement by demonstrating affection and interest, by stimulating empathy and prosocial behavior and by being available to all students in the classroom. Involvement is also expressed by showing involvement in the learning behavior of the students. The negative dimension of involvement is called disaffection or rejection .

Two school types

Two school types were used in this study. The first type is the more traditional, teacher-centered approach. Schools that are prototypically traditional must meet the following criteria in this study:

• All lessons are given in the same groups of students.

• The lessons mainly consist of the teacher who explains the teaching material to the class, and students who have to carry out the teacher's assignments.

• Mainly summarizing rather than formative evaluation methods.

The second type is the social constructivist approach. Schools that are prototypically social constructivist must meet the following criteria in this study:

• There is more attention for higher-order skills with regard to self-regulation and metacognition.

• Students bear responsibility with regard to their own learning process and the learning objectives they have set.

• Especially formative rather than summary evaluation methods.

• Teaching takes place in an authentic context.

• Learning is considered a social activity.

Traditional movement

In the traditional approach, teachers take most of the responsibility in the students' learning process. They must transfer their knowledge through verbal and written lessons. They must structure the teaching material. The assignments must be made by the students individually or in small groups. The students are systematically guided through series of assignments by the teachers until they have achieved the teachers' goals. The teachers monitor the processes of the students and see how much they have already learned and provide feedback on the quality of their performance.

Social constructivist approach

After the cognitive revolution in the 70s, the social constructivist approach emerged. According to this approach, teachers should lead the students, while the students themselves are responsible for the cognitive and metacognitive aspects of their learning process and their learning objectives. The teachers must gradually transfer the responsibility to the students. Learning would not only take place through cognitive factors, but also through situational and social factors. These situational factors can be used by offering contextualized assignments in authentic contexts. Because there are individual differences in what constitutes an authentic context, students should be involved in determining their own learning activities. The social factor can be stimulated by creating dialogue between the students themselves and between the students and the teacher. The assessment of the teacher must be focused on the student's learning process and above all be formative rather than summarizing.

Triggers

There are certain factors that shape the manifestations of NST. To date, little is known about these factors, which are called triggers in here. Two triggers are distinguished here that are important for this research. The first trigger is pressure from above. This is the pressure experienced by teachers to ensure that their students perform well. They often adopt a controlling motivational learning style consisting of strict instructions and criticism and with little room for the students' input. This effect can be enhanced by a traditional approach, because the teachers there are largely responsible for the learning processes of the students. The second trigger is the power difference between teacher and student. This pressure would be greater in schools with traditional approaches, because teachers are considered as the authority there. In contrast to socio-constructivist schools, where learning is a social process and there is more dialogue between the teacher and the student.

Operationalization of dimensions

The three dimensions were operationalized in this research in the following way:

• Autonomy support was operationalized as offering choice, offering relevance to the activity and respecting the students (for example, by listening to their opinions and ideas). Autonomy thwart was operationalized by retaining the teaching material (for example by giving answers too early, putting pressure on or giving the students no time to find the solution themselves), having meaningless activities carried out and disrespect for the students.

• Structure was measured on the basis of clarity, leadership, encouragement and informational feedback. There was a lack of support when the teacher was unclear or disorganized, did not give proper guidance to the students (for example, by not being present or paying attention) or by not encouraging the students. Giving evaluative feedback was also measured as a factor that contributed to chaos. 

• Involvement was measured by observing affection, coordination (for example, showing understanding), allocation of resources (for example, being available to all learners) and dependence. Rejection was observed in disaffection (for example, unkindness, lack of interest), poor coordination, no allocation of resources, and a lack of dependence.

Important results

The results show large differences, but also similarities.

Cognitive autonomy support

Cognitive autonomy support involves offering problems that do not have a clear solution, so that students can approach the problem themselves and work on a solution. In the traditional classroom, the teacher sometimes stimulated such cognitive autonomy and the students actively engaged in discussion. This did not occur in the social-constructivist class, probably because as a result of this approach the knowledge levels between the students differed too much from each other (because they encourage the use of their own learning speed). It happened in the social constructivist class with individual students, or in smaller groups, and that did not happen in the classical class.

Autonomy support with limited choices

When offering a new assignment, the purpose of the assignment was often discussed in the social constructivist class. If the students were negative, the relevance of the assignment was suggested either by the teacher or by other students. This convinced the students of its usefulness and they wanted to carry out the assignment themselves, instead of being forced to see the usefulness of it. This did not happen within the classes with the classical approach. 

Step-by-step instructions

With regard to the dimension of structure, it was observed that in the social-constructivist classes individual help was given on the basis of step-by-step instructions, while this was not the case with the classical classes. One of the reasons for this is the lack of time experienced by teachers in classical schools. They are responsible for the results of all students and cannot afford to consider each student individually.

Disaffection and autonomy thwart

In the classical classes it was observed that the teachers were regularly disaffective, while this was rare in the social constructivist classes. In the social constructivist classes, the pupils' learning processes were also discussed and they were guided by pointing them out and helping them with their own learning process. This form of giving structure did not occur in the classical classrooms. In the classical classes, autonomy thwart (autonomy transverse) was also observed in interactions of a disciplinary nature. This did not occur in the social constructivist classes.

Similarities

In both types of classes, giving structure in the form of encouragement and informational feedback was observed. Chaos was not common in both types. The involvement of the teachers was also expressed in both classes.