Expectancy Value Theory

Compared to the self-worth theory, the expectancy value theory is a lot easier for me to accept. However, I must remember that this is just a brief overview of the theory; the general synopsis provided in table 6.1 allows me to interpret the vagueness of this description however I please. (Further research could show that my assumptions here are not in accordance with a more detailed profile of the theory.) 

On Expectancy:

Essentially, no one is going to take on a task they know to be impossible. Still, there's a huge spectrum of different levels of "challenging" that spans between the endpoints of "easy" and "impossible." 

The way I see it, somewhere along that spectrum the challenge level shifts from encouraging to overwhelming (no doubt there are shades of gray in between those two points as well). 

I would predict that people of almost all ages are open to challenges, but I'd expect that the level /intensity of challenge that a person is willing to undertake--that is to say, the level at which the challenge remains predominantly encouraging--would correlate to experience of some measure (not necessarily years). 

On Value:

Here I'm a bit more inquisitive than I was with the 'expectancy' variable. 

The E.V. Theory says that motivated learners have to believe that there is some benefit to the task at hand. Okay, I can get on board with that: we wouldn't do/learn something unless we had good enough reason to. 

As the description goes on to say, 

"Learners must place a value on the task itself or the outcomes that are likely to result." 

I start to wonder whether this distinction (the bolded part of the quote) is at all connected to the seemingly similar distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, which Ormrod also discusses in chapter six:

"intrinsic motivation: [A person] is motivated by factors within herself or inherent in the task she is performing. Learners who are intrinsically motivated may engage in an activity because it gives them pleasure, helps them develop a skill they think is important, or is the ethically and morally right thing to do. Some learners with high levels of intrinsic motivation become so focused on and absorbed in an activity that they lose track of time and completely ignore other tasks--a phenomenon known as flow.

extrinsic motivation: [A person] is motivated by factors external to herself and unrelated to the task she is performing. Learners who are extrinsically motivated may want the good grades, money, or recognition that particular activities and accomplishments bring. Essentially, they are motivated to perform the task as a means to an end, not as an end in and of itself." (pg. 181)

In terms of my question, I'm still pretty torn as to whether the distinction between "value of the task itself" and "value of the task's outcomes" is the same as the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

One could argue that the distinction made within the value definition (the task itself vs. the outcomes of the task) still implies intrinsic motivation, because even the outcome is still related to the task. On the other hand, "getting good grades" is technically a beneficial outcome of an otherwise unappealing task, and one that Ormrod has classified as external to the task. 

The ultimate question in my mind becomes, "Is there a difference between 'performing a task for beneficial outcomes' and "performing a task as a means to an end'?"

Motivation: A Failure to Cooperate

"Play with this so I can take your picture!”

“L., come here and look at the shoes. Look! Look at the shoes. Hey, come back. Where are you going?”

In the Arthur's Kitchen/ Kidport area, I observed a girl who looked to be about two years old with her mother who was trying to direct her daughter's play while also texting on her phone. First, mom tried to interest her in some shoes that were lined up against the wall in the kitchen, but it was clear that she was more interested in the airplane that was across the play area. She ran toward the plane and explored the various areas while mom stood nearby, alternately taking pictures and typing on her phone. The next thing we saw, the little girl was running away down the hallway. Mom initially didn't notice because she was texting. Within a few seconds, she was off, chasing after her daughter.

What I noticed during this parent interaction was that the mom seemed to be either trying to control/ direct her daughter's play, or not paying attention at all. Both behaviors appeared to have an effect on her daughter. When the mom was trying to compose a photo op or direct her daughter, the child actively resisted. We know that young children “seem to prefer classroom activities of their own choosing, and their perception of autonomy versus control are often seen in their notions of play or work” (Ormond, 2009, p. 189). In some of what I witnessed, it seemed that the parent's attempt to direct play actually lessened the child's desire to play. When her mother shifted her attention away from her child, the girl ran away, presumably, because she knew her mother would give chase.

Could both mother and child have had a more calm and satisfying interaction if mom had taken the role of interested observer? Possibly. What I think I witnessed, was the power of situational interest. Situational interest is "evoked by something in the immediate environment. Things that are new, different, unexpected, or especially vivid often generate situational interest….” (Ormond, 2009, p. 193-194). There were many vivid and engaging play spaces in the vicinity of the kitchen. Interest is a form of motivation. This girl was interested in several things in the area and wanted to be free to explore the areas that captured her interest. She also seemed to be trying to communicate with her mother, both by ignoring her and trying to get her attention.

I was surprised by the number of parents who tried to micromanage their child's play at the museum. In the dozens of children and parents that I observed, this level of pressure seemed to do very little to drive their children toward playing with one toy or another. Children were motivated to explore what they themselves found most interesting. I wonder how I've been guilty of this as a parent over the years. Watching these families interact has really made me think of how manipulative we parents can be at times and how little we tend to listen to our children as they try to communicate with us!