Expectancy-Value Theory (E-V Theory) states that individuals have expectancies for success, and subjective value for tasks, which determine the choices, achievement and learning of individuals (Linnenbrink-Garcia & Patall, 2014). E-V Theory can predict student’s motivation to learn by examining student’s individual expectancies for success, and the value students place on specific tasks. Within E-V theory expectancies are better predictors of performance, and task values are a better predictor of choice and enrollment (Linnenbrink-Garcia & Patall, 2014).
E-V theory seems to be well-suited to provide specific insights into the causes of individual motivation. Not only is E-V theory broken into expectancies and values, but task values itself is a multi-dimensional construct, consisting of four different task values. The task value of cost may also be further broken down into 3 sub-dimensions. This specificity allows researchers to investigate the interplay between these dimensions and sub-dimensions of motivation, and thus provide a deeper insight into how the workings of motivation within individuals.
E-V theory is not well suited to examine the impact that motivation plays in dictating the activities of young children. Indeed Linnenbrink-Garcia and Patall state that, “expectancies and value predict achievement outcomes….among children as young as the first grade, and the relations gain strength with age.” (Linnenbrink-Garcia & Patall, 2014, Page 92). This statement suggests that while predictions may be made for first grade children, these predictions may not be as strong or accurate as with older children. It may be necessary to modify this theory, or use an alternative theory, when investigating motivation in young children.
I’m intrigued by your takeaway about expectancy-value theory’s utility for young children. I read your quoted sentence as an argument for the theory’s utility across a wide range of ages. Your point makes intuitive sense, at least from the values end. The values young children place on tasks are likely qualitatively different than older students, given that their concerns are likely not related to careers or grades, so adjustments are probably needed. On the other hand, Linnenbrink-Garcia and Patall (2015) say, “Declines seem to occur particularly for language arts in early elementary years and for math during high school” (p. 92). Given the reference to early elementary, do you think the authors would agree with you about the weakness of the theory for young students?
I think we may be talking about two slightly different things, and I may not have been entirely clear. It seems that ability of expectancies and task values to predict achievement outcomes increases as children age, with first grade the mentioned starting point for this predictive relationship. I was attempting to state that the E-V framework may not be well suited to examine motivation in children before first grade, for example kindergarteners or pre-schoolers. I think what the authors meant by your quote was that while motivation may decline as students age, the predictive power of expectancies and values does not.
Hi Matthew – It’s interesting that you noted the difference in motivation when it comes to age. As Linnenbrink-Garcia & Patall (2014) describe the limitation of motivation theories as being less applicable to younger populations, it makes me think about how motivation functions with children younger than 5 years old? is it that children are still developing other aspects of their lives (i.e. gender identity, sexual orientation, etc.), that researchers are less concerned with their motivation to persist in academia? I’m not sure I know the answer to this question, but it makes sense that a lot of researchers have focused on older populations that have trouble staying motivated. Also implied by the fact that motivation declines with age (Linnenbrink-Garcia & Patall, 2014). However, due to this gap in the literature, I think it is important to consider motivational implications for a younger population of students.
Administrators:
Christine Greenhow
Diana
Rand
cainwil1
Ming
Top Posters:
galvins1: 51
richkat3: 50
albertsk: 43
moudgal1: 43
schellma: 41
liraamal: 39
Emilia: 35
zhumengd: 34
Forum Stats:
Groups: 6
Forums: 19
Topics: 97
Posts: 339
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 0
Members: 77
Moderators: 0
Admins: 5
Most Users Ever Online: 58
Currently Online:
1 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)