# data[].attributes.headline
How To Make Learning Interesting, Engaging & Motivating!

# data[].attributes.subject
How To Make Learning Interesting, Engaging & Motivating!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I often hear parents say that their child doesn't pay enough attention in school. But what they don't realize is that the same child spends hours and hours exploring the world of their latest computer and video games, that too with immense concentration and with a great urge to learn. When education is presented in a push model, it becomes the slowest, least effective and most uninteresting path to learning. Not only does it makes learning dull and de-motivates the children; it also makes schools boring places where young children find it difficult to concentrate on one thing for long. As a result, children develop a negative attitude towards learning and school.

Do you think, it is possible to turn around the situation? Is it possible that children become as excited about learning as they are about play or videogames? So much so that they love schooldays more than holidays . Sure! it is, all it requires is an understanding of a child, her interests, passions and using these as a vehicle for motivation.

As a teacher, you know that in each of your class, there are a variety of students, each of whom bring to the learning environment different perceptions, prior knowledge, attitudes and learning styles. Each one of them have different levels of understanding, types of intelligences and different pace of learning. As a concerned teacher, it becomes important to recognize the individuality of each child and to make use of a variety of instructional approaches to ensure that all "types" of students and their various needs are being met.

Further it becomes challenging to make learning interesting for each one of them. In order to make learning interesting, the most essential factor is to keep the learners engaged. So one of the biggest concerns as an educator is- How to gain attention of the students? And how can we get our students more engaged in their learning? There are various classroom techniques which when used effectively can help in achieving the desired result.

To begin with, you must make connection with your students at the beginning of your class. Determine what your students already know and what they enjoy. Also show enthusiasm about what you are teaching and let your students see that excitement through your lessons.

Further, make your lessons interesting and fun by planning them in advance. Work out in detail the concept to be taught, the teaching methodologies you plan to use, the teaching aids you need to prepare etc. This will give you time to bring in innovation and creativity in your teaching. By adopting new and interesting ways you will be able to enhance & maintain the interest of the students.

The old adage "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" is equally true of teaching strategies. If, on the other hand, you have more tools in your toolbox, you will have the opportunity to choose the most appropriate tool for the task at hand. Sometimes ,the classes at the school seem monotonous to the child and result in low concentration levels of the kids. Using a variety of teaching methods keeping in mind children's interests, learning styles, intelligences etc. will help in sustaining interest in the topic being taught. Moreover, when the child enjoys the learning process, he concentrates more and retains more resulting in better grades and improved attitude towards learning.

Additionally, give them a lot of examples while teaching. It is necessary that the child is able to relate himself to whatever he does. It would definitely help to gain his attention and develop his interest in the concept.

Further, invite active participation by students in the teaching-learning process. Teaching should not just be a one-sided process but it should be interactive as well. Design hands on activities, organize group discussions, quizzes and other interactive activities to make learning engaging. Also, encourage students to raise their doubts and queries so that they become frank in discussing their doubts and clarify their confusions.

Last but not the least, use technology extensively to introduce, elaborate and clarify concepts to children in the everyday classroom environment. This is so, as ICT leads to active engagement, increased concentration and greater retention. Further technology also changes the way teachers teach, offering educators effective ways to reach different types of learners and assess students understanding through multiple means. Therefore, effective tech integration must happen across the curriculum into subject areas in a way that teachers grow into roles of advisors, content experts and mentors. This way Technology helps make teaching and learning more meaningful and fun thus enhancing the relationship between teacher and student.

Remember, the quality of learning and the resulting habits of mind developed in your classroom will affect not only your students, but also their families, their friends and eventually the society. It is in this relation that your potential for changing the world is matchless. It is humbling and perhaps a little overwhelming; when you realize that the future of the country is indeed in your hands.

I wish you realize this and are empowered by the ideas presented herein. I hope you will be successful in making learning creative, engaging and motivating for your students!

All the Best!

Comments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to make learning interesting, engaging & motivating!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I often hear parents say that their child doesn't pay enough attention in school. But what they don't realize is that the same child spends hours and hours exploring the world of their latest computer and video games, that too with immense concentration and with a great urge to learn.

# data[].attributes.body
While it's important to know what to do to set your goals and motivate yourself, It's also very important to master the entire process of setting a goal. If you are trying to set goals, it's actually less simple then one may think!
When setting a goal you have to keep in mind if it's possible within the timeframe, too simple, or too complicated for the time you wanted. At first though you may think that goal setting is a thing that we already know, but in reality you have to learn and master it as if it was like a sport or exercise. Students who can  set goals and achieve them masterfully outperform other students by around 250%.
It's not like setting a goal and mastering the process is easy though, only around 8% of people actually follow through with their goals. Usually unforeseen circumstances can interrupt someone trying to achieve a goal. The further the goal is from today, the more likely those unforeseen circumstances will catch up to you. It's a rewarding process to master goal setting because you become 30% more efficient and you gain academic confidence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zLtfzsaP58

# data[].attributes.body
The Usual thought of goal setting is that you first start a goal, then you make a plan to achieve it and finally you start taking action to get towards your goal. One would wonder how do I set these goals? First thing you should think about is, is my goal achievable? and why do I want this goal. To understand that, author "Tony Jeary And his article Stick to it: the necessity of goal-setting" states that 1.Think of what you really want in the future 2. Visualize and then 3. Figure out the steps to achieve it. In conclusion Goal setting is a common practice , because it sets up how you wanna live your life. You think it, you then want it, then finally you take action and achieve it.
https://youtu.be/E8agsaXfHN4

# data[].attributes.body
In life it's an essential to be motivated, motivation is the reason for people's actions along with being an intended key to success. Motivation is derived from the word motive which means to obtain something to your highest effort and satisfaction. Having motivation will get you through your personal life and academic life. For example in primary school we were taught necessary concepts and skills to prepare us in our life beyond those years. Our teachers used small but effective learning tactics to motivate us to want to learn more and trust the process.

Motivation has several effects on students' way of learning and their behavior.

First, motivation sets minds towards particular goals, Motivation will Significantly enhance a student's work time on a task and is also an Important factor affecting their learning and achievement. Therefore, it also connects with having a grit mindset: having the perseverance toward a goal. With life in college it is very important that you are a motivated student because you're surrounded by multiple distractions like friends, work, parents or even a family. With that being said you will not begin to fail classes and fall short of your learning. Along with you will be driven to want to grow your education and focus on your academic life.

Diving deeper into the knowledge of motivation has helped me acquire more knowledge on how to stay motivated and the effects on being a motivated student.
https://youtu.be/WQiwbScOOtA

# data[].attributes.headline
How to make your learning more intriguing

# data[].attributes.subject
How to make your learning more intriguing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Document controls

Main content

Developing motivated learners is an ongoing struggle for teachers. Many of their students find learning to be boring and irrelevant. Therefore, teachers need strategies to enhance student motivation by making learning interesting and personally meaningful. This article provides teachers with four motivational strategies and makes suggestions to stimulate student curiosity and to give students a sense of personal control in their learning programs. In addition, it is suggested that teachers provide moderately difficult tasks and establish the relevance of content by relating it to students' needs and interests. Support for this approach from a theory of student motivation is presented, along with research about student interest. For students with motivational deficiencies, the strategies are necessary for their active engagement in the learning process.

Student motivation is a major problem in classrooms. Many children are bored, inattentive, and unable to see much connection between schoolwork and their lives outside classrooms. Their boredom diminishes attention, lowers achievement, and is a likely reason for dropping out of school. How serious is the problem? A survey of 25,000 eighth-graders found that about half claimed that they were bored in school half or most of the time (Rothman, 1990). Furthermore, numerous investigators (e.g., Goodlad, 1984; Sirotnik, 1983) have found that student engagement in academic activities is of poor quality. Therefore, teachers need strategies to reduce student boredom and enhance student motivation. The purpose of this article is to provide teachers with four strategies to make learning interesting and relevant. This approach to enhancing student motivation is designed to help students value participation in learning activities. An additional purpose is to help teachers develop a better understanding of student motivation. For teachers to be professionals, they need to know both what is effective and why it is effective.

The research on student motivation indicates that most approaches, including the present one, evolved from expectancy-value theory. According to this theory, the intensity of motivation is determined jointly by the learner's expectancy for success and by the incentive value of the goal. It is assumed that no effort will be invested in a learning activity if either factor is missing entirely. This theory suggests that students can gain success if they apply reasonable effort and appreciate the value of learning activities.

Motivation theorists and researchers have devoted considerably less attention to the value component of this theory than to the expectancy component. The value factor merits attention, because a student who does not value an outcome is unlikely to expend much effort regardless of expectancies for success. Therefore, in this article I claim that motivation is tied to the belief that learning must be interesting and relevant, and therefore, of value.

To begin our discussion, let us consider two students named Joel and Rebecca. Both children entered kindergarten excited about learning. They were inquisitive and eager to undertake any assignment. A few years later, they are bored. Joel is inattentive during most learning activities, his enthusiasm for learning is fading, and his performance continues to suffer. When he does put forth effort, he lacks strategies to monitor his own work. Finally, he is more focused on completing assignments than on ensuring he understand what he is supposed to be learning. Rebecca is also losing her enthusiasm for learning. She is unable to see how learning in the classroom connects to her life away from school or to some future aspect of her life. She wonders what's in it for her. When she does try, she finds the work unchallenging. She wants to assume some control in her learning program, but the teacher does not want to relinquish control. The teacher needs strategies to establish the relevance of learning for Rebecca, and she needs strategies to stimulate Joel's curiosity.

Motivational Strategies to Make Learning Interesting and Relevant

A review of the research on motivational strategies showed that teachers can design learning activities in more stimulating and valuable ways for children like Joel and Rebecca. Teachers may capitalize on four sources of motivation -- student curiosity, challenge of the assignment, relevance of the content, and student sense of control. The following strategies use these sources to make learning more interesting and relevant for students.

Stimulate Curiosity by Asking Thought-Provoking Questions

Curiosity is a condition of aroused uncertainty that exists when there is a gap between a given and desired state of knowledge (Berlyne, 1960). If a teacher presents new or different information from that which students already know, this causes a discrepancy in their thinking. Their subsequent behavior following curiosity is generally exploration, a search for information in order to reduce uncertainty and eliminate the discrepancy.

Educators generally agree that virtually all children are curious and eager to learn at an early age. The needs to explore, discover, and understand are said to be inherent to a child's nature. Therefore, younger children want to manipulate and explore objects relevant to what is being studied. However, as children grow older, they become less curious about many tasks in classrooms. As a result, researchers have studied strategies that teachers can use to maintain student interest.

Jones (1980) asked teachers at all grade levels what methods they used to stimulate student curiosity. Teachers reported that asking thought-provoking questions was one of their most successful methods. The researcher suggested that teachers ask "perplexing, paradoxical, and unexpected" questions. The following examples illustrate these kinds of questions:

* If seagulls are ocean birds, why are they outside the classroom window 90 miles from the ocean? (perplexing)

* If there is enough food in the world to feed every human being, why do so many people starve to death? (paradoxical)

* Does anyone know how to eliminate the horrible flavors of some medicines? Put an ice cube on your tongue to deaden the taste buds. (unexpected)

After teachers capture student attention, they need to sustain interest by creating an attitude of inquiry. They can pose problems and encourage students to generate their own questions. One effective method for encouraging student questions is reciprocal teaching (Palinscar & Brown, 1984). Teachers arrange students in small groups to generate questions about a portion of reading. Each student takes a turn to ask others either to summarize, ask a question about a main idea, clarify a point, or make a prediction. Other ways to maintain attention include using anecdotes, analogies, humor, and injecting personal and emotional elements.

Provide Challenges -- Moderately Difficult Tasks

Children have an inherent need to search for and master challenging activities (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Ideally, each student should have an assignment that is hard enough to require some effort, but easy enough to be completed with no more than a modest amount of assistance. A challenging program is laborious for teachers to implement in crowded classrooms, and in particular with some children who lag behind other students. Children, like Joel, need assignments completely different from those of other students, because they are unable to understand most class assignments. Rebecca needs a different assignment too, because she feels unchallenged and works unenthusiastically. She seems to work harder when there is some uncertainty about the likelihood of success. Joel and Rebecca's teacher may provide them with a form of individualized instruction to adjust learning activities to each student's skill level.

In reality, many teachers create error-proof classrooms to ensure student successes rather than provide optimally challenging activities. Teachers often reduce task difficulty, overlook errors, de-emphasize failed attempts, and ignore faulty performances. Clifford (1990) suggests that teachers emphasize tolerance of errors and reward correction of errors. She argues that teachers must encourage students to learn from mistakes.

Give Students a Sense of Control

Rebecca is in a power struggle with her teacher to gain some control in her learning program. Like other children, she has a drive to exert some control over her environment (deCharms, 1968). When she senses personal control in her own learning, she becomes more interested and involved. Giving up some control is difficult for her teacher, however, allowing Rebecca more choices can lead to learning self-management skills, such as planning and goal-setting.

There are many ways to provide students with choices. For example, they can choose from alternative learning activities or various ways to meet requirements. Students could arrange the sequence of activities according to their personal preferences. Finally, students can pursue their own interests by conducting research, performing an experiment, or even producing a video. Rebecca, who has an interest in cats, may choose to explore the history of domestic cats in this country. She may want to bring her cat to the classroom for a demonstration to reinforce a point about feline behavior.

Help Students Connect Learning to their Needs and Interests

Teachers can adapt assignments to learners' needs, so that students can find learning personally meaningful. For example, Rebecca and other students express a need to socialize. They spend hours talking on the telephone at home and too many minutes talking to friends during schoolwork time. Her teacher uses cooperative learning and peer tutoring to meet their need for affiliation. In addition, her teacher chooses subjects, such as friendship and communication for study.

Teachers can appeal to students' interests too. Rebecca and some of her classmates love to play with their cats at home. They have cat stationary, cat book folders, and cat t-shirts. The teacher appeals to Rebecca's interests by requiring students to compare and contrast the nervous systems of cats to humans as an introduction to a unit on the human body.

The use of relating content to the needs and interests of students is rooted in Dewey's (1913) work. He shed some light on the subject of student interest when he urged educators to focus on the whole child. He stated, "the principle of 'making things interesting' means that subjects be selected in relation to the child's present experience, powers, and needs". Furthermore, he claimed," . . . making a thing interesting by the sugar-coating method -- assumes a certain ready subject-matter existing wholly independently of the pupil's own activity. Some interest, some bond of connection must be found".

Some theorists today also claim that the concept of "interest" within the learner is a more meaningful construct than that of the "interesting" aspects of learning. Schiefele (1991) defines interest as a learner characteristic composed of feelings and perceptions of task value. He suggests that enjoyment and involvement are the most common feelings related to interest. In addition, he maintains that interest is always related to specific topics or learning activities. Schiefele suggests that in order to stimulate interest in specific subject matter, it may be necessary to use particular instructional methods. In other words, cooperative learning may facilitate student interest in history, whereas it may be ineffective in math. To summarize, Schiefele's (1991) theory of interest stresses student affect and the concept of subject-matter-specific interest.

Hootstein (1993) explored the instructional methods used by middle school teachers to motivate their students to learn social studies. The teachers were less concerned with the "bond of connection" suggested by Dewey and more invested in making learning active, enjoyable, and realistic. Teachers assigned less significance to the relevance of subject matter than to their attempts to arouse learner interest with a variety of motivational strategies that students may find interesting. Dewey suggested that subject matter should be related to the students' needs in their lives outside the classroom, whereas these teachers appeared to focus more on strategies to meet student's immediate needs in the classroom (e.g., affiliation, physical activity).

In summary, the four categories of motivation can help teachers thing about student motivation in specific areas of influence. Teacher thinking about student curiosity, challenge of the assignment, relevance of content, and student sense of control can help them to generate their own motivational strategies. However, the categories do not inform teachers when to use strategies, and how to incorporate them into instruction. Additional exploration is necessary in these areas.

There are no easy answers or magic formulas for motivating students to learn, particularly when we consider the context of instruction, such as grade level and subject matter. For example, Stodolosky, Salk, and Glaessner (1991) found that students' perceptions of the subject matter may affect student motivation to learn. In their comparisons of students' views about learning social studies and mathematics, they found that student evaluation of mathematics experiences were judged by the likelihood of success, whereas social studies experiences were judged by how interesting they were.

Looking back to Joel and Rebecca, recall that they have lost their desire for learning as they progressed through the grades. Joel is bored and inattentive. When he does expend effort, he lacks learning strategies. He performs tasks to complete his work rather than to get the intended academic benefits. Rebecca, on the other hand, does not perceive the relevance of learning. She wants challenges as well as more control in her learning program.

There is a happy ending for our students. Their teacher stimulates student curiosity with a variety of thought-provoking questions. The students' assignments tend to be moderately difficult, so when they succeed or fail, they attribute their performances to effort. The assignments have become more relevant; the children can see the connections between school learning and their own lives outside the classroom. Finally, they are setting their own goals and beginning to monitor their own learning. Now they have a sense of control in their learning. Joel and Rebecca are motivated to learn.

Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Brophy, J. (1987). On motivating students. In D. C. Berliner & B. V. Rosenshine (Eds.), Talks to teachers (pp. 201-245). New York: Random House.

Clifford, M. M. (1990). Students need challenge, not easy success. Educational Leadership, 48, 32-36.

DeCharms, R. (1968). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press.

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

Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort. Cambridge, MA: The Riverside Press.

Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hootstein, E. (1993). Motivational strategies and beliefs of U. S. history teachers at the middle school level. Journal of Social Studies Research, 16 & 17, (2), 28-33.

Jones, R. S. (1980). Teachers who stimulate curiosity. Education, 101, (2), 158-165.

Lepper, M. R. & Hodell, M. (1989). Intrinsic motivation in the classroom. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Ed.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. III, Goals and cognitions (pp. 73-105). New York: Academic Press.

Rothman, R. (1990). Educators focus on ways to boost student motivation. Education Week, November 17, 11-13.

Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299-323.

Sirotnik, K. A. (1983). What you see is what you get--consistency, persistence, and mediocrity in classrooms. Harvard Educational Review, 53, 16-31.

Stodolsky, S. S., Salk, S., & Glaessner, B. (1991). Student views about learning math and social studies. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 89-116.

Source Citation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Enhancing student motivation: make learning interesting and relevant

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Developing motivated learners is an ongoing struggle for teachers. Many of their students find learning to be boring and irrelevant. Therefore, teachers need strategies to enhance student motivation by making learning interesting and personally meaningful.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I have this sort of funny, sort of kitschy book of office sayings sitting on top of my desk. One of my favorite quotations in that book is "I love deadlines. I especially love the sound they make as they go whooshing by." It would almost be funny, except I think there is a little truth in that saying, and we all too often experience it in the workplace. There is the occasional day in my office that I work hard and stay busy, but then at quitting time, I have to ask myself what I did all day. I worked diligently but everything on my to-do list that morning is still there. Unfortunately, that project or new program that I have wanted to start but just haven't gotten to yet is still staring me in the face. Also, that task that I am not particularly looking forward to do just seems to sit on my to-do list and never gets accomplished. If this sounds familiar, then read on!

It's easy to fall into bad work habits that prevent you from doing what is most important in your job. Focusing on the tasks that are fun versus undertaking the more pressing ones, doing routine tasks because they are familiar and comfortable instead of jumping into something new, focusing on what someone is asking you for right now instead of prioritizing it against all of your other tasks--all of these can lead to a loss of long-term productivity and success. All of these bad habits can certainly keep us busy. But are we really performing our jobs to the best of our ability? Goal-setting can be an important tool to help us stay focused on what is important to better serve the needs of our organization and community.

A work plan is a tool used to set medium-to long-term goals. Often used by boards, commissions and standing committees, the work plan identifies the high-priority work projects for the group. The plan is usually developed for a period of 12 months but can be for as long as three to five years. For a 12-month plan, there are typically no more than 10 items on the plan, but the number of items depends on the size of the group and the amount of time they have to work on each item in the work plan.

Work plans can also be used by individuals. I use a work plan to set my goals for the 12-month period between my performance evaluations. I identify about six or seven major items I wish to accomplish with at least one goal that is related to my professional development. For example, one of the items on my work plan for 2012 was to completely rewrite my department's emergency action plan manual.

I ask my supervisor to provide input on my work plan for the next evaluation period and also to use my work plan to assist him in evaluating me over the next year. This is great motivation for me because what gets measured also gets prioritized and ultimately done. There are other options for accountability if your supervisor is not supportive of your work plan being part of the evaluation process. You can find a mentor or co-worker who is willing to help you stay on track and encourage you to make progress.

Each item on the work plan should have intermediate steps that will mark progress toward completing the work plan item within the 12-month period. These intermediate steps or goals should be specific actions that are placed on a timeline and can be completed within the month or quarter. Using the rewrite of my department's emergency action plan manual as an example, some of my intermediate goals included: form a work committee, research what changes were needed, develop a draft, etc.

Immediate goals are the daily goals that keep you on task and help you meet your intermediate and long-term goals. Of course, the to-do list is part of this. But if your to-do list is anything like mine, there are many more things "to do" than I can get done in one day. My co-worker Seth shared the "Six Things" rule with me: take the highest-priority six things from your to-do list and just focus on accomplishing those in one day.

My co-worker Vic constantly finds himself getting booked for meetings, so he blocks time each week on his calendar to make sure he has enough time to work on important projects. And lastly, one must understand the difference between urgent and important. Urgent tasks are time-sensitive, but are not necessarily important. Make sure you don't spend all of your time on what is urgent and neglecting what is important.

I have found that with a few simple exercises I can increase my efficiency at work and make sure that the important projects and tasks move forward. Find out what works for you. Happy goal-setting!

Kathy Capps, CPRE, is the Grants and Risk Manager for the City of Raleigh Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Department in North Carolina (kathy.capps@raleighnc.gov).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I have this sort of funny, sort of kitschy book of office sayings sitting on top of my desk. One of my favorite quotations in that book is "I love deadlines. I especially love the sound they make as they go whooshing by."

# data[].attributes.headline
Stick to it: the necessity of goal-setting

# data[].attributes.subject
Stick to it: the necessity of goal-setting

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Q I HAVE TROUBLE SETTING GOALS AND KEEPING THEM. I KNOW GOAL-SETTING IS IMPORTANT FOR HIGH ACHIEVERS, SO DO YOU HAVE ADVICE FOR HOW I CAN SET BETTER GOALS AND STAY MOTIVATED TO ACHIEVE THEM?

A: Goals work because they help you filter out things that don't matter and stay focused on the things that are important to you. They allow the right things to enter your mind, and hence, your life.

There's a part of your brain called the reticular activating system (RAS) that understands goals. Your RAS is a small group of cells at the base of your brain stem. Its function is to act like a sorting office, evaluating the incoming information from all senses and prioritizing what enters your brain, and eventually what gets your attention. Because your conscious brain can't capture everything, the more serious you are about what you want in life, the more your subconscious will focus on achieving it. In fact, your conscious mind can only consume 50 bits of data per second, while your subconscious mind can consume 20 million bits of data per second. That's powerful.

There are three components to making your goals work and leveraging your RAS:

1. Write down with clarity what you really want.

3. Employ congruent self-talk for achieving those goals. Goals should not just be about what you want to have, but also what you want to experience, share, give and become.

Actor Jim Carrey did an interview with Oprah Winfrey in 1997 in which he shared that in 1992, he had written himself a check for $10 million for acting services rendered, and he gave himself three years to accomplish that goal. He dated it Thanksgiving 1995, put it in his wallet, and kept it there. Just before Thanksgiving 1995, he found out he was going to make $10 million on Dumb and Dumber. It was a pivotal lesson for him in setting personal goals.

Similarly, as I was beginning my career at 19, I framed and signed a note to myself that stated I would be a millionaire by 25.

I hung it in my bedroom and looked at it daily. I set out to do this when I had barely finished high school. I knew I was willing to work as hard as it took to reach this goal. It was my first representation of a vision board, and I accomplished this goal in just three years.

Some people are ready to jump in and go to another level of goal setting, but most need to "weed their gardens." They need to make some changes in their thinking so they actually believe goal-setting is effective.

Goals work because they allow you to get clear on where you are today and where you want to go, and in turn focus on the right things to help achieve your targets.

A powerful question here is: "Why don't people set goals?" One reason is that it just isn't on their radar as being important. Others don't see the benefit of spending the time to set goals or believe that it leads to more accomplishments. Some people were not introduced to goal-setting when they were younger, and it is just not on their belief window.

A belief window can be described as a window or filter through which you view the world. On this window are principles, rules and truisms that were primarily established by your parents early in your life but have since been influenced by your education, friends, experiences and career. Sometimes, you find that something you had previously believed is no longer valid, so your principle changes. The example I often share is this: Many grew up with their parents telling them they should always clean their plate. Today people know that cleaning their plate often leads to overeating. It's actually best to have your plate taken away once you start getting full. Yet some still feel guilty if they don't finish their food. It's an old and erroneous principle that many people still believe, and it needs to change within their windows. In the same light, perhaps you need to change what's in your window related to goal-setting.

I have an exercise that will help you attain clarity so you can begin setting more effective goals.

Ask yourself this question: How could my life be 10 times better? Take some time and begin listing people and actions that will make a difference in your personal and professional effectiveness. It could be things you already know to do, but just haven't set goals for yet. Continue to add things on an ongoing basis. If you're stuck, try these prompts.

* Strengthen my relationship with my spouse?

* Be more disciplined, determined, confident, persistent and focused?

* Strengthen family relationships?

* Live a life of ultimate health?

* Have greater financial strength?

* Maximize my contacts/network?

* Educate and improve my wisdom?

* Perfect my business strengths?

* Increase negotiating strength?

Once you answer these questions, you will be able to set goals that are truly meaningful to you, and in turn, you will be motivated to achieve them.

Do you have questions for The RESULTS Guy? Send them to editor@SUCCESS.com.

JEARY IS A STRATEGIST AND BEST-SELLING AUTHOR ADVISING TOP ORGANIZATIONS AND HIGH ACHIEVERS AROUND THE WORLD ON HOW TO GET RESULTS FASTER.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stick to it: the necessity of goal-setting

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Q I HAVE TROUBLE SETTING GOALS AND KEEPING THEM. I KNOW GOAL-SETTING IS IMPORTANT FOR HIGH ACHIEVERS, SO DO YOU HAVE ADVICE FOR HOW I CAN SET BETTER GOALS AND STAY MOTIVATED TO ACHIEVE THEM? A: Goals work because they help you filter out things that don't matter and stay focused on the things that are important to you.

# data[].attributes.headline
Goal Setting/Motivation resources- Dylan Valadez

# data[].attributes.subject
Goal Setting/Motivation resources- Dylan Valadez

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zLtfzsaP58
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eNpVYJ3dZc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFkc6Z7mOow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4N1q4RNi9I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8agsaXfHN4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5RV2nMq-xo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=737RGCTC1aE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjo8-WV9dQk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mt0sq8MVAU4
https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newHTE_90.htm

# data[].attributes.headline
Goal Setting/Motivation resources- Paul Vela

# data[].attributes.subject
Goal Setting/Motivation resources- Paul Vela

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/2018/01/31/set-goals-in-the-middle/

https://www.wisegoals.com/motivation-and-goal-setting.html

https://www.excelatlife.com/articles_goals.htm

https://performanceandeventmanagement.com/goal-setting-and-motivation/

https://www.managementstudyhq.com/goal-setting-theory-of-motivation.html

https://positivepsychology.com/benefits-goal-setting/

https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/organization/motivation-organization/goal-setting-theory-of-motivation-an-overview/63893
https://jamesclear.com/goal-setting

https://wol.iza.org/uploads/articles/178/pdfs/goal-setting-and-worker-motivation.pdf

https://wol.iza.org/articles/goal-setting-and-worker-motivation/long

https://oxfordre.com/psychology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.001.0001/acrefore-9780190236557-e-12

# data[].attributes.body
https://youtu.be/o2yVu5-o274

https://youtu.be/vtX_Ueh0j-E

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638280410001644932

http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20Volumes/Lunenburg,%20Fred%20C.%20Goal-Setting%20Theoryof%20Motivation%20IJMBA%20V15%20N1%202011.pdf

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4166132?seq=1

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED532670.pdf

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/articleid=10.1371/journal.pone.0197599

https://positivepsychology.com/goal-setting/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-moment-youth/201803/goal-setting-is-linked-higher-achievement

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-brain-and-emotional-intelligence/201112/motivation-what-moves-us

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Citation metadata

Document controls

Main content

The purpose of this study was to examine student motivation for SAEs through the lens of the Self-Determination Theory. Self-Determination Theory proposed that human beings are more genuinely motivated when driven by internal factors as opposed to external factors. We used historical research and general qualitative interpretative methods to develop an explanation of student motivation for SAEs. We examined historical magazines, documents, and books for detailed cases of SAE participation. Three specific time periods were examined: 1928-1934, 1947-1953, and 1966-1973. We found that student motivation for SAEs has been a prevailing topic since the 1920s. SAEs have typically been initiated by utilizing extrinsic motivating forces through mandating, awards, class requirements, or collaborative school projects. Although extrinsic motivation was not ideal, half of the cases studied ended with a developed internal locus of causality. This demonstrated that student motivation to participate in SAEs could be established by external motivators and later sustained by internal stimulus. We recommend that agricultural education practitioners use caution when assigning external rewards. Overuse of external rewards such as money, trophies, or recognition could potentially distort a student's acquisition of the "true" SAE values of enhanced learning and career exploration.

Keywords: SAE, school-based agricultural education, student motivation, self-determination theory

Supervised agricultural experiences (SAEs) are intended to be an experiential learning tool for students enrolled in school-based agricultural education programs. SAEs constitute one-third of the agricultural education model and are critical to the mission of agricultural education (Moore, 1988; Phipps, Osborne, Dyer, & Ball, 2008). Through SAEs, students apply concepts learned in the classroom to real world applications (Dyer & Osborne, 1995; Dyer & Williams, 1997; Phipps et al., 2008; Talbert, Vaughn, & Croom, 2005). Agriculture teachers value the concept of SAEs but often fail to successfully implement SAEs within their programs (Dyer & Osborne, 1995; Retallick, 2010). Furthermore, student participation in SAEs has consistently declined throughout the past few decades (Dyer & Osborne, 1995; Retallick & Martin, 2005; Steele, 1997). However, the reasons for declining student participation in SAEs have not been well examined. Considering the long history and purported value of SAEs, an examination of students' motivation over the years for SAE participation could help educators understand the trend of declining SAE participation.

Student participation in SAEs has historically been a concern of agricultural educators. To address this problem, agricultural education professionals have required agriculture students to engage in a SAE. During the early years of the agricultural education profession, federal and state governing agencies mandated student participation in SAEs (Moore, 2003; Wilson & Moore, 2007). Though SAEs are no longer federally mandated, many teachers require all students to have a SAE or maintain SAE records as a component of the curriculum (Dyer & Osborne, 1995; Retallick, 2010). Although the teacher's intentions of requiring student SAE participation may be well intended, research indicates that students can potentially develop negative attitudes towards SAEs if they are perceived as just a requirement (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008).

Researchers have suggested declining SAE involvement is partly attributed to a lack of student motivation for SAE participation (Dyer & Osborne, 1995; Osborne, 1988). The National FFA Organization (FFA) has provided awards to stimulate student interest and participation in SAEs. By the 1940s, B. L. Bible (1941) described how the FFA degree system motivated students' participation in SAEs. "The opportunity for degree advancement provides the single strongest drive for the boy to develop a strong supervised farm practice program.... if he works hard enough to build a record of scholarship and leadership and a long-time farming program" (p. 117). Teachers still attempt to stimulate and maintain student participation in SAEs using FFA Proficiency Award, FFA Degrees, and American Star Award programs (Bender, Taylor, Hansen, & Newcomb, 1979; National FFA Organization, 2012; Retallick, 2010; Tenney, 1977; Wilson & Moore, 2007). However, current motivational theories suggest that excessive extrinsic awards are not always an effective strategy to motivate students (Deci & Ryan, 1985a; Schunk, 2009).

Agricultural education professionals have utilized mandates and awards to stimulate and motivate student participation in SAEs. However, the problem may not be a lack of motivation--the problem could be a lack of effective motivational strategies. Existing research related to SAEs has primarily focused on the teacher's motivation for implementing SAEs (Jenkins & Kitchel, 2009; Retallick, 2010; Robinson & Haynes, 2011; Wilson & Moore, 2007). Limited research exists to examine motivational approaches used in SAE programs and subsequent behaviors of students resulting from those motivational approaches. The continued decrease in SAE participation constitutes a problem that may be alleviated by examining how agriculture students have been effectively or ineffectively motivated to begin and continue participation in SAEs.

We conducted a review of historical SAE literature to better understand how student motivation to initiate and participate in SAEs evolved during the first 60 years of vocational agriculture. The purpose of this study was to examine student motivation for SAEs through the lens of the Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985a). Specifically, SAEs were analyzed according to the two central concepts of Self-Determination Theory: (a) regulatory styles and (b) perceived locus of causality (Ryan & Deci, 2000). This study aligns to Priority 5 of the National Research Agenda to develop highly effective agricultural education programs (Doer fert, 2011).

Motivation is the "means to be moved to do something" (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 54). According to Self-Determination Theory, human behaviors are a result of motivating forces that fluctuate on a continuum. On one end of the continuum is intrinsic motivation, or being motivated by internal forces, and on the other end is extrinsic motivation, or being motivated by external forces (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). Self-Determination Theory proposes that human behavior is contingent on the level of choice an individual has before and during an activity. An individual will have a higher level of motivation for an activity if they believe the activity is self-directed (Deci & Ryan, 1985a). The motivating forces continuum can be further differentiated by two categories of when motivating forces can fluctuate: (a) regulatory styles and (b) perceived locus of causality (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Regulatory Motivating Styles

Regulatory styles are the reasons or choices for beginning an action. Regulatory styles can fluctuate between highly controlled by the individual to highly uncontrolled by the individual. Regulatory styles are classified as being amotivational, extrinsic, or intrinsic to the individual (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Amotivational regulatory styles

The antithesis of being motivated is amotivation. An individual may become amotivated when forced to participate in an activity rather than having a choice to participate in the activity. An individuals may be provided with little if any decision making opportunities throughout the activity and will often maintain a low value for the activity (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). Amotivation regulation styles can be harmful to an individual's emotions related to the activity at hand (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978; Deci & Ryan, 1985a; Ryan, 1995). An individual who experiences an amotivational regulatory style is likely to develop negative feelings towards the activity as well as other persons or institutions associated with the activity (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Extrinsic regulatory styles

An individual is classified as being externally motivated when they are persuaded, coerced, or enticed to choose participation in an activity (Vallerand & Bissonnette, 1992). This could include an individual participating in an activity primarily to receive extrinsic rewards or to avoid extrinsic punishments. Although the individual did in fact have a choice concerning participation, the individual was externally pressured enough to lose the feeling of self-directedness (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). The individual may not necessarily desire to participate but is ultimately persuaded to participate based upon external consequences (Ryan & Deci, 2000). An individual will be compliant simply to receive the reward or avoid the punishment; thus, the individual's internal value for the activity may be diminished (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008).

Intrinsic regulatory styles

An individual is intrinsically motivated when their actions are chosen based upon their internal aspirations (Deci, 1971) that have little or no external reward or consequence (Deci & Ryan, 1987; White, 1959). Actions driven by intrinsic regulations are often used to satisfy one or more of three needs influencing human behaviors: competence, a person's need to feel a level of confidence in themselves and their abilities; relatedness, the feeling that one belongs to a group or community; and autonomy, one's ability to feel control, choice, or direction (Deci & Ryan, 1985a; Ryan & Deci, 2002). Intrinsic motivation is looked upon as the most powerful and fulfilling regulatory style. The individual's decision and/or consequences of participation are based solely on that individual; the internal meaningfulness before, during, and after the activity is what causes an individual to participate (Schunk, 2009).

Perceived Locus of Causality

The second category of fluctuating motivational factors is the perceived locus of causality (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Locus of causality describes how an individual chose to continue participating in an activity independent of the initial regulatory style. Locus of causality is classified as impersonal, external, or internal according to Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Impersonal locus of causality represents the least self-directed and least motivated level of causation for continuance of an activity. An individual will view the activity as being beyond their ability to control decisions and/or outcomes. An individual who experiences an impersonal locus of causality is likely to react to an activity in a submissive or passive manner (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). The result is an individual reluctant to continue the activity and will often become disengaged from that activity (Deci & Ryan, 1985b).

An individual can experience external causality if some level of self-directedness occurs during the activity. However, a distinctive difference is the individual feels compelled by an external force to continue participation in the activity. An individual may choose to continue to participate in an activity to gain an external reward, avoid some type of loss, or avoid a punishment (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). Although the individual has chosen to participate, the individual is less likely to continue the activity in the future because the choice to continue participation was derived from an external pressure (Ryan & Connell, 1989).

An individual may choose to continue a task if the task is inherently valuable (Vallerand & Bissonnette, 1992). In other words, the individual's locus of causality is derived mostly from the interest held for the activity (Ryan & Connell, 1989). Although internal drive is ideal, an individual may not fully realize the internal meaningfulness of an event or activity unless they were first drawn to it through external means. An example would be someone who began an activity for only financial gain, but later found a high level of internal satisfaction from the experience. The individual may continue participation in similar future activities because of high internal meaningfulness and not for financial gain (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008).

Self-Determination Theory proposes that human beings are more effectively motivated when allowed to be self-directed as opposed to being externally-directed during a given activity (Deci & Ryan, 1985a). In other words, human behaviors are more effectively initiated and sustained when an individual has an element of decision-making before and during an event or activity. An individual's behaviors can be motivated by a variety of regulatory styles and perceived locus of causality combinations (Deci & Ryan, 2000). For instance, an individual can potentially begin an activity with an internal directedness, but later develop a more external or impersonal locus of causality towards the activity due to high levels of external directedness. Similarly, an individual could potentially be forced to begin an activity but later develop internal meaningfulness from a level of self-directedness. Figure 1 provides an overview of the taxonomy of human motivation proposed by Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

We used historical and qualitative interpretative research methods to develop an interpretation of student motivation for SAEs. We were interested in understanding the context and the evolution of SAE motivation through time. The variation of cases and time frames ensured a more detailed depiction of the historical development of SAEs (Rampolla, 2007; Spalding & Parker, 2007). We understood the contextual changes that occurred in agriculture, which affected school-based agricultural education and SAEs: including the changing nature of production agriculture, communities where agricultural education occurred, and the development of the SAE awards system (Boone, Doerfert, & Elliot, 1987; Moore & Borne, 1986; Retallick, 2010; Wilson & Moore, 2007). Thus, We identified primary and secondary sources covering a range of SAE practices and eras in agricultural education. Primary sources included interviews with former agriculture students (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2007). The interviews were either found in the literature or conducted by us. There were two types of secondary sources utilized in this study.

One type of secondary source was written by agriculture teachers about their students' SAEs. The student's motivations were interpreted from how the teacher described the formation and continuance of student's SAEs; the teachers were assumed to provide credible and accurate depictions of how students became involved and continued their SAE projects. The biases of the teachers were reduced by interpreting the requirements that the teachers set for students while they engaged in SAEs and the student responses that the teacher witnessed. The teacher's personal opinions were not interpreted.

The second type of secondary sources was written by agricultural education professionals about the SAE practices of agriculture teachers and students. The student's motivations were interpreted from how the agricultural education professionals described the formation and continuance of student's SAEs; the agricultural education professionals were assumed to provide credible and accurate depictions of how students became involved and continued their SAE projects.

We examined historical magazines, documents, and books covering school-based agriculture for detailed cases of SAE participation. Three time periods were chosen based on the number of available sources of SAEs information and manuscript space restrictions. Examining cases from three different time periods allowed for historical trends to emerge. We did not interview current students because a contemporary time period analysis would have shifted the focus away from historical methods. We analyzed The Agricultural Education Magazine and 12 texts from 1928-1934; the time frame of 1947-1953 included the The Agricultural Education Magazine, Better Farming Magazine, and 21 texts; and We analyzed the The Agricultural Education Magazine and 9 texts from 1966-1973. While numerous cases emerged from the different time periods, especially during the time periods of 1928-1934 and 1947-1953, the page limitations of this manuscript limited the number of cases that could be described from each time period. Cases were chosen to highlight the variety of different types of SAEs within each time period. We also interviewed former FFA members that had in SAEs during the time frame of 1966-1973. The decision to include interviews was based on the number of cases that emerged from the literature during the time frame of 1966-1973. The third time period had fewer detailed cases of SAEs to analyze compared to the other two time periods. The pool of possible interviewees was collected from a list of six people generated by a state department of education staff. The interviewees were selected based on their level of engagement in FFA and their SAE. We utilized two of the three interviews conducted based on the limited space of the manuscript. First, a female was chosen to represent the unique, but growing population of agriculture students during the early 1970s. Second, a male was chosen who lived on a family farm, worked on the farm for his SAE, but then left the farm after graduating high school. We felt that these students were not recognized in the sources and were part of a growing number of agriculture students during the 1970s.

The data analysis occurred in a collaborative setting and the cases were analyzed for their defining characteristic, regulatory style, and locus of control. We categorized the cases by a defining characteristic that best represented the student's motivation for conducting the SAE. We identified the characteristics to ensure a variety of cases were represented. The defining characteristics were not grounded in agricultural education literature. The characteristics were subjectively chosen by us and peer-reviewed with other agricultural education faculty for accuracy. The characteristics included (class) mandate, student interest/owned, collaboration, experiential learning opportunity, and awards. We then analyzed the cases for their regulatory style and locus of control. The interpretations were grounded in peer-reviewed researched definitions (Ryan & Deci, 2000) and examples provided by a campus professor with expertise in student motivation. Each case was analyzed and compared to the established definitions of regulatory style and locus of causality; cases were labeled with the regulatory style and locus of causality that most accurately represented the characteristics provided in the case. Although the available cases may have had missing information related to the regulatory style and locus of causality, We assumed the available case information to be holistically supportive of making regulatory style and locus of causality characterization interpretation. Each time period had a synopsis of the analysis of cases from that time period.

Trustworthiness and rigor of the research was maintained through research techniques that emphasized creditability, confirmability, and dependability. First, credibility was developed by utilizing consensus and peer-review techniques during the data analysis. An expert in motivational theory was consulted during the consensus process. Primary and secondary historical sources were exposed to external criticism to ensure credibility of the research. Bias was controlled by framing the interpretations in the cases to the case itself and through collaborative debriefing to ensure confirmability. Dependability was built through the inclusion of varying SAE examples and keeping an audit trail. Finally, We developed creditability by finding a variety of SAE cases to ensure a multitude of interpretations (Ary, Jacobs, Razavieh, & Sorensen, 2006; Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2007).

The findings were divided into three different subsections representing the three time periods included in the analysis. SAE projects were first individually described with a synopsis. Next, each time period case analysis was put into a table format to organize the findings. Then, we developed a description of each individual case.

We examined four SAE cases representing the time period from 1928 to 1934. The four defining characteristics of the SAE projects were found to be mandated production project, student interest/student owned project, collaborative project, and awards driven project. Two projects were found to have extrinsic regulatory styles; one project had an amotivational regulatory style, and one project had an intrinsic regulatory style. Three projects were found to have an internal locus of causality while one project had an impersonal locus of causality. The internal locus of causality to continue participation developed through either student-to-student competition or the desire to achieve high levels of accomplishment via FFA awards. The mandated SAE projects were interpreted to have an impersonal effect of student's locus of causality because students viewed them as a negative component of vocational agriculture. The case descriptions for the time period of 1928-1934 are displayed in Table 1.

The SAE mandate. The requirement of the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 for all students to have a SAE was quickly adopted. In 1921-22, 79% of all agriculture students across the nation had a SAE (True, 1929) and this rose to about 90% by 1930 (Maltby, 1931). But, just because most students had a SAE did not mean that all students valued their SAE. Schmidt (1928) illustrated this situation quite well:

      In too many instances the project
   has been regarded as something that
   must be done because it has been made
   a requirement. In a school where such
   an attitude prevails, many of the boys
   who are studying vocational agriculture
   regard the projects as a six-month sentence
   at hard work to be served as a result
   of selecting the training course in
   vocational agriculture (p. 260).

Martin's poultry SAE. As the special editor of the supervised practice section of The Agricultural Education Magazine, G. A. Schmidt reported about SAEs. One such report was a short article about the poultry flock of Martin Rand (1930). As a sophomore Martin wanted to raise a poultry flock of 500 hens on his farm, despite his father's reluctance. His father initially suggested 50-100 hens, but Martin persisted and eventually his father gave in. Martin built the brooder houses, started a flock, and by the first year made almost $1,000. Martin's father was so impressed that he encouraged his to son increase the poultry business, invited his other son into a family partnership, and together raised 2,400 baby chicks by year three (Schmidt, 1930).

Lebanon's class SAE. F. A. Blauer (1930), agriculture teacher of Lebanon, Kansas, conducted a class poultry operation for seventeen students who did not live on a farm. He shared the results of this class SAE in an Agricultural Education Magazine article. The students built the poultry house, cared for the laying hens, and conducted experiments. The results of the production experiments were shared with the community, as well as the products the students' produced. Blauer reported that students were highly interested in the collaborative project. "A contest spirit prevails among the boys. Such questions as 'Whose pullets laid the most eggs this week?', 'How many eggs today?', and 'How are the birds doing?' are often heard" (p. 54).

SAE awards. The first student awards established for the National Organization FFA were the FFA degrees. The varying levels of degrees were awarded partially based on the students' SAE. The degree system was designed to recognize students at the local chapter, state association, and national organization level. Nominations for an American farmer degree were privileges that went to the top students in each state (Groseclose, 1929). For instance, James Neal was nominated for the America farmer degree from Oregon in 1931. His biography included:

Neal has been actively identified with the Oregon association and served the organization as its first president. He is a leading character in the Oregon Future Farmer motion picture film made by Southern Pacific Railway during the annual Smith-Hughes Week-end at Oregon Agricultural College, to explain the work of vocational agriculture as carried on in Oregon. James was also the president of his local chapter (Crabtree, 1931, p. 192).

Soon after the establishment of the FFA degree award system, practitioners realized the power of SAE awards to motivate students (Bible, 1941).

We examined four SAE cases representing the time period from 1947 to 1953. The four defining characteristics of the SAE projects were found to be two required collaborative projects, one mandated placement project, and one student interest/student owned project. The required collaborative projects and mandated placement project were found to have extrinsic regulatory styles while the student interest/student owned project had an intrinsic regulatory style. The two required collaborative projects both had an external locus of causality, but for different reasons; one external locus of causality was derived from money while the other was viewed as a "burden" that must be continued due to its requirement. However, the mandated placement project had an internal locus of causality due to stimulation of the student's interest. The student interest/student owned case was initially started based on the student's intrinsic motivation and continued to be derived from an internal locus of causality. The data and case descriptions from 1947-1953 are displayed in Table 2.

Kalispell FFA chapter's SAEs. The following excerpt comes from G. P. Deyoe's book, Farming Programs in Vocational Agriculture (1953). Deyoe's research and writings on SAEs were the most extensive in the history of agricultural education. Deyoe included the Kalispell FFA chapter in his section about chapter-wide SAEs:

The supervised farming programs of 112 individual boys in a recent year included an average of three improvement projects as well as the ownership projects. The chapter operates a farm of 100 acres on which is demonstrated the restoration of fertility, the reduction of alkalinity, and the control of weeds.... The members are paid dividends on shares which they own in the chapter farm (Deyoe, 1953, p. 218).

Joe Harris's family ranch. The following excerpt also comes from Deyoe's Farming Programs in Vocational Agriculture (1953) text. This text, along with the early edition of the same text (Deyoe, 1947), contained a multitude of detailed examples of SAEs. Deyoe's presented this example within his section entitled accomplishments of individuals in their farming programs:

When Joe [Harris] was in the fourth grade, his father died. Joe, and older brother Sam, and his mother agreed to keep the 3,800 acre ranch going, and each brother was promised a one-third partnership upon graduation from high school. They developed an extensive cattle enterprise. To aid in hay-making on a large scale, they constructed buck rakes and hay stackers. When Sam was called into the armed forces, Joe became manager of the ranch and the herd of 700 cattle. A major development was the construction of a reservoir for impounding water from a spring; this increased the irrigation potential from 20 acres to 300 acres (Deyoe, 1953, p. 221).

Battle Ground's school farm. B. Brown (1949), the agricultural supervisor from Olympia, Washington, reported on his program's school farm in The Agricultural Education Magazine. Brown described how he managed labor and instruction of the 51 acre school farm:

   The class program is kept flexible so
   that, if weather permits, a class can go to
   the farm on short notice. Lockers are
   provided in which each boy keeps farm
   work clothes and shoes. Acreage of
   each crop is rather small so that the labor
   does not become monotonous. A
   boy learns to prune raspberries in one or
   two hours. A week of it would have little
   or no educational value. Experience
   driving tractors, plowing, and disking, is
   possible for all boys in the department
   (p. 62).

The profits were used to finance the program and students were paid a wage for their work.

Jamaica Plains and East Weymouth High Schools of Massachusetts, both near Boston, had to adapt to the SAE requirements to fit the placement experiences available to their students. Most of the students did not live on farms (Deyoe, 1947; Nelson, 1950). Over a four year program, students of Jamaica Plains and East Weymouth agricultural programs were expected to spend their summers working with a variety of different local agricultural businesses. Students gained experience in the fields of marketing garden produce, poultry farming, dairy production, and greenhouse operations. This variety of experiences would be hard to duplicate in an individual student's entrepreneurial production experience, especially in an area near Boston. These types of placement experience arrangements were popular in ever increasingly metropolitan states, such as Massachusetts, because up to 90% of the students did not have the home facilities for an individual production or non-production agricultural experience (Taft, 1960).

We examined five SAE cases representing the time period from 1966 to 1973. The five defining characteristics of the SAE projects were found to be two mandated projects, one award driven project, one student interest/awards project, and one student interest project. All five projects were found to have extrinsic regulatory styles. Two of the five cases were interpreted to have developed an internal locus of causality originating from personal preference of the project. Three of the five cases were interpreted to have an external locus of causality derived from money, power, requirements, or seeking approval from others. The data and case descriptions from 1966-1973 are displayed in Table 3.

New SAE awards. School-based agricultural education, especially SAEs, changed after the passage of the Vocational Education Act of 1963. Agriculture curriculum had a broader perception of agricultural careers. Students began to have SAEs in broader agricultural careers as well. SAEs were no longer mandated for each student, though individual agriculture programs could still require students to have SAEs. Professionals argued for an update to the SAE award system of the FFA, including proficiency awards, to include more off-farm activities (Kantner & Bender, 1967; Selland & Vog, 1969; Sheppard, 1968). In response to the external pressures the National FFA Organization began to adapt proficiency awards starting in 1970. The changes included the addition of proficiency awards, such as outdoor recreation and forest management, and the inclusion of a placement category to many of the pre-existing proficiency areas (Seefeldt, 1970). These awards would motivate those students in these newer areas by providing them the same level of recognition as students with traditional projects.

Outdoor recreation SAE. The following excerpt was from an interview with a former female FFA member. She was part of a growing minority in agricultural education during that time period. The decision to start the SAE was partially grounded in the likelihood that she could win a proficiency award:

   He [the FFA advisor] would do home
   visits to each student home and interview
   the family and student to determine
   the student interest and capability
   to complete the SAE. We were raising
   beef cattle and raised tobacco and tomatoes,
   yet my Advisor knew that I would
   not be competitive in those areas so we
   went with the area I was the strongest.
   My family had sold the dairy farm when
   I entered high school and bought 70
   acres on which we developed a
   campground. I was able to compete in
   the outdoor recreation proficiency and
   won the Southern Region (personal
   communication, April 11, 2011).

South Rowan High School's placement SAEs. John W. Allison (1966) was an agriculture teacher that believed in the value of every student having a SAE. He was the agriculture teacher from South Rowan High School in China Grove, NC. The excerpt from The Agricultural Education Magazine was brief, but Allison provided many details about how he managed his students' SAEs, including facilitating students' placement experiences:

Out of 113 students enrolled in vo-ag we have 55 engaged in work experiences away from their homes. These work experiences include work on highly specialized horticulture farms, dairy farms, general farms and produce farms.... Our boys realize they are being graded by the farm manager as well as the teacher of agriculture. Systematic raises in pay when earned get a good effort from all students. As students get more experience and exhibit leadership, they are used as field supervisors to direct fellow workers (Allison, 1966, p. 53).

Loudonville's production SAEs. J. Nowels, of Loudonville, Ohio, was another agriculture teacher that required students to have a SAE, but in this case students had to have entrepreneurial, production projects. Nowels' (1973) Agricultural Education Magazine article also included his philosophy of a complete program of school-based agriculture:

Students in our vocational agriculture department must carry a minimum of two production projects and three improvement projects per student.... In my 25 years of teaching vocational agriculture (21 years here at Loudonville) their requirement has always been met readily by interested students regardless of whether they live on a farm or in town. One hundred per cent of our membership has always exhibited projects at our Ashland County Fair and our local Loudonville Fair. Nearly all of our students have 100 per cent ownership of their production projects (Nowels, 1973,p. 248).

A dairy operation SAE. The following quote is from a former FFA member in the later 1960s. His father was his FFA advisor and he eventually became an agriculture teacher himself. Interestingly, the man talked about his past experience in both the awards he won and life lessons he learned:

   I was born into a dairy operation and
   that was the basis for my SAE. Dad
   gave me ownership in 2 cows as a
   freshman in return for milking every
   morning and afternoons when school or
   sport activities didn't interfere. I was
   also responsible for working the fields
   raising corn and hay for feed.. My
   dairy operation expanded to 20 cows
   and replacement heifers through high
   school and first year of college. I placed
   1st in dairy proficiency at the Middle TN
   regional level. I learned a lot of valuable
   skills related directly to dairy and
   crop production. Most importantly, I
   learned self-discipline and the importance
   of hard work which helped me
   get through college and eventually a
   successful teaching career (personal
   communication, April 11, 2011).

Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations

The purpose of this study was to examine student motivation for supervised agricultural experiences (SAEs) through the lens of Self-Determination Theory. From the cases occurring during the 1928-34 era, three of the four cases initiated participation in SAEs by means of externally motivating factors. Three of the four cases in this time period were also sustained by an internal locus of causality. Three of the four cases from 1947-1953 began based on extrinsic motivation of the student. Two of the cases had an external locus of causality while two had an internal locus of causality. All five from 196673 began with extrinsic motivation and three of the five cases in this time period being sustained by an external locus of causality.

A conclusion from these findings was that initiating student participation in SAE projects during the selected time periods has been driven by external motivating factors more than internal motivating factors. External motivators appeared in the form of mandating SAE participation, awards, or collaborative SAEs required at school. Internal motivators appeared in the form of student interests and/or student owned projects. These conclusions support the findings of contemporary research on teachers' facilitation of SAEs. Specifically, Wilson and Moore (2007) found that student participation in SAEs was driven by the teachers' desire for FFA awards. The FFA award system was also listed as a motivator to implement SAEs by the teachers interviewed in Retallick's (2010) study. These three conclusions are supported by existing literature stating external motivators are sometimes necessary to begin an action (Deci, Eghart, Patrick, Leone, 1994; Deci & Ryan, 1985a). Four cases in this study demonstrated SAEs could be started using external motivational strategies, but this motivation can be transitioned into students having an internal drive to continue their SAE. The findings from this study imply that the use of external motivators, though not ideal according to motivational theories, can be a means to initiate student SAE participation (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

We recommend agricultural education practitioners continue to utilize external motivators with caution to introduce students to SAEs. Practitioners should strive to find ways to internally motivate students to participate in SAEs. Reeve (2009) proposed a list of strategies teachers can utilize to enhance students' intrinsic motivation in learning environments. Educators could better initiate students' intrinsic motivation for SAEs by applying strategies such as focusing on students' personal interests related to SAE areas, designing SAEs that would be personally meaningful to the student, or providing rationale to students as to how and why SAEs are important to their educational and/or personal development.

Another conclusion was five SAE cases were started with external motivational approaches and the locus of causality remained external. An internal locus of causality was not evident when SAEs were deemed as only a requirement for the course or continued for money. According to motivational research (Deci & Ryan, 1985a; Ryan & Deci, 2000), the use of external motivating approaches can lead to a lowered chance of gaining an internal locus of causality for the SAE project. Reaching a point of internal locus of causality is ideal according to Self-Determination Theory. The implication from this finding is that externally rewarding students' continued participation in SAEs, either through program requirements, money, or awards, can condition students for the award more so than the experience. This could subsequently diminish the students' internal drive for the experience.

It is recommended that agricultural education practitioners use caution when assigning external rewards for student's participation in learning activities such as SAEs. Overuse of external rewards such as money, trophies, or recognition can potentially reduce a student's acquisition of the "true" SAE values of enhanced learning and career exploration. Practitioners should strive to help students realize the value of SAEs as a means to learning knowledge and career skills within an agriculture context that can be later transferred to contexts beyond agriculture. Simply put, educators should help students find value in SAEs beyond a plaque and a paycheck.

We acknowledge the limitations of transferability of the findings. The cases included in this study were only interpreted based on what information was provided by the sources. Historical researchers need to continue identifying detailed historical SAE sources to better understand the evolution of SAEs. Future historical research should investigate the motivation of students through historical narrative methods. Historical narrative methods would focus on a couple of students and develop a more detailed historical description of SAEs. This historical analysis found that motivating students to participate in SAEs has been a concern since the 1930s, which echoes the findings of present day SAE research. Navigating the boundaries between using extrinsic rewards and developing an intrinsic drive has been a continual challenge. Considering the decreasing number of agriculture students with a SAE, further research and subsequent instructional approaches are needed to strike a balance between intrinsic and extrinsic motivating strategies to improve the implementation and continuation of valuable SAEs.

DOI: 10.5032/jae.2013.01031

Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87(1), 49-74. doi:10.1037/0021843X.87.1.49

Allison, J. W. (1966). Now every vo-ag student learns through supervised practice. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 39(3), 53.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Razavieh, A., & Sorensen, C. (2006). Introduction to research in education. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Bender, R. E., Taylor, R. E., Hansen, C. K., & Newcomb L. H. (1979). The FFA and you: Your guide to learning. Danville, IL: Interstate Printers and Publishers.

Bible, B. L. (1941). The F.F.A. as an aid in improving supervised farming programs. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 14(6), 109, 117.

Blauer, F. A. (1930). A class poultry project. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 2(4), 54.

Boone, H. N., Doerfert, D. L., & Elliot, J. (1987). Supervised occupational experience programs: History, philosophy, current status, and future implications. Journal of American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 28(4), 57-64. doi:10.5032/jaatea.1987.04057

Brown, B. L. (1949). School farm becomes much used resource. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 22(3), 55, 62.

Crabtree, W. E. (1931). James Neal, "American Farmer" of Oregon. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 3(12), 192-193.

Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18(1), 105-115. doi:10.1037/h0030644

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985a). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985b). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109-134.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024-1037. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior, Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-68. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Deci, E. L., Eghart, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62(1), 119-142. doi:10.1111/14676494.ep9406221281

Doerfert, D. L. (Ed.) (2011). National research agenda: American Association for Agricultural

Eductaion's research priority areas for 2011-2015. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University, Department of Agricultural Education and Communications.

Deyoe, G. P. (1947). Supervised farming in vocational agriculture. Danville, IL: Interstate Publishers Company.

Deyoe, G. P. (1953). Farming programs in vocational agriculture. Danville, IL: Interstate Publishers Company.

Dyer, J. E., & Osborne, E. W. (1995). Participation in supervised agricultural experience programs: A syntheses of research. Journal of Agricultural Education, 36(1), 6-14. doi:10.5032/jae.1995.01006

Dyer, J. E., & Williams, D. L. (1997). Supervision of supervised agricultural experience programs: A synthesis of research. Journal of Agricultural Education, 38(4), 59-67. doi:10.5032/jae.1997.04059

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Groseclose, H. (1929). Two "American farmers". The Agricultural Education Magazine, 1(6), 10.

Jenkins, C. C. III., & Kitchel, T. (2009). Identifying quality indicators of SAE and FFA: A delphi approach. Journal of Agricultural Education, 50(3), 33-42. doi:10.5032/jae.2009.03033

Kantner, E. F., & Bender, R. E. (1967). The FFA in a changing Vo Ag program. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 39(11), 246-248.

Maltby, R. D. (1931). Progress in supervised practice. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 3(10), 155, 164.

Moore, G. E. (1988). The forgotten leader in agricultural education: Rufus W. Stimson. The Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 29(3), 51-58. doi:10.5032/jaatea.1988.03050

Moore, G. E. (2003). The sixteen theorems of SAE. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 75(6), 20-21.

Moore, G. E., & Borne, C. (1986). The secondary vocational agriculture curriculum from 1890 to 1980. Journal of American Association of Teacher Educators in agriculture, 27(3), 8-19. doi: 10.5032/jaatea.1986.03008

National FFA Organization. (2012). Official FFA manual. Indianapolis, IN: National FFA Organization.

Nelson, H. S. (1950). Summer farm placement. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 22(11), 247.

Nowels, J. (1973). An ag teacher's view: The effectiveness of supervised farming program. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 45(11), 248.

Osborne, E. W. (1988). Planning and supervision strategies for SOE programs in agriculture. The Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 29(4), 49-56. doi: 10.5032/jaatea.1988.04049

Phipps, L. J., Osborne, E. W., Dyer, J. E., & Ball, A. L. (2008). Handbook on agricultural education in public schools. Clifton Park, NY: Thomson Learning, Inc.

Rampolla, M. L. (2007). A pocket guide to writing in history. Boston: Bradford/ St. Martin's.

Retallick, M. A. (2010). Implementation of supervised agricultural experience programs: The agriculture teachers' perspective. Journal of Agricultural Education, 51(4), 59-70. doi:10.5032/jae.2010.04059

Retallick, M. A., & Martin, R. A. (2005). Economic impact of supervised agricultural experience in Iowa: A trend study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 46(1), 44-54. doi:10.5032/jae.2005.0104

Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 159-175.

Robinson, J. S., & Haynes, J. C. (2011). Value and expectations of supervised agricultural experiences as expressed by agriculture instructors in Oklahoma who were alternatively certified. Journal of Agricultural Education, 52(2), 47-57. doi:10.5032/jae.2011.02047

Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality, 63(3), 397-427. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.ep9510042298

Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 749-761. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.749

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new direction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). When awards compete with nature: The undermining of intrinsic motivation and self-regulation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 13-54). San Diego: Academic Press.

Seefeldt, R. A. (1970). A new look for FFA proficiency awards. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 43(3), 62-63.

Selland, L., & Vog, W. M. (1969). FFA for the new concept of vocational agriculture. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 41(9), 208-209.

Schmidt, G. A. (1928). Efficiency in vocational education in agriculture. New York: Century Company.

Schmidt, G. A. (1930). Ohio boys nets $1,654. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 2(5), 71.

Schunk, D. H. (2009). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Sheppard, N. A. (1968). Improving the image of FFA. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 40(10), 224.

Spalding, R., & Parker, C. (2007). Historiography: An introduction. New York: Manchester University Press.

Steele, R. (1997). Analysis of the continuing decline in use of supervised agricultural experience (SAE) in New York State. Journal of Agricultural Education, 38(2), 49-58. doi:10.5032/jae.1997.02049

Taft, J. A. (1960). Placement for farm work experience. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 33(1), 6-8.

Talbert, B. A., Vaughn, R., & Croom D. B. (2005). Foundations of agricultural education. Catlin, IL: Professional Educators Publications, Inc.

Tenney, A. W. (1977). The FFA at 50: A golden past, a brighter future. Alexandria, VA: Future Farmers of America.

True, A. C. (1929). A history of agricultural education in the United States, 1785-1929. Washington DC: Government Printing Office.

Vallerand, R. J., & Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and

amotivational styles as predictors of behavior: A prospective study. Journal of Personality, 60(3), 599-620. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.ep9209210978

White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered. Psychological Review, 66(5), 297-333. doi:10.1037/h0040934

Wilson, E. B., & Moore, G. E. (2007). Exploring the paradox of supervised agricultural experience programs in agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(4), 82-92. doi:10.5032/jae.2007.04082

University of Nebraska-Lincoln

WILLIAM A. BIRD is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communication at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 303A Ag Hall, Lincoln, NE 68583, wbird2@unl.edu.

MICHAEL J. MARTIN is a Graduate Student in the Department of Agricultural Education at the University of Missouri, 125 Gentry Hall, Columbia, MO 65211, mjmgg7@mail.missouri.edu.

JON C. SIMONSEN is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Agricultural Education at the University of Missouri, 121 Gentry Hall, Columbia, MO 65211, simonsenj@missouri.edu.

Table 1
Interpretive Analysis of SAE Motivators from 1928 to 1934

SAE Data           Defining
and Cases          Characteristic       Categories of Motivation

                                        Regulatory      Locus of
                                        Style           Causality

Mandated SAEs      Mandated             Amotivational   Impersonal
                   Production Project
Martin's poultry   Student Interest/    Intrinsic       Internal
  SAE                Student
                   Owned Project
Lebanon's class    Collaborative        Extrinsic       Internal
  SAE                Projects
SAE Awards         Award Driven         Extrinsic       Internal
                     Project

Table 2
Interpretive Analysis of SAE Motivators from 1947 to 1953

                      Defining
SAE Data and Cases    Characteristic       Categories of Motivation

                                           Regulatory   Locus of
                                           Style        Causality

Kalispell FFA         Collaborative        Extrinsic    External
  Chapter's SAEs        Projects
Joe Harris's Family   Student Interest/    Intrinsic    Internal
  Ranch                 Student Owned
Battle Ground         Collaborative        Extrinsic    External
  School Farm           Projects
Urban Placement       Mandated Placement   Extrinsic    Internal
  SAEs                  Project

Table 3
Interpretive Analysis of SAE Motivators from 1966 to 1973

                     Defining                     Categories of
SAE Data and Cases   Characteristic               Motivation

                                              Regulatory   Locus of
                                              Style        Causality

New SAE Awards       Award Driven Projects    Extrinsic    Internal
Outdoor Recreation   Student Interest &       Extrinsic    Internal
  SAE                  Award Driven Project
South Rowan High     Mandated Placement       Extrinsic    External
  School's             Project
  Placement SAEs
Loudonville's        Mandated Production      Extrinsic    External
  Production SAEs      Project
A Dairy Operation    Student Owned Project    Extrinsic    External

Source Citation

Gale Document Number: GALE|A381950099

Google Drive™

OneDrive™

Email

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Student motivation for involvement in supervised agricultural experiences: an historical perspective

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The purpose of this study was to examine student motivation for SAEs through the lens of the Self-Determination Theory. Self-Determination Theory proposed that human beings are more genuinely motivated when driven by internal factors as opposed to external factors. We used historical research and general qualitative interpretative methods to develop an explanation of student motivation for SAEs.