Bromphy and Cross’ observation, summarized in Barkley (2010), that much of what researchers have discovered about motivation can be organized with an expectancy x value model helped me see my motivation to complete my undergraduate degree in Mechanical Engineering differently.
A solid B+ average will satisfy most employers. This was my mantra that I developed during my undergraduate degree after I realized I didn’t want to do a masters and could not see the benefit of maintaining a GPA above this, especially given the disproportionate amount of effort it would require.
Looking at the expectancy x value model it was clear to me that the value of my undergraduate degree was its ability to provide me with a well paying secure job. The value did not go deeper to include an intrinsic love of the subject matter itself. What has changed is my perspective on expectancy.
I used to think that obtaining an A average was always within my reach and simply a matter of how hard I wanted to work. After reading more about expectancy, and in particular the concept of self worth models, I can see that my ego wanted me to see that the only thing preventing me from obtaining an A average was the amount of effort I was willing to invest (something I had control over) as opposed to a limit on my talents at math and physics (something I had no control over).
My take-away from this is the amount of energy an individual’s mind will devote at an unconscious level to protecting itself by employing a number of defense mechanisms, with rationalization being just one of them, when confronted with a threatening situation.
I come from a family of over-achieving scientists and engineers and to admit to myself that obtaining similar levels of success in either of these fields might be limited by my talents was a threatening situation for me. A much less threatening explanation (or rationalization) was to look at it as simply the amount of energy I was prepared to invest or in other words an explanation that gave me control over the situation and allowed me to live up to familial expectations.
As an instructor this is a reminder to me that students experiencing difficulties comprehending or mastering the class material (a threatening situation for them) may employ a number of defense mechanisms, with rationalization being one of them. For instance a student may rationalize to herself that her poor performance is due to her lack of interest in the subject matter as opposed to the reality that she needs to invest more effort to further develop the required skills and/or knowledge to achieve mastery.
My takeaway then is to keep an eye out for learner’s who are struggling to engage and to maintain a sense of curiosity and empathy for them. This will help me and the learner to see beyond the defense mechanisms to pinpoint the exact cause and work with him/her to find a solution.
References:
Barkley, E. F. (2010). Student Engagement Techniques - A Handbook for College Faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
McLeod, S. (2008). Defense Mechanisms. SimplyPsychology. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/defense-mechanisms.html
A solid B+ average will satisfy most employers. This was my mantra that I developed during my undergraduate degree after I realized I didn’t want to do a masters and could not see the benefit of maintaining a GPA above this, especially given the disproportionate amount of effort it would require.
Looking at the expectancy x value model it was clear to me that the value of my undergraduate degree was its ability to provide me with a well paying secure job. The value did not go deeper to include an intrinsic love of the subject matter itself. What has changed is my perspective on expectancy.
I used to think that obtaining an A average was always within my reach and simply a matter of how hard I wanted to work. After reading more about expectancy, and in particular the concept of self worth models, I can see that my ego wanted me to see that the only thing preventing me from obtaining an A average was the amount of effort I was willing to invest (something I had control over) as opposed to a limit on my talents at math and physics (something I had no control over).
My take-away from this is the amount of energy an individual’s mind will devote at an unconscious level to protecting itself by employing a number of defense mechanisms, with rationalization being just one of them, when confronted with a threatening situation.
I come from a family of over-achieving scientists and engineers and to admit to myself that obtaining similar levels of success in either of these fields might be limited by my talents was a threatening situation for me. A much less threatening explanation (or rationalization) was to look at it as simply the amount of energy I was prepared to invest or in other words an explanation that gave me control over the situation and allowed me to live up to familial expectations.
As an instructor this is a reminder to me that students experiencing difficulties comprehending or mastering the class material (a threatening situation for them) may employ a number of defense mechanisms, with rationalization being one of them. For instance a student may rationalize to herself that her poor performance is due to her lack of interest in the subject matter as opposed to the reality that she needs to invest more effort to further develop the required skills and/or knowledge to achieve mastery.
My takeaway then is to keep an eye out for learner’s who are struggling to engage and to maintain a sense of curiosity and empathy for them. This will help me and the learner to see beyond the defense mechanisms to pinpoint the exact cause and work with him/her to find a solution.
References:
Barkley, E. F. (2010). Student Engagement Techniques - A Handbook for College Faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
McLeod, S. (2008). Defense Mechanisms. SimplyPsychology. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/defense-mechanisms.html