Interest in mathematics and science learning

It is the first to address the range of approaches to studying interest inK–16 mathematics and science learning; from the learning of children as young as those in kindergarten— the “K”

Interest in Mathematics and Science Learning

Interest in Mathematics and Science Learning

Edited by

K Ann Renninger

Martina Nieswandt

Suzanne Hidi

standards of professional review to ensure their quality, accuracy, and objectivity Findings and conclusions in publications are those of the authors and do not reflect the position or policies of the Association, its Council,

or its officers.

© 2015 American Educational Research Association

The AERA Books Editorial Board

Chair: Gilberto Q Conchas

Members: D Jean Clandinin, Jeffrey R Henig, Felice J Levine, Simon W Marginson, Nailah Suad Nasir,

Charles M Payne, Russell W Rumberger, Mariana Souto-Manning

Published by the American Educational Research Association

1430 K St., NW, Suite 1200

Washington, DC 20005

Printed in the United States of America

All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, including, but not limited to, the process of scanning and digitization, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Interest in mathematics and science learning / edited by K Ann Renninger, Martina Nieswandt, and Suzanne Hidi pages cm

Includes bibliographical references and subject index.

ISBN 935302-38-7 (pbk : alk paper) ISBN 935302-39-4 (hardback : alk paper) ISBN 935302-42-4 (e-book) 1 Science Study and teaching 2 Mathematics Study and teaching 3 Motivation in education I Renninger, K Ann., editor II Nieswandt, Martina (Professor of education), editor

978-0-III Hidi, Suzanne, editor

Q181.I6554 2015

507.1 dc23

2015009010

We dedicate this book to our friend and colleague Dr Lore Hoffmann Her collaborationshave guided many scholars, and her ideas continue to inspire research on interest andscience education that bridges research and practice

In dedicating this volume to Lore, we acknowledge her pioneering work in the study ofinterest, and science interest in particular We specifically appreciate her efforts to focusserious attention on the possibilities for using research to understand and provide supportfor the development of female students’ interest in physics through curricular change andinstructional practice Lore’s research has contributed to developing understanding aboutthe complexity of interest as a psychological variable and interests as possible triggers forengaging students in learning

From 1972 until her retirement in 2002, Lore conducted research at the Leibniz Institute

of Science and Mathematics Education at the University of Kiel, Germany With her leagues, she helped to organize two international conferences on interest: the First Interna-tional Conference on Interest Research in 1984 and the Seeon Conference on Interest andGender in 1996

col-It was in the spirit of Lore’s efforts that we organized an AERA Education ResearchConference on Interest, the Self, and K–16 Mathematics and Science Learning that washeld at Swarthmore College in May 2012 The conference brought together researcherswith established research programs focusing on learners and their interest in mathematicsand science The participants, many of whom contributed to the present volume, camefrom different disciplines and through Skype from across the world to bridge research tra-ditions, identify complementarities in their work, and consider next steps for future researchand for practice

The editors would like to thank the American Educational Research Association (AERA)for sponsoring an AERA Education Research Conference on Interest, the Self, and K–16Mathematics and Science Learning that was held at Swarthmore College, May 6–8, 2012.Particular appreciation is extended to Felice Levine and the AERA Research Advisory Committee for their help in conceptualizing the design of the conference and their encour-agement to use the present volume as a way to disseminate conference discussion Theeditors also thank Felice and the AERA Books Editorial Board for their thoughtful support

of this interdisciplinary volume The editors gratefully acknowledge the contributions andsupport provided by the external reviewers for volume chapters; Melissa Emmerson andWilliam Lin, who helped with conference facilitation; and Rose Pozos-Brewer, who assisted

in assembling the volume In addition, the editors wish to acknowledge support for theirwork on this volume from the Senior College of the University of Toronto, the College ofEducation at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and Swarthmore College

K Ann Renninger, Martina Nieswandt, and Suzanne Hidi

Section 1 Interest and Other Motivational and Demographic Variables

1 Early Science Learning Experiences: Triggered and Maintained Interest 17

Mary Ainley and John Ainley

2 The Roles of Interest and Self-Efficacy in the Decision to Pursue

Mimi Bong, Sun Kyoung Lee, and Yeon-Kyoung Woo

3 One Size Fits Some: Instructional Enhancements to Promote Interest 49

Amanda M Durik, Chris S Hulleman, and Judith M Harackiewicz

4 The Effects of Interest and Utility Value on Mathematics Engagement

Sung-il Kim, Yi Jiang, and Juyeon Song

Johnmarshall Reeve, Woogul Lee, and Sungjun Won

6 Perceptions of Science and Their Role in the Development of Interest 93

K Ann Renninger, Christine N Costello Kensey, Sabrina J Stevens, and Dana L Lehman

7 The Relation Between Interest and Self-Regulation in Mathematics and Science 111

Carol Sansone, Dustin Thoman, and Tamra Fraughton

Section 2 Interest and Subject Matter

8 Promoting Information Seeking and Questioning in Science 135

Ayelet Baram-Tsabari

9 Play as an Aspect of Interest Development in Science 153

Mizrap Bulunuz and Olga S Jarrett

10 Interest, Self-Efficacy, and Academic Achievement in a Statistics Lesson 173

Ian Hay, Rosemary Callingham, and Colin Carmichael

11 Intrinsic Motivation, Self-Efficacy, and Interest in Science 189

Shawn M Glynn, Robert R Bryan, Peggy Brickman, and Norris Armstrong

Adam V Maltese and Joseph A Harsh

13 Undergraduate Students’ Interest in Chemistry: The Roles of Task and Choice 225

Martina Nieswandt and Gail Horowitz

14 Teachers Learning How to Support Student Interest in Mathematics and Science 243

Julianne C Turner, Hayal Z Kackar-Cam, and Meg Trucano

Section 3 Interest Development

15 Emerging Individual Interests Related to Science in Young Children 261

Joyce M Alexander, Kathy E Johnson, and Mary E Leibham

16 Sustaining Interest-Based Participation in Science 281

Flávio S Azevedo

17 Interest and the Development of Pathways to Science 297

Kevin Crowley, Brigid Barron, Karen Knutson, and Caitlin K Martin

18 Understanding Well-Developed Interests and Activity Commitment 315

Jacquelynne S Eccles, Jennifer A Fredricks, and Alanna Epstein

19 Fostering Students’ Identification With Mathematics and Science 331

Brett D Jones, Chloe Ruff, and Jason W Osborne

20 Canalization and Connectedness in the Development of Science Interest 353

Kimberley Pressick-Kilborn

21 Supporting the Development of Transformative Experience and Interest 369

Kevin J Pugh, Lisa Linnenbrink-Garcia, Michael M Phillips, and Tony Perez

Conclusions: Emerging Issues and Themes in Addressing Interest in

Suzanne Hidi, K Ann Renninger, and Martina Nieswandt

Ashman, Adrian, University of Queensland, Australia

Bergin, David, University of Missouri

Boscolo, Pietro, University of Padova, Italy

Dohn, Niels Bonderup, Aarhus University, Denmark

Graeber, Wolfgang, Institute for Science Education, University of Kiel, GermanyGreene, Barbara A., University of Oklahoma

Grosshandler, Dean, University of Illinois at Chicago

Herrenkohl, Leslie, University of Washington

Holden, George W., Southern Methodist University

Horowitz, Gail, Brooklyn College

Murayama, Kou, University of Reading

Olsen, Ron, University of Oslo, Norway

Phillipson, Sivanes, Monash University–Peninsula Campus, Australia

Potvin, Geoff, Clemson University

Rogat, Toni, Rutgers University

Reeve, Johnmarshall, Korea University

Schauble, Leona, Peabody College, Vanderbilt University

Smith, Jessi L., University of Montana

Trautwin, Ulrich, University of Tuebingen, Germany

Wong, David, Michigan State University

Yarden, Anat, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel

On the Power of Interest

Educators, researchers, and, more recently, policy makers agree that understanding andworking with learners’ interest in mathematics and science is important This AmericanEducational Research Association (AERA) volume reflects the emergent state of research

on learner interest in mathematics and science learning and related activity in formal andinformal contexts It is the first to address the range of approaches to studying interest inK–16 mathematics and science learning; from the learning of children as young as those in kindergarten— the “K” of K–16—to that of undergraduate learners completing “Grade 16.”

It includes chapters that focus on mathematics and/or science learning, as well as chaptersaddressing the integration of these disciplines with technology and engineering as STEM(science, technology, engineering, and mathematics).1

The volume includes contributions from scholars who are working in various fields (e.g.,motivation, mathematics education, science education, learning science, and developmentalpsychology) and have developed research programs addressing interest in mathematicsand/or science learning The contributors were participants in an AERA-sponsored confer-ence on the volume’s topic,2 a conference that was designed to enable distinct researchgroups to begin to bridge research traditions, identify complementarities in their work, anddesign steps for future research as well as for practice

As Valsiner (1992) observed, the word interest is part of our everyday discourse and has

different meanings, ranging from attraction to passion The impact of this variety ofmeanings is that there are a number of conceptualizations and research methods for studyinginterest These differences have consequences for how findings are interpreted and the edu-cational implications that are then derived The conceptualization and operationalization

of interest are especially important for clarifying how learners might most effectively besupported to develop connections to the hard sciences (Becher & Trowler, 2001), disciplinesthat are rigorous, perceived to be difficult, and hierarchical in the sense that courseworkbuilds on previous coursework and, frequently, missed content has to be mastered beforenew content can be learned (see related discussions in Hannover & Kessels, 2004; Kessels,Rau, & Hannover, 2006)

Despite differences in interest researchers’ focus (e.g., interest as development, interest asemotion, interest as task feature/environment, interest as value, interest as vocational interest),there are five characteristics of interest on which most of those studying interest as a distinctpsychological variable tend to agree (Renninger & Hidi, 2011) First, interest always refers tointeraction with particular content (e.g., mathematics, science) It describes focused attention,with development to continued engagement and reengagement Second, interest exists in aparticular relation between the learner and the environment; a learner has the potential forinterest in his or her genetic makeup, and the content and the environment determine

whether it is supported to develop or not Third, interest has both affective and cognitivecomponents, although the influence of each varies depending on the phase of interest devel-opment In earlier phases of interest development, the affective component may be moresalient because knowledge requirements are minimal, but for interest to develop, knowledgeand value, in addition to affect, need to be present (Renninger & Hidi, 2011) Fourth, alearner may or may not be consciously aware that his or her interest has been triggered.Fifth, interest has a physiological or neurological basis (Hidi, 2006); given the relation of in-terest to the reward circuitry, Hidi (in press) and Ainley and Hidi (2014) have suggested thatinterest serves as a reward that leads the learner to seek resources and challenges

The Importance of Learner Interest in Mathematics and Science

At this time, there is solid research evidence that the presence of interest positively influenceslearners’ attention, strategy use, and goal setting (for reviews, see Hidi & Renninger, 2006;Potvin & Hasni, 2014; Renninger & Hidi, 2011) With interest, learners are likely to be able

to self-regulate and persist to complete tasks even when they are challenging, whereaslearners with little interest typically have difficulty engaging and continuing to work withtasks (Nieswandt, 2007; Renninger & Hidi, 2002; Sansone, Fraughton, Zachary, Butner, &Heiner, 2011; see Renninger, 2010)

Studies have demonstrated that interest can be supported to develop even if a personinitially has low self-efficacy, lacks academic goals for learning, and/or is not able to self-regulate (e.g., Hidi, Weiss, Berndorff, & Nolen, 1998; Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009;Nieswandt, 2007; Sansone et al., 2011) The need to develop learner interest has been impli-cated as critical if students are to continue in STEM (e.g., Maltese & Tai, 2011; Sjøberg &Schreiner, 2010) The Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K–12 ScienceEducation (National Research Council [NRC], 2011) stressed that “effective instructioncapitalizes on students’ early interest and experiences, identifies and builds on what theyknow, and provides them with experiences to engage them in the practices of science andsustain their interest” (p 18)

The challenges of developing a principled understanding of mathematics and science ciplinary content have been the topic of international and national calls (e.g., EuropeanCommission, 2007; NRC, 2012; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,

dis-2006, 2007) and recent efforts to develop connections among STEM disciplines more generally

(e.g., NRC, 2011, 2012) Citing the National Academies’ 2007 report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, business and

industry leaders declared the small numbers of students in the United States who are interested

in and choosing to pursue careers in STEM fields a national challenge (Business Higher ucation Forum, 2010) Moreover, the National Science Board (2014) report indicated con-tinued low representation in the science and engineering workforce of women and of histor-ically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, particularly Blacks and Hispanics Independently, the U.S President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology(2010) issued a call to increase students’ interest in STEM majors and careers They targetedstudent proficiency in STEM subjects, especially mathematics, observing that mathematics

Ed-is necessary as a prerequEd-isite for students who might select and then be successful in STEMmajors They also underscored the need for educators in formal and informal learning en-vironments to understand what enables learners to develop their skills and knowledge inmathematics and science and the implications of this information for their work with them.Honey, Pearson, and Schweingruber (2014) corroborated this suggestion, noting in particularthe need for a better understanding of the role of interest in STEM learning and the inte-gration of STEM coursework

Studying Interest: Interdisciplinary Considerations

To date, research on interest indicates that students can be supported to engage in matics and/or science through the provision of information about STEM careers (e.g., Hall,Dickerson, Batts, Kauffmann, & Bosse, 2011; Harackiewicz, Rozek, Hulleman, & Hyde,2012), role models (Barron, Kennedy-Martin, Takeuchi, & Fithian, 2009; Weber, 2011, 2012),hands-on activities (e.g., Bulunuz, 2013; Dohn, 2011; Holstermann, Ainley, Grube, Roick,

mathe-& Bögeholz, 2012; Swarat, Ortony, mathe-& Revelle, 2012), personally relevant topics (e.g., Basu mathe-&Calabrese Barton, 2007; Fusco, 2001; Glynn, Taasoobshirazi, & Brickman, 2007; Palmer,2009), novelty and challenge (Durik & Harackiewicz, 2007), and transformative experience(e.g., Pugh, 2011)

When instruction allows it, students have also been found to promote and develop theirown interests in the classroom (e.g., Jones & Wilkins, 2013; Pressick-Kilborn & Walker,2002; Reeve, 2013) Similar findings have been reported both in online contexts (e.g., Baram-Tsabari, Sethi, Bry, & Yarden, 2006; Sansone, Smith, Thoman, & MacNamara, 2012) and inout-of-school or informal science settings (Alexander, Johnson, & Kelley, 2012; Azevedo,

2006, 2011; Crowley, Callanan, Jipson, Galco, Topping et al., 2001; Eagan, Hurtado, Change,Garcia, Herrera et al., 2013) Moreover, studies have also suggested that teachers’ interest intheir students and knowledge of the discipline are likely to lead to explanations that theirstudents understand (e.g., Rotgans & Schmidt, 2011; Xu, Coats, & Davidson, 2012)

As the present volume demonstrates, interest in mathematics and science has beenstudied in a variety of ways In educational and social psychology, attention has tended tofocus on interest as a psychological variable that develops and on its impact on othervariables such as goals, self-efficacy, and self-regulation Research in mathematics and scienceeducation, on the other hand, often focuses on “fun” or “enjoyment” as an indicator of en-gagement and usually targets assessment at a single point in time, rather than addressinghow change may be supported to occur However, because neuroscientific research nowsuggests that liking, wanting, and learning are separable psychological components of mo-tivation (Berridge, 2012; Berridge, Robinson, & Aldridge, 2009), it cannot be assumed thatchanges in liking will necessarily lead to the development of interest (Harackiewicz, Barron,Tauer, & Elliot, 2002; Turner & Silvia, 2006)

Hidi and Renninger (2006; see also Renninger & Hidi, 2011) used findings from theempirical literature to identify four phases in the development of interest: triggered situa-tional, maintained situational, emerging individual, and well-developed individual interest(see Table 1) In earlier phases of interest (triggered situational and maintained situational

interest), learners need support to make real-world connections to tasks, whereas in laterphases of interest (emerging individual and well-developed individual interest) those con-nections are in place, and learners are ready to work more directly with the challenges ofthe content; in fact, this is what learners in more developed phases of interest find useful(Renninger, 2010) Working with the Four-Phase Model of Interest Development, severalauthors in this volume target learners in earlier or later phases of interest development,and others focus on patterns that emerge in interest engagements across various develop-ment phases Numerous authors address the state of interest and do not focus on develop-ment and/or work with the Four-Phase Model

The Present Volume

The chapters of this volume provide a foundation for considering what we know and whatstill needs to be considered about the role of interest in K–16 mathematics and sciencelearning They represent diverse contributions from scholars whose research programs ad-dress interest using a wide range of qualitative and quantitative methods (e.g., case studies,text analysis, large-scale survey, and mixed methods), varied populations (preschool childrenthrough practicing teachers), and settings representing cultural and social diversity, althoughdiversity is not the sole focus of consideration

Phases of Interest Development Phase I:

Triggered

Situational

Phase 2:

Maintained Situational

Phase 3:

Emerging Individual

Phase 4:

Well-Developed Individual

changes in cognitive and

affective processing

Ȉ•›…Š‘Ž‘‰‹…ƒŽ•–ƒ–‡–Šƒ–

involves focused attention and persistence over extended period, and/or reoccurs and persists

Ȉ•›…Š‘Ž‘‰‹…ƒŽ•–ƒ–‡and

the beginning of relatively enduring predisposition to seek reengagement with particular classes of content

Ȉ•›…Š‘Ž‘‰‹…ƒŽ•–ƒ–‡and a

relatively enduring predisposition to reengage particular classes of content

ȈMay or may not be

reflectively aware of the

experience

ȈReengages content that previously triggered attention Ȉ • supported by others to find connections among their skills, knowledge, and prior experience Ȉƒ• positive feelings Ȉ • developing knowledge

of the content Ȉ • developing a sense of

–Š‡…‘–‡–ǯ•˜ƒŽ—‡

Ȉ • likely to independently re-engage content ȈHas curiosity questions that leads to seek answers ȈHas positive feelings ȈHas stored knowledge and stored value Ȉ •˜‡”›ˆ‘…—•‡†‘Š‹•‘”

her own questions

Ȉ †‡’‡†‡–Ž›”‡‡‰ƒ‰‡• content

Ȉƒ• curiosity questions ȈSelf-regulates easily to reframe questions and seek answers

Ȉƒ• positive feelings ȈCan persevere through frustration and challenge in order to meet goals ȈRecognizes ‘–Š‡”•ǯ contributions to the discipline ȈActively seeks feedback

Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press, USA From Renninger, K A & Su, S (2012) Interest

and its development In R M Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford University Handbook of Motivation (pp 167–187).

New York: Oxford University Press.

Table 1 The Four Phases of Interest Development: Definitions and Learner Characteristics

The chapters take up unanswered questions that are critical for research and practice(see Renninger & Su, 2012) What in particular is important for educators to understandabout interest in K–16 mathematics and science learning? Does the relation between thetriggering of interest in K–16 mathematics and science classrooms vary if a person is in anearlier or a later phase of interest development? What contributes to whether or not interest

in mathematics and science is maintained, once it is triggered? What supports shifts fromearlier to later phases of interest development in mathematics and science?

The chapters point to parents or educators, at home, in school, or in out-of-school grams or groups, who can encourage thinking about and doing mathematics and/or science

pro-as a bpro-asis for supporting the development of mathematics and science interest As thechapters suggest, social context provides models for seriously engaging mathematics andscience content, as well as scaffolding to do so

Some of the chapters detail interest as it is involved in facilitating learners’ work withmathematics and science (Alexander, Johnson, & Leibham; Azevedo; Crowley, Barron, Knut-son, & Martin; Nieswandt & Horowitz; Pressick-Kilborn; Pugh, Linnenbrink-Garcia, Phillips,

& Perez; Turner, Kackar, & Trucano); some report on contextual supports for this facilitation(Ainley & Ainley; Alexander et al.; Bulunuz & Jarrett; Glynn, Bryan, Brickman, & Armstrong;Maltese & Harsh; Reeve, Lee, & Wong); and others explore the implications of learners’competence, domain identification, self-efficacy, self-regulation, and/or utility for how fa-cilitation might be supported (Bong, Lee, & Woo; Durik, Hulleman, & Harackiewicz; Eccles,Fredricks, & Epstein; Hay, Callingham, & Carmichael; Jones, Ruff, & Osborne; Kim, Jiang,

& Song; Renninger, Costello Kensey, Stevens, & Lehman; Sansone, Thoman, & Fraughton).The chapters of the volume are organized into three sections based on the primary focus

of the research questions they address: interest and other related motivational and graphic variables, subject matter and interest, and interest development Researchers addressinginterest and other variables suggest a reciprocal, or proportional, relation of the given variable(e.g., achievement, self-efficacy) for learners with less or more developed interest Their focusdiffers from that of researchers who focus on questions about interest and subject matter.For the latter researchers, the focus is on task features and how to support learners in seeingthese features Although this group of researchers recognizes the potential of interest todevelop, their research targets support for learners to attend to tasks that are presented.Finally, researchers whose questions address interest and development focus on more devel-oped interest and the factors that enable the development of later phases of interest Somechapters draw on related models to consider the relation between interest and development(e.g., expectancy-value [Eccles et al.], the MUSIC Model [Jones et al.], and Teaching forTransformative Experience [Pugh et al.])

demo-The content of the chapters that make up each section is overviewed in more detail next

Section 1: Interest and Other Motivational and Demographic Variables

The chapters addressing interest and other motivational and demographic variables describefindings from studies in which interest was studied as an independent variable that relates

to other variables such as achievement (Kim et al.; Renninger et al.; Sansone et al.); tions to experience (Ainley & Ainley), competence (Durik et al.; Kim et al.; Reeve et al.),

connec-and disciplinary understconnec-anding (Renninger et al.); gender (Bong et al.; Renninger et al.);self-efficacy (Bong et al.; Renninger et al.); self-regulation (Sansone et al.); and social class(Renninger et al.)

In their chapter, Ainley and Ainley use data from their own and others’ research programs

to suggest that the developing and maintaining of science interest depends both on tunities to engage and reengage with the content of interest and on support for taking upthose opportunities The authors point specifically to experiences of young children in thefamily, features of tasks or contexts, and classroom experiences such as those that includetalking with scientists Similarly, Reeve et al.’s chapter elaborates on the positive feelingsthat accompany engagements that are well facilitated, and Sansone et al.’s chapter describestheir participants’ experience of interest and consequently their abilities to self-regulate, aslinked to both the relation between interpersonal goals and activity and the degree to whichothers (teacher, peers, and parents) are responsive to the activity that they find interesting Renninger et al.’s chapter further considers the perceptions of science held by learnerswith less and more developed interest in science Their data suggest that (a) learners withequally strong standardized achievement profiles do not all have more developed interest inscience, (b) gender may be a more influential factor for those with less developed interest inscience than for those with more developed interest, and (c) students with more and lessdeveloped interest in science may see the same flaws in classroom practice but those withless developed interest are either less willing or less able to seek additional resources such asout-of-school science experiences than are those with more developed interest

oppor-In their chapter, Durik et al conclude on the basis of extensive experimental work thatlearners must focus on task content in order to develop their interest Their findings indicatethat those with more developed interest are oriented on the task and may only need opportu-nities to engage with the content, whereas learners with less developed interest need support

to attend to the task In addition, Durik et al further note the need to attend to the concepts of learners with less developed interest since these are typically poorly developed Kim et al.’s chapter explores changes in the relation of interest in mathematics, utilityvalue, perceived competence, engagement, and achievement across grade levels The authorsfind that for middle and high school students who rate themselves as low on perceivedcompetence, interest in mathematics should be promoted rather than the utility of mathe-matics; whereas for middle and high school students who rate themselves as high onperceived competence, the utility value of mathematics should be emphasized Similarly,based on analysis of two national data sets of Korean youths’ work with mathematics andscience, Bong et al find that interest is a more powerful determinant of subsequent self-efficacy than self-efficacy is of subsequent interest They further note that, given the corre-lations between performance in mathematics and science and the predictive utility of priorinterest for self-efficacy, it is imperative to support students to go beyond frequent successexperiences in these disciplines and develop their interest

self-Section 2: Interest and Subject Matter

The chapters that focus on interest and subject matter examine what is needed to supportlearner interest in the tasks of mathematics and/or science and/or point to the critical role

of the responsive educator in engaging learners in such tasks.3These researchers are

partic-ularly concerned about how to support educators to increase their students’ learning of

mathematics and/or science and/or to develop their interest in this subject matter

As Baram-Tsabari points out, there is often a gap between what the curriculum offersand what students want to learn She notes, as do Glynn and his colleagues, that studentsoften have questions that are not addressed in the courses they take, which results in a gapbetween school science and student interest In addition to student interest, this gap mayreflect discrepancies in how tasks are presented and how students respond to triggers for interest— whether the tasks are group projects or laboratory work, in school or out ofschool (Maltese & Harsh; Nieswandt & Horowitz) The chapters each point to the importance

of educators as a potential support for the development of mathematics and science interestand the need for educators to develop enough content knowledge, if they do not alreadyhave it, to be able to support their pupils to have fun with the discipline (Bulunuz & Jarrett)

In addition, professional development is a suggested vehicle for supporting educators tounderstand student motivation and its role in the development of student interest andlearning (Hay et al.; Turner et al.; see also Ainley & Ainley, Section 1, and Pressick-Kilborn,Section 3)

In her chapter, Baram-Tsabari describes a programmatic study of questioning in contexts

as varied as the biology classroom, the online Ask-a-Scientist site, and Google inquiries.She describes findings indicating that voluntary information-seeking is an outcome of thetriggering of situational interest; she uses these to demonstrate the importance of educatorsresponding to potential interests of students in their curriculum planning When learners’interest is triggered, they have questions to which they want answers; their interest develops,and they become engaged as learners

Glynn and his colleagues also find that the content of particular topics (e.g., humans,ethical issues) is strongly related to interest, and to the forms of intrinsic motivation thattogether with self-efficacy predict school achievement Based on findings from their ScienceMotivation Questionnaire, they argue that student interest should inform curricular devel-opment because developing interest promotes intrinsic motivation and mastery experiencesthat, in turn, can enable the learner to develop feelings of self-efficacy and sustain engagement Nieswandt and Horowitz address the importance of task features in laboratory activitiesassigned to undergraduate chemistry students The results of their studies indicate that theinclusion of features such as suspense, challenge, personal relevance, and choice has the po-tential to trigger interest Their results also suggest that students’ prior content knowledge,together with the quality of instructors’ scaffolding, informs whether triggered interest isthen maintained

Like the Nieswandt and Horowitz chapter, the chapters by Hay et al and Turner et al.underscore the role of the instructor in supporting learners to work with task content Hay

et al describe findings from a large-scale project addressing the development of students’interest and self-efficacy for statistical literacy, statistical knowledge, and statistical compre-hension The results indicate that teachers could trigger student interest for statistics throughactivities that promote relevance and meaning making Like the findings reported by Glynn

et al., (see also those of Bong et al and Durik et al in Section 1), their findings suggest that

self-efficacy in statistics is a significant predictor of achievement and that level of interest isstrongly associated with level of self-efficacy

With the premise that interest is fostered when students can make connections amongideas and with the world, the chapters by Turner et al and Bulunuz and Jarrett considerwhat those who work with students might benefit from understanding Turner et al focus

on how two teachers supported their students to make connections with the content oftheir classes The teacher who was able to support her students’ development of interest wasthe one who used strategies to trigger their interest, by supporting them to make connectionsbetween their own lives and the science they were learning She also used the students’questions as a way to help make science meaningful As Turner et al observe, teachers need

to both understand and be willing to take responsibility for student motivation, in addition

to attending to the conceptual development of their students

Bulunuz and Jarrett’s research also focuses on the connections that students and teachersare able to make with science content They find that working with science content is im-portant and suggest that opportunities to play, have fun, and explore are task features thatserve to trigger value for, and the science interest of, college science majors, scientists, andpreschool and elementary school preservice teachers They find that the learners who aresupported to play, have fun, and explore science content are also those who begin to developinterest

Maltese and Harsh conclude their chapter by suggesting that there may be an interactionbetween the phase of learners’ STEM interest and the inquiry level of the STEM-related ex-periences in which they are involved The authors review four distinct data sets addressingK–16 science learning that include differing levels of inquiry Together the studies suggestthe potential advantage of initially supporting learners and/or their instructors with lessdeveloped interest to connect to tasks that involve more closed inquiry and then adjustingthe openness of the inquiry of the tasks as interest develops

Section 3: Interest Development

The chapters of the third section concern interest development They describe studies thatcontribute to understanding specific aspects of interest development Alexander et al andCrowley et al consider the development of science interest in young children; they explainthe role of early experience as formative, characterized by intensity of focus, and as comple-mented by involvement in activities in school and out of school Azevedo extends this de-scription to provide details about the process of triggering and sustaining interest in a study

of an after-school program and the hobby of model rocketry He points to “tailored practice”

as essential to the development of interest Similarly, in detailing her work with Kate, asixth-grade student whose interest in science shifted from less to more developed, Pressick-Kilborn describes how tailored practice with science can be facilitated

Jones et al describe transitions in the development of learning in science as a progressiveprocess too, one that includes increasing domain identification They detail the relation be-tween the learner’s developing domain identification and the learner’s transition from less

to more developed phases of mathematics and science interest Pugh and his colleaguesalso point to the transition as occurring through transformative experiences in the science

classroom They describe characteristics of transformative experiences that trigger and thensupport learners to sustain and develop their interest Finally, Eccles and her colleagues de-scribe the relations between her Expectancy-Value Theoretical Model and the Four-PhaseModel of Interest Development, pointing to the complementarity of these models as de-scriptions of motivation once interest development has been triggered and sustained

In their consideration of interest and development, Alexander et al describe a longitudinalstudy of young, middle-class children and how their interests are supported to develop athome and in school through their interactions with others such as parents, educators, andpeers The authors describe the shifting roles and responsibilities of parents and children inmaintaining science-related interests and how these form the foundation for the development

of science interest In his chapter, Azevedo also details shifting patterns in the ways in whichhigh school students and adults pursue interest, but the shifts and turns he describes areless about interactions with others and more about increasingly detailed and idiosyncraticwork with content in which these older learners with more developed interest engage

In their chapter, Crowley et al describe the resources that provide a pathway frominterest to disciplinary expertise and engagement Based on retrospective life-history in-terviews with adult scientists and interviews with students of middle school age, they showhow science interest in everyday activity is extended and deepened over time Their resultspoint to the possibility of developing interest prior to formal schooling And, like Alexander

et al and Azevedo, they describe learners who have more developed interest as seeking andcreating their own opportunities to learn

Pressick-Kilborn further nuances this description of interest development by focusingattention on the processes of canalization and connectedness, whereby the larger socialcontext informs and supports (or does not support) the possibility that the learner willmake connections to content She considers how learners are supported to make meaning

as they engage with triggers for interest over time, as their interest develops Throughsupport to engage and make meaning of the triggers for interest in the classroom, Kate’s ex-perience of science was transformed, and her interest deepened and developed

Pressick-Kilborn’s description of her work with Kate is illustrative of points included inPugh et al.’s description of transformative educational experiences As Pugh et al explain,the Teaching for Transformative Experience model includes both the presence of interestand the catalyzing of deeper interest through specific teacher-facilitated experiences thathighlight the relevance and meaning of the content being addressed It is a teacher- and con-tent-centered approach with the goal of supporting students to be active, involved, and in-tentional by enabling them to develop value for science Ideally, the teacher supports thelearner to reframe his or her understanding of science and/or provides a model for this Therole of the social agent, here the teacher, in supporting or facilitating transformative experiencehas parallels to the development of interest as discussed in the Four-Phase Model However,Pugh et al.’s model is specific to teachers and school-based settings, whereas though the fa-cilitation of interest development may be undertaken and/or supported through experiences

at school, it is not limited to that context

The perception of the self in this process of interest development is focal in the chapters

by Jones et al and Eccles et al In Jones et al., the transition from less to more developed

interest is described as a process of developing domain identification: the extent to whichstudents define themselves in terms of a domain, such as science or mathematics, throughtheir participation in that domain Jones et al suggest that domain identification, and thetransition from less to more developed interest, can be supported using Jones’s (2009)MUSIC Model of Academic Motivation, which involves (a) empowering students, (b) en-abling them to see the usefulness of the domain, (c) supporting success, (d) triggering in-terest, and (e) fostering a sense of caring and belonging Like Pugh et al.’s discussion oftransformative educational experiences, the MUSIC Model also presumes facilitation bythe educator and the meta-awareness of the student who is being supported to experience

a different type of participation in the domain

Similarly, in their discussion of how youths become intensely interested in and committed

to activities such as science and mathematics, Eccles et al consider the relation between theExpectancy-Value Theoretical Model and the Four-Phase Model of Interest Development.They suggest that understanding the motivational origins of different rates of participation

in STEM fields is critical and that the two models provide similar portraits of what isinvolved in developed engagement in STEM They also note that the process of enablingengagement based on Expectancy-Value Theory and the Four-Phase Model of Interest De-velopment differs such that in Expectancy-Value Theory, learners are assumed to be meta-aware of their activity This is not a necessary expectation of the Four-Phase Model; learnersmay be meta-aware of their interest, but it is also likely that they are engaged and notstopping to reflect on their engagement

Conclusions

This volume was compiled to enable the dissemination of findings concerning the power ofinterest that have potential impact on practice, research, and policy No grand theory isposited; rather, the chapters provide a basis for appreciating the essential role of otherpeople, including parents, educators, and peers, in enabling interest to develop and deepen—and the benefits of doing so

In the concluding chapter, we draw on the chapters of this volume to describe the presentstate of research on interest in mathematics and science and related activities We identifyvariation in the conceptualization and measurement of interest that reflects differences inresearch questions We also note themes that emerge across the chapters, including the roles

of early childhood experience and support by other people, triggering and maintaining terest in older populations, teachers and interest development, choice and the development

in-of interest, gender and interest in mathematics and science, difficulty and interest in ematics and science, self-efficacy, self-concept, and interest development

3 Most of the chapters in this section of the volume address science and interest and as such reflect the focus of developed research programs at the time of the 2012 AERA annual meeting Only Hay et al.’s research addresses student work with mathematics (statistics) Turner and her colleagues’ chapter focuses

on two cases: the instructional practices of a middle school mathematics teacher and a middle school science teacher

References

Ainley, M., & Hidi, S (2014) Interest and enjoyment In R Pekrun & L Linnenbrink-Garcia (Eds.),

International handbook of emotions in education (pp 205–227) New York: Taylor and Francis

Alexander, J M., Johnson, K E., & Kelley, K (2012) Longitudinal analysis of the relations between

opportunities to learn about science and the development of interests related to science Science

Education, 96, 763–786 doi:10.1002/sce.21018

Azevedo, F S (2006) Personal excursions: Investigating the dynamics of student engagement

Inter-national Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 11, 57–98 doi:10.1007/s10758/sce.21018

Azevedo, F S (2011) Lines of practice: A practice-centered theory of interest relationships Cognition

and Instruction, 29(2), 147–184 doi:10.1080/07370008.2011.556834

Baram-Tsabari, A., Sethi, R J., Bry, L., & Yarden, A (2006) Using questions sent to an Ask-a-Scientist

site to identify children’s interests in science Science Education, 90(6), 1050–1072 doi:10.1002/

sce.20163

Barron, B., Kennedy-Martin, C., Takeuchi, L., & Fithian, R (2009) Parents as learning partners in the

development of technological fluency International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2), 55–77.

doi:10.1162/ijlm.2009.0021

Basu, S J., & Calabrese Barton, A (2007) Developing a sustained interest in science among urban

minority youth Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(3), 466–489 doi:10.1002/tea.20143 Becher, T., & Trowler, P R (2001) Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures

of disciplines (2nd ed.) Buckingham, UK: Open University Press/SRHE.

Berridge, K C (2012) From prediction error to incentive salience: Mesolimbic computation of

reward motivation European Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 1124–1143

doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.07990.x

Berridge, K C., Robinson, T E., & Aldridge, I W (2009) Dissecting components of reward: “Liking,”

“wanting,” and learning Current Opinion in Pharmacology, 9, 65–73 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/

j.coph.2008.12.014

Bulunuz, M (2013) Teaching science through play in kindergarten: Does integrated play and science

instruction build understanding? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(2),

226–249 doi:10.1080/1350293X.2013.789195

Business Higher Education Forum (2010) Increasing the number of STEM graduates: Insights from

the U.S STEM Education & Modeling Project Washington, DC.: Author

Crowley, K., Callanan, M A., Jipson, J L., Galco, J., Topping, K., & Shrager, J (2001) Shared scientific

thinking in everyday parent–child activity Science Education, 85(6), 712–732 doi:10.1002/sce.1035

Dohn, N B (2011) Situational interest of high school students who visit an aquarium Science

Edu-cation, 95, 337–357 doi:10.1002/sce.20425

Durik, A M., & Harackiewicz, J M (2007) Different strokes for different folks: How personal interest

moderated the effects of situational factors on task interest Journal of Educational Psychology,

99, 597–610 doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.597

Eagan, K., Hurtado, S., Chang, M J., Garcia, G A., Herrera, F A., & Garibay, J C (2013) Making a

difference in science education: The impact of undergraduate research programs American

Ed-ucational Research Journal, 50(4), 683–713 doi: Doi 10.3102/0002831213482038

European Commission (2007) EUR22845—Science Education NOW: A renewed Pedagogy for the

Future of Europe Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

Fusco, D (2001) Creating relevant science through urban planning and gardening Journal of Research

in Science Teaching, 38(8), 860–877 doi:10.1002/tea.1036

Glynn, S M., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Brickman, P (2007) Nonscience majors learning science: A

theoretical model of motivation Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 1088–1107.

doi:10.1002/tea.20181

Hall, C., Dickerson, J., Batts, D., Kauffmann, P., & Bosse, M (2011) Are we missing opportunities to

encourage interest in STEM fields? Journal of Technology Education, 23(1) Retrieved from

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v23n1/

Hannover, B., & Kessels, U (2004) Self-to-prototype matching as a strategy for making academic

choices: Why German high school students do not like math and science Learning and Instruction,

14(1), 51–67 Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.002

Harackiewicz, J M., Barron, K E., Tauer, J M., & Elliot, A J (2002) Predicting success in college: A gitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors of interest and performance

lon-from freshman year through graduation Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 562–575.

doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.562

Harackiewicz, J M., Rozek, C R., Hulleman, C S., & Hyde, J S (2012) Helping parents to motivateadolescents in mathematics and science: An experimental test of a utility-value intervention

Psychological Science, 40 doi:10.1177/0956797611435530

Hidi, S (2006) Interest: A unique motivational variable Educational Research Review, 1, 69–82.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2006 09.001

Hidi, S (in press) Revisiting the role of rewards in motivation and learning: Implications of

neuro-scientific findings Educational Psychology Review.

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K A (2006) The Four-Phase Model of Interest Development Educational

Psy-chologist, 41(2), 111–127 doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4

Hidi, S., Weiss, J., Berndorff, D., & Nolen, J (1998) The role of gender, instruction and a cooperativelearning technique in science education across formal and informal settings In L Hoffman, A

Krapp, K A Renninger, & J Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning: Proceedings of the Seeon

Con-ference on Interest and Gender (pp 215–227) Kiel, Germany: IPN.

Holstermann, N., Ainley, M., Grube, D., Roick, T., & Bögeholz, S (2012) The specific relationshipbetween disgust and interest: Relevance during biology class dissections and gender

differences Learning and Instruction, 22(3), 185–192 Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.

1016/j.learninstruc.2011.10.005

Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H (2014) STEM integration in K–12 education: Status,

prospects, and an agenda for research Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Hulleman, C S., & Harackiewicz, J M (2009) Promoting interest and performance in high school

science classes Science, 326, 1410–1412 doi:10.1126/science.1177067

Jones, B D., & Wilkins, J L M (2013) Testing the MUSIC Model of Academic Motivation through

confirmatory factor analysis Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental

Educational Psychology, 33(4), 482–503 doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.785044

Kessels, U., Rau, M., & Hannover, B (2006) What goes well with physics? Measuring and altering the

image of science British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(4), 761–780 doi:10.1348/

000709905X59961

Maltese, A V., & Tai, R H (2011) Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational

ex-periences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S students Science Education Policy, 95, 887–

907 doi:10.1002/sce.20441

National Research Council (2011) Successful K–12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches

in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2012) A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting

concepts, and core ideas Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K–12 Science Education

Standards Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.Washington, DC: National Academies Press

National Science Board (2014) Science and engineering indicators 2014 (NSB 14-01) Arlington, VA:

National Science Foundation

Nieswandt, M (2007) Student affect and conceptual understanding in learning chemistry Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 908–937 doi:10.1002/tea.20169

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006) Evolution of student interest in

science and technology studies: Policy report Paris: OECD Global Science Forum

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2007) PISA 2006: Science competencies

for tomorrow’s world: Vol 1 Analysis Paris: Author

Palmer, D H (2009) Student interest generated during an inquiry skills lesson Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 46(2), 147–165.

Potvin, P., & Hasni, A (2014) Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K–

12 levels: A systematic review of 12 years of educational research Studies in Science Education,

50(1), 85–129 doi:10.1080/03057267.2014.881626

President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2010) Prepare and inspire: K–12 education

in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for America’s future Washington, DC:

Author Retrieved from stem-ed-final.pdf

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-Pressick-Kilborn, K., & Walker, R A (2002) The social construction of interest in a learning

com-munity In D M McInerney & S Van Etten (Eds.), Sociocultural influences on motivation and

learning (Vol 2, pp 152–182) Greenwich, CT: Information Age

Pugh, K J (2011) Transformative experience: An integrative construct in the spirit of Deweyan

pragmatism Educational Psychologist, 46, 107–121 doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.558817

Reeve, J (2013) How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves:

The concept of agentic engagement Journal of Educational Psychology Advance online publication.

doi:10.1037/a0032690

Renninger, K A (2010) Working with and cultivating the development of interest, self-efficacy, and

self-regulation In D Preiss & R Sternberg (Eds.), Innovations in educational psychology: Perspectives

on learning, teaching, and human development (pp 107–138) New York: Springer.

Renninger, K A., & Hidi, S (2002) Student interest and achievement: Developmental issues raised

by a case study In A Wigfield & J S Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp.

173–195) New York: Academic

Renninger, K A., & Hidi, S (2011) Revisiting the conceptualization, measurement, and generation

of interest Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 168–184 doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.587723 Renninger, K A., & Su, S (2012) Interest and its development In R Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook

of human motivation (pp 167–187) New York: Oxford University Press.

Rotgans, J J., & Schmidt, H G (2011) The role of teachers in facilitating situational interest in an

active-learning classroom Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 37–42 Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.025

Sansone, C., Fraughton, T B., Zachary, J L., Butner, J., & Heiner, C (2011) Self-regulation of

motivation when learning online: The importance of who, why and how Educational Technology,

Research and Development, 59(2), 199–212 doi:10.1007.s11423-011-9193-6

Sansone, C., Smith, J L., Thoman, D B., & MacNamara, A (2012) Regulating interest when learning

online: Potential motivation and performance trade-offs The Internet and Higher Education, 15(3),

141–149 Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.10.004

Sjøberg, S S., & Schreiner, C (2010) The ROSE project: An overview and key findings Retrieved from

http://roseproject.no/network/countries/norway/eng/nor-Sjoberg-Schreiner-overview-2010.pdfSwarat, S., Ortony, A., & Revelle, W (2012) Activity matters: Understanding student interest in school

science Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 515–537 doi:10.1002/tea.21010

Turner, S A., Jr., & Silvia, P J (2006) Must things be pleasant? A test of competing appraisal structures

Emotion, 6(4), 670–674.

Valsiner, J (1992) Interest: A metatheoretical perspective In K A Renninger, S Hidi, & A Krapp

(Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp 27–42) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erl-baum

Weber, K (2011) Role models and informal STEM-related activities positively impact female interest

in STEM Technology and Engineering Teacher, 71(3), 18–21.

Weber, K (2012) Gender differences in interest, perceived personal capacity, and participation in

STEM-related activities Journal of Technology Education, 24(1), 18–33 Retrieved from

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v24n1/pdf/weber.pdf

Xu, J., Coats, L T., & Davidson, M L (2012) Promoting student interest in science: The perspectives

of exemplary African American teachers American Educational Research Journal, 49(1), 124–

154 doi:10.3102/0002831211426200

Interest and Other Motivational and Demographic Variables

Early Science Learning Experiences:

Triggered and Maintained Interest

A key question for science educators is how to sustain interest in novel or intriguing scientific phenomena so that interest in science is maintained, with the potential to develop into a more enduring interest as manifested in choice of studies in senior high school and tertiary programs According to Hidi and Renninger (2006), progress through the phases of interest development depends on the availability of opportunities to engage and reengage with content of the interest, and on support for taking up those opportunities In this chapter, we investigate the validity of this proposition, examining evidence from early childhood studies, classroom experiences, and large-scale longitudinal studies.

Findings from young children’s expressions of interest and from research into family factors associated with adolescents’ educational development point to the important role of parents and teachers in identifying children’s interests and supporting them through provision of op- portunities to engage with the interest When we examine the evidence from classroom and cur- riculum research, we arrive at the same conclusion For students to have more than a fleeting interest in science, they require classroom experiences that provide opportunities to engage with science activities that connect with their own experiences Not the least of these is the opportunity

to experience science through exposure to scientists and the work of scientists Findings from a number of studies support the contention that early experiences with learning in general and science in particular underpin later choices— decisions to participate in science activities both

in school and in the community as well as choices to study science at higher levels.

This wide-ranging evidence points to early childhood experience and to later classroom posure to science in real-world environments as key to the development of interest in science When opportunities for triggering interest in science, and ongoing support for maintenance of that interest in science, are features of these environments, students are likely to choose science studies in their last years of high school and to make science a part of their lifelong learning and activities.

ex-Introduction

The Global Science Forum (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,2006) has responded to the declining percentage of students studying science, technology,engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in many economies with a call to make science andtechnology studies more interesting The forum observed that interest in science and tech-nology emerges early in primary school and remains stable between the ages of 11 and 15

years but declines beyond 15 years of age They recommended attention to curricula tobetter reflect modern science and technology and its social relevance, as well as enhancingthe scientific and technical knowledge of teachers This response focuses attention on thecontent of science and technology studies, with the implication that if the prospectivecontent is sufficiently interesting, students will choose to study science But what makes sci-ence and technology studies interesting? Can science and technology studies be designed insuch a way that all students will have their interest triggered? How can this triggered interest

be sustained, allowing access to information that will expand their knowledge and standing of scientific phenomena?

under-In this chapter, we focus on the development of interests in two different but relatedways One perspective on interest development directs attention to the course of development

of the interest itself Distinctions are described in line with the successive phases of interestdevelopment proposed in Hidi and Renninger’s (2006) Four-Phase Model of Interest De-velopment: triggered situational interest, maintained situational interest, emerging individualinterest, and well-developed individual interest According to Hidi and Renninger, progressthrough these phases of interest development depends on the availability of opportunities

to engage and reengage with interest content In the initial phases, this requires high levels

of support, decreasing as the interest moves toward becoming an individual interest We amine how opportunity and support are conditions promoting interest development.Questions of triggering and maintaining interest in scientific phenomena direct attention

ex-to the immediate learning situation What specific curriculum design and classroom practicesprovide opportunities to trigger interest in science and/or support its maintenance? Factorsassociated with triggering situational interest have been well documented (e.g., Hidi, 1990;Schraw & Lehman, 2001; Wade, 2001) When combined with the literature on curiosity (e.g.,Berlyne, 1960; Cordova & Lepper, 1996), the research makes clear that encounters with novel

or intriguing scientific phenomena will attract students’ attention and generate questionsand exploratory activities focused on the novel or intriguing phenomenon Interactions withinterest content are likely to result in knowledge acquisition For example, Palmer (2009)showed that although there was considerable variation in the level of situational interest as-sociated with different types of activities, the strongest trigger for situational interest wasnovelty However, for many students, the novelty quickly wears off, and they disengage This

is the problem of maintaining or sustaining the triggered interest

A second perspective on interest development concerns the role of early experiences forlater expression of interest in science Which early experiences contribute to the likelihoodthat students will have their interest triggered by novel scientific phenomena? Which earlyexperiences contribute to the maintenance of students’ interest beyond the initial triggering,allowing the development of an interest in science based on a strong core of scientificknowledge and understanding? What does it take for interest in science to be maintained sothat it informs lifestyle and career choices?

In this chapter, we present research findings concerning young children’s expressions ofinterest, family contexts, and classroom experiences to explore how opportunity and supportcontribute to the development of interest in science We then examine findings on students’

participation intentions and choice of studies in secondary school from research studieswith participants representing broad student populations.

The Role of Opportunity and Support

Early Experiences and Interest in Science

It is clear from the literature that persistent interests do occur in very young children (e.g.,Alexander, Johnson, Leibham, & Kelley, 2008; Renninger & Wozniak, 1985) The intensityand extent of attention to a particular category of objects or activities in some youngchildren have given rise to the phrase “extremely intense interests” (DeLoache, Simcock, &Macari, 2007) For the purposes of this discussion, we explore what is known about youngchildren’s interests that might be precursors for the development of sustained interest inscience

children has identified how particular types of interaction between parents or caregiversand children predict later behavior In an early study of curiosity, Saxe and Stollack (1971)reported that children’s exploration and information seeking were contingent on mothers’displays of positive feeling and curiosity toward the novel object More recent findings(Chak, 2002) suggest that parental support of focused exploration is associated with knowl-edge and information acquisition Findings from Alexander, Johnson, and colleagues’ lon-gitudinal study (see Alexander, Johnson, & Kelley, 2012; Leibham, Alexander, Johnson,Neitzel, & Reis-Henrie, 2005) of the development of interests also highlight the importance

of early interactions with parents that focus and support the exploration and engagement

of young children in their preferred activities Leibham et al (2005) reported that the ference in parental behavior between four- and five-year-old children whose interests per-sisted over the following 24 months and those whose interests were relatively short term

dif-“has more to do with acknowledging the child’s continuing interest rather than withfulfilling a particular quota of interest-related experiences” (p 410) This parental ac-knowledgment emphasized “academic stimulation” and curiosity and the provision ofmaterials in the home related to the child’s expressed interests Neitzel, Alexander, andJohnson (2008) reported that these types of interest can be seen in the information childrencontribute to discussions and activities in their kindergarten classes Children’s choices ofactivities in the early school years suggest that some forms of early interests appear to setchildren on a course of interacting with experience in ways that support the development

of interest in science

The important contribution of early support for the development of interest in science isemphasized in Alexander and colleagues’ statement of the relation between opportunitiesprovided by parents for participation in science-related activities and science interests (seeAlexander et al., 2012; Leibham et al., 2005) Free play and opportunities to engage in con-versation with parents around the interest activity were key aspects of parental support forinterest development

Parental influences in adolescence In adolescence, we also find evidence that parents contribute

to the development of students’ interests through provision of challenging and supportivefamily environments (Rathunde, 2001) Challenging family environments are those in whichadolescents perceive that their families require them to invest attention and focus on whatare considered to be important goals In supportive family environments, parents are per-ceived as caring and warm, open to the adolescent’s point of view, and offering help whennew or difficult situations arise Rathunde and colleagues followed cohorts of adolescents— Grades 6 to 8, Grades 8 to 10, and Grades 10 to 12—over two years using experiencesampling methods Interest was investigated as “undivided interest,” which is characterized

by strong positive affect generated when pursuing activities associated with important goals.The pattern of these researchers’ findings is echoed in perspectives such as expectancy-value theory, in which parent contributions are identified as an important socializing factorcontributing to students’ academic choices (e.g., Eccles, Barber, Updegraff, & O’Brien, 1998).The results of large-scale surveys of parents as part of the Programme for InternationalStudent Assessment (PISA) 2009 in 14 countries also point to the importance of parentalinvolvement in reading and discussions of complex issues at early ages for types of engage-ment as well as cognitive and noncognitive outcomes (Borgonovi & Montt, 2012) Theseresults in the domain of reading have parallels in the exploration of natural phenomenaand science

Opportunities for conversation with parents around interest activities are a key aspect ofparental support for interest development in young children The same appears to be thecase with support for adolescent students’ interest in science For example, Stocklmayer,Durant, and Cerini (2011) implemented a pilot program giving hands-on experience ofsecondary school science to a group of mothers who lacked confidence with science Theprogram was delivered by science specialists to help mothers develop knowledge andlanguage to discuss science activities Qualitative analyses suggested that one of the strongestpositive outcomes was mothers reporting the discussions about science they were now able

to have with their adolescent children In a recent experimental study, Harackiewicz, Rozek,Hulleman, and Hyde (2012) demonstrated that encouraging conversations between parentsand adolescents about the value of science has a significant impact on students’ choices ofSTEM courses in their later years of high school

Curriculum and Classroom Experience

The findings on the early development of interest in children suggest that opportunity andsupport for participation in science activities from the earliest levels of schooling are required

to maintain interest for students who have already started to develop interest in science and

to trigger interest in science for all students

in and understanding of STEM studies (Tytler, Osborne, Williams, Tytler, & Clark, 2008)focused on the transition from primary to secondary school The authors identified anumber of obstacles to students’ developing interest in science, such as a lack of sciencetaught in Australian primary schools and a lack of confidence of primary teachers in

teaching science These obstacles bear directly on opportunity and support for the opment of interest in science The restricted instructional time devoted to science wasdocumented by Martin, Mullis, and Foy (2007) In 2006, 5% of the instructional time forAustralian fourth-grade students was devoted to science, compared with 7% in England,8% in the United States, and an international average of 8% There were also wide varia-tions in teacher qualifications, with low levels of science and mathematics backgroundamong Australian primary school teachers.

devel-To improve science knowledge and understanding in primary schools, the AustralianAcademy of Science developed Primary Connections, a teacher professional learning programsupported with curriculum resources (see Hackling, Peers, & Prain, 2007; Hackling & Prain,2008) This program used an inquiry approach emphasizing science literacy to develop in-vestigative skills through student participation in authentic and engaging activities Evaluation

of the program suggests that teachers’ self-efficacy in relation to teaching science and theirconfidence in using a range of science teaching strategies were enhanced In addition, scienceclass time increased (Hackling et al., 2007) Hackling and Prain (2008) found that students

in Primary Connections classes reported experiencing curiosity and learning interestingthings more frequently than students from comparison classes The study also found thatstudents in Primary Connections classes achieved higher mean scores on measures of scienceliteracy and processes These results point to the ways that changes to teaching science inprimary school can expand students’ opportunities and provide support for the development

of interest in science with enhanced learning outcomes

of science subjects in senior secondary school (Lyons & Quinn, 2010) found that valuingscience, enjoying interesting lessons, and experiencing success in science classes were im-portant factors in students’ choices of science subjects in senior secondary school Theauthors suggested that the decline in the proportion of students electing to study key sciencedisciplines can be linked to a context in which there is a larger number of subjects available

to students Many students had difficulty “picturing themselves as scientists” (p i) Themost frequently chosen reasons students gave for not choosing science studies were “can’tpicture myself as a scientist” and “don’t need it for university or career.”

Opportunity for students to see themselves as scientists concerns students’ perceptions

of the type of person who “does science” and, more specifically within their immediatesocial environment, the type of student who chooses to study science Hannover and Kessels(2004) proposed that students’ self-image and the image of science are incompatible Theyconducted a self-to-prototype-matching study in which students described prototypes ofstudents liking and disliking a range of school subjects, including physics and mathematics,

as well as describing themselves The analysis considered the underlying structure of thedescriptors for the school subjects and found different patterns for science or mathematicsand humanities subjects There were different prototypes for students who liked scienceand students who disliked science The authors reported that “students’ perception of theprototypical peer favouring the sciences was less similar to their self-image than their pro-totype of the peer disliking sciences and their prototype of the peer favouring the humanities”

(p 63) This self-prototype similarity was not simply a function of the negative science andmathematics prototype Similar processes were investigated by Shanahan and Nieswandt(2011) in their analysis of the pattern of attributes and actions students associate withschool science students They found evidence of a strong set of expectations among their10th-grade students concerning the attributes and behavior of school science students: “in-telligent,” “skilled in science,” “well behaved,” and “scientific.” These expectations, and howwell they fit with students’ self-concepts, constrain students’ actions, including the choicesthey make regarding participation in science classes.

In the studies described above, the stereotype concerned the student who studies sciencerather than the scientist as a professional However, when students have very little knowledge

of scientists as professionals and the place of science in a wide range of lifestyles, it is nothard to see that the stereotype of the science student might be guiding their choices inrelation to science studies One solution to address this lack of knowledge is for scienceprograms to include some experience of scientists and their approach to knowledge

provide some evidence that these experiences can trigger an interest in science Regan (2009)reported on an intervention in Irish junior secondary schools designed specifically to triggerinterest by “showing the fascinating nature of experimental science” (p 264) The interventionincluded a chemical magic show consisting of chemical experiments that were highly visualand were known to have a “wow” factor This program was designed to change “science intomagic,” and each demonstration was followed by an explanation of what had happened andclass discussion After the “magic show” session, student and teacher support materials weredistributed to schools, with the intention that teachers would build student interest in chem-istry Open-response questionnaires were completed by a sample of the 8,500 students andlater coded (p 273) However, there was no indication of the level of success in increasinglater enrollments in chemistry Longer-term effectiveness requires teachers to build on thesestudent responses, incorporating more of the “wow” factor of science into a wide range ofclassroom activities to support maintenance of the interest that has been triggered Thesefindings parallel Palmer’s (2009) interpretation of the importance of novelty for triggeringinterest in scientific phenomena

A second “scientist in the classroom” approach employed graduate student scientists frombiomedical and engineering programs to visit classrooms from early primary school to seniorsecondary school to conduct inquiry-based class presentations (Laursen, Liston, Thiry, &Graf, 2007) Qualitative analysis of interview responses following the program indicated thatstudents showed enhanced interest and engagement in science Just under one half of theteachers reported that students had new views of science and scientists Again, follow-up isneeded to determine the effectiveness of the program in maintaining students’ interest inscience and choosing to study science

A third example involves a pilot Scientists in Schools program that involved 500 scientist–teacher partnerships in Australian schools (Howitt & Rennie, 2008) Approximately half ofthe participating schools were primary schools, and the most common mode of operationinvolved presentations by scientists to students Participating teachers reported that com-

munication with scientists and other teachers, and their increased access to resources, improved their knowledge and understanding of contemporary science Students enjoyedparticipating, and science teachers commonly reported that students had benefited fromthe opportunities they had to see scientists as real people Teachers also reported that theirstudents now had a greater awareness of science-related careers.

These scientists-in-schools programs are practical applications of a number of the issues

we have highlighted in relation to triggering and maintaining interest in science The noveltyand “wow” factor triggered interest in most students, and this undoubtedly affected manystudents who previously had no interest in science Nieswandt (2007) provided furtherinsight into the process, demonstrating that both situational interest and self-efficacy weresignificant mediators for increased knowledge in ninth-grade chemistry classes As Palmer(2009) concluded from his research with ninth-grade students, novelty-triggered situationalinterest “is able to temporarily override any negative motivational orientation that studentsmay have” (p 162) In addition, support for the triggered interest to develop into a maintainedsituational interest comes from teachers who are confident in their knowledge and under-standing of science

Although there is a range of examples of scientists-in-schools programs, considerableupscaling is required for such an approach to make a major impact on students’ interest inscience and choices to study science as part of their senior high school programs

Summary

Findings from research into family factors associated with adolescents’ educational opment, and children’s expressions of interest, point to the important roles of parents andteachers in identifying children’s interests and supporting them to engage with the interest.The evidence from classroom and curriculum research suggests that for students to havemore than a fleeting interest in science, they require classroom experiences that provide op-portunities to engage with novel and intriguing scientific phenomena, as well as supportingtheir interactions with scientific content

devel-Interest, Intentions, and Participation

Maintaining students’ interest in science beyond the transient triggering of an immediateinterest in novel or intriguing situations is often the outcome of a cumulative process Weconsider findings from studies based on large Australian surveys that support the contentionthat early experiences with learning in general and science in particular support lastingchoices and behavior indicative of interest in science

Interest and Intentions

To identify the development of early patterns of attitudes to schooling that may underpinthe development of interest in science and decisions to study science, we have examined therelation between attitudes to learning and intentions for future participation in learning.Here, findings from research highlighting cumulative processes that contribute to studentschoosing to participate in senior secondary science studies are overviewed

Intentions to complete schooling.Using the theory of planned behavior (Azjen, 2001), Khooand Ainley (2005) demonstrated that general attitudes to schooling of 9th-grade studentspredicted participation in 12th grade and further participation in tertiary education Surveydata collected from 13,600 young people sampled in 9th grade in 1995 for the LongitudinalSurveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) included measures of students’ intentions to continue atschool as well as their general attitude to schooling Students with the highest scores on theattitude to schooling scale recorded strong agreement with items expressing openness tonew information and a sense of excitement and enjoyment of learning Data concerning thecompletion of secondary schooling and participation in tertiary studies were available fromlater years of the surveys Using structural equation modeling analyses, Khoo and Ainleydemonstrated that after allowing for the predictive effects of achievement and a range ofbackground factors, students’ positive attitudes toward schooling predicted intention to con-tinue, and intention predicted actual behavior Students’ attitudes to schooling in ninth gradedid not directly predict participation, but predictive effects were mediated through intentionmeasured in ninth grade.

These studies, using representative national samples, demonstrate the importance ofstudents’ early development of positive attitudes to learning for their intentions to continuewith schooling and the importance of intentions for actual participation Although thesurvey instruments did not directly measure interest in science, many of the critical itemsexpressed interest in the experiences that make up classroom learning (“The work we do isinteresting” and “I get excited about the work we do”)

(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2007) to assess the predictiverelation between interest in science and both current participation in science activities andintentions for future participation in science activities (M Ainley & J Ainley, 2011a), aswell as between interest in science and interest in finding out more about specific sciencetopics (M Ainley & J Ainley, 2011b) We examined the relations among psychological di-mensions associated with students’ interest in science, including students’ views on howthey value science, how much they enjoy science, and their intentions for future participation

in science, whether through studies, a career, or participation in science projects (M Ainley

& J Ainley, 2011a)

We found that personal value and enjoyment are important predictors of students’ interest

in science, and together these components predict students’ current participation in scienceand motivation to participate in science in the future Personal value and enjoyment of sciencehad direct effects on current participation and intentions for future participation, as well asindirect effects on participation and intentions through students’ general interest in learningscience The role of science knowledge in this structure varied with the overall level of scienceknowledge for each participating country For countries where overall science knowledge wasrelatively high, students’ science knowledge also was a significant predictor of their interest inlearning science

In further analyses (M Ainley & J Ainley, 2011b) we modeled the predictive relations ofvalue, enjoyment, and interest in learning science for a situational measure of interest in

specific science topics (embedded interest) The embedded interest items in PISA 2006were designed to assess students’ desire to find out more about the topics involved in thescience knowledge questions, that is, their interest in acquiring further knowledge and un-derstanding of a topic Embedded interest was predicted by the same set of variables, withenjoyment and general interest in learning science functioning as partial mediators ofscience knowledge, and personal value of science affecting desire to reengage with and findout more about the topic.

re-quires not only that the relations between these psychological dimensions predict intentionsfor the future but that intentions predict students’ future participation To this end, we useddata from the LSAY (National Centre for Vocational Education Research, 2011; Penman,2004), more specifically students who had participated in PISA 2006, and set out to identifywhether 15-year-old students’ general interest in science and associated dimensions of per-sonal value, enjoyment, and their intentions to participate in science-related activities inthe future predicted 12th-grade participation in science studies The nationally representativesample (Thomson & De Bortoli, 2007) consisted of 14,170 students who completed thePISA 2006 assessment of science literacy and its associated questionnaires (Organisationfor Economic Co-operation and Development, 2009)

Information about students’ educational, employment, and social activities was collectedannually, and at each interview (conducted toward the end of the school year), questionswere asked to identify specific subjects studied Using data from each of the survey years(2007, 2008, and 2009), it was possible to generate a set of dichotomous measures ofstudents’ participation in biology, chemistry, and physics as part of their 12th-grade studies.The results indicated that 24% had studied 12th-grade biology, 20% had studied chemistry,and 17% had studied physics

As expected, there were strong correlations among personal value of science, enjoyment

of science, interest in science, and future-oriented science motivation and moderate lations between these variables and science knowledge As predicted in our model, therewere also moderate correlations of the attitudinal and knowledge variables with the 12th-grade science participation variables, especially for chemistry

corre-We tested a set of similar models to those reported above (M Ainley & J Ainley, 2011a)with participation in 12th-grade science subjects as the outcome variable In addition, weincluded gender, because of its known relationship with participation in some science sub-jects, and socioeconomic status, because of its positive relation with science knowledge andpotentially with science participation Thus, our model envisaged that socioeconomic back-ground, gender (we had approximately equal numbers of boys and girls), science knowledge,and personal value of science potentially influenced enjoyment of science, interest in science,and future-oriented science motivation, which in turn predicted science participation in12th grade Using Mplus, we conducted path analyses (Muthén & Muthén, 2010) to test thefit of our model and estimate the strength of the relationships among its constituentelements The model was run separately for all three science participation measures (biology,chemistry, and physics)

Science knowledge and personal value of science, along with gender and socioeconomicstatus, were entered as predictors of enjoyment of science and then as predictors of interest

in learning science The next set of paths examined science knowledge, personal value ofscience, gender, enjoyment of science, and interest in learning science as predictors of fu-ture-oriented science motivation The final set of paths entered consisted of the influence

of these variables on each of the four measures of science participation The models foreach of biology, chemistry, and physics are shown in Figure 1 All the fit indices (see Byrne,2001), including the root mean square error of approximation, indicated good fit (see J.Ainley & M Ainley, 2011)

In developing the models, we explored a number of alternatives Across this nationallyrepresentative sample, the effect of socioeconomic status on the motivation variables and

on later participation in science studies operated through its effect on science knowledge.For that reason, socioeconomic status does not appear in the final models reported AsFigure 1 indicates, we found evidence for a set of paths indicating motivational influences

on the uptake of science studies in 12th grade Strong predictive paths connect personalvalue of science with science participation through enjoyment of science, interest in learningscience, and future-oriented science motivation, which in turn predicts participation Theinfluence of future-oriented science motivation on participation is stronger for chemistry(.44) than for physics (.30) and biology (.23) There are also additional direct influences ofinterest in learning science on participation in all three science fields and a small directpath connecting personal value of science and participation in biology

In addition to these motivational influences, there are direct effects of science knowledge

on 12th-grade participation, with the direct effect of knowledge on participation strongerfor chemistry and physics than for biology Even after allowing for the other influences inthe model, there is a strong positive influence of gender for physics and a strong negativeinfluence of gender for biology participation For both subjects, these gender effects areamong the strongest predictors Boys are more likely to choose to study physics, and girlsare more likely to choose to study biology There is no demonstrated influence of gender onparticipation in chemistry

The findings of these analyses suggest that in addition to the direct effects of scienceknowledge, there are strong predictive relations among personal value of science, enjoyment

of science, interest in learning science, future-oriented science motivation, and participation

in science studies in the final years of secondary schooling Enjoyment and interest werevery closely associated Interest in learning science partially mediated the effect of enjoyment

of science on students’ expression of their intention to engage further with science, andthese intentions predict actual participation in science studies in the final year of school.This provides strong evidence that in addition to the effects of prior achievement, studentswho enjoy their experiences of science and have developed interest in learning sciencemidway through high school are the students who are more likely to have formed intentions

to participate in science studies in their final high school years And as shown in Figure 1,intentions predict actual participation In addition, when students believe that science haspersonal relevance and meaning for their lives, they are more likely to experience enjoymentand interest in their science studies and choose to continue those studies

20 53

35

-10

17 11

-41 09

23 16

20 53

35

-10

17 36

44 20

20 53

35

-10

17 34

in- of interest, gender and interest in mathematics and science, difficulty and interest in ematics and science, self-efficacy, self-concept, and interest development