Robert McCartney
Jonas Boustedt
Anna Eckerdal
Carol Zander
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
In this article, we address the question of why computing students choose to learn computing topics on their own. A better understanding of why some students choose to learn on their own may help us to motivate other students to develop this important skill. In addition, it may help in curriculum design; if we need to leave some topics out of our expanding curriculum, a good choice might be those topics that students readily learn on their own.
Based on a thematic analysis of 17 semistructured interviews, we found that computing students’ motivations for self-directed learning fall into four general themes: projects, social and peer interactions, joy of learning, and fear. Under these, we describe several more specific subthemes, illustrated in the words of the students.
The project-related and social motivations are quite prominent. Although these motivations appear in the literature, they received greater emphasis from our interviewees. Perhaps most characteristic of computing is the motivation to learn to complete some project, both projects done for fun and projects required for school or work.
- Kenneth E. Barron and Judith M. Harackiewicz. 2000. Achievement goals and optimal motivation: A multiple goals approach. In Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: The Search for Optimal Motivation and Performance, C. Sansone and J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.). Academic Press, Waltham, MA, 231--254.Google Scholar
- Phyllis C. Blumenfeld, Elliot Soloway, Ronald W. Marx, Joseph S. Krajcik, Mark Guzdial, and Annemarie Palincsar. 1991. Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist 26, 3--4, 369--398.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, Robert McCartney, Kate Sanders, Lynda Thomas, and Carol Zander. 2011. Students’ perceptions of the differences between formal and informal learning. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER’11). ACM, New York, NY, 61--68. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Naomi R. Boyer, Sara Langevin, and Alessio Gaspar. 2008. Self direction & constructivism in programming education. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGITE Conference on Information Technology Education (SIGITE’08). ACM, New York, NY, 89--94. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1414558.1414585 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 77--101.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Juan C. Burguillo. 2010. Using game theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student motivation and performance. Computers and Education 55, 2, 566--575. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.018 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lyn Corno. 1993. The best-laid plans: Modern conceptions of volition and educational research. Educational Researcher 22, 2, 14--22.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jennifer Crocker, Scott Moeller, and Aleah Burson. 2010. The costly pursuit of self-esteem: Implications for self-regulation. In Handbook of Personality and Self-Regulation, R. H. Hoyle (Ed.). Wiley, 403--429.Google Scholar
- Brian Dorn and Mark Guzdial. 2006. Graphic designers who program as informal computer science learners. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER’06). ACM, New York, NY, 127--134. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1151588.1151608 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brian Dorn and Mark Guzdial. 2010. Discovering computing: Perspectives of Web designers. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER’10). ACM, New York, NY, 23--30. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1839594.1839600 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carol S. Dweck. 2008. Can personality be changed? The role of beliefs in personality and change. Current Directions in Psychological Science 17, 6, 391--394.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Heidi Grant and Carol S. Dweck. 2003. Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85, 3, 541--553.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gerald O. Grow. 1991. Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly 41, 3, 125--149.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Laura Helle, Päivi Tynjälä, Erkki Olkinuora, and Kirsti Lonka. 2006. Project-based learning in post-secondary education—theory, practice and rubber sling shots. Higher Education 51, 287--314.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Laura Helle, Päivi Tynjälä, Erkki Olkinuora, and Kirsti Lonka. 2007. ‘Ain’t nothin’ like the real thing’. Motivation and study processes on a work-based project course in information systems design. British Journal of Educational Psychology 77, 2, 397--411.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gregory W. Hislop, Heidi J. C. Ellis, and Ralph A. Morelli. 2009. Evaluating student experiences in developing software for humanity. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 41, 3, 263--267. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1595496.1562959 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Malcomb S. Knowles. 1975. Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for Learners and Teachers. Association Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Thomas A. Litzinger, John C. Wise, and Sangha Lee. 2005. Self-directed learning readiness among engineering undergraduate students. Journal of Engineering Education 94, 2, 215--221.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert McCartney, Anna Eckerdal, Jan Erik Moström, Kate Sanders, Lynda Thomas, and Carol Zander. 2010. Computing students learning computing informally. In Proceedings of the 10th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling’10). ACM, New York, NY, 43--48. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1930464.1930470 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Peter Nenniger. 1999. On the role of motivation in self-directed learning: The “two-shells-model of motivated self-directed learning” as a structural explanatory concept. European Journal of Psychology of Education XIV, 1, 71--86.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel H. Pink. 2009. Drive: The Surprising Truth about What Motivates Us. Riverhead Books, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Harry T. Reis, Kennon M. Sheldon, Shelly L. Gable, Joseph Roscoe, and Richard M. Ryan. 2000. Daily well-being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26, 419--435.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55, 1, 68--78.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Carol Sansone and Judith M. Harackiewicz (Eds.). 2000. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
- Daniel Schugurensky. 2000. The Forms of Informal Learning: Towards a Conceptualization of the Field. NALL Working Paper No. 19, Centre for the Study of Education and Work, OISE/UT. http://www.nall.ca/res/19formsofinformal.htm (Accessed April 15, 2011).Google Scholar
- Marilla D. Svinicki. 1999. New directions in learning and motivation. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 80, 5--27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kathryn R. Wentzel. 1999. Social-motivational processes and interpersonal relationships: Implications for understanding motivation at school. Journal of Educational Psychology 91, 1, 76--97.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert K. Yin. 2014. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
- Carol Zander, Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, Robert McCartney, Jan Erik Moström, Kate Sanders, and Lynda Thomas. 2012. Self-directed learning: Stories from industry. In Proceedings of the 12th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling’12). ACM, New York, NY, 111--117. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2401796.2401810 Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Why Computing Students Learn on Their Own: Motivation for Self-Directed Learning of Computing
Recommendations
The Gaming Involvement and Informal Learning Framework
Aim. This article presents a model of how gaming involvement and informal learning come together in practice.
Method. Based on a series of interviews, case studies, and a wider survey, the Gaming Involvement and Informal Learning (GIIL) framework ...
Learners Self-directing Learning in FutureLearn MOOCs: A Learner-Centered Study
Transforming Learning with Meaningful TechnologiesSocial media in everyday learning: how Facebook supports informal learning among young adults in South Africa
Koli Calling '13: Proceedings of the 13th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education ResearchSocial media has in the recent years become a part of people's daily lives, and with it has come a new way to communicate and interact. The functions of social media in formal and non-formal learning are well studied, but much less attention has been ...
Comments