Stefan

Education Tech Research Dev (2008) 56:329359 DOI 10.
1007/s11423-006-9009-2 DEVELOPMENT ARTICLE
Project-based learning in an internship program: A qualitative study of related roles and their motivational attributes
Abbas Johari Amy C. Bradshaw
Published online: 14 November 2006 Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2006
Abstract The roles of task, learner, and mentor in a successful project-based instructional technology (IT) internship program were studied in light of contemporary motivation theories. Interns in four different locations were asked to apply their academic experiences in constructing real projects at work under the supervision of their site mentors and academic advisor. Data included tape-recorded intern interviews, status-review notes, e-portfolios, mentor interviews, and mentor evaluations. Data were collected over 6 semesters, from 18 different cases, 4 of which are highlighted here. The study considered the roles of task, learner, and mentors as they are needed to make the most of project-based internship programs. Implications for the design and development of internship and capstone programs, and specically successful student performance in internship programs, are considered. Keywords Contemporary motivation theories IT capstone internships Open-ended learning environments Project-based learning Situated learning environments Introduction There has been a great recognition of the importance of educational partnership between instructional technology (IT) programs and local high-tech
A. Johari (&) MultiMedia Design Department, Cameron University, 2800 W. Gore Boulevard, Lawton, OK 73505, USA e-mail: abbasj@cameron.edu A. C. Bradshaw Instructional Psychology and Technology, The University of Oklahoma, 820 Van Vleet Oval, Collings Hall 321, Norman, OK 73072, USA
123
330
A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw
corporate organizations (Baird, 2001; Oldman & Hamadeh, 2000). These organizations offer internships to IT students for a variety of reasons. For example, internships offer rms relatively low-cost opportunities for production and for updating and identifying employable talent. Students learn about corporate structure, processes, and behavior and obtain opportunities for authentic learning and practice (Johari, Bradshaw, & Aguilar, 2002). Interns acquire knowledge that is situated and performed in an actual workplace producing real products. Internships are intended to offer the breadth, depth, and scope of real IT experiences. Despite theoretical assumptions predicting IT internship projects are generally valuable, some IT internship programs have produced less than satisfactory outcomes (Hartt & Rossett, 2000) and it is common to hear of internship projects being boring and wasteful, or going out of control. One approach to solving this problem is to design and evaluate internship programs using measuring devices suited to authentic learning and problem solving environments. Programs designed and evaluated according to their own theoretical denitions and assumptions can provide interns with meaningful learning experiences and can bring positive changes. This is a compelling reason to focusing attention more closely on learner-centered, and particularly project-based learning, theoretical and developmental frameworks as a determinate of the success of internship experiences.
Perspectives on project-based learning Project-based internship programs stem from learner-centered, problemsolving, open-ended environments, and project-based learning approaches. Dewey (1916) described learner-centered education as that reconstruction or reorganization of experience which adds to the meaning of experience, and which increases ability to direct the course of subsequent experience (p. 76). In a problem-solving learning environment, examples of the abilities learners need to acquire are observing, nding patterns and generalizing, forming conclusions based on patterns, and assessing conclusions based on observations (Eggen & Kauchak, 1992). Open-ended learning environments (OELEs) are learner-centered systems that provide learners with rich learning environments, facilitating problem solving, critical thinking, and perspective building (Land & Hannan, 1996). Hill and Hannan (1997) found that learners in OELEs use a variety of strategies based on perceived self-efcacy and perceptions of disorientation. Learners are involved in projects of depth, complexity, duration, and real-world relevance (Berliner, 1992, p. 12). Further, project-based learning provides environments suited to the nurturing of intrinsic motivation (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). In project-based learning, learners cant fail because [they] will be given enough time to rework unsatisfactory products and performances (Mitchell, 1992, p. 37).
123
Project-based learning in an internship program
331
Assumptions of cognitive motivational theories An important aspect of project-based learning environments is that they offer rich opportunities to respond to and support individuals underlying motivational needs. This section provides a brief overview of three motivational theories: (a) attribution theory, (b) self-efcacy theory, and (c) self-determination theory. Attribution theory holds that learners explain success and failure in terms of seven general causes (ability, effort, mood, task difculty, teacher bias, luck or chance, and unusual help from others) (Glover & Bruning, 1990). Which of these causes is typically attributed corresponds to a persons general locus of control. Those with an internal locus of control typically attribute success to ability and effort, and failure to lack of effort. Those with an external locus of control are more likely to believe that their success or failure is determined by the difculty of the task, chance, lack of ability, mood, bias, or unusual help from others (Wigeld, 1988). Self-efcacy may be dened as condence in ones relevant abilities. Bandura (1997) described it as the belief in ones capabilities to recognize and execute courses of action required to produce given attainments (p. 3). Bandura and his associates (Bandura & Jourden, 1991; Bandura & Wood, 1989; Wood & Bandura, 1989) showed a relationship between self-efcacy and the use of performance improvement strategies. In a meta-analysis, Multon, Brown, and Lent (1991) found that self-efcacy in educational settings was related to both academic performance and persistence. Self-determination theory looks at learner needs for competence, relationship, and autonomy (Deci, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991). At the core of intrinsic motivation is an attitude of self-determination (feeling competent, engaging in benecial relationships with people, and being autonomous). Applying external reward for intrinsically motivated students decreases their subsequent intrinsic motivation (Bates, 1979; Morgan, 1984). Learner-centered, problem solving, and open-ended or project-based learning approaches have important embedded intrinsic motivational theories and carry assumptions that should be understood to obtain maximum benets. In general, these approaches place heavy emphasis on the projects doable task, the dynamic role of the teacher as a mentor, facilitator, or advisor, and the appropriate learning environment. Although these approaches do not have precisely dened qualitative performances measures, their theoretical assumptions are important implicit goals of project-based learning experiences. Evaluation in situated learning should be integrated, ongoing, and seamless (Young, 1993, p. 48), and examine the the learning process, the learners progress, the instructional strategies deployed, and the learning environment (McLellan, 1993, p. 39). McLellan suggests diagnosis as an evaluation device that includes learners portfolio, student performance, the teachers ongoing assessment, and the students reection and self-assessment. This article investigates the roles of task, learner, and mentor in an IT internship program that encourages excellent student project-based
123
332
performance and motivational behavior in project-based setting and OELEs. There is a dearth of research on project-based learning internship programs, particularly involving programs that emphasize cognitive motivational strategies through a combination of roles. A few studies have examined the learners role in open-ended or project-based environments in general: Hill and Hannan (1997) found that in a hypermedia information system, learners use a variety of strategies that are affected by perceptions of disorientation, perceived self-efcacy, and self-reported knowledge. Land and Hannan (1997) reported on learners inaccurate scientic understanding in an OELE. Land and Greene (2000) investigated how learners in a project-based environment sought, located, and integrated information resources. In contrast, there are numerous related studies on motivation and learning. For example, several researchers have reported that students are very interested in tasks that, despite requiring a lot of work, are perceived by them as authentic (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1992, p. 817). Situated motivation, coined by Paris and Turner (1994), is emerging as an area of study, as socioconstructivist research increases. The current study extends the literature on project based open-ended learning contexts by focusing on the roles of task, learner, and mentor, and whether contemporary motivational theories are applied.
The present study This study emerged from a desire to understand the underlying reasons why a particularly successful internship program (comprising two four-credit, undergraduate, capstone courses) was so successful. The internship program is a critical element of a fairly new department recognized across the university and throughout the regional community for its highly successful graduates. Continuous survey research conducted by the department beginning in 2001 indicates that 75% of interns placed at corporations were subsequently hired by them or other companies that had hosted the departments interns. The department receives consistent positive feedback from internship site mentors, both formally and informally. The success of the program and its graduates is particularly noteworthy as the program is offered at the undergraduate level; comparative training and preparation are available generally from exclusively graduate-level instructional design and technology programs. In planning the Multimedia Design Degree (MDD), the program designers (university provost, department advisory board, faculty, and local industry leaders) recognized a necessity to provide real world experiences for the learners. As part of the Associate degree requirements, lower division students needed to work as team members; therefore, the second-year internship (the rst Capstone course) requires students to work in teams under a project manager. The Bachelor degree objectives included providing opportunities for upper-division students to learn management skills, thus the 4th year internship allowed seniors to work as project managers. Together these opportunities
123
333
provided real world experiences that make students more well-rounded and marketable as they seek jobs in the multimedia instructional design industry. Among the criteria for, and indicators of, the internship programs success, four elements were key: (1) High employment of department graduates by IT companies in the surrounding communities. (2) Successful funding of grant proposals to the States Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology. This small, high-impact agency funded by state appropriations is governed by a board of directors representing both private and public sectors. Funded research projects are rst reviewed by out-of-state science and business experts and ranked according to scientic merit and commercial potential to ensure state funds are wisely invested where they will have the most impact. (3) Favorable regard for the Internship program by the Departments Advisory Board. The Advisory Board comprises individuals from area IT businesses. So many department graduates have been hired by local rms following their internships that the current advisory board now includes department alumni. (4) Favorable regard by the Universitys upper administration. The department was charged with being successful or risking elimination. The administrations perception of the success of the department has resulted in its being relocated to a prestigious location on campus with cutting-edge facilities. As with project-based learning in general, motivation is a critical component in the success of learning in the applied, authentic settings of internship programs. In the less formally controlled environments of project-based learning, and particularly in internship situations, motivation keeps learners engaged in the project, thereby increasing the likelihood of success. Were the underlying principles of prominent motivational theories at the core of the programs success? This studys purpose was to examine not only the roles played during these internship projects, but also to determine whether motivational theories, specically attribution, self-efcacy, and self-determination, were employed in this successful internship program. To understand the dynamic interactions between learners, real tasks, and mentors in project-based learning internship projects, qualitative methods involving multiple data sources and diverse techniques were employed in an explanatory formative evaluation of the departments capstone program. Several scholars have recognized that formative evaluation is not limited to front-end, linear application or early draft testing, but also can (and some assert should) occur for as long as the instruction is in use (Komoski & Woodward, 1985; Weston, McAlpine, & Bordonaro, 1995; Young, 1993). Young in particular has called for ongoing evaluations integrated with the instruction in situated learning contexts. The implicit goal of this study involves attending to the theoretical assumptions of project-based learning and OELEs. The researchers examined the components of the internship program to determine what elements could be identied and applied in other settings by those seeking to design and develop new internship programs or to improve existing ones. The primary working (organizing) question that supported the overall goals and purpose of this study was, What are the roles of tasks, learners, and mentors in these
123
334
particular internship IT project-based learning environments? This question provided an entrance into assessing the t among the theoretical assumptions of project learning and three current motivational theories. Three secondary questions evolved from the primary question: 1. 2. 3. Does a successful project-based learning internship program encourage interrelationship among the roles? Does a successful project-based learning internship program support intrinsic motivation? Did the individual aspects of the internship program apply elements of cognitive motivational theories?
Method Participants, design, and context Eighteen interns participated in the study through two university undergraduate courses (Capstone I & II) in which students were to develop IT projects and learn organizational behavior. Data were collected during six semesters (Summer 2001, Fall 2001, Spring 2002, Summer 2002, Fall 2002, Spring 2003). Interns were not awarded extra credit for participating in this study and were studied as separate cases (Yin, 1994). This article primarily focuses on four key cases (units of analysis) described in detail in the Findings and Discussion section. These four cases are empirical units that are, on the one hand, circumstantial and specic and, on the other hand, theoretical or general to the other 14 cases. As Ragin and Becker (1992) assert, they are not simply cases but cases of. Although these four cases comprise specic and bounded contexts and are not occurrences selected for the study (Schwandt, 2001), they are products of an anticipatory data reduction process formed from the other 18 cases from four different locations during several semesters. Qualitative data reduction can be reduced and transformed in many ways: through selection, through summary or paragraphs, through being subsumed in a larger pattern, and so on (Miles & Huberman, 1994). These four were selected because they generally represented the relevant characteristics of the other 14 participants. Gender and race also were considered in the selection of these four cases (two of the four are female, one of the four is black). A qualitative approach was selected to aid in the conceptualization of motivation in relation to its particular topic and setting within which motivation is tested (CTGV, 1992, p. 817) and to understand the interrelationship among the roles of tasks, learners, and mentors in these particular settings. This study is similar to previous socioconstructivist descriptive research investigations that use qualitative approaches to understand the processes and relationships of different and interconnected roles (Guba & Linclon, 1982). Therefore, the design was naturalistic and descriptive, employing grounded
123
335
theory techniques similar to those suggested by Strauss and Corbin (1990). The researchers included the academic mentor (course instructor) and a colleague from a graduate-level IT program at a nearby university. Learning activities discussed in this study are part of sophomore- and senior-level internship courses in an associates and bachelors degree-granting program, at a small state university in the south central part of the United States. While attending school, interns worked at local corporations, up to 20 hours a week, working within corporate teams on actual projects or separate from the corporation teams on actual miniprojects. Some interns were paid and all received a letter grade upon completion of the assigned internships. The course grade was primarily based on the site mentor grade on project development and organizational behavior, the interns online portfolio construction, and attendance at the course seminar and individual sessions. Attendance at orientation, biweekly status-review sessions (both group and individual appointments), and nal project presentations were required. Regular contact with teams, corporate mentors, the academic mentor, and other interns was required, consistent with the assumptions of cognitive motivational theories (Bandura, 1997; Deci et al., 1991; Glover & Bruning, 1990) and project-based learning (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Class materials and structure Classroom materials included a course Web site, course syllabus, a journal article and other handouts, several computer-generated presentations, an online collection of previous portfolio projects, some hints regarding e-portfolio construction, and written critiques from individual appointments. The course syllabus included course description and objectives, teaching and learning philosophy, internship evaluation criteria, and an outline of scheduled activities. Handouts included the PRIDE (Professionalism, Responsibility, Integrity, Dedication, and Excellence) model (CARA Corporation, 1997) and the sample MRL (Mentor Recommendation Letter) format, both of which also were provided via the course Web site. The PRIDE criteria includes: Professionalism (verbal, written, and listening skills), Responsibility (technical skills, quality of work, and training), Integrity (punctuality, attitude, and compliance with standards), Dedication (team member, user interaction, and problem resolution), and Excellence (leadership, ethics, and advice). Three books related to the design and development of multimedia projects, portfolio construction, and reporting technical information constituted the required course texts. A computer-generated presentation on organizational behavior was provided at the orientation session. An article on successful internship project planning was distributed at the beginning of the course for students to critique and summarize. To shape interns thinking about design and level of complexity, some previous online portfolio projects were available. Some general requirements for e-portfolio construction were provided, including project audience, objectives, phases of design, development, and evaluation, and materials needed to construct the e-portfolios. Interns met
123
336
individually with the academic mentor (the course instructor) twice during their internships. At the end of each individual appointment, interns received a copy of the e-portfolio critiques. The course structure consisted of the following activities: First, the department selection committee identied prospective interns. Then, interns attended an orientation seminar session, placement interviews, a project process-review session, and individual appointments, and, nally, they presented their nal reports and presentations. Prior to the beginning of the semester, the departments selection committee members determined whether a request for internship was accepted. They then suggested the placement of individual interns for specic corporate internship settings. The course mandated eight appearances at the university classroom: six seminar sessions, and two individual appointments (e-Portfolio Construction and Mentor Recommendation Letter) to receive constructive feedback from the academic advisor. The rubric used for grading consisted of: (a) Site mentor overall satisfaction with project and performance (using PRIDE)40%, (b) e-Portfolio (demonstrating project progress and graded by the academic mentor)40%, (c) Final presentation10%, (d) and Attending the seminars10%. The corporate environment The internship contexts were several different businesses with project-based instructional design and development environments that provided all the IT tools necessary for the projects. Interns had access to multimedia computers connected to the Internet, with all required software programs. They were given designated work space or ofces and worked near their mentors. All the IT companies were in very close proximity to the university except one, which was in a nearby city to which two interns traveled together twice a week. Interns needed to work 13 weeks, 16 hours per week. The hours were exible to accommodate interns class schedules. Almost all the participating companies use the ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation) instructional model in the creation of their products. Some interns had specic projects to do from the beginning to the end. Others entered into some part of a project and performed a few miniprojects as part of the bigger project. Regardless of length or stage of project, the corporate contexts considered in this study supported the basic assumption of project-based learning: enhancing motivation and fostering cognitive engagement through their design, mentors, and technology use (Blumenfeld et al., 1991, p. 380).
Data collection Data collection included (a) in-depth interview transcripts from interns and mentors, (b) six status review notes, (c) individual appointments notes, (d) mentor reports, and (e) intern portfolios. The mentor and intern interviews, and intern portfolio contents were the key sources.
123
337
Structured interviews Upon completion of their internship projects, participating interns were asked questions in a structured interview to measure whether and how the components of PBL were met during their internship experiences. These components included the roles of task, intern, and mentor, as they relate to cognitive motivational theories. There were a total of 33 questions, of which 12 were follow-up questions. Several of the questions focused on related roles and their motivational attributes. Learners were asked about their experiences with their capstones project tasks, in terms of duration, needed skills, available solutions, choices, feasibility, processes, nal products, and the like. The remaining questions examined the roles of both mentors and interns in light of motivational theories. What did the learners think about the tasks and themselves? Did they believe their success was due to their effort or to luck? Did they believe that they could accomplish the overall goals of their project because they were competent? Did their mentors monitor their learning strategies, promote team work, and assign projects that were realistic? Status review notes There were six status review sessions throughout the semester, from Week 2 to Week 14. In Week 2, interns (a) showed their academic mentor that their class syllabus had been signed by their corporate mentors, and (b) displayed their online portfolios, logsheets, and initial project analysis pages. Their initial project analysis was required to include the topic or a general purpose of their internship, the product audience characteristics, learning themes, goals, or objectives, and the subject content. For conducting all of the Week 2 activities, interns received 3 points (100 points were possible in this class, of which 40 were assigned by the academic mentor). A few interns received only 1 point. In Week 4, interns reported on the assigned chapters of their books and displayed some planning of their projects in their e-portfolios, again for three points. All interns were focused and received all the points. In Week 6, most interns reported on a reading assignment on elements of design and their e-Portfolio construction, and provided the class with images of their work environment, mentor, and equipment used at work. They also displayed the storage structure of their e-portfolio (again, for a total of three points). Some interns did not show the storage structure of their e-portfolio. In Week 8, evidences of design elements embedded in the e-portfolio and the progress report to the academic mentor were displayed for three points. Class notes indicated that a few interns were behind the course schedule because of the nature of their work, their mentors were behind in their agenda in terms of equipment, or project funding was delayed, or the like. Some evidence of project development was required in Week 10. Class notes indicated that those who were behind in the design of their projects continued to be behind for the project development stage due dates. In Week 12, a
123
338
complete draft of the e-portfolio and a letter from the site mentor regarding the interns professionalism, instructional and visual design and development, and technological capabilities were due for 10 points. Many interns did not provide letters to the academic mentor. In Week 14, complete e-portfolios were due for peer evaluation and further discussion regarding their construction and contents (for ve points). In Week 16, the nal presentation and reports were due. The nal report was worth 10 points and was a macro-level summary of (a) all the events that occurred during the internship, (b) unforgettable personal reections, and (c) evidence of lessons learned in a journalistic story-telling format. This was a very friendly, persuasive paper describing an organized collection of evidences that monitored growth of the interns knowledge, skills, and attitude (Cole, Ryan, & Kick, 1995) in an actual PBL environment. Using this report, interns also were required to present their capstone experiences to the class for two points. Individual appointments, mentor reports, and intern portfolios There were 2 one-on-one individual appointments: (a) the rst occurred in Week 1 during the orientation session when interns were assigned to their corporate mentors, and (b) the other in Week 14 when interns displayed their e-portfolio drafts, recommendation letters from their mentors, and competencies via an oral quiz on courseware evaluation. Interns received six points for accomplishing these tasks. Importantly, during the second individual appointment, the academic mentor asked open-ended questions regarding the interns PBL plan. The academic mentor sought information regarding motivation, self-determination, self-efcacy, and attribution theory based on the interns experiences. This information was used to adjust the course for the cohort of interns that would follow. At the conclusion of the internship, corporate mentors completed a PRIDE model (CARA Corporation, 1997) form and wrote two letters. The rst letter was used as a nal report to the academic adviser. The second could serve as a letter of recommendation. Based on these reports, interns received 40% of their nal grade for their capstone course. The PRIDE letter indicated a letter grade (A to D) for each component of the model. The recommendation letter needed to contain the corporations logo and be written properly. The academic mentor provided information regarding the general content and structure of the recommendation letter and requesting information regarding the interns organizational behavior, instructional design, graphic and layout capabilities, and technology or authoring strengths. The structured intern portfolios included the topic and general purpose of the project, audience characteristics, learning themes or objectives, subject content, applied instructional methods, due dates, design (implementation of graphic design rules, authoring process capabilities, and ID model), time log sheet, and formative and summative evaluations. The interns e-portfolio provided 40% of their nal grade. Besides presenting valid content, the Web
123
339
sites had to be independent of the interns homepages, developed professionally, and approved by the corporate mentors. Interns could not display any content, including images, that violated the companys policies.
Data coding and analysis Data Analysis was conducted during several phases. As the internships progressed, several themes and similarities between projects emerged, which were noted and reserved for later consideration. Hence, data collection and analysis proceeded simultaneously (see Glaser & Strauss, 1967). During audio tape transcription, notes were made to identify areas related to initial questions, to record new and emerging questions and themes, and to note any possible contradictions that occurred to the researcher during transcription. Summaries of participants experiences and their perceptions of those experiences were then developed. Some general codes were generated based on the initial research questions. The researchers coded the intern and mentor interview transcripts, course materials, and course products, and identied additional codes and themes as they emerged. The process is presented in Fig. 1. Denitions, assumptions, and codes were organized by the roles and motivational framework of the study. Researchers then organized the data according to codes, themes, and research questions in a more focused coding (Glaser, 1978). Roles, assumptions about those roles, and the corresponding codes are presented in Table 1. For example, Research Question 1 (Roles and Relationships) was analyzed into four distinct categories: (a) Task or Project, (b) Learner, (c) Site Mentor, and (d) Academic Mentor. Detailed descriptions of the question categories can be found in the Findings and Discussion section of this article.
Findings and discussion Findings and interpretations are presented together (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) in two formats: (a) distinctions among four participants; and (b) the degree to which the codes associated with each question. The remainder of this article will focus on 4 of the 18 participants initially included in this study, for the purposes of diversity (Whitt, 1991), richness of the data indicated by the various instruments, and minimizing unnecessary information across participants. Detailed analyses were conducted on these four individual participants and the intent is not to generalize the discussions beyond the scope of this study. Distinctions among participants A summary of ratings of the four key participants is presented in Table 2. The ratings reect the ndings of research questions on the various measures and overall success. Assumed names are used to protect the identity of the
123
340
Start
Collect Data (e-Portfolios, Process Reports, In-Dept Interviews)
Reduce Data Into New and Old Categories
Add the New Categories To the Old Categories (List the Categories)
Code the Data Record According to the Categories (Each piece of data may fall into several categories)
Has Coding Begun to Make Conceptual Sense?
No
Write Essays Or Analytic Memos
Do We Need Theoretical Sampling?
Yes
Write The Theory

Fig. 1 Synopsis of data analysis
End
participants. The descriptors provided for participants indicate their overall characteristics related to the research questions. These ratings were assigned based on data from intern interviews and one-on-one conversations with the academic mentor. Vicky: a multimedia instructional designer, in her mid 30s Vicky was an intern at a local IT company and was in the nal year of her courses. Her project involved developing a computer-based tutorial for schools and she was able to contact the projects client directly. Vicky reported that her designated task at work took an extended period of time to complete, almost the entire semester. She had to use different disciplines within the multimedia design eld to complete her project. She used her knowledge of graphic design literature, multimedia authoring tools, and team
123
Project-based learning in an internship program Table 1 Related roles: categories, ideal assumptions, and codes Category 1.1 Task/project (T) Assumptions Involves collaboration (Cl) Is doable (Do) Is authentic (A) Is of extended duration (Du) Provides challenge (Cha) Provides choice (Cho) Leads to culminating project (P) Attributes success to own effort (E) Believes can accomplish project goals (G) Perceives self as competent (Cm) Believes in learner, beyond innate abilities (BI) Focuses on both process and product (PP) Provides encouragement (En) Provide feedback (F) Establishes clear task-goals and performance (GP) Encourages intern to know the personnel management process (PM) 3. Encourages intern to identify expressed and implied needs (IN) 4. Encourages interns to work with the systems (training, personal, and company systems) (WS) 5. Encourages interns to become thinkers (organizational analysts and active participants) (BT) 6. Keeps all parties positively involved (AH) Codes T-IC T-Do T-A T-Du T-Cha T-Cho T-P L-E L-G L-Cm SM-BI SM-PP SM-En SM-F AM-GP AM-PM AM-IN
341
Pattern 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1.2 Learner (L) 1. 2. 3. 1.3 Site mentor (SM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 1.4 Academic 1. mentor (AM) 2.
4 of 4
AM-WS 4 of 4 AM-BT 4 of 4
AM-AH 4 of 4
Table 2 Summary ratings of four key participants proles Participants Roles & relationships Task Case Case Case Case 1 2 3 4 Vicky Carl Tina Larry High Mid High High Learner High High High High Mentor Mid High Mid High Intrinsic motivation Attribution High High High High (effort) (ability) (effort) (effort) Self-eff. Mid High High High Self-det. High High High High PBL applied Mid High Mid High Overall success High High High High
working strategies to accomplish the projects goals. Vicky stated that Graphic design was a big one ... also authoring because I was using different types of authoring tools ... but, overall, it was a team project. Vicky reported that although she could use a variety of solutions to nish her project, she used only one authoring program. Carl: an instructional graphics designer, in his early 40s Carl was an intern at another local IT company. His project involved developing computer-based training materials for the U.S. Army. While working in the IT eld, he was in the nal year of his multimedia instructional design study. Carl reported that he completed many miniprojects during his internship
123
342
at work and that most of [them] were completed over an extended period, be it a week or two weeks. When asked what disciplines he needed to complete his projects, he replied that the biggest part of that [was] the teamwork rst, and then graphic design and authoring, some instructional psychology. Carl indicated that he had all the solutions to nish his internship project. He had access to his mentor, coworkers, and the clients: I would have them come and take a look to make sure that I was proceeding according to what they wanted. There was involvement with my mentor at all times. Tina: a print-based instructional designer, in her late 30s Tina was an intern for a local IT company in addition to being a mother and she repeatedly made the university presidential honor list. Her project involved developing computer-based training programs for industry. She reported that her task on her internship project was, the instructional psychology part of it, creating quizzes, creating tests... She had to complete a very long project and had access to many instructional development software programs. In terms of mentor involvement in her project, she stated, Everything had to go through [a project manager] before it got to my mentor. Larry: an instructional designer, in his early 30s Larry worked at a local IT company, in addition to his regular responsibilities as a father of two and as an employee at a food company. His internship project involved developing web-based instruction for a school. He acknowledged that the tasks during his internship were completed over an extended period of time and required several sessions that called on teamwork and instructional design skills. Asked about mentors guiding him in completing the task versus the processes involved, he replied, My sponsor was denitely involved in the process. The project changed depending on the information they gave us. We learned more about the project, what they needed, and why. We changed accordingly.
Findings by research questions Question 1: supporting, facilitating, and ensuring interrelationship among the roles Question 1 examined the interrelationships between the major roles related to the internships and, secondarily, whether or not the guiding assumptions that related to each of the roles would be conrmed in real contexts. The projectbased learning nature of the internship program appeared to strongly support the interrelated and the guiding intrinsic motivational assumptions of the roles. Adopted from Borich and Tombari (1997) and Blumenfeld et al. (1991),
123
343
interviews were coded for evidence of four role categories: (a) task or project, (b) learner, (c) site mentor, and (d) academic mentor. In almost all interviews, instances of relationships were found directly (for example, When going into the project, I felt that I had somebody behind me that understood if I had any questions, was a typical theme during intern interviews). The role of task or project A project-based learning task or environment requires a central question or problem that serves to organize and drive a series of project activities as products that culminate in a nal product in which the question or the problem is answered and solved (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Within this category were seven subcategories: (a) involves collaboration, (b) is doable, (c) is authentic, (d) is of extended duration, (e) provides challenge, (f) provides choice, and (g) leads to culminating project. Researchers were constantly seeking the assumptions underlying the role of task in project-based learning. Almost all participants reported positively that their planned internship projects provided tasks that reected most of the underlying assumption of PBL. (Patterns are indicated in Tables 1, 2.) All participants engaged in authentic and culminating projects, on which company budgets and success depend. Vickys comments regarding the assumptions of the high role of task during her internship experience were typical of comments from other interns: It was a team project ... [it] took several sessions to complete ... [in terms of software] I did not have a choice ... It was one authoring program that I had to use. The role of learner No matter how powerful the role of tasks in PBL, projects need to engage students in learning in pursuit of a solution. There are three major factors that constitute a high role of learners in Project-based learning. PBL fosters understanding if learners (a) nd the projects to be interesting and valuable, (b) perceive that they have the competence to engage in and complete the project, and (c) focus on learning rather than on outcomes and grades (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). There was enough evidence in the data to support these three elements as subcategories of the role of learner: (a) nding value and interest in the problem and the elements of the project (b) believing project goals can be accomplished, and (c) being self-competent. All four participants responded positively to these subcategories, as shown by sample interview quotes. Carl: I had a great opportunity to speak with some future customers, and I was kind of put at the forefront of a new project ... Because [the project] directly related to learning a specic piece of software, it was kind of a two-for-one type deal: Get this project done, and oh, by the way
123
344
youre going to benet because youre learning this application ... I would say, denitely. My mentor [also] felt that I had the capability to get it done. That was the end result. They did not tell [me] how to build the wall, just build it type of mentality. The role of site mentor In addition to the powerful roles of task and learner in PBL, interns need quality mentors who can further engage them in learning that is personal and cooperative. A mentor can respect a learner by valuing the involved activity and the products of such activity in their own rights, appreciating the ways in which the learner operates including his or her personal and cognitive styles, and being sensitive to the learners ideas (Bussis & Chittenden, 1973). Students use multiple sources of information, including other individuals, when they confront problems in complex real situations (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Resnick, 1987). A quality mentor who provides constant encouraging or persuading feedback for the students is an important part of the learners social support network. Therefore, the site mentor role category was divided into the following subcategories: (a) believes in learner beyond innate abilities, (b) focuses on both process and product, (c) provides encouragement, and (d) provides feedback. The interns experiences with their mentors revealed these important attributes: Tina: [My mentor] did not talk down to [me] for anything that I did ... everything had to go through [an individual] before it got to my mentor. It was overseen a couple of times before it got to the mentor ... Getting to work with people who are doing it for a living was the best experience ... Theyre really concerned about the end product being completed as soon as possible right now, but they were involved with the process from the beginning to end ... You can tell how youre doing; the way people treat you, the way your team members treat you ... I was provided with good people to work with and there was a lot of, Thats good, Thats a good way to do it. The role of academic mentor The academic mentor taught the internship courses as a teacher and, when necessary, provided advice and assistance to all parties involved in the different projects. In an open classroom, a large part of the artistry of teaching is to know when to play one role and when to play the other (Cook & Mack, 1973). This is consistent with Duncan and Bells (1990) musical analogy of teacher as conductor: The musical conductor is about ensuring that the pace and balance are right ... [likewise] the teacher will facilitate the group of learners in following the learning design according to the constraints, abilities and environment in which learning take place (p. 134). In addition to being a
123
345
teacher, the academic mentor had a role as an advisor, a supporter, or both throughout the whole internship process. At times, the academic mentor needed to intervene when a particular intern needed specic guidance. The following subcategories emerged from the academic mentor category during the data analysis: (a) Establishes clear task goals and performance, (b) encourages interns to know the personnel management process, (c) encourages intern to identify expressed and implied needs, (d) encourages intern to work with the systems (training, personal, and company systems), (e) encourages interns to become thinkers (organizational analysts and active participants, and (f) keeps all parties positively involved. In terms of task goals and performance, interns relied strongly on support they received from the academic mentor via the class syllabus: Larry: They [the class syllabus and materials] were helpful. They helped us document our experience and made us think about more than just the project we were working on, but the whole process of being an intern and why we were doing this. The stages [of project development] compartmentalized the project and rather than getting buried in the project, we could step back and see where we are in the project. Kind of step back and look at the big picture: this is the planning stage, Phase I, Phase II, Phase III, and you just kind of know where you are and where youre going and if youre at this point and you need to get here at the end you have an idea of what amount of work you need to do to get there. That [class syllabus] helps to keep you on track. The academic mentor encouraged interns to express their external as well as internal needs during their internships. He provided such mentoring both at the capstone orientation and during the whole internship process (for example, he considered interns skill levels and talents in matching interns and mentors). The academic mentor rmly encouraged the interns to become problem solvers and active participants at work (for example, by providing interns with organizational behavior concepts). For evidence of this, see the Class Materials and Structure section. In addition, the academic coordinator kept interns, site mentors, and other individuals positively involved via distributed list e-mail system, different kinds of reports, letters, personal visits, log-sheets, and e-portfolios. Question 2: supporting intrinsic motivation Question 2 examined whether or not the elements of intrinsic motivation were supported by the context, structure, and organization of the internship project-based program. Project-based learning environments can activate and sustain intrinsic motivation, if the complex nature of student motivation and knowledge required in engaging cognitively difcult work is understood (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Substantial evidence of three motivational perspectives applied to the present study supports this. Data were coded for evidence of three intrinsic motivation categories (adapted from Blumenfeld
123
346
et al., 1991; Borich and Tombari, 1997): (a) inuencing attributions, (b) selfefcacy, and (c) self-determination needs (Table 3). Inuencing attributions Attribution theory emphasizes that success and failure depend on some factors that learners can control. These factors include effort, mood, task difculty, teacher bias, luck or chance, and unusual help from others (Glover & Bruning, 1990). Data regarding inuencing attributions were coded for ve assumptions, based on Borich and Tombari (1997): (a) monitoring attributional messages, (b) focusing on learning strategies, (c) avoiding ability grouping, (d) promoting cooperation, and (e) setting realistic goals. Monitoring attributional messages refers to a teachers communication behaviors that convey attributional information, which should be monitored carefully to elicit effort and ability rather than discouraging the learner. Ginott (1972) recommended that teachers focus on encouraging statements instead of praise. Stevens (a site mentor) made encouraging statements directed at student actions rather than either their character or personality. He reported, I think that people need to hear that their work is appreciated. Thats something that is intangible but it means a lot to people to know that they are valued. The site mentors and academic advisor emphasized the cognitive learning strategy of projects by more heavily monitoring what interns were doing during the process of learning than what they had accomplished at the end of their internships. Site mentor Mitchell also noted, That [learning strategy] depended upon the intern, the assignment, and the interns skill set. Once the intern demonstrated the ability to work independently, he or she is given more independence. All participants were involved in teams that valued the interns effort over ability and had a problem-solving learning strategy. For example, site mentor
Table 3 Intrinsic motivation: categories, attributes, and codes Category Question 2: Intrinsic motivation 2.1 Self-determination needs (SD) Attributes Code Pattern
2.2 Self-efcacy (SE)
2.3 Inuencing attributions (IA)
2.1.1 Autonomy (A) 2.1.2 Competence (C) 2.1.3 Relationship (R) 2.2.1 Past experience 2.2.2 External inuences 2.2.3 Peer modeling 2.3.1 Monitoring attributional messages (M) 2.3.2 Focusing on learning strategies (LS) 2.3.3 Avoiding ability grouping (AG) 2.3.4 Promoting cooperation (PC) 2.3.5 Setting realistic goals (RG)
SD-A SD-C SD-R SE-PE SE-EI SE-PM IA-M IA-LS IA-AG IA-PC IA-RG
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
of of of of of of of
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4
123
347
Stevens commented, the thing with me is that I try to always use we... its a team effort, regardless of whether its me thats falling back or the other individual. Regarding cognitive strategy, all mentors used instructional methods ranging from indirect to self-directed instruction. The mentors placed interns in projects with designs that used realistic goals and simple-to-complex instructional designs. Site mentor Brown noted, We went through the whole ADDIE model. We started with a complete Needs Analysis and thats where all those resources were provided. Um, we did the owchart, we did the storyboarding, and then the development. All sites incorporated instructional designs that used elements of teaching processes such as the instructional events of Gagne, Briggs, and Wagner (1992) in the design of their lessons. Self-efcacy Self-efcacy relates to learners judgments regarding their competence for success at a particular task. Learner appraisals of ability can be affected by many factors, including the number of current or past success or failure experiences, encouraging statements of others, occurrences of physiological cues, hearing peers positive self-efcacy statements, and observing successful performances (Schunk, 1991). Data regarding self-efcacy were coded on three assumptions, (a) past experience, (b) external inuences, and (c) peer modeling. Self-efcacy theory indicates that learners who consistently have earned high rewards or grades on the last several tests or assignments will have greater self-efcacy and consequently greater effort and persistence for the current tests or assignments, although learners favorable self-efcacy to achieve a task does not always predict successful future performance (Schunk, 1989). Students in the multimedia design program have extensive experiences conducting projects both as ordinary individual class assignments and nal group projects. In addition, to be qualied for internship projects, students need to have high grade point averages and ability to work with others. This sense of cooperation is noted by the site mentor Mitchell: One of the strengths of the [universitys] interns is their ability to work as team members, and Intern Tina, who had consistent success within the program: Im the kind of person that I might start something that is beyond what I am capable of doing, but I will seek until I nd someone who can help me be capable of doing this job. So I feel like I succeed in everything I do. Learners with low self-efcacy can often be persuaded to perform successfully by a convincing and inspirational teacher (Borich & Tombari, 1997). Intern Larry demonstrated this during his interview: They [Mentors] gave me encouragement to accomplish ... It lifted me up and it gave me a positive attitude. The task may seem daunting, but I just needed to learn more about it. I wanted to take it further ... Specically,
123
348
my teacher has been instrumental in my career here at [the university]. He was a great motivational factor. Learners who hear peers positive self-efcacy statements and observe successful performances tend to increase their own self-efcacy judgments (Schunk & Hanson, 1985; Schunk, Hanson, & Cox, 1987; Zimmerman & Ringle, 1981). The internship course Web site displayed most of the internship projects from the previous three years. During class seminars, interns viewed online previous internship work and critiqued each others e-portfolios, which presented their current work. Interns listened to each others successes and dilemmas and were encouraged to provide solutions. For example, Intern Vicky stated: The class meetings showed me some areas that I could clean up in my own project. It gave me ideas on how to conduct myself a little bit better. It helped me analyze what was going on and turn around and do something a little differently to make things a little bit easier. Tina also indicated the benets of observing some successful performances: Another motivating factor is when we would view other previous classes work and we would build on what they created. We would build professionalism. Self-determination Beyond a learners beliefs about the causes of successes or failures (argued by attribution and self-efcacy theories), self-determination theory relates to the learners attitude toward achieving goalsas modied by feeling competent, having relationships with peers and adults, and being autonomous (Deci et al., 1991). According to this theory, an attitude (not just a belief) of self-determination affects learners intrinsic motivation. Creating an open learning environment that supports learners needs for competence, autonomy, and relationship, therefore, is an important aspect of any internship program that is designed to build intrinsic motivation. Because the internship program in this study is intended to strongly support learners intrinsic motivation, the following attributes of self-determination theory were coded from the selfdetermination subcategory during the data analysis: Needs for (a) competence, (b) autonomy, and (c) relationship. Competence and autonomy were consistent themes among the interns, despite their slightly different roles in their internship programs. Many commented that they felt they were somehow initiating and controlling aspects of their internship projects. One reason for this may be that the interns had adequate IT skills and conceptual understanding of instructional design to achieve the projects goals. Their knowledge of instruction design and their technological skills were sufcient to meet their competence needs, and contributed to meeting autonomy needs. The data consistently indicate that the interns had adequate abilities to initiate and regulate their assigned tasks independently. For example, intern Carl felt highly competent in his
123
349
internship environment, and appreciated the autonomy-supportive nature of his internship project: Part of what motivated me was, I think, being out of a traditional classroom environment and working with professionals in the eldhaving that personal accountability put on you. Knowing that no one is going to hold my hand. These are the things I have to do. These are the things I have to account for. That was my motivationselfassessment and pushing yourself to go to the next level. To go beyond just doing what was required. Question 3: aspects of internship program applying motivational theories of PBL This question examined how the various aspects of a successful internship program incorporated elements of cognitive motivational theories of projectbased learning. This question sought to determine what elements could be identied and then applied in other settings by those seeking to develop new internship programs or to improve existing ones. The various forms of data were coded for evidence of elements underpinning the three cognitive motivational theories previously described: attribution, self-efcacy, and selfdetermination (Table 4). Data forms included status review notes, individual appointments, mentor reports, and intern portfolios. Status review notes The academic mentor provided six status review sessions throughout the semester (described earlier). Data were coded for each attribute of the three motivation theories considered here, with a subsequent in-depth analysis for the attributes that were most strongly evident.
Table 4 Question 3: categories, theoretical elements, and codes Category Theoretical element Code Pattern
Question 3: Aspects of internship program 3.1 Status review notes (SR) Attribution theory (A) 3.1.1 Focusing on learning strategy (LS) 3.1.2 Setting realistic goals (S) Self-efcacy theory (SF) 3.1.3 Peer modeling (P) Self-determination theory (SD) 3.1.4 Relationship (R) 3.2 Individual appointments (IA) Attribution theory (AT) 3.2.1 Monitoring attributional messages (M) 3.3 Mentor reports (MR) Self-determination theory (SD) 3.3.1 Relationship needs (R) 3.4 Intern portfolio (IP) Attribution theory (AT) 3.4.1 Achievement outcomes (A)
SR-A-LS SR-A-S SR-SF-P SR-SD-R IA-AT-M
4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4
MR-SD-R IP-AT-A
4 of 4 4 of 4
123
350
In terms of attribution theory, researchers found the focusing on learning strategy and setting realistic goals attributes of the theory repeatedly throughout the sessions. The early sessions especially emphasized construction of projects starting from the needs analysis, including realistic goals. (See the earlier section on Status Review Notes for more detail.) According to self-determination theory, an attitude of self-determination is experienced when a learners needs for competence, autonomy, and relationship are met (Deci et al., 1991). Access to viewing projects from the previous years could promote interns feeling competent with regard to nding out the kinds of skills that would be required from them at work. The academic mentor wrote in his status review notes, It was a great idea to show the class [a previous student]s e-Portfolio of his internship project from AST, it seems to have captured everyones attention, great! The online projects also could help them be prepared for a variety of challenges and support feelings of autonomythey could have more control on their development at work. With regard to self-efcacy theory, the researchers found the relationship attribute to be most evident. During the status review sessions throughout the entire semester, interns repeatedly showed and discussed their projects in various stages, reports and special content structures, logs that indicated snapshots of their hours of work, and understanding how to apply school assignments at work. The department faculty often heard interns interacting with each other regarding issues discussed during the class or peers work they had seen online. The academic mentor observed interns developing small interaction groups depending on the similarity of skills required from them at specic companies and work environments. A short note from the academic mentor relates to this bonding: ISD [Instructional System Design] interns are more friendly to each other than the other group, I need to ask them about that before this class is over. Individual appointments The academic mentor provided 2 one-on-one individual appointment sessions during the semester. These sessions were described in the Method section of this article. (Because individual appointments, mentor reports, and intern portfolios subcategories are partly embedded in the status review notes subcategory, researchers searched and coded these segments of the data for evidences of only the most inuential elements of the three motivation theories.) Although evidence of applications of all three theories was found in the data, monitoring attribution messages of attribution theory stood out prominently among the codes. Monitoring attributional messages refers to the extremely important communication behaviors of teachers, who need to be careful not to strongly stress effort over ability or vice-versa. Rather, it is important for teachers to make encouraging statements regarding both characteristics. For example, McQueen (1992) reported that low achievers are painfully aware of their teachers suggesting behaviors.
123
351
Mentor reports Toward the end of the internship, the academic mentor asked site mentors to submit three reports: (a) The rst report included the components of the PRIDE model (CARA Corporation, 1997) and the other reports included some components of (b) corporate behavior and (c) multimedia design competencies. The rst report was specic, requesting a letter grade for each component of the PRIDE model by the site mentors. The second and third reports were more comprehensive but required the use of the following elements in their construction: organizational behavior, instructional design, graphic and layout capabilities, and technology or authoring capabilities. The second report was used as a nal report to the academic adviser, and the third report served as a letter of recommendation. In-depth analysis of data indicates a rather interesting nding. These reports not only encouraged interns to be cooperative at work to fulll the PRIDE model requirements, they encouraged them to demonstrate all their capabilities in multimedia design in order to fulll the suggested elements of the recommendation letter. All interns acknowledged the perceived importance of As (in a four-credit hour course) to gaining jobs at their internship institutions or future IT companies (e.g., Larry said, I think we did a good job and I think the grade will reect that. I wanted to do a good job and the grade was a big factor.) Evidence of the application of all three theories was found in all the mentor reports, whether obvious or implied. The relationship needs attribute of selfdetermination theory stood out signicantly among the codes. The relationship needs attribute refers to teachers encouraging relationships among learners that support the development of competence and autonomy (Deci et al., 1991). Further evidence of competence and autonomy within the internmentor relationship is the fact that two of the intern participants in this study are now employees of the companies in which they interned. A department graduate follow-up report indicates these graduates now serve the company as members of the management team and are handling new accounts. They have the necessary skills and independence for projects and control the development process from the beginning to the end. Intern Carl, for example, said, That [autonomy] was my motivationself-assessment and pushing yourself to go to the next levelto go beyond just doing what was required. Intern portfolios The main intent was to have a graphic history of their skills and gradual accomplishments. However, the portfolios turned out to include many general features of students internship projects at work, including topic and general purpose of the project, audience characteristics, learning themes, subject content, applied instructional methods, due dates, design stages, and time log sheets.
123
352
The initial coding of the e-portfolios data (including data from the academic mentor) led the evaluator to believe that either the focusing on learning strategies or setting realistic goals attributes of attribution theory were the standout codes. However, at the end of in-depth analysis process, researchers found otherwise. The researchers realized that not all participants recognized or reported either of these attributes in particular. In fact, the data from the interns emphasized that intern interpretation of achievement outcomes, rather than an actual outcome, was the most benecial aspect of the e-portfolios assignment. Carl: initially that [portfolio construction] was not a part of my make up. Now, in retrospect, I denitely have an appreciation for those tasks, the logs, being detail oriented, if you will. I can understand and appreciate all of it because it is not just something that you apply to even the ISD process. This is something that you can use in any type of thing you do... A big learning experience and the ability to review all of your work.... Building my portfolio this time allowed me to say, Wow. This is all the effort I put into it. Because usually you just see the end result and you dont think about the hours that youve put into it. So it was good for me. These statements t with a general summary of attribution theory addressed by Weiner (1985) that learners causal attributions (or explanations) for achievement outcomes determine subsequent achievement striving and, thus, are key motivational beliefs.
Implications and recommendations: developing a successful internship program This section discusses implications and recommendations centered around three main ndings that emerged from this study: (a) strengths of related roles, (b) elicitation of motivation in internship programs, (c) and strengths of different internship elements. Strengths of related roles in PBL internship programs A very important nding from this study is that the project-based learning nature of the internship program strongly supports the interrelated roles and the guiding intrinsic motivational assumptions made. In almost all interviews, whether from intern or mentor, instances of relationships were found directly for all role categories and subcategories. Project-based learning environments can require more cognitively complex tasks and provide opportunities for solving real problems (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). However, the tasks should be collaborative and doable but challenging, not too complex, and offer choices. This combination of characteristics is conducive to nding joyfulness in the project. Related work on ow theory
123
353
indicates that tasks requiring a balance of skills and challenge (and therefore not creating either boredom or anxiety) can make human learning joyful (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). This optimal experience will continue by gradually increasing the skills and challenges required for accomplishing more challenging and complex tasks. Further, if learners nd the projects to be interesting and valuable, they will be more engaged to complete the project and to focus on learning, rather than on outcomes and grades (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). In addition to providing encouraging feedback, the role of mentor in project-based learning includes respect for the learnersbeyond their innate abilitiesand for their efforts and individuality as well. Because of this respectful relationship and the fact that internship experiences occur in social contexts, the role of mentors largely involves facilitation, monitoring learning processes, and gradually releasing learning responsibilities to the learner. In addition to many important qualications for becoming a facilitator, according to Rogers (1969), one needs to have attitudinal quality: [This quality] is a transparent realness in the facilitator, a willingness to be a person, to be and live the feelings and thoughts of the moment. When this realness includes a prizing, a caring, a trust and respect for the learner, the climate for learning is enhanced. When it includes a sensitive and accurate empathic listening, then indeed a freeing climate, stimulative of self-initiated learning and growth, exists. The student is trusted to develop. (p. 126) As for academic mentors, besides providing clear task goals and performance for the interns, their responsibility includes guiding interns to discover and understand their workplace culture. To be viewed as a valued intern and possibly a future employee, they also must cultivate and emulate nontaskspecic characteristics such as cooperation, punctuality, and integrity (Johari et al., 2002). Without involved mentors from both academia and corporations, the chance of failed projects and resulting negative representations for all parties is very high (p. 24). An important implication of the present study, therefore, is that projectbased internships may be more successful if they not only include all the roles (task, learner, and mentor), but provide structure in ways that implement and support specic motivational elements related to these roles. For example, for the planning or evaluation of the roles, teachers or designers may need to ask the following questions such as: Does the projects task involve collaboration? Does the internship provide value and interest for the interns? Does the site mentor believe in the learner beyond innate abilities? Does the academic mentor include clear task goals and performance?
123
354
Eliciting motivation in internship programs An important implication is that mentors need to practice monitoring attributional messages (from attribution theory) as they interact with their interns. Strategies consistent with (and assumed by) attribution theory include focusing on learning strategies, avoiding ability grouping, promoting cooperation, and setting realistic goals. Such strategies usually are embedded within theoretically based designs of project-based learning and openended environments. According to Babad (1993), research consistently reveals that teachers provide low-status learners with negative affective messages and that students are often aware of such messages. Previous ndings in expectation research conrm this dilemma (Babad, 1993; Delpit, 1995; Jones, 1990; Weinstein & McKown, 1998). To avoid negative expectation effects, Good (1981) urged teachers to call on low achievers to participate often and wait a longer time for their responses, try to improve their responses, then, give them answers and praise them, even for responses that are not correct. Self-efcacy theory focuses on expectancies for success (Bandura, 1997). According to Schunk (1991), learners appraisals of ability can be affected by many factors, including the number of current or past success or failure experiences, others encouraging statements, occurrences of physiological cues, hearing peers positive self-efcacy statements, and observing successful performances. Accordingly, mentors may improve learners successful expectancies by reminding them of past successful experiences, establishing relationships between them and other people in successful similar internships, and displaying previous outstanding internship projects. Peer modeling is valuable because learner self-efcacy increases when they observe the successful performances of others (Schunk, 1991; Schunk & Hanson, 1985, 1989; Schunk et al., 1987). In terms of implications regarding self-determination theory, mentors need to monitor the amount and kinds of external control and guidance they provide interns to encourage in them a sense of self-determination at work. Self-determination helps fulll interns needs regarding competence, relationship, and autonomy. The important inuence of these elements on each other should be noted. For example, interns who have competence in accomplishing tasks, and intrinsic motivation associated with the tasks, but whose mentors do not allow some degree of independence, will lack a sense of self-determination, negatively affecting their enthusiasm for the task. Much research indicates that there is a decrease in intrinsic motivation from exerting external control and by giving negative competence feedback support, and that offering external rewards for tasks that learners are told to do often reduces the feeling of autonomy and intrinsic motivation (Cameron & Pierce, 1994; Deci & Ryan, 1985, Deci et al., 1991). Therefore, mentors should provide appropriate positive feedback for tasks initiated by the interns.
123
355
Strengths of different internship elements An important implication that can be drawn from the dominant codes is that creating successful, motivating project-based learning requires planning. In the internship program under study, the academic unit was formed with the specic purpose of preparing students for IT jobs in area IT-related companies. Among the departments aims was the goal that students graduating from the department be prepared, supported, and independent. These goals map nicely onto the competence, relationship, and autonomy elements discussed by Deci et al. (1991). The elements of the program seem to have been designed to accentuate certain attributes of motivational theory to promote intrinsic motivation. For status review sessions, academic mentors focused on cognitive learning strategies (for example, encouraging learners to have an active role at work) and setting realistic goals. Interns were encouraged to become more skilled at gathering and using knowledge during their internships by observing the site mentors and other peers while performing tasks, as a form of cognitive apprenticeship (see Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989; Pressley, 1995; Rogoff, 1990). The academic mentor emphasized realistic and changing goals for the interns. Bandura (1997) and Schunk (1990) have indicated that specic and challenging goals promote self-efcacy and improved performance. Interns need to know the purpose of their project, the product audience characteristics, the learning themes, goals, objectives, and the subject content of their project. The peer-modeling effect for interns as they hear their peers positive self-efcacy statements and observe successful performances is well supported in the present data. Previous studies have supported this assertion (Schunk & Hanson, 1985; Schunk et al., 1987; Zimmerman & Ringle, 1981). By showing past projects, mentors may help interns discover the kinds of skills that would be required from them at work. The online projects also could help them be prepared for a variety of challenges and support feelings of autonomy. The peer discussion meetings support learners in forging informal groups and out-of-class interactions during which they may discuss and discover additional supports, questions, and solutions that they might never bring up during class sessions. Self-directed learning experiences that utilize forms of reciprocal teaching via class discussions have previously been shown to be very effective (Gall, 1984; Palincsar, 1987; Palincsar & Brown, 1984, 1989). During individual appointments, academic mentors need to monitor their attributional messages. The mentors, for example, need to provide encouraging statements to the interns about their abilities and efforts, while taking care not to strongly stress effort over ability or vice-versa. The format of the mentor reports requires careful design and elements may include organizational behavior and instructional design. In the present study, the reports not only encouraged interns to be cooperative at work and fulll the PRIDE model requirements, they encouraged them to demonstrate all their capabilities in multimedia design in order to fulll the suggested elements of the recommendation letter. Mentors may ask interns to construct e-portfolios in
123
356
order to have a graphic history of their skills and gradual accomplishments. The portfolios may include many general features of their projects, including design stages and time log sheets. Although initial coding of data indicated that focusing on learning strategies or setting realistic goals were the main attributes emerging from the e-portfolios, further analysis indicated that the interns positive interpretations of their achievement outcomes was the most benecial aspect of the e-portfolio assignment. A challenge in designing an IT internship program is to promote, generate, and sustain intrinsic motivation in both the academic setting and in the internship environment. Competence, relationship, and autonomy are key elements in the overall success of this IT internship program. Internship program developers can benet from this study by considering the successful design of this program and its powerful theoretical learner-centered roots. Future research on internships could focus on additional motivation theories, such as those related to learners achievement goals and achievement behavior (see Ames, 1992; Covington, 2000; Dweck 1999), and goal patterns, for example, ego-involved goals versus task-involved goals (see Blumenfeld, 1992; Butler, 1993; Dweck 1999; Nicholls, 1984). Application of Flow theory (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990) instead of attribution, self-efcacy, and determination theories would be another worthy challenge. The ARCS model (Keller, 1987) also may be used as a replacement for both the ADDIE model and the motivational strategies used in this study. As technology can serve as a potentially powerful motivator for both students and teacher (Blumenfeld et al., 1991), future research also should consider the role of technology, along with the roles of task, mentor, and learner.
References
Ames, C. (1992). Classroom: goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261271. Babad, E. (1993). Teachers differential behavior. Educational Psychology Review, 5, 347376. Baird, B. (2001). The internship, practicum, and eld placement handbook: A guide for the helping professions. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efcacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Bandura, A., & Jourden, F. J. (1991). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing the impact of social comparison on complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 941951. Bandura, A., & Wood, R. E. (1989). Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards on self-regulation of complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 805814. Bates, J. (1979). Extrinsic reward and intrinsic motivation: A review with implication for classroom. Review of Educational Research, 49, 557576. Berliner, D. C. (1992). Redesigning classroom activities for the future. Educational Technology, 32(10), 713. Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 272281. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, 369398.
123
357
Borich, G. D., & Tombari, M. L. (1997). Educational psychology: A contemporary approach (2nd ed.). New York: Addison-Wesley. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 3242. Bussis, A. M., & Chittenden, E. A. (1973). The teachers manifold roles. In C. E. Silberman (Ed.), The open classroom reader (pp. 213232). New York: Vintage Books. Butler, R. (1993). Effects of task-and ego-achievement goals on information seeking during task engagement. Journal of Personal Social Psychology, 65, 1831. Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: a metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, 64, 363423. CARA Corporation. (1997). Consultant orientation guide. Oak Brook, IL: Author. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992). Looking at technology: A framework for understanding technology and education research. In D. Jonassen (Ed.) Handbook of Research in Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 807840). New York: Simon & Schuster, Macmillan. Cole, D. J., Ryan, C. W., & Kick, F. (1995). Portfolios across the curriculum and beyond. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.). Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453494). Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cook, A., & Mack, H. (1973). The teachers role. In C. E. Silberman (Ed.), The open classroom reader (pp. 232240). New York: Vintage Books. Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative review. Annual review Psychology, 51, 171200. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial. Deci, E. L., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325346. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human learning behavior. New York: Plenum. Delpit, L. (1995). Other peoples children: Cultural conict in the classroom. New York: The New Press. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan. Duncan, H., & Bell, C. (1990). Evaluating and assessing for learning. New York: Kogan Page. Dweck, C. (1999). Self-theories: their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychological Press. Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (1992). Educational Psychology: Classroom connections. NY, NY: Mcmillan. Gagne, R., Briggs L., & Wagner, W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt, Brace. Gall, M. (1984). Synthesis of research on questioning in recitation. Educational leadership, 42(3), 4040. Ginott, H. G. (1972). Teacher and child. New York: Macmillan. Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine. Glover, J. A., & Bruning, R. H. (1990). Educational technology: Principles and applications (3rd ed.). Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company. Good, T. (1981). Teacher expectations and student perceptions: A decade of research. Educational Leadership, 38, 415423. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. ETCTJ, 30(4), 233252. Hartt, D. C., & Rossett, A. (2000). When instructional design students consult with the real world. Performance Improvement, 39(7), 3643. Hill, R. H., & Hannan, M. J. (1997). Cognitive strategies and learning from the World Wide Web. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(4), 3764. Johari, A., Bradshaw, A. C, & Aguilar, D. (2002). Making the most of instructional technology internships. Performance Improvement Journal, 41(1), 1925. Jones, E. (1990). Interpersonal perception. New York: W. H. Freeman.
123
358
Keller, J. M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and Instruction, 26(8), 17. Komoski, P. K., & Woodward, A. (1985). The continuing need for the learner verication and revision of textual materials. In D. H. Jonasson (Ed.), The technology of text: Vol. 2. Principles for structuring, designing, and displaying text (pp. 396415). New Jersey: Educational technology Publication. Land, S., & Greene, B. A. (2000). Project-based learning with the World Wide Web: A qualitative study of resource integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(1), 45 67. Land, S., & Hannan, M. J. (1996). A conceptual framework for the development of theories-inaction with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(3), 3753. Land, S., & Hannan, M. J. (1997). Patterns of Understanding with open-ended learning environments: A qualitative study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(2), 47 73. McLellan, H. (1993). Evaluation in a situated learning environment. Educational Technology, 33(3), 3945. McQueen, T. (1992). Essentials of classroom management and discipline. New York: Harper Collins. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage. Mitchell, R. (1992). Measuring up: Student assessment and systemic change. Educational Technology, 32(11), 3741. Morgan, M. (1984). Reward induced decrements and increments in intrinsic motivation. Review of Educational Research, 54, 530. Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-efcacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analysis investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 3038. Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328346. Oldman, M., & Hamadeh, S. (2000). Americans top internships. NY: Princeton Review. Palincsar, A. S. (1987). Reciprocal teaching: Can student discussion boost comprehension? Instructor, 5(96), 5660. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117175. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1989). Classroom dialogues to promote self-regulation. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (pp. 3571). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Paris, S. G., & Turner, J. C. (1994). Situated Motivation. In P. Pintrich, D. Brown, & C.E. Weinstein (Eds.), Student motivation, cognition, and learning: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie (pp. 213237). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pressley, M. (1995). Advanced educational psychology for educators, researchers, and policymakers. New York: Harper Collins. Ragin, C. C., & Becker, H. S., (1992). What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Resnick, L. B. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16, 13210. Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press. Schunk, D. H. (1989). Social-cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Springer-Verlag. Schunk, D. L. (1990). Goal setting and self-efcacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology, 25, 7186. Schunk, D. L. (1991). Self-efcacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207 232. Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R. (1985). Peer models: Inuence on childrens self-efcacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 313322. Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R. (1989). Inuence of peer-model attributes on childrens beliefs and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 431434.
123
359
Schunk, D. H., Hanson, A. R., & Cox, P. D. (1987). Peer model attributes and childrens achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 5461. Schwandt, T. A., 2001. Dictionary of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Weiner, B. (1985). An attribution theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548573. Weinstein, R. S., & McKown, C. (1998). Expectancy effects in context: Listening to the voices of students and teachers. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching. Expectations in the classroom (pp. 215242). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Weston, C., McAlpine, L., Bordonaro, T. (1995). A Model for understanding formative evaluation in instructionsl design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(3), 2949. Whitt, E. J. (1991). Hit the ground running: Experiences of new faculty in a school of education. The Review of Higher Education, 14(2), 177197. Wigeld, A. (1988). Childrens attributions for success and failure: Effects of age and attentional focus. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 7681. Wood, R. E., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impacts of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 407 415. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Young, M. (1993). Instructional design for situated learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(1), 4358. Zimmerman, B. J., & Ringle, J. (1981). Effects of model persistence and statements of condence on childrens self-efcacy and problem solving. Journal of Psychology, 73(4), 485493.
Abbas Johari is an associate professor of Instructional Technology in the Department of Multimedia Design at Cameron University, Lawton, OK. Amy C. Bradshaw is an associate professor of Instructional Technology in the Educational Psychology Department at the University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK.
123

Stefan

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Stefan

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Education Tech Research Dev (2008) 56:329359 DOI 10.

1007/s11423-006-9009-2 DEVELOPMENT ARTICLE

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Collect Data (e-Portfolios, Process Reports, In-Dept Interviews)

Reduce Data Into New and Old Categories

Has Coding Begun to Make Conceptual Sense?

Write Essays Or Analytic Memos

Do We Need Theoretical Sampling?

Write The Theory

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

2.2 Self-efcacy (SE)

2.3 Inuencing attributions (IA)

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

SR-A-LS SR-A-S SR-SF-P SR-SD-R IA-AT-M

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

A. Johari, A.C. Bradshaw

Project-based learning in an internship program

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen