Rigor, Relevance and Relationships in Educational Reform:
The Story of the Hope Study
By Ronald J. Newell and Mark J. Van Ryzin
EdVisions Schools is a Gates Foundation intermediary whose focus is creating and
sustaining small, innovative secondary schools. Two of our design essentials are
project-based learning and advisory grouping. Project-based learning emphasizes
individual and collaborative projects as the foundation for learning and includes
very little of the whole-class instruction typically found in traditional secondary
schools (Newell, 2003). Advisory grouping provides a stable sense of support for
adolescents by matching them with an adult and a group of peers over an
extended period of time (Newell, 2003).
During our history, we have been interested in not only developing learning
cultures that support adolescent emotional and psychological growth, but also in
finding some way to assess the growth of these developmental assets. Our
interest is based upon the rather sobering results reported by research on
traditional secondary schools, which reveals year-by-year decreases in student
motivation, engagement, and interest in school (Eccles, Midgley, & Adler, 1984;
Gottfried, Fleming, & Gottfried, 2001; Harter, 1981; Hirsch & Rapkin, 1987;
Marks, 2000). Further, adolescents show an increase in the frequency of high risk
behaviors and psychological disturbances, such as depression and eating disorders
(Dryfoos, 1990; Kazdin, 1993). Anecdotally, we knew that adolescents in
EdVisions’ settings were happier, more satisfied, and had better attendance
records than in their previous schools, but our stories, though compelling, did not
constitute scientific proof that our pedagogical model was indeed benefiting youth
development.
To evaluate our pedagogical model, we turned to stage-environment fit theory,
which states that traditional middle and high school environments are often not
able to meet the developmental needs of adolescents, increasing the risk of
negative outcomes, like drops in motivation and engagement (Eccles & Midgley,
1989; Eccles, et al., 1993; Roeser, Eccles, & Strobel, 1998). The theory also
asserts that a better match in terms of adolescent needs and the educational
environment should result in more positive outcomes (Midgley, Feldlaufer, &
Eccles, 1989).
Thus, we asked the basic question: is our pedagogical model a good stageenvironment fit for adolescents? We were interested in determining whether the
EdVisions learning community was a healthy place for adolescent psychological
development. We decided that surveys measuring student perceptions of
autonomy, belongingness, goal orientation, engagement and hope would give
good indications of how adolescents perceive the school environment and how, in
turn, they respond. This grouping of surveys has become known within EdVisions
as the Hope Study.
From preliminary surveys results in ‘04-‘05, we have determined that EdVisions
sites are psychologically healthier places for adolescents than traditional secondary
schools, and that the project-based learning and full-time advisory systems are
design essentials that increase levels of engagement and hope in our students.
The Gates Foundation and EdVisions believe that the new three R’s in the 21 st
Century ought to be Rigor, Relevance and Relationships. EdVisions believes that
the survey components from the Hope Study can give definitive indications as to
whether or not our replication sites are holding rigor, relevance and relationships
in high regard. The Hope Study survey results can be used to determine the
development of design principles that create powerful learning environments for
adolescents.
The Hope Study Survey Components
Autonomy: having choices, setting your own goals and timelines, choosing what
to study and when, viewpoints are accepted.
Project-based learning enables students to pursue their own interests and
passions, what is “in the moment” rather than imposed. Autonomy affects
motivation and has a direct relationship to persistence and engagement, as well as
graduation rates (Deci, Nezlek, & Sheinman, 1981; Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman, &
Ryan, 1981; Flink, Boggiano, & Barrett, 1990; Ryan & Grolnick, 1986; Vallerand &
Bissonnette, 1992; Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon, & Deci, 2004).
Among the 3 R’s, autonomy is directly related to Relevance; in EdVisions schools,
students are encouraged to pursue those academic interests that are most
relevant.
Belongingness: perceiving high levels of support from peers and teachers, in
both personal issues and academic issues.
The need for strong, mutually supportive relationships is a fundamental human
need (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). In the school setting, belongingness refers to
the quality of interpersonal relationships with teachers and peers. High levels of
belongingness lead to increases in motivation, positive social behavior and
academic achievement (Wentzel, 1994, 1997, 1998; Wentzel, Barry, & Caldwell,
2004; Wentzel & Caldwell, 1997). In contrast, socially rejected students show
lower levels of engagement, have higher levels of academic and behavioral
problems (DeRosier, Kupersmidt, & Patterson, 1994), and can be at significant risk
of dropping out of school and eventually running afoul of the law (Parker & Asher,
1987). Belongingness can also enhance school adjustment, perceived
competence, and self-esteem (Barrera, Chassin, & Rogosch, 1993; Cauce, 1986;
Kurdek & Sinclair, 1988).
Belongingness is a direct measure of Relationships. EdVisions’ schools foster these
positive relationships through the practice of advisory grouping.
Goal Orientation: perceiving high expectations from teachers; belief that effort
will be recognized; emphasis on deep understanding rather than shallow
recitation.
Students who perceive a positive or “task” goal orientation in school will seek
challenges and show persistence in the face of adversity, use more effective
learning strategies, have more positive attitudes and demonstrate more
engagement in learning (Roeser, Midgley, & Urdan, 1996). On the other hand,
students who perceive a negative or “performance” goal orientation seek to avoid
challenge and, in the face of failure, attribute their results to lack of ability and
exhibit a “learned helplessness” response, which refers to a negative emotional
response and a defeatist attitude (Eccles & Midgley, 1989).
Goal orientation is a good measure of the Rigor of an educational environment;
schools that are uniformly rigorous and emphasize deep understanding will see
high scores in “task” goal orientation, whereas schools that favor some students
over others or who emphasize shallow understanding will see high scores in
“performance” goal orientation. In EdVisions’ schools, both project-based learning
and advisory grouping come together to inspire a positive “task” goal orientation.
Engagement: a reflection of the student work ethic, concentration and attention
paid to school work; behavioral and emotional involvement in school.
A higher level of engagement is a reflection of the amount of effort and passion a
student will put into learning (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). A lower level
of engagement usually means a student will not complete work on time and will
not learn much of value. An engaged learner will do superior work, obtain a
deeper level of understanding, and retain the knowledge and skills for a longer
period of time.
Hope: an individual’s conception of their ability to conceptualize goals, develop
strategies for goal completion, and initiate and sustain motivation toward those
goals.
Higher hope students set more challenging goals for themselves and tend to
perceive they will be more successful at attaining those goals, even if at first they
do not succeed (Snyder, et al., 1991). Hope can predict college grade point
averages, higher graduation rates, optimism about life, more physical health,
more self-esteem, and greater levels of happiness (Snyder, 2002; Snyder, et al.,
2002).
Results
To assess the impact of project-based learning and advisory grouping, an Analysis
of Covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted using data from three schools located in
the same rural area southwest of Minneapolis. The three schools had similar
students and similar socio-economic conditions. One of the schools was a longterm EdVisions site, one was a relatively new EdVisions site, and one was a typical
traditional rural Minnesota comprehensive high school. Data at all three schools
was collected multiple times, so longitudinal measures of change could be
captured for the same students.
The data indicated that student perceptions of autonomy, teacher support, and
“task” goal orientation were significantly higher in EdVisions sites, while
perceptions of a “performance” goal orientation where higher in the traditional
school. As a result, students in the EdVisions schools demonstrated higher levels
of engagement, and student hope scores grew over a relatively short span of time
(five months), whereas they fell slightly for students in the traditional high school.
In fact, the levels of autonomy and engagement were nearly twice as high in
EdVisions sites. Only peer support was relatively similar, although EdVisions
students showed slightly higher levels.
In EdVisions schools, hope grew from an aggregate score of 48.87 to 50.69
(+1.82) in the older EdVisions site, from 47.47 to 49.45 in the newer EdVisions
site (+1.98), and fell slightly from 48.59 to 48.35 (-.24) in the traditional site.
This growth in hope among the EdVisions students is phenomenal when
considering the fact that hope index scores are generally quite stable during
adolescence and adulthood unless a significant intervention is introduced.
The hope score increases were accompanied with other indicators of success in
EdVisions sites. Percentile rank scores in reading and math went up in every
EdVisions site where data was available for three years, increasing in aggregate
6.3 percentiles in reading, and 8.7 percentiles in math. ACT scores at the nine
oldest EdVisions sites (22.4) averaged higher than the Minnesota state average
(22.2) in ‘04-‘05. Although there is not enough comparable data to make a
definitive statement, there is indication that as hope scores go up, standardized
academic measures will follow.
The 3 R’s
As can be seen, all of the above attributes of learning communities ultimately are
brought together in the three R’s (Rigor, Relevance, and Relationships). As
measurement instruments, the Hope Study components can indeed connect the
three R’s to student outcomes and can provide insights into what the learning
community does to provide students with a challenging, supportive and
stimulating place in which to learn. By measuring the components mentioned
above, the survey instruments provide educational reformers with feedback
regarding whether their changes are enhancing the ability of students to achieve
their goals, whether they are able to engage them in wanting to learn.
As previously mentioned, academic results soon follow the 3 R’s. We believe that
students rarely adopt higher academic learning goals in response to “surface”
reforms, such as changes in curriculum or subject matter; however, if the reforms
permit higher levels of autonomy for students, encourage higher levels of peer and
teacher support, and provide higher levels of “task” goal orientation, then
academic results will not only appear but will be longer lasting.
When new school cultures are created, the general assessment practice is to
immediately look for academic gains as measured by grades, standardized tests,
or criterion referenced academic scores. Even when student performance is
measured, it is more than likely tied to academic performances rather than life
skills. Generally, dispositional goals are dismissed as too difficult to discern or as
irrelevant. Unfortunately, when only academic gains are measured, there may be
an immediate level of growth in response to change in the environment, but these
gains will be short-lived if not accompanied by deeper levels of change in the
learning community along the lines of the 3 R’s. Simply making greater demands
on students will not ensure long term success, especially for the students who
have had little success in traditional settings.
But when long term changes in the learning community are geared towards Rigor,
Relevance and Relationships, long-term academic success is more likely. By
measuring the 3 R’s in the Hope Study, EdVisions is able to help build greater
capacity for reform and therefore have more long-term effects on more children’s
lives.
References
Barrera, M., Jr., Chassin, L., & Rogosch, F. (1993). Effects of social support and
conflict on adolescent children of alcoholic and nonalcoholic fathers. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 602-612.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for
interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological
Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
Cauce, A. M. (1986). Social networks and social competence: Exploring the effects
of early adolescent friendships. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14,
607-628.
Deci, E. L., Nezlek, J., & Sheinman, L. (1981). Characteristics of the rewarder and
intrinsic motivation of the rewardee. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
40, 1-10.
Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to
access adults’ orientations toward control versus autonomy with children:
Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 73, 642-650.
DeRosier, M. E., Kupersmidt, J. B., & Patterson, C. J. (1994). Children’s academic
and behavioral adjustment as a function of the chronicity and proximity of peer
rejection. Child Development, 65, 1799-1813.
Dryfoos, J. G. (1990). Adolescents at risk: Prevalence and prevention. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage/environment fit: Developmentally
appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In R.E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.),
Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, pp. 139-186). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Eccles, J., Midgley, C., & Adler, T. (1984). Grade-related changes in the school
environment: Effects of achievement motivation. In J.G. Nicholls (Ed.), The
development of achievement motivation (pp. 283-331). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Midgley, C., Reuman, D., MacIver, D., & Feldlaufer, H.
(1993). Negative effects of traditional middle schools on students’ motivation. The
Elementary School Journal, 93, 553-574.
Flink, C., Boggiano, A. K., & Barrett, M. (1990). Controlling teaching strategies:
Undermining children’s self-determination and performance. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 59, 916-924.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement:
Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research,
74, 59-109.
Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfried, A. W. (2001). Continuity of academic
intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescent: A longitudinal study.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 3-13.
Harter, S. (1981). A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in
the classroom: Motivational and informational components. Developmental
Psychology, 17, 300-312.
Hirsch, B. J., & Rapkin, B. D. (1987). The transition to junior high school: A
longitudinal study of self-esteem, psychological symptomatology, school life, and
social support. Child Development, 58, 1235-1243.
Kazdin, A. E. (1993). Adolescent mental health: Prevention and treatment
programs. American Psychologist, 48, 127-141.
Kurdek, L. A., & Sinclair, R. J. (1988). Adjustment of young adolescents in twoparent nuclear, stepfather, and mother-custody families. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 56, 91-96.
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the
elementary, middle and high school years. American Educational Research Journal,
37, 153-184.
Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Student/teacher relations and
attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school.
Child Development, 60, 981-992.
Newell, R. J. (2003). Passion for learning: How project-based learning meets the
needs of 21st-century students. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. R. (1987). Peer relations and later personal adjustment:
Are low-accepted children at risk? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357-389.
Roeser, R. W., Eccles, J. S., & Strobel, K. R. (1998). Linking the study of schooling
and mental health: Selected issues and empirical illustrations at the level of the
individual. Educational Psychologist, 33, 153-176.
Roeser, R. W., Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. C. (1996). Perceptions of the school
psychological environment and early adolescents’ psychological and behavioral
functioning in school: The mediating role of goals and belonging. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 88, 408-422.
Ryan, R. M., & Grolnick, W. S. (1986). Origins and pawns in the classroom: Selfreport and projective assessments of individual differences in children’s
perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 550-558.
Snyder, C.R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry,
13, 249-275.
Snyder, C.R., Harris, C., Anderson, J.R., Holleran, S.A., Irving, L.M., Sigmon, S.T.,
Yoshinobu, L., Gibb, J., Langelle, C. & Harney, P. (1991). The will and the ways:
Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 575-585.
Snyder, C.R., Shorey, H.S., Cheavens, J., Pulvers, K.M., Adams, V.H., & Wiklund,
C. (2002). Hope and academic success in college. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 94, 820-826.
Vallerand, R. J. & Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational
styles as predictors of behavior: A prospective study. Journal of Personality, 60,
599-620.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004).
Motivating learning, performance and persistence: The synergistic effects of
intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 87, 246-260.
Wentzel, K. R. (1994). Relations of social goal pursuit to social acceptance,
classroom behavior, and perceived social support. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 86, 173-182.
Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived
pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411-419.
Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The
role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 202209.
Wentzel, K. R., Barry, C. M., & Caldwell, K. A. (2004). Friendships in middle
school: Influences on motivation and school adjustment. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 96, 195-203.
Wentzel, K. R., & Caldwell, K. (1997). Friendships, peer acceptance, and group
membership: Relations to academic achievement in middle school. Child
Development, 68, 1198-1209.