Environments, learners,
processes and outcomes
Dave Putwain
Environment/ Situation Characteristics:
Physical environment
Psycho-social environment
Relationships/ relatedness
Promotion of value/ utility of learning and outcomes
Learning Behaviours/ Processes:
Metacognition
Self-regulation (learning, behaviour and emotions)
Appraisal and coping
Effort, persistence, task-focus
Learner characteristics
Competence beliefs (self-efficacy/ concept, growth mindset)
Motivation/ Goals
Competence-related emotions (learning and assessment)
Resilience/ buoyancy
(1) Motivational messages made prior
to high-stakes tests and exams
Putwain & Symes
You need to get at
least a C in GCSE
maths to get into
college.
Your maths GCSE is
only 1 month away
now, you need to
start revising.
If you don’t work
hard, you will fail
GCSE maths.
If you don’t pass
maths GCSE you
won’t get a good
job.
Motivational messages…
• Achievement outcome Focus: attaining success vs. avoiding
failure
• Achievement outcome Values: why are GCSEs important?
• Response efficacy: what behaviours are required to attain
success/ avoid failure?
• Self efficacy: encouragement to perform those
behaviours
Predicts lower
grades on tests
Low self-efficacy
Predict lower
autonomous
motivations
High Value/ Fear
Threat Appraisal
Messages
High Value of
GCSE outcome
Predicts mixed
effects on goals
Increases worry
and anxiety in
tests
Aims of this project:
Examine how value judgements and selfefficacy are related to:
• Threat Appraisals
• Challenge Appraisals
• Discounting Appraisals
• Study 1:
• In vivo with 252 Year 11 students from 2 secondary schools
• Ask them to report teachers’ use of value-promoting
messages and their appraisal
• Examine relations with academic self-efficacy and value
judgements
• Higher ecological validity/ no causality
• Study 2:
• In vitro with 371 Year 12/13 students from 4 sixth form
colleges
• Give them scenarios in which value academic self-efficacy
and value judgements are manipulated
• Ask them how a fictional student would respond
• Lower ecological validity/ causality possible
Study 1
Step 1: Revise existing measure
Scale
Example
Loadings
α
Frequency
How often do your teachers tell you that unless you
work hard you will not get a grade C in maths GCSE and
be able to go to college or 6th form?
.57 - .87
.72
Timing
How often do your teachers tell you that your maths
GCSE exam is getting nearer?
.51 - .92
.72
Threat
Do you feel worried when your teachers tell you that
maths GCSE is important in order to get a good job?
.66 - .91
.90
Challenge
Do you feel inspired to pass GCSE maths when your
teachers tell you it is important in order to get a good
job?
.72 - .90
.85
Step 2: Examine correlations with value and
academic self-efficacy
Frequency
Frequency
of Messages of Messages
re Failure
re Timing
Self-efficacy
Intrinsic Value
Attainment Value
Extrinsic Value
* p <.05, ** p <.01
-.05
-.06
-.02
-.03
-.03
-.03
-.02
-.05
Threat
Appraisal
Challenge
Appraisal
-.20**
-.25**
-.26**
-.10**
.32**
.39**
.51**
.40**
Study 2
High
Low
High
Vignette A
Vignette C
Low
Value
Academic Self-Efficacy
Vignette B
Vignette D
An example:
Sarah is a hard working Year 11 student who is good at
maths. She finds the work done in lessons challenging, but
usually does very well. In her Year 10 maths exam she got a
grade A and is predicted a grade A in her GCSE maths.
Sarah believes that maths is an important subject to do well
in. She wants to go to college to study A levels and knows
she must get at least a pass in GCSE maths. She also knows
that maths is a useful skill to have in daily life to help with
things like bills.
When the teacher says this, how much would Sarah think, “what the teacher says isn’t relevant to me?”
Put an X on the line below to indicate how you think Sarah would respond:
Not at all relevant
Very much relevant
180
Anaologue Reponses
160
140
120
100
Discounting
80
Challenge
60
Threat
40
20
0
High SE/
High Value
High SE/
Low Value
Low SE/
High Value
Low SE/
Low Value
What we have shown
1. Challenge appraisals are linked to high value of
GCSE outcomes and high academic self-efficacy
2. Threat appraisals are linked to high value of
GCSE outcomes and low academic self-efficacy
3. Messages are disregarded when GCSE outcomes
are not valued and academic self-efficacy is low
(2) Exam related anxiety, buoyancy
coping and GCSE grades
Putwain, Chamberlain, Daly &
Sadreddini
Analytic Approach:
A mediated moderational model
Test
Anxiety
Academic
Buoyancy
Test Anxiety x
Academic
Buoyancy
Exam
Coping
Approach
GCSE
achievement
Structure of the study
Prior Measure of Educational Attainment: KS2 SAT Grades (English, science and maths)
T1 Measures: Test anxiety and academic buoyancy
T2 Measures: coping with pre-exam anxiety
Educational achievement outcome: GCSE grades (English, science and maths)
Participants…
• 325 Year 11 students
• male n = 142, female n = 183
• mean age of 15.3 years (SD = .61)
• Drawn from 10 secondary schools
• 14.3% FSM (English mean = 15.9%)
• 12.0% EFL (English mean = 12.3%)
• 61.9% 5 x GCSE passes (English mean = 59.4%)
Measures:
Academic Buoyancy
(α = .76, ρI = .01)
‘I think I’m good at dealing with schoolwork pressures’
Worry
(α = .76, ρI = .02)
‘During exams I find myself thinking about the
consequences of failing’
Tension
(α = .83, ρI = .01)
‘I start feeling very uneasy just before getting an
important exam grade back’
Social Derogation
(α = .88, ρI = .01)
‘I am worried that if I fail an exam my parents will not like
it’
Task Focus
(α = .78, ρI <.01)
‘I put other activities to one side and concentrate on the
exams coming up’
Social Support
(α = .78, ρI = .01)
‘I talk to others to find out more about the exam’
Avoidance
(α = .70, ρI = .05)
‘I go to the movies or watch TV so I don’t think about the
exams so much’
Indirect Effect
B = -.07, SE = .03 [-.02 to -0.15]
Worry
Results
-.20
-.47
Tension
.38
Indirect Effect
B = .05, SE = .03 [.01 to 0.11]
Worry x
Academic
Buoyancy
.15
Task focus &
orientation
.14
GCSE
achievement
Moderating role of buoyancy
6
Mean GCSE Grade
5.5
5
High Buoyancy (+1SD)
4.5
Mid Buoyancy (Mean)
4
Low Buoyancy (-1SD)
3.5
3
Low (-1SD)
High (+1SD)
Worry
Simple slopes:
High Academic Buoyancy: B = .09, t = -0.64, p = .52
Mid Academic Buoyancy: B = -.39, t = -3.30, p = .001
Low Academic Buoyancy: B = -.69, t = -4.88, p <.001
What we have shown
1. Indirect negative relationship between worry
and GCSE achievement partly due to less use of
task focus
2. Indirect positive relationship between tension
and GCSE achievement due to more use of task
focus
3. High academic buoyancy protects achievement
from high worry
(3) An ITC-based multimodal
intervention for reducing test anxiety
Putwain, Daly, Chamberlain &
Sadreddini
Strategies to Tackle
Exam Pressure & Stress
• Six session programme
• Combines CBT, Stress Inoculation Training
and Cognitive Skills Deficit Training
• IT-based resource (CD or school server)
• Booklet for self-reflection tasks
The six sessions:
1. What is exam stress and anxiety
2. Identifying negative thoughts, replacing them
with positive thoughts
3. Controlling physiological reactions to stress
4. Revision and test-taking skills
5. Motivation and goal setting
6. Identifying what works for you?
Outcome Study Design
10 schools, Years 10 and 11 (N =3111)
Intervention (n =1602)
Non-intervention (n =1519)
Time 1: Baseline assessment of whole sample – TA/ AB questionnaire administered
Completed STEPS
(992 were given STEPS as homework and
399 as classwork)
Time 2: Assessment of whole sample – TA questionnaire administered
Complete STEPS (N=1445)
Intervention group participants
• 219 (13.7%) completed the entire programme
• 409 (25.5%) partially completed the
programme
• 974 (60.8%) chose not to complete any of the
programme
Study participation
• More likely if scheduled into school curriculum
(p < .001)
• Did not differ by gender (p >.05)
• Did not differ by level of pre-intervention test
anxiety (p >.05)
High TA: Intervention vs. Control
4
Worry/ Tension Scores
3.5
3
Control
2.5
Intervention
2
1.5
1
Pre-
Worry
Post-
t(329) = 4.89, p < .001, d = .63,
Pre-
Tension
Post-
t(329) = 3.46, p = .001, d = .53
High TA: Completers vs. Non-completers
4
Worry/ Tension Scores
3.5
3
Intervention: No Sessions
2.5
Intervention: Completers
2
1.5
1
Pre-
Worry
Post-
t(95) = 3.93, p < .001, d = .89
Pre-
Tension
Post-
t(95) = 2.82, p = .006, d = .49
What we have shown
1. The development of a multimodal ICT delivered
resource
2. Has potential to reduce worry and tension in high TA
students