University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Effects of teacher autonomy support with structure on marginalized urban student math achievement

(USC Thesis Other)

Effects of teacher autonomy support with structure on marginalized urban student math achievement

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: TAS+STRUCTURE EFFECTS ON STUDENT MATH ACHIEVEMENT

Effects of Teacher Autonomy Support with Structure on
Marginalized Urban Student Math Achievement

by

Mary Elizabeth Shimazaki

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2019

2019 Mary Elizabeth Shimazaki

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 2
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge my friends, family, and colleagues who have supported me
through this incredible academic, professional, and personal journey. Most of all, I want to thank
God for inspiring a life-changing paradigm shift into approaching my full personal and
professional potential. I want to acknowledge my mother and mentor for her unyielding support.
Without her encouragement and time spent discussing my ideas and helping me to shape and refine
my focus, I would not have enjoyed the graduate study process as much. It is through her strength,
that I have found mine. I want to acknowledge my daughter who has waited patiently through all
my graduate study years of writing evenings and weekends and has listened to me talk endlessly
about my research. I very much look forward to returning the favor to her a decade from now.
This journey has been for both of us: to pave a path for my daughter to follow, and then to cheer
as she blazes her own trail, and reaches goals about which she is passionate, as I have done.
I would like to thank the superintendent of the district in which the study school resides,
Dr. Brian McDonald, for supporting school-based research studies and being receptive to rigorous
research findings that can inform teaching methods to help all our students achieve their potential.
Thank you to my principal, Erica Ingber, for believing in and supporting my research study.
Additionally, I am grateful to the administrative staff and faculty at my school site, for their
generous support and efforts to collect demographic data and feed me when I forgot my lunch.
Thank you to my USC dissertation committee team for all the hours you gave in providing
feedback and clarification. Thank you to Dr. Erika Patall for inspiring my study through her
research and instruction during my doctoral studies, for her in-depth feedback, and support
throughout my challenging intervention process. Thank you to Dr. Courtney Malloy for taking
time from her extremely busy schedule to teach me how to select and to apply proper statistical
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 3
analytic techniques to my data. I would like to acknowledge also Dr. Mary Helen Immordino-
Yang for her insights into my research ideas and for explaining her neuro-cognitive research
findings which have contributed significantly to my intrapersonal paradigm shift and,
consequently, have helped me to become a better mother, daughter, teacher, and researcher. Thank
you to Dr. Adam Chandler for engaging conversations about statistical procedures and taking time
to help me to analyze my data. Thank you to my USC doctoral dissertation chairs, Dr. Patricia
Tobey and Dr. Wayne Coombs, for encouraging me to investigate learning challenges which affect
marginalized students, the children about whom I am most passionate. Finally, thank you to my
USC Educational Psychology doctoral cohort, a very special group of people with whom I have
grown, laughed, and whined, and a special shout out to Paula Obermeyer. Without my superb
cohort team, achieving this dream would not have been nearly as rewarding, exhilarating, or
entertaining.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 4
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 2
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 6
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 7
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY ........................................................................ 9
Background of the Problem....................................................................................................... 10
Marginalized Student Risk Factors........................................................................................ 11
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................... 13
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 13
Importance of the Problem ........................................................................................................ 15
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................... 15
Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................................. 17
Organization of the Study ......................................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................... 20
Self Determination Theory ........................................................................................................ 21
Teacher Autonomy Support with Structure ........................................................................... 24
Critique of Self Determination Theory .................................................................................. 31
Autonomy Supportive Practices for Marginalized Students ................................................. 33
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 44
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 45
Sample and Population .............................................................................................................. 46
Intervention ............................................................................................................................... 48
Intervention Procedures ......................................................................................................... 48
Teacher Autonomy Support Training .................................................................................... 50
Instrumentation.......................................................................................................................... 52
Student Intrinsic Motivation .................................................................................................. 53
Student Autonomy ................................................................................................................. 54
Student Perceived Learning Climate ..................................................................................... 55
Student Math Achievement ................................................................................................... 56
Data Collection .......................................................................................................................... 57
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 58
Intervention Timeline: Twelve-week classroom TAS implementation .................................... 58
Confidentiality ........................................................................................................................... 60
Trustworthiness and Credibility ................................................................................................ 60
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS ..................................................................................................... 61
Preliminary Analysis ................................................................................................................. 61
Student Demographic Data .................................................................................................... 61
Dependent Variable Descriptive Statistics ............................................................................ 62
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 66
T-test ...................................................................................................................................... 66
Correlations ........................................................................................................................... 68
Qualitative Data ..................................................................................................................... 69
Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 72
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 73
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 5
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 75
Findings Discussion .................................................................................................................. 76
Quantitative Data ................................................................................................................... 76
Qualitative Data ..................................................................................................................... 78
Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 79
Diffusion of Treatment .......................................................................................................... 80
Teacher Stress ........................................................................................................................ 80
Scale Modification ................................................................................................................. 80
Incomplete Data ..................................................................................................................... 81
Implications for Practice ........................................................................................................... 82
Teacher Attributes ................................................................................................................. 82
School Organizational Relationships..................................................................................... 84
Teacher Autonomy Support Training .................................................................................... 85
Future Research ......................................................................................................................... 86
Marginalized Student Academic Motivation ......................................................................... 87
Teacher Social and Emotional Skills ..................................................................................... 87
Study Replication .................................................................................................................. 88
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 88
References ..................................................................................................................................... 91
Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix ........................................................... 108
Appendix B: Parent Consent Form ............................................................................................. 109
Appendix C: Teacher Intervention Consent Form ...................................................................... 111
Appendix D: Teacher Control Consent Form ............................................................................. 113
Appendix E: IRB University of Southern California Approval.................................................. 115
Appendix F: Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A) instrument* .......................... 116
Appendix G: Activity Feeling States (AFS) Scale* ................................................................... 117
Appendix H: Learning Climate Questionnaire ........................................................................... 118
Appendix I: iReady on-line mathematics diagnostic and performance program........................ 119
Appendix J: TAS Teacher Training Seminar: PowerPoint Presentation .................................... 120
Appendix J: TAS Teacher Training Seminar: Presentation ........................................................ 121
Appendix K: Teacher Training Video Script: TAS Strategies for Marginalized Students ......... 122
Appendix L: Posttest Mean Scores: Pearson Correlations among Dependent Variables ........... 123
Appendix M: Qualitative Field Note Codebook Themes ........................................................... 124
Appendix N: Intervention Field Notes ........................................................................................ 125

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 6
List of Tables
Table 1: TAS Intervention Timeline ..............................................................................................60
Table 2: Student Demographic Data by Ethnicity, Free Lunch Qualification, and ELL Level ....62
Table 3: Dependent Variable Descriptive Data by Experimental Condition .................................65
Table 4: Independent-Samples Tests by Experimental Condition .................................................67
Table 5: Pearson Correlations among Dependent Variables .........................................................69

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 7
List of Figures
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework: Teacher Autonomy Support (TAS) to increase urban
marginalized student academic achievement .................................................................................24

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 8
ABSTRACT
Self-determination theory asserts that, in order to experience well-being, all human beings must
possess three basic psychological needs: relatedness, perceived competence, and autonomy
(Ryan & Deci, 2000). In school contexts, autonomous students are self-managed and
intrapersonally motivated to achieve (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The study purpose was to
demonstrate that teacher autonomy support with structure could increase math achievement in
urban marginalized students served in a public elementary school. The study school serves
students who are 93 percent low-SES, 54 percent English language learners, 92 percent Hispanic
immigrants, 5 percent African American, and 1.5 percent white (CALP ADS, 2018). The study
implemented a Teacher Autonomy Support with structure intervention across all academic
content areas in grades two through four. It was hypothesized that marginalized student
exposure to a 12-week teacher autonomy support with structure classroom intervention would
lead to increased student academic autonomy, motivation, and achievement compared with
students in control classrooms. Measurement instruments of established validity were
administered. Outcome measures were student: (a) math performance, (b) academic motivation,
(c) academic autonomy, and (d) learning climate. Data were collected prior to and immediately
following the 12-week classroom intervention. Independent t-test analyses examining the
relative effectiveness of the intervention on student dependent variables revealed no statistically
significant pretest/posttest differences or by experimental condition. Bivariate correlational
analyses found statistically significant correlations between student academic motivation and
perceived learning climate and between student autonomy and motivation.
Key words: Self Determination Theory, autonomy, motivation, achievement, marginalized
students, urban students, teacher autonomy support
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 9
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Effects of Teacher Autonomy Support (TAS) with structure on marginalized student
academic: autonomy, motivation, and math achievement were examined. Supported by Self-
Determination Theory (SDT), TAS practices have been shown to increase student academic
achievement by increasing their academic autonomy and academic motivation (Jang, Reeve, &
Deci, 2010; Reeve, 2006; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Additionally, autonomy supportive classroom
structure, e.g., focused feedback and preselected assignment-related choices have demonstrated
increased student motivation (Jang et al., 2010). Marginalized students often contend with toxic
stress factors that are external to school (Burchinal et al., 2011; Shonkoff et al., 2012; Schreier &
Chen, 2013). These factors include unstructured environments with few opportunities to develop
intrapersonal autonomy skills (Schreier & Chen, 2013). TAS with structure can improve student
academic performance by embedding learning activities into autonomy supportive classroom
environments where marginalized students often spend the majority of their waking hours. TAS
with structure operationalizes the Cognitive Evaluation (CET) sub-theory of SDT by
strengthening student perceived academic competence through autonomy-supportive
instructional methods. TAS with structure teaching practices, incorporated into daily instruction
across all academic content areas, can help teachers meet marginalized students' basic
psychological need for autonomy, as asserted in self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
The extent to which teacher autonomy support with structure practices could strengthen
marginalized student math achievement by increasing two moderators of achievement: academic
autonomy and motivation were examined.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 10
Background of the Problem
Since the inception of the public-school system, nationwide cycles of ineffectual legislative
mandates have attempted to close the achievement gap between ethnic minority students and their
white classmates (Tyack & Cuban, 1995). In the 21
st
Century, the achievement gap between black
and Latino student subgroups and their white counterparts persists and widens from Kindergarten
through high school grades. (NAEP, 2018; Reardon, 2011). Over the two decades from 1992-
2017, National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) data reveal that Latino and black
student mathematics and reading scores have been lower consistently by 19 or more points
compared with mathematics and reading scores of white students during the same period (NAEP,
2018). NAEP analyses reveal a 24-point mathematics performance gap between black and white
students as of 2017 and a 19-point reading performance gap between Latino and white students in
2017 (NAEP, 2018). Parallel data from 2011 demonstrate similar score discrepancies for these
minority student subgroups (Hemphill & Vanneman, 2011; Vanneman, Anderson, & Rahman.,
2009). The data reveal wide and persistent gaps throughout the grade sequence despite mandated
educational policies such as the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 and Every Student Succeeds
Act in 2015 (US Dept of Education, 2018). Recent research findings underscore the need for
corrective interventions to address risk factors for academic failure to thrive which exist both
within school contexts and outside school in students’ homes and neighborhoods (Blair & Raver,
2014; Burchinal et al., 2011; Shonkoff et al., 2012). Examination of factors that can depress
marginalized student academic achievement illuminates how teacher autonomy support practices
with structure can support such students’ achievement of their learning potential.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 11
Marginalized Student Risk Factors
Various factors related to student failure to thrive academically are external to the school.
Such factors include: low socio-economic status (Blair & Raver, 2014; Burchinal et al., 2011),
uncertain immigration status (Elias, White, & Stepney, 2014; Mendoza-Denzon, 2014; Perez,
Espinoza, Ramos, Coronado, & Cortes, 2009; Reyes & Garcia, 2013), racial and cultural
discrimination (Elias et al., 2014; Madrid, 2011; Perez et al., 2009; Reardon, 2013; Reyes &
Garcia, 2013; Rojas, LeBouef, & Slate, 2011), and exposure to neighborhood violence (Bolland
et al., 2007; Levy, Heissel, Richeson, and Adam, 2016; Mendoza-Denton, 2014). These factors
can increase student anxiety and depress emotional self-regulation, thus interfering with
academic achievement (Burchinal et al., 2011; Elias, White, & Stepney, 2014; Levy et al., 2016).
Furthermore, living in neighborhoods which are emotionally and physically violent creates toxic
stress which can disrupt children’s normal brain development (Schreier & Chen, 2013; Shonkoff
et al., 2012 Burchinal et al., 2011).
Toxic stress can be a function of student exposure to: neighborhood violence (Bolland et
al., 2007), living in poverty, (Schreier & Chen, 2013), racial and cultural discrimination (Levy et
al., 2016; Mendoza-Denton, 2014), and chaotic home environments (Spiegel, 2017). Toxic
stress can have profoundly detrimental effects on students’ executive function (Cooper &
Schleser, 2006; Noble et al., 2015; Shonkoff et al., 2012), social competence (Cokely, McClain,
Jones, & Johnson, 2011), and achievement of their academic potential (Blair & Raver, 2014;
Burchinal et al., 2011). Such factors create cognitive stress loads that can interfere with healthy
brain development and learning (Immordino -Yang, 2015).
Many marginalized students contend with these stress factors that can be extraordinarily
burdensome for students who are trying to learn. Because these types of stress originate in
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 12
students’ homes, socio-cultural circumstances, and neighborhoods, they cannot be amended
easily, if at all, within the public-school context (Schreier & Chen; Shonkoff et al., 2012).
Moreover, these factors reduce students’ abilities to become intrinsically motivated and
academically successful. For the purposes of this study, marginalized students are defined as
students who: reside in low-SES homes, are English language learners, have suffered physical or
emotional trauma, and are burdened by precarious and uncertain immigration status.
While family environment and societal factors cannot be controlled directly within public
school contexts, research has demonstrated that within-school variables, such as Teacher
Autonomy Support (TAS) instructional practices can help students achieve academic self-
regulation and can have positive effects on achievement, thus contributing to closing the
achievement gap (Dembo & Eaton, 2000; Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor & Schellinger,
2011; Blair & Raver, 2014; Jones & Kahn, 2017; Linnenbrink- Garcia, Patall, & Pekrun, 2016;
Patall, Steingut, Vasquez, Trimble, & Freeman, 2018; Reeve, 2009; Schunk, Meece, & Pintrich,
2014). Additionally, extensive empirical studies demonstrate that TAS practices, as well as TAS
practices with structure, can increase student academic: autonomy, motivation, engagement,
positive emotions, and achievement (Cheon & Reeve, 2015; Jang et al., 2010; Jang, Reeve, &
Halusic, 2016; Patall et al., 2018; Patall, Sylvester, & Han, 2014; Vansteekiste et al., 2012).
Little research has been conducted, however, to determine the effects of TAS, or TAS with
structure, in support of marginalized student academic achievement (Wallace, Sung, & Williams,
2014). Given that TAS has been widely successful in school-based research studies with non-
marginalized general education students from fifth grade (Grolnick & Ryan, 1987) through
college (Jang, 2008), it is reasonable to propose that TAS procedures can be successful with
marginalized students.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 13
Additionally, autonomous behaviors (Ryan & Deci, 2006), self-regulation behaviors
(Dembo & Eaton, 2000), and executive function (Immordino-Yang, 2016; Lee & Reeve, 2017)
are coordinated with the prefrontal cortex. The prefrontal cortex can be compromised in
marginalized students as a result of external environmental toxic stress factors which depress
academic achievement (Schreier & Chen, 2013). Therefore, because autonomous behaviors
function in a system that includes the prefrontal cortex, a compromised prefrontal cortex can
disrupt the development of student academic autonomy. However, in structured autonomy
supportive classroom learning contexts, marginalized students may develop their autonomy skills
and improved cognitive function. TAS classroom strategies may help such students develop
intrapersonal autonomy skills by strengthening their cognitive function and encouraging
autonomous academic behavior in emotionally structured and nurturing learning environments.
Statement of the Problem
The district in which the intervention school resides serves a large majority of ethnic
minority low SES students, and program directors have attempted to close the achievement gap
in myriad ways for decades. Recently, classroom-based programs such as Response to
Intervention have been mandated, and social-emotional skill-development curricula have been
distributed to all school sites. Despite extensive and ongoing district-wide efforts to correct the
achievement gap, performance data continue to replicate the national pattern of academically
underserved marginalized students (CDE, 2017).
Purpose of the Study
By strengthening within-school variables that can increase student academic
achievement, the study purpose was to provide insights into how the math achievement gap can
be reduced by applying classroom-based TAS with structure teaching practices. Self-
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 14
determination theory (SDT) contends that humans possess three basic psychological needs which
are pre-requisites to self-determination and contribute to the overall perception of well-being.
The three SDT-posited psychological needs innate to all human beings are: perceived
competence, relatedness, and autonomy. SDT asserts that autonomy can be attained by students
when classroom teachers nurture their inner motivational resources (Deci & Ryan, 1987; Ryan &
Deci, 2000). The structure concept is derived from a self-determination sub-theory: Cognitive
Evaluation Theory, which posits that perceived competence enhances student autonomy
development and is produced through structured teacher guidance. For this study, TAS with
structure is designed to help marginalized second-grade through fourth-grade students reach their
math academic potential. Additionally, as academic motivation is a consequence of autonomy
and facilitates achievement, dependent variables are: student academic autonomy, motivation,
and math achievement (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Appendix A).
The research question (Appendix A) is, What differences in academic autonomy,
motivation, and achievement are observed in marginalized students exposed to a 12-week TAS
with structure intervention compared with marginalized students exposed to 12-weeks of
traditional teaching practices? The study was designed to implement a TAS with structure
instructional intervention which includes teachers: (a) providing students with choices of
materials and resources used to complete math assignments, (b) incorporating student-specific
cultural interest into math lessons, including materials and concepts which are relevant to and
supportive of the cultures represented in the classroom student population, (c) providing clear
rationales for mastering math learning objectives which were meaningful to students, and (d)
providing credible and informational academic feedback focused on learning objectives and
using no coercive or controlling language. The intervention was implemented during all
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 15
academic lessons in second through fourth-grade classrooms in an urban public elementary
school serving a majority of marginalized students.
Importance of the Problem
The problem is important to address because, in classrooms serving general education
non-marginalized students, Teacher Autonomy Support (TAS) practices have been demonstrated
to achieve increased student academic autonomy, motivation, and achievement. Studies have
also demonstrated that marginalized student academic underperformance is exacerbated by low
self-regulatory skills and low academic motivation levels (Blair & Raver, 2014; Patall et al.,
2018). Recent research findings maintain that both self-endorsed student academic autonomy
and intrinsic academic motivation are critical components of student engagement in sustained
efforts required to master complex educational objectives (Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2016).
Furthermore, TAS practices have been found to increase general education non-marginalized
student: (a) positive academic emotions (Cheon & Reeve, 2015), (b) intrinsic motivation (Cheon,
Reeve, & Lee, 2018; Lee & Reeve, 2017; Patall, 2013), (c) self-regulation (Vansteenkiste et al.,
2012), and (d) academic achievement (Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2016; Patall, et al., 2018).
Results of this study hold promise to inform educators of the potential positive effects of TAS
practices with structure on the academic achievement of marginalized students who comprise an
increasing majority in urban classrooms. In this way, it was anticipated that study results could
provide insights into closing the achievement gap between marginalized and non-marginalized
students.
Limitations and Delimitations
Study limitations included the use of a convenience sample and lack of random selection
of student and teacher test subjects from their populations, as well as lack of exclusively
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 16
objective (i.e. observational or behavioral) assessment measures. A true experimental study
would include the random assignment of teachers and students to control and intervention
groups. Had such sampling procedures been conducted, study results could have been
generalized, i.e., applied to marginalized elementary classroom students served elsewhere and to
urban elementary classroom teachers serving elsewhere (Creswell, 2014). For the current study,
participating teachers were block randomly assigned within one available site, i.e., one urban
elementary school. Another study limitation is that, except for math assessment measures, only
self-report data were obtained from student and teacher participants. Self-report data can
produce invalid results if subjects submit untruthful or otherwise inaccurate responses. To
control for potential weaknesses inherent in self-report data, student survey instruments were
administered whose validity and reliability have been established in published research studies
by experts in the field (Reeves & Sickenius, 1994; Ryan & Connell, 1989). A further limitation
is the three-month data collection interval. Because of dissertation submission deadlines, a
period of only three months was available for data collection and analysis. These are appropriate
procedures for testing field study hypotheses and research questions (Creswell, 2014).
Study delimitations were related to data analysis procedures and to the single-school
implementation site. T-test and bivariate correlational analyses were conducted to determine the
degree to which the TAS practices with structure intervention influenced marginalized student
academic motivation, academic autonomy, and math achievement. The intervention school site
constituted an additional study delimitation. The study was conducted at one urban elementary
school; therefore, generalization of study results to other target audiences, intervention
occasions, and intervention contexts was precluded.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 17
Definitions of Terms
Autonomy: Autonomy experiences are characterized by the perception of control over one’s
activities and pursuits (Deci & Ryan, 1987; Ryan & Deci, 2000; Patall, Cooper, & Robinson,
2008). When individuals experience autonomy, they perceive that their decisions derive from an
internal locus of causality, i.e., that they have made volitional decisions which determine the
outcomes of their choices.
Intrinsic motivation: Intrinsic motivation involves intrapersonal decision-making and is
reflected in the urge to explore, learn, and seek new knowledge and skills inherently without the
necessity of external motivational prompts (Deci & Ryan, 1987; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Intrinsic
motivation prompts engagement in activities by natural inclination and personal interest.
Marginalized students: For the purposes of this study, marginalized students refer to students
who: (a) are living in poverty, i.e., low SES (Scherier & Chen, 2013), (b) suffer from toxic stress
induced by living conditions or trauma (Shonkoff et al., 2012), (c) face uncertain immigration
status (Adelman & Taylor, 2011, and (d) are English language learners (Reyes & Garcia, 2013).
Structure: Structure is comprised of student-specific scaffolded teaching strategies designed to
increase student perceived academic competence and intrapersonal control over their
achievement. For the purposes of this study, structure includes teacher: (a) clarification of
academic expectations, (b) assignment-related choices, (c) student collaboration behavior
expectations, and (d) direct instruction, as needed, to help marginalized students become
intrinsically motivated to achieve their potential (Jang et al., 2010; Vansteenkiste et al., 2012).
Teacher Autonomy Support (TAS): TAS behaviors are designed to guide students through the
process of becoming intrinsically motivated to achieve their academic potential. TAS teacher-
student interpersonal behaviors facilitate student development of their intrapersonal volitional
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 18
choice to engage in and to persist to mastery of academic tasks and goals. TAS practices have
been demonstrated to increase student academic intrinsic motivation (Jang et al., 2010).
TAS strategies: TAS instructional strategies include providing students with: (a) clear rationales
for mastery of learning objectives that are meaningful to students; (b) appealing assignment-
related choices; (c) learning materials and resources that are relevant and interesting to students;
and (d) credible and informational instructional feedback which implies student choice to be
present in the classroom and which uses no coercive or controlling language (Jang et al., 2010).
Organization of the Study
TAS with structure instructional practices are based on self-determination theory (Ryan
& Deci, 2000). Conventionally, TAS and structure are understood as opposite constructs, in that
autonomy connotes freedom and structure connotes control. Nevertheless, recent research has
demonstrated that combining TAS with student-specific structure practices can increase
academic achievement in general education non-marginalized students (Aelterman,
Vansteenkiste, Van Keer, & Haerens, 2015; Jang et al., 2010). The study aimed to measure
effects of classroom-based TAS with structure teaching methods on urban marginalized students
who endure additional academic risk factors external to the school context. Therefore, Chapter
Two presents relevant literature which describes: (a) self-determination theory, (b) TAS and
TAS with structure classroom effects on general education non-marginalized student academic
achievement, (c) critiques of self-determination theory, and (d) proposed autonomy supportive
practices for marginalized students. Chapter Three presents the study research methodology
including intervention details and data collection methods. Chapter Four describes data analysis
procedures and presents program effects of Teacher Autonomy Support on marginalized student
academic autonomy development, motivation, and math achievement and correlational analysis
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 19
of dependent variables. In Chapter Five, study conclusions, recommendations, and implications
for further study are presented.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 20
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Learning is a social experience, and teacher-created motivational classroom climates are
critically important to student mastery of educational objectives (Bandura, 1986; Immordino-
Yang, 2016; Reeve, 2006; Vygotsky, 1978). Teachers who help students develop autonomous
intrapersonal reasons for learning facilitate student emotional well-being, academic motivation,
and achievement (Ryan & Deci, 2006). Moreover, classroom-based development of student
autonomy and motivation skills is especially important for marginalized students who contend
with multiple compounding factors outside of school that can depress academic motivation and
achievement (Burchinal et al., 2011; Blair & Raver, 2014; Shonkoff et al., 2012). Marginalized
students endure academic risk factors external to the school context, consequently, teachers are
challenged to create classroom environments that engage, develop, and help marginalized
students practice application of their inner motivational resources to the pursuit of academic
excellence (Adelman & Taylor, 2011; Vansteenkiste et al., 2012).
According to self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000), all human beings possess
inner motivational resources which can be nurtured. Students whose inner motivational
resources are nurtured in autonomy supportive classrooms develop increased academic
motivation, self-endorsed academic autonomy, and consequently, achievement (Ryan & Deci,
2000). Marginalized students often lack guidance outside school which is necessary to nurture
their inner motivational resources supportive of academic excellence. Thus, such students can
benefit from having those innate, but underdeveloped resources supported and practiced in the
classroom (Schreirer & Chen, 2013). The purpose of the current study was to assess Teacher
Autonomy Support (TAS) with structure effects on marginalized student academic autonomy,
motivation, and achievement. Literature reviewed explores TAS effectiveness studies and
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 21
adaptations of TAS classroom practices for increasing academic autonomy and motivation
among marginalized students as moderators of their math achievement.
The literature review begins with a justification of the self-determination theory as the
study's underlying conceptual foundation. Derived from self-determination theory, strategies
have been devised to help students develop and practice intrapersonal autonomy skills in the
classroom context; such practices constitute the teacher autonomy support construct. Within
self-determination theory, the cognitive evaluation sub-theory posits that teacher facilitation of
student perceived competence can help to foster student development of academic autonomy.
Student perceived competence is referred to in the literature as structure, and student
autonomy development can be stimulated by specific types of teacher-guided classroom
structure. For example, rather than using controlling directive speech, non-coercive nurturing
teacher feedback to students supports their autonomy development and academic performance
through incremental steps to mastery. Relationships among self-determination theory, how the
cognitive evaluation sub-theory supports and informs classroom structure, integration of
structure practices into teacher autonomy support for marginalized students, and teacher
autonomy support with structure as a practical application of self-determination theory and its
cognitive evaluation sub-theory are examined in the literature review.
Self Determination Theory
As conceptualized by Ryan and Deci (2000), Self Determination Theory (SDT) asserts
that human beings require fulfillment of three basic psychological needs for personal well-being.
The three needs are perceived competence, relatedness, and autonomy. Perceived competence is
the intrapersonal conviction that task mastery is achievable by means of personal effort (Deci &
Ryan, 1987). Relatedness denotes perceptions of social acceptance and possession of intimate
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 22
connections with peers and role models (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Autonomy is characterized by
volition and self-endorsement of one’s behavioral choices and activities (Ryan & Deci, 2010).
Intrapersonal autonomy has significance for human quality-of-life and is defined as self-
endorsement of values and behavior (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Autonomy is not synonymous with
independence (Ryan & Deci, 2006), as autonomous behavior and values can originate even in the
presence of or as a result of external prompts. Autonomy is distinguishable from independence
in that adopted autonomous values and behaviors can be initiated using external prompts but
become intrinsically motivated through intrapersonal transformation. Authenticity is critically
important to autonomy and is reflected in the fact that authentically autonomous acts must
originate from and reside in an internal locus of causality (deCharms, 1968). For example, in the
classroom, autonomy-supportive prompts by teachers must be neither coercively controlling nor
focused on external rewards or punishments of students such as prizes, deadlines, threats, or
praise based on performance (Deci & Ryan, 1987). Instead, student autonomy is developed
through teacher-created classroom climates characterized by: (a) timely, lesson objective-
focused, and encouraging verbal feedback, (b) engagement of students’ personal interests,
choices, and creativity, and (c) nurturing relationships that foster positive academically goal-
oriented emotions (Deci & Ryan, 1987: Jang et al., 2010). Autonomy has been demonstrated
empirically to be, not simply an academic construct, but an innate need present in every human
being which can be strengthened in supportive learning contexts with credible role models as
guides (Deci & Ryan, 1987; Ryan & Deci; 2000).
According to Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET), a sub-theory of SDT, social context
plays a critical role in meeting autonomy needs and shaping the nature and strength of human
motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). That is, internal forms of motivation to participate with a sense
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 23
of well-being emerge in social contexts which support student autonomy and perceived
competence to master immediate objectives and long-term academic goals (Ryan & Deci, 2000;
Boggiano, & Vallerand, 2001). In contrast, social contexts which thwart student autonomy and
perceived competence can provoke amotivation, negative goal-oriented emotions, and reluctant
compliance (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Furthermore, Ryan and Deci maintain that perceived
competence does not enhance intrinsic motivation unless the perception of competence is
accompanied by self-endorsed autonomy (2000). That is, perceived competence to achieve a
skill must be internally recognized as a value worthy of expending sustained effort to attain.
This internal endorsement can be achieved in experiences that support learner autonomy and
perceived competence, such as teachers providing students with scaffolded choices that guide
them through incremental mastery experiences (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Vygotsky, 1978). In sum,
the SDT sub-theory, cognitive evaluation theory, stresses the educational importance of social
learning contexts and how social context impacts the development of intrinsic academic
motivation, for good or ill.
According to SDT, all students have inherent motivational resources that can be nurtured
to help them become autonomous learners (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Additionally, the CET sub-
theory application to enhance student perceived competence within autonomy development
practices by means of classroom structure complements and reinforces the development of
student motivation and academic autonomy. In the classroom, teachers can implement strategies
that nurture student innate motivational resources by creating autonomy supportive learning
environments which increase student intrinsic motivation to achieve their academic potential
(Reeve, 2006). Practices that support students’ autonomy development are referred to as teacher
autonomy support practices. Additionally, such practices with student-specific structure yield
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 24
increased academic performance which is especially important for addressing the academic
achievement gap between marginalized and non-marginalized students in urban public schools.
The following sections present the application of self-determination theory and the cognitive
evaluation sub-theory to teacher autonomy support with student-specific classroom structure.
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework: Teacher Autonomy Support (TAS) to increase urban
marginalized student academic achievement

Jang Reeve, & Deci, 2010. * For the purposes of this study, TAS strategies have been modified to
accommodate needs of urban marginalized students who often are exposed to toxic stressors outside school that can
depress their academic function in school.

Teacher Autonomy Support with Structure
Autonomy support occurs when one person’s behavior nurtures another’s behavior into
becoming volitional, self-endorsed, and with an internal locus of causality, that is, when a
person’s behavior comes from within and is not externally driven (de Charms, 1986; Reeve &
Jang, 2006). Aligned with SDT, teacher autonomy support practices (Fig. 1) can nurture student
Self-
Determination
Theory
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 25
inner motivational resources and meet their foundational human need for autonomy by: (a)
establishing and maintaining classroom environments that offer students’ academic choices and
clear behavioral expectations, (b) developing relationships with students that respect and support
student perspectives, interests, and opinions, (c) relating academic content meaningfully to
student interests, (d) using academic feedback language which is learning objective-focused,
informational, and neither coercive nor controlling, and (e) providing appealing rationales for
achieving academic objectives (Jang et al., 2012; Reeve, 2006; Reeve, 2009).
Rooted in SDT, Teacher Autonomy Support (TAS) practices are instructional strategies
that increase student academic autonomy, intrinsic motivation and, consequently, academic
achievement (Cheon & Reeve, 2015; Cheon, Reeve, Lee & Lee, 2018; Jang, Kim & Reeve,
2012; Jang et al., 2010; Jang, Reeve, Ryan, & Kim, 2009; Patall et al., 2018; Reeve & Cheon,
2016; Reeve & Jang, 2006; Yu, Li, Wang, & Zhang, 2016). According to a sub-theory of self-
determination theory, i.e., cognitive evaluation theory, specific types of classroom structure can
contribute to meeting students’ need for perceived competence and increase student motivation
and engagement (Jang et al., 2010). The three components of structure are: (a) clear meaningful
goals and expectations when introducing learning activities, (b) monitoring student task activity,
and (c) nurturing objective-focused feedback during and following learning activities
(Vansteenkiste et al., 2012). Examples of teacher behaviors that reflect autonomy supportive
classroom structure are: (a) strong encouraging leadership of instructional activities, (b) clear and
thorough step-by-step procedures, (c) positively assertive instructional guidance, (d) verbal
feedback which is neither coercive nor controlling, and (e) teaching practice consistency (Jang et
al., 2010; Skinner & Belmont, 1993). Research has demonstrated that providing such academic
structure can help increase student engagement (Jang et al., 2010; Skinner & Belmont, 1993).
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 26
Furthermore, structure incorporated into TAS practices can enhance student academic motivation
through provision of meaningful and persuasive rationales, choices, and feedback.
Autonomy-supportive teachers stimulate autonomous experiences in students by stating
clear rationales for mastery of learning objectives which are meaningful to students. When
delivering instruction, such teachers value student perspectives, opinions, and even acknowledge
students' negative feedback. By validating these types of student perspectives, autonomy-
supportive teachers help students both to develop academic autonomy and to take metacognitive
control over their learning (Reeve, 2006; Reeve & Jang, 2006). Furthermore, application of
structure in an autonomy-supportive manner, such as providing clear goals with behavioral and
academic expectations, while providing meaningful rationales for learning, helps students to
develop academic autonomy by creating internally endorsed purpose and utility for achievement
of learning objectives (Reeve, 2006). Teachers who do not provide adequate autonomy-
supportive student-specific structure and who are perceived by students to be unclear about
classroom expectations can permit chaotic learning environments to develop. For students to
attain perceived internal loci of academic control, teachers must provide clear, comprehensive,
comprehensible, and meaningful directions, student-specific academic scaffolding, and
behavioral boundaries to ensure development of classroom climates that enhance student
perceived competence and motivation to sustain engagement during complex academic tasks
(Vygotsky, 1978; Skinner, Zimmer-Gembeck, Connell, Eccles, & Wellborn, 1998).
Autonomy-supportive teachers also offer students opportunities to choose aspects of how
they will meet learning objectives. Teachers promote student internal locus of causality when
students are encouraged to engage in volitional choices of assignment-related materials,
resources, and mastery demonstration methods (deCharms, 1968). Rather than simply being
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 27
assigned tasks with no options, academic choices help students to become increasingly self-
regulated and intrinsically motivated (Patall et al, 2018). For example, students given learning
assignment-related choices have been found to be more academically engaged than students
simply assigned tasks (Zuckerman, Porac, Lathin, Smith, & Deci, 1978). Nevertheless, too many
choices provided to students who possess low levels of perceived competence can produce
cognitive overload (Kirschner, Ayres, Chandler, 2010; Patall et al., 2014) and thwart autonomy
development due to their feeling overwhelmed by having to discriminate among many options.
For such students, it may be necessary to provide limited choice opportunities (Patall, 2013;
Patall et al., 2014; Thompson & Beymer, 2015).
Autonomy-supportive teacher feedback to students does not hinder students’ academic
autonomy development. Instead, TAS-style instructional feedback offers students informative,
learning objective-oriented, non-coercive language which complements and facilitates the
development of student perceived competence, which is a necessary precursor of self-
determination and academic autonomy (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Vansteenkiste et al., 2012).
Moreover, teacher feedback to students, applied in an autonomy-supportive manner, can increase
student motivation (Patall et al., 2014). TAS feedback, when applied as student-specific
scaffolding during learning activities, can help students feel competent as they move towards
mastery in achievable increments. Autonomy-supportive teachers initially provide student-
specific external motivational prompts and structured scaffolding. This can help students to
increase their perceived academic competence and gradually transform the teacher’s external
academic values into students’ volitionally self-endorsed and intrinsically motivated behaviors
(Ryan & Deci, 2006). Furthermore, Jang et al. (2010) have demonstrated that structure
integrated into TAS practices strengthens student engagement characterized by an internal locus
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 28
of causality. These types of structure provide scaffolded guidance during student progress
toward desired outcomes, thus reducing the likelihood of off-task behavior and classroom chaos.
Additionally, autonomy-supportive instruction, in which teachers implement learning
materials that are personally relevant and interesting to students, has been found to increase
motivation even when students are not interested initially in a topic or academic objective
(Patall, 2013). A study of autonomy supportive practices focusing on student interest found that
when given a choice, greater on-task performance was associated with higher levels of student
interest. Also, tasks perceived as interesting were linked to greater subsequent interest and
enjoyment during task mastery activities (Patall, 2013). Furthermore, autonomy supportive
teacher-student interactions that reflect teacher investment in and recognition of student interests
lead to increased student comprehension of new concepts (Jang, Reeve, & Halusic, 2016).
Teacher-student interactions in which teachers use nurturing supportive language engage
students, whereas controlling coercive language can have negative outcomes. Recent research
findings report that teachers who use controlling language can create negative feelings and
thwart student autonomy development, depress motivation, and increase academic
disengagement (Cheon & Reeve, 2015; Jang et al., 2010; Patall et al., 2018; Reeve & Tseng,
2011). Moreover, cortisol, a marker of physiological stress, has been found to increase in
students exposed to controlling teacher language (Reeve & Tseng, 2011). In a laboratory setting,
researchers measured pre and post cortisol levels in student saliva samples. After enduring
controlling teacher language during a puzzle activity, student cortisol levels increased, thus
providing objective physiological measures of student negative stress reactions to controlling
teacher instructional style (Reeve & Tseng, 2011).
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 29
Confirming the negative effects of controlling language, in a study during which adult
participants role-played teacher and student interactions using either controlling language or
autonomy supportive instruction, autonomy supportive teaching yielded positive effects on
student autonomy (Reeve & Jang, 2006). All participants were knowledgeable of the negative
effects of controlling language as they took turns role-playing teacher. Controlling instruction
was correlated negatively with perceived autonomy, even though all participants were aware of
the study parameters. This demonstrates that autonomic negative responses to controlling
language can override cognitive knowledge (Reeve & Jang, 2006; Reeve & Tseng, 2011).
Research findings such as these underscore the importance of positive nurturing teacher
instructional attitudes, speech, and behaviors which are required to increase student motivation
and, thus, academic achievement.
Furthermore, research incorporating structure in an autonomy-supportive way has
demonstrated that structure complements autonomy supportive practices and yields increases in
student motivation and engagement. Jang et al., (2010) maintain that student engagement levels
are optimized when teachers implement both autonomy support and structure. In a study of
2,523 high school students and 133 teachers in Midwest schools Jang et al., (2010) examined the
effects of structure delivered with high levels of TAS. Students rated teachers’ autonomy
support behaviors, i.e., aligned with self-determination theory, and teachers’ structure behaviors,
i.e., aligned with Skinner’s motivational concept of structure. Additionally, students completed
self-reported academic engagement questionnaires. Results included strong positive correlations
between student classroom engagement and TAS with classroom structure (Jang et al., 2010).
Confirming the beneficial relationship between teacher autonomy support and structure, a
study by Vansteenkiste et al., (2012), surveyed 1036 7
th
through 12
th
-grade students. Student
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 30
perceptions of their teacher's autonomy supportive and structure styles were surveyed. Students
in the high autonomy support/high structure (i.e., clear expectations) cluster reported the highest
levels of autonomous motivation. These students reported more positive academic behaviors,
e.g., time management and deep-level learning, than students did in the low autonomy
support/low structure (i.e., vague expectations) cluster. Also, students in the high autonomy
support/high structure group reported lower test anxiety than did students in the low autonomy
support/low structure group. Results of this study show promise for engaging and motivating
students by combining autonomy-supportive structure with TAS instructional practices.
Teachers who support, nurture, and scaffold the development of students’ inner
motivational resources by: encouraging students’ choices, acknowledging students’ perspectives,
showing interest in students’ concerns, relying on non-controlling informational language,
communicating academic value with clear personally meaningful rationales, and acknowledging
and accepting students’ perspectives and expressions (Reeve, 2006; Reeve, 2009) become more
supportive of student autonomy development in the classroom. Furthermore, autonomy
supportive classroom practices can result in a beneficial iterative process. That is, as student
motivation and autonomy increase, teachers become increasingly autonomy supportive, and
these increases in motivation and autonomy lead to increases in academic achievement (Reeve &
Cheon, 2016).
While these practices have demonstrated robust success, there are researchers who
contend that self-determination theoretical constructs and TAS practices are not generalizable
across socially, ethnically, and culturally diverse populations. Critiques are described in the next
section and countered with support for the generalizability of the theory because self-
determination is an inherent need of all human beings, regardless of race, ethnicity, or culture.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 31
Critique of Self Determination Theory
SDT critics have claimed that the theory is not generalizable across cultures and,
therefore, not applicable to marginalized student populations. For example, critics have asserted
that SDT is applicable only in Western cultural contexts and cannot be generalized to Eastern
cultures which often demonstrate more collectivist social orientations than do their Western
counterparts (Leptokaridou, Vlachopoulos, & Papaioannou, 2015; Markus & Kitayama, 1991;
Ryan & Deci, 2006). Furthermore, Markus and Kitayama (1991) maintain that autonomy is a
Western construct, as only Western cultures value independence highly. Ryan and Deci (2006)
point out that such claims mistake autonomy for independence, which is not a synonymous
construct.
Studies in varied worldwide educational contexts have demonstrated positive effects of
SDT on student academic motivation as defined and operationalized by Deci and Ryan. SDT
asserts that all human beings possess the innate motivation to become successful, regardless of
race or culture. A review of diverse cultural applications of SDT designed to increase student
academic motivation confirm the contention that SDT is cross-culturally generalizable.
Studies conducted in Korea have applied TAS practices successfully to increase student
academic motivation (Cheon & Reeve, 2015; Cheon et al., 2016). Korean teachers who
participated in TAS professional development completed the classroom intervention with an
increased intrinsic motivational style of teaching which resulted in increased student motivation
(Cheon & Reeve, 2015). Successful implementation of TAS training in Korean cultural contexts
refutes claims that SDT is exclusively a Western construct.
Furthermore, Froiland, Davison, and Worrell, (2016) studied the effects of TAS
instructional practices with Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islander students and found positive
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 32
TAS effects on student intrinsic motivation and academic achievement. Also, Kaur, Hashim,
and Noma (2018) implemented TAS practices with English language learners in Thailand and
found that TAS instruction increased student interest, effort, relatedness, and motivation:
findings which are similar to results of TAS studies with American public-school students (Kaur
et al., 2018; Patall et al, 2018).
Another study confirming TAS generalizability across cultures was conducted in
Germany. Sosic-Vasic, Keis, Lau, Spitzer, and Streb, (2015), examined the effects of TAS
practices on student motivation and executive function. Teacher self-report application of TAS
strategies in the classroom was used to measure levels of TAS as opposed to student self-report.
High self-report levels of TAS behavior were positively related to student intrinsic motivation.
SDT maintains that all humans possess the innate need to become self-determined, regardless of
race or culture (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Additionally, because TAS has been found to be effective
in numerous culturally diverse studies, it is plausible to assume that TAS practices with the
addition of student-specific classroom structure would be cross-culturally generalizable as well.
To that end, it was anticipated that TAS instructional practices with structure would increase
student academic autonomy, motivation, and achievement in an urban elementary school serving
a high proportion of marginalized low-SES immigrant families.
Another criticism of SDT, by Iyengar and Lepper (2000), claims that choices involving
multiple options are discouraging to students rather than motivating. Ryan and Deci’s response
emphasizes that volitional choice and self-endorsement are key elements of autonomy.
However, they clarify that students possessing low levels of perceived competence may benefit
from teachers delimiting choices. That is, a few choices aligned to student interests can support
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 33
their self-determination development by providing choice while reducing the possibility of such
students feeling overwhelmed by complex decision-making options (Ryan & Deci, 2006).
Ryan and Deci assert further that criticism of SDT originates in a misunderstanding of the
definition of the term autonomy. Even Bandura equated autonomy with independence, which is
an incomplete understanding of autonomy as posited by Ryan and Deci. While critics aim to
discredit generalizability of the self-determination theory, Ryan and Deci cite empirical studies
worldwide across a variety of distinctly diverse cultures which confirm that engaging in
autonomous behavior leads to improved sense of well-being (Chrikov, Ryan, &Willness, 2005;
Hayamizum, 1997; Chirkov, Ryan, Kim, & Kaplan, 2003; Tanaka, 2013). The successful
application of TAS in worldwide cultural settings supports its potential to help close the
academic achievement gap endured by marginalized students in the United States (NAEP, 2018).
Although TAS practices have been successful across cultural contexts, TAS with
structure to meet the needs of urban marginalized students has not been reported. The next
section presents TAS with structure practices that have been modified for marginalized urban
students. The practices are described in terms of how they can moderate the negative
consequences of academic risk factors external to the school that affect many urban marginalized
students.
Autonomy Supportive Practices for Marginalized Students
While numerous studies of the positive effects of autonomy support practices on student
achievement have been reported (Cheon & Reeve, 2015; Reeve & Cheon, 2016; Cheon et al.,
2015; Jang et al., 2010; Jang et al., 2012; Jang et al., 2009; Patall et al., 2018; Reeve & Jang,
2006; Yu et al., 2016), a gap in the literature exists: relatively limited evidence is available
regarding the effects of TAS practices on marginalized student achievement. A database search
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 34
including ERIC, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and
Scorpus, using the descriptors: marginalized, students, academic achievement, urban school
academic achievement, teacher autonomy support, and autonomy support resulted in one
qualitative study that focused on teacher autonomy support with a small sample of marginalized
students (Wallace et al., 2014). Wallace et al. reported that autonomy supportive teacher-student
communication increased student engagement and autonomy (Wallace et al., 2014). Procedures
included students viewing video clips of their teachers and identifying autonomy supportive
teacher as a classroom management mechanism. Teachers in the videos embedded TAS into
interactions with students, provided feedback, and redirected students. Results reported that
students increased their perceptions of teacher autonomy support behaviors. Similar to the
current study, the Wallace et al. (2014) study infused TAS practices into instruction across the
curriculum, and study findings support the potential of TAS classroom practices for marginalized
students (Wallace et al., 2014).
The current study is the first quantitative study to examine effects of TAS practices on
marginalized student academic autonomy, motivation, and achievement in a low SES urban
elementary school serving a large proportion of marginalized students. Instructional practices
recommended by neuroscientists are closely aligned with TAS practices, such as providing
students with opportunities to develop ownership over their learning through connecting material
with student interest, allowing student choice, and creating learning environments that increase
student engagement (Immordino-Yang, 2016). Therefore, because marginalized students
contend with factors that can affect their cognitive development, TAS classroom practices were
expected help to reduce the negative effects of external home and neighborhood toxic stress that
inhibit marginalized student academic achievement. Furthermore, TAS classroom practices can
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 35
support both cognitive development and increased executive function which are necessary
precursors of self-regulation skills required to develop academic autonomy and intrinsic
motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2006). The specific TAS practices implemented during this study
were designed to meet marginalized student academic needs and unique challenges, taking into
consideration the effects of external stress factors that can depress their academic achievement.
The practices were tailored by incorporating student-specific structure designed to enhance
student perceived competence and thereby increased student autonomy and achievement.
Rationale for learning. It is especially important that the clarity and direction of
teacher-presented academic rationales provide marginalized students with meaningful academic
utility value for mastery of learning objectives (Reeve, 2006). Rationales should be presented in
a manner that stimulates student interest, engagement, utility value, and academic autonomy
development (Eccles, 2009; Wigfield, Tonks, & Klauda 2009). Additionally, when students hear
rationales which they perceive as relevant, they are able to make connections with socio-cultural
experiences and prior learning which increase volitional self-endorsement and emotional
investment in academic content and objectives (Bennett, 2001). In Wallace’s et al. (2014) study
of 59 urban middle school students, autonomy support practices that included providing
persuasive academic rationales were identified by students as promoting independent thinking
because the teacher clarified the utility value of the assignment in a way that was perceived as
persuasive and meaningful to students’ future learning. Additionally, convincing rationales can
build academic structure which facilitates students making autonomous connections with their
learning. Marginalized students often live in one-parent homes (Burchinal et al., 2011), with a
parent who works extended hours or has more than one job (Schreier & Chen, 2013); in such
circumstances, students must function autonomously in caring for siblings and themselves in the
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 36
absence of adult influence. These responsibilities require students to develop home-management
autonomy at a relatively early developmental stage. Teachers who serve such students can
capitalize on such students’ personal autonomy skills which were developed in the home and
reinforce intrapersonal autonomous behavior in the classroom by providing students with
learning rationales that help them to become academically autonomous as well.
Student cultural interests. For the current study, the TAS practice of engaging students'
personal interests was modified and expanded to include culturally relevant material (Willis,
2007). For marginalized minority ethnic students, culturally relevant academic resources,
materials, and content are especially important. It is particularly important to incorporate
culturally relevant materials and resources because marginalized students often lack experiences
required to build background knowledge and schema necessary to make cognitive connections
with mainstream learning material and concepts. TAS studies to date have not accounted for the
cultural variety present in urban classrooms.
Sociocultural learning theory maintains that students learn in the social context of their
cultural surroundings (Vygotsky, 1978). Therefore, teachers can use the cultural and ethnic
diversity of the urban classroom as opportunities to incorporate into academic activities
culturally relevant material and resources with which students can identify (Nasir & Hand,
2006). To make learning meaningful to students from varying ethnic backgrounds, it is
important for educators to understand how different cultures view learning-related behaviors
such as class participation and problem-solving (Nasir & Hand, 2006). Researchers encourage
examination of meaningful conceptualizations of culture to gain deep and rich understandings of
how culture impacts student motivation to learn (Ogbu, 1992; Linnenbrink-Garcia & Patall,
2014; Milner, 2006). Additionally, researchers have found that, to establish a personal identity
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 37
among multiethnic marginalized minority student subgroups, incorporating cultural
characteristics that reflect student cultural origins can create inviting learning environments
(Artilles, Rueda, Salazar, & Higareda, 2005; Galimore & Goldenberg, 2010; Nasir & Hand,
2006). Using literature from students' ethnic backgrounds helps students feel represented in their
learning contexts. In language arts lessons, for example, carefully curated stories having relevant
ethnic protagonists can facilitate student identification with story characters and topics which can
increase academic engagement in marginalized students. In this way, teachers draw on students'
inner motivational resources by incorporating information that students bring to the classroom
every day: their cultural backgrounds.
Cooper’s (2014) study of academic engagement levels of 1132 students found that
teacher-student relationship quality was critical to fostering student engagement. Additionally,
the study revealed a positive correlation between student ability to identify with curriculum
content on a cultural level and their engagement with the academic content (Cooper, 2014).
Thus, incorporating into learning activities which are culturally relevant materials related to
student personal interest can increase student engagement and motivation to learn. This is
especially important for marginalized students, as societal and school structures often do not
support equal representation of ethnicities in learning materials, which often results in
marginalized students disengaging from mainstream curricula (Nasir & Hand, 2010).
In schools serving primarily marginalized students, incorporating student-specific
cultural backgrounds in literature, math problems, and across all academic topics is neither
commonly practiced nor mandated in prescribed curricula. Students are likely to engage
enthusiastically in academic topics, assignments, and homework which are perceived as relevant
to their cultural experiences and perspectives. Thus, to foster marginalized student academic
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 38
interest, intervention teachers in this study were trained to apply the TAS strategy of
incorporating into math word problems information and realia which align with and support
students’ cultural backgrounds. Creating math problems with which students can relate
culturally can increase their interest through identification (Cokley et al., 2012).
Choice. For marginalized students, creating opportunities for autonomy development
through academic choice is administered optimally using high levels of student-specific structure
to ensure that marginalized students are provided with sufficient scaffolding to make competent
academic choices (Jang et al., 2010). Marginalized students may possess lower perceived
academic competence levels than are possessed by their non-marginalized classmates because of
fewer academic autonomy-development experiences in their homes and neighborhoods
(Burchinal et al, 2011; Schreier & Chen, 2013). These circumstances can result in lower levels
of background knowledge and relevant schema required for such students to make academic-
related choices grounded in self-management skills (Burchinal et al, 2011; Schreier & Chen,
2013). For students who possess low levels of perceived competence, providing unlimited
academic choices can result in cognitive overload (Kirschner, Ayres, Chandler, 2010; Patall et
al., 2014).
Patall, Sylvester, and Han’s (2014) four-condition experimental study of perceived
competence effects of choice on student motivation revealed that not all choice conditions are
equivalently motivational. For example, students having low perceived competence levels can
become more motivated when little-to-no choice is available compared with circumstances in
which a wide variety of choices is offered. In contrast, high perceived competence students
often are highly motivated by unlimited choice options (Patall et al., 2014). Students possessing
low perceived competence may feel anxiety during complex choice opportunities which can
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 39
produce negative stress emotions related to the act of discriminating among many choices.
Additionally, the anxiety associated with making decisions may cause cognitive overload which
affects learning negatively (Flowerday & Schraw, 2003; Kirschner, 2002; Pekrun, 2011).
Students with low perceived competence tend to persist less intentionally and often suffer from
cognitive overload induced by low academic self-efficacy (Skinner et al., 1998).
Preselecting and scaffolding choices to student interest and achievement level are
especially important for marginalized students who may lack adequate schema and self-efficacy
in specific academic content areas to benefit from opportunities to choose among complex
alternatives. Ethnic minority marginalized students often are affected negatively by stress
factors that have compromised their cognitive, social, and emotional development in comparison
with their non-marginalized student counterparts (Cooper & Schleser, 2006; Schreir & Chen,
2013). Lack of academically and culturally enriching experiences outside school can reduce the
complexity of marginalized student schema (Kirschner et al., 2010) which diminishes the ability
to make connections with new academic content. However, controlling the academic cognitive
load and limiting extraneous load through structured choices and scaffolding can facilitate
pathways to development of complex cognitive skills necessary for academic achievement
(Winne & Nesbit, 2010). For example, teachers can present student-specific scaffolded options
to work on a project with each option aligned to learning objectives while allowing students the
perceived freedom of choice to create an autonomous learning experience. In this way, teachers
can support marginalized student autonomy development.
Intriguingly, research also has found that not all choice conditions are supportive of
student autonomy. For example, researchers deconstructed autonomy support into three types of
TAS: organization autonomy support, procedural autonomy support, and cognitive autonomy
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 40
support (Stefanou, Perencevich, DiCintio, & Turner, 2004) and concluded that providing
students with only procedural and/or organizational choice was not sufficient to increase
academic motivation and achievement. However, cognitive autonomy support was effective in
increasing academic engagement and motivation because cognitive autonomy support
empowered students to develop self-reliance in their critical thought; and self-reliance is a
precursor of self-regulation (Dembo & Eaton, 2000; Stefanou et al., 2004). In the Stefanou et al.
(2004) study, the teacher provided scaffolding and modeling to avoid stressful student cognitive
load levels (Kirschner, 2002). This procedure instilled in students the perceived competence
required to think autonomously about the task (Stefanou et al., 2004). Such autonomy support is
especially important for marginalized students because their self-regulation skills often are
compromised due to external environmental stress factors beyond their or the school’s direct
control (Blair & Raver, 2014). Classroom teachers can help such students access and engage
inner motivational resources by applying cognitive autonomy support strategies.
In this way, applying TAS to nurture marginalized student inner motivational resources
through manageable choice options can facilitate development of student perceived competence
and academic autonomy. TAS with structured teacher guidance can scaffold for students the
development of intrinsic motivational self-regulation (Thompson & Beymer, 2015). For this
study, to facilitate student autonomy development in exercising choice grounded in perceived
competence, intervention teachers were trained to offer a variety of predetermined student-
specific scaffolded math assignment choices, i.e., related to student personal interests and
cultural background, rather than in an anxiety-inducing open-ended and unlimited manner.
Incorporating structure into academic choice options can guide marginalized students toward
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 41
academic mastery by helping such students develop authentic academic autonomy within
comforting cognitive boundaries (Jang et al, 2010; Vygotsky, 1978).
Feedback. Teachers can nurture students' inner motivational resources by providing
informational feedback in an autonomy-supportive manner. While verbal feedback can
contribute to perceived competence (Deci & Ryan, 2000), according to Cognitive Evaluation
Theory (CET), positive objective-focused teacher feedback also facilitates autonomy
development. CET posits that autonomy support leads to increased perceived competence which
strengthens motivation and can be facilitated by TAS verbal feedback (Guay, Boggiano, &
Vallerand, 2001). That is, perceived competence is a mediator of teacher autonomy support
effects on student motivation. Feedback must be applied in an autonomy-supportive way to
complement and facilitate student perceived competence (Vaansteenkiste et al., 2012). CET
maintains that, for students to increase volitional, self-endorsed, intrapersonal academic
autonomy, they must feel competent to master assigned tasks and objectives (Ryan & Deci,
2000). Low perceived competence has negative effects on motivation, and researchers have
found that verbal feedback and academic choice interact based on the quality of teacher feedback
provided (Patall et al., 2014). Patall et al. found that students who received high perceived-
competence teacher feedback were more volitional in their choices to pursue subsequent
academic tasks; whereas students exposed to teacher verbal feedback which did not strengthen
their perceived competence, i.e., low perceived competence feedback, decreased student
willingness to continue engaging in tasks, thus thwarting autonomy development (2014). As a
moderator of marginalized student academic motivation, teacher support of student perceived
competence has been shown to facilitate student autonomy development; therefore, a TAS verbal
feedback component was incorporated into intervention teacher training.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 42
Moreover, autonomous student academic behavior requires self-regulation to make
volitional decisions which lead to increased intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2006).
Autonomous functioning occurs in many parts of the brain, including the prefrontal cortex which
regulates executive function, and damage can interrupt autonomy development (Murayama,
Matsumoto, Izuma, & Matsumoto, 2010; Ryan & Deci, 2006). Marginalized students who may
have damaged or delayed cognitive development caused by exposure to toxic stress in their
neighborhoods and home environments are likely to require assistance in the classroom to
become academically autonomous and could benefit from the academic structure provided by
autonomy-supportive verbal feedback (Ryan & Deci, 2006). It is likely that marginalized
students require credible, timely, and positive informational feedback to develop their perceived
competence, sense of self-endorsed academic autonomy, and academic motivation. For
example, teachers who offer clear non-coercive and non-controlling verbal feedback help
students maintain task-engagement (Lucariello et al, 2016; Wallace et al., 2014) which is
critically important for marginalized students who often struggle with self-regulation (Blair &
Raver, 2014). This is especially important for developing intrinsic academic motivation in
marginalized students who often are reared with authoritarian parenting styles, characterized as
coercive and confrontive, which may preclude the development of children’s autonomy
(Baumrind, 2012; Burchinal et al., 2011). Developing and maintaining student engagement by
delivering nurturing, objective-focused, and encouraging academic feedback can be a valuable
tool for increasing student motivation. While TAS feedback is acknowledged to increase
academic perceived competence, when used in an autonomy-supportive manner, verbal feedback
also becomes a critical component for developing marginalized student academic autonomy.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 43
Teachers can provide much-needed academic critique necessary to guide student learning
by offering scaffolding and being thoughtful about the quality and character of feedback offered
to students. For example, according to Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory, learning takes place
during intentional speech between student and teacher (1978). That is, Vygotsky distinguishes
speech versus language and defines speech as an interpsychological function which includes
tones and expressions that accompany the verbal component during instructional interactions
(Werstch, 2008), as opposed to simple linguistic constructions. Consequently, motivating
students requires the social communication of speech to deliver credible informational feedback
in order to maintain student task-direction and academic engagement. Vygotsky's Zone of
Proximal Development conception posits that adults lead children to increase levels of mastery
by communicating instruction through structured speech (Vygotsky, 1978). Thus,
interpsychological speech transitions to intrapsychological functioning as a result of adult-child
verbal interaction (Vygotsky, 1978; Wertsch, 2008). In this way, teachers can facilitate students
becoming intrinsically motivated, provided that their intentional speech communication is
autonomy supportive. The effects of the transition from interpsychological to intrapsychological
functioning are correlated with the student socio-economic status level (Wertsch, 2008). That is,
marginalized students often experience low levels of quality interpsychological speech
interactions with adults in the home, and thus, are likely to arrive at school possessing lower
levels of intrapsychological skills compared with non-marginalized students. Therefore,
marginalized students are likely to require scaffolding and autonomy-supportive
interpsychological speech feedback in order to achieve their academic potential (Burchinal et al.,
2011; Schreier & Chen, 2010). In this way, when teachers provide TAS verbal feedback, they
facilitate marginalized student autonomy development and increased intrinsic motivation.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 44
Summary
Marginalized students often contend with toxic stress factors outside school which are
beyond their control, and these factors not only pose threats to childhood academic achievement,
but also to lifelong cognitive function which is critical to adult citizenship responsibilities
(Shonkoff, et al., 2012). Recent studies have shown that, because children’s’ brains are in
critical developmental stages, teachers can play pivotal roles in reducing negative cognitive
effects on marginalized student of exposure to risk factors external to the school context (Blair &
Raver, 2014; Lee & Reeve, 2017; Sosic-Vasic et al., 2013). Because motivation takes place in
the brain component which controls emotion, teachers can engage with and strengthen positive
academic emotions by nurturing students’ inner motivational resources during instruction
(Immordino-Yang & Sylvan, 2010). To that end, teachers can apply autonomy support to
nurture students’ inner motivational resources and guide them along pathways required to
becoming academically autonomous and able to achieve their potential (Noble, Houston, Brito,
Bartsch, & Kan, 2015; Patall et al., 2018; Shonkoff et al., 2012).
Self-determination theory provides a theoretical framework in which to implement
teaching practices that can increase student motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2000) and, thus,
academic achievement. Structured teacher autonomy support practices can provide marginalized
students with scaffolded instruction that shapes their cognitive development, and thus, facilitates
increased autonomy, motivation, and achievement. The current study extended prior research as
the first intervention study to examine TAS with structure effects on marginalized urban public-
school elementary student: academic autonomy, motivation, and achievement.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 45
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Schools continue to face a persistent achievement gap between ethnic minority urban
marginalized students and their white counterparts. The purpose of this quasi-experimental
intervention study (Creswell, 2014) was to provide insights into how to narrow the academic
achievement gap between urban marginalized students and their non-marginalized counterparts
by implementing TAS with structure instructional techniques based on self-determination theory
(Ryan & Deci, 2000). While numerous studies have examined motivation and academic
achievement variables in general education non-marginalized students, this study measured the
effects of TAS with structure on motivation, autonomy, and achievement in urban marginalized
students. Of particular interest is how TAS practices with structure can lead to increased
marginalized student academic autonomy, intrinsic motivation to learn, and by means of these
academic moderators, to math achievement. Intervention and control conditions included six
second-grade through fourth-grade urban classrooms in an elementary school which serves a
high proportion of low-SES marginalized families. Primary stakeholders include second-grade
through fourth-grade teachers and students, i.e., a class of 30 students for each teacher, and the
school principal. A Teacher Autonomy Support (TAS) with structure intervention was
implemented in the three intervention classrooms. The intervention implemented modified TAS
strategies grounded in self-determination theory and derived from successful TAS strategies in
studies with non-marginalized students.
Furthermore, the structure component was designed to increase marginalized student
perceived academic competence which is necessary to achieve their academic potential.
Research studies have demonstrated increases in academic autonomy, motivation, and
achievement by providing general education non-marginalized students with TAS such as:
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 46
academic assignment-related choices (Patall et al., 2018), instructional feedback (Sierens.
Vansteenkiste, Goossend, Soenens, & Dochy, 2009), academic rationales (Reeve, 2006), and
engaging student personal interests (Patall, 2013). As an extension of the demonstrated success
of TAS on academic achievement among non-marginalized students, it was hypothesized that
TAS with the addition of structure would increase marginalized student (a) autonomy, (b)
motivation, and (c) achievement.
The research question was: What differences in academic autonomy, intrinsic motivation,
and math achievement will be observed in marginalized students who are exposed to a 12-week
TAS with structure intervention compared with marginalized students who are exposed to 12-
weeks of traditional teaching practices? To answer the research question, the study included a
three-classroom intervention group and a three-classroom measurement-only control group. For
the purposes of this study, dependent variables were intrinsic motivation, academic autonomy,
and math achievement. The independent variable was a classroom intervention comprised of
four TAS with structure strategies (Creswell, 2014). Data from pre-post student survey
responses to instruments of established validity measuring autonomy and motivation and district-
generated objective academic math performance data were analyzed to determine the degree to
which exposure to the TAS intervention affected the dependent variables: marginalized student
academic autonomy, intrinsic motivation, and math achievement.
Sample and Population
The study sample was comprised of second-grade through fourth-grade students in an
urban public elementary school serving 527 pre-K through fifth-grade families. School
demographic measures include: 93 percent low-SES, 54 percent English language learners, 92
percent Hispanic immigrants, 5 percent African American, and 1.5 percent white (CALP ADS,
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 47
2018). The total study sample includes 124 students and six teachers serving grades two through
four. From pre-Kindergarten through fifth grade, the study school serves two classes of
approximately 30 students each at every grade level. The school was chosen for the high
proportion of low SES marginalized families whom it serves. Approximately 93 percent of the
student body is eligible for a free and reduced-fee lunch program. The school is subsidized
through Title I funding which allows the school to provide poor students with free uniforms,
socks, and one new pair of shoes each year. Additionally, the school was chosen because it is
accessible: the principal supports academic research studies.
The teacher sampling design is single-stage, as all potential teacher participant names are
available (Creswell, 2014). Teacher participants were assigned to the intervention condition or
to a measurement-only control condition by means of a random blocked design by grade level.
Sampling and assignment procedures were random selection and assignment to the TAS
experimental condition of one of the two teachers/classrooms at each grade level and assignment
of the remaining classroom at each grade to the control condition. Human subjects active
consent forms were distributed to all parents in both English and Spanish (Appendix B). Also,
all participating teachers signed active consent human subject forms (Appendices C&D).
The urban school selected for the study has struggled for decades to close a chronic
achievement gap between marginalized and non-marginalized students; thus, selection of the
school for this intervention study reflected purposeful sampling for examination of the potential
of TAS with structure to boost marginalized student academic achievement. Extensive efforts by
district personnel, school administrators, and faculty to implement corrective curricula, programs
and academic standards have not been successful; in fact, the gap is widening (CDE, 2018). The
school community continues to struggle to serve the academic needs of their marginalized
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 48
students, especially the academic needs of English Language Learners (ELL) (CDE, 2018).
Furthermore, recent analysis has resulted in assigning the school a red mark deficit, i.e., the
lowest evaluation level, for the instructional quality provided to English Language Learners
(CDE, 2018). The CDE assessment is a clear indication that ELL programs in place do not serve
the academic needs of the large, and increasing, proportion of the marginalized student
population at this school site. Therefore, school personnel, district personnel, and researchers
could benefit from study results of program effects on marginalized student dependent variables
which are required precursors of their academic achievement.
Intervention
The study intervention was comprised of teacher training and modification of classroom
instructional methods: (a) two teacher training interactive seminars, one prior to implementation
and one midway through the implementation period, (b) video demonstrations of four student
autonomy support practices designed for marginalized students, i.e., math lesson rationales,
student assignment choice, cultural relevance, and positive focused feedback, and (c) twelve
weeks of trained teacher instruction implementing the four strategies in intervention classrooms.
Intervention Procedures
IRB approval was obtained by both University of Southern California and the school
district in which the study school resides (Appendix E). During the first week of the 2018-19
school year, the researcher met in person with all second-grade through fourth-grade teachers to
solicit their participation in the study. Teachers' names by grade level were randomly assigned
either to the intervention or to the control classroom condition, and teachers were notified of the
condition to which their classrooms had been assigned.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 49
Intervention teacher training began on a Monday near the beginning of the academic year
with a two-hour professional development session. On the following day, a substitute teacher
administered to intervention and control students three instruments: the Academic Self-
Regulation Questionnaire (SQR-A), the Activity Feeling States (AFS) scale, and the Learning
Climate Questionnaire (LCQ) to measure baseline student intrinsic motivation, academic
autonomy, and student perceptions of classroom climate, respectively (Appendices F-H). A
substitute teacher was hired as data collector to control for possible student response bias that
might have occurred as a result of their classroom teachers or the researcher reading the survey
questions. The substitute teacher was trained in survey administration procedures and read all
the questions to the students as a whole class while students entered responses into
Chromebooks. Following the professional development seminar, intervention and control
classroom baseline student-specific iReady math performance diagnostic data (Appendix I) were
obtained by the site resource teacher. Intervention teachers conducted the TAS intervention
practices in their classrooms for twelve weeks and were asked to contribute weekly emails to the
researcher for updates and feedback. One email thread was used to provide support to teachers
during the intervention implementation period. Following the twelve-week intervention, both
intervention and control classroom iReady student-specific math assessments were obtained by
the site resource teacher. The posttest measures were compared with student baseline scores to
assess changes in math achievement during the intervention period. Additionally, the substitute
teacher who administered pre-intervention surveys also administered the post-SQR-A
questionnaire, the post-AFS scale, and the LCQ questionnaire to compare pre-post-intervention
levels of student intrinsic motivation, academic autonomy, and perceptions of classroom climate,
respectively.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 50
Control group teachers did not receive TAS training. Instead, control classroom students
received traditional teaching methods during the 12-week intervention period. Intervention and
control group students completed pre- and post-intervention self-report autonomy, motivation,
and learning climate surveys at the same intervals. Also, iReady math performance data were
collected for control group students to compare academic achievement differences between
intervention and control group students over the twelve-week study period.
Teacher Autonomy Support Training
For the purposes of the study, intervention teachers were asked to implement the
following TAS instructional practices: (a) providing students with assignment-related choices,
(b) incorporating students’ cultural interests into lesson activities, (c) providing rationales for
achieving lesson objectives which were perceived as meaningful to students, and (d) delivering
to students timely, nurturing, lesson-objective focused, and non-coercive verbal feedback.
A one-hour professional development seminar for intervention teachers was held during a
teacher grade-level meeting prior to the implementation of TAS intervention activities. At the
intervention teachers’ request, training was limited to one hour due to multiple obligations they
were required to meet during the two-hour planning period. The researcher-trainer began the
meeting with a Power Point presentation (Appendix J) summarizing TAS research findings
followed by video demonstrations of each of the four TAS strategies designed for marginalized
students (Appendix K). The presentation explained the effects of toxic stress on student learning
with a video highlighting several examples of toxic stress endured by students. The video was
followed by a brief discussion of teachers’ reactions and anecdotal examples from their
classrooms. Next, a brief overview of the study’s theoretical framework was presented with an
explanation of how each strategy can help marginalized urban students improve their academic
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 51
performance. Video demonstrations of each strategy by a respected peer teacher were followed
with slides of examples of scripts for each strategy which intervention teachers could use in
classrooms. Following each video, teachers practiced and discussed each of the four TAS
strategies in pairs. Each training video was followed by a slide specific to the strategy with an
example script. Teachers were asked to think of a recent lesson and develop their own script for
each of the strategies. Following each video and brief practice, teachers shared ideas and
suggestions for their personal examples. Time did not allow for video recording and playback of
intervention teacher practice of each strategy as intended in the intervention curriculum.
Additionally, time constraints did not allow for teachers to generate ideas for each strategy for
various academic content areas besides math.
Video 1: Rationale for learning. Model teacher presents a lesson rationale designed to
persuade students of the benefits of mastering the lesson's objective. For example, the teacher
might say, Today’s story is about a little girl from Mexico. She came to the United States with
her mother because the family lost everything in Mexico. As we read this story, we will identify
who the main characters are in the story. Main characters are the people who the story is about.
Can anyone name some main characters from their favorite stories?
Video 2: Choice. Teacher describes assignment-related choices which she knows will
appeal to students based on the results of a student preferences survey she had conducted with
the whole class. The choice is designed for students to follow their preferences while
maintaining high academic standards. For example, teacher might say, You may choose among
three options: make a poster and explain to the class how it meets the three lesson objectives,
write a summary of how you would teach the objectives and read it to the class, or you may
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 52
prepare a commercial which depicts the three objectives and act out the commercial for the
class. Be sure to include all three lesson objectives in your project.
Video 3: Student cultural interest. Video demonstrated using culturally relevant
material of interest to students. For example, in a class of majority of Latino students, the
teacher may use a novel for a language arts unit about a young Hispanic student facing
challenges while growing up in Mexico. In math, word problems can be formulated to
incorporate Latino heritage background knowledge and social circumstances. For example, the
teacher may introduce three-digit multiplication of dollars and cents by saying, Juan and Maria
(i.e., names of two student classmates) are buying tacos for themselves and two friends. They
combine their money and have a total of $10.50. If each taco costs $2.50, how would they figure
out whether or not they have enough money to purchase four tacos?
Video 4: Feedback. Video demonstrated teacher with small student collaborative group,
providing credible TAS-style feedback to students using language which is neither coercive nor
controlling yet is focused on helping students achieve the lesson objective. For example, the
teacher might say, I like your ideas for the background of the story. Think about each of your
good ideas. Then, try to describe each idea in short clear sentences. Don’t forget to use periods
to show where your ideas end.
Instrumentation
To measure pre-post differences between intervention and control group student
academic autonomy, intrinsic motivation, perceived learning climate, and math achievement,
students in both conditions were surveyed prior to and immediately following the 12-week
intervention period. An additional pre-post iReady student-specific math performance measure
was administered to answer the research question related to the dependent variable, math
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 53
academic achievement, resulting from marginalized student exposure to the intervention.
(Appendix I). The instruments used to assess student autonomy and motivation were adapted to
accommodate the ages and relatively lower reading ability of student participants compared with
their non-marginalized counterparts (Appendices F-H). Also, emoticons replaced numerical
response options because some student participants are in second grade and may not be familiar
with survey style responses. For example, the choice of a happy face emoticon indicates
strongly agree, and a sad face indicates strongly disagree. The questions were read to the whole
class as students entered their responses online using Chromebooks. The instruments were
selected because the dependent variable outcome measures are student academic autonomy,
motivation, and achievement, as stated in the research question and hypothesis. Additionally, the
instruments have been validated in previous published studies.
Student Intrinsic Motivation
The self-regulation questionnaire for academic motivation (SRQ-A) has been developed
and validated by Ryan and Connell (1989) and was used to measure student motivation levels in
both intervention and control groups. (Appendix F). The SRQ-A is designed to assess locus of
prompts which elicit student engagement in academic tasks. Student responses are categorized
as falling into one of the following categories on the external-internal motivation continuum: (a)
external, (b) introjected, (c) identified, and (d) intrinsic. The subscales originate from the theory
that students who are externally regulated are less motivated to engage volitionally, i.e.,
intrinsically, in academic tasks (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Results of Ryan and Connell’s (1989)
study demonstrate congruence among subscale categories with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients
among the four subscales are adequate for the purposes of this study. Deci, Hodges, Pierson, and
Tomassone (1992) developed a learning disability version of the SRQ-A questionnaire, which
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 54
will be used for this study. This version was selected because the majority of participating
marginalized students possess reading skills below grade level. In this way, students benefited
from a simpler format to increase comprehension of item content and to reduce cognitive load
(Kirschner, 2002). The SRQ-A learning disability questionnaire has been found to be both valid
and reliable in a study by Deci, Hodges, Pierson, and Tomassone (1992) = .66-.82. Multiple
research studies report the strong validity and reliability of this instrument for measuring both
student motivation and student autonomy (Grolnick, Ryan, & Deci, 1991; Grolnick & Ryan,
1989; Grolnick & Ryan, 1987; Miserando, 1996; Patrick, Skinner, & Connell, 1993).
For the purposes of this study, according to the extrinsic to intrinsic behavior scale, items
chosen from the SRQ-A LD measured only identified motivation and intrinsic motivation; that
is, only items 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, and 15 from the SRQ-A LD questionnaire version were
administered (Appendix F). Items measuring only the identified and intrinsic motivation scales
were included to measure students' pre-post intervention progress on the continuum towards
achieving intrinsic academic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Mean scores were calculated
with higher scores representing student intrapersonal progression from externally motivated
behavior towards intrinsic self-endorsed motivation. Examples of questions are: I do my
classwork because I want to learn new things; I enjoy doing my classwork; I try to do well in
school because that is what I am supposed to do; I try to do well in school because I like doing a
good job on my school work.
Student Autonomy
The Activity Feeling States (AFS) scale (Reeve & Sickenius, 1994) was used to measure
student autonomy in both intervention and control groups. The AFS scale measures the three
basic needs which must be met for individuals to become self-determined (Reeves & Sickenius,
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 55
1994). Specific responses for measuring autonomy are rated on a scale from one to three, with
one denoting strong disagreement and three indicating strong agreement. The autonomy
subscale of the AFS measures the degree to which students feel autonomous during learning
activities. For the purposes of this study, only the questions that reflect measurement if
autonomy were used (Appendix G). Questions from the original scale used for this study were:
Being in class makes me feel…; I’m doing what I want to be doing; I feel free to decide for
myself what to do.
The AFS Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for autonomy is .93 (Reeve & Jang, 2006). Reeve
and Jang have demonstrated that the AFS scale is internally consistent, largely uncorrelated
across subscales, and possesses high factorial validity. Numerous studies have shown the AFS
scale to be an acceptable psychometric tool with good internal consistency, good construct
validity, and good predictive validity (Jang, Kim, & Reeve, 2012; Reeve & Tseng, 2011; Jang,
Reeve, Ryan, & Kim; 2009; Reeve & Jang, 2006; Reeve, Nix, & Hamm, 2003). Thus, the AFS
provided an adequate student self-report measure of perceived autonomy for the purposes of the
current study (Reeve & Sicknieus, 1994). Mean values were calculated with scores above the
mean designating higher autonomy than scores below the mean.
Student Perceived Learning Climate
To assess intervention implementation fidelity, students completed pretest and posttest
surveys to measure their perceived learning climate regarding teacher autonomy-supportive
behaviors. The degree to which teachers implemented the intervention with fidelity was
evidenced by student responses on the Learning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ). The Learning
Climate Questionnaire (Appendix H) was used to measure student-perceived teacher autonomy
support practices which were demonstrated in their classrooms during the implementation period
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 56
(Deci, n.d.). The LCQ has a Cronbach’s Alpha greater than .90 and has been administered in
studies measuring classroom climate and motivation (Black & Deci, 2000; Williams, Saizow,
Ross, & Deci, 1997; Williams & Deci, 1996; Williams, Wiener, Reeve, & Deci, 1994). For the
purposes of this study, the LCQ questions have been simplified to align with reading levels of
elementary student participants.
Additionally, the site principal was trained separately in the strategies. She was asked to
look for evidence of TAS practices in intervention classrooms during her weekly classroom
observations. The principal was given examples of how the four TAS strategies would be
practiced for the purposes of identifying strategy implementation during classroom observations.
Student Math Achievement
Pre-post intervention and control student math achievement was assessed by the online
district-administered iReady program (Curriculum Associates, n.d.). The district in which the
participating school resides mandates 45 minutes weekly of iReady math practice time for every
student, school-wide. Thus, classroom teachers at all grade levels include iReady practice in
their math lesson plans. At the beginning of the academic year, an online math diagnostic test
was administered to all students. The iReady program applies the student-specific diagnostic test
results to assign math practice levels for each student at every grade level (Appendix I). Post-
intervention timelines aligned with district mandated administration of a second diagnostic
assessment which provided post iReady math achievement results for this study.
The iReady program is an adaptive math platform based on the George Rasch Item
Response model published in 1960 (Curriculum Associates, n.d.). The Rasch model calculates
the probability that a student of a given ability level can solve a mathematics problem at a
specific difficulty level. The program scaffolds items to students’ correctly solved math
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 57
problems, thus, adapting math challenges to student ability level. Expert advisors who attest to
the iReady program’s validity as a math performance assessment tool include University of
Southern California Professor Richard Brown, Ph.D. (Curriculum Associates, n.d.).
Data Collection
Data assessing math achievement, autonomy, motivation, and learning climate were
collected from students in intervention and control group classrooms immediately prior to the
first week of TAS program implementation and again during the week immediately following
the 12-week implementation period. Both intervention and control students completed the
posttest SQR-A, the AFS, and the LCQ surveys measuring student autonomy, motivation, and
classroom climate.
Pre- and postintervention math performance data function as the student academic
achievement measure for the study. Both intervention and control classroom iReady student-
specific reports were obtained from the site resource teacher. During the same week, the SQR-A
survey, the AFS, and the LCQ were administered by a substitute teacher data collector hired to
read items and response options aloud in both control and intervention classrooms.
Approximately forty minutes was required for the data collector to administer the surveys.
Following the twelve-week intervention, the data collector also administered posttest surveys to
both intervention and control students. The site resource teacher produced a follow-up iReady
student-specific math performance report for each participating classroom. iReady math
performance data were collected for control group students to compare academic achievement
differences between intervention and control groups over the twelve-week intervention period.
Pre- and postintervention scores were recorded for triangulated comparison of student autonomy,
motivation, and classroom climate with the iReady math achievement reports.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 58
Data Analysis
Statistical procedures were conducted on data collected from student pre- and post-
intervention survey questionnaires and student-specific iReady online math performance reports.
Statistical procedures included t-tests and correlation analyses. Comparison of intervention and
control group student pre- and post-intervention autonomy, motivation, and learning climate self-
report responses and pre- and post-intervention iReady math performance scores were examined
to assess differences in student dependent variables resulting from exposure to the intervention.
Intervention Timeline: Twelve-week classroom TAS implementation
The twelve-week intervention timeline (Table 1) began during the second week of
September at the beginning of the academic year. Both intervention and control students
completed: (a) the iReady math Diagnostic Test, (b) the Academic Self-Regulation
Questionnaire adapted to measure only student Identified and Intrinsic motivation, (c) the
Activity Feeling States questionnaire adapted for measurement of student autonomy only, and
(d) the Learning Climate Questionnaire. Data from these pre-intervention assessments were
entered into a database. During the second week of September, the intervention began with a
professional development seminar for intervention teachers. Following the professional
development seminar, the researcher shared with intervention teachers a folder in Google drive
having all instructional videos for teachers to revisit as needed. Additionally, teachers were
asked to check their email once a week for messages from the researcher and to return to the
researcher their reactions, questions, feedback, and challenges experienced during their
implementation of each TAS instructional strategy. After one month, the researcher met with
intervention teachers to conduct a follow-up training seminar to address concerns, clarifications,
and feedback about the implementation process. During the last implementation week, both
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 59
intervention and control teachers administered a student iReady math assessment, and a
substitute teacher data collector was hired to administer the post-SRQ-A, AFS, and LCQ scales,
the data from which were entered into the database.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 60
Table 1
TAS Intervention Timeline
Week(s) TAS Intervention Procedures by Week
1 and 2
• Researcher met individually with all 2
nd,
3
rd,
and 4
th
grade teachers to solicit their
participation in the study
• Random assignment of participant teachers/classrooms to intervention or control
condition
• Informed teachers of their classrooms research conditions
• Informed intervention teachers of TAS training seminar date-time-venue
• Intervention teacher training seminar conducted
• Administered student pretests
• Entered pretest data into data base
3 • Intervention teachers contacted for follow up and clarification
4-12
• Intervention teachers implemented TAS instructional strategies across all curricula
and during all learning activities
• Follow up meeting was held for Intervention teachers
12
• Administered student posttests
• Entered posttest data into data base

Confidentiality
The names of study participant: school, teachers, and students remained confidential.
Student survey instruments were stored in a locked cabinet accessible by the researcher only.
Student and teacher data entered into statistical programs and all data analysis procedures were
secured in password-protected files accessible only by the researcher.
Trustworthiness and Credibility
Instruments administered during the study possess strong reliability coefficients whose
reliability has been established (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). All metrics selected for the study
have reliability coefficients adequate for study purposes. To reduce internal validity threats to the
study, within-school random assignment of teachers and classrooms to experimental and control
conditions was conducted (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Due to the use of adapted existing data
collection instruments, a reliability analysis test was conducted to test scales prior to data analysis.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 61
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
Derived from the study hypothesis, the research question is “What differences in
academic autonomy, motivation, and achievement are observed in marginalized students exposed
to an experimental 12-week TAS with structure classroom intervention compared with a control
condition in which marginalized students are exposed to 12 weeks of traditional classroom
teaching practices?”
Statistical analyses which answer the research question are (a) preliminary analyses of
student demographics and dependent variables and (b) pre/post t-test and correlation analyses to
determine the degree to which the classroom intervention strengthened marginalized student
academic autonomy, intrinsic motivation, and math achievement.
Preliminary Analysis
Participants were all students enrolled in second through fourth grade classrooms in the
study school (n =124) and their teachers (n = 6). Classrooms by grade level were assigned to
condition using a blocked random design. Thus, the six teacher/classroom units were assigned
randomly to an intervention or control condition such that one intervention classroom and one
control classroom participated at each of the second through fourth grade levels. The three
intervention and three control classrooms were comprised of a total of 66 students and 58
students, respectively. Preliminary analysis includes examination of student demographic and
dependent variables by condition (i.e., intervention and control) and assessment period (i.e., pre-
intervention and postintervention).
Student Demographic Data
Table 2 presents analysis of student demographic data by ethnicity, free lunch
qualification, and English Language Learner (ELL) level. Student ethnic categories are
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 62
Hispanic, African American, White/Caucasian, Asian American, and Other. A majority of
student participants are categorized as low SES by virtue of having qualified for free or reduced-
price lunch. Student ELL proficiency levels are Level 1, in which students have minimally
developed oral and written English language skills; Level 2, in which students have somewhat
developed English language skills; Level 3, in which students have moderately developed
English language skills; and Level 4, in which students have developed proficient oral and
written English language skills.
Table 2.
Student Demographic Data by Ethnicity, Free Lunch Qualification, and ELL Level
Demographic Variable N % Min Max Mean SD
Ethnic Group
Hispanic 97 78.2 1 5 1.49 .50
African American 18 14.5 1 5 1.16 .38
Asian American 4 3.2 1 5 1.50 .70
White 2 1.6 1 5 2.00 .00
Other 3 2.4 1 5 1.66 .57
Free Lunch
Qualification
Paid 19 15.3 1 3 1.42 .50
Reduced 19 15.3 1 3 1.42 .50
Free 86 69.4 1 3 1.48 .50
Written/Oral
English
Development
L1 Minimal 54 43.5 1 4 1.31 .46
L2 Somewhat 11 8.9 1 4 1.45 .52
L3 Moderate 48 38.7 1 4 1.68 .46
L4 Proficient 11 8.9 1 4 1.27 .46

Dependent Variable Descriptive Statistics
Pretest and posttest preliminary analyses include descriptive measures of student
academic autonomy, intrinsic motivation, and math achievement. Table 3 presents descriptive
data for dependent variables by experimental condition.
Student autonomy. The Activity Feeling States (AFS) scale was used to measure student
autonomy. Reeve and Jang (2006) have reported good internal consistency for the AFS with a
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 63
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .90. In the current study, the preintervention Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient was .643 and .694 postintervention.
Student intrinsic motivation. The self-regulation questionnaire (SRQ-A) was used to
measure student intrinsic motivation. Ryan and Connell (1989) have reported good internal
consistency for the SRQ-A, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .93. In the current study, the
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .727 preintervention and .741 postintervention
Student perceived learning climate. The Learning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ) was
used to measure student perceptions of teacher autonomy support. Williams and Deci (1996)
have reported good internal consistency for the LCQ with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .90.
In the current study, the preintervention Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .643 and .694
postintervention.
Student math achievement. The iReady online diagnostic math assessment system is
implemented by the school district in which the study school resides. iReady math tests are
administered at 12- to 15-week intervals throughout the academic year. The first and second
administrations during the current academic year have aligned with the study intervention
timeline. iReady math assessments are scaffolded to student learning levels based on student
diagnostic performance. Each week, in addition to classroom instruction, students engage in 45
minutes of online individualized math practice at student-specific achievement levels. The
iReady tests and practice sessions are administered district-wide online and are aligned with
classroom math instructional standards and objectives but are not generated by the teacher,
school, or researcher.
Table 3 reports mean minimum and maximum iReady math achievement values by
experimental condition and assessment period. Minimum and maximum scores present overall
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 64
lowest and highest student scores, respectively. In Table 3, iReady 1 scores represent student
baseline math performance immediately prior to the beginning of the intervention, and iReady 2
scores report student math performance at the end of the 12-week intervention. For the purposes
of this study, changes in pre/post group means demonstrate math achievement differences
between intervention and control group students.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 65
Table 3
Dependent Variable Descriptive Data by Experimental Condition
Dependent
Variable
Survey
Items
N Min/Max
Mean SD
Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest
Intervention/
Control
Intervention/
Control
Intervention/
Control
Intervention/
Control
Intervention/
Control
Intervention/
Control
Academic
Autonomy
When I’m in this class:
• I feel free 65/57 1/3 1.91/1.93 1.78/1.88 .80/.70 .74/.70
• I’m doing what I want
to be doing
66/58 1/3 1.77/1.93 1.77/1.74 .78/.83 .82/.68
• I can choose what I
want to do
66/58 1/3 1.48/1.34 1.48/1.59 .73/.58 .68/.65
Total
1.71/1.73 1.68/1.73 .63/55 .55/.49
Intrinsic
Motivation
• My classwork is fun 66/58 1/3 2.50/2.36 2.50/2.36 .53/.61 .53/.61
• I enjoy my classwork 66/57 1/3 2.50/2.21 2.50/2.21 .59/.65 .59/.65
• It’s fun to try hard
questions
66/58 1/3 2.09/2.02 2.09/2.02 .70/.73 .70/.73
• I want to learn new
things
65/57 1/3 2.74/2.68 2.74/2.68 .48/.54 .48/.54
• I try to answer hard
questions
66/58 1/3 2.61/2.41 2.61/2.41 .55/.67 .55/.67
• I like trying to do well
in school
65/58 1/3 2.75/2.81 2.75/2.81 .53/.44 .53/.44

Total
2.58/2.52 2.53/2.41 .40/.34 .40/.40

My teacher:
Learning
Climate
• Gives me choices 65/57 1/3 2.02/1.91 2.18/1.96 .70/.58 .65/60
• Understands me 65/57 1/3 2.51/2.44 2.31/2.56 .62/.57 .71/.53
• Thinks I can do well 64/56 1/3 2.67/2.70 2.70/2.77 .54/.53 .55/.42
• Likes my questions 64/55 1/3 2.52/2.70 2.63/2.50 .62/.62 .58/.50
• Likes my ideas 65/57 1/3 2.17/2.14 2.20/2.17 .67/.52 .62/.53
• Likes what I think 64/57 1/3 2.34/2.26 2.38/2.31 .72/.67 .68/.68

Total
2.37/2.30 2.40/2.38 .40/.32 .42/.33
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 66

Data Analysis
To answer the research question, t-tests measured the degree to which statistically
significant changes occurred in student dependent variables as a result of exposure to the
intervention (Table 4). Independent-samples tests were conducted to identify pre- and
postintervention changes in mean values of the dependent variables. Data were analyzed by
neither ethnicity nor socioeconomic status as the student body is homogeneous with 85% of
participants of low income and of either Hispanic or African American heritage (Table 2). A
bivariate correlational analysis was conducted to compare correlations of math scores with
student intrinsic motivation, academic autonomy and learning climate variables (Table 4).
T-test
Independent-samples t-tests were conducted to compare preintervention and
postintervention dependent variable scores for intervention and control students. Dependent
variables were student academic motivation, student perceptions of teacher autonomy support,
student learning climate perceptions, and math achievement (Table 4).
Student intrinsic motivation. No statistically significant differences were observed in
academic motivation scores between intervention students and control students (Table 4). The
magnitude of differences was small in mean values at pretest and posttest: pretest mean
difference = .05, 95% CI: –.074 to .191; eta squared = .006; posttest mean difference = .11, 95%
CI: –.022 to .252; eta squared = .02.
Students autonomy. No statistically significant differences were observed in academic
autonomy scores between intervention students and control students (Table 4). Mean differences
Math Achievement 66/58
T1: 321/385
T2: 366/395
423.02/
430.12
438.32/
445.37
37.04/
25.16
33.50/
24.15
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 67
were small: pretest mean difference = -.02, 95% CI: –.226 to .195; eta squared = .0001; posttest
mean difference = -.05, 95% CI: –.024 to .130; eta squared = .002.
Student perceived learning climate. No statistically significant differences were
observed in perceived learning climate scores between intervention students and control students
(Table 4). Differences in means at pretest and posttest were small: pretest mean difference =
.072, 95% CI: –.058 to .203; eta squared = .009; posttest mean difference = -.015, 95% CI: –.12
to .151; eta squared = .0004.
Student math achievement. No statistically significant differences were observed in
math achievement scores between intervention students and control students (Table 4). Mean
differences were small at pretest and posttest: pretest mean difference = -7.10, 95% CI: –18.25 to
.4.04; eta squared = .01; posttest mean difference = -7.04, 95% CI: –17.33 to 3.249) was very
small (eta squared = .01.)
Table 4
Independent-Samples Tests by Experimental Condition
* p < 0.05

Mean
Equal Variances
Assumed
Levene's Test: Equality of
Variances
t-test:
Equality of Means
F
Pretest/
Posttest
Sig.
Pretest/
Posttest
t
Pretest/
Posttest
df
Pretest/
Posttest
Sig. (2-tailed)
Pretest/
Posttest
Intrinsic
Motivation
.217/
.356
.642/
.552
.874/
1.66
122/
122
.384/
.100
Academic
Autonomy
1.49/
.324
.226/
.571
-.146/
-.574
122/
122
.884/
.567
Learning
Climate
1.56/
1.99
.214/
.161
1.10/
.230
120/
122
.273/
.818
Math Achievement N/A N/A
-1.26/
-1.36
115.02/
117.71
.209
/.178
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 68
Correlations
Relationships at posttest among student dependent variables and student math
achievement were examined using the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (Table 5).
Preliminary analyses were performed to ensure no violations of normality, linearity, and/or
homoscedasticity assumptions.
No statistically significant positive correlations were observed between math
achievement and student academic motivation, autonomy or perceived learning climate.
However, strong correlations were observed at preintervention between student academic
motivation and both student academic autonomy and perceived learning climate.
Postintervention analysis revealed an even stronger significant correlation between student
academic motivation and both perceived learning climate and student autonomy (Table 5).
In the intervention condition, no statistically significant positive correlations were
observed posttest between math achievement and student academic motivation or student
perceived earning climate (Appendix L). A statistically significant positive correlation, however,
was observed between academic motivation and perceived learning climate among intervention
students (Table 5). Among control group students, no statistically significant correlations were
observed at posttest between math achievement and student academic motivation or perceived
learning climate (Appendix L). Nevertheless, the statistically significant positive correlation
observed in intervention students between academic motivation and perceived learning climate,
also was observed among control group students (Table 5).

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 69
Table 5
Pearson Correlations among Dependent Variables
Measurement
Period
Dependent
Variables
Correlations
Math Motivation Autonomy Learning Climate
Pre-
Intervention
Math
1 .090 .012 .015
Motivation
.090 1 .218* .370**
Autonomy
.012 .218* 1 .311**
Learning Climate
.015 .370
**
.311** 1
Post
Intervention
Math
1 .038 -.038 .148
Motivation
.038 1 .173 .581**
Autonomy
-.038 .400
**
1 .167
Learning Climate
.148 .524
**
.167 1
*p<.05
**p <0.01
Qualitative Data
Field notes recorded by the researcher during the intervention period reveal challenges
experienced by intervention teachers that may have posed a threat to the validity of the quasi-
experimental field study results. Coded field notes were recorded from follow-up training and
informal interactions between the researcher and intervention teachers throughout the
intervention period. Themes arising from the thematic analysis of the observations and
interactions (Appendices M & N) provide insights into potential reasons for lack of statistical
significance in survey outcome measures. These themes include (a) diminished implementation
fidelity on the part of intervention teachers, (b) unanticipated sources of intervention teacher
stress unrelated to the intervention, and (c) school-wide diffusion of two components of the
experimental program midway through the intervention period (Appendices M & N).

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 70
Implementation fidelity. As teacher participation was voluntary, implementation
fidelity of the experimental program in treatment classrooms was difficult to control other than
by personal persuasion on the part of the researcher. Furthermore, midway through the
intervention period, a follow-up meeting with intervention teachers was held for the researcher to
provide support and to obtain verbal feedback regarding implementation procedures. Teachers
reported feeling overwhelmed by unexpected district and school administrative requirements
which prevented their optimal implementation of the TAS classroom management strategies.
Copies of the original training notes and slides were provided by the researcher to all
intervention teachers, and the researcher provided additional regular, informal, on-the-spot
training maintenance support throughout the implementation period. However, increasing
demands from the district made it difficult for teachers to implement the intervention with
fidelity as evidenced in emails and conversations during the intervention period. Additionally,
had the TAS strategies been mandated by the principal for intervention teachers only, instead of
school-wide, more statistically significant positive effects of the intervention on marginalized
student academic autonomy, motivation, and math achievement may have been demonstrated.
Feedback from pre and post program satisfaction surveys revealed that intervention
teachers had developed increased confidence in their ability to implement the four autonomy
support strategies, and they possessed increased enthusiasm regarding implementing the
practices. They stated, however, that they could have benefited from additional training that
included classroom observations by the researcher and practice and would have preferred to
implement and master one TAS strategy at a time, rather than attempting all four at once.
Of particular interest are multiple intervention teacher reports that the TAS academic
feedback strategy is the most challenging to master and implement consistently and with fidelity
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 71
to the original design (Appendix N). Field notes recorded during the implementation period
reveal that intervention teachers often struggled to implement positive academic feedback,
especially when managing disruptive students, and they often found themselves using negative
controlling language to confront student conduct that impeded instruction. Field note thematic
analyses illuminate intervention teachers’ struggles with implementation fidelity, and this
circumstance aligns with findings of the t-test mean differences between pre and post surveys for
student autonomy (-.02), motivation (.11), and learning climate (-.015). For the purposes of the
study, learning climate is defined as the degree to which students perceive the teacher to be
supportive of their academic autonomy. Intervention teachers reported struggles to deliver
positive non-controlling verbal feedback when interacting with disruptive students, and such
circumstances likely contributed to lower levels of student perceived academic autonomy in the
classroom learning climate. These qualitative teacher feedback findings contribute to the
understanding of significant correlation between learning climate and motivation found in this
study. Consequently, the struggles to provide appropriate positive feedback which intervention
teachers reported throughout the study may have contributed to lack of pre and post changes in
mean values that could have confirmed the study hypothesis.
Teacher stress. Sources of intervention teacher stress included both requests by the site
principal to implement unexpected unfamiliar procedures and disruptive student behavior which
was not ameliorated by intervention teacher attempts to implement the TAS strategies in which
they had been trained. Intervention teachers reported that classroom management demands often
interfered with TAS intervention implementation fidelity. For example, intervention teachers
stated that disruptive students often were not responsive to autonomy support strategies, and that
teachers often struggled to manage defiant student behavior. It is reasonable to conclude that
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 72
intervention teachers’ defaulting to authoritative and controlling classroom management
behaviors may have impacted student performance and study results, thus contributing to the
lack of hypothesized findings.
Diffusion of experimental treatment. Shortly after the intervention period began, the
school principal directed all teachers school-wide to begin implementing two of the TAS
intervention strategies during math classes: (a) student choice regarding elements of math
assignment completion and (b) formative academic math feedback. Two related events may
contribute to explaining the lack of statistically significant differences in dependent variable
outcome measures observed between intervention and control group students: (a) the principal’s
school-wide mandated diffusion of two experimental treatment components coupled with (b) her
statement that she would be looking for evidence of those practices during her classroom
observations of math lessons throughout the year as an effort to increase math achievement.
Thus, all teachers, including those assigned to the study control condition, implemented student
choice and academic feedback during math lessons, potentially confounding study effects.
Discussion
The study investigated differences in marginalized urban student math achievement,
academic autonomy, and intrinsic motivation as a result of participation in a 12-week teacher
autonomy support classroom intervention. Results of the current study demonstrated no
significant differences between intervention and control group student math achievement,
academic autonomy, or academic motivation. Statistically insignificant changes in means
between pre and postintervention measures (Table 3) reveal that results of this study with low-
SES academically marginalized students have not replicated the effects of teacher autonomy
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 73
support practices on student academic achievement, autonomy, and motivation which have been
demonstrated in abundant prior studies with non-marginalized students.
The present study with marginalized urban students found a statistically significant
correlation between intervention students’ perceptions of teacher autonomy support in the
classroom and student academic motivation (Appendix L). A parallel positive correlation was
observed posttest among control group students, and an additional positive correlation was
observed between student autonomy and students’ perceptions that the teacher’s classroom
management style was autonomy supportive (Appendix L). At both pre- and postintervention
assessments, a consistent strong correlation was observed between student perceived learning
climate and student academic motivation level (Table 5). These correlational findings are
supported by the qualitative thematic analysis that revealed themes arising from intervention
teacher-researcher interactions indicating high levels of teacher stress throughout the study
implementation period (Appendix M). Teacher stress, due to circumstances outside the study,
may have affected intervention teachers’ ability to implement the strategies with fidelity to the
intervention design. Such findings illuminate the importance of providing marginalized students
with nurturing learning environments to increase motivation and academic achievement.
Summary
Independent-samples t-tests demonstrated no significant effects of the teacher autonomy
support intervention on student math achievement, academic autonomy, or academic motivation.
Nevertheless, a positive correlation was observed between student academic motivation and
perceptions that the teacher supported their academic autonomy (Table 5). Also, a positive
correlation was found between student autonomy and student academic motivation.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 74
Unexpected school-wide diffusion of treatment components (i.e., student academic
choice regarding math assignment elements and formative math feedback from teachers to
students) by the site principal may have confounded study results. In a faculty meeting during
the intervention period, the principal asked all teachers to implement student academic choice
and feedback during math instruction in all classrooms.
Additionally, reduced intervention implementation fidelity may have affected dependent
variables negatively. By chance, during the block randomization procedures of assigning
teachers/classrooms to condition, the teachers having the most highly developed controlling and
directive classroom management styles were randomly assigned to the treatment condition. The
teachers who had developed more autonomy supportive classroom management styles were
randomly assigned to the control condition.
Unanticipated demands and complications external to the classroom resulted in stress
which may have caused the intervention teachers to default to a more controlling management
style midway through the 12-week intervention (Appendix N). This circumstance, coupled with
the site principal’s diffusion of treatment elements, may have combined to impair demonstration
of program effects. In classrooms serving regular education non-marginalized students,
abundant classroom-based research findings have demonstrated that teacher autonomy support
for students can have significant positive effects on student academic achievement, autonomy
and motivation. The hypothesis underlying the present study, designed to replicate such results
in classrooms serving low-SES, urban, marginalized public-school students, was not confirmed
and did not replicate findings of prior published studies.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 75
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS
Abundant research findings have demonstrated that, for non-marginalized students,
autonomy supportive teaching practices can increase student academic autonomy which
functions as a significant positive arbiter of achievement. Nevertheless, well into the 21
st

Century, academically marginalized students endure achievement gaps which have persisted
since the inception of American public education. Many factors external to school, such as
poverty, exposure to violence, and racism can depress marginalized student academic
achievement. Because these neighborhood and community factors are not amenable to direct
intervention by public-school faculty and administrators, it is incumbent upon researchers and
educators to discover and implement instructional practices that can strengthen marginalized
student achievement. The current study contributes insights into how the marginalized student
achievement gap can be ameliorated within the school context.
The research question, (i.e., What differences in student academic autonomy, intrinsic
motivation, and math achievement are observed in marginalized students exposed to a 12-week
TAS with structure intervention compared with marginalized students exposed to 12-weeks of
traditional teaching practices?) was designed to explore the degree to which autonomy
supportive classroom strategies affect academic achievement in classrooms serving marginalized
students. The quasi-experimental intervention study was conducted in an urban public
elementary school which serves high concentrations of low SES students, ethnic minority
students, and English language learners. One two-hour professional development seminar in
which intervention teachers were trained to implement four TAS strategies was followed by 12
weeks of classroom implementation. Data collection was administered prior to and immediately
following the intervention period. Assessments measured student: math achievement, academic
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 76
autonomy, academic motivation, and learning climate perceptions. Truncated intervention
teacher training and unexpected administrative directives during the implementation period
resulted in the null hypothesis being confirmed. Nevertheless, positive correlations between two
autonomy support variables and findings from a qualitative field note analysis support prior
research and inform both implications for practice and recommendations for further research.
Findings Discussion
Study findings are based on both quantitative student-level data and qualitative
intervention teacher-level observations and reported satisfaction levels during the
implementation period. Quantitative outcome analyses determined the degree to which the
classroom intervention strengthened marginalized urban student academic autonomy.
Qualitative field note process analyses contributed to the understanding of study results.
Quantitative Data
Outcome measures. Research has demonstrated that, when teachers use autonomy
supportive classroom management practices, student academic achievement has increased (Jang,
Reeve, & Halusic, 2016; Patall et al., 2018; Reeve & Cheon, 2016). Furthermore, research has
demonstrated that teacher autonomy supportive learning climates increase student academic
autonomy (Jang et al., 2012, Reeve, 2006; Reeve, 2009). That is, when teachers provide students
with opportunities to develop academic autonomy skills, students increase their metacognitive
sense of autonomy. Findings from the current study do not support previous research findings,
as no significant mean differences in pre/post student math achievement, academic autonomy,
and/or intrinsic motivation were observed.
Correlational analysis. Findings from this study confirm current research regarding
effects of teacher autonomy supportive classroom climates on student academic motivation.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 77
Research has demonstrated that when students perceive their teachers to be autonomy
supportive, their academic motivation increases (Jang, 2008, Patall et al., 2018; Patall et al.,
2008). Correlational analysis conducted for this study found statistically significant correlations
between marginalized student academic motivation and their perceptions that teachers support
their academic autonomy. This significant positive correlation between student intrinsic
motivation and their perceptions of the classroom climate as an environment in which teachers
support their academic autonomy was observed in both intervention and control classrooms.
Additionally, pre- and postintervention correlation analyses found consistent relationships
between student perceptions of the learning climate and their academic motivation. These
findings confirm current research results regarding relationships between autonomy supportive
learning environments and student motivation. As all students in both intervention and control
classrooms were classified as marginalized by virtue of a combination of low SES, ethnic
minority, and/or ELL membership, this finding provides evidence that marginalized students are
academically motivated in classrooms in which teachers provide an autonomy supportive
learning climate.
Marginalized students often face challenges within the home that create high levels of
toxic stress (Shonkoff et al., 2012). Low SES levels and immigrant status have been found to
elicit stress in students simply as a function of inter-cultural exposure to disparagement and
racial discrimination (Burchinal et al., 2011; Madrid, 2011; Rojas-LeBouef & Slate, 2011).
Students who live in homes and neighborhoods with such adversity can benefit from school
environments that are perceived as warm learning climates in which marginalized students feel
nurtured and can thrive academically.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 78
Correlational findings from the current study underscores the strong relationship between
marginalized student intrinsic motivation and marginalized student perceptions that their
classrooms are learning climates that support their academic autonomy. Furthermore, research
studies with non-marginalized students have found that high levels of teacher autonomy support
behaviors are associated with student motivation to learn (Reeve & Halusic, 2006; Sosic-Vasic et
al., 2015, Patall et al., 2018; Wallace et al., 2014). Due to negative home and neighborhood
environmental influences, Blair and Raver (2014) have found high physiological stress levels in
students as young as preschool. Research with non-marginalized students has shown that
relationships and interactions between teacher classroom management practices and student
academic achievement are not clear empirically (Kunter, Baumert & Koeller, 2007). That said,
understanding how teacher classroom management practices and student academic achievement
affect poor urban marginalized students remains a critical challenge for educators. Classroom
learning climates can reduce the effects of such stress on marginalized student academic
achievement by meeting their inherent human need to be nurtured in order to become
autonomous learners.
Qualitative Data
Field notes reveal difficulties that intervention teachers faced during implementation of
the TAS strategies. None of the intervention teachers found implementing the TAS cultural
interest strategy to be challenging. The success reported by teachers implementing the TAS
cultural interest strategy is encouraging, as marginalized students benefit academically from
having their cultures represented in learning activities (Nasir & Hand, 2006). However,
qualitative data confirmed quantitative findings that there were more challenges with
implementation than reported in post intervention discussions with teachers.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 79
Coding and analysis of researcher field notes reveal that teachers struggled to implement
with fidelity two of the four TAS practices: providing lesson rationales that are meaningful to
students and formative academic verbal feedback. Researcher field notes show that performance
stress and problems implementing unequivocally positive verbal feedback were predominant
themes. Research has found that teacher talk in the classroom affects how students perceive the
classroom climate and their teacher’s autonomy supportive styles (Wallace et al., 2014).
Teachers who use controlling language have been found to cause negative physiological
reactions in students (Reeve & Tseng, 2011), and intervention teachers in the current study
commented frequently that positive verbal feedback was particularly difficult to implement when
encountering disruptive or defiant student behavior. Additionally, research has shown that
teachers who use positive focused academic feedback, which is designed to scaffold learning,
can facilitate student pursuit and achievement of increasingly sophisticated academic objectives,
such as higher-order problem-solving skills (McCaslin & Good, 1998). It can be assumed that
such stress led teachers to become frustrated and to default to controlling language patterns of
classroom management. Traditionally, teachers have been taught to manage disruptive behaviors
after they have occurred, as opposed to: (a) proactive promotion of positive student behavior, and
(b) teaching students to become thoughtful and reflective about their behavior choices (McCaslin
& Good, 1998; Meyer & Turner, 2002). It is reasonable to suspect that negative teacher
reactions to disruptive behavior may have thwarted the development of student academic
autonomy and intrinsic motivation as evidenced in the null study outcomes.
Limitations
Study limitations derive from both measurement issues and unanticipated influences on
the intervention implementation fidelity which may have biased or confounded study
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 80
effectiveness measures. These include diffusion of treatment components, unexpected teacher
stress, modification of one of the instruments which may have affected measurement of student
academic autonomy, and incomplete student data.
Diffusion of Treatment
One study limitation can be attributed to threats to internal validity as a result of the site
principal’s mandated diffusion of treatment. During the initial phase of the intervention process,
the principal directed the entire faculty to implement two of the four intervention strategies
which likely confounded assessment of intervention effects.
Teacher Stress
A second limitation was evidenced in intervention teacher on-going feedback throughout
the implementation. Teachers stated repeatedly that because of unexpected administrative and
district instructional requirements they felt overwhelmed and would be able to implement the
strategies only as best they could under the circumstances. Although intervention teachers
reported in post-implementation satisfaction surveys that they had a firm understanding of the
TAS strategies, study quantitative outcomes (Appendices M & N) suggest that they may not have
implemented the intervention strategies with consistent fidelity to the TAS training standards.
Scale Modification
For the purposes of this study, all scales were modified for readers as young as second
grade. A limitation related to measurement of student autonomy occurred as a result of
modifying the Activity Feeling States instrument. Previous research has reported a Cronbach’s
alpha of (α = .93) for the Activity Feeling States (AFS) scale (Reeve & Jang, 2006). For
purposes of the current study, the only AFS items used were those designed to measure student
autonomy (Appendix G). Correlational analysis for the current study found a Cronbach’s alpha
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 81
of α = .559 for the three AFS autonomy-related items. The low Cronbach’s alpha coefficient
indicates that measures of student autonomy in the current study may not have been accurate.
Second grade was the lowest grade level participating in the study. Probable reasons for lower
scores include modification of the original survey questionnaire to be readable by students as
young as second grade. Additionally, the original scale was 1-7. To simplify the survey for
younger students, the scale was reduced to 1-3. Finally, only the autonomy items from the
original survey were included for measurement in this study, had the entire AFS been
administered, it might have led to different outcomes.
The SRQ-A used to measure student motivation originally reported a Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of .93 (Ryan & Connell, 1989). In this study the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was
.727 preintervention and .741 postintervention. A lower Cronbach’s alpha may have been a
result of modification of the survey items for younger readers.
The original learning climate questionnaire reported a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .90
(Williams & Deci ,1996). In the current study, the preintervention Cronbach’s alpha coefficient
was .643 and .694 postintervention. The lower Cronbach’s alpha most likely can be attributed to
the modification of the survey items to meet the needs of second-grade student reading and
comprehension skills. Additionally, the scale in the original survey was 1-7, whereas for the
current study the scale was reduced to 1-3.
Incomplete Data
An additional limitation concerns lost data, in that survey administration procedures did
not require students to respond to every item. Many students skipped survey questions which
resulted in a loss of data, as their scores could not be included. Had the lost data been available
to the study, different quantitative outcomes may have been obtained.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 82
Implications for Practice
While study results did not confirm the hypothesis, important implications for
professional practice in the field of education for marginalized urban students were illuminated.
These include teacher attributes which are necessary to meet marginalized student academic
needs, consideration of specific characteristics of optimal teacher training for TAS strategy
implementation, and school organizational qualities which are necessary to support marginalized
student achievement of their academic potential.
Teacher Attributes
The pre-intervention teacher training seminar provided information regarding sources of
toxic stress which marginalized urban students endure and four TAS classroom practices
designed to help such students maximize their academic potential. However, an important
teacher attribute which was not considered in designing the training seminar was teachers’ own
potential social and emotional skill deficits which could have been barriers: (a) to engage
emotionally with their students, and (b) to provide nurturing love from their hearts for their
marginalized students. Examples could include taking time: (a) to acknowledge student
academic efforts and small achievements and then verbalizing academically formative, focused,
and loving feedback; (b) to explain why mastering the lesson objective is important and relevant
to students’ current lives; (c) providing innovative assignment-related choices, and (d) to
administer a classroom interest inventory of students’ social and cultural likes and dislikes to
incorporate into lesson content. Such efforts require teachers with heart who are willing to
extend themselves and engage personally with their marginalized students. The consensus of
most of the world is that all teachers love their jobs and their students, but this is not always true.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 83
A study of autonomy support classroom management with marginalized students found
that the teacher who practiced the highest levels of student-perceived autonomy support
possessed high levels of social and emotional skill characteristics in their interactions with
students (Wallace et al., 2014). Furthermore, students of teachers whom they perceived to have
low levels of social and emotional characteristics did not perform academically as well as
students in the classroom of the teacher having the highest social and emotional score.
Therefore, it is recommended that classroom teachers develop their own social and emotional
skills in order to demonstrate the sensitivity required to nurture the inner motivational resources
of all students, especially teachers serving marginalized students who endure toxic stress outside
school.
Jones, Bouffard, and Weissbourd (2013) assert that increasing student achievement
through social and emotional practices must start with teachers. That is, teachers need to
develop fully their own social and emotional abilities before they can teach their students how to
do so. Self-determination theory maintains that nurturing the inner motivational resources of
students increases student academic autonomy and in turn, their academic achievement (Ryan &
Deci, 2000); before teachers are able to model and formatively help students to develop
academic autonomy, their own social and emotional skills must be firm and sound.
The current study found that intervention teachers were overwhelmed by stress
management demands related to both their regular instructional responsibilities as well as
additional stress from their voluntary participation in the study at the beginning of the academic
year (Table 6). Based on teacher feedback, it can be concluded that, as intervention teachers
perceived stress increasing during the implementation period, at times they defaulted to
controlling teaching styles which have been found to thwart student motivation and academic
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 84
autonomy (Cheon & Reeve, 2015; Jang et al., 2010; Patall et al., 2018; Reeve & Tseng, 2011).
Furthermore, research examining marginalized student perceptions of teacher verbal interaction
styles found that such students are highly receptive to teachers who practice autonomy
supportive styles of academic feedback (Wallace et al., 2014). Marginalized students often do
not have autonomy supportive interpersonal interactions with their primary caregivers (Schreier
& Chen, 2013). Therefore, it is important for teachers to be sensitive to this void in their
students’ lives and to exercise awareness of how teacher-student interactions support or depress
student academic achievement. By practicing authentic and nurturing academic feedback,
educators can help to meet one of the many needs that marginalized students bring to our
classrooms. Thus, teachers should be aware of their own social and emotional skill strengths and
deficits and how both affect their delivery of instructional practices and, consequently, their
student academic achievement. Current research conducted at USC by Dr. Mary Helen
Immordino-Yang measures teacher physiological markers of emotions during instruction.
Findings from the study will provide important contributions to both pre-service and in-service
teacher training for all students but will be especially salient for teachers serving marginalized
students who endure toxic stress outside school.
School Organizational Relationships
Another implication of study results for practice in the field of education is the value of
site principal classroom observations as collegial feedback mechanisms rather than as corrective
interactions. Had the researcher been able to observe intervention teachers during the
intervention and make practical collegial suggestions, she could have offered informative
feedback to improve teacher implementation of the TAS strategies. Linda Darling Hammond
(2015) maintains that applying teacher classroom observations as formative feedback tools can
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 85
improve teacher practices and thereby increase student achievement. In the current study, the
principal was asked to look for the four TAS strategies during her weekly classroom
observations. At the study school, the understanding has been established that principal’s
informal classroom observations can result in recorded evaluations. Thus, teachers often change
their demeanor and behavior to conform to that which they assume the principal wants to see.
During the current study, although the principal reported having seen evidence of choice
and feedback during classroom observations, quantitative study outcomes suggest that the TAS
strategies may not have been implemented consistently or with fidelity to the original design.
Had the school organizational mindset been that principal observations were formative and
collaborative, rather than evaluative, the principal may have identified intervention teacher
implementation infidelity occurrences which, if corrected, may have influenced study outcomes
positively. Study results shed light on the importance of using classrooms observations as
formative tools for administrators and teachers to work together to improve daily instructional
practices that can result in lasting positive effects on marginalized student achievement.
Teacher Autonomy Support Training
Research-based training in skills required for educators to create classroom climates that
facilitate student motivation to achieve academic personal-best skill-sets are needed to close the
chronic academic achievement gap endured by marginalized low-SES urban students compared
with their non-marginalized counterparts. A final implication for practice derived from study
results is the importance of professional development opportunities which not only inform
teachers of new research-based practices but also support teachers’ practice-to-mastery of
innovative strategies.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 86
The intervention teacher professional development for this study was intended to be at
least one two-hour training followed by two-hour follow-up training. Unfortunately, time was
limited because intervention teachers had volunteered to participate and were asked to sacrifice
their grade-level planning time in order to attend the initial and follow-up TAS training seminars.
When the teachers arrived at the pre-implementation seminar, they expressed a need to keep the
training brief due to many other obligations they were required to fulfill during that planning
period. To save time, the section of intervention training procedures which focused on video
practice and discussion of the TAS strategies with peer intervention teachers was omitted. This
circumstance likely compromised implementation fidelity of the TAS practices in intervention
classrooms. Prior research has demonstrated the effectiveness of the TAS practices which were
applied in the current study (Cheon, Reeve, & Moon, 2012). However, the Cheon, Reeve and
Moon training was conducted over two six-hour sessions. Additionally, both teacher participants
and administrative staff endorsed the study (Cheon et al., 2012). Thus, the implication for the
field of education from results of the current study is to ensure that professional developments
are thorough, engaging, and that they ensure mastery of TAS practices prior to the intervention
period. By doing so, professional development providers can ensure that teachers acquire the
necessary knowledge and skills to improve their professional practices, and that training notes do
not wind up in the trash.
Future Research
School-based empirical study is needed to clarify an array of influences that affect the
academic achievement of marginalized students, the student subgroup which to date has been
poorly served by the public education system, especially in comparison with the opportunities
and resources provided to non-marginalized students. Of special interest is how academic
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 87
agentic function may differ in marginalized students compared with their non-marginalized
counterparts, and how strategies that strengthen both neuro-cognitive and agentic function can be
incorporated with implementation fidelity in classrooms serving marginalized urban students.
Research is needed also to identify how classroom teachers’ personal social and emotional skill
levels affect all students, especially students who experience toxic stress outside school and have
few autonomy supportive role models outside their classrooms.
Marginalized Student Academic Motivation
While extensive research has examined effects of intrinsic motivation and student
academic autonomy constructs on learning (Cheon & Reeve, 2015; Jang et al., 2010; Jang,
Reeve, & Halusic, 2016; Patall et al., 2018; Patall, Sylvester, & Han, 2014; Vansteekiste et al.,
2012), limited empirical research has been conducted on how these important issues affect
marginalized, toxically-stressed, urban, public-school students. Future areas of needed empirical
study continue in the area of academic motivation, particularly for marginalized students.
Current research at USC by Dr. Erika Patall is investigating ways to increase student motivation
in terms of fostering agentic engagement in marginalized students. This issue is consistent with
the self-determination theory emphasis on student autonomous engagement in establishing and
meeting academic goals which fulfill students’ full academic potential. Findings from the study
could inform strategies to train teachers who serve marginalized students of all academic ability
levels and at all grade levels.
Teacher Social and Emotional Skills
Further research should be conducted to assess the impact of classroom teacher social and
emotional skill levels on marginalized student achievement. It is critically important that
educators and administers appreciate the effects, for good or ill, of their own behavior on student
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 88
achievement in communities where the academic achievement gap is widest. Furthermore, a rise
in popularity of social and emotional learning has led to widespread classroom practices which
are only loosely based on valid and reliable empirical research findings. Researchers maintain
that there is much left to learn about social and emotional learning and how best to use social and
emotional support to increase student achievement and well-being (Jones & Kahn, 2017).
Critical to eliminating the chronic marginalized student achievement gap in urban public schools
is further research: (a) to inform teachers of the effects of their own social and emotional
strengths and deficits on student achievement, and (b) to help teachers master the autonomy
support mediators of marginalized student academic achievement.
Study Replication
Finally, further research could include replicating the current study with multiple pairs of
demographically matched intervention and control urban schools which serve high proportions
of marginalized students. To be executed successfully, recruitment of site administrators would
require that they both endorse the program enthusiastically and also agree to provide nurturing
formative implementation fidelity support. Additionally, a two-day intervention teacher training
program: (a) providing engaging activities, (b) incorporating video practice, and classroom
follow-up could improve teacher acquisition of knowledge and skills requisite to successful TAS
strategy implementation with marginalized students (Cheon et al., 2018; Cheon et al., 2012).
Conclusions
Study results support the need for further research regarding relationships between
marginalized student intrinsic motivation and teacher-controlled autonomy supportive learning
climates. Educators, researchers, and administrators can benefit from understanding the
consequences of epigenetic toxic stress factors that can impede academic achievement among
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 89
students living in socially unstable and often violent communities. (Alexander, Jang, &
Kankane, 2017; Shonkoff et al., 2012.) Understanding the daily trauma many marginalized
students undergo can increase teacher compassion for marginalized student perspectives and a
willingness to apply research-based strategies to create nurturing autonomy supportive classroom
environments. Classroom climates that promote love for one another and help marginalized
students aspire to their full academic potential are required to moderate the negative influences
of toxic stress that marginalized students endure outside school (Immordino-Yang, Darling-
Hammond, & Krone, 2018). In this way, marginalized students can recognize the classroom as a
safe zone in which to flourish both personally and academically.
Creating classroom climates that are conducive to maximizing marginalized student
potential begins with the school-wide organizational learning climate. Rather than evaluative
and judgmental relationships between and among administrative staff and teachers, collaborative
and facilitative relationships are needed to engender teacher receptivity to research-based ways
to help marginalized students succeed. Opening teachers’ minds can open their hearts. That is,
when teachers are better informed, they become more likely to accommodate students’
perspectives and appreciate what students can contribute to their learning experiences, thus
contributing to development of an autonomy supportive learning climate.
In the 21
st
Century, the teaching profession requires skills which are not easy to master;
and without fully developed self-regulation skills, public-school teachers often burn out (Jones et
al., 2013). Such burnout can lead to detrimental classroom consequences, especially for the
primary public-school stakeholders: marginalized students. Therefore, while current educational
trends promote teaching practices that strengthen student social and emotional behaviors,
marginalized student behaviors cannot change without credible teacher self-regulated role
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 90
modeling. Qualitative field note analysis for the current study suggest that intervention teachers
who are inundated with unexpected professional obligations may have defaulted to authoritarian
behavior management practices. Thus, they may have been unable to create learning climates
that support student autonomy as a positive mediator of their academic achievement.
Teachers of marginalized students must be credible role models by being emotionally
self-regulated in order to teach students how to do the same. It is under such circumstances that
students’ inner motivational resources can be nurtured. When I began teaching twenty- three
years ago, I had been taught that the most important teaching practices to master were pedagogy,
subject matter knowledge, and strict classroom management. I am delighted to report that a
profound paradigm shift has occurred in how I interact with my beloved marginalized students.
It is not enough that I care deeply about their opportunities to achieve their potential. Teaching
such students requires that each child knows that I have invested authentic care, love, and deep
emotional support for their achievement. I recognize that, to motivate students who have few
autonomy supportive role models outside school, it is critically important that I: (a) model strong
nurturing autonomy support behaviors, and inspire my students: (b) to be proud of who they are,
the language they speak, the food that they eat, and (c) to permit nothing to stand in the way of
achieving their full academic potential and becoming life-long autonomous learners.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 91
References
Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2011). Expanding school improvement policy to better address
barriers to learning and integrate public health concerns. Policy Futures in Education,
9(3), 431–446. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2011.9.3.431.
Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Van Keer, H., & Haerens, L. (2016). Changing teachers’
beliefs regarding autonomy support and structure: The role of experienced psychological
need satisfaction in teacher training. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 23, 64–72.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.10.007.
Artiles, A., Rueda, R., Salazar, J., & Higareda, I. (2005). Within-Group Diversity in Minority
Disproportionate Representation: English Language Learners in Urban School
Districts. Exceptional Children, 71(3), 283-300.
Baumrind, D. (2012). Differentiating between confrontive and coercive kinds of parental power-
assertive disciplinary practices. Human Development, 55(2), 35–51.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000337962.
Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of
social and clinical psychology, 4(3), 359-373.
Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of educational
research, 71(2), 171-217.
Blair, C., & Raver, C. C. (2014). Closing the achievement gap through modification of
neurocognitive and neuroendocrine function: Results from a cluster randomized
controlled trial of an innovative approach to the education of children in kindergarten.
PLoS ONE, 9(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112393.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 92
Boggiano, A. K., & Vallerand, R. J. (2001). Autonomy Support, Intrinsic Motivation, and
Perceived Competence. Personality and Psychology Bulletin , 27(6).
Bolland, J. M., Bryant, C. M., Lian, B. E., McCallum, D. M., Vazsonyi, A. T., & Barth, J. M.
(2007). Development and risk behavior among African American, Caucasian, and mixed-
race adolescents living in high poverty inner-city neighborhoods. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 40(3–4), 230–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-007-9132-1.
Burchinal, M., McCartney, K., Steinberg, L., Crosnoe, R., Friedman, S. L., McLoyd, V., &
Pianta, R. (2011). Examining the Black-White achievement gap among low-income
children using the NICHD study of early child care and youth development. Child
Development, 82(5), 1404–1420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01620.x
California Department of Education. (2016). California Assessment of Student Performance and
Progress (CAASPP) Results. Retrieved from: http://caaspp.cde.ca.gov.
California Department of Education. (2017). California Assessment of Student Performance and
Progress (CAASPP) Results. Retrieved from: http://caaspp.cde.ca.gov.
Charms, R. D. (1968). Personal causation.
Cheon, S. H., & Reeve, J. (2015). A classroom-based intervention to help teachers decrease
students’ amotivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 99–111.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.06.004.
Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., Lee, Y., & Lee, J. won. (2018). Why autonomy-supportive interventions
work: Explaining the professional development of teachers’ motivating style. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 69, 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.09.022.
Cheon, S.H., Reeve, J., & Moon, I.S. (2012). Experimentally Based, Longitudinally Designed,
Teacher-Focused Intervention to Help Physical Education Teachers Be More Autonomy
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 93
Supportive Toward Their Students. J Sport Exerc Psychol. ;34(3):365-396.
doi:10.1123/jsep.34.3.365
Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y., & Kaplan, U. (2003). Differentiating Autonomy From
Individualism and Independence: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective on
Internalization of Cultural Orientations and Well-Being. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 84(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.97.
Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., & Willness, C. (2005). Cultural context and psychological needs in
Canada and Brazil: Testing a self-determination approach to the internalization of
cultural practices, identity, and well-being. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 36,
423–443.
Cokley, K., McClain, S., Jones, M., & Johnson, S. (2012). A Preliminary Investigation of
Academic Disidentification, Racial Identity, and Academic Achievement Among African
American Adolescents. The High School Journal, 95(2), 54–68.
https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2012.0003.
Cooper, K. S. (2014). Eliciting Engagement in the High School Classroom: A Mixed-Methods
Examination of Teaching Practices. American Educational Research Journal, 51(2),
363–402. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213507973.
Cooper, J. A., & Schleser, R. (2006). Closing the achievement gap: Examining the role of
cognitive developmental level in academic achievement. Early Childhood Education
Journal, 33(5), 301–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-006-0075-1.
Creswell, J.W., (2014). Research Design. Lincoln, NE. Sage Publications Inc.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 94
Curriculum Associates, (n.d.). Grounded in research. Retrieved from:
https://www.curriculumassociates.com/products/ready-research-iRdiag-why-it-
works.aspx.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2015). Can Value Added Add Value to Teacher Evaluation? Educational
Researcher, 44(2), 132–137. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15575346
Deci, E. L., Hodges, R., Pierson, L., & Tomassone, J. (1992). Autonomy and competence as
motivational factors in students with learning disabilities and emotional handicaps.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 457-471.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior /
Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. (Perspectives in social psychology). New York:
Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024–1037.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024.
Dembo, M. H., & Eaton, M. J. (2000). Self-Regulation of Academic Learning in Middle-Level
Schools. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 473–490.
https://doi.org/10.1086/499651.
Department of Education (2018) Every Students Succeeds Act. Retrieved from:
https://www.ed.gov/essa.
Department of Education (2018) No Child Left Behind. Retrieved from:
https://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The
impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta ‐analysis of school ‐
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 95
based universal interventions. Child development, 82(1), 405-432. Retrieved from:
http://www.episcenter.psu.edu/sites/default/files/news/Durlak%20et%20al.%20(2011)%2
0meta%20analysis%20SEL.pdf.
Eccles, J. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective
identities as motivators of action. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 78-89.
Elias, M. J., White, G., & Stepney, C. (2013). Surmounting the Challenges of Improving
Academic Performance: Closing the Achievement Gap through Social-Emotional and
Character Development. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research, 10, 14–24.
Flowerday, T., & Schraw, G. (2003). Effect of choice on cognitive and affective engagement.
Journal of Educational Research, 96(4), 207–215.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670309598810.
Froiland, J. M., Davison, M. L., & Worrell, F. C. (2016). Aloha teachers: teacher autonomy
support promotes Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students’ motivation, school
belonging, course-taking and math achievement. Social Psychology of Education, 19(4),
879–894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-016-9355-9.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing Cultural Models and Settings to Connect
Minority Achievement and School Improvement Analyzing Cultural Models and Settings
to Connect Minority Achievement and School Improvement Research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children's self-regulation
and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 143- 154.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 96
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children's learning: An experimental and
individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52,
890-898.
Guay, F., Boggiano, A. K., & Vallerand, R. J. (2001). Autonomy support, intrinsic motivation,
and perceived competence: Conceptual and empirical linkages. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 27(6), 643-650.
Hemphill, F. C., & Vanneman, A. (2010). Achievement Gaps: How Hispanic and White Students
in Public Schools Perform in Mathematics and Reading on the National Assessment of
Educational Progress. Assessment, (NCES 2011-459), iii-66.
https://doi.org/10.1037/e595292011-001.
Hayamizu, T. (1997). Between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: examination of reasons for
academic study based on the theory of internalization. Japanese Psychological Research,
39(2), 10. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5884.00043.
Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2015). Emotions, Learning, and the Brain: Exploring the Educational
Implications of Affective Neuroscience (The Norton Series on the Social Neuroscience of
Education). WW Norton & Company.
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Sylvan, L. (2010). Admiration for virtue: Neuroscientific
perspectives on a motivating emotion. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(2),
110–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.003.
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much
of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995–1006.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 97
Jang, H., Kim, E. J., & Reeve, J. (2012). Longitudinal test of self-determination theory's
motivation mediation model in a naturally occurring classroom context. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1175.
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Halusic, M. (2016). A New Autonomy-Supportive Way of Teaching That
Increases Conceptual Learning: Teaching in Students’ Preferred Ways. Journal of
Experimental Education, 84(4), 686–701.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2015.1083522.
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging Students in Learning Activities: It is Not
Autonomy Support or Structure but Autonomy Support and Structure. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019682.
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Halusic, M. (2016). A New Autonomy-Supportive Way of Teaching That
Increases Conceptual Learning: Teaching in Students’ Preferred Ways. Journal of
Experimental Education, 84(4), 686–701.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2015.1083522.
Jang, H., Reeve, J., Ryan, R. M., & Kim, A. (2009). Can self-determination theory explain what
underlies the productive, satisfying learning experiences of collectivistically oriented
Korean students?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 644.
Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2008). The prosocial classroom: teacher social
and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes.
Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491e525. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/
0034654308325693.
Jones, S. M., & Kahn, J. (2017). The evidence base for how we learn: Supporting students’
social, emotional, and academic development. The WERA Educational Journal, 5.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 98
Jones S.M., Bouffard, S.M., & Weissbourd, R. (2013) Educators’ social and emotional skills
vital to learning. Phi Delta Kappan.;94(8):62-65. doi:10.1177/003172171309400815
Kaur, A., Hashim, R. A., & Noman, M. (2015). Teacher autonomy support intervention as a
classroom practice in a Thai school. Journal for Multicultural Education, 9(1), 10–27.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-07-2014-0033.
Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the
design of learning.
Kirschner, P. A., Ayres, P., & Chandler, P. (2011). Contemporary cognitive load theory research:
The good, the bad and the ugly. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 99–105.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.025.
Kunter, M., Baumert, J., & Köller, O. (2007). Effective classroom management and the
development of subject-related interest. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 494e
509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.002.
Lee, W., & Reeve, J. (2017). Identifying the neural substrates of intrinsic motivation during task
performance. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 17(5), 939–953.
https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-017-0524-x.
Leptokaridou, E. T., Vlachopoulos, S. P., & Papaioannou, A. G. (2015). Associations of
autonomy, competence, and relatedness with enjoyment and effort in elementary school
physical education: The mediating role of self-determined motivation. Hellenic Journal
of Psychology, 12(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014241.
Levy, D. J., Heissel, J. A., Richeson, J. A., & Adam, E. K. (2016). Psychological and biological
responses to race-based social stress as pathways to disparities in educational
outcomes. American Psychologist, 71(6), 455.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 99
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. & Patall, E. A. (2015). Motivation. In L. Corno & E. Anderman (Eds.),
Handbook of Educational Psychology, 3
rd
Edition, (pp. 91-103). Sponsored by the
American Psychological Association. New York, NY: Routledge.
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Patall, E. A., & Pekrun, R. (2016). Adaptive motivation and emotion in
education: Research and principles for instructional design. Policy Insights from the
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 228-236.
Lucariello, J. M., Nastasi, B. K., Dwyer, C., Skiba, R., DeMarie, D., & Anderman, E. M. (2016).
Top 20 Psychological Principles for PK–12 Education. Theory into Practice, 55(2), 86–
93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1152107.
Madrid, E. M. (2011). The Latino achievement gap. Multicultural Education,18(3), 7.
Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion,
and Motivation. Psychological Review, American Psychological Association, 98(2), 224–
253.
McCaslin, M., & Good, T. L. (1998). Moving beyond management as sheer compliance: helping
students to develop goal coordination strategies. Educational Horizons, 76(4), 169e176.
McCaslin, M., & Good, T. L. (1992). Compliant cognition: the misalliance of management and
instructional goals in current school reform. Educational Researcher, 21(3), 4e17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X021003004.
Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2002). Using instructional discourse analysis to study the
scaffolding of student self-regulation. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 17e25.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3701_3.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 100
Milner, H. R. (2006). Preservice teachers’ learning about cultural and racial diversity:
Implications for Urban education. Urban Education, 41(4), 343–375.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085906289709.
McEwan, E.K. & McEwan, P.J., (2003). Making Sense of Research. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Corwin Press Inc.
Mendoza-Denton, R. (2014). A social psychological perspective on the achievement gap in
standardized test performance between White and minority students: Implications for
assessment. The Journal of Negro Education, 83(4), 465-484.
Miserandino, M. (1996). Children who do well in school: Individual differences in perceived
competence and autonomy in above-average children. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 88, 203-214.
Murayama, K., Matsumoto, M., Izuma, K., & Matsumoto, K. (2010). Neural basis of the
undermining effect of monetary reward on intrinsic motivation. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 107(49), 20911–20916.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1013305107.
NAEP (2018). Publications and newsroom. Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs_newsroom/.
Nasir, I.S. & Hand, V. M. (2006). Exploring Sociocultural Perspectives on Race, Culture, and
Learning. Review of Educational Research Winter, 76(4), 449–475.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076004449.
Noble, K. G., Houston, S. M., Brito, N. H., Bartsch, H., & Kan, E. (2015). Family income ,
parental education and brain structure in children and adolescents, 18(5).
https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3983.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 101
Ogbu, J. U. (1992). Understanding Cultural Diversity and Learning. Educational Researcher,
21(8), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X021008005.
Patall, E. A. (2013). Constructing motivation through choice, interest, and interestingness.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 522–534. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030307.
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). The Effects of Choice on Intrinsic
Motivation and Related Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Research Findings.
Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 270–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.270.
Patall, E. A., Steingut, R. R., Vasquez, A. C., Trimble, S. S., Pituch, K. A., & Freeman, J. L.
(2018). Daily autonomy supporting or thwarting and students’ motivation and
engagement in the high school science classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology,
110(2), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000214.
Patall, E. A., Sylvester, B. J., & Han, C. woo. (2014). The role of competence in the effects of
choice on motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50(1), 27–44.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.09.002.
Patrick, B. C., Skinner, E. A., & Connell, J. P. (1993). What motivates children’s behavior and
emotion? Joint effects of perceived control and autonomy in the academic domain.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 781-791.
Pekrun, R. (2011). Emotions as Drivers of Learning and Cognitive Development. In New
Perspectives on Affect and Learning Technologies (pp. 23–39).
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' self-
regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative
research. Educational psychologist, 37(2), 91-105.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 102
Perez, W., Espinoza, R., Ramos, K., Coronado, H. M., & Cortes, R. (2009). Academic resilience
among undocumented Latino students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31(2),
149-181.
Pasadena Unified School District (2018). Data and Research. Student Demographic Data.
CALPADS 1.2 Fall Norm Day Snapshot, CALPADS Report 1.18 K-12 FRPM/English
Learner/Foster Youth List. Retrieved from:
https://www.pusd.us/site/Default.aspx?PageID=7592
Reardon, S. F. (2011). The Widening Academic Achievement Gap Between the Rich and the
Poor: New Evidence and Possible Explanations. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality
and the Uncertain Life Chances of Low-Income Children, (July), 91–116.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312042002305.
Reardon, S. F., & Bischoff, K. (2011). Income inequality and income segregation. American
Journal of Sociology, 116(4), 1092–1153. https://doi.org/10.1086/657114.
Reardon, S. F., & Galindo, C. (2009). The Hispanic-White achievement gap in math and reading
in the elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 853-891.
Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as Facilitators: What Autonomy ‐Supportive Teachers Do and Why
Their Students Benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225–236.
https://doi.org/10.1086/501484.
Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how
they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 159–175.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903028990.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 103
Reeve, J., & Cheon, S. H. (2016). Teachers become more autonomy supportive after they believe
it is easy to do. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 178–189.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.001.
Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students’ autonomy during a
learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209–218.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.209.
Reeve, J., Nix, G., & Hamm, D. (2003). Testing models of the experience of self-determination
in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice. Journal of educational
psychology, 95(2), 375.
Reeve, J., & Sickenius, B. (1994). Development and validation of a brief measure of the three
psychological needs underlying intrinsic motivation: The AFS scales. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 54, 506–515.
Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Cortisol reactivity to a teacher’s motivating style: The biology
of being controlled versus supporting autonomy. Motivation and Emotion, 35(1), 63–74.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-011-9204-2.
Reyes, A., & Garcia, A. (2014). Turnaround policy and practice: A case study of turning around
a failing school with English-language-learners. The Urban Review, 46(3), 349-371.
Rojas-LeBouef, A., & Slate, J. R. (2012). The Achievement Gap between White and Non-White
Students. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 7(1), n1.
Ryan, R.M., & Connell, J.P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining
reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-
761.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 104
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.55.1.68.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does
psychology need choice, self-determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74(6),
1557–1585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x.
Schreier, H., & Chen, E. (2013). Socioeconomic status and the health of youth: a multilevel,
multidomain approach to conceptualizing pathways. Psychological Bulletin, 139(3), 606.
Schunk, D. H., Meece, J. R., & Pintrich, P. R. (2014). Motivation in education: Theory,
research, and applications. Pearson Higher Ed.
Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., McGuinn, L., ... &
Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care. (2012). The lifelong
effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232-e246.
Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., & Dochy, F. (2009). The synergistic
relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in the prediction of self-
regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 57–68.
https://doi.org/10.1348/000709908X304398.
Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the Classroom - Reciprocal Effects of
Teacher-Behavior and Student Engagement across the School Year. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1037/0022-
0663.85.4.571.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 105
Skinner, E. A., Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Connell, J. P., Eccles, J. S., & Wellborn, J. G. (1998).
Individual differences and the development of perceived control. Monographs of the
society for Research in Child Development, i-231.
Sosic-Vasic, Z., Keis, O., Lau, M., Spitzer, M., & Streb, J. (2015). The impact of motivation and
teachers’ autonomy support on children’s executive functions. Frontiers in Psychology,
6(FEB), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00146.
Stefanou, C. R., Perencevich, K. C., DiCintio, M., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Supporting autonomy
in the classroom: Ways teachers encourage student decision making and
ownership. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 97-110.
Spiegel, E. J. (2017). Managing stress for at-risk students. Phi Delta Kappan, 98(6), 42–46.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717696477.
Tanaka, M. (2013). Examining kanji learning motivation using self-determination theory.
System, 41(3), 804–816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.08.004.
Thompson, M., & Beymer, P. (2015). The effects of choice in the classroom: Is there too little or
too much choice? Support for Learning, 30(2), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-
9604.12086.
Tyack, D. & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering towards Utopia. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University
Press.
Vanneman, A., Hamilton, L., Anderson, J. B., & Rahman, T. (2009). Achievement Gaps: How
Black and White Students in Public Schools Perform in Mathematics and Reading on the
National Assessment of Educational Progress. Statistical Analysis Report. NCES 2009-
455. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from:
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED505903.pdf.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 106
Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Dochy, F., Mouratidis, A., … Beyers,
W. (2012). Identifying configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and
structure: Associations with self-regulated learning, motivation and problem behavior.
Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 431–439.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.002.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental process.
Wallace, T. L. B., Sung, H. C., & Williams, J. D. (2014). The defining features of teacher talk
within autonomy-supportive classroom management. Teaching and Teacher Education,
42, 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.04.005.
Wertsch, J. V. (2008). From social interaction to higher psychological processes. Human
Development, 51(1), 66-79.
Wigfield, A., Tonks, S., & Klauda, S. L. (2009). Expectancy-value theory. Handbook of
motivation at school, 55-75.
Willis, J. (2007). Review of Research: Brain-Based Teaching Strategies for Improving Students’
Memory, Learning, and Test-Taking Success. Childhood Education, 83(5), 310–315.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2007.10522940.
Winne, P. H., & Nesbit, J. C. (2010). The Psychology of Academic Achievement. Annual
Review of Psychology, 61(1), 653–678.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100348.
Yu, C., Li, X., Wang, S., & Zhang, W. (2016). Teacher autonomy support reduces adolescent
anxiety and depression: An 18-month longitudinal study. Journal of Adolescence, 49,
115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.03.001.
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 107
Zuckerman, M., Porac, J., Lathin, D., & Deci, E. L. (1978). On the importance of self-
determination for intrinsically-motivated behavior. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 4(3), 443-446.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 108
Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix

Research Question
Theoretical
Framework
Outcome Variable
Measurement
Instrument
What differences in
academic autonomy,
motivation, and
achievement will be
observed in marginalized
students who are exposed
to a 12-week TAS with
structure intervention
compared with
marginalized students who
are exposed to 12-weeks
of traditional teaching
practices?
Self Determination
Theory
(Deci & Ryan,
1987)
Academic
Motivation
Self-Regulation
Questionnaire-A LD
(Ryan & Connell, 1989)
Academic
Autonomy
Activity Feeling States
questionnaire
(Reeve & Sicknieus,
1994)
Mathematics
Achievement
iReady Mathematics
Diagnostic and
Performance Program
(Curriculum Associates,
n.d.)

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 109
Appendix B: Parent Consent Form

For confidentiality purposes the names have been removed
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 110
Appendix B: Parent Consent form continued

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 111
Appendix C: Teacher Intervention Consent Form

For confidentiality purposes the names have been removed

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 112
Appendix C: Teacher Intervention Consent Form continued

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 113
Appendix D: Teacher Control Consent Form

For confidentiality purposes the names have been removed

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 114
Appendix D: Teacher Control Consent Form continued

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 115
Appendix E: IRB University of Southern California Approval

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 116
Appendix F: Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A) instrument*

SRQ-A
Item
#
Motivation
Type
SRQ-A
Identified and Intrinsic Motivation
Items
How often?
Always Sometimes Never
5 Intrinsic I do my classwork because it’s fun.

7 Intrinsic I enjoy doing my classwork.

10 Intrinsic
I try to answer hard questions because
it’s fun to answer hard questions

3 Identified
I do my classwork because I want to
learn new things.

12 Identified
I try to answer hard questions to find
out if I’m right or wrong.

15 Identified
I try to do well in school because I like
doing a good job on my school work.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 117
Appendix G: Activity Feeling States (AFS) Scale*

AFS Autonomy Items
How often?
Always Sometimes Never
When I am in this class, I feel free.

When I am in this class, I’m doing what I want to be doing.

When I am in this class, I can choose what I want to do.

*AFS Items selected for this study measure only student autonomy feeling states during class.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 118
Appendix H: Learning Climate Questionnaire

LCQ Items
How often?
Always Sometimes Never
My teacher gives me choices.

My teacher understands me.

My teacher thinks I can do well in class.

My teacher likes me to ask questions.

My teacher likes my ideas how to do things.

My teacher likes to know what I think.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 119
Appendix I: iReady on-line mathematics diagnostic and performance program

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 120

Appendix J: TAS Teacher Training Seminar: PowerPoint Presentation

Slides Talking Points

Students’ brains that many of us are entrusted to mold
look like the right picture.
The area of interest for this study is the prefrontal
cortex. This is where self-regulation occurs, also
where an area that is coordinated with autonomy
development.

The Self Determination theory states that people have
three basic needs to become self-determined:
competence, relatedness, and autonomy.
For this study, our focus is on autonomy.
Autonomy supportive teachers nurture students’ innate
motivational resources to become intrinsically
motivated. By offering explanatory rationales,
providing choices, showing interest, and providing
feedback we can help students achieve their academic
potential by strengthening their academic autonomy.

Explain rationales and the importance for marginalized
students who could benefit from knowing exactly what
is expected of them behaviorally and academically

Following video:
• Ask for participant examples
• Generate list of examples
• Roleplay, record and reflect

Interest helps nurture inner motivational resources
because it connects students to previous schema-
something to which they can relate

Following video:
• Ask for participant examples
• Generate list of examples
• Roleplay, record and reflect

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 121
Appendix J: TAS Teacher Training Seminar: Presentation

Slides Talking Points

Explain the concept of Choice and the importance for
marginalized students who benefit from having choices
in the classroom

Following video:
• Ask for participant examples
• Generate list of examples
• Roleplay, record and reflect

Explain the concept of Feedback and the importance
for marginalized students who benefit from positive
lesson-objective-focused formative verbal feedback

Following video:
• Ask for participant examples
• Generate list of examples
• Roleplay, record and reflect

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 122
Appendix K: Teacher Training Video Script: TAS Strategies for Marginalized Students

Video Topic Example: Teacher Explanation or Teacher-Student Interchange
Learning
Rationale
Today we are going to learn how to add fractions because knowing how to add
fractions will be important for many math classes you will take after fifth grade. For
example, in your middle school math classes, you will need to know how to add, subtract,
multiply, and divide fractions. (explains skill application: Cheon, Reeve, & Moon, 2012).
Knowing how to work with fractions is helpful when you measure things using a ruler or
tape measure or when you cook. Most of all, fractions can be fun to work with and there
are many different ways to solve fraction problems.
Cultural
Interest
After school, Dejohn, Rashad, and Jayde (names of students in the class: cultural
interest) share a bag of Takis snacks. A total of 29 Takis are in the bag. They want to
share the Takis evenly. What fraction of the Takis will each classmate receive? Will any
Takis be left over?
After school, Jose and Ryan (names of students in the class: personal interest) bought
a pizza to share (food they both like to eat: cultural interest: Cheon Reeve, & Moon,
2012). Since they both paid for the pizza, they decided to share it evenly. If we cut the
pizza into 8 slices, what fraction of the pizza will each classmate receive?
Choice
Today we practiced ways to add fractions. We used a number line, illustrations, and
math calculations. Here are a few problems for practice, you may solve the problems in
pairs or by yourself (structured supportive choice: Cheon Reeve, & Moon, 2012; Patall,
Cooper, & Robinson, 2008). You may use any of the three methods that we learned today
or any other way you can think of to solve the problems (facilitates intrinsic motivation
development).
Feedback
Teacher: Kenneth, you are very close to solving that problem; you can do it (Reeve &
Jang, 2006). What is the first step to solve the fraction problem? (informative,
objective-focused, non-coercive language)
Student: Finding the common denominator.
Teacher: Yes, good first step, Kenneth. Now how will you find the common
denominator?
Student: I’m not sure.
Teacher: Look up on the wall where we posted the steps needed to find the common
denominator.
Student: Oh, yes. I forgot to use the poster.
Teacher: Can you follow the steps?
Student: I think so. I’ll try.
Teacher: Good, Kenneth; I believe you can do it too; but if you need help, ask your
classmates or me if you cannot solve it together.

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 123
Appendix L: Posttest Mean Scores: Pearson Correlations among Dependent Variables

Study Group
Dependent
Variables
Correlation
Posttest Mean Scores
iReady Motivation Autonomy
Learning
Climate
Intervention
Classrooms
iReady Math
Pearson Correlation 1 .080 -.043 .127
Sig. (2-tailed) .525 .732 .309
N 66 66 66 66
Motivation
.080 1 .010 .637
**

.525 .936 .000
66 66 66 66
Autonomy
-.043 .010 1 .189
.732 .936 .129
66 66 66 66
Learning
Climate
Pearson Correlation .127 .637
**
.189 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .309 .000 .129
N 66 66 66 66
Control
Classrooms
Math
Achievement
Pearson Correlation 1 .025 -.048 .200
Sig. (2-tailed) .853 .721 .132
N 58 58 58 58
Motivation
Pearson Correlation .025 1 .400
**
.524
**

Sig. (2-tailed) .853 .002 .000
N 58 58 58 58
Autonomy
Pearson Correlation .048 .400
**
1 .134
Sig. (2-tailed) .721 .002 .315
N 58 58 58 58
Learning
Climate
Pearson Correlation .200 .524
**
.134 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .132 .000 .315
N 58 58 58 58
**p <0.01

AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 124
Appendix M: Qualitative Field Note Codebook Themes

Problems reported by Intervention Teachers
Teacher
Autonomy
Support

Implementation
Component

Instructional
Rationale
• Struggle with math rationales
• Need help with rationales
• Need help with math rationales
Cultural
Relatedness
• No problems reported
Academic
Feedback
• Struggles with implementing feedback
• Consistent feedback problem
• Problem with feedback
• Trying feedback
• Feedback continues to be a struggle
• Problems with controlling language feedback
Assignment
Choice
• Struggle with math assignment choices
Classroom
Management
• Student behavior problems affect implementation negatively
• Problem with reaching behavior problem students
• Disruptive students remain a problem
• Disruptive students not receptive to autonomy strategies
• Teachers stressed about student disruptive behavior
• Teachers stressed about student disruptive behavior and habits
Logistical
Issues
• Teachers upset with student pre-test
• Concerned about unexpected principal demands
• Teachers not participating in emails
AUTONOMY SUPPORT TO INCREASE MATH ACHIEVEMENT 125
Appendix N: Intervention Field Notes

Intervention
Period
Intervention Teacher (IT) Statements
Pre-
Intervention
• ITs were enthusiastic and receptive during PD
• ITs were very interested in mastering implement strategies
• ITs Requested and were given copies of PD instructional slides
• Preintervention classroom survey administration challenges
Weeks 1–4
IT1
• Reported problems implementing positive academic feedback
• Stated student disruptive behavior causing struggle to deliver positive feedback
IT2
• Stated need for help developing assignment-specific math rationales
• Reported stress due to upcoming parent/teacher conferences
IT3 • No problems or challenges reported
Weeks 5–8
IT1
• Continues struggle to give positive feedback to disruptive students
• Researcher observed IT1 shouting at students as they entered her classroom
• Continues to struggle to provide regular positive feedback
• Reports that most students, but not all, are more engaged in lessons
• Positive changes include students: (1) more accountable, (2) exert more academic
effort, (3) Put more time and effort into academic processes and products
• Requests evidence to support answers, and sees students double check their work
• Feels like she could do more
• Likes reaction from students when she gives math rationales
• Stated that students are more cooperative in group work
• Stated that feedback is still hard, especially when frustrated by student behavior
IT2 • No problems or challenges reported
IT3
• Success implementing academic choice: students show increased motivation
• Student behavior problems are frustrating
• Stated that autonomy support practices are really helpful.
• Engage student interests, game names or student names in math word problems
• Trying to be more helpful to students, smile more, even when they're off-task
• To apply feedback strategy, asks if students need help to get started
• Feedback strategy not working well with disruptive students
Weeks 9–12
IT1 • Stated that she enjoyed the intervention and wished we could see results in spring
IT2
• Stated repeatedly need for help developing math rationales
• Stated need for help motivating students to complete HW
• Reported struggles to implement all four TAS strategies at the same time
• Preferred to conduct one at a time until she could master all four
IT3
• Stated that she likes the strategies and results she sees from most students
• Stated that three students continue to disrupt class
Postintervention
IT1
• Stated in follow-up email that she would have liked to have been observed
implementing the strategies with direct feedback provided
• Data collector who administered pre and post surveys in all classes noted that IT1
was visibly stressed
IT2 • “Intervention worked well”
IT3 • Did not respond

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Self-determination theory asserts that, in order to experience well-being, all human beings must possess three basic psychological needs: relatedness, perceived competence, and autonomy (Ryan & Deci, 2000). In school contexts, autonomous students are self-managed and intrapersonally motivated to achieve (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The study purpose was to demonstrate that teacher autonomy support with structure could increase math achievement in urban marginalized students served in a public elementary school. The study school serves students who are 93 percent low-SES, 54 percent English language learners, 92 percent Hispanic immigrants, 5 percent African American, and 1.5 percent white (CALP ADS, 2018). The study implemented a Teacher Autonomy Support with structure intervention across all academic content areas in grades two through four. It was hypothesized that marginalized student exposure to a 12-week teacher autonomy support with structure classroom intervention would lead to increased student academic autonomy, motivation, and achievement compared with students in control classrooms. Measurement instruments of established validity were administered. Outcome measures were student: (a) math performance, (b) academic motivation, (c) academic autonomy, and (d) learning climate. Data were collected prior to and immediately following the 12-week classroom intervention. Independent t-test analyses examining the relative effectiveness of the intervention on student dependent variables revealed no statistically significant pretest/posttest differences or by experimental condition. Bivariate correlational analyses found statistically significant correlations between student academic motivation and perceived learning climate and between student autonomy and motivation.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Examining perspectives of academic autonomy in community college students: a quantitative study

PDF

Teacher management style: its impact on teacher-student relationships and leadership development

PDF

The effect of site support teams on student achievement in seven northern California schools

PDF

Culturally-relevant, autonomy supportive instruction: toward an integration for enhancing the motivation of racially and ethnically diverse learners

PDF

Cultivating motivation and persistence for urban, high achieving, low-SES African American students

PDF

Best practices general education teachers implement to foster a positive classroom environment

PDF

Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: Factors that support English learner and Hispanic student academic achievement in an urban intermediate school

PDF

Factors including student engagement impacting student achievement in a high performing urban high school district: a case study

PDF

Discipline with dignity for African American students: effective culturally responsive practices used by teachers in kindergarten through second grade in Los Angeles County urban elementary schools

PDF

Teachers' experiences implementing social and emotional learning in the elementary classroom

PDF

Relationship of teacher's parenting style to instructional strategies and student achievement

PDF

Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Organizational structures and systems in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools: the construct of race and teacher expectations as mediating factors in student achievement

PDF

Enacting ideology: an examination of the connections between teacher ideology, classroom climate, and teacher interpretation of student behavior

PDF

The teacher evaluation: key components that positively impact teacher effectiveness and student achievement

PDF

Urban schools that have narrowed the achievement gap: middle school math achievement in an urban setting

PDF

Examining the learning environments of urban high school educators who are culturally aware and serve a majority of students from historically marginalized populations

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

The effect on teacher career choices: exploring teacher perceptions on the impact of non‐instructional workload on self‐efficacy and self‐determination

Asset Metadata

Creator Shimazaki, Mary Elizabeth (author)

Core Title Effects of teacher autonomy support with structure on marginalized urban student math achievement

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/29/2019

Defense Date 03/13/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag achievement,Autonomy,marginalized students,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,self determination theory,teacher autonomy support,toxic stress,urban students

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Coombs, Wayne (committee member), Patall, Erika (committee member)

Creator Email maryshimazaki@gmail.com,mshimaza@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-159141

Unique identifier UC11661005

Identifier etd-ShimazakiM-7347.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-159141 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ShimazakiM-7347.pdf

Dmrecord 159141

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Shimazaki, Mary Elizabeth

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA