Search

Background: Provision of structure in classroom settings constitutes one of the pillars of conducive learning environments. However, little is known whether the particular elements of provided structure—namely, contingency, clear expectations, help and support, and monitoring—are equally important for student learning and motivation. Aims: In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to investigate to what extent students’ autonomous motivation is linearly and curvilinearly related to their perceptions of their teachers’ contingency, clear expectations, help and support, and monitoring. Sample: Participants were 12,036 Turkish adolescent students (age range: 15–19 years; 54.4% males) from 446 classes, nested into 24 public schools. Methods: Cross-sectional, based on student ratings of their self-determined motivation and their teacher structure provision and autonomy support. Results: Multilevel and ordinary least-squares polynomial regression analyses showed all the four perceived structure elements to predict autonomous motivation, with expectations and contingency (especially when coupled with monitoring) being even more important predictors than the other elements. Response surface analyses also showed strong positive relation between autonomous motivation and all the possible pairs of the four elements of perceived structure along the line of congruence, suggesting an additive effect when teachers are thought to be contingent and helpful and supportive (or monitor their students, or clearly communicate their expectations). Conclusions: These findings imply the key role that teachers could play in enhancing their students’ autonomous motivation by providing all the elements of structure. © 2022 The British Psychological Society.

Adapting education to students’ diverse educational needs is widely recognised as an important, but also complex aspect of effective teaching. In this chapter, we provide insight into how Dutch primary school teachers implement differentiation based on students’ current mathematics achievement level. We review evidence from four independent samples in which the same teacher self-assessment questionnaire was administered (N = 907 teachers in total), supplemented with qualitative data from various perspectives: external observers, students, and teachers. Based on these sources of information, we identify the following general patterns. Teachers generally implement achievement-based differentiation at least to some extent. That is, student achievement is monitored, and efforts are taken to adapt instruction or practice to students’ current achievement level. This is often organised using within-class homogeneous achievement groups. While low-achieving students regularly receive additional instruction, specific instruction for high-achieving students is uncommon. Refined, qualitative strategies to diagnose students’ individual educational needs and to adapt education to these individual needs are also used relatively infrequently. These relatively infrequently used strategies point to areas for improvement. Furthermore, the flexibility of within-class achievement groups seems to vary and deserves more attention in future research and practice.