Determining Instructional Design Effects on Self-Efficacy, Interest, and Knowledge in a Small Engines Course

Authors

  • Will Doss University of Arkansas
  • Christopher M. Estepp University of Arkansas
  • Donald M. Johnson University of Arkansas
  • Kobina Fanyinkah University of Arkansas

Keywords:

Agricultural Mechanics, Small Engines, Situated Learning Theory, Self-Efficacy, Student Interest, Video Reflection, Instructional Design

Abstract

Small engine maintenance and repair is a topic in which school-based agricultural education teachers lack technical skills and need instructional planning professional development. At the college level, this topic is taught to preservice SBAE teachers and serves as example that can be used at the secondary school level. To maximize the quality of instruction in this area, a critical evaluation of procedures used to teach small engine concepts at the post-secondary level was conducted. This study examined three factors regarding instruction in a small engines course: student knowledge, interest, and self-efficacy. A quasi-experimental design was used to compare pre and post knowledge levels, perceived self-efficacy, and subject matter interest of participants on the topics of precision measurement and carburetor part identification and function. Participants received instructional treatments designed based on situated learning theory related to each specific topic. Having two different topics allowed for an internal replication of the study. We found the precision measurement instructional treatment resulted in a significant increase in knowledge scores and slight decreases in self-efficacy and interest. For the carburetor topic, there were increases in knowledge, though not significant, and decreases in measured perceived self-efficacy and interest. For the internal replication, the direction of changes in self-efficacy, interest, and knowledge were the same across both designs and with both topics, however, significance was not always the same. Instructors at the post-secondary level and secondary SBAE teachers could use methods described in this study to teach precision measurement and carburetor part identification and function if their goal is to increase knowledge of these topics. We recommend conducting further research to identify ways to maintain or increase self-efficacy and interest while gaining knowledge. Additional testing of instructional designs using situated learning theory in agricultural mechanics and other agricultural topics is also encouraged.

References

Anderson, K., Anderson, R., & Swafford, M. (2022). Effects of a professional development workshop on career and technical education teachers’ perceptions of teaching two-stroke engine repair skills: A preliminary study. Journal of Agricultural Systems, Technology, and Management, 33(1), 1-13. https://jastm.org/index.php/jastm/article/view/10217

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Arikan, A., & Bakla, A. (2011). Learner autonomy online: Stories from a blogging experience. In D. Gardner (Ed.), Fostering autonomy in language learning (pp. 240-251). Zirve University. http://ilac2010.zirve.edu.tr/Fostering_Autonomy.pdf

Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64(6), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043445

Bailey, J. M., Lombardi, D., Cordova, J. R., & Sinatra, G. M. (2017). Meeting students halfway: Increasing self-efficacy and promoting knowledge change in astronomy. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 020140. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.020140

Bell, R. L., Maeng, J. L., & Binns, I. C. (2013). Learning in context: Technology integration in a teacher preparation program informed by situated learning theory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 348-379. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21075

Blackburn, J. J., & Robinson, J. S. (2017). An investigation of factors that influence the hypothesis generation ability of students in school-based agricultural education programs when troubleshooting small gasoline engines. Journal of Agricultural Education, 58(2), 50-66. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2017.02050

Blackburn, J. J., Robinson, J. S., & Lamm, A. J. (2014). How cognitive style and problem complexity affect preservice agricultural education teachers’ abilities to solve problems in agricultural mechanics. Journal of Agricultural Education, 55(4), 133-147. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2014.04133

Borg, S., & Al-Busaidi, S. (2012). Learner autonomy: English language teachers’ beliefs and practices. London: British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/b459%20ELTRP%20Report%20Busaidi_final.pdf

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.

Clark, T. K., Anderson, R., & Paulsen, T. H. (2021). Agricultural mechanics preparation: How much do school based agricultural education teachers receive? Journal of Agricultural Education, 62(1), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2021.01017

Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective Task Value and the Eccles et al. Model of Achievement-Related Choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121). Guilford Publications.

Gable, R. K., & Roberts, A. D. (1983). An instrument to measure attitude toward school subjects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43(1), 289-293. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448304300139

Green, C., Eady, M. J., & Andersen, P. J. (2018). Preparing quality teachers: Bridging the gap between tertiary experiences and classroom realities. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 6(1), 104-125. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.6.1.10

Gregg, C., & Bowling, A. (2023). Undergraduate student perceptions of cooperative discussion groups as a classroom engagement tool. NACTA Journal, 67(1), 139-145. https://doi.org/10.56103/nactaj.v67i1.92

Guo, Y. M., Klein, B. D., & Ro, Y. K. (2020). On the effects of student interest, self-efficacy, and perceptions of the instructor on flow, satisfaction, and learning outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 45(7), 1413-1430. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1593348

Hackett, G., & Campbell, N. K. (1987). Task self-efficacy and task interest as a function of performance on a gender-neutral task. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 30(2), 203-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(87)90019-4

Hainline, M. S., & Wells, T. (2019). Identifying the agricultural mechanics knowledge and skills needed by Iowa school-based agricultural education teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 60(1), 59-79. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.01059

LaVergne, D. D., Bakhtavoryan, R., & Williams, R. L. (2018). Using a logistic regression approach to estimate the influence of demographical factors on small engine and welding competencies of secondary agricultural education teachers. The Texas Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 31(1), 1-11. https://txjanr.agintexas.org/index.php/txjanr/article/view/355

Mathew, S., Bright, K., Barrero-Molina, L. B., & Hawkins, J. (2022, April). Expectancy-value theory. OSU motivation in classrooms lab-motivation minute. https://education.okstate.edu/site-files/documents/motivation-classrooms/motivation-minute-expectancy-value-theory.pdf

National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academies Press.

Newcomb, L. H., McCracken, J. D., Warmbrod, J. R., & Whittington, M. S. (2004). Methods of teaching agriculture (3rd ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.

Niemivirta, M., & Tapola, A. (2008). Self-efficacy, interest, and task performance: Within-task changes, mutual relationships, and predictive effects. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21(3/4), 241-250. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.21.3.241

Nuutila, K., Tapola, A., Tuominen, H., Molnár, G., & Niemivirta, M. (2021). Mutual relationships between the levels of and changes in interest, self-efficacy, and perceived difficulty during task engagement. Learning andIndividual Differences, 92, 102090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102090

Paek, I. (2015). An investigation of the impact of guessing on coefficient α and reliability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39(4), 264-277. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621614559516

Pate, M. L., & Miller, G. (2011). A descriptive interpretive analysis of students’ oral verbalization during the use of think-aloud pair problem solving while troubleshooting. Journal of Agricultural Education, 52(1), 107-119. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2011.01107

Pate, M. L., Wardlow, G. W., & Johnson, D. M. (2004). Effects of thinking aloud pair problem solving on the troubleshooting performance of undergraduate agriculture students in a power technology course. Journal of Agricultural Education, 45(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2004.04001

Peake, J. B., Duncan, D. W., & Ricketts, J. C. (2007). Identifying technical content training needs of Georgia agriculture teachers. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 23(1), 44-54. https://journalcte.org/articles/10.21061/jcte.v23i1.442

Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33

Rasty, J., & Anderson, R. G. (2005). The importance of agricultural mechanics skills training: Implications for agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Systems, Technology & Management, 36(1), 1-13. https://jastm.org/index.php/jastm/article/view/11453

Rosenshine, B., & Furst, N. (1971). Research on teacher performance criteria. In B.O. Smith (Ed.), Research in teacher education: A symposium (pp. 37-72). Prentice-Hall.

Shoulders, C.W., Stripling, C.T., & Estepp, C.M. (2013). Preservice agriculture teachers’ perceptions of teaching assistants: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 54(2), 85-98. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2013.02085

Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2

Talbert, B. A., Croom, B., LaRose, S. E., Vaughn, R., & Lee, J. S. (2022). Foundations of agricultural education (4th ed.). Purdue University Press.

Valdetero, H. E., Kirk, K. R., Dobbins, T. R., & Fravel, P. M. (2015, July 26-29). Teaching small engine diagnostics using mobile app technology. [Paper presentation]. ASABE Annual International Meeting, New Orleans, LA, United States. https://elibrary.asabe.org/pdfviewer.asp?param1=s:/8y9u8/q8qu/tq9q/5tv/L/3471IGHL/H LIHPGGKG.5tv&param2=J/IK/IGIL&param3=HJG.HOK.ILI.K&param4=46279

Wells, T., & Hainline, M. S. (2021). Examining teachers’ agricultural mechanics professional development needs: A national study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 62(2), 217-238. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2021.02217

Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49-78. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23359359

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015

Wigfield, A., Muenks, K., Eccles, J. S., (2021). Achievement motivation: What we know and where we are going. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 3(1), 87-111. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-050720-103500

Downloads

Published

2025-01-01

How to Cite

Will Doss, Christopher M. Estepp, Donald M. Johnson, & Kobina Fanyinkah. (2025). Determining Instructional Design Effects on Self-Efficacy, Interest, and Knowledge in a Small Engines Course. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 75(01). Retrieved from https://jsaer.org/index.php/jsaer/article/view/26

Issue

Section

Research Articles