Homework Motivation And Preference Questionnaire Definition - Homework for you

Homework for you

Homework Motivation And Preference Questionnaire Definition

Rating: 4.0/5.0 (11 Votes)

Category: Homework

Description

Relationships of homework motivation and preferences to homework achie by Ayten Iflazoglu and Eunsook Hong

Abstract

Whether students' motivation, organizational approaches, physical needs, and environmental and interpersonal preferences during the homework process predict homework achievement and attitudes toward homework was examined in 1,776 Turkish students in Grades 5 through 8. The Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire was utilized to assess students' homework behaviors, and a multiple regression approach was employed to determine whether students' homework motivation and preferences predict homework achievement and attitude, while controlling for the effects of gender and socioeconomic status. Homework self-motivation, organization (order), sound, and interpersonal preference (studying alone) have relatively strong and consistent relationships with homework achievement and attitudes toward homework. However, other organizational (place), perceptual (tactile), and physical (intake) preferences, and other motivational sources (parent- and teacher-motivated), are related to attitudes toward homework more so than perceived homework achievement. Of these elements, self-motivation and set-order were consistent and strong in their relationships with homework achievement and attitudes across grades. The importance for teachers to individual homework and for parents to accommodate home environment was discussed, especially in the context of Turkish education.

Keywords

Attitude toward homework; Gender; Grade; Homework achievement; Learning preferences; Motivation; Socioeconomic status

Disciplines

Education | Educational Psychology | Psychology

Language Permissions

Use Find in Your Library, contact the author, or interlibrary loan to garner a copy of the item. Publisher policy does not allow archiving the final published version. If a post-print (author's peer-reviewed manuscript) is allowed and available, or publisher policy changes, the item will be deposited.

Identifier Repository Citation

Iflazoglu, A. Hong, E. (2011). Relationships of homework motivation and preferences to homework achievement and attitudes in Turkish students. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26 (1), 57-72.
Available at: http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/edpsych_fac_articles/48

Other articles

ERIC - Relationships of Homework Motivation and Preferences to Homework Achievement and Attitudes in Turkish Students, Journal of Research in Childhoo

Iflazoglu, Ayten; Hong, Eunsook

Journal of Research in Childhood Education. v26 n1 p57-72 2012

Whether students' motivation, organizational approaches, physical needs, and environmental and interpersonal preferences during the homework process predict homework achievement and attitudes toward homework was examined in 1,776 Turkish students in Grades 5 through 8. The Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire was utilized to assess students' homework behaviors, and a multiple regression approach was employed to determine whether students' homework motivation and preferences predict homework achievement and attitude, while controlling for the effects of gender and socioeconomic status. Homework self-motivation, organization (order), sound, and interpersonal preference (studying alone) have relatively strong and consistent relationships with homework achievement and attitudes toward homework. However, other organizational (place), perceptual (tactile), and physical (intake) preferences, and other motivational sources (parent- and teacher-motivated), are related to attitudes toward homework more so than perceived homework achievement. Of these elements, self-motivation and set-order were consistent and strong in their relationships with homework achievement and attitudes across grades. The importance for teachers to individual homework and for parents to accommodate home environment was discussed, especially in the context of Turkish education. (Contains 4 tables.)

Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals

Relationships of homework motivation and preferences to homework achievement and attitudes in Turkish students

Whether students' motivation, organizational approaches, physical needs, and environmental and interpersonal preferences during the homework process predict homework achievement and attitudes toward homework was examined in 1,776 Turkish students in Grades 5 through 8. The Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire was utilized to assess students' homework behaviors, and a multiple regression approach was employed to determine whether students' homework motivation and preferences predict homework achievement and attitude, while controlling for the effects of gender and socioeconomic status. Homework self-motivation, organization (order), sound, and interpersonal preference (studying alone) have relatively strong and consistent relationships with homework achievement and attitudes toward homework. However, other organizational (place), perceptual (tactile), and physical (intake) preferences, and other motivational sources (parent- and teacher-motivated), are related to attitudes toward homework more so than perceived homework achievement. Of these elements, self-motivation and set-order were consistent and strong in their relationships with homework achievement and attitudes across grades. The importance for teachers to individual homework and for parents to accommodate home environment was discussed, especially in the context of Turkish education.

Keywords: homework achievement, attitude toward homework, motivation, learning preferences, grade, gender, socioeconomic status

Homework has been used in schools across cultures as part of teaching strategies for meeting the educational needs of individual children. Although classroom learning has served learners in their knowledge and skill acquisitions, homework has played a significant role as supplemental learning opportunities (Bembenutty, 2009; Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006; Kitsantas & Zimmerman, 2009; Xu, 2005). Homework allows children to be active and participatory in their learning with families and allows for flexibility, as individual learners can approach homework using their preferred ways of completing assignments. In addition, homework as assigned by classroom teachers should be closely tied to curriculum.

Homework is learner centered, as learners use their own learning styles and seek information from various sources, thus directing their own learning (Hong & Milgram, 2000). The literature demonstrates various benefits that accrue when learners' preferred ways of learning are accommodated. For example, students develop positive attitudes toward learning, become more productive, and perform better when their learning preferences are accommodated (Dianne & Les, 1998; Dunn, Griggs, Olson, Gorman, & Beasly, 1995; Haar, Hall, Schoepp, & Smith, 2002; Minotti, 2005). Students who were instructed to use their strong learning preferences when they were preparing for examinations outperformed those who did not receive such instruction (Dunn, Deckinger, Withers, & Katzenstein, 1990).

When the home environment matches students' preferred ways of doing homework, homework achievement and attitudes toward homework improve (Hong & Lee, 2000, 2003; Hong & Milgram, 1999; Hong, Milgram, & Rowell, 2004). Students reporting that they are highly motivated to do homework also report high homework achievement and a positive attitude toward homework. A similar pattern is demonstrated with those students who are parent- and/or teacher motivated (Hong, 2001; Hong & Lee, 2000). Students who organize their homework in a certain order of their preference, do homework in a bright home environment, prefer specific and detailed homework instructions, and do homework alone tend to be high homework achievers and have positive attitudes toward homework (Hong, 2001).

These studies suggest that accommodating students' home learning preferences by manipulating environmental conditions will make studying at home more meaningful and productive. As the studies by Dunn and her associates (1990) and by Hong and her associates (2004) suggest, however, this learner-centered home learning approach requires a commitment by classroom teachers and by parents.

The current study examined Turkish students' homework motivation and preferences. With a recent change in education policy in Turkey, a learner-centered approach to instruction became a significant topic in schools. Homework is largely a learner-centered learning activity. To fully implement learner-centered homework, it is important to understand Turkish students' preferred ways of doing homework and their motivation sources. A detailed description of Turkish education is provided further below.

RELATIONSHIPS OF AGE, GENDER, AND SOCIOECONOMIC BACKGROUND TO HOMEWORK BEHAVIORS

Throughout schooling, students experience changes in types, amount, and purposes of homework assignments (Cooper, Lindsay, & Nye, 2000). Students' grade levels are consistently related to the amount and type of homework assigned and time spent on homework (Muhlenbruck, Cooper, Nye, & Lindsay, 2000). Older students, compared to their younger counterparts, show more independence at home, prefer no adult supervision, are less concerned about satisfying their parents, and prefer to study with peers while doing homework (Hong & Milgram, 2000). Older students, more so than younger students, regard homework in general as boring and meaningless, expend less effort, and are less motivated to do homework (Hong et al. 2000: Trautwein, Ludtke, Kastens, & Koller, 2006).

Iflazoglu and Hong (2011) examined age, gender, and socioeconomic status differences in Turkish middle-school students' homework preferences (organizational approaches, physical needs, environmental and interpersonal preferences) using multivariate ANOVA. They found that older Turkish students preferred no adult supervision and were less concerned about satisfying their teachers and parents as compared to younger Turkish students. Among Turkish students, some environmental and biological needs (e.g. light preference and intake needs) are more stable across grades, whereas sound and tactile preference showed small changes across grades. Although Turkish students' homework behaviors reflected Turkish culture in some components (Iflazoglu & Hong, 2011), most of the findings were strikingly similar to those from students of other countries (Hong, 2001; Hong & Lee, 2000, 2003; Hong & Milgram, 2000). For example, Turkish students, more so than students from Hong Kong, Korea, and the United States, preferred to do homework in the same place. However, decreased motivation for homework completion was demonstrated in older students from the United States and Korea, as well as from Turkey (Hong, Peng, & Rowell, 2009; Iflazoglu & Hong, 2011).

Gender differences have been found in homework motivation and preferences. Boys, more so than girls, seem to prefer homework that involves tactile learning and are parent motivated; girls prefer a bright environment more so than boys (Hong & Milgram, 1999). Girls, in general, tend to have more positive attitudes toward homework than boys, showing more responsibility and persistence in completing homework (Harris, Nixon, & Rudduck, 1993; Honigsfeld & Dunn, 2003). However, regarding homework preferences, there are more similarities than differences across gender (Hong & Milgram, 2000). For example, when cultural and gender differences in homework motivation and preferences were examined across U.S. Korean, and Chinese (Hong Kong) 7th-graders, Korean students showed more gender differences than did U.S. or Hong Kong students, with females preferring more structured homework and formal design, and males preferring work that involves tactile or kinesthetic activity. However, beyond these few differences, more similarities than differences were indicated across gender within each country on various homework motivation and preferences components. Among Turkish students, gender differences did not appear significant in most elements of homework preferences (Iflazoglu & Hong, 2011).

Interestingly, Turkish students with low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds reported more positive attitudes toward homework than did those with high SES backgrounds (Iflazoglu & Hong, 2011). More students with low-SES backgrounds reported that they are self-motivated to do well on homework, organize assignments in a certain order before working on homework, have a set place for homework, and prefer less background sound and more authority figures present than students with high-SES background. Ayata and Ayata (2003) and Memis (2007) speculated that families with low-SES background in Turkey believe that education provides skills to obtain a good quality occupation; parents tell their children to study hard to get a better job. However, even though most low-SES families value education, most parents are unprepared to help their children with homework, leaving children to find a way to complete their assignments on their own. Coulter (1979) contended that students from lower income homes often do not have the conditions appropriate for homework success and must compete on unequal terms with their middle-class counterparts. It seemed that the adverse home environment might have led Turkish children of low SES to strive to do well in homework, thus having more favorably viewed characteristics than children of high SES. Other studies on homework preferences did not examine the effect of SES background.

HOMEWORK MOTIVATION AND PREFERENCES: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Because the current study examined Turkish students' motivation sources and preferred ways to study at home, we adopted Hong and Milgram's (2000) model of homework motivation and preferences as the conceptual framework. This framework was helpful for the purpose of this study, as it illustrates a learner-centered approach on homework. Their model describes motivation and preferences of individuals engaging in homework. Motivation explains why learners do homework, and it includes the source and strength of the motives that explain the initial activation of the process of doing the required homework assignments. Four preference categories were presented in the model: organizational, surroundings, perceptual-physical, and interpersonal. The organizational preference consists of structure, order, place, and time, representing individuals' preference toward structured versus unstructured homework, arrangement of assignments before working on them, and where and when to do homework. The surroundings influence the degree to which the learner sustains the effort to successfully complete homework tasks, manifested by his or her attempt to adjust sound, light, temperature, and furniture design to his or her liking. Six elements of perceptual-physical preferences include auditory, visual, tactile, kinesthetic, intake, and mobility. The interpersonal category includes two elements: preference to do homework alone or with peers, and preference to do homework with or without the presence of an adult authority figure (Hong et al. 2004). Studies have demonstrated that when environment matches the students' preferred ways of doing homework, homework achievement and attitudes toward homework improve (Hong & Lee, 2003; Hong & Milgram, 1999).

Studies on homework preferences have been conducted mostly with students from the United States and some Asian countries. In Turkey, although a number of studies on homework have been conducted (Akin, 1998; Babadogan, 1990; (Cetinkaya, 1992; Demirel, 1989; Gur, 2003; Yapici, 1995; Yucel, 2004), these studies do not focus on students' motivation and learning preferences during homework, except for one study by Iflazoglu and Hong (2011) that examined the grade level and SES differences in these homework variables. However, Iflazoglu and Hong did not examine which homework motivation and preferences elements predict students' homework achievement and attitudes toward homework.

Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine whether there are certain elements of homework motivation and preferences that distinguish varied levels of homework achievement and attitudes toward homework. We examined whether Turkish elementary and middle school students' motivation sources, organizational approaches, physical needs, and environmental and interpersonal preferences during the homework process were related to their perceived homework achievement and attitudes toward homework. These relationships were examined while controlling for the effects of gender and socioeconomic status, as previous research found significant gender and SES differences in some elements of homework motivation and preferences.

The participants were 1,800 students in Grades 5 through 8 from 10 schools in a major urban city in Turkey. The 10 schools were randomly selected from two districts based on the list obtained from the Ministry of Education in the region. Influence analysis was conducted to determine outliers that influence the study results unduly. Based on the leverage and standardized difference in fit value (Pedhazur, 1997), 23 partipants were found to be outliers. After removing 23 outliers, 1,776 participants remained in the database. Table 1 presents the data distribution by gender and SES levels (see Measures). The gender and SES distributions were similar across grades and within each grade. Although homework is used in all grade levels of schoolchildren and in higher education, Grades 5 through 8 were selected for the study because the current study utilized an instrument suitable for upper elementary to high school students. In this study, we focused on middle-level students.

Context of the Study: Homework in Turkish Elementary and Middle Schools

The Ministry of National Education in Turkey modified the curriculum of basic courses in 2005 (Turkish Ministry of Education, 2005). With these changes, education at school is viewed as actual life, rather than a preparation period for later life. The overall objectives of Turkish National Education policy suggest that education take place not only in schools, but also at home and in workplaces. With this policy, learning at home and doing homework has become a more prominent issue in Turkey. Homework as a learner-centered learning activity has a number of advantages over schoolwork. Unlike learning in school, where, often, teachers experience difficulties in adapting their instruction to every student's learning preferences, students at home study at their own rate and with their preferred ways of learning and studying (Hong & Milgram, 2000). Utilizing a learner-centered approach to homework is a step toward decreasing numerous homework-related problems in Turkey.

During the 2004-2005 academic year, the issue of homework was revisited and restructured for the elementary school program. In this program, project assignments and homework assignments were defined and stressed for the purpose of providing students with opportunities to gain various learning experiences (Turkish Ministry of Education, 2005). In addition, the importance of homework in the evaluation of lower grade-level students was indicated in the new program: "In Grades 1, 2, and 3, students' achievements and developments are evaluated through classroom teachers' observations such as homework performance, class participation and projects, but not through exams" (Turkish Ministry of Education, 2005, para. 12). Homework performance scores are also an important component of student evaluation for 4th- through 8th-graders: "In addition to written exams, students' achievements are assessed by means of projects, homework performance, and class participations" (Turkish Ministry of Education, 2005, para. 18).

Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire. The 63-item Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire (HMPQ; Hong & Milgram, 1998, 2001) was used to measure students' homework motivation sources and preferences. The conceptual model and the development and validation history of the instrument are described in Hong and Milgram (2000). Students responded to each item by rating themselves on a 5-point scale indicating the degree of agreement.

In the current study, we examined motivation sources (self-, parent-, teacher-motivated); organizational approaches (order, place); surroundings (sound, light); perceptual and physical needs (tactile, intake); and interpersonal preferences (alone/peers, authority figure). Eleven elements (self-motivated through authority figure) were examined in this study, with each element consisting of three items. Table 2 presents item examples for the HMPQ elements examined in this study.

High scores in sound, light, and alone/peers show preferences to have background sound, more light, and working with peers, respectively. For order and place, high scores indicate set order and set place, and low scores indicate various orders and various places (see Table 2 for item examples). For other elements, high scores indicate students' preference to the element. Detailed descriptions of what low and high scores of these elements represent are provided in Hong et al. (2004).

Internal consistency estimates (Cronbach's alpha) for the Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire (HMPQ) subscale scores ranged from .59 to .84 ([mdn] = .69) for Grade 5, from .62 to .87 (mdn = .70) for Grade 6, from .59 to .88 (mdn = .70) for Grade 7, and from .63 to .87 (mdn = .77) for Grade 8. The coefficient of .59 in Grades 5 and 7 was from one component, alone/peers. The low reliability estimates for some components are partly due to the small number of items. However, reliability as low as .49 may not be a problem when the items cover the content meaningfully (Schmitt, 1996).

Principal component analyses with direct oblimin rotation were conducted to examine the structural integrity of the HMPQ scores in each grade. Briefly, the eight-factor solutions fit the data and theoretical structure well, with 60%, 61%, 61%, and 65% explained variances for 5th- through 8th-graders, respectively. Self-motivated and order were loaded on one emprical factor, as well as parent- and teacher-motivated, and place and sound. The rest of the empirical factors corresponded to their corresponding theoretical elements. Inspection of factor loadings indicate that self-motivated students tend to organize assignment according to a certain order, parent-motivated students tend to be teacher-motivated, and students who prefer to have a set place for homework tend to prefer a quiet environment. To test the research hypotheses, however, we analyzed each element as originally named because (1) the contents of these items clearly indicate what they intend to measure; for example, items for parent-motivation include the word parent; and (2) empirical factors are extracted based on sizes and patterns of correlations--that is, factorial validity does not supersede content validity.

The questionnaire was translated into Turkish by three faculty members at a university who were competent in Turkish and English. The Turkish version was back-translated into English by two faculty members and was compared with the original scale. Items that showed discrepancies between back-translated and original items were subjected to another round of translation and back-translation. The process continued until all translated items were considered representing the original questionnaire and all members of the translation team reached a consensus.

Perceived homework achievement and attitudes toward homework. Eight items that assessed participants' perceived homework achievement (four items) and attitudes (four items) were interspersed in the HMPQ (see Table 2 for item examples). Participants rated on a 5-point scale indicating the degree of agreement. The internal consistencies ranged from .62 to .77 (mdn = .72) for perceived achievement and from .65 to .77 (mdn = .67) for homework attitudes across grades. Four items for homework achievement and four items for homework attitudes were subjected to factor analysis respectively in each grade level. One-factor solutions for homework achievement and attitude fit the data well, with 50% to 58% explained variances for 5th- through 8th-graders, respectively, in homework achievement, and 51% to 60% explained variances for homework attitude.

Demographic information. A separate questionnaire was used to obtain participants' grade, gender, and SES. The Turkish Socio-Economic-Status Questionnaire, developed by Bacanli (1997), was used. Questionnaire items include parents' educational background and professions, the number of family members, the number of rooms in their house, monthly income of the family, the air-conditioning facilities of houses, family belongings (e.g. refrigerator, washing machine, television, computer), and whether the family was a landlord or a tenant. A score was given to each answer according to the rubric developed by Bacanli.

Responses to the questionnaire were aggregated for each person. Total scores ranged from 16 to 82. Individuals scoring one standard deviation above or below the group mean SES score on the Bacanli (1997) scale were operationally defined as high and low, respectively, and those with scores within one standard deviation above/below the mean as middle. There were 948 (52.7%) low, 282 (15.7%) middle, and 570 (31.7%) high SES students. Due to a small proportion of students with middle SES, as defined by Bacanli, high and middle SES groups of students were combined for the purpose of this study (henceforth called "high").

Data collection. One of the researchers, who resides in the area in Turkey where the data were collected, distributed questionnaires to students in class, after obtaining an official permission from the city's Ministry of Education. A member of the research team visited each class and described the research purposes and distributed informed consent forms with an explanation that consent by parent or guardian was required for research participation. The signed forms were collected in a few days. The process was repeated a second time for those students who did not return the form on the first request. The data collection from Grades 5 through 8 in each school spanned 1 to 2 weeks, depending on the situation at school, taking 10 weeks for completion. The dates were selected by school principals, in cooperation with the researcher, to ensure that there were no major school events or exams immediately before or after the data collection. In each classroom, the purpose of the study was explained and students were ensured of the anonymity and confidentiality of their responses. Participation in this study was voluntary, although all students present on the date of the data collection participated. Students completed a demographic sheet and the HMPQ with no time limits.

Data analysis. Data were screened to determine outliers using leverage, standardized difference in fit value, and regression case-wise analyses (Pedhazur, 1997). Results of evaluation of statistical assumptions for multiple regression analyses (normality, linearity, homoscedasticity, and multicollinearity) were satisfactory. To determine whether students' homework motivation and preferences predict their perceived homework achievement, multiple regression analyses were conducted within each grade level. Adjustment was made for gender and SES by entering them into the equation first, followed by all 11 motivation and preference subscale scores, thus determining whether the latter variables predict homework achievement, after controlling for the effects of gender and SES variables. The same procedure was used for attitudes toward homework.

As gender and SES were entered into the equation for controlling purposes, the current report focuses on the relationships of homework motivation and preferences to perceived homework achievement and attitudes toward homework. We present the findings of gender and SES first. In general, gender and SES were more influential on homework attitudes than homework achievement. SES levels demonstrated a significant relationship with attitudes in all grade levels, ps

Preference legal definition of preference

preference Preference

The act of an insolvent debtor who pays one or more creditors the full amount of their claims or a larger amount than they would be entitled to receive on a pro rata distribution.

For example, a debtor owes three creditors $5,000 each. All three are equally entitled to payment, but the debtor has only $12,000 in assets. Instead of paying each creditor $4,000, the debtor pays two creditors in full and pays the third creditor the remaining $2,000.

The Common Law does not condemn a preference. Some state statutes prescribe that certain transfers are void—of no legal force or binding effect—because of their preferential character. If a state antipreference provision protects any actual creditor of the debtor, the trustee in Bankruptcy can take advantage of it.

Bankruptcy law does condemn certain preferences. The bankruptcy trustee can void any transfer of property of the debtor if the trustee can establish the following:

  1. The transfer was "to or for the benefit of a creditor."
  2. The transfer was made for or on account of an "antecedent debt"—that is, a debt owed prior to the time of the transfer.
  3. The debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer.
  4. The transfer was made within 90 days before the date of the filing of the bankruptcy petition or was made between 90 days and one year before the date of the filing of the petition to an insider who had reasonable cause to believe that the debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer.
  5. The transfer has the effect of increasing the amount that the transferee would receive in a liquidation proceeding under chapter 7 of the bankruptcy law (11 U.S.C.A. § 701 et seq.). 11 U.S.C.A. § 547.

Other statutory provisions, however, create exceptions; if a transfer comes within an exception, the bankruptcy trustee cannot invalidate the transfer even though the aforementioned five elements exist.

preference

n. in bankruptcy, the payment of a debt to one creditor rather than dividing the assets equally among all those to whom he/she/it owes money, often by making a payment to a favored creditor just before filing a petition to be declared bankrupt. Such a preference is prohibited by law, and the favored creditor must pay the money to the bankruptcy trustee. However, the bankruptcy court may give secured creditors (with a judgment, lien, deed of trust, mortgage or collateralized loan) a legal preference over "general" creditors in distributing available funds or assets. (See: bankruptcy )

preference preference

PREFERENCE. The paying or securing to one or more of his creditors, by an insolvent debtor, the whole or a part of their claim, to the exclusion of the rest. By preference is also meant the right which a creditor has acquired over others to be paid first out of the assets of his debtor, as, when a creditor has obtained a judgment against his debtor which binds the latter's land, he has a preference.
2. Voluntary preferences are forbidden by the insolvent laws of some of the states, and are void, when made in a general assignment for the benefit of creditors. Vide Insolvent; Priority.

Link to this page:

Relationships of Homework Motivation and Preferences to Homework Achievement and Attitudes in Turkish Students

Relationships of Homework Motivation and Preferences to Homework Achievement and Attitudes in Turkish Students

Homework is a ubiquitous feature of schooling around the world. Yet questions linger about its efficacy for improving children's learning and achievement. The extent to which students are motivated to invest quality effort into homework completion is dependent on many factors, including cultural perspectives that may vary from one country to the next. Recent research demonstrates that students develop positive attitudes toward learning, become more productive, and perform better when their learning preferences, including their preferences for completing homework, are accommodated. İflazoğlu and Hong's research examines Turkish students' homework motivation and preferred ways to study at home, and whether certain elements of homework motivation and preferences distinguish varied levels of perceived homework achievement and attitudes toward homework.

This study surveyed the source and strength of students' motives for completing required homework assignments, as well as four categories of preferences. The first category addressed organizational preferences, including how students structure their work, the order in which they prefer to do it, the place and time preferred for homework completion, and whether students prefer structured versus unstructured assignments. The second category, surroundings, addressed preferences for sound, light, temperature, and furniture design. The perceptual-physical preference category included students' inclinations toward auditory, visual, tactile, and kinesthetic aspects of homework completion, as well as preferences toward mobility. The final category, interpersonal, assessed whether students prefer to do homework alone or with peers, and the relative importance of working with or without an adult authority figure.

Participants in this study included 1,776 students in grades 5 through 8 in 10 schools in a major city in Turkey. All participants completed a homework motivation and preferences questionnaire in their classrooms under the supervision of one of the researchers. Analyses of the data revealed associations between motivation/homework preferences and students' perceptions about their homework achievement. Students who self-reported that they were motivated to do well with homework and those who organized homework assignments using a set order when completing multiple assignments had positive perceptions about their homework achievement and positive homework attitudes. However, students' homework achievement and attitudes were not predicted by motivation to satisfy parents or teachers. Additionally, students preferring to study alone and in stable, quiet places self-rated higher on their homework achievement.

The authors note the consistency of findings from similar studies across multiple countries, suggesting that some universal components of homework preferences may exist that affect achievement and attitudes of schoolchildren. Because not all findings were consistent across contexts, however, this study points to the importance of understanding and using individual children's homework motivation and preferences to enhance their learning.

Full article published in Journal of Research in Childhood Education,
January-March 2012, Volume 26, No. 1, pp. 57-72-39.

Summary written by April Bedford and Renée Casbergue.

Homework • Chapters 10 and 11

Homework • Chapters 10 and 11

Marketing Research Proposal • Executive Summary – Major findings – Conclusions – Recommendations • Background (describe sector, business, issue and justify your choice) • Problem Definition/Objectives of the Research – Discussions with the decision makers & industry experts (if any) – Secondary data analysis (briefly describe content) – Qualitative research that was conducted (briefly describe content) – Statement of the management-decision problem and marketing research problem • (The purpose of this project is…). • Approach to the Problem – Academic and trade literature review – Analytical model – Research questions – hypotheses • Research Design – Type of research design (exploratory, descriptive, causal research design or combination etc. justify your choice) – Information needs – Data collection from secondary sources (justify your choice) – Data collection from primary sources (justify your choice) – Scaling techniques – Questionnaire development and pretesting – Sampling techniques • Fieldwork/Data Collection (how the data will be collected) • Data Analysis (how the data will be analyzed) • Reporting (how the results will be presented) – Any Intermediate Reports? – Formal presentation? • Cost and Time – Budgeting and time scheduling • Project Personnel (group members and their contribution factors) • Appendices (all data, statistics, graphs etc. related to the project, which were not included in the background section)

Focus of This Chapter Relationship to Previous Chapters Relationship to Marketing Research Process • Questionnaire Design • Research Design Components (Chapter 3) • Basic Types of Scales (Chapter 9) • Continuous and Itemized Rating Scales (Chapter 10) Problem Definition Approach to Problem Field Work Data Preparation and Analysis Report Preparation and Presentation Research Design. Figure 11. 1 Relationship of Questionnaire Design to the Previous Chapters and the Marketing Research Process

Application to Contemporary Issues Technology Ethics. International. B e a D M. B e an M R. E xperiential Learning Opening Vignette W h a t W o u ld Y o u D o. Importance of Questionnaire Design Process Specifying the Information Needed and Interviewing Method Determining Individual Question Content Overcome Inability and Unwillingness to Answer Choosing Question Structure. Fig 11. 3 Fig 11. 4 Figure 11. 2 Questionnaire & Form Design

Application to Contemporary Issues Technology Ethics. International. B e a D M. B e an M R. E xperiential Learning Opening Vignette W h a t W o u ld Y o u D o. Choosing Question Wording Determining the Order of Questions Identify the Form and Layout Reproduce the Questionnaire Eliminate Bugs by Pretesting Observation Forms. Fig 11. 5 Figure 11. 2 Questionnaire & Form Design (continued)

Questionnaire Objectives • It must translate the information needed into a set of specific questions that the respondents can and will answer. • A questionnaire must uplift, motivate, and encourage the respondent to become involved in the interview, to cooperate, and to complete the interview. • A questionnaire should minimize response error. How —.

Specify the Information Needed Specify the Type of Interviewing Method Determine the Content of Individual Questions Design the Question to Overcome the Respondent’s Inability and Unwillingness to Answer Decide on the Question Structure Determine the Question Wording Arrange the Questions in Proper Order. Figure 11. 3 Questionnaire Design Process

Identify the Form and Layout Reproduce the Questionnaire Eliminate Bugs by Pretesting. Figure 11. 3 Questionnaire Design Process (continued)

Effect of Interviewing Method on Questionnaire Design Department Store Project Mail Questionnaire • Please rank order the following department stores in order of your preference to shop at these stores. Begin by picking out the one store that you like most and assign it a number 1. Then find the second most preferred department store and assign it a number 2. Continue this procedure until you have ranked all the stores in order of preference. The least preferred store should be assigned a rank of 10. No two stores should receive the same rank number. Store Rank Order 1. Lord & Taylor ______ 2. Macy’s ______. 10. Wal-Mart ______

Effect of Interviewing Method on Questionnaire Design Telephone Questionnaire • I will read to you the names of some department stores. Please rate them in terms of your preference to shop at these stores. Use a ten point scale, where 1 denotes Not So Preferred and 10 denotes Greatly Preferred. Numbers between 1 and 10 reflect intermediate degrees of preference. Again, please remember that the higher the number, the greater the degree of preference. Now, please tell me your preference to shop at. (READ ONE STORE AT A TIME) Store Not So Greatly Preferred 1. Lord & Taylor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2. Macy’s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. 10. Wal-Mart

Effect of Interviewing Method on Questionnaire Design Personal Questionnaire • (HAND DEPARTMENT STORE CARDS TO THE RESPONDENT). Here is a set of department store names, each written on a separate card. Please examine these cards carefully. (GIVE RESPONDENT TIME). Now, please examine these cards again and pull out that card which has the name of the store you like the most, i. e. your most preferred store for shopping. (RECORD THE STORE NAME AND KEEP THIS CARD WITH YOU). Now, please examine the remaining nine cards. Of these remaining nine stores, what is your most preferred store for shopping? (REPEAT THIS PROCEDURE SEQUENTIALLY UNTIL THE RESPONDENT HAS ONLY ONE CARD LEFT) Store Rank Name of the Store 1. 1 _________ 2. 2 _________. 10 _________

Effect of Interviewing Method on Questionnaire Design Electronic Questionnaire • This question for e-mail and Internet questionnaires will be very similar to that for the mail questionnaire. • In all these methods, the questionnaire is self-administered by the respondent.

Individual Question Content Is the Question Necessary? • If there is no satisfactory use for the data resulting from a question, that question should be eliminated. information needs vs. time and volume

Individual Question Content Are Several Questions Needed Instead of One? • Sometimes, several questions are needed to obtain the required information in an unambiguous manner. Consider the question, “ Do you think Coca-Cola is a tasty and refreshing soft drink? ” (Incorrect) • Such a question is called a double-barreled question. because two or more questions are combined into one. To obtain the required information, two distinct questions should be asked: “ Do you think Coca-Cola is a tasty soft drink? ” and “ Do you think Coca-Cola is a refreshing soft drink? ” (Correct)

Overcoming Inability To Answer Is the Respondent Informed? • In situations where not all respondents are likely to be informed about the topic of interest, filter questions that measure familiarity and past experience should be asked before questions about the topics themselves. • A “don’t know” option appears to reduce uninformed responses without reducing the response rate.

Overcoming Inability To Answer Can the Respondent Remember? How many gallons of soft drinks did you consume during the last four weeks? (Incorrect) How often do you consume soft drinks in a typical week? (Correct) 1. ___ Less than once a week 2. ___ 1 to 3 times per week 3. ___ 4 to 6 times per week 4. ___ 7 or more times per week

Overcoming Inability To Answer Can the Respondent Articulate? • Respondents may be unable to articulate certain types of responses, e. g. describe the atmosphere of a department store. • Respondents should be given aids, such as pictures, maps, and descriptions to help them articulate their responses.

Overcoming Unwillingness To Answer Effort Required of the Respondents • Most respondents are unwilling to devote a lot of effort to provide information.

Overcoming Unwillingness To Answer Please list all the departments from which you purchased merchandise on your most recent shopping trip to a department store. (Incorrect) In the list that follows, please check all the departments from which you purchased merchandise on your most recent shopping trip to a department store. 1. Women’s dresses ____ 2. Men’s apparel ____ 3. Children’s apparel ____ 4. Cosmetics ____. 16. Jewelry ____ 17. Other (please specify) ____ (Correct)

Overcoming Unwillingness To Answer Context • Respondents are unwilling to respond to questions which they consider to be inappropriate for the given context. • The researcher should manipulate the context so that the request for information seems appropriate. Legitimate Purpose • Explaining why the data are needed can make the request for the information seem legitimate and increase the respondents’ willingness to answer. Sensitive Information • Respondents are unwilling to disclose, at least accurately, sensitive information because this may cause embarrassment or threaten the respondent’s prestige or self-image.

Overcoming Unwillingness To Answer Increasing the Willingness of Respondents • Place sensitive topics at the end of the questionnaire. • Preface the question with a statement that the behavior of interest is common. • Ask the question using the third-person technique (see Chapter 5): phrase the question as if it referred to other people. • Hide the question in a group of other questions which respondents are willing to answer. The entire list of questions can then be asked quickly. • Provide response categories rather than asking for specific figures. • Use randomized techniques.

Choosing Question Structure Unstructured Questions • Unstructured questions are open-ended questions that respondents answer in their own words. Do you intend to buy a new car within the next six months? _________________

Choosing Question Structured Questions • Structured questions specify the set of response alternatives and the response format. A structured question may be multiple-choice, dichotomous, or a scale.

Choosing Question Structure Multiple-Choice Questions • In multiple-choice questions, the researcher provides a choice of answers and respondents are asked to select one or more of the alternatives given. Do you intend to buy a new car within the next six months? ____ Definitely will not buy ____ Probably will not buy ____ Undecided ____ Probably will buy ____ Definitely will buy ____ Other (please specify)

Choosing Question Structure Dichotomous Questions • A dichotomous question has only two response alternatives: yes or no, agree or disagree, and so on. • Often, the two alternatives of interest are supplemented by a neutral alternative, such as “no opinion, ” “don’t know, ” “both, ” or “none. ” Do you intend to buy a new car within the next six months? _____ Yes _____ No _____ Don’t know

Choosing Question Structure Scales • Scales were discussed in detail in Chapters 8 and 9: Do you intend to buy a new car within the next six months? Definitely Probably Undecided Probably Definitely will not buy will buy

Choosing Question Wording Define the Issue • Define the issue in terms of who, what, when, where, why, and way (the six Ws). Who, what, when, and where are particularly important. Which brand of shampoo do you use? (Incorrect) Which brand or brands of shampoo have you personally used at home during the last month? In case of more than one brand, please list all the brands that apply. (Correct)

Choosing Question Wording The W’s Defining the Question Who The Respondent It is not clear whether this question relates to the individual respondent or the respondent’s total household. What The Brand of Shampoo It is unclear how the respondent is to answer this question if more than one brand is used. When Unclear The time frame is not specified in this question. The respondent could interpret it as meaning the shampoo used this morning, this week, or over the past year. Where At home, at the gym, on the road?

Choosing Question Wording Use Ordinary Words “ Do you think the distribution of soft drinks is adequate? ” (Incorrect) “ Do you think soft drinks are readily available when you want to buy them? ” (Correct)

Choosing Question Wording Use Unambiguous Words In a typical month, how often do you shop in department stores? _____ Never _____ Occasionally _____ Sometimes _____ Often _____ Regularly (Incorrect) In a typical month, how often do you shop in department stores? _____ Less than once _____ 1 or 2 times _____ 3 or 4 times _____ More than 4 times (Correct)

Choosing Question Wording Avoid Leading or Biasing Questions • A leading question is one that clues the respondent to what the answer should be, as in the following: Do you think that patriotic Americans should buy imported automobiles when that would put American labor out of work? _____ Yes _____ No _____ Don’t know (Incorrect) Do you think that Americans should buy imported automobiles? _____ Yes _____ No _____ Don’t know (Correct)

Choosing Question Wording Avoid Implicit Alternatives • An alternative that is not explicitly expressed in the options is an implicit alternative. 1. Do you like to fly when traveling short distances? (Incorrect) 2. Do you like to fly when traveling short distances, or would you rather drive? (Correct)

Choosing Question Wording Avoid Implicit Assumptions • Questions should not be worded so that the answer is dependent upon implicit assumptions about what will happen as a consequence. 1. Are you in favor of a balanced budget? (Incorrect) 2. Are you in favor of a balanced budget if it would result in an increase in the personal income tax? (Correct)

Choosing Question Wording Avoid Generalizations and Estimates “ What is the annual per capita expenditure on groceries in your household? ” (Incorrect) “ What is the monthly (or weekly) expenditure on groceries in your household? ” and “ How many members are there in your household? ” (Correct)

Choosing Question Wording Dual Statements: Positive and Negative • Questions that are in the form of statements should be worded both positively and negatively.

Determining the Order of Questions Opening Questions • The opening questions should be interesting, simple, and non-threatening. Type of Information • As a general guideline, basic information should be obtained first, followed by classification, and, finally, identification information. Difficult Questions • Difficult questions or questions which are sensitive, embarrassing, complex, or dull, should be placed late in the sequence.

Effect on Subsequent Questions • General questions should precede the specific questions (funnel approach). Q 1: “What considerations are important to you in selecting a department store? ” Q 2: “In selecting a department store, how important is convenience of location? ” (Correct)Determining the Order of Questions

Determining the Order of Questions Logical Order The following guidelines should be followed for branching questions: • The question being branched (the one to which the respondent is being directed) should be placed as close as possible to the question causing the branching. • The branching questions should be ordered so that the respondents cannot anticipate what additional information will be required.

Form and Layout • Divide a questionnaire into several parts. • The questions in each part should be numbered, particularly when branching questions are used. • The questionnaires should preferably be precoded. • The questionnaires themselves should be numbered serially.

1 1/2 hours to 1 hour 59 minutes. -4 2 hours to 2 hours 59 minutes. -5 3 hours or more. -6 Less than 30 minutes. -1 30 to 59 minutes. -2 1 hour to 1 hour 29 minutes. -3 The American Lawyer A Confidential Survey of Our Subscribers (Please ignore the numbers alongside the answers. They are only to help us in data processing. ) 1. Considering all the times you pick it up, about how much time, in total, do you spend reading or looking through a typical issue of THE AMERICAN LAWYER? Example of a Precoded Questionnaire

Reproduction of the Questionnaire • The questionnaire should be reproduced on good-quality paper and have a professional appearance. • Questionnaires should take the form of a booklet rather than a number of sheets of paper clipped or stapled together. • Each question should be reproduced on a single page (or double-page spread). • Vertical response columns should be used for individual questions. • Grids are useful when there a number of related questions which use the same set of response categories. • The tendency to crowd questions together to make the questionnaire look shorter should be avoided. • Directions or instructions for individual questions should be placed as close to the questions as possible.

Pretesting refers to the testing of the questionnaire on a small sample of respondents to identify and eliminate potential problems. • A questionnaire should not be used in the field survey without adequate pretesting. • All aspects of the questionnaire should be tested, including question content, wording, sequence, form and layout, question difficulty, and instructions. • The respondents for the pretest and for the actual survey should be drawn from the same population. • Pretests are best done by personal interviews, even if the actual survey is to be conducted by mail, telephone, or electronic means, because interviewers can observe respondents’ reactions and attitudes.

Pretesting • After the necessary changes have been made, another pretest could be conducted by mail, telephone, or electronic means if those methods are to be used in the actual survey. • A variety of interviewers should be used for pretests. • The pretest sample size varies from 15 to 30 respondents for each wave. • Protocol analysis and debriefing are two commonly used procedures in pretesting. • Finally, the responses obtained from the pretest should be coded analyzed.

Observational Forms Department Store Project • Who: Purchasers, browsers, males, females, parents with children, or children alone. • What: Products/brands considered, products/brands purchased, size, price of package inspected, or influence of children or other family members. • When: Day, hour, date of observation. • Where: Inside the store, checkout counter, or type of department within the store. • Why: Influence of price, brand name, package size, promotion, or family members on the purchase. • Way: Personal observer disguised as sales clerk, undisguised personal observer, hidden camera, or obtrusive mechanical device.

TABLE 11. 1 Questionnaire Design Check-List (Cont. ) Step 4 Overcoming Inability and Unwillingness to Answer 1. Is the respondent informed? 2. If respondents are not likely to be informed, filter questions that measure familiarity, product use, and past experience should be asked before questions about the topics themselves. 3. Can the respondent remember? 4. Questions which do not provide the respondent with cues can underestimate the actual occurrence of an event. 5. Can the respondent articulate? 6. Minimize the effort required of the respondents. 7. Make the request for information seem legitimate. 8. Is the information sensitive?

TABLE 11. 1 Questionnaire Design Check-List (Cont. ) Step 6 Choosing Question Wording 1. Define the issue in terms of who, what, when, where, why, and way (the six Ws). 2. Use ordinary words. W ords should match the vocabulary level of the respondents. 3. Avoid ambiguous words: usually, normally, frequently, often, regularly, occasionally, sometimes, etc. 4. Avoid leading questions that clue the respondent to what the answer should be. 5. Avoid implicit alternatives that are not explicitly expressed in the options. 6. Avoid implicit assumptions. 7. Respondent should not have to make generalizations or compute estimates. 8. Use positive and negative statements.

TABLE 11. 1 Questionnaire Design Check-List (Cont. ) Step 9 Reproduction of the Questionnaire 1. The questionnaire should have a professional appearance. 2. Booklet format should be used for long questionnaires. 3. Each question should be reproduced on a single page (or double-page spread). 4. The tendency to crowd questions to make the questionnaire look shorter should be avoided. 5. Directions or instructions for individual questions should be placed as close to the questions as possible.

TABLE 11. 1 Questionnaire Design Check-List Step 10 Pretesting 1. Pretesting should be done always. 2. All aspects of the questionnaire should be tested, including question content, wording, sequence, form and layout, question difficulty, and instructions. 3. The respondents in the pretest should be similar to those who will be included in the actual survey. 4. Begin the pretest by using personal interviews. 5. Pretest should also be conducted by mail, telephone, or electronically if those methods are to be used in the actual survey. 6. A variety of interviewers should be used for pretests. 7. The pretest sample size is small, varying from 15 to 30 respondents for the initial testing. 8. After each significant revision of the questionnaire, another pretest should be conducted, using a different sample of respondents. 9. The responses obtained from the pretest should be coded analyzed.

Homework • Chapter 11 • Start design your team project’s questionnaire • Quiz 6, ch. 11 (5 True/False Questions + 5 Multiple Choice Questions + 3 Short answer Questions)