Analysing Student Motivation in Challenge-Based Learning in Higher Engineering Education Using the Self-Determination Theory
-
Panagiotis PantzosDepartment of Learning in Engineering Sciences, Royal Institute of Technology KTH, SE-10044, Stockholm, SwedenAuthor
-
Arnold PearsDepartment of Learning in Engineering Sciences, Royal Institute of Technology KTH, SE-10044, Stockholm, SwedenAuthor
-
Jeffrey BuckleyDepartment of Technology Education, Technological University of the Shannon, N37HD68, Midlands Midwest, IrelandAuthor
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63385/ipt.v1i1.45Keywords:
Challenge-Based Learning, Higher Engineering Education, Learning, Qualitative Study, Self-Determination Theory, Student motivationAbstract
Challenge-based learning (CBL) engages students in complex, real-life challenges, promoting responsibility for their learning. Existing research has identified several factors that contribute to students’ motivation in CBL environments. However, prior studies have focused primarily on cognitive and metacognitive learning functions in active learning environments in higher engineering education. Further, affective/motivational functions regulate behaviors and emotions that arise during learning and stimulate affective responses that may positively, negatively or neutrally influence students’ learning process, performance, and well-being. Thus, using Self-Determination Theory (SDT), this qualitative study examines engineering students’ motivation in CBL environments. Twelve Master’s level students from a research-intensive university in Sweden took part in semi-structured interviews discussing their experiences during different CBL courses studies. Analysis combined inductive and deductive approaches, identifying affective/motivational functions emerging from the interviews and analysing them based on SDT concepts. The qualitative thematic analysis identified motivations that emerged such as innovation, entrepreneurship, designing learning, practical experience, real-world problem-solving, and societal contribution through sustainability, grounded by Self-determination continuum. SDT’s nutritient concepts of autonomy, competence, and relatedness were satisfied through structured tasks, mastery, learning, feedback, and positive social relationships. However, problematic areas such as a lack of rationale in tasks, absence of project choice, insecurity about professional rights, lack of feedback, limited growth opportunities, and negative social relationships frustrated students’ psychological needs. The study suggests practical applications to support motivational needs in higher engineering education, including regulating emotions during learning.References
Most Viewed
- Reimagining Krashen’s Input Hypothesis: The Role of AI and Multimodal Strategies in Language Acquisition 630
- Contemporary Challenges in Education: A Study on School–Family Interaction in the Primary Education Context of Malema-Sede, Mozambique 621
- Digital Citizenship Education for Good Governance: A Character-Based Approach Rooted in Local Wisdom 530
- Assessing Perceived Nursing Competence of Final Year Students of Selected Nursing Colleges 383
- Cloud Computing Adoption and Academic Performance in Higher Education: An Extended Technology Acceptance Model Approach 326
×