|
Âåñòíèê ¹ 7 / 2000 ÈÇ ÍÀÓ×ÍÎÉ ËÀÁÎÐÀÒÎÐÈÈ Motivation and Activity Joachim
Lompscher,
University of Potsdam Motivation is one of the most psychological topics of this science. It constitutes the very nature of what psychology is about - namely, how people regulate multiple interactions within the world, including themselves. Motivation was and is interpreted very differently, depending on the various theoretical and methodological positions. In this paper the perspective of the so-called socio-cultural or cultural-historical school which was founded by Vygotsky, Luria, Leontiev and their co-workers will be described with the aim to reveal a number of ideas that might be useful even for research in motivation in our days. However, it is impossible to give a complete picture of the theoretical and methodological positions of this rich and ramified tradition line here. Thus, the following explanations will be confined to one central part of it, namely the elaborated activity theory, above all, the work of Alexej Leontiev. In this paper, first the concept of activity and then the concept of motivation will be outlined in its theoretical framework These will subsequently be made concrete with respect to motives of learning activity. Finally, some current perspectives and open problems will be mentioned. The concept of activity People live and develop under concrete historical and cultural conditions. One of the most general and important aspects of human life is that individuals ensure their existence and development by activity. People shape and change their natural and societal life on the basis of interactions with the world. At the same time, they are constantly affected by actions and reactions of nature and society. Human activity is, first of all, characterised by communication and co-operation between people. In other words, activity is embedded in societal and social contexts, even when one is confronted with a problem or task as a singular person. Joint activity - in immediate as well as in mediated forms - is the framework within which people transform parts or aspects of the world into an object they act upon according to the means and possibilities they have in order to satisfy their needs. Structure and process of concrete activities are substantially determined by their objects, their features and relations with other objects, but also by the conditions under which the activity takes place. Activity not only suggests results for the satisfaction of needs, it also produces new needs of material and cultural origin. Through activity people not only modify objects, means and conditions, they change themselves as well and become conscious of this activity. Thus, the concept of activity comprises the interaction and interrelation between subjects acting upon and modifying or producing all kinds of objects (including other subjects), in order to satisfy different human needs. Individuals use means or tools in a more or less adequate way to turn aspects of the world into objects and anticipate the results of the activity. This is taking place under concrete cultural-historical, societal and natural, social and individual conditions. Human activity is societal and object-related in its substance. There is no activity without object and the subject of any activity is not an isolated individual, but he or she acts in different societal and social networks not to be ignored when concrete activities are analyzed. Activity is psychologically regulated and characterised by different degrees of goal-directedness, consciousness and other qualities. It has a hierarchical or heterarchical structure, which means that it consists of and is realised by actions directed towards goals of different levels, range, and significance. Goal-directed actions, in turn, are comprised of different partial actions and more or less automated operations realised depending on concrete conditions of the respective activity. Content, position and interrelation of actions depend on the concrete activity they are components of. The same actions may constitute different kinds of activity. This is most of all determined by the respective motivation. But what means motivation in this theory? The activity theoretical concept of motivation Motivation cannot be reduced to its energetic or dynamic aspects. In its substance it is object -related and object-determined as is activity itself. Activity is stimulated by different needs, but this is still a vague, not goal-oriented activation. Needs, organic as well as cultural ones, have to be satisfied by appropriate objects, but such objects cannot be represented within the needs as states of a subject. Such objects have to be found and discovered through human-world-interaction, in other words through the process of activity. So, on the one hand, needs are starting points or presuppositions of activity, but on the other hand, needs are results or products of activity in the sense, that they are assigned a meaning by concrete objects. The term „object“ means not only refers to singular things, but to situations and persons as well. Objects which an individual represents cognitively and which satisfy a certain need therefore become emotionally significant for the individual. As such they become the real motive of a concrete goal-oriented, object-determined activity. In this sense, motives represent a unity of cognition and emotion. (Leontiev, 1978, 79) Motives are not simply given. Rather, they are established in the process of activity. Diversity and variety of human activity produces a respective diversity of human motivation. New motives constantly arise or change their position and significance, other motives loose their power or fade away. Each structural component of human activity may become a motive of further activity in this process - partners, means and conditions, course and consequences, the activity subject her or himself. This can be shown in detail, at different developmental levels – sociogenesis, ontogenesis, genesis of actions as well as genesis in actual situations and processes. Leontiev’s theory is a methodological one in the first place. It has stimulated various concrete investigations in this field. For this reason some essential aspects will be explained first, examples will be given later on. The hierarchical or heterarchical structure of activity mentioned above is mainly connected with motivation. As a rule, human activity is stimulated by different motives simultaneously which differ in position and significance in the motivational structure. These motives may be subordinated or they may function on equal footing. They may even come into conflict with each other. There are leading or „sense-giving“ motives which determine the personal significance or personal sense of an activity or its components for an individual and therefore determine the whole character of that activity and its position in an individual’s life and activity system. At a more subordinate level other motives stimulating activity, function in connection with sense-giving motives. The concept of personal sense was further elaborated by Leontiev’s followers, first of all, by Dimitri Leontiev (1990). Another aspect of the activity structure is connected with the interrelations between motives and goals. While action theories usually view goals as a given fact, activity theory explores how goals come into being, what they depend on and, of course, how they function. As already explained, goals are derived from motives. They stimulate and determine the character and direction of an activity. In otherwords, motives generate goals for actions necessary for reaching the desired result. One of the function of goals consists of anticipating results and thus determining the way towards the result. Goals directing the action which is in turn part of a motivated activity. Motives are superordinated in relation to goals. In some cases, goals may become motives or coincide with motives, but as a rule, human activity is characterised by the difference between these two psychological components. Consider a certain motivation for scientific research and the variety of actions and their respective goals that are oriented towards realisation of that motivation. The personal evaluation of reaching or failing a certain goal much depends largely on the relationship between that goal and the motive leading the whole activity. Success or failure concerning a goal with a subordinated position in an activity structure will play a different emotional role than one concerning a central goal which can neither be ignored nor substituted or changed. More or less complex activity structures are results of development. Leontiev (1994) reported experiments with preschool-children showing the first steps in that development. For instance, one action included in different activities was carried out in different ways and qualities. Under a play motive, children were able to perform a certain voluntary motor behaviour or a cognitive task like remembering a certain word list much better than under a motive of communicating with an adult. In this latter situation they wanted to fulfill the instruction as well, but they could not. Other developmental levels and other situations show other phenomena, but the substance is the same: The performance of an action and thus the realisation of a goal much depends on the activity it is included in and thus on the respective motivational structure. In this context another finding called „bitter sweet“ is of prime interest. In an experimental situation a preschooler had the task to take an object with his hands without moving from his place. This could not be achieved, as the distance was too large. After the instruction had been given, the experimenter went out of the room and the child was observed from outside. After various trials when sitting at his place the child moved to the object, took it and went back to his place. The subsequent behaviour was quiet, without signs of bad conscience or other hints to failure. The experimenter returned, praised him for performing so well and gave him a sweet. The child refused it and even began to cry. Leontiev’s interpretation: The child’s action was included into two different activities, subordinated to two different motives – on the one hand, to get a reward, an object, on the other hand, to shape his relation with the adult. Performing the action the child did not feel any conflict or contradiction. Only afterwards, when the experimenter praised him for fulfilling a task he could not and did not fulfill, the conflict arose – according to his personal sense, the sweet became „bitter“. This is one of the starting points of personality development. Personality in this theory is interpreted in terms of co-ordination and structuring of different activities and motives which lead to complex personality structures. As this is a further and very complex topic, it will not be discussed here. In the following section the activity theoretical concept of motivation will be concreted with respect to the aspect of learning. Motives of learning activity What is meant by learning activity? This term does not coincide with learning processes in general. It seems necessary to discriminate two basic forms of learning: On the one hand, learning through activity – that is, learning in various activity modes (play, every day communication, work etc.) without any special learning goal (incidental learning as a result of activity directed towards other goals than learning). On the other hand, learning as activity – that is, a specific kind of activity directed towards learning goals (intentional learning). Hence, if we refer to learning activity the latter type of learning is addressed (Davydov 1988a, b, Dawydow, Lompscher & Markowa 1982, Elkonin 1989). Historically, learning activity primarily stems from work activity. In the ontogenetic process it emerges from interaction and communication with other people, every day activity and, especially, from play. What is characteristic of that special activity? Five characteristic features will be outlined: First, learning activity is directed towards the acquisition of societal knowledge and competence. This means that it is performed with the goal to cope with learning tasks, presupposing that special learning objects or domains are constituted (subject matters or similar categories: parts of societal knowledge and competence especially selected, shaped and presented for the purpose of acquisition). Second, this acquisition is possible only by individual re-production of societal knowledge, action patterns, forms of behaviour. This means that learning actions which are adequate to goal and object have to be performed in order to acquire and to modify memory contents. These learning actions consist of productive and reproductive components which depend on each other and form a unity. A third feature of learning activity is that tools which can be used when actions are performed are necessary in order to reach learning goals. Such learning „tools“ are, on the one hand, material ones (for example, text books, computers etc.) and, on the other hand and most importantly, ideal ones (cognitive operations, cognitive structures, i.e. knowledge of concepts and rules, learning strategies and techniques etc). Learning tools can only fulfill their function, while they are incorporated into the structure of learning actions, if they were learning objects to begin with, i.e., these have to be acquired as well. A fourth characteristic is that a learning activity emerges and develops under specific societal conditions. It is mainly pedagogically organised and needs special environments for more or less optimal formation and functioning. Finally, as a fifth characteristic, learning activity is to be performed on concrete levels of personality development and inter-individual difference. If we consider these characteristics, learning activity differs from all other kinds of activity in that it is not directed towards affecting objects as parts of the world (even though it may seem to be). On the contrary, the main goal and real sense of learning activity is self-modification and self-perfection of the learner. This goal can be reached only by performing particular actions with different objects. Another substantial feature does not discriminate learning activity from other kinds of activity: It is not simply given to the individual, but has to be acquired by the individual as a part of the societal culture and experience. Learning activity in this sense has to be shaped insofar as learning itself is an objective that has to be learned. This is a long term process which entails specific tasks and problems on each level of personality development. The main and general problem in this process is that the quality and structure of learning activity which is reached at a certain developmental level is usually not sufficient for setting and reaching new, further learning goals. When entering a new field or turning to a deeper structure of a learning domain, the learner has to use new or higher-order learning actions in order to penetrate the learning material. But there would not be anything to learn, if the person already possessed them in the necessary quality. Moreover, it is impossible to acquire such individually new learning actions, if they are isolated from the respective learning object, because learning actions can fulfill their function only, if they fit the substance of object and goal. Obviously, learning activity and learning object have to be considered as a unity. That means that learning material has to be shaped and presented appropriately, in order for an approach to be active and include independent inventions of methods, strategies, explanation by the learners, which may or may not prove to be successful in the further learning process, as well. This characterisation of learning activity leeds to the following conclusion: A learning activity cannot originate or unfold under conditions of pressure and compulsion. Learning activity should be based on learning needs and motives. This makes it possible to directly turn towards learning objects, achieve satisfaction from pursuing them and from developing one’s personality. Such a motivation leeds to the formation of learning goals directed towards acquisition of new knowledge and competence, towards coping with new learning tasks and challenges, towards penetrating deeper and deeper into a learning object or domain. Thus, learning activity is characterised by a certain level of independence, individual initiative, cognitive interest, efforts towards enhancement of competence. One might argue that these characteristics may only be true for persons with relatively high levels of development. However, they can also be observed in respective elementary, child-related forms in primary schools and classes as well. A regressive process may be observed in regular schools: Elementary forms of learning activity in primary school don not develop further, but disappear with growing age and school experience. Obviously, learning activity does not emerge and develop spontaneously and under any conditions. There seem to be great inter-individual differences in this respect. Indeed, not every learner learns to learn! Learning activity as discussed above has to be formed systematically. A higher form gives an orientation for the analysis of lower levels and elementary forms and, above all, of necessary conditions and steps towards further development. This was studied by Galperin (1973, 1982), Davydov (1988b), Elkonin (1989), Engestrom (1987) and many others in the activity theoretical framework, including my own work (Lompscher 1989a, b). With regard to the main steps in the development of learning activity we have to note however, that it is determined by schooling, but not in a formal way: Not the fact of starting school life and career evokes learning activity, but the principally new activity conditions and content: Literacy, arithmetic etc. demand and produce a principal change in the approach to the world, namely it slowly becomes a theoretical one, which is more or less mediated by abstractions and generalisations, by organising things and experiencing them in a structured, systematic way that differs from every-day experience and situations. For example, observable phenomena are explained and interpreted by means of knowledge acquired so far. Prerequisites for this change emerge in cognitive, emotional, motivational and volitional respect during the preschool stage of development. Generally, learning activity forms and becomes the dominating kind of activity during the first school years. This means, as Leontiev indicated, that it determines the position of children in their surrounding world and the type of their relationships with others. Learning activity constitutes a new activity system and stands in the centre of this system, it affects all other kinds of children’s activities, and above all, it stimulates the psychological development to a certain extent, as it places learning tasks in „zones of proximal development“ - to use a term coined by Vygotsky. In the case that learning activity is formed as a special activity, i.e., learners have really learned to learn, they continue to do so with increasing proficiency, but learning activity looses its dominating position and becomes a part of the further developing activity system. In the mean time other kinds of activity may become dominating ones, for example communication among peers. Later on, in the course of personality development, learning activity may return to the surface in the form of vocational learning (orientation towards and acquisition of work activity and profession). Further on, it serves as a component of the individual activity system as life-long learning in different directions and forms – again, with great inter-individual variation which is also due to the societal conditions of individual development. As may be inferred from that characterisation of learning activity, that motivation is the centre of this conception. Leontiev (1994) reconstructed the general development of learning motives which derived from different investigations of his co-workers – under concrete historical and cultural conditions, of course. The prerequisites for the motive to acquire knowledge and skills in a more or less systematic way emerge in the late preschool age. The first real learning motive of young school-children is „to take part in an activity that is required and valued by society. The personal sense for the children is first and foremost that of occupying the position of pupil“ (Leontiev 1994, 27). Thus, they receive a new position in the world, they have serious work and duties to fulfill which are represented – not lastly – by external signs. Even when learning difficulties arise, they don’t like to return to kindergarten, because – as one of the subjects in an interview said – they don’t have holidays there! Learning in school, in general, is most important during that early period. As time goes by, it becomes a normal every-day activity for the pupils and new learning motives arise which are connected with school life, relationships and position in the class, grading etc. Further on, preparation for future life becomes the basis of learning motivation, though in more or less vague or one-sided forms yet. Leontiev summarizes the development of the general motivation to learn: „In the course of the school years we can detect three main levels in the development of motivation to learn: (a) the level of motives that lie in learning itself; (b) the level of motives that lie in school life and relationships within the class and school collective; and (c) the level of motives that lie in the world, future occupation, and life’s prospects“ (Leontiev 1994, 28). These general motives are completed by particular types of learning interests. In Leontiev’s words: „At the first level, children have no distinctive interests in the content of subject matters and learning tasks. Seven-years-old appear to be attracted equally to writing, arithmetic, and all other subjects, just so long as they have the character of learning...At the next level, learning interests begin to differentiate. The concrete content of the instructional material takes on significance. Here, the first personal learning interests are formed. At the same time, other things are found to be boring and are only done because they are required. Interests now shift from external actions related to learning to their content, that is, to the task that the action serves. If a task appears to the children as insufficiently rich in content, then the immediate motives that would otherwise have motivated performance of the corresponding action give way, usually and sometimes exclusively, to grades and other factors in which the general motivation to learning at this level is concretised. Out of this arise some new problems. What is now required for learning is the use of the will to subordinate the actions of learning to a motive that may have little connection to their content and evokes no immediate interest. The pupils acquire little by little a constant and selective point of view with respect to the various disciplines, and by the middle or late school years they will already grasp the significance of scientific knowledge. At the same time, the first cognitive motives develop, acquiring this or that shading according to the level of general motivation for learning. It is the period of scientific learning interests in which the immediate motivation for learning actions expresses itself. These lines (of general and particular learning motives, J.L.) do not exist independently of each other. And they don’t run in parallel but interpenetrate one another. The result is a wide range of individual paths of development and types of learning motivation“ (p. 28). This general and schematic picture of the development of learning motivation was given by Leontiev in 1946. It became the basis for other investigations concerning conditions and causes of learning motivation, inter-individual differences in this respect, approaches to modifying motivation, the role of learning motivation in personality development (e.g., Bozhovich, 1970, Elkonin & Dragunova, 1967, Markova, 1983, Shchukina 1979, Scheibe 1989). Leontiev himself discussed learning motivation especially in the context of the problem of conscious learning in his book Activity, Consciousness, Personality (Leontiev, 1979). Usually, learning activity has a complex motivational structure. Different motives take part in it and interact with each other. They may hold different positions in that structure, for example, a more dominating or more subordinated, sense-giving or stimulating one without particular personal sense, a positively or negatively motivating, really stimulating activity or one serving only as knowledge about socially required motives. Depending on the concrete content, conditions and course of activity, motives emerge and gain or loose their power. They modify their position in the motivational structure. Each component of the general activity structure - object or content, actions and course of activity, conditions and means, partners and social relations, the activity subject him or herself – may become learning motives. Different motivational taxonomies were elaborated and discussed in this context. Three large groups of motives seem to be most important groups, from an activity theoretical point of view: social, self-related and cognitive motives. In the following section some aspects about each of these groups will be discussed. Social learning motives like identification with teachers or other persons, communication and co-operation with peers, interrelations in the group and, especially, between a group and the respective pupil, learning as a means to help and support others, feelings of duty to learn, may become powerful learning motives. The individual biography, social and societal conditions of life and, of course, the concrete conditions and situations in school and in class determine the development and mode of action of social learning motives. In this respect, many common positions and results which are compared to other theories can be found (see, e.g., Aebli 1987). In any case, motives as psychological components of activity are individual phenomena and in this sense self-related. Nevertheless, it is possible and even necessary to define a group of learning motives as self-related ones. In the case of social motives, activity partners and relationships with them and among them shape the motive’s content. This is immediately connected with the individual learner. However, when he himself, his own personal development and well-being, his achievement and self-perfection, his success and position compared with others motivate him for learning, we may speak about self-related learning motives. It seems to me that this aspect was the preferred or even the only topic in the psychology of motivation in Western countries over a relatively long period, while other motives were considered and studied much less. In the last years this situation has been changing (see, e.g., Boekaerts 1992, Krapp & Prenzel 1992, Rheinberg 1989, 1995, Schiefele & Schreyer 1994). If learning activity is concieved as an activity directed towards the acquisition of societal knowledge and competence, we should give special attention to motives the content of which is formed by the learning object and its acquisition. This is mostly - though not exclusively - a matter of cognition. Therefore cognitive motives have to play an important role in learning. They were especially studied and formed in experiments with the teaching strategy of ascending from the abstract to the concrete (Davydov 1988b, Lompscher 1989a,b). Briefly, this strategy is directed towards a systematic formation of learning activity in pupils. Learning actions and learning motives are viewed in their interrelatedness. A great deal of attention is paid to the formation of the learners’ own learning goals and their more or less independent realisation, to the analysis and reflection of task requirements and individual presuppositions by the learners themselves, and further aspects. The learning activity is organised in such a way that, at first, so-called initial abstractions are formed in the process of actively performing actions with the learning object or its representatives. Then, these abstractions are used as cognitive tools for penetrating the whole learning material in a particular domain or a defined part of it. Thus, abstractions are the result of the own cognitive activity of the pupils under the teacher’s guidance. They therefore become the prerequisite for further acquisition. The concrete diversity of a domain is thus acquired on the basis of starting abstractions being themselves enriched in this process by concretisation. We found in different subject matters in primary education that not only the quality of knowledge became significantly better than with usual instructional methods, but the quality of the cognitive activity, for instance, in problem solving was much higher as well. This was interpreted as development of elementary forms of theoretical thinking compared with empirical thinking Theoretical thinking is defined as more or less deep-structured understanding compared to more or less superficial orientation towards phenomena alon. In this context, the development of learning motives showed interesting modifications as well. Motives directed immediately towards acquisition of knowledge and competence are the primary form of learning motives. However, at the beginning, the personal sense lies, very globally, in learning as such as mentioned above. Cognitive learning motives in exactly this sense of the term coincide with the developmental level of learning activity. In line with Markova (1983, Dawydow, Markowa & Lompscher 1982) and others we discriminate different levels of cognitive motives. A lower level is the pendant to empirical thinking: Cognitive activity is motivated by more or less isolated facts, interesting details, singular relations lying on the surface of a learning object. Considering the process of learning, most interesting for the learners is to get a result. With development of theoretical thinking, cognitive motives gradually reach a higher level: Ways and methods which are necessary to reach a result become more interesting for the learners. When learners try to reveal the deep structure of a learning object, cognitive tools are of special significance. Phenomena may be observed immediately – at least on an elementary level – but substance, inner relations, laws and regularities of an object or domain have to be made accessible by means of special methods. Learners who have learned that there is something behind the surface of a learning object and that it can be revealed using, for instance, experimental methods and certain cognitive operations, begin to be interested in this aspect of way and method. This is a very powerful learning motive, because it is not limited to singular phenomena and results. Penetration into an object is a principally endless process – behind one layer of substance another one is opened up. Therefore, it is difficult or even impossible to satisfy motives which are directed towards such cognitive tasks. If learning is motivated in such a way, it becomes unselfish. In this case, the motivational structure of learning activity is dominated by the intrinsic interest in the learning object itself which serve as the basis for intensive learning over periods of time that may, however, differ in their duration. On the contrary, low-level cognitive motives directed towards superficial facts and similar things are not able to stimulate intensive and long-lasting cognitive activity, because they can be satisfied relatively easily and therefore loose their motivational potential relatively quickly. Lower and
higher levels of cognitive motivation in the discussed sense are extreme
poles on a broad continuum with different intermediate levels. The shift
to higher levels is a long term process. However, in elementary forms,
they may be observed in primary school already. In connection with an
elementary course of science in fourth grade classes organised as ascending
from the abstract to the concrete, Scheibe (1989) studied the development
of cognitive motivation. Usually, introduction into science in primary
school is oriented towards description of different phenomena, a kind
of systematisation of the children’s knowledge on the level of every-day
concepts. In our experimental teaching, we tried to form elementary scientific
concepts of processes in nature, their conditions and causes etc. Systematic
observation, experimenting, problem solving, reflection on the students’
own learning experience and methods were used as major ways to obtain
this goal. Cognition and motivation were mutually affected. It became
interesting for the children to analyse processes in nature, the changes
of phenomena and their causes, to reveal new sides and aspects of nature
never considered before. This cognitive activity gradually became a motive
in itself for the children. In the case of our teaching experiment which lasted about 30 lessons, the development of cognitive motives could be seen from other findings as well. A significant increase in the percentage of interest for solving productive tasks or problems compared with reproductive and routine tasks and an increase in the level of independence in solving productive tasks was observed, again in comparison with control classes. These findings are based on special methods which will be described later on, and were supported by observation in the classroom. Even low-performance pupils were actively engaged in determining learning goals and in realising them. A majority of the pupils continued to be occupied with such topics even after the lessons. Analogical findings were reported by several other authors (see Davydov 1988b, Dawydow, Lompscher & Markowa 1982, Lehwald 1985, Markova 1983). Cognitive motives were formed and stimulated in a complex process of formation of learning activity as a whole, first of all, by a systematic formation of learning actions which are necessary for the acquisition of knowledge through problem solving, experimenting etc. Cognitive motives develop in connection with and in dependence on the development of cognitive operations and structures and, in turn, stimulate cognitive development. However, this is a long-term process during which the experience of successful and partially unsuccessful cognitive activity has to be acquired and motives have to be stabilised and supported in various domains and situations. A general motivation towards cognition and acquisition of knowledge and competence is then completed by and differentiated into more or less special object-related interests. It therefore forms inter-individually varying and complex motivational structures. The study of cognitive motivation and of its development is – to a great deal – a problem of appropriate methods. We could not reveil differences between experimental and control classes in this respect – at least at this age level – on the level of conscious learning motives or – in other words – of knowledge about motives which can be stated by means of questionnaires or interviews. Control classes were cognitively „motivated“ – in words only – as much as our experimental classes, but the behaviour in real learning situations in the classroom or under special conditions differed substantially. We therefore tried to study cognitive motives through the analysis of real actions. For example, in individual experiments, we confronted the children with tasks of different cognitive load and asked them to select the task they would like to solve most of all and to explain why. The process of solving the selected task and another task not selected by the child was analysed as well. While the children were confronted with difficulties in solving tasks, they were asked which kind of help they would prefer - for instance, hints or concrete steps in the direction of the result to be found or hints to methods how the respective result could be found independently. A whole help system may be defined and given step-by-step so that the child’s reactions can be stated in a more or less differentiated way. Talking to the pupil within this real action situation or immediately after it, as well as the observation of behaviour and achievement in such situations may give additional information. Methods such as the selection of tasks or help ought to be improved further and other action-related methods should be elaborated. Some effort was made to standardise such an approach for diagnostic goals. The work of Lehwald (1985) may be mentioned here, as he stressed two features of cognitive motives, namely the willingness to make cognitive effort and the interest in independent knowledge acquisition. He elaborated several methods for the analysis of cognitive motivation under conditions of information-seeking in problem situations in grades 6 and 7. A great deal of work remains to be done that concerns methods for the analysis of cognitive motivation. Thus, we will reach the fourth and last point of this discussion. 4. Unsolved problems and possible prospects As shown in the former paragraphs, the motivational structure of activity in general and of learning activity in particular is a very complex field and a lot of questions are not yet answered or even asked. One substantial prerequisite to succeed in deeper understanding motivation is to study it not in isolation from other psychological aspects and processes but as a component of the psychological regulation of activity embedded in real-life processes and situations. Progress in improving the analysis of activity as a whole, in methodological and theoretical respects, will bring forward the study of motivation as well (see, e.g. Davydov 1991, 1993). It seems to me very important, therefore, to investigate the interrelationships between different kinds or groups of learning motives - cognitive, social and self-related ones. None of these or maybe other particular motives are alone responsible for a given quality and course of learning activity. The latter is a result of their interaction. But how they really interact and how this depends on concrete conditions is not known and will not be known, if we continue to investigate cognitive or social or self-related motives without trying to grasp their interaction and mutual dependency under concrete conditions. One of the partial problems in this context concerns the interrelationships between cognitive motives and cognitive operations as a special aspect of the general problem of interrelationships between motivation and cognition, motivation and emotion and further aspects. Another problem in trying to reveal motivational structures and their role in activity regulation is the organisation of long-term investigations in this field in analogy, for instance, with longitudinal studies of cognitive development in preschool and primary school age which were conducted by Weinert, Helmke and their colleagues during the last years (Weinert & Helmke 1996). Usually, only relatively small segments of the developmental process are under study and it remains unknown what happened before and after, how the selected segment was influenced by former periods or stages of development and how this segment will affect further development. This is true for cross-sectional investigations as well as for investigations in a singular stage or situation. A third problem is closely tied to that developmental approach. Though difficult enough, long-term studies of motivational development, as an aspect of the general psychological development, are not sufficient, if they only describe and analyse development as it occurs in „normal“ conditions (though nobody exactly knows what „normal“ is!). Trying to shape defined conditions in teaching experiments or other forms of experimentation – long-term ones again – which are based on theoretical insights and hypotheses about components and conditions of a process is another way to reveal further substantial aspects of the topic. This approach is oriented towards a conscious and systematic formation of new psychological qualities and is known in the cultural-historical tradition line as the causal-genetic method created and argued by Vygotsky, further elaborated and used by Galperin, Davydov and many others. The list of unsolved problems and possible prospects may be continued. However, the problem of appropriate methods, mentioned above, might be one of the most important, because, first of all, action-related methods are needed in order to be able to analyse in detail and simultaneously, in a complex manner, how human activity is regulated in concrete situations and conditions and how and why it is changing and developing. Although this overview of an activity theoretical approach to motivation remained rather global and sketchy, it is nevertheless a special contribution to further discussion and investigation. The latter merits further observation and might be fruitful in bringing together insights and approaches from different tradition lines for a mutual effort in investigating motivation and its role in human activity and life. Ñòàòüÿ ðåêîìåíäîâàíà Á.À. Çåëüöåðìàí References Aebli, H.
(1987): Grundlagen des Lehrens. Stuttgart: Klett |