Student’s motivation determines, directs, and sustains what they do to learn. Theories of motivation to pursue specific learning goals often focus on two factors (1) Value and (2) Expectancy (Lovett et al 2023). (1) A goal's importance, or subjective value, directly influences how people's behavior (or what goals they seek to obtain, based on their perceived value). For example, if a student does not find the content of a course interesting or relevant, they may see little to no value in learning the material. To help students see the subjective value of reflecting, instructors can explain the value of reflecting relative to students’ own interests. For example, if collaboration, you could ask students: “How might you use Wolf’s group writing strategy of a Team Contract in your GVSU student organization?” (2) While individuals typically need to find value in a goal to pursue it, they also are motivated to pursue outcomes they expect they can successfully achieve. For example, if a student doesn't think they can be successful in a Writing course, they will likely disengage from behaviors required for deep learning.   

Another common way to think about motivation is through Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan 1985). According to Ambrose et all (2023), "grounded on the assumption that people inherently pursue growth and learning, self-determination theory suggests that students will find value when learning address three important needs" including autonomy, competence, and relatedness (92-33). In distinguishing between different needs and goals, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation emerge differentially.  Intrinsic motivation deals with the satisfaction one gains by simply doing the task. Users typically already assign value to the content of the goal or activity. For example, if a student finds reading enjoyable and interesting, they are more likely to value reading, and thus more motivated to read for class. On the other hand, extrinsic motivation deals with the satisfaction one gains from a reward or doing something for a separate outcome (Ryan & Deci 2001).  For instance, a student may choose to complete an extra credit assignment because they are extrinsically motivated by the extra points to improve their overall grade.  Or a student may put more effort into a process reflection because they are motivated by the time it will save them completing a final project.  

For more on strategies to improve student’s motivation, check out the Pew FTLC’s teaching guide on Motivation.  

As faculty, consider what bias you may be introducing. Try using open-ended questions that encourage exploration in thinking rather than suggesting a certain answer. For instance, instead of: “Considering you did not perform well on this last exam, what do you think you need to do differently to earn a higher grade?” you might ask: “What did you do to prepare that helped you be successful? Why were those strategies helpful? Now that you’ve received feedback on your first exam, what might you differently?”  

You may also avoid writing leading questions by eliminating inquiries about what students liked or disliked in an assignment, reading, class discussion, etc. E.g. “What was your favorite part of this assignment?” A more effective question to pose might be, “In this last assignment, what did you do well to support your learning?” This question could be even more specific by connecting the learning to a specific learning objective. 

Transparency in expectations goes a long way. Clarify with students why you are asking them to reflect, and how that activity is connected to their learning. Students may be trying to please you because they don’t understand the task’s purpose or goal. If you’re concerned about using ChatGPT, talk to them about your concerns. Explain why you want to hear their thoughts because you’re interested in their learning process. Explicitly directing students to the learning goal or outcome can help students demystify some of the process. At the Pew FTLC we have a similar policy regarding the use of AI in Grant Applications: 

“…we want faculty to engage in their own metacognitive thinking and reflect on their own experience./In other words, we are interested in your/originality of thought in applications and reflections. As readers, we want you to focus on the process, not the product” (FAQs – Grants). 

You can also tailor the prompt so that it would be difficult for students to use ChatGPT. For example, if you are asking students to reflect on their process, require that they reference specific draft feedback from their peers or the instructor.  

As for grade concerns, you might consider making reflections low stakes by reducing the number of points or weight or assessing the reflections on a 3–5-point scale. Concerns about grades often revolve around assessments being perceived as high stakes (e.g. a single assessment being worth 40% of their grade). To emphasize the importance of the learning process over product, structure the reflections so that if students miss one or two - or don’t provide what you consider to be a substance effort -  it won’t tank their final grade.