The purpose of this study was to explore how students experienced impaired concentration in relation to self-determination in learning activities, both in terms of motivation for learning, and their need for teachers’ autonomy support. Impaired concentration has negative influence on learning processes (Løhre, Vedul-Kjelsås & Østerlie, 2021), and concerns many students in school, typically students with diagnoses such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyscalculia and dyslexia, but also students with no diagnoses.

Given that previous research suggests that self-determination is a basic psychological need, important for students’ motivation, wellbeing, and performance (Ryan & Deci, 2016), it was surprising to us that we did not find any studies that specifically investigated self-determination in students with impaired concentration. However, the related concept self-regulation is widely studied, for instance in persons diagnosed with ADHD (Barkley, 2015; Cibrian et al., 2022). Self-determination in learning activities, which entails expectations of self-regulated learning (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2021), can be difficult to master for students with impaired concentration. Hence, the generally great advantage of self-determination in learning activities (Ryan & Deci, 2016) tell us this should be studied specifically in students with impaired concentration, to broaden our understanding of the role self-determination may play for them. The following research question was formulated: how do students with impaired concentration experience self-determination in learning activities, both in relation to challenges and opportunities?

Below we present those parts of Self-Determination Theory SDT that helped us give meaning to the analyzes of data. Self-determination is described as voluntary behavior that originates within the person himself, in his own interests or values (Deci & Ryan, 1987). Such behavior is important for the experience of having one's own will or being the source of one's own actions. In other words, it is an internally motivated behavior (Ryan & Deci, 2000a). SDT theory emphasizes that self-determination, intrinsic motivation and self-regulated behavior are three facets of the same issue: that, at a phenomenological level, human autonomy is reflected in the experience of volition that accompanies self-regulated action” (Deci & Ryan, 2000, p. 254). On this basis, Deci and Ryan (1995) refer to the concept of autonomous self-regulation, which stands in contrast to behavior that is controlled from the outside.

In contrast to self-determinate behavior, SDT describes externally motivated behavior having its causes outside the individual, such as avoiding punishment or receiving a reward. However, also this kind of motivation depends on the extent to which self-determination is present, according to the internalization of the value of the behavior or activity (Ryan & Deci, 2000a). For so, learning activities can be externally regulated. Internalization will then mean that the student sees the value and importance of the activity and perceives performing the assignment as their own choice. This is described as autonomous extrinsic motivation in the theory, as in contrast to controlled extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2008). Further, the term autonomy support in SDT theory refers to teachers facilitating the influence and opportunity students have to make their own choices in line with their own values, interests or needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000b).

In a school-based intervention program teachers were instructed to practice a didactic model for adapted education (the TIL-model) (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2021). The model was practiced one day a week (called the TIL-day) over one school year, and both students’ and teachers’ stories were studied (Uthus, 2020). The TIL-model consists of a work plan empathizing three phases, a planning-, working-, and an evaluation phase. With close guidance of the teacher, the students are self-regulated learners, planning what to do, when to do it, who to work with, and with how much effort, as well as working with the tasks, carry them out accordingly, and take a break, if necessary. Some of the learning tasks can be done "individually" and others through "collaboration". Another distinction is tasks of “first priority” (must do) and “second priority” (voluntary). Based on the work plan, students are working with the tasks, carry them out accordingly, and take a break, when necessary. In sum, this gives the students influence over their day and the opportunity to make independent choices served by an autonomy-supporting teaching style. With the aim of answering the research question we listened to the voices of two students with impaired concentration, and their teachers in primary school, grade 6. To inductively approach their experiences, the interview guide was prepared with open-ended questions. Before the interviews started, everyone was informed that the interview was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time. The interviews were audio recorded and subsequently transcribed. In the analysis, data was reduced to a few topics, with underlying categories and codes (Miles & Huberman, 1994). It became clear that students' experiences of self-determination could not be understood as either being associated with opportunities or challenges. On the contrary, it turned out that their experiences moved between these. E.g., although self-determination challenged the students being self-regulated learners, this seemed like a new opportunity for increased self-awareness about how to deal with impaired concentration. For the teachers as well, this gave increased insight into the prerequisites and needs for these students. With this, the further analyses focused on exploring the connection between the opportunities and challenges, considering SDT, volition, intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation and teachers’ autonomy support. For so, we explored the data in a constant movement between the data and the theory as well as in comparison with previous research (Tjora, 2021).

Preliminary findings suggest that self-determination in learning activities is highly appreciated by the students, giving associations to self-determination as a basic psychological need and wellbeing. Further the students seemed to have high self-awareness, describing their concentration as beyond their own will, as it could not be overridden. Considering this, both the students and their teachers concerned about if the tasks are associated with interests or joy, corresponding to intrinsic motivation in SDT terminology. Interest and joy seemed crucial for the students not to "lose” their concentration and avoid failure in learning activities. While the students described concentration as beyond their will, SDT define self-determined actions as originate in the person's own will ("internal locus of causality"). This means that when the students lost concentration in learning activities at TIL-days, they also loosed the psychological feeling of being self-determined, which, at least, can explain their struggling being self-regulated learners this day. However new opportunities followed: As they appreciated self-determination, they seemed to broaden their self-reflections that they couldn’t only do tasks for its inherent satisfaction, but rather because the activity felt worthwhile (autonomous extrinsic motivation), e.g.: “It's pretty motivating; okay, if I finish my tasks now, then it's probably going to be a really nice day”. Further, as experiencing volition ("the power of choosing"), they reflected about their own needs, e.g., choosing the "opposite" of what the teacher thought was best; saving the most thought-provoking tasks till the end of the day, because; “then the concentration is all gone anyway, and what is left is ‘just do it’”. In this way, they could take care of their own needs, in SDT described as autonomous self-regulation. Being self-determinate also seemed to promote their self-reflections about their need for adapted teacher support; in making good choices and being met on their emotional struggles.

Barkley, R. A. (2015). Executive functioning and self-regulation viewed as an extended phenotype: Implications of the theory for ADHD and its treatment. In Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment, 4th ed. (pp. 405-434). The Guilford Press. Cibrian, F. L., Lakes, K. D., Schuck, S. E. B., & Hayes, G. R. (2022). The potential for emerging technologies to support self-regulation in children with ADHD: A literature review. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 31, 100421. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of personality and Social psychology, 53(6), 1024–1037. Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self- esteem. I M.H. Kernis (red.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (p. 31–49). Plenum Press. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. Løhre, A., Vedul-Kjelsås, V., & Østerlie, O. (2021). Enjoyment as a learning resource: Stories told by students with harmful concentration problems. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Pedagogikk Og Kritikk, 7, 81-98 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Sage Publications. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54–67. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2016). Facilitating and hindering motivation, learning, and well-being in schools: Research and observations from self-determination theory. In K.R. Wentzel & D.B. Miele (red.), Handbook of motivation at school (p. 96–119). Routledge. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2021). Skolen som læringsarena: Selvoppfatning, motivasjon, læring og livsmestring. The school as a learning arena: Self-esteem,motivation, learning and life skills. Universitetsforlaget. Tjora, A. (2017). Kvalitative forsknings-metoder i praksis. Qualitative research methods in practice. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. Uthus, M. (2020). Folkehelse og livsmestring i skolen. Hva sier elever om erfaringer med å bestemme selv i læringsaktiviteter? En kvalitativ intervjustudie. Health and life skills in education. What do students say about experiences with autonomy in learning activities? A qualitative interview study. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk og kritikk, 6, 191-206.