-->

Motivational Factors For High School Students

Analysis

Self-determination Theory: Autonomy, information and control, and relatedness.

Self-determination theory hypothesizes the factors that affect a person’s ability to become an independently guided learner. To achieve self-determination, a student should be immersed in an environment that encourages his autonomy, provides information that enables the student to have control, and offers meaningful relationships within a supportive community (Deci & Ryan, 2009).

Paul enjoyed show choir because he felt very autonomous in this class. He stressed the importance of doing things his way and being allowed to be creative. Show choir was a way for him to explore his own thoughts and interpretations without fear of being wrong.

He mentioned that he got to try a lot of new techniques and felt that he learned a lot through show choir. His teachers provided him with the information to succeed and become more creative.

Show choir offered Paul a communal environment with a group of people who shared the same interests as him and encouraged one another in this pursuit.

Mary showed a lot of autonomy in her schoolwork, whether it was provided by the teacher or not. She was able to find her special interest and value in most of her subjects and this motivated her to learn for the sake of learning. Sometimes her learning took a different direction than her teachers’ intents but she was much more self-determined in the learning process because of it.

Though Mary didn’t always find her teachers or parents as helpful resources, she acknowledged that if she made an effort to build better relationships in her learning communities, she would likely receive more assistance. Regardless, as a very intrinsically motivated student, she finds additional help through her friends and admirable work ethic.

As I mentioned earlier, Mary didn’t feel like she had the strongest relationships with her teachers but she has support from her family and friends who encourage her in her own success.

Attribution theory: Locus, Stability, and Controllability.

Attribution theory attempts to explain the different ways we attribute the causes of our successes and failures. It hypothesizes that every outcome can be categorized by locus, stability, and controllability. Locus refers to whether the cause was internal or external. Stability refers to whether the cause is unchanging or changeable. Controllability refers to whether it was within our control (Weiner, 2000).

Paul and Mary both had a strong internal locus. They attributed his successes to their innate intelligence and effort. Paul claimed that he expected to get A’s without a lot of effort, but also made sure to increase effort if the task required it. On the rare occasion that he did not do as well as he would have liked, he took the failure particularly hard because of his belief in his ability and potential.

Though his successes may not have always been stable, his effort seemed to remain stable throughout his high school career. With personal expectations put on himself as well as pressure from parents to succeed, Paul was both internally and externally motivated to maintain a high academic performance.

Mary also rarely experienced failure but always looked on the positive side of what she could do to improve her results next time.

Because of their high confidence and resulting sensitivity to failure, Paul and Mary displayed a belief in his ability to maintain control over even difficult learning situations. Though they do not particularly like to turn for help, they often look inside find the answers and strategies that will help them succeed.

Both Paul and Mary shared that if they did turn to anyone for help it would most likely be their friends and not their teachers because they feel more comfortable around their peer group. In adolescence, students will often place more importance on the opinions of their in-group of friends than they will on the opinions of their older peers, such as parents and teachers. The weight of a peer’s opinion can directly affect their self-efficacy and future motivation (Kiran-Esen, 2012).

Incremental view of ability:

Ability can be viewed both as fixed or developmental. Incremental view of ability attributes intelligence and other successes to the effort of its owner. This view encourages self-reliance and a positive view of self-worth because one can always improve if one tries harder (Dweck, 1996).

When we asked Paul and Mary to share their ideas on where ability originates, they both said that they think ability is both inherent and malleable. Though Paul and Mary think some people are born with more ability than others, all have the opportunity to grow and improve. Their beliefs about personal ability affected their motivation in school. Having a high opinion of personal ability, as well as a strong sense of self-efficacy, Paul and Mary had the confidence to approach most assignments with the belief that they would do well, even if they required additional effort.

Mastery Approach and Performance avoidance:

Goal orientation is a theory that attempts to explain the underlying motivation we use to accomplish tasks. This theory posits that one can be motivated to learn for the sake of learning or one can be motivated to perform for others.

Mastery approach is learning because one loves to learn. This approach encourages exploratory learning that is satisfactory to the student but shows little correlation with quality work because the learner is working for himself and not for the instructor (Anderman, Anderman, & Meese, 2006).

Performance avoidance is completing assignments to avoid looking inadequate in front of others. This approach can be detrimental to having a meaningful learning experience because this motivation leads to surface knowledge needed to perform and then is forgotten when no longer needed (Anderman, Anderman, & Meese, 2006).

Paul showed both a mastery and performance orientation to learning that varied depending on his interest level in the subject. In show choir he is very intrinsically motivated to learn because it isn’t about mastering someone else’s concept but creating his own. He favors assignments that value his perspective and creativity, as well as provide him with the autonomy needed for intrinsic motivation to thrive (Henderlong & Lepper, 2000).  Paul’s genuine interest in acting and performance is what motivates him to pursue these activities in the present and as he mentioned, hopefully as a career later in life.

Mary is also very intrinsically motivated to learn. She expressed that her most difficult subject is her favorite subject because it challenges her to learn new concepts. Her least favorite subject was so because she found it tedious and couldn’t find a personal connection to its intended purpose.  Common to mastery approach learning, sometimes her interests would pull her away from the assignment because she would get carried away in the content. This sometimes hurt her but overall encouraged her love for new concepts because she consistently made an effort to connect them to her life.

Though Paul maintains a mastery approach in some areas, he shows a performance avoidance approach in others. He mentioned that one of his biggest motivations to do well in his classes is his parent’s expectations towards his success. Though he never expressed a desire to be the best in his class, he did share that he didn’t want to look intellectually inferior to others or disappoint his parents, a key tenet to performance avoidance (Elliot, 2010).

 Another motivation to perform well was keeping up with his friends’ intellectual successes. Paul has a group of friends who consistently perform well in school and not keeping up with their success would cause him to stand out in a negative way.  His friends’ influence made unappealing assignments more interesting to him because he admired their interests and success. Often positive social contexts can motivate students to perform better because they want to fit into that social context (Jarvela, Volet, & Jarvenoja, 2010).

Expectancy x Value theory:

Expectancy value theory states that the likelihood of completing a task relies on both the individual’s belief in her ability to complete the task as well as the value the individual believes she will receive from the task (Wiggfield & Eccles, 2000).

As mentioned earlier, Paul has a strong sense of self-determination and belief in his ability to succeed. When asked about how he felt about assignment length and difficulty, he said he preferred shorter assignments but saw the value in longer assignments because they offered the opportunity for additional practice and in-depth learning. Paul was able to motivate himself in most assignments because he had a strong sense of self-efficacy in his school environment as well as an ability to see opportunity for growth in his learning experiences.

Mary also showed an ability to find value in assignments that didn’t immediately connect with her. She shared that she completes all assignments as soon as possible and even the ones she is not interested in, she can maintain her attention half way through at a steady pace. Though her value for every assignment may not always be intrinsic, she nonetheless searches for value, shows faith in her effort, and produces quality results. Her natural desire to learn motivates her to want to go to college and pursue a career in education where she can motivate others to also personally value learning. As this is common with intrinsically motivated students, Mary expressed a desire to learn for a lifetime (Hornya & Raacke, 2012).

References

STRUCTURE, STUDENT MOTIVATION, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT. Blackboard.bsu.edu.

Deci, Edward L. Ryan, Richard M. (2009). Promoting Self-Determined School Engagement: Motivation, Learning and Well Being. Blackboard.bsu.edu

Dweck, Carol S. (1996). Implicit Theories as Organizers of Goals and Behaviors. Blackboard.bsu.edu

Eccles, Jacquelynne S. Wigfield. (2000). Expectancy –Value Theory of Achievement Motivation. Blackboard.bsu.edu

Elliott, Andrew J. (2010). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hedp20 =

Hennderlong, Jennifer. Lepper, Mark R. (2000). Turning “Play” into “Work” and “Work” into “Play:” 25 Years of Research n Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivation. Blackboard.bsu.edu

Weiner, Bernard. (2000). Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Theories of

Motivation from an Attributional Perspective. Blackboard.bsu.edu

JARVELA, S., VOLET, S., & JARVENOJA, H. (2010). Research on Motivation in Collaborative Learning: Moving Beyond the Cognitive-Situative Divide and Combining Individual and Social Processes. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 15-27. doi:10.1080/00461520903433539

Horyna, B., & Bonds-Raacke, J. M. (2012). DIFFERENCES IN STUDENTS' MOTIVATION TO ATTEND COLLEGE: LARGE VERSUS SMALL HIGH SCHOOLS. Education, 132(4), 708-724.

Kiran-Esen, B. (2012). ANALYZING PEER PRESSURE AND SELF-EFFICACY EXPECTATIONS AMONG ADOLESCENTS. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 40(8), 1301-1309.