Showing posts with label achievement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label achievement. Show all posts

Thursday, April 13, 2017

Society and Academic Achievement Motivation


Recent development of research on motivation in education has tried to understand the role that sociocultural contexts play on students' academic motivation.

Liem and his colleagues (2012) conducted a study aimed at testing the mediating role of individual-orientated and social-orientated achievement motives in linking value orientations (e.g. achievement, security, conformity)  to achievement goals (mastery-approach, performance-avoidance etc.).    

They state that:
values and achievement motivation orientations are socioculturally-rooted antecedents of achievement goals because individuals develop these basic personality factors through socialization. As societies and cultures are associated with different sets of affordances and constraints that facilitate and inhibit the internalization and expression of values (Schwartz, 2005) and motives (McClelland, 1985;Yu & Yang, 1994), a particular set of values and achievement motivation orientations is more strongly endorsed in one culture than those in others. 
For example, Australian adolescents were higher than their Singaporean, Filipino, and Indonesian counterparts on values serving individual interests (e.g. self-direction, hedonism), whereas the reverse was true for serving collective interests (e.g. conformity, security). Similarly, Lieber and Yu (2003) demonstrated that US students were higher than their Taiwanese counterparts in individual-orientated achievement motive whereas the reverse was true for social-orientated achievement motive.  

 "Achievement goals are not only posited to lead to achievement but are also catalyzed by different sources" (Liem 2012). Competence-based variables (achievement motive, fear of failure) and relationally-based values (e.g. affiliation motivation, fear of rejection) are among intrapsycholgical antecedents of achievement goal endorsement (Elliot, 2006).

Earlier, I have mentioned that achievement motivation positively predicted mastery-approached and performance-approach goals, whereas fear of failure positively predicted mastery-avoidance and performance-avoidance goals. In addition, Spence (1985) argues that competence-related constructs that have been studied as predictors of achievement were characteristically 'individual orientated' or mirror individualist values. However, 'other-orientated' competence-related predictors were less frequently studied.  

Liem's study sought to distinguish individual-orientated and social-orientated achievement motives and relate them by assessing their differential effects on the four types of achievement goals. For example, Yu and Yang (1994) argued that individual-orientated achievement motivation might not fully explicate achievement-related processes and outcomes in Eastern and collectivist culture, in which individual prioritizes the primacy of their family's goals and accomplishments than those of their own. "Further, in collectivist cultures, conformity values and social norms play a key role in individual's behaviors more so than individual personality dispositions" (Markus & Kitayama, 1991).

Putting this in perspective, we can now conceptualize achievement motivation differently when taking social values into account.

 For example, early definitions of achievement motivation tried to define it as an internal drive to meet or fulfill a particular standard. Similarity, Yu and Yang (1994) conceptualized achievement motivation orientation as a cognitively-based general inclination that energized behavior and orients individuals to pursue a certain achievement standard. Specifically, socially-orientated achievement motivation was defined as an inclination to achieve a standard of excellence set by significant others (e.g. teachers, parents), whereas individual-orientated achievement motivation is an inclination to achieve a self-determined standard of excellence.

Furthermore, Liem used Schwartz's (2005) cultural value theory in which 10 values (security, conformity, tradition benevolence, universalism, self-direction, stimulation, hedonism, achievement, and power) to try to explain individual and social orientated achievement motivation and motivational goal perusal.

Finally, Liem found that security and conformity values positively predicted social-orientated achievement motivation, self-direction values positively predicted individual achievement motivation and hedonism values negatively predicted both achievement motivation orientations.Also, some values were found to be direct predictors of academic achievement.  

Overall, we can see that society can have a significant effect on academic achievement motivation particularly when there is is a strong infleunce to conform and compare one's performance with others. Also, we learned that values and achievement motivation orientations can be sociocultural antecedents that give rise to achievement goals and achievement.          

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Role of Family in Academic Achievement Motivation



The performance of adolescents in school is determined to a large extent by rearing practices they are exposed to in their homes. For example, "It has been found that half to one third of student performance is directly related to home variables" (Chabra, 2011).

Family is the first and major agency of socialization which plays a pivotal role in developing achievement motivation in children. It is well known that motivation plays a large role in student interest and enjoyment in academic contexts. Being appropriately motivated enables individuals to strive for excellence, work and learn effectively, and achieve their potential at school.

Studies have proved that a supportive nurturing environment at home could enhance a child's achievement. According to Lezin, Rollen, Bean, and Taylor (2004), the quality of parent-child relationship has been linked to a wide variety of outcomes including traits (self-confidence, coping skills, motivation, overall well-being), mental health (depression, suicide, identity), risky behaviors (violence, drug and alcohol use), school achievement, and social skills.

Parent's education influences parent's skill, values, and knowledge of the educational system, which in turn influences their educational practices at home. Well-educated parents are more involved in their children's education than less educated parents (Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994; Stevenson & Baker, 1997). As a result," the more actively involved parents are in children's education, the higher their children's perceptions of competence and the better they perform in school and enhance their achievement motivation" (Chabra 2011). Students whose parents are more involved in their school life and attend more school activities have higher educational aspirations.      

In one paper on achievement motivation and home environment, Joshi states:
 Parental involvement had a positive influence on adolescents' achievement. The results also subscribe to the view that where parents of high achievers provide good quality home environment, ensuring balance in all its quality dimensions, children get introduced to higher achievement motivation levels. Home environment is a basic and essential nurturing support system for all of us as no other system could be a substitute for multiple bonding provided by family. 
Furthermore, Moula (2010) tried to investigate the relationship between achievement motivation and human environment. He defined the home environment by five factors (parent's encouragement, parent's occupation, parent's education, family size, and learning facilities at home. The findings showed that four factors (parent's occupation, parents' education, family size, and learning facilities) affect achievement motivation positively while only parental encouragement showed unclear results with academic motivation. The reason being is that parental encouragement is usually good but might sometimes result in parents pressuring children which might create anxiety and fear of failure (thus diminishing intrinsic motivation).

However, other studies like Ramiah (1990) observed a different relationship between parental encouragement and academic achievement of students. He found that the more the parental encouragement, the better the academic achievement. For example, Sharma (2002) "studied the effect of parental involvement and aspirations on student's aspirations and academic achievement and found that students with high parental involvement scored higher on educational aspiration as compared to their counterparts with low parental involvement."

Interestingly enough, "family income, education, and occupation are less influential for achievement motivation of adolescents than parental interaction with children, involvement in their children's education and expectation for their children" (Hao and Burns, 1998).    

Additionally, studies by Boon (2007) and Gonzalez and Wolters (2006) found that parents who exhibited an authoritative parenting style (characterized by relationships wherein the child's perspective is acknowledged and respected with appropriate boundaries and rules) had children who were mastery goal orientated.

Finally, "Supportive and caring relationships with parents were found to positively predict greater interest in academic endeavors, higher expectations of success, better self-regulation, as well as increased perceptions of competence" (King,2014).

All in all, a family's social conditions and parenting practices used in raising and teaching children significantly correlate to the child's sense of academic achievement motivation. This includes education, occupation, encouragement, involvement, emotional support, and access to resources which all correspond to teaching children self-regulatory practices to enhance their motivation in school.      

Thursday, April 6, 2017

What is the Self-EfficacyTheory of Achievement Motivation?


In the last informational post, we briefly mentioned that achievement goal theory branches into two predominant approaches: expectancy-value theory and self-efficacy theory. Expectancy-value theory states that individuals are more likely to engage in a particular achievement task when they expect to do well and when the task has some value to them. (This is the scale I am using personally to measure my variables for achievement motivation.) Self-efficacy theory, on the other hand, emphasizes the importance of individual judgments of capability.

Today, I desire to provide a short look into self-efficacy theory and relate it to academic motivation.

Besides cognitive factors, various motivational factors were have been found to be important predictors of first-year academic achievement and study persistence. "In a meta-analysis of psychological correlates of university student's academic performance in general, performance self-efficacy was found to be the strongest correlate, followed by high-school GPA and ACT scores" (Richardson et al 2012).Self-efficacy is similar to psychological self-concept which alongside autonomous motivation has been repeatedly associated with academic achievement.  

Self-efficacy is defined as "People's judgements of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of actions required to attain designated types of performances" (Bandura, 1986, p.391). Much research has clarified the role of self-efficacy as a mechanism underlying behavioral change, maintenance, and generalization. For example, there is evidence that self-efficacy predicts such diverse outcomes as academic achievements, social skills, smoking cessation, pain tolerance, athletic performances, and career choices (Bandura, 1986). Individuals who feel efficacious are hypothesized to work harder and persist longer when difficulties than those who doubt their capabilities.

"Self-efficacy theory postulates that people acquire information to appraise efficacy from their performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences, forms of persuasion, and physiological indexes" (Schunk 2014).  For example, students can acquire positive persuasory feedback which enhances self-efficacy (e.g. "You can do this"), but this feedback will be temporary if subsequent efforts turn out poorly. Students also derive efficacy information from physiological indexes (e.g. heart rate and sweating). Bodily symptoms signalizing anxiety might be interpreted to indicate a lack of skills.  Schunk (1989) discussed how self-efficacy might operate during academic learning.

At the start of an activity, students differ in their beliefs about their capabilities to acquire knowledge, perform skills, master the material so forth. Initial self-efficacy served as a function of aptitude and prior experiences. Such personal factors such as goal setting and information processing, along with situational factors affects students while they are working. Motivation is enhanced when students perceive they are making progress in learning. In turn, as students work on tasks and become more skillful, they maintain a sense of self-efficacy for performing well.
 Expectancy-value theory stresses the notion that behavior is a joint function of people's expectations of a particular outcome of performing a behavior and the extent to which they value those outcomes. (Eccles,1983). However, Self-efficacy theory differs from expectancy-value formulations in its emphasis on student's beliefs concerning their capabilities to learn and effectively employ the skills and knowledge necessary to attain the valued outcomes.

According to multiple assessments and statistical tests, self-efficacy predicts motivational outcomes fairly well. Significant and positive correlations (rs = .38 to .42) have been obtained between self-efficacy for learning assessed before receiving instruction and subsequent rate of problem-solving (Schunk & Hanson, 1985). Shell, Murphy, and Bruning (1989) found that self-efficacy accounted for significant portions of the variability in both reading and writing achievement. Collins (1982) demonstrated that self-efficacy predicts motivation and achievement across levels of student ability. Children identified as high, average, or low in mathematical ability, were classified as high or low in efficacy for solving word problems. In one test, children who were given some problems to solve (some were insolvable) and could rework any they missed. Low- and average-ability students with high efficacy worked on insolvable problems longer than did low-efficacy students. Finally, regardless of ability, students with higher efficacy reworked more problems than did students with lower efficacy.    

All in all, self-efficacy is another model of achievement motivation that is being extensively evaluated and tested alongside achievement goal theory as a predictor of individual success.    

Sunday, April 2, 2017

Literature Review: Classroom Structure and Achievement Goals



Hello everyone! Since I have completed my literature review on the required course texts, I will continue my analysis and discussion on other, related psychological articles. Today, I will go through "Classroom, Goal Structure, Student Motivation, and Academic Achievement" by Meece and his colleagues. Their study focused on using an achievement goal framework to examine the influence of classroom and school environments on student's academic motivation and achievement. However, rather than experimenting and publishing a new study, Meece created a synthesis paper to analyze prior research and relate it to an academic context. Let's begin!

The author starts by explaining how education in America has changed significantly over the past 25 years:
 Computer and interactive software are common in most classrooms today, and rows of student desks have been replaced with movable tables and chairs that promote collaborative learning among two or more students. many states and school districts have reduced class size to increase learning opportunities, especially for young or high-risk students. Reform at the middle school level has introduced block scheduling, advisory teams, schools-within schools, and other structural changes to meet the developmental needs of young adolescents (p. 488) 
Alongside this, national councils have called for paradigm shifts in how teachers think about learning and teaching. More modern curriculum standards emerged that emphasized individual inquiry, problem-solving, critical thinking, and collaborative learning rather than focusing on rote learning and memorization. "With the exception of research on class size, little evidence is available to evaluate the effects of various reform efforts of the past 25 years on student learning and motivation"(Meece et al., 2006). Child development research suggests that schools along with the family and peer group, are one of the most influential social contexts for children's development (Eccles, 2004).

 In the paper, an achievement goal framework is adopted for examining the influence of different classroom and school environments on children's development as learners. In particular, the student's motivation and their self-perceptions are emphasized along with their academic engagement.

Meece then provides an extensive overview of Achievement Goal Theory:
Motivational theories focus on the processes that explain goal-directed activity. Generally, motivation theorists are interested in explaining physical activity such as task engagement and persistence, as well as cognitive activities such as problem-solving and decision-making. In educational research, motivation theories are most often used to explain student's activity choice, engagement, persistence, help seeking, and performance in school.    
Motivated behavior has been explained in terms of drives, instincts, motives, and other internal traits (Weiner, 1990). But it has also been rationalized in terms of behavioral associations involving rewards contingencies. "More contemporary theories focus on social-cognitive processes as sources of motivation" (Meece et al, 2006). For example, this approach strives to link achievement to how individuals interpret their success and failures in achievement situations. This led to the development of expectancy-value theory which looks at achievement-related behavior to individual expectancy and value perceptions (Atkinson, 1964; Wigfield & Eccles 1992, 2000). Similarly, the self-efficacy theory of achievement motivation was created to emphasize the importance of individual judgments of capability (Bandura, 1986).

In terms of academic application, "Achievement goal theory has served as an important lens for analyzing the influence of different classroom structures and school environments on student motivation and learning" (Meece et al., 2006). Achievement goal theorists focus specifically on goals involving the development or demonstration of competence (Nicholls 1984). Meece (2006) states:
The distinguishing feature of achievement behavior is its goal of competence or perception of competence, and ability can be defined in several different ways. Thus, the criteria or standards of excellence people use to judge their competence are key to achievement goal theory. This point is critical because classrooms and school environments differ with regards to evaluation standards used to assess students' academic progress and achievement (p. 489).               
The author continues by explaining the differences between the four different goal orientations commonly used in achievement goal theory (mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, performance-avoidance). I mentioned these in a previous blog post of mine, which you can access here.

Much of achievement goal research indicates that mastery goals are the most effective goals, in terms of their results, as they have been linked to "higher levels of task involvement, persistence at difficult tasks, better learning strategies that enhanced conceptual understanding, and positive perceptions of academic ability" (Meece et al., 2006). However, the expected positive relation between mastery goals and academic performance has not been consistently found.

On the other hand, performance goals also show interesting relations to achievement-related behaviors across studies. A good deal of evidence suggests that they are associated with surface-level learning strategies, which do not necessarily promote conceptual understanding. Also, older research that did not incorporate the performance approach and performance avoidance distinction found some associations between performance goals and self-handicapping strategies (e.g. goofing off, procrastinating, etc.). Therefore, the general consensus is that performance-approach goals are slightly positive, while performance-avoidance goals are linked with maladaptive behaviors like self-handicapping strategies.

Next, the author highlights the importance of classroom goal structures since students' goal behaviors are quite influenced by what the teacher or academic curriculum stresses.
Research focused on the classroom has examined how teachers may create different goals structures in the classrooms through their use of various instructional, evaluation, and grouping strategies (Kaplin et al. 2002). For example, some teachers are known to differ in their use of ability grouping or competitive grading practices, which can increase the salience of performance goals. Other teachers focus on skill development, mastery, and improvement which can lead students to adopt a mastery orientation (p. 492).   
We discussed above how student's personal achievement goals shape their behavior and learning in educational settings. How might classroom goal structures play a role in these processes? Meece (2006)  articulates:
Classroom goal structures are generally viewed as precursors of student's personal goal orientations, which are thought to have a more proximal influence on motivation and achievement patterns. [....] When students perceive their classrooms or schools as emphasizing effort and understanding, they are more likely to adopt mastery-oriented goals. Conversely, students are more likely to adopt performance-orientated goals when they perceive their school environment as focused on competition for grades and social comparisons of ability (p. 495).       
Finally, there is also evidence to suggest that perceptions of classroom goal structure may exert a direct effect on outcome measures as well. "Evidence to date indicates that approximately 5% to 35% of the variation in student's goal structure perceptions is related to classroom differences" (Meece et al., 2006). As a result, student's subjective perception are very critical for understanding achievement-related patterns in the classroom.

To conclude, in the past 25 years, goal theories of achievement have emerged as an important framework for analyzing the influence of learning environments on a range of developmental and learning outcomes. "Much of this research indicates that young people adopt the most positive and an adaptive approach to learning when the school emphasizes learning, understanding, improving skills, and knowledge (Meece et al., 2006). Therefore, classroom goal structures and environments have a very important role. "Evidence suggests that students show the most positive motivation and learning patterns when their school settings emphasize mastery, understanding, and skill development" Meece et al, 2006). Whereas school environments that are focused on demonstrating high ability and competing for grades can increase the academic performance of some students, research suggest that many young people experience diminished motivation under these conditions.

Sunday, March 12, 2017

Literature Review: Conformity and Deviation (Part 1)


    
Conformity is one of the most notorious areas of study in the field of social psychology. Earlier we mentioned it as “the act of changing one’s behavior to match the responses of others" (Cialdini, 2004). But now we are going to investigating it through the lens of the earliest formalized studies of it and how it relates to conversion, deviation, and other significant sociological tendencies. Without further ado, I bring to you Conformity and Deviation by Berg and Bass! 

"Conformity, resistance, and conversion share basic psychological processes in common, based on the fact that an individual requires a stable framework, including salient and firm reference points, in order to orient himself and to regulate his interactions with others" (Helson, 1955; Sherif, 1936). An individual's framework provides them with the opportunity to establish themselves and, as a result, controls their behavior with regards to internal and external influences. Therefore, someone with a well-defined personal composition would be said to be capable of filtering out information that is inconsistent with themselves. 

In the absence of such a framework, the individual can seek ways to orient themselves in social contexts which may lead them to consider or accept conforming attitudes. For example, subtle influences to someone's behavior, under optimal conditions, can cause shifts in attitudes, opinions, and understandings even when the person is unaware of this. In other words, "Conversion can be produced by demonstrating the inadequacy of as a presently accepted frame of reference and then introducing another which is more satisfactory"(Berg & Bass, 2). An example of this occurs when a person comes into a social situation where his actions, judgments, or opinions different than those of others. This leads to a dilemma, in which the individual must decide to either succumb to peer influence and conform or maintain his personal position and deviate from the group. Successful influence or pressure towards conformity is called conversion and occurs when someone corresponds his behavior to match that of others. On the other hand, not deciding to change one's framework and remaining independent of the group is called resistance or deviation.

Individuals appear to be more susceptible to conformity pressures when expressing social opinions and ideological attitudes and when dealing with abstractions rather than concrete experience or well-acquainted, factual subjects. When an individual is uncertain about their own beliefs or is uninformed, they tend to be easily influenced by others.  Tendencies toward conformity and conversion are heightened when an individual is with others, at least three in member, where the others are in uniform agreement or whose opinions are only slightly off from that of the individual's beliefs. "From a personality angle, the kind of individual who is least able to resist conformity pressures, and probably interrogation pressures as well, is submissive, lacking in self-confidence, less intelligent, lacking in originality, authoritarian-minded, lacking in achievement motivation, conventional, and searching for social approval"(p.28).       

Berg and Bass cite hundreds of conformity studies explaining how they were implemented to try to find factors leading to conformity. They view conformity as being conceived as the reflection of successful influence. Going from that definition, the authors applied a general theory of interpersonal behavior to create multiple theorems and hypothesizes that affected conformity and deviation. They are as follows:

           1. The importance of the group, the situation, and the individual members are relative
matters. We can increase or decrease the significance of each at will (p.17).

2. Group goals modify subsequent behavior to the extent that they are relevant to the members of the group (p.51)

3. Immediate rather than ultimate effectiveness is more significant for understanding interaction among individuals (p.54).

4. Members will tend to behave in ways to maintain or increase a group's effectiveness to the extent the group rewards its members  (p.75). Assuming that absence of conflict in interactions is rewarding, members will conform to each to each other rather than disagree in the expectation of maintaining secure, harmonious, and satisfying relationships.  

5. Conformity is greater in more attractive groups (p.244).

6. If the group’s source of attraction to members is its control of what is wanted by the members, the group has the power to coerce motivated members, resulting in increase in public but not necessarily private conformity with increases in attraction. The greater the group’s control, the more conformity is likely to occur. (p.241).  

7. If the group’s source of attraction is its perceived greater ability to cope with problems than can be done alone, members can be persuaded by the group’s decisions - resulting in increases in both public and private conformity with increases in the group’s attractiveness (p.240).  

8. The clearer the group’s rewards and goals, the more attractive will be the group (p.65); hence the clearer its goals, the more members will conform to the group.

9. The more members share the same goals obtainable through cooperation, the more likely they will be attracted to each other (p.69); hence the more members will share the same goals obtainable through cooperation, the more likely they are to conform to each other in their behavior.

10. A group is more attractive, the greater the rewards which may be earned by membership and the greater the expectation of earning them (p.60); hence the greater rewards and expectancies of reward for membership, more likely the conformity to group demands.   
11. Current effectiveness promotes subsequent attractiveness (p.79); hence conformity currently is likely to be greater in a group that experienced effectiveness earlier; more dissension and deviation is likely to occur in a group with a preceding history of failure.  

12. Members of groups are motivated by consideration or lack of it: promises of reward, support, affection, or threats of punishment, burdensome demands and deflation of self-esteem (p.99). Since conformity is defined as a reflection of influence,

13. Leadership is accomplished by initiating structure - making others more able to overcome the obstacles thwarting goal attainment (p.101). Assuming conformity is the obverse of leadership, it follows that conformity of an individual will depend on the extent others in his group instruct, supervise, inform, or decide for him.  

14. Influence occurs sooner, to a greater extent and brings more reinforcement as a consequence of interaction (p.129). Assuming that conformity reflects leadership, a function of interaction, conformity to the demands of others is more likely to occur faster when interaction is possible.  

15. As problems facing the group become more difficult or as the members become less able to cope with their problems, more leadership becomes possible (p.134). Since conformity is a reflection of leadership, as problems of the group become more difficult or as the members become less able, conformity is likely to increase in that group.

16. If the difficulties facing a group are too great, members’ expectations of failure may make the groups sufficiently unattractive to cause the members to withdraw rather than attempt to solve the problems or attempt to succeed as leaders (p.137). Assuming that conformity is the observe of leadership, if the group's difficulties are too great, members may deviate further from the norms of the group rather than increase in conformity.  

17.  The task-oriented leader will attempt leadership most often when the group is
attractive to him because of its tasks and the rewards for task success (p. 155). Considering conformity as the obverse of leadership, the task orientated member will attempt to conform to his group to the extent it is attractive to him because of its tasks and rewards for task effectiveness, and when he sees such conformity enables him to achieve task success.    

18. The interaction-orientated member will avoid attempting leadership likely to disrupt current patterns of interaction or likely to involve risks of making mistakes while interacting with others (p. 156). Considering conformity as the obverse of leadership, the interaction-orientated member will attempt to conform to avoid disrupting current patterns of interaction or to avoid making mistakes while interacting with others.   

19. The self-orientated member is more concerned with his success rather than effectiveness as a leader (p.153). Considering conformity as the observe of leadership, it follows that the self-oriented member conforms to the extent that doing so meets his personal needs irrespective of whether it is conducive to the task or interaction effectiveness of the group.   

20. One member can persuade another if he has demonstrated his ability to solve the other member’s problems (p.162). Considering conformity as the obverse of leadership, it follows that one member will conform to the suggestion of another if the other has demonstrated his ability to solve the first member’s problems.

21. In a wide variety of situations, the more fluent, intelligent, original, and adaptable member is more likely to succeed as the leader (p.166). Considering conformity as the obverse of leadership, it follows that in a wide variety of situations, the less fluent, the less intelligent, less original, and less adaptable member is more likely to conform to the suggestions of others.   

22. The would-be leader cannot be too much more able than those he leads to succeed maximally as a leader (p.177). Considering conformity as the obverse of leadership, it follows that a member may be unable rather than unwilling to conform to the norms of his group, because of his very great lack of ability of others in his group.   

23. The ability of the leader must be relevant to solving the problems of the groups he expects to lead (p. 174). Considering conformity as the obverse of leadership, conformity of the less able person will depend on his inadequacies in solving the particular problems of the group in which he is a member.  

24. If he has been successful and effective earlier, a leader will succeed and be effective to a maximum in any situation the more it actually resembles the earlier one (p.183); assuming that conformity is a reflection of leadership, conformity to others will be maximum in a new situation the more the new situation resembles an earlier one in which conformity occurred in the same way for the same reasons.

25. Successful leaders are more likely to have been the youngest child in their family; had  facilitating, stimulating, approving, accepting parents; and come from harmonious, friendly, tolerant, family atmospheres (pp.195-198). Assuming conformity is the obverse of leadership, it follows that, conformists are more likely to have been the oldest child in their family; had domineering, inconsistent, rejecting, parents; and come from discordant, unfriendly, intolerant family atmospheres.     

26.  Conformity to group standards and decisions is greater among more influential members and those closer initially to the majority or group decision (p. 247).   

27. The higher one’s status, the more likely he is to succeed as a leader among those of lower status (p. 269). Assuming conformity is the obverse of leadership, it follows that the lower one’s status the more likely he is to conform to those of higher status.   

28. Conformity to the person with status but without power will continue until it became apparent that the figurehead has only the symbols of status. Even then, others may conform ritualistically to the powerless bearer of status symbols because the ritual is habitual and satisfying in its own right, or is a custom approved by the group whose violation would bring social disapproval (p. 267).  

29. The higher one’s esteem, the more likely he is to succeed as a leader among those of lower esteem (p.289). Assuming conformity is the obverse of leadership, it follows that the less esteem a member has, the more likely he is to conform to the suggestions of others.

30. The more esteemed member can be more persuasive if his esteem depends on being perceived as being able to solve the group’s problems; he can be more coercive if his esteem depends on his personal control of what is desired by others in the group (p.289) Assuming conformity is the obverse of leadership, it follows that (a) a member is more likely to be persuaded, conforming both publically and privately, if his lack of esteem is due to lack of ability and (b) he is more likely to be coerced, conforming both but not privately, if his lack of esteem is due to his lack of personal power.   

31. Conformity to group decisions, modal opinion, or norms of behavior, should be greater among groups where mutual esteem is high.   

32. The person with high self-esteem appears more likely to change others, to lead others, rather than be changed by others to conform readily.

33. Increases in self-accorded status reduce the tendency to conform.

34. Events preceding the conformity behavior or taking place concurrently may result in the failure of what would have been conforming behavior.

35. Conformity is likely to be greater in situations of crisis or emergency.

Hey, nobody said sociology was particularly fun (but understanding others is quite fascinating). To summarize, the authors spend a significant part of the first quarter of the text to enumerate numerous conditions and factors that affect rates of conformity and deviation. They interpret conforming behavior as an aspect of the general phenomenon of interaction. In this sense, they were able to form generalizations about conformity through a wide collection of facts which have been well established.      

If you're interested in the book  (or dubious about my claims), you can pick it up from Amazon: Conformity and Deviation.


Sunday, March 5, 2017

Literature Review: Punished By Rewards (Part Four)

  
  Resuming Alfie Kohn's Punished By Rewards, I will articulate on the negative aspects of rewards and behaviorism practices in education, and then provide alternatives to improve them. Since I am focusing on academic achievement motivation specifically in my research project, I will cover only the education-related aspects of this book rather than continue the author's analysis on the effect of rewards to parenting and work. 

   When kids first begin their educational journey, they are endlessly fascinated by the world. They sit rapt as the teacher reads from a storybook and once home, they excitedly tell their parents all about the new connections and facts they've learned. But by the time they have spent years within the system, their spellbound trance becomes broken. Children start complaining about homework. They count each minute until the period is over, each day until the weekend, and each week until the next break. They begin to question whether they need to know the information they're learning. 

This change in attitude is usually written off as a natural development or of the loss of innocence, but instead it is the direct result of what is occurring in schools. "Though no single factor can completely account for this dismaying transformation, one feature of American education goes a long way towards explaining it: "Do this and you'll get that" (p. 143). 

Two recent studies confirm what everyone already knows: rewards are constantly used in the classrooms to motivate children and improve their performance. They are offered stickers and stars, edible treats, extra recess, grades, and awards. ... When rewards don't succeed at enhancing student's interests and achievement, we offer - new rewards. When this too proves ineffective, we put the blame on the students themselves, deciding that they must lack the ability or are just too lazy to make an effort. Perhaps we sigh and reconcile ourselves to the idea that "it is not realistic to expect students to develop the motivation to learn in classrooms" (p. 143). 
   Setting aside everything we know about grades and motivation, Kohn states that three facts about education eventually present themselves. First, "young children don't need to be rewarded to learn". The author cites Martin Hoffman and states that "Children are disposed to try to make sense of their environments"(p. 144). Nearly every parent of a preschooler or kindergartner will attest they play with words and numbers and ideas, asking questions ceaselessly, with as purely intrinsic a motivation as can be imagined. "As children progress through elementary school, though, their approach to learning becomes increasingly extrinsic, to the point that careful observers find little evidence of student motivation to learn in a typical American classroom" (p. 144). 

   Secondly, "at any age, rewards are less effective than intrinsic motivation for promoting effective learning. The point here is quite simple; just as adults who love their work will invariably do a better job than those goaded with artificial incentives, so children are more likely to be optimal learners if they are interested in what they are learning" (p. 144). Kohn cites a study that reveals how important intrinsic motivation is for achievement. "One group of researchers tried to sort out the factors that helped third and fourth graders remember what they have been reading. They found that how interested students were in the passage was thirty times more important than how readable the passage was" (p. 145). 

   Taking this into consideration as well as the evidence cited in the past few blog posts, we would expect intrinsic motivation to play a prominent role in the sort of learning that involves conceptual and cognitive thinking. Kohn conjectures that educators and parents often fail to see a truth starting them in the face: "If educators are able to create the conditions under which children can become engaged with academic tasks, the acquisition of intellectual skills will follow. We want students to be rigorous thinkers, accomplished readers and writers and problem solvers who can make connections and distinctions between ideas. But the most reliable guide to a process that is promoting these things is not grades or test scores: it is the student's level of interest " (p.146). In this sense, educators and parents should be focusing their attention on who read on their own and come home chattering about what they learned that day. 

   Additionally, Kohn believes that interest in education is not merely a means to an end of achievement. He cites Richard Ryan, who argues that it is not enough "to conceive of the central goal of 12 years of mandatory schooling as merely a cognitive outcome" (p. 147). Instead, we should aim for children who are willing and even enthusiastic about achieving something in school, curious and excited by learning to the point of seeking out opportunities to follow their interests beyond the boundaries of school. We think school "should prepare people not just to earn a living but to live a life - a creative, humane, and sensitive life, then children's attitude towards learning are at least as important as how well they perform at any given task" (p. 147). 

   The third fact Kohn wanted to reiterate is that rewards for learning undermine intrinsic motivation. It is bad enough if high grades, stickers, and other Skinnerian inducements just weren't good at helping children learn. The tragedy is that they also decrease the sort of motivation that does help. Kohn references Carole Ames and Carol Dweck, two of the most penetrating thinkers on the subject of academic motivation, and states that they have "independently pointed out that we cannot explain a student's lack of interest in learning simply by citing low ability, poor performance, or low self-esteem- although these factors may play a role". According to one study, if teachers or parents emphasize the value of academic accomplishment in terms of rewards it will bring, student's interest in what they are learning will almost certainly decline. 

   Kohn continues in discussing two reasons for the decrease in intrinsic motivation: the controlling techniques used in the classroom and the emphasis on how well students are performing. In stating this, it must be noted, that Kohn does not argue that educators should stop providing guidance or structure to children. Rather, he says that is better to provide students with a reasonable degree of autonomy. For example, "Tests are not used so much to see what students need help with but to compel them to do the work that has been assigned" (p. 149). 

   Telling students what they have to do, or using extrinsic incentives to get them to do it, often contributes to the feeling of anxiety and even helplessness. Some children, as a result, relinquish their sense of autonomy.  This is because "the more we try to measure, control, and pressure learning from without, the more we obstruct the tendencies of students to be actively involved and to participate in their own education. Not only does this result in a failure of students to absorb the cognitive agenda imparted by educators, but it also creates deleterious consequences for the affective agendas of schools [that is, how students are feeling]"(p.149).  Kohn provides more evidence which suggests that tighter standards, additional testing, tougher grading, or more incentives will do more harm than good. Thus, the students' lack of interest becomes highly correlated with the excessive control implemented by the education system. 

   With regards to student performance and grades, there is an enormous difference between getting students to think about what they are doing, on the one hand, and about how well they are doing it. Students who are encouraged to think about what they are doing will likely come to find meaning in "the processes involved in the learning content, value mastery of the content itself and exhibit pride in craftsmanship" (p. 156 - from Brophy & Kher, 1986, p. 264). This is precisely what education wants to promote - partly because students who care more about the subject rather than the grade are more likely to be successful in learning it. 

   In contrast, "students led to think mostly about how well they are doing - or even worse, how well they are doing compared to everyone else - are less likely to do well" (p.156). Having students focus on grades and tests rather than doing well on the task or subject results in the same effect with rewards that mentioned in previous posts: they don't do as well on measures of creative thinking or conceptual learning. Even when they only have to learn things by rote, they are more apt to forget the material a week or so later. Getting people to focus on how well they are doing also increases student's fear of failure. This is harmful since "the game is not to acquire knowledge but to discover what the teacher wants, and in what form she wants it" (p.158). 

   For anyone who remembers my blog on Achievement goal theory, the desire to avoid failure is synonymous with children motivated by a  performance avoidance goal (PAv). And the negative side to it is that PAv goals result in the least amount of learning out of the four possible goal orientations. To conclude, students often say that "getting grades is the most important thing about school". However, anything that gets children to think about their performance will undermine their interest in learning, their desire to get challenged, and ultimately the extent of their achievement.    

   Now that the critiques are all laid out, Kohn explains the various methods that school can undertake to gradually resolve the problems that exist in teaching and education. 

The job of the educator is neither to make students motivated nor to sit passively; it is to set up the conditions that make learning possible. The challenge is not to wait until a student is interested but rather offer a stimulating environment that can be perceived by students as presenting vivid and valued options which can lead to successful learning and performance (p. 199).  

Kohn argues that there should be a gradual removal of rewards existing within education, but first mentions that this is not a change that could occur overnight. For example, if a teacher chooses to stop all extrinsic motivation starting tomorrow students will not be leaping out of their seats cheering, "Hooray! Now we can be intrinsically motivated!" When teachers contemplate a new method of doing things they ought to bring the children in on the process such as by opening up a discussion with them. Secondly, even when the behaviorist tactics are abandoned, the structures and conditions necessary to facilitate appropriate motivation must also be created. Next, Kohn explains the concepts of grades by how they are justified in their use and then provides alternatives to them. The first three axioms for on the use of grades are typically justified in a classroom are as follows: 

 1. They make students perform better for fear of receiving a bad grade or in hope of        
  getting a good one.

  2. They sort students on the basis of their performance which is useful for college 
 admission and job placement.

 3. They provide feedback to students about how good a job they are doing where they 
need improvement 
  
   I will tackle these in order. Kohn in 200 pages - or the equivalent of my past three blog posts -  argued that the first rationale is wrong. " The carrot-and-stick approach, in general, is unsuccessful; grades, in particular, undermine intrinsic motivation and learning, which only serves to increase our reliance on them. In addressing the second justification,"Grades do serve a purpose of sorts: they enable administrators to rate and sort children, to categorize them so rigidly that they can rarely escape" (p. 201). Some critics argue that the grading categories are too rigid, the criteria too subjective, the tests on which grades are based. Thus, it is alleged that grades do not provide much useful information to business hiring or college admitting students on that basis. 

    Kohn argues that grades offer spurious precision since studies show greater when the work is evaluated by more than one teacher. "The trouble is not that we are sorting badly - the trouble is that we spend too much time sorting them at all. In certain circumstances, it may make sense to ascertain the skill level of each student in order to facilitate teaching or placement. But as a rule, the goal of sorting is simply not commensurate with the goal of helping students learn."(p.202) In this sense, faculties seem not to know that their chief instructional role is to promote learning, not to serve as personnel selection agents for society. 

   The third justification for grades is that they let students know how they are doing. In fact, informational feedback is an important part of the educational process. But if our goal is really to provide such feedback, rather than just rationalize the process of giving grades for other reasons, then reducing someone's work to a letter or number is unnecessary and terribly unhelpful. 
A B+ at the top of a paper tells a student nothing about what was impressive about the paper or how it can be improved. The problem is not just that grades don't say enough about people's performance it's that the process of grading fixes their attention on their performance (p. 202). 
   To some degree, Kohn's criticism of grades was a true situation that I had faced in the past. In one of my Honors English courses, I had repeatedly come to my teacher because I was unsure on how to improve upon my timed essay writing. I consistently received low scores, which were indicated by a simple number on the first page of the essay. The teacher justified to the class that this was her method for grading 'holistically' and that comments would not be provided. Upon arriving at the teacher's support hours, I was given a few words of advice and was directed to look towards the essays in which I had higher grades, see what I did well, and go from there. However, this advice did not satisfy me, as I was on a downward trajectory with my writing and I wasn't going to emulate my first ever essay. The content in class got a bit more difficult over time and I needed to adapt my strategies rather than try to recycle a prior original work. I inevitably acquired a helpful tutor which restabilized my grade significantly as well as prepared for me the AP exam. But I digress.                 

   Kohn then suggests that tests, as a form of evaluation, should be less punitive and more informative. In particular, a classroom should be an environment in which students feel safe to admit they are wrong or don't understand something so that they can ask for help. 
"Ironically, grades and tests, punishments and rewards, are the enemies of safety; they therefore reduce the probability that students will speak up and that truly productive evaluation will take place" (p. 203). To summarize, grades cannot be justified on the grounds that they motivate students, because they actually undermine the sort of motivation that leads to success. Using them to sort students undercuts our efforts to educate. And to the extent we want to offer students our feedback about their performance - a goal that demands a certain amount of a caution lest their improvement in the task itself be sacrificed - there are better ways to do this than by giving grades.

   The advantages cited to justify grading students to not seem terribly compelling at closer inspection. But the disadvantages only become more pronounced the more familiar one is with the research. Earlier in this post, I cited evidence showing that students who were motivated by grades or other rewards typically don't learn as well, think as deeply, care as much about what they are doing, or choose the challenge themselves at the same level as those who are not grade orientated. But the damage doesn't stop there. "Grades dilute the pleasure performance that a student experiences on successfully completing a task. They encourage cheating, strain the relationship between teacher and student, and reduce a student's sense of control over his own fate" (p. 204). Again, notice how it is not only those who are punished by F's but also those who are rewarded with A's that who bear the cost of grades.

   Furthermore, Kohn outlines the gradual process by which the system of education can progress away from grading and towards the children's interest and genuine learning. His seven suggestions to teachers are as follows (pp. 208-209):
                      
 1. ...Limit the number of assignments for which you give a letter or number grade, or better yet, stop giving grades altogether. Offer substantive comments instead, in writing or in person. 
                     
  2. If you feel you must give them a mark...at least limit the number of gradations. For example, switch from A/B/C/D/F to check-plus/check/check-minus.
                  
  3. Reduce the number of possible grades to two: A and Incomplete. This theory here is that any work that does not merit an A isn't finished yet. ... Most significantly, it restores proper priorities: helping students improve becomes more important than evaluating them. 
                     
  4. Never grade students while they are still learning something; even more important, do not reward them for their performance at that point. Pop quizzes and the like smoother the process of coming to understand because they do not give students the time to be tentative.
                      
 5. Never grade for effort. Grades by their very nature make students less inclined to challenge themselves. Specifically, grading by a student's effort feels like an attempt to coerce them to try harder.          
                      
 6. Never grade on a curve. Under no circumstances should the number of good grades be artificially limited so that one's student's success makes another's less likely. "It is not a symbol of rigor to have grades fall into a normal; distribution, rather, it is a symbol of failure - failure to teach well, failure to test well, and failure to have any influence at all on the intellectual on the intellectual lives of students" (from Milton et al, 1986, p. 285).   
                      
 7. Bring students in on the evaluation process to the fullest extent. This doesn't mean let them mark off their own quizzes while the instructor reads off the answers. It means working together with them to determine the criteria by which they are learning can be assessed and having them do as much as much of the actual assessment as is practical.  
The abolition of grades may upset some parents, but one reason so many seem obsessed with their children's grades and test scores is that this may be their only window into what happens at school. If you want them to accept the shift away from grades, these parents must be offered alternative sources of information about how their children are faring. Plenty of elementary schools function without grades, at least until children are ten or eleven (p. 210).  
   It is ambitious, but by no means impossible, to free high school students from the burden of grades. The major impediment in doing so is the fear that it would spoil student's chance of getting into college. 
Given that the most selective colleges have been known to accept home-schooled children who have never set foot in a classroom, it is difficult to believe that qualified applicants would be rejected if, instead of the usual transcript, their schools sent thoughtful qualitative assessments from some of the student's teachers explaining how the school prefers to emphasize learning over sorting, tries to cultivate intrinsic motivation rather than a performance orientation, and is consequently confident that its graduates are exquisitely prepared for the rigors of college life (p. 210).     
    Kohn mentions as a side note that he once had the opportunity to address an entire body of students and faculty at an elite prep school.

Already, I knew, they had learned to put aside books that appealed to them so that they could prepare for the college boards. They were joining clubs that held no interest for them because they thought their membership would look good on transcripts. They were finding their friendships strained by their struggles for scarce slots at Ivy League. What some of them failed to realize is that none of this ends when they finally get to college. It starts all over again: they will scan the catalog for courses that promise easy A's, sign up for new extracurriculars to round out their resumes and react with gratitude rather than outrage when teachers when professors tell them exactly what they need to know for exams so that they can ignore the rest. Nor does this mode of existence end at college graduation. The horizon never comes closer. Now they must struggle for the next set of rewards so that they can snag the best residences, the choicest clerkships, the fast-track positions in the corporate world. Then comes the most prestigious appointments, partnerships, vice presidencies, and so on, working harder nose stuck in the future, ever more frantic. And then, well into middle age, they will wake up suddenly in the middle of the night wondering what happened to their lives. When I was finally speaking,  I looked out into the audience and saw a well-dressed boy of about sixteen signaling me from the balcony. "You're telling us not to just get in a race for the traditional rewards," he said. "But what else is there?" It takes a lot to render me speechless, but I stood on that stage clutching my microphone for a few minutes and just stared. This was probably the most depressing question I have ever been asked. Here, I guessed, was a teenager who was enviably successful by conventional standards, headed by greater glories, and there was a large hole where his soul should have been. It was not a question to be answered so much as an indictment of grades, of the endless quest for rewards, or the resulting attenuation of values, that was far more scathing than any argument I could have offered." (p. 206).            
   Returning from the tangent, - and subsequently wrapping up this post - the available research shows that encouraging children to become fully involved with what they are working on and to stop worrying about their performance contributes to "a motivational pattern likely to promote long-term and high-quality improvement in learning" (p. 211). In this sense, students can use their mind to "discover something" rather than "learn something". The benefit of this is that children can see success and failure, not as reward and punishment, but as information. School can gradually shift their focus towards promoting intrinsic motivation by allowing for active learning, explaining the purpose of assignments so that children can value their work, eliciting curiosity, and welcoming mistakes. As for teachers' beliefs in learning, there is obviously a wide range of assumptions and practices to be found. 

   It is impossible to wish away the pervasiveness of Skinnerian techniques in American schools. But a recent national survey of elementary school teachers found fairly widespread understanding that rewards are not particularly effective at getting or keeping children motivated. The fact that extrinsic tactics are frequently used despite the knowledge this knowledge may reflect pressure to raise standardized test scores or keep control of a class. If teachers understand that rewards are not helpful for promoting motivation to learn, perhaps this is not the overriding goal of educators. If so, then a renewed call to emphasize the importance of motivation is what we need. We can get children hooked on learning- if that is really what we are determined to do.     

   And this concludes my blog series on Alfie Kohn's Punished By Rewards. Next week, I am going to begin with Conformity and Deviation by Berg and Bass.  

   If you're interested in the book, you can pick it up from Amazon: Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise, and Other Bribes.           

         

Thursday, March 2, 2017

What are Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation?



Previously, I have mentioned the more complex aspects of motivation, such as achievement motivation, and how it relates to achievement goals. But for today I will articulate on a simple yet significant distinction in motivation literature which is the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

Extrinsic Motivation occurs when an individual is motivated by something external such as a reward, a desire to avoid punishment, money, good grades, etc. This is a very common method for getting others to accomplish or do something specific as a means to promote appropriate behavior or achievement.    

Intrinsic motivation is the type of motivation that exists because of internal factors such as engaging task because it is personally rewarding. For example, the individual believes that the task at hand is very exciting or enjoyable. This contrasts the previous type of motivation since no external rewards are involved.    

Though everyone desires a sense of personal independence and therefore value intrinsic motivation over extrinsic motivation - namely since intrinsic motivation leads to higher productivity- extrinsic rewards are also essential. Extrinsic motivation is helpful in motivated those who have no initial interest in a subject and can also provide a structure for people who already have internal motivation to be aided by an external force. In this way, external rewards can potentially incentivize people to promote efficiency alongside what they are already doing.

Do you want to easily find out which one you are? I created an online quiz that you can take here!



Thursday, February 9, 2017

What is Achievement Motivation?



Motivation is defined as the process that initiates, guides, and maintains goal-oriented behaviors. Motivation is what causes us to act, whether it is getting a glass of water to reduce thirst, or reading a book to gain knowledge.

Achievement motivation functions as a subjective and internal psychological drive, enabling individuals to pursue work they perceive to be valuable and eventually achieve their goals. From this, achievement motivation can best be defined as the need for success or the attainment of excellence. Other than being seen as an intrinsic need to excel, it has also been viewed as a desire to do well relative to a standard of success, such as through competition.

Understanding and harnessing such a psychological feature would provide a tremendous amount of productivity and utility in all possible social sectors. Since students form values, self-concepts, and beliefs about their abilities at a young age, the development of achievement motivation has significant implications for later careers and routes of success. With a greater and growing impetus on achievement in today’s world, the influence of motivation in the field of achievement motivation has been noteworthy to attaining specific goals.