The Main Nutrient of Examination Performance; Motivation and Related Factors

Etiketler: arkabahçe, arkabahçe psikoloji
Kategoriler: Bilimsel Makalelerimiz

12th THE EUROPEAN CONGRESS OF PSYCHOLOGY 2011

 The Main Nutrient of Examination Performance;

Motivation and Related Factors

OLCAY GÜNER, AYŞE ESRA ASLAN

ARKABAHÇE Psychological Development, Training and Consulting & MARMARA University,

Istanbul, Turkey

INTRODUCTION

Due to growing global market, contemporarily, young citizens of the world compete not only with youngsters living in their own country but also with youngsters living in other countries. Turkey’s population as per 2000 is 65.3 million, with a young population structure. 30 % of the population is in the age class of 0-14 and 64 % of the population is in the age class of 15-64. In view of the circumstances, regulations about providing a basis for offering everyone a chance for education and schooling, preventing accumulation in transition to higher education, ensuring equality of educational opportunity and establishing an efficient guidance system are unsatisfactory (Çolakoğlu, 2002).

Educational establishments fall short of meeting demands and accept students based on entrance exam points. Thus, students enter for a challenging race for performing. One of the most basic variables that affect performance is motivation.

According to Turkish Language Association motivation is a French origin word defined as “encouragement, inducement” (http://tdkterim.gov.tr/bts/erişim 27/0672011). “Inducement which starts as an internal stimulation incites the organism towards behaviors pushing on a target and the organism that hit the target is satisfied thanks to inducement”.

The present study investigates the relationship of motivation, as one of the factors affecting test performance, with different variables in terms of test success.

The present study investigates

(1) The relationship between physical conditions that affect test performance, anxiety during the test, pessimism, pressure of the immediate social environment, insufficient physical conditions, and reluctance/lack of motivation.

(2) The relationship between grade class, gender, parents’ educational level, family’s monthly income, type of school attended, academic support by private school offering specialized courses/ private lessons, student’s self-expectancy, preparation efficiency perceived by student, importance attached to tests by the student and reluctance/lack of motivation.

METHOD

Survey model is used as research design. Research sample is randomly selected  among students studying  at one private school and  five state schools in Istanbul, who are attending to the support group at the counseling center (N=644, 344 girl 58%, 318 boy 52%) , aged from 12 to 18.

Sample size is determined based on the data collection tool’s “Scale of Attitudes Negatively Affecting Performance, POET 1-S” lack of motivation sub-scale standard deviation value (Güner and Otrar, in print). The formula used for determining sample size is (n=z*ss/e) (Karasar, 2004).

 Instruments

Demographic Information Form and Scale of Attitudes Negatively Affecting Performance 1/Exam (POET-1/S) are data collection tools. The survey includes ten closed-ended questions about gender, age, grade, school type, parents’ education level and students ‘ preparation processes for tests.

Scale of Attitudes Negatively Affecting Performance 1/S (POET 1/S)

Scale of Attitudes Negatively Affecting Performance 1/S (POET 1/S) is a five point Likert type scale consisting of 71 items designed by Güner and Otrar (in print). The scale is developed to assess attitudes affecting 12-18 age groups’ test performance. POET 1/S has six sub dimensions. These are, (1) Physical Conditions, (2) Anxiety During Tests, (3) Pessimism, (4) Reluctance/Lack of Motivation, (5) Pressure of the Immediate Social Environment, (6) Insufficient Physical Conditions. The present study includes only Reluctance/Lack of Motivation sub dimension. The Cronbach Alpha coefficient of reluctance/lack of motivation sub-scale is .831 and of total scale is .953. The six factors resulting from ANOVA test explain 42% of total variance, reluctance/lack of motivation factor by itself, explains 7.37% of total variance. Eigenvalue of reluctance/lack of motivation sub-dimension is found to be 5.24.

The POET 1/S scale is applied to the same group together with Test Anxiety Scale developed by Öner and Albayrak (1985) and tested for criterion validity. There is a mediocre but significant relationship between Scale of Attitudes Affecting Performance and reluctance/lack of motivation (r=.584,  p<.001)

Data Analysis Method

Besides independent group t test, ANOVA and Pearson Product Moment Correlation Technique, Scheffe and Tamhane methods, are used as complementary techniques. Results are analyzed with SPSS 15.0 statistical package.

RESULTS

Based on grade class factor, highest lack of motivation mean score is obtained by 9^th grade class or older students, and lowest lack of motivation mean score is obtained by 6^th grade class students. One way ANOVA test results indicates that students’ reluctance with respect to their grades are statistically meaningfully different (F=12, 78 p<.001), (Table-1).

Tamhane test is used for Post-hoc analysis after ANOVA. Accordingly, 7^th, 8^th, 9^th grade classes and older students scores of reluctance towards tests are meaningfully (p<.001) higher than 6^th grade students. ANOVA analysis results indicated a differentiation in motivation scores depending on mother’s education factor (F= 2, 57, p<.05). On the other hand, Scheffe test indicated no meaningful difference between categories (Table-2).

The nature of relationship between student’s self-expectancy, preparation efficiency perceived by student, importance attached to tests by the student with reluctance/lack of motivation is tested with Pearson Product Moment Correlation Technique. A negative significant relationship between student’s self-expectancy and lack of motivation score (r= -.334, p<.001), preparation efficiency and lack of motivation score (r= -.347, p<.001) and a negative relationship between importance attached to tests and reluctance/lack of motivation score (r=.188, p<.001) is found (Table 3).

As seen at Table 4, again, a positive significant relationship is detected between POET 1/S’s sub-scale scores (physical signs r=.498 p<.001, anxiety during exam r=.495 p<.001, pessimism r=.622 p<.001, near surroundings pressure r=.319 p<.01, insufficient physical circumstances r=.281 p<.01 and total score r=.735 p<.001) and reluctance/lack of motivation.

Gender, father’s educational level, parents’ monthly income, type of school attended, academic support by private school offering specialized courses/ private lessons are not found to be related to motivation. Gender, father’s educational level, parents’ monthly income, type of school attended, academic support by private school offering specialized courses/ private lessons are not found to be related to motivation.

DISCUSSION

1. Results indicate that students attending higher grade classes are more likely to have lower motivation scores. 7^Th, 8^th and 9^th grade class students’ motivation scores are significantly lower than 6^th grade class students. This result may possibly due to a certain level of burnout reached over years.

A study conducted by Harter and Jackson (1992) showed that internal motivation that reached peak levels at 3th grade class systematically turns into external motivation  at 9^th grade class depending exam marks and this transformation reaches peak levels at 6^th grade class.

2. Mother’s educational level is not a factor affecting motivation. However other researches indicate that parents’ educational level and related attitudes has a positive effect on children’s academic success and motivation (Gonzalez-DeHass, A. R., Willems, P. P., & Doan Holbein, M. F., 2005)

The study conducted by Izzo, Weissberg,, Kasprow and Fendrich (1999) revealed that parent’s interest towards child’s academic activity has a positive effect on child’s motivation. Besides, other researchers argued that the reflection of parent’s thoughts and values about success and child’s motivation and adequacy are strongly related (Marchant, Paulson and Rothlisberg, 2001). Child’s motivation increases if he/she realizes that the parent is interested in his/her education (Ames, Khoum and Watkins, 1993). However, these studies don’t differentiate mother’s effect from fathers. The present study revealed that father’s educational level doesn’t have an effect on child’s motivation level as well. This result may indicate that family structure of the present sample may not be giving fathers a role with which he would closely monitor child’s academic situation.

3. Another outstanding result is the significant relationship between student’s self-expectancy, preparation efficiency perceived by student, importance attached to test by student and motivation. These results are in line with the literature.

Bong & Skaalvik (2003) point out the importance of examining the relationship between learning and success. They argue nature of the construction concerning test anxiety, beliefs of sufficiency and success goals should be investigated. Their research results suggest that increase in self-expectancy increases motivation.

Aysan and Harmanlı (2003) define “proficiency expectation” as individual’s belief about being able to mobilize motivation and cognitive abilities and they emphasize that it is formed due to cognitive evaluations about life experience. Thus, “self-evaluation” matters.

There are other studies that agree with present results. Students with higher self-confidence study with greater desire and this positively affects test performance (Oettingen, Mayer, 2002). Individuals with high self-activity struggle against difficulties and they tend to resist (Bandura, 1986; Zimmerman, 1989).

Recurrence of success generates a positive vicious cycle and increases proficiency expectation versus failure. Selçuk (2001) remarks that previous success is an important predictor of proficiency expectation. Most of studies concerning performance and proficiency expectation reveal a positive relationship between proficiency expectation and high performance. Beauchamp, Bray and Albinson (2002), investigated the relationship between proficiency expectation and performances of sportsmen and suggested that sportsmen with good performance have high proficiency expectation and sportsmen with bad performance have low proficiency expectation.

Paying heed to test increases the motivation for test and this is a result of internal motivation.  According to Lazarus and Folkman (1984) and Blascovich and Tomata (1996) whether difficulty is perceived as challenge or threat matters. If an individual perceives “test” as a challenge, he/she can adopt an optimistic point of view and consider it as an opportunity. However, if he/she perceives it as a threat, he/she can be affected negatively and may think that it can be dangerous.

4. A negative significant relationship is found between preparation efficiency perceived by student and reluctance/lack of motivation. We can conclusively argue that students are motivated by the sufficiency of their preparation level. Putwain & Daniels (2010) suggested that “proficiency beliefs” and “test anxiety” positively affect goal oriented behavior. They additionally pointed out that “proficiency beliefs” and “test anxiety” increased performance and individuals with high self-perception have higher proficiency motivation.
5. Total score and six dimensions of POET is significantly related to motivation. Higher is the score of sub-scales, lower the motivation is. Thus, motivation is the main factor affecting test performance. Many other research studies support this result (Chan, Schmitt, DeShon, Clause, & Delbridge, 1997; Arvey, Strickland, Drauden, & Martin, 1990).

In conclusion, in Turkey and all over world, offering limited supply on the face of great demand or other kind of selective eliminations would necessarily provoke test anxiety in individuals. However, it is worrisome that in Turkey, professionals specialized in preparation to tests might push young generation to an unnatural motivation and drag them to directions other than their real ideals.

According to self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan 1985b, 1991; Ryan & Deci, 2000) individuals tend to adapt their natural tendencies to their physical and social environment and turn intrinsic regulators to extrinsic regulators for motivating themselves to integrate to a greater social chain. Even though self-determination theory emphasizes that especially, this is the evolution of unification tendencies of individuals in connection with their basic psychological needs of autonomy, sufficiency and interrelation. In other words, human development is a natural intra-psychic, interpersonal unification tendency what is called autonomy and homonymy by Angyal (1965). Only, this tendency is not activated by effective implementation with autonomy, sufficiency and interrelation at the beginning and it needs to be fed by these experiences. Social world make so much possible the satisfaction of these needs, so that individuals march to a greater autonomy, homonymy, induced alienation and subjective well-being.

Here, there is strong evidence that the main problem is exposed gratification which is in relationship with evolved tendencies towards autonomy and reward strategies. These intend to organize behavior from outside, sabotage processes keeping the organism in contact with its needs for being able to react to the environment.

This reward contingency is arbitrary and it is often powerfully activated with an approach used for enlightening the reward-expected behavior. In reality, in many cases, individuals are rewarded for expected unnatural behaviors. For instance, they are expected to work for hours, discarding their interests and relationships or dealing with worthless behaviors and trying to convince others that they do it because they are interested. In this case, reward falls beyond the scope of its purpose and pose long term problems. Especially, unexpected use of rewards sabotage intrinsic motivation and predominate natural tendencies.  (Ryan & Deci, 2000)

We suggest researchers to conduct longitudinal studies about young people and their motivational tendencies, values and interests for rendering possible inducement of test anxiety.

Especially, developmental psychologists should investigate parents’ attitudes during preparation for test period, effects of external environment such as teachers, media etc. on youngsters’/children’s personality traits such as self-esteem, values.

Since there are not many instruments for measuring test performance, Scale of Attitudes Negatively Affecting Performance, POET 1-S should be studied for enlarging age intervals and for normative application.

Finally, counselors and educational psychologists working in the field are strongly recommended to mobilize individual’s internal regulators in competitive situations and cause them acquire self-observation and regulation skills, developing educational/developmental programs for making them internalize reward system and experimentally investigate the efficiency of these programs.

REFERENCE

Ames, C., Khoju, M., and Watkins, T. (1993). Parent Involvement: The Relationship Between School-to-Home Communication and Parents’ Perceptions and Beliefs (Report No. 15). Urbana, IL: ERIC Document Service No. ED362271, Center on Families, Communities, Schools, and Children’s Learning, Illinois University.

Arvey, R. D., Strickland, W., Drauden, G., & Martin, C. (1990). Motivational components of test taking: Personnel Psychology,43, 695-716.

Aysan, F., Harmanlı, Z.(2003).Yaşam Doyumunu Yordamada, Yaşam Uyumu, Özyeterlik ve Başaçıkma Stratejileri, VII. Ulusal Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Kongresi Bildiri Özetleri 09-11 Temmuz, İnönü Üniversitesi (pp. 93), Malatya: Pegem A Yayımcılık.

Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Clinical and Social Psychology, 4, 359-373.

Beauchamp, M.R., Bray, S.R., Albinson, J.G. (2002). “Pre-competition imagery, self-efficacy and performance in collegiate golfers”. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20 (9), 697-705.

Blascovich, J., & Tomata, J. (1996). The biopyschosocial model of arousal regulation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 28, 1-51. New York: Academic Press.

Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E.M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1-40

Chan, D., Schmitt, N., DeShon, R. P., Clause, C. S., Delbridge, K. (1997) Reactions to cognitive ability tests: The relationships between race, test performance, face validity perceptions, and test-taking motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology by the American Psychological Associatiofi, Inc, 82(2).

Çolakoğlu, J.(2002).Yaşam Boyu Öğrenmede Motivasyonun Önemi. Retrieved June 3, 2011, from http://yayim.meb.gov.tr/dergiler/155-156/terzi.htm

Gonzalez-DeHass, A. R., Willems, P. P., & Doan Holbein, M. F. (2005). Examining the relationship between parental involvement and student motivation. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 99-123.

Güner, O. and Otrar, M. (2011) Development of Scale of Attitudes Negatively Affecting Performance/ Test I (POET-I/S). Poster session presentation at The 12th European Congress of Psychology, Istanbul.

Harter, S. and Jackson, B. K. (1992). Trait vs. nontrait conceptualizations of intrinsic/ extrinsic motivational orientations. Motivation and emotion, 16, 209-230.

Izzo, C. V., Weissberg, R. P., Kasprow, W. J., and Fendrich, M. (1999). A longitudinal assessment of teacher perceptions of parent involvement in children’s education and school performance. Am. J. Community Psychology. 27(6): 817–839.

Karasar, N. (2007). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

Marchant, G. J., Paulson, S. E., and Rothlisberg, B. A. (2001). Relations of middle school students’ perceptions of family and school contexts with academic achievement. Psychol. Schools 38(6): 505–519.

Oettingen, G., & Mayer, D. (2002). The motivating function of thinking about the future: Expectations versus fantasies. Journal of personality and social psychology, 83(5), 1198-1212.

Putwain, D.W. & Daniels A.R. (2010). Is the relationship between competence beliefs and test anxiety influenced by goal orientation? Learning and Individual Differences, 20 (1), 8-13.

Ryan. R. M., Deci. E. L. (2000). When Rewards Compete with Nature: The Undermining of Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Regulation.  (In Intrinsic an Extrinsic Motivation The Search for Optimal Motivation and Performance). Sansone C. and. Harackiewicz, J.M (Editors). California:  Academic Press.

Selçuk, Z. (2001). Gelişim ve Öğrenme, Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım

Tevruz, S. (1999). Davranışlarımızdan Seçmeler, İstanbul:Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım

Türk Dil Kurumu, Büyük Türkçe Sözlük. Retrieved from http://tdkterim.gov.tr/bts 27/0672011

Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social-cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329-339

Table 1 One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Results of POET I/S Reluctance/Lack of Motivation Scores for Grade Class Variable Levene: 2,955 *   * p<,05   **p<.01   ***p<.001

Grade Class	N	Mean	Std. dev.	Source   of Variance	Sum of Squares	sd	Mean of Squares	F	p
6th grade	166	38,5756	28,92115	Inter groups	30367,716	3	10122,57	12,78	,000***
7th grade	143	52,7682	29,64858	In groups	521681,80	659	791,626
8th grade	270	53,5325	28,07912	Total	552049,51	662
9th grade and upper	84	57,1051	23,73481
Total	663	50,0754	28,87753

Table 2 One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Results of POET I/S Reluctance/Lack of Motivation Scores for Mother’s Education Variable 

Mother’s Education	N	Mean	Std. dev.	Source of Variance	Sum of Squares	sd	Mean of Squares	F	p
Primary	170	53,3302	26,09601	Inter groups	7804,734	3	2601,578	3,150	,025*
Middle	107	48,6651	28,19988	In groups	544244,78	659	825,865
High	209	45,6000	29,94945	Total	552049,51	662
College	177	53,0865	29,98968
Total	663	50,0754	28,87753

Levene:2,044      * p<,05   **p<.01   ***p<.001

Table 3 The Relationship Between Student’s Self-expectancy, Preparation Efficiency Perceived by Student, Importance Attached to Tests by The Student with Reluctance/Lack of Motivation Scores

Continuous Variable	Lack of Motivation
Self-expectancy	-.334***
Preparation Efficiency	-.347***
Attached Importance	-.188***

* p<,05   **p<.01   ***p<.001

Table 4 Relationship between Reluctance/Lack of Motivation and POETI/S’s Total and Sub-Scale Scores.

	Reluctance/Lack of Motivation
Physical Signs	,498***
Anxiety during the test	,495***
Pessimism	,622***
Pressure	,319**
Insufficient Conditions	,281**
Total	,735***