Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.8 Motivation
2.8.4 Theoretical Framework for Motivation
The modern motivational paradigm is dominated by cognitive theories that claim that individuals’ ideas, beliefs, and emotions together influence motivation (Wigfield & Eccles, 2002). According to the social-cognitive perspective, students’
motivation is relatively situation or context specific (Pintrich, Marx & Boyle, 1993).
This approach emphasizes the important role of students' beliefs and interpretations of actual events, as well as the role of the achievement context for motivational dynamics (Pintrich et al., 1993; Wigfield & Cambria, 2010). Based on social cognitive theory, students who have or appreciate positive feelings about mathematics or have higher expectations for success tend to do more, learn more, and show higher mathematics performance (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). In addition, students' emotional interactions with the task and the performance of their task affect their effort, perseverance, and performance (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
Motivation is not directly noticeable, and therefore the conceptual framework setting is important for its measurement. Motivation theories are concerned with understanding what motivates people to act in a specific way, and what makes an individual choose the direction and intensity of actions. Thus, some influential theories about motivation to learn mathematics will be reviewed. Motivational theories in education study cognitive, social, behavioral, and self-regulation perspectives as well as perspectives from self-determination theory (Ryan, 2012). Three theoretical approaches are particularly important for motivational processes in the context of (mathematics) education and more specifically suggest the theoretical potential of contextual tasks to motivate students to learn mathematics: self-determination theory, expectancy-value theories, and achievement goal theory.
2.8.4.1 Self-Determination Theory (SDT)
It is one of the most powerful motivational theories. SDT is a general theoretical framework used to study human motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2002). The SDT focuses on the degree to which an individual’s behavior is self-motivated and self- determined. The SDT distinguishes different types of motivation based on different types of causes or goals that produce motivation. Intrinsic and different types of extrinsic motivation are distinguished to explain motivated behavior (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Among the issues, a central assumption of self-determination theory is that humans have innate psychosocial needs (i.e. competence, independence, and social relatedness) that develop in interaction with the surrounding social context and help to understand the process of goal chasing (Ryan & Deci, 2002, 2017). It is believed that meeting these needs is accompanied by positive emotional experiences (Ryan & Deci, 2002) and it permits individuals to develop intrinsic motivation and achieve a more in- depth understanding of the learning content, which in turn can contribute to positive achievement.
Intrinsic motivation: It is when the work is done “for its own sake,” without expectation of external rewards. It entails personal development, enjoyment, or exploring that leads to feelings of “internal rewards,’ or enjoyment of the moment. The focus is on the process more than the result itself (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Extrinsic motivation: It indicates goals or reasons for reaching an external reward or avoiding negative consequences. Extrinsic motivation is often described as opposing intrinsic motivation; however, it can be intrinsic to the self to aspire to external rewards (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Both internal and external factors guide the motivating behavior in practice.
The difference between individuals lies in the balance between internal and external motivation.
2.8.4.2 Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT)
The most widely used expectancy-value model of achievement motivation derives from the more recent work of Wigfield and Eccles (2000). It is one of the social cognitive models of achievement motivation. This model shows that beliefs about value and expectation of success are related to the effort in learning mathematics. The focus of this model is on the role of students' expectations for academic success and how they perceive the value for academic assignments; it is based on personal, social, and developmental psychology (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
The EVT comprise a variety of motivation constructs that can be organized into two broad categories (Pintrich et al., 1993) : an expectancy of success that is reflected by the question “Can I do this task?” and value components that correspond to the question “Do I want to do this task and why?”. The EVT is believed to influence the engagement in a subject, educational choices, and ultimately achievement. The expectation component of the model refers to one's beliefs and judgments about his or her abilities to do and succeed in a task. Expectancy beliefs, including self-concept, ability perceptions, and expectancy for success. Both components are important predictors of achievement behavior (Wigfield & Eccles, 1992).
The value component of the model indicates the different reasons individuals have to engage in a task or not, and the strength of these values. The use of contextual tasks to motivate students is particularly supported by the value aspect of theory
because it addresses the belief in the usefulness and personal relevance of the content (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000) and “awareness of its role in improving the quality of our lives” (Brophy, 2004, p. 133). In this model, value is consisting of four components:
importance, interest, utility, and cost (Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). The attainment value is about the importance of doing well on a task. The second element is intrinsic value or interest, which is about the degree to which a person enjoys doing a task (Wigfield
& Eccles, 1992). The third element, utility value indicates the usefulness in terms of the individual’s future goals (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). The last component is the cost, which is perceived as the negative aspects associated with the task, such as the effort involved or the loss of opportunities to perform other tasks. Intrinsic value is conceptually similar to intrinsic interest in the SDT (Deci & Ryan 1985), while utility value resembles the extrinsic motivation component in the SDT (Michaelides et al., 2019).
2.8.4.3 Achievement Goal Theory
Students’ goal orientations are broader cognitive orientations that students have toward their learning and they reflect the reasons for doing a task (Dweck &
Leggett, 1988). This theory is consistent with the previous two theories and assumes that students have different reasons to either engage or not in their learning (Pintrich, 2000). According to Patrick et al. (2011), these reasons affect what, how, and why students learn and perform. Two types of achievement goals are identified (Dweck &
Leggett, 1988); (1) the mastery goal in which a mastery-oriented person is learning for the task's own sake (similar to intrinsic motivation in the SDT and intrinsic value in the EVT). (2) the performance goal where it reflects the desire to compare performance relative to others. The goal here is to do well and get rewards associated with high
performance (Similar to extrinsic motivation in the SDT and utility value in the EVT).
Each of these two goals has different consequences in the context of achievement, with mastery being associated with higher performance than performance orientation (Michaelides et al., 2019).
Taking into consideration that PISA also is studying the association between mathematics motivation and mathematics achievement in high school-aged students.
This study looked at two different types of motivation as described by OECD (2013):
intrinsic motivation, which described if students enjoyed and were interested in math, and instrumental (extrinsic) motivation, which described if students valued math for its role in their education or career goals—and found both correlated to math achievement (OECD, 2013). Chiu, Pong, Mori, and Chow (2012) believe that the way students engage in learning and doing mathematics is due to their beliefs about the value of mathematics. For example, Deci and Ryan (2000) indicated that students who love to learn mathematics (intrinsic motivation) often show higher achievement in mathematics, as well as students who see mathematics as a useful tool for other goals (instrumental motivation) (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
This program was mainly designed to connect mathematics to students’ life based on the mathematical literacy framework because it can be said that for almost all students, the motivation to learn mathematics increases when they see the importance of what they have learned to the world outside of the classroom and other subjects (OECD, 2013, 2018). To study motivation to learn mathematics, the expectancy-value model was adopted that reflects the social cognitive theory.
Expectancy-value theory stresses appreciating the worth of learning specific topics (Brophy, 2008). It is suggested that making the content meaningful and relevant, and
connecting it to other important aspects of students' lives, will support their motivation to learn. The focus of this study is on two main scales namely-- intrinsic goal orientation and extrinsic goal orientation. The items were selected and modified from the scales of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the MSLQ questionnaire (Pintrich et al., 1991).