Motivating the Academically Unmotivated - Assignment Example

The discipline of motivation has seen a tremendous elevation in its knowledge reserve over the past decades of the last century and the 21st century. This implies that more resources are accessible to educators that endow with knowledge and approaches to improve motivation for learning. The more people understand the significance of motivation in learning and the dilemmas, prospects and challenges that it confronts, the better the policies and strategies created and implemented for its progress. I. Introduction Anyone who has observed children is aware that it is expected of them to be energetic and attentive throughout their roused hours. If free from biological urges, they consume most of their energy and concentration to activities they find fascinating. For prolonged periods of time they arrange and then rearrange blocks, dress dolls, push cartons, drain jam jars, hurl balls, or play with their dinosaurs. They repeatedly do these play activities without nudges or stimulation; in fact, they at times persist despite of nudges or stimulation on the opposite. For parents, this can be simultaneously rewarding and disturbing. Since interest is an influential motivator, children take pleasure from the activities that constantly arouse their interests and they gain knowledge about their world by doing so. However, they sometimes carry on with these activities rather than accomplishing other stuff that parents deem more essential for learning or social harmony. In actual fact, children may refuse to give in and become bad-tempered when their parents attempt to steer their attention away from the activities that interest them the most (Renninger, 1992). Nevertheless, young children are not the mere ones who are motivated through interest. Even grown-ups can become entirely engrossed in an activity that is devoid of payoff apart from the gratification they experience while in the course of the activity. Most frequently, such immersion takes place in leisure pursuits; to be precise people on average pursue crafts primarily because of enthusiasm in the activities. However, interest can additionally be an essential motivator in one’s occupation. Indeed, since people who are interested in their work are characteristically committed to better completion of work-related tasks, several behavioral specialists have been investigating how to make jobs more motivating for individuals (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Though, adults’ behaviors are less frequently motivated wholly by interest than are children’s, for the reason that with grown people the motivational tendency of interest is habitually combined with other motivational influences such as “evaluation apprehension, ego-involvement, social comparison and habit” (Renninger et al, 1992, 44). II. Task Motivation: An Interaction between the Cognitive and Content-Oriented Dimensions in Learning The interaction on cognitive and motivational factors in teaching and learning has consumed the educational disciplines for centuries. According to Comenius (1627), in harmony with nature, effectual teaching not simply smooths the progress of learning but also should also provide for its reassurance and satisfaction. On the other hand, Herbart (1806) argued that the fostering of diversified interest is an essential requirement for prospective learning and, thus, a fundamental objective of very instructive treatment. For Herbart, this aim is derived from the fact that, even though realistic philosophy can be relied on to specify the necessities of an educational perception based upon the power of moral ascendancy, it bestows no direction in meeting the probable future needs of the individual at some stage in maturity. No more than an education that guides to an unbiased mix of various interests can nurture for the future. In lieu of Herbart’s principle, Dewey (1913) emphasized the need of interest for the upholding of learning as a self-induced, content-related activity, the proficiency of which generates contentment and pleasure. Just decades ago, motivational concepts associated to education and teaching became more particular due to the impact of psychological research. Helpful instruction came to be illustrated in terms of the outside circumstances for learning and the substance to be learned mislaid much of its previous significance in support of a focus on the processes of its attainment (Wittrock, 1986). In the previous decade, nevertheless, this tendency appears, at least in a number of disciplines, to have overturned itself. In recent years, the concern on the strategy to improve teaching in order to guarantee effective learning has become progressively complex area of research. Specifically, researchers have acknowledged that not merely cognitive but also motivational elements, such as interest, contribute an important input in student learning. Moreover, the chief function of content in motivational processes and its related effect on learning has been reestablished. The association between motivation and the ease of use of learning strategies, specifically, to the degree motivation is a purpose of the availability of learning strategies, or the other way around, remains imprecise. In-depth studies into this concern have produced conflicting results (McKeachie et al, 1986) even though it appears logical to assume a give-and-take relationship between these two constituents of learning. In order to assist student learning of an undertaking, the teacher should consider student goal orientation and motive. These motivational precursors result in various learning strategies and, hence, in various learning processes. At some stage this last few decades, majority of the general theories regarding learning and instruction, in addition to related proposal for more successful teaching, have integrated either a primarily cognitive or mainly motivational perspective. Frameworks putting emphasis all together on both components of learning have been fairly uncommon (Alderman, 2004). A. Goals and Goal Setting The terms such as aim, aspiration, purpose or intent are all synonymous to one motivational concept, goal. Goals have been characterized simply as “something that the person wants to achieve” (Locke & Latham, 1990, 2). On the other hand, goal theory implies that “human action is directed by conscious goals and intentions” (ibid, 4). However, it is important to note that there is a significant difference between goal setting theory and goal orientation. Goal setting implies a particular result that an individual is aiming to accomplish, while goal orientation refers to a form of goal orientation or fundamental objective behind the intended goal (Alderman, 1999). From a motivational perspective, goals and goal setting contribute a primary role in self-regulation (Schutz, 1991). Goal setting affects learning and motivation through providing an intention and knowledge about how well one is doing. One opportunity for teachers is to underline that learning tasks may have numerous outcomes or goals. Ford (1992) stressed that when an individual has multiple reasons for participating in an activity motivational strength is increased, giving a form of motivational assurance. For instance, Wentzel (1991) finalized that a goal of attempting to interact will peer is not necessarily disadvantageous to classroom learning. The quest of both social obligation and academic objectives were mainly linked to achievement. Hence, for students who primarily put emphasis on entertainment and friendship than on learning and self-enhancement, it perhaps is likely to use several goals principle to ease meaningful interaction. A case in point is cooperative learning which provides opportunity for manifold goals such as academic, social aptitude, peer relations and duty. A number of educators are recently beginning to widen the potential kinds of goals through developing the types of learning outcomes that are achievable in school. III. Motivation: Dilemmas, Prospects and Perspectives Challenges in the area of motivation are described by many scholars from two frameworks that intermingle. The first point of view emerges from the motivational research on the contribution of beliefs on the effort and aptitude as they relate to school achievement or performance. The second perspective mirrors motivational discrimination as it influences academic achievement. Several of the problems within this framework are founded in the dilemmas confronting society. From these two frameworks, educational institutions are part of the problem and can recommend likelihoods for solutions. A. Effort and Ability Framework Hidi and Harackiewicz (2000) proposed that there are two perspectives for inadequate academic performance of students, namely, effort and ability. Lack of initiative or effort is one dilemma that educators can address. Basically, this framework implies viewpoints about the particular contributions of effort and ability to performance and achievement in school. Covington and Beery (1976) wrote a treatise that would become the typical description of motivation problems in schools. The predicament, from this perspective, indicates that “one’s self worth often comes to depend on the ability to achieve competitively” (Covington, 1998, 78). In several societies, the inclination is to liken human worth with accomplishment. Various school and classroom experiences then serve to weaken an individual’s feeling of self-worth because students become persuaded that ability is the foremost attribute for attaining success and insufficient ability is the underlying cause of failure. The ideas about ability are comparisons for other students. In competitive circumstances, the basic motivation for several students is to safeguard their self-worth from the impression that they have inferior ability. In order to protect their self-value, a number of students take on failure-preventing mechanisms. Two of these failure-preventing mechanisms are setting impractical goals, either extremely high or too low, and preserving effort. Both mechanisms provide students with justifications aside from ability for not performing well, hence protecting their self worth. Educators frequently brand these apathetic students as lazy or indifferent (ibid). On the other hand, the concern on the nature of effort as a motivational dilemma can be defined through the function of both habits and beliefs about the association between effort achievement and disappointment. This perspective of effort, illustrated by Bempechat (1998) as “lack of persistence, a preference for easy tasks over challenging tasks, or a tendency to fall apart at the first sign of difficulty” (37), is damaging to student achievement. For instance, student disconnection or lack of initiative in learning in secondary schools is another point of view on effort (Newman, 1992). Attitudes specifying disconnection span from severe such as omitting, distraction, failure to do assignments, to attitudes that, on the exterior, do not seem to be motivation dilemmas. This latter group of students performs well, always presents at class sessions, and does their work, yet they exhibit little pride in their work of dedication to gaining knowledge. An instance of disconnection in the goals of learning is this student’s remark, “When you get home there’s always something you can be doing with your friends besides homework so you just do enough to get a decent grade but you don’t try to get your best grade, you do just enough to finish” (Newmann, 1992, 15). Another case in point of effort and ability as a motivational problem emerges from a comparative study of Japanese and Chinese students with American students with respect to the contribution of effort and ability in mathematical better performance (Stevenson & Lee, 1990). The findings revealed that American students judged that intrinsic ability was primarily essential for success, while Japanese and Chinese students put emphasis on effort. Identical disparities in beliefs were also established among the students’ parents. These depressing motivational trends observed from the effort and ability framework may be cultivated through school and classroom activities. One of the most common is distinguished as the “competitive learning game” (Covington, 1992, 130). This game indicates classroom traditions that compel students to compete against each other for rankings and recognition. Such activities integrate grouping students on the basis of ability, restricting the range of accomplishments that obtain incentives, and appreciating ability over effort (ibid). B. Motivational Discrimination as a Dilemma and Challenge Motivational discrimination has been described by several scholars as the situation wherein students who do not possess paramount motivation for intellectual improvement are at a disadvantage compares with those who do have. Students who possess most favorable motivation have leverage because they have adaptive behaviors and techniques, such as sustaining innate interest, goal setting, and self-observance. There is proof that this motivational discrimination has elevated rather than diminished in the years it was initially conceptualized (Tomlinson, 1993). Regrettably, in several cases the motivational difficulties are furthered by school environment and teaching practices that may hinder students from reaching their maximum potential. One example of these practices is the segregation of students into categories based on their ability. Once ability classification is set up, several students are not trained to painstaking subject matter that perhaps can prepare them for college admission tests and college tasks, and it does not instruct them for job-related duties (Maeroff, 1988). Moreover, the subordinate ability level group is dispossessed of peer forms of motivation techniques that would assist them to achieve (Brown, 1993). Lastly, educators are probable to have lesser expectations for this group and instruct them consequently (Oakes, 1985). Furthermore, motivational discrimination presents supplementary challenges for schools and teachers because of growing ethnic and cultural diversity of the school populace. “Nearly 40% of the public school population is composed of students from a minority culture, and this percentage is expected to increase in the future” (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2000, as cited in Alderman, 2004, 8). Schools nowadays are composed of a highly heterogeneous population, or on a more detailed note, student population of African-American, Anglo and Hispanic cultures. On the other hand, socioeconomic status ranges from a “middle and upper middle professional population to mobile, low-income population” (ibid, 8). Some questions the motivational problems and challenges that increasing diversity may have. One challenge for educators is the cultural diversity present in the level of educational attainment, particularly the underachievement of African-American and Hispanic learners (Garibaldi, 1993). A consistent and alarming finding is that African-American students on the average achieve lower grades, drop out more frequently, and obtain less education than white students (Simmons & Grady, 1990). There are motivational factors that contribute in these performance disparities. One factor is an inconsistency between African-American students and their teachers with regard to goals. Teachers take too lightly students’ goals and this consequently affected the kind of education they provided to students. Another dilemma is the nonexistence of a taxing curriculum in several educational institutions with principally low-income, marginal populations (Haycock, 2001). Furthermore, for marginal students, there is occasionally negative peer pressure in opposition to behaviors related with school success. These are acknowledged as behaving like White or Anglo conducts (Fordham & Ogbu, 1986). The environment of the school is an aspect in whether these off-putting beliefs are at hand or missing. Since this is a complex problem, it is one that must be dealt with by schools, educators, parents, communities, and other stakeholders. IV. Conclusion The most essential factor for motivation with diverse student populations is to gain awareness about their families’ cultural values. It is important not to take for granted the reality that cultures have different values. Teachers can then initiate on shared aims between school and families while recognizing and respecting the cultural differences. As Bempechat (1998) eloquently stated, “Cultural sensitivity—ever more necessary in our schools—is realized through a healthy balance between respecting the ways in which culture and ethnicity guide the academic and motivational support that parents provide for their children and maintaining high academic goals for all children” (115). The effective reinforcement of motivation strategies rests largely on the teacher’s motivation. Motivational attributes of teacher efficacy, goal setting abilities, risk taking, willpower and perseverance are particularly essential for implementing plan of action. The beginning of the school year is the perfect time to establish the framework and perspective for a motivation amenable to all students. The fundamental framework for paramount motivation and commitment is resolved at this period and it includes prospects, points of view about ability and effort, an environment that sustains a sense of belongingness, task modules that cultivate engagement, and the reward or incentive and ranking system. This is the time to talk about achievable motivation processes with students, factors for success and failure, the purpose of effort in the classroom, impressions of intelligence and the significance of learning strategies (Renninger, 1992). These issues may be communicated in class discussions, use of visual aids with key knick-knacks, or a more detailed manual. It is a common knowledge in human development that individuals have stark differences especially in their cognitive capacities and behavioral attributes. Education was then established to somehow reconcile this individual diversity hence it is a must for teachers to allot substantial amount of their time to prepare and assess instructional approach and materials that they will employ in classes of heterogeneous populace of students. Therefore, motivation, as all believe is indeed a complicated subject matter which roused the intellectual curiosity of the scholastic communities and individuals from all walks of life. Works Cited Alderman, M. K. (2004). Motivation for Achievement: Possibilities for Teaching and Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Renninger, K. A. (1992). The Role of Interest in Learning and Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bempechat, J. (1998). Against all odds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Brown, B. B. (1993). School culture, social politics, and the academic motivation of U. S. students. In T. M. Tomilinson (Ed. ), Motivating students to learn(pp. 63-98). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Comenius J. A. ( 1627) Magna Didactica [Grosse Didaktik, translated and edited by A. Flitner]. Düsseldorf: Schwann. Covington, M. V. (1998). The will to learn: A guide for motivating young people. New York: Cambridge University Press. Covington, M. V, & Beery, R. (1976). Self-worth and school learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Dewey J. ( 1913). Interest and effort in education. Boston, MA: Riverside Press. Ford, M. E. (1992). Motivating humans: Goals, emotions, and personal agency beliefs. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. U. (1986). Black students school success: Coping with the “burden of acting white. ” The Urban Review, 18(3), 176-206. Garibaldi, A. M. (1993). Creating prescriptions for success in urban schools: Turning the corner on pathological explanations for academic failure. In T. M. Tomlinson (Ed. ), Motivating students to learn(pp. 125-138). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Hackman J. R., & Oldham G. R. ( 1980). “Motivation through the design of work". In J. R. Hackman & G. R. Oldham, Work redesign (pp. 71-94). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Haycock, K. (2001). Closing the achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 58(6), 6—11. Herbart J. F. ( 1806). Allgemeine Pädagogik, aus dem Zweck der Erziehung abgeleitet [orig. 1806]. Düsseldorf: Küpper. ( Herbart J. F. Pädagogische Schriften Bd. 2.) Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 151-179 Isen A. M., Daubman K. A., & Nowicki G. P. ( 1987). "Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (6), 1122-1131. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Maeroff, G. J. (1988). Withered hopes, stillborn dreams: The dismal panorama of urban schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 69(9), 632-638. McKeachie W. J., Pintrich P. R., Lin Y., & Smith D. ( 1986). Teaching and learning in the college classroom: A review of the research literature. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan. (National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning. National Center of Educational Statistics. (2000). The condition of education. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Newmann, F. M. (1992). Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. New York: Teachers College Press. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Schutz, P. A. (1991). Goals in self-directed behavior. Educational Psychologist, 2, 55-67. Simmons, W., & Grady, M. (1990). Black male achievement: From peril to promise(Report of the Superintendents Advisory Committee on black male achievement). Prince Georges County, MD: Prince Georges County Schools. Stevenson, H., & Lee, S. (1990). Contexts of achievement: A study of American, Chinese, and Japanese children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 55(1-2), 1-119. Tomlinson, T. M. (1993). Education reform: The ups and downs of good intentions. In T. M. Tomlinson (Ed. ), Motivating students to learn(pp. 3-20). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Wentzel, K. R. (1991). Social and academic goals at school: Motivation and achievement in context. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds. ), Advances in motivation and achievement(Vol. 7, pp. 185-212). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Wittrock M. ( 1986b). "Student thought processes". In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research and teaching ( 3rd ed., pp. 297-314). New York: Macmillan. Read More