Conceptual Framework: What is Motivation - Essay Example

?Conceptual Framework Conceptual Framework What is Motivation? Motivation is a driving force that initiates and directs behavior. Motivation can be viewed as an internal energy that drives a person to do something in order to achieve a certain goal (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). It is what causes an individual to take action, whether to eat a snack to decrease hunger or go in college to receive a degree. The powers that lie under motivation can be biological, social, emotional, or cognitive in nature (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Definitions of motivation differ because of the complexity of the concept. Many researchers defined motivation based on different theories. According to Gellerman (1963), he emphasized that internal tensions were at the base of motivation, which he defined as our speculation about someone else's purpose, and we usually expect to find that purpose in some immediate and obvious goal such as money or security or prestige. Yet the particular goals that people seem to be striving for often turn out, on analysis to be the instruments for attaining another fundamental goal. Thus wealth, safety, status, and all the other kinds of goal that supposedly "Cause" behavior are only paraphernalia for attaining the ultimate purpose of any individual, which is to be himself ” (p. 190). Hence, the question among psychologists is how motivation influenced behavior. There are several different types of motivation, based on the goal or end that motivates individuals. However, in the broadest sense, motivation can be categorized into two main different types: intrinsic which refers to internal desires to perform a particular task and extrinsic motivation which refers to factors external to the individual and unrelated to the task they are performing (Ryan & Deci, 2000). In this regard, intrinsic motivation is the act of doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable as opposed to extrinsic motivation that involves doing something because it leads to a separable outcome” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 55). Intrinsic motivation results as improved achievement that it can be affected either positively or negatively by others within the context of one’s achievement (see: Ryan & Deci, 2000; Deci, Koestner & Ryan, 2001, and Soenens& Vansteenkiste, 2005). Extrinsic Motivation Extrinsic motivation refers to factors external to the individual and unrelated to the task they are performing. Examples include money, good grades, and other rewards. Kohn (1993) define it “as a way of doing things to individuals rather than working with them” (p.784). This view of management disregards one’s ability to think and reason on one’s own, not allowing individuals the chance to develop self-determination or independent thinking. Punishments or rewards are used to control the motivation of the teachers. Extrinsic motivation is also considered as the driving force for various activities in people’s life from education to the workplace (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2000). The different types of extrinsic motivation range from the more common ones such as money, recognition, awards and prizes, status and opportunities to the negative ones like bribery, pressures, and punishments that have been utilized by man of all ages and sizes, and in different circumstances. Extrinsic motivation does not mean that a person will not get any satisfaction from doing or completing an assignment (Herzberg, 1989). It just means that the pleasure they predict from some external reward will continue to be a motivator even when they have little interest in the task to be done (Herzberg, 1989). Finally, employees learn different kinds of behavior before and after taking a job, and they meet a host of stimuli at work place that can cause them to behave in certain ways (Roberts, 2006). These types of behaviors are either rewarded or punished depending on their value to the work. The stimuli in the workplace include schedules, community structures, school policies, managers, and so on. Intrinsic Motivation Intrinsic motivation refers to internal desires to perform a particular task. People who are intrinsically motivated do certain activities because it gives them pleasure (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Intrinsic motivation results in doing something for its natural satisfactions (Ryan and Deci, 2000). Intrinsically motivated individuals respond to tasks that have been fun or challenging rather than to external pressure or reward. Intrinsic motivation is not the only form of motivation, but it is a pervasive and important one. It is part of our natural inherent instincts to grow in knowledge and skills (Ryan and Deci, 2000). In addition, intrinsic motivation lives within individuals, but also in relation between individuals and actions. Humans sometimes note intrinsic motivation as stimulating factor, while others define it by the satisfaction a person gains from the task completion (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). Ryan and Deci (2000) inferred that intrinsic motivational tendencies appear only under specifiable conditions. The Self-Determination as Intrinsic Motivation Social identity and concept of self are critical aspect of human social behavior. Through the times, social scientists have tried to rationalize human actions. Many researchers promote goal-based theories, which broadly focused on identifying factors that serve to motivate people to work towards their goals and objectives. Deci and Ryan’s (1985) theory of Self Determination is hugely relevant as it is comprehensive in its research and delves deeply into the various intrinsic and extrinsic environmental variable which significantly influence one’s actions. The theory focuses on the ‘Content’ of motivation and as to how people determine their actions. It established that competence, autonomy, and relatedness further influence the way individuals pursue their goal. They emphasized on ‘what’ the content should be and process the reasons for setting goals. It mainly works on the voluntary nature of human behavior and helps understand the degree to which individuals participate in tasks and what motivates them to complete that given task. Just like seeking validation from others, a self-determined individual will actively tend towards psychological growth and development to finish challenges and get a clear sense of self, constantly seeking support from the local environment. It is important fact that while need-fulfillment largely explained self-determination theory, supporting mini-theories helped further in comprehending it. The four mini theories of Self Determination Theory explored the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation while considering the wider aspects of psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Causality orientation theory and basic needs theory, both sub-theories, gave interesting factual insight. However, they are not as applicable or relevant as Cognitive Evaluation and Organismic Integration Theory. According to Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET), social contexts serve as a major motivation for an individual. It broadly described tasks that are taken up because people find them enjoyable and genuinely get pleasure from the time spent on it. At the same time, extrinsic motivation is driven by reward and recognition of an individual. It is important to note that many studies and meta-analysis have found that intrinsic motivations of rewards are considerably reduced with predefined conditions and adversely affect self-determination (Deci, 1971; Deci et al., 1999). Organismic Integration theory, on the other hand, refers to one’s sense of self. In other words, it is the ability to comprehend one’s actions and experiences. It not only identifies one’s interest and capabilities but also integrates them with other aspect of one’s self. It makes one’s relationship with others more significant and satisfying. it was found out that human interaction and sharing help integrate and organize complex experiences into meaningful social relationships. At work place, for example one is able to engage, interact, and organize information through constant peer interaction. Experiences and information are easily shared because of the process of internalization. Internalization facilitated understanding experiences and making rewards redundant in the overall scheme of carrying out tasks within the wider imperatives of social work. As such, the psychological need of relatedness provided the primary drive for internalizing values. In Self-Determination theory, internalization is therefore, was viewed as a motivated process. In this sense, internalization process varied along an autonomy continuum. Beginning on the extrinsic end of the motivation continuum, Organismic Integration is defined by four sets of regulations: integrated regulation, identified regulation, introjected regulation, and external regulation. External regulation was achieved when the behavior was influenced by socially constructed pressure or environment. It is not considered a self-determined form of motivation. Introjected regulation meant internalizing rules so that one’s behavior helps to maintain self esteem and hide shame or guilt. Identified regulation indicated acceptance of a rule as a free choice rather than as coercion. For instance, solving a math problem might not be enjoyable for most but it needs to be understood for going to the next level; Integrated regulation is fully determined because desired needs of the tasks are assimilated within the wider value set of the individuals and therefore voluntary thus accompanied with the goals of the self (Deci et al., 1991). It essentially meant that students, who maybe on time for an exam, might be doing it not only to graduate to the next level but because they want to succeed. Punctuality and professionalism mainly corroborated with their inherent values and principles that guide their lives. These students tended to internalize their identities as good student and a professional by integrating these values within their actions and behavior. Hence, individuals are fully self determined when their actions are guided by integrated regulation. Within STD theory, motivation was driven by a desire to satisfy basic needs. SDT suggested that people’s actions are determined by three main needs: first, the need for autonomy, which means making one’s own choices on issues concerning him/her; second, the need for competence, which means exercising abilities or improving them; and third, the need for relatedness, connecting with others or feeling socially valued (Ryan and Deci 2002,Brophy, 2004) Self-determination theory is based on the assumption that people have innate tendencies to grow and develop psychologically, and to combine experience into self-concept (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). The SDT is a macro-theory of human motivation, personality development, and satisfaction (Ryan, 1995). The theory focused especially on self determined behavior and the social and cultural conditions that stimulate it (Deci & Ryan, 1985). The focus of many SDT studies was the situations that tend to increase or reduce people’s natural activity and enthusiasm. SDT proposed to explain components of personality and behavioral self-regulation through interactions between intrinsic and environmental elements within social contexts (Ryan and Deci 2000).  This theory held that a person’s actions are self-determined if the person acts independently, regulates his or her own behavior, initiates and responds to events in a manner indicating psychological empowerment, and behaves in a manner that is self-realizing. That is, the person acts in ways that make positive use of knowledge and understanding about his or her own characteristics, strengths, and limitations (Wehmeyer, Kelchner, & Richards, 1996). The SDT focused on developing feelings of competence in individuals, leading to an enhancement of intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 59). Importantly, though, individuals have to associate their feelings of competence with a sense of autonomy, or self-determination, it is also true that individuals perceive a variety of things as external controllers of behavior, and that these reduced a sense of competence, relatedness, and autonomy. Ryan and Deci (2000, p. 60) review such examples as tangible rewards, deadlines, threats, directives and competition pressure, showing that these aspects prevented the individual’s sense of self-determination. It is thus challenging to develop intrinsic motivation. Much human behavior stems from external motivations, due to social demands, externally produced rules (especially in schools), and the lack of intrinsically interesting activities in places of learning, or the workplace. The development of humans, then, could be argued to be dependent on intrinsic motivation not only in childhood, but also throughout the life of an individual. This aspect of human nature directly affects “performance, persistence, and well-being across life’s epochs” (Ryan & La Guardia cited in Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.55), suggested that life is primarily directed to satisfying the psychological needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness. Figure 1 A diagram depicting the three elements of self-determination theory According to Pintrich and Schunk (2002) autonomy is the degree of choice that individuals have about tasks and when and how to perform them. Brophy (2004) suggested that people experience autonomy when their effort is valued and encouraged. He also recommended that supporting autonomy could help in stimulating intrinsic motivation by understanding the learner’s perspectives, increasing their plans, producing more chances for choice, and allowing individuals to work in their own way (2004). There were two ways to define autonomy based on Ryan and Deci “being the perceived origin or source of one’s own behavior” (Ryan & Deci, 2002, p. 8) and “volition and self- endorsement” (Ryan & Deci, 2003, p. 266). Deci and Ryan explained further, “Autonomous action is chosen when people experience themselves as initiators of their own behavior; they select desired outcomes and choose how to achieve them. Regulation through choice is characterized by flexibility and the absence of pressure” (p. 1025). They used the term choice in the definition many times, but Deci and Ryan notified that they did not mean choice in its sense of cognitive “decisions between behavioral options” (p. 1025). The historical background of autonomy emerged from personal causality by Heider in 1958(de Charms; Deci & Ryan, 1985who wrote that personal causality implies that the cause of an action comes from within the person (1958). this focus was on how people attributes and actions relates to the other individuals or environment. The personal causality concept is very much similar to the concept of autonomy. Deci and Ryan widen Heider’s ideas about autonomy by adding it to situations beyond interpersonal relations and describing it as a basic psychological need (Ryan & Deci, 2000b). Ryan and Deci (2002) defined autonomy in a similar way but with less technical language as “being the perceived origin or source of one's own behavior” (p. 8). In this sense, autonomy involves whether one perceives that a behavior or action originated from within the self or from a source external to the self. Autonomy was discussed in many studies under different names of theories. Ryan and Deci (2000, 2002) used the concept of motivation in a theory that was based upon the perceived autonomy (or self-determination) of certain behavior, or the level to which a person feels the behavior originated within himself. In various places, this theory has been called the “self-determination theory” (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000b, 2002), the “relative autonomy theory” (Ryan & Deci, 2003), and the internalization theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Brunetti (2001) used the autonomy concept to study professional growth. He implied that professional autonomy reflected individuals’ need for personal freedom to make decisions for personal and professional growth. Brunetti (2001) defined professional autonomy as an intrinsic reward providing high levels of career satisfaction. Multiple examples of professional autonomy were found in Bavendam’s (2002) six factors of job satisfaction: adequate authority, opportunities, and leadership. Bavendam furthered that employees are more satisfied when they have enough freedom while they are working in a certain job. Deci and Ryan (1985) considered that the degree of autonomy related to a behavior that correlated with the internal motivation for that behavior. Thus, if a behavior is low in autonomy, the locus of causality is external, and the motivation of that behavior is external. However, if a behavior is high in autonomy, the locus of causality is internal, and as a result, the motivation is internal (Ryan and Deci, 2000, 2002). Competence Brophy (2004) defined competence as needs that can be met when individuals successfully deal with the environment and control things around them. The need for competence implies to the experience of effectiveness in dealing with a certain activity (White, 1959). When teachers expect themselves to do well, they tend to try harder, persist, and perform better. Those teachers are much more likely to be motivated in terms of effort, persistence, and behavior than those who believe they are less able and do not expect to do well. Individuals need competence to feel successful in their achievement. However, what should be considered is that controlling environments will likely result in extrinsic motivation, and that competence alone is not enough for intrinsic motivation. Competence plays a main part in motivation, and that is explained when individuals feel competent at work place thus they are able to feel more secure to choose and carry out any task. Many of the studies investigating the influence of competence on motivation have focused on how feedback influences self- determined motivation. Negative responses decreased of level of competence and intrinsic motivation, whereas positive responses were assumed to deepen the sense of competence and intrinsic motivation Relatedness Relatedness is the need to feel connected to others and to feel like individuals are part of something; they belong to a larger community (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Relatedness can sometimes be perceived as friendship because people want to feel accepted and supported, therefore, interaction with others is important, and it represents a need to belong in a group (Brophy, 2004). The desire for belonging reflects a need for connection to others thus people feel more secure and composed when they are accepted in a group. The need for relatedness can be satisfied in the working environment when allowing individuals to interact with peers freely without imposing limitations on who to interact with. Autonomy develops in best situations where individuals feel a sense of relatedness. Related Research in SDT Not only students, but also teachers, need motivation. The field of teaching has many responsibilities.Some of these responsibilities are not pleasant; thus, teachers need to be motivated to do these duties. It is necessary that teachers’ motivation to be intrinsic more than extrinsic. In particularly Western society, the external controls on teaching are extensive. These external controls, such as curriculum restrictions, externally imposed standards and grade-related goals make it difficult for the teacher to find a level of intrinsic motivation. A very fundamental concept in SDT is that improved achievement is directly linked to intrinsic motivation. Thus, it seems apparent that the means must be found to encourage a sense of intrinsic motivation in teachers. As has been shown, this would positively affect the lives not only of teachers, but of students, too. Several studies employed SDT to enhance the understanding of employees’ experiences within their work settings (Gagne & Deci, 2005). Two studies found out that there was a relationship between basic needs of satisfaction and the significance of occupational outcome variables such as performance and participation. Ryan & Deci (2000) identified teachers’ motivation as one of the important characteristics that a teacher needs in order to remain in his or her classroom. They argued that teachers become motivated if they feel that they have instructional knowledge, supported by the administration and belonged to a school community (2008). However, Ryan and Deci cautioned that intrinsic motivation appears only if the activities relate to intrinsic interest to the person in that there has to be a seed of interest before the social context has an impact. But once the seed is there, the social context can make a big difference” (Deci & Ryan 145). Shen (1977) supported that the school, and more specifically administration, assist and support teachers to encourage them to teach with high levels of proficiency, belonging, and helpfulness because of the link between one's satisfaction on the job. Structuring the choice for teachers in a way that their choices are more focused by interest supports ownership, Self-determination played a major role in enhancing feelings when support for selecting and planning activities was absent in individuals. (Brophy (2004) noted that school districts structure and instructions that utilized choice rather than control increased feelings of self-determination in teachers. In contrast, Birkeland and Johnson (2003) noticed that most teachers reported job dissatisfaction as the primary reason for school or leaving teaching profession. An earlier study Shin and Reyes (1995) found that teacher’s job satisfaction was a major cause for a teacher’s commitment to their school. On a more broad social scale, it has been shown that controlled regulation was associated with negative psychological consequences, whereas autonomous motivation produced high performance, well being, and low burnout (Eyal & Roth, 2011, p. 257). This is true of employees’ motivation and thus autonomy-supportive behaviors such as provision of rationale, provision of choice, allowing criticism, encouraging critical thinking, and demonstrating the value of a behavior were advised by leadership experts writing on management of the workplace (Roth et al., 2009; cited in Eyal & Roth, 2011, p. 259). Bono and Judge (2003) found that transformational leaders encouraged autonomous motivation for specific goals among their employees (Eyal & Roth, 2011, p. 260) and task performance and innovation were improved by this leadership style. Applying this conceptual framework to teaching certainly proved effective in that interpersonal dimensions of autonomy support and relatedness” significantly influenced the affective and cognitive outcomes of education” when adults engaged in fostering an inner motivation to learn. A reward-system of motivation – be the rewards physical or verbal – was shown in a study by Deci, Koestner and Ryan (2001, p. 15) to diminish intrinsic motivation in individuals. The advice of these writers was to develop more interesting learning environments and activities for children, with the aim of ensuring that intrinsic motivation led to better creative task engagement, cognitive flexibility, and conceptual understanding (Amabile, 1982, McGraw & McCullers, 1979, cited in Deci, Koestner & Ryan, 2001, p. 15). In addition, not all-external motivation is completely without individual autonomy. Identification with the personal perception of the importance of a behavior allowed the individual to accept a regulation as his/her own. Finally, integrated regulation described the full acceptance of an external regulation into the self. Thus, an extrinsic motivation was accepted completely as part of the self, and comes to operate as an intrinsic motivating factor. Research in the field of Educational Psychology bears out opinion such as those referred to in the preceding paragraph by arguing that an autonomy-supportive teaching style, for example, has been shown to improve school engagement, higher grades and better school adjustment among adolescents (Soenens& Vansteenkiste, 2005, p.591). Furthermore, psychological control is argued to be related to increased depression, lower self-esteem, externalizing of problems, and to negatively affect students’ academic performance. It is an ongoing concern of researchers and educational practitioners to develop ways of encouraging internal rather than external motivation in individuals. Within the sphere of teaching, the major influence on teachers’ levels of motivation is the Principal’s development of a clear vision, framed school goals, and the attempts to seek staff consensus on desired outcomes (Eyal & Roth, 2011, p. 261). Vision set up by the Principal tended to offer potential personal goals for the teacher, and the belief that future change was possible. It is necessary that the vision was reflective of the needs and interests of the school community, and realistic, so that teachers will be prepared to sacrifice their own interests for the sake of the organization (Barnett & McCormick, 2003, cited in Eyal & Roth, 2011, p. 261). Studies have also shown that actual training to induce feelings of competence, as well as the confirmation of expectations when teachers are presented with a new learning style or methodology influenced intrinsic motivation positively. Competence and autonomy were vital in that they affected teacher evaluations and course evaluations. The result in this study was that perceived competence was discovered to be the main predictor of any of the psychological needs for both teacher and course evaluations. Autonomy was significant for both ratings, and relatedness was significant for evaluations of the teacher. Perceived usefulness of e-learning technologies was found to predict satisfaction and intention to continue e-learning usage among teachers in a study by Sorebo, Halvari, Flaata Gulli, and Kristiansen (2009, p. 1182). This sense of usefulness, the consequent feeling of competence, and continuing improvement of skills and knowledge in e-learning all contribute to an intrinsic motivation among teachers. It is clear that teachers’ not engaging with e-learning will reduce learning outcomes for students – when it is assumed that e-learning strategies are effective and promote intrinsic motivation in students. The implications of a conceptual framework such as this are evident within education. In the lens of STD, people can benefit from conditions in which they are autonomous, feel competent and relate to their achievement. SDT proposes that individuals can have practices and structures provided for that can “enhance” rather than diminish their needs satisfaction, and thus be able to perform and achieve at the highest levels possible. Similarly, though, this theory can and should be applied in the practice of teachers, and in their personal approaches: if teachers discover their intrinsic motivations, rather than rely on extrinsic motivation, their performance in classrooms is sure to be enhanced. Summarily, research has shown that motivation plays a significant role in developing personality and self-esteem of an individual in that a well-motivated person is likely to work hard to achieve his or her goals. In addition, leaders and institutions need to motivate their employees in order to attain their desired objectives. Lack of motivation can be disastrous to a persons’ life since they have no interest in what they do. Therefore, employees and teachers are advised to motivate their work for them to be successful. Read More