Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education (Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, 39) 3031428943, 9783031428944

Citation preview

Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39

Joseph Zajda

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education

Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research Volume 39

Series Editor Joseph Zajda, Faculty of Education and Arts, Australian Catholic University, East Melbourne, VIC, Australia Editorial Board Robert Arnove, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA Birgit Brock-Utne, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway Martin Carnoy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA Holger Daun, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden Lyn Davies, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Fred Dervin, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Karen Evans, University of London, London, UK Kassie Freeman, Alcorn State University, Lorman, MS, USA MacLeans Geo-JaJa, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA Andreas Kazamias, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA Leslie Limage, UNESCO, Paris, France Susan Majhanovich, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada Marcella Mollis, University of Buenos Aires, CABA, Argentina Val Rust, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA Yvonne Vissing, Salem State University, Salem, MA, USA Advisory Editors Abdeljalil Akkari, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland Beatrice Avalos, National Ministry of Education, Santiago, Chile Karen Biraimah, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA David Chapman, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA Sheng Yao Cheng, Chung Chen University, Chia-yi, Taiwan Pamela Hallam, McKay School of Education, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA Deborah Henderson, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia Yaacov Iram, Bar Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Henry Levin, Teachers College Columbia University, New York, NY, USA Noel McGinn, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA David Phillips, Oxford University, Oxford, UK Gerald Postglione, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Heidi Ross, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA M’hammed Sabour, University of Joensuu, Joensuu, Finland Jurgen Schriewer, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany Sandra Stacki, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY, USA Nelly Stromquist, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

Carlos Torres, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA John Whitehouse , Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia David Willis, Soai University, Osaka, Japan

The Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research book series aims to meet the research needs of all those interested in in-depth developments in comparative education research. The series provides a global overview of developments and changes in policy and comparative education research during the last decade. Presenting up-to-date scholarly research on global trends, it is an easily accessible, practical yet scholarly source of information for researchers, policy makers, and practitioners. It seeks to address the nexus between comparative education, policy, and forces of globalisation, and provides perspectives from all the major disciplines and all the world regions. The series offers possible strategies for the effective and pragmatic policy planning and implementation at local, regional, and national levels. The book series complements the International Handbook of Globalisation and Education Policy Research. The volumes focus on comparative education themes and case studies in much greater scope and depth than is possible in the Handbook. The series includes volumes on both empirical and qualitative studies of policy initiatives and developments in comparative education research in elementary, secondary, and postcompulsory sectors. Case studies may include changes and education reforms around the world, curriculum reforms, trends in evaluation and assessment, decentralisation and privatisation in education, technical and vocational education, early childhood education, excellence, and quality in education. Above all, the series offers the latest findings on critical issues in comparative education and policy directions, such as: ● developing new internal strategies (more comprehensive, flexible, and innovative modes of learning) that take into account the changing and expanding learner needs; ● overcoming ‘unacceptable’ socio-economic educational disparities and inequalities; ● improving educational quality; ● harmonizing education and culture; ● international co-operation in education and policy directions in each country.

Joseph Zajda

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education

Joseph Zajda Faculty of Education and Arts Australian Catholic University East Melbourne, VIC, Australia

ISSN 2543-0564 ISSN 2543-0572 (electronic) Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research ISBN 978-3-031-42894-4 ISBN 978-3-031-42895-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023, corrected publication 2024 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Paper in this product is recyclable.

To Rea, Nikolai, Belinda, Sophie, Imogen, Paulina, Jan, Dorothy and Jim

Foreword

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivational Theories in Education, the 39th in the 48-volume book series Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, analyses major discourses of dominant models of motivation theories affecting learners in schools. It focuses on the student’s identity, belonging, inclusive schooling, engaging motivational environments, and resultant academic achievement. The book focuses on globalisation and major models of motivation in educational institutions schooling globally, the student’s identity, belonging, performance in the classroom, and the significance of cognitive, cultural, emotional, and social capital in affecting students’ attitudes to education, engagement, motivation, and academic achievement. The book analyses such topics as behavioural, cognitive, social cognitive, humanistic theories, as well as discourse analysis in understanding motivation theories in education, and values in major motivation paradigms in schools, affecting both teachers and students. The book contributes in a very scholarly way, to a more holistic understanding of the nexus between globalisation, dominant models of motivation in schools, and quality education for all. The chapters offer a timely analysis of current education and policy issues affecting inclusive schooling and motivational strategies for improving students’ self-esteem, self-efficacy, and performance. The book provides innovative ideas concerning the future directions of the use of motivation theories in educational settings, in order to promote more engaging and more meaningful knowledge and values of motivational approaches in inclusive schooling, both locally and globally. Joseph Zajda, Ph.D., FACE Faculty of Education and Arts Australian Catholic University East Melbourne, VIC, Australia

vii

Preface

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, the 39th book in the 48-volume book series Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, analyses major motivation theories, and engaging motivational environments globally. It focuses on major theories of motivation, as used in educational settings, affecting students’ identity, attitudes, values, belonging, and academic performance in the classroom. The book discusses and evaluates major education policy shifts in methodological approaches in research dealing with motivational theories and engaging learning environments. The book examines such topics as major theories of motivation, the students’ cultural identity and achievement, motivational strategies for creating an engaging motivational learning environment, the use of constructivist pedagogy for critical thinking, and values of education in the classroom. The book provides a better and deeper knowledge and understanding of globalisation, major theories of motivation, as used in educational settings, in order to promote engaging learning environments for all students. By examining some of the recent education policy shifts in the use of major models of motivation in educational settings, the book offers a comprehensive synthesis of the intersecting and diverse discourses of globalisation, dominant theories of motivation, and values education. As a sourcebook of ideas for researchers, educators, practitioners, and policymakers specialising in the areas of globalisation, and theories of motivation in education, the book provides a timely overview of current education policy reforms and strategies for enhancing engaging motivational environments, designed to provide the quality of education in all educational institutions globally. Joseph Zajda, FACE Faculty of Education and the Arts Australian Catholic University East Melbourne, VIC, Australia

ix

Editorial by the Series Editor

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivational Theories in Education (Volume 39) is a further publication in the Springer Series of books on Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, by Joseph Zajda. Joseph Zajda’s monograph, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivational Theories in Education, the 39th book in the 48-volume book series Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, examines dominant discourses of major models of motivation in schools globally. It focuses on major theories of motivation, as used in the classroom, affecting students’ identity, attitudes, values, a sense of belonging, performance in the classroom, and the significance of cognitive, cultural, emotional, and social capital in improving student’s academic achievement. The book discusses and evaluates the shifts in methodological approaches in research dealing with motivational theories, and engaging learning environments. The book analyses such topics as major theories of motivation, the students’ cultural identity and achievement, motivational strategies for creating engaging motivational learning environment, the use of constructivist pedagogy for critical thinking, social constructivism, and values education in the classroom. This book critiques dominant discourses and debates pertaining to inclusive education, and cultural identity, set against the current backdrop of growing social stratification and unequal access to quality education. It addresses current discourses concerning globalisation, ideologies, and the state, as well as approaches to inclusive education in schools. The book also explores conceptual frameworks and methodological approaches applicable to research on inclusive education, cultural diversity, and identity politics. Drawing on diverse paradigms, ranging from critical theory to globalisation, the book, by focusing on globalisation, ideology, and inclusive education, critically examines recent research dealing with cultural diversity and its impact on inclusive schooling. The book contributes in a very scholarly way, to a more holistic understanding of the nexus between globalisation, comparative education research, motivation theories, inclusive schooling, and engaging learning environments. I want to express my deep gratitude to Suzanne Majhanovich (Western University, Ontario), Pamela Hallam (Brigham Young University), Yvonne Vissing (Salem xi

xii

Editorial by the Series Editor

State University), John Whitehouse (The University of Melbourne), Sev Ozdowski (University of Western Sydney), and Vince Wright (Education consultant, Taupo, New Zealand) for their insightful and constructive comments, and I am also grateful to the anonymous international reviewers who reviewed the chapters in the final manuscript.

Contents

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

2 Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance in Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

31

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

47

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . .

63

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

81

7 The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation . . . . . . . .

99

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools . . . . . . . . . . 111 9 The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Correction to: Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C1

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

xiii

About the Series Editor

Joseph Zajda, B.A. (Hons), M.A., M.Ed., Ph.D., FACE co-ordinates and teaches in graduate courses: M.Teach. courses: (EDES591, EDHI299&599, and EDSS600) in the Faculty of Education and Arts, at the Australian Catholic University (Melbourne Campus). He specialises in globalisation and education policy reforms, social justice, history education, human rights education, and values education. He has written and edited 52 books and over 150 book chapters and articles in the areas of globalisation and education policy, higher education, history textbooks, and curriculum reforms. Recent publications include: Zajda, J. (2023). Globalisation and inclusive schooling: Engaging motivational environments. Springer; Zajda, J. (2023). Discourses of globalisation, cultural diversity and values education. Springer; Zajda, J. (2022). Discourses of globalisation, and the politics of history school textbooks. Springer; Zajda, J. (2022). Globalisation and education reforms: Overcoming discrimination. Springer; Zajda, J. (2021). Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning environments. Springer; Zajda, J. & Majhanovich, S. (2022). Race, ethnicity and gender in education: Emerging paradigms. Springer; Zajda, J. & Vissing, Y. (2022). Discourses of globalisation, ideology, and human rights. Springer; Zajda, J. (Ed). (2021). 3rd International handbook of globalisation, education and policy research. Springer; Zajda, J. (2021). Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda, J. & Majhanovich, S. (Eds.) (2021). Globalisation, cultural identity and nationbuilding: The changing paradigms. Springer; Zajda, J. (Ed). (2020). Globalisation, Ideology and Education Reforms: Emerging Paradigms. Springer; Zajda, J. (Ed). (2020). Human Rights Education Globally. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2020). Globalisation, Ideology and Neo-Liberal Higher Education Reform. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda, J. & Rust, V. (2020). Globalisation and comparative education. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda, J. & Majhanovich, S. (Eds.) (2020). Globalisation, cultural identity and nation-building: The changing paradigms. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda, J. (2019) (Ed.). Globalisation, ideology and politics of education reforms. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda, J. (2018). Globalisation and education reforms: Paradigms and ideologies. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda, J. (2017). Globalisation and National Identity in History Textbooks: The Russian Federation. Dordrecht: Springer; xv

xvi

About the Series Editor

Zajda, Tsyrlina-Spady & Lovorn (2017) (Eds.). Globalisation and Historiography of National Leaders: Symbolic Representations in School Textbooks. Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda & Ozdowski (2017). (Eds.), Globalisation and Human Rights Education Dordrecht: Springer; Zajda & Rust (Eds.) (2016). Globalisation and Higher Education Reforms. Dordrecht: Springer; Editor and author of the Second International Handbook on Globalisation, Education and Policy Research. Springer, 2015; Zajda, J. (2014). The Russian Revolution. In G. Ritzer & J. M. Ryan (Eds.), The WileyBlackwell Encyclopedia of Globalization Online; Zajda, J. (2014); Zajda, J. (2014). Ideology. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Philosophy. Thousand Oaks: Sage; Zajda, J. (2014). Values Education. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Philosophy. Thousand Oaks: Sage; Zajda, J. (2014); Values Education. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Philosophy. Thousand Oaks: Sage; Zajda, J. (2008). Schooling the New Russians. Melbourne: James Nicholas Publishers. He is the Editor of the forty-eight book series Globalisation and Comparative Education (Springer, 2013&2025). He edits the following journals: http://www.jamesnicholaspublishers.com.au/journals/ct/; Editor, Curriculum and Teaching, volume 38, 2023. http://www.jamesnicholaspublishers.com.au/journa ls/es/; Editor, Education and Society, volume 41, 2023 http://www.jamesnicholaspu blishers.com.au/journals/wse/ Editor, World Studies in Education, volume 24, 2023. His works are found in 605 publications in 4 languages and some 12,103 university library holdings globally. He is the recipient of the 2012 Excellence in Research Award from the Faculty of Education, Australian Catholic University. The award recognises the high quality of research activities, and particularly celebrates sustained research that has had a substantive impact nationally and internationally. He was also a recipient of the Australian Awards for University Teaching in 2011 (Citation for Outstanding Contributions to Student Learning, for an innovative, influential, and sustained contribution to teacher education through scholarship and publication). He received the Vice Chancellor’s Excellence in Teaching Award, at the Australian Catholic University (Melbourne Campus). He was awarded an ARC Discovery Grant (with Monash University) for 2011–2015 for a comparative analysis of the history of national curriculum implementation in Russia and Australia ($315,000). Elected as a Fellow of the Australian College of Educators (June 2013). Completed (with Professor Fred Dervin, University of Helsinki) the UNESCO report: Governance in education: Diversity and effectiveness. BRICS countries. Paris: UNESCO (2022).

Chapter 1

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting Schools

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivational Theories Affecting Schools: Introduction Motivation is the most significant construct defining the nature of human beings, their continuing survival, and subsequent required necessary and planned behaviour and actions, to achieve designated goals. There is no doubt that motivation affects all of us. Individuals, due to genetic and environmental factors, are programmed to act, in order to achieve their needs. The continuing survival of humanity over the last hundred thousand years was the result of this inner and outer drives to act and satisfy basic survival needs, as later popularised by Maslow’s (1962) book Toward a psychology of being. To be motivated, or to do something, requires an effort and choice. The aphorism ‘To be or not to be’, is the opening sentence of a monologue by Prince Hamlet in the ‘nunnery scene’, in Hamlet, Act 3, William Shakespeare’s play. Shakespeare’s play offers a choice for individuals: to do or not to do. Similarly, in the Terminator’s movie, in one the most famous catchphrases, we are given the choice: ‘Come with me if you want to live’ (The Terminator, movie 1984). The line was first delivered in the 1984 movie The Terminator, when Kyle Reese, played by Michael Biehn, destroys cyborg from the future, the T-800, performed by Schwarzenegger, and saves Sarah Connor, played by Linda Hamilton. Motivation in the classroom can be defined as an internal process in the mind that energises, directs and maintains students’ behaviour, to perform successfully teachers’ designated activity, and task. Motivation has been described as ‘an internal process that initiates and sustains behaviour’ (Schunk et al., 2014). Robert Slavin The original version of the chapter has been revised. Belated corrections have been updated on page 7, line 8. A correction to this chapter can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_10

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023, corrected publication 2024 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_1

1

2

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

(2022) has defined motivation as ‘an internal process that activates, guides and maintains behaviour over time’. Similarly, Woolfolk & Margetts (2022) defined motivation as ‘an internal state that arouses, directs, and maintains behaviour’ (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2022).In plain language, motivation is what gets you going, keeps you going, and determines where you’re trying to go. The general consensus regarding motivation is that it represents an internal state that results in achieving a goal-oriented behaviour. According to Ryan and Deci (2020), to be motivated, means to ‘be moved to do something’ (Ryan & Deci, 2020). In plain language, motivation is what gets you going, keeps you going, and determines where you’re trying to go. The concept of motivation is significant in every sphere of life, and organizational culture affecting individuals, in performing their specified tasks. Motivation is one of the most studied psychological constructs in educational psychology (Koenka, 2020). We tend to use it constantly in our everyday language. Sport coaches use it all the time, to get the best performance for their teams and participating individuals. There is a global consensus that motivation plays a key role in the teaching and learning environment. Both teachers and students use relevant motivation theories and strategies to improve the nature of learning and academic achievement. According to Hannah Hawthorne (2021), motivation plays a key role in all aspects of learning and teaching. Students, who are motivated, are ‘much more likely to achieve their potential and find success’ (Hawthorne, 2021). Similarly, Andrea Cox (2022) believes that motivation plays a ‘key role in education’ (Cox, 2022). More importantly, motivation also results in ‘more positive behaviour’ and promotes students’ ‘greater sense of well-being’ (Hawthorne, 2021). In short, motivation in the classroom results in students’ greater engagement, positive behaviour, well-being, and improved academic achievement, which are discussed in this book later on. Let us now examine the concept of motivation in research literature, within the context of globalisation and forces of globalisation, affecting every sphere of societies and including educational organisations. The term ‘globalisation’ is a complex, and constantly evolving construct, as well as a euphemism, concealing numerous contested meanings, influenced by dominant ideologies, various cultural contexts, politico-economic priorities, and educational policies, meeting the challenges of globalisation and the market economy. The term globalisation, was informed and shaped by multiple perspectives, ranging from Wallerstein’s (1974, 2004) ambitious ‘world-systems’ model, to Giddens’ (1990) notion of ‘time–space distantiation’ highlighting the ‘disembeddedness’ of social relations – their effective removal from the immediacies of local contexts, and Castells’ (1989, 2000) perception of globalisation as way of networking, proposing that the power of flows of capital, technology, and information, constitutes the fundamental morphology of an emerging ‘network society’ (Castells, 2000). The term ‘globalisation’ can be defined from a social and cultural transformation perspective, as a new dominant ideology of cultural convergence, which is accompanied by corresponding economic, political, social, technological and educational transformations (Zajda, 2021a). Such a process is characterised by increasing

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivational Theories Affecting …

3

economic, cultural and political interdependence between nations, and which ultimately, transforms the ethnocentric core of nation-state and national economy. This was already exemplified by Wallerstein’s (1974a) world-system concept map model of social change, which is still relevant, as a major theoretical perspective explaining globalisation, where ‘the world system’ is a network of unequal economic and political relationships between the developed and less developed nations. His model of the world-system is also relevant to theories of social stratification and discourses of inequality. Social stratification is commonly defined as unequal distribution of socially valued commodities, such as power, status, occupation, education and wealth. Globalisation is one of the most complex and contested concepts (Gilpin, 1987; Guillen, 2000; Zajda, 2023). Gilpin (1987), when developing his theory of globalisation of economies, defined globalisation as the ‘increasing interdependence of national economies in trade, finance and macroeconomic policies’ (Gilpin, 1987, p. 389). As a dominant ideology, globalisation was associated with neo-liberalism and technocratic solutions to economic reforms (Cox, 1996; Zajda, 2021b) Castells (1996) Kobrin (1997), and Carnoy and Rhoten (2002), on the other hand, stressed the informational dimension, as result of the advances in the ICT (Information Communication Technologies) of the global economy. Apart from the multi-faceted nature of globalisation that invites contesting and competing ideological interpretations, numerous paradigms and theoretical models have been also used, ranging from structuralism to post-structuralism, to explain the phenomenon of globalisation. When, for instance, a writer or a seminar speaker uses the word ‘globalisation’ in a pedagogical and educational policy context, one wonders what assumptions, be they economic, political, social and ideological, have been taken for granted, and at their face value—uncritically, as a given, and in this case, as a globocratic (like technocratic) phenomenon. The politics of globalisation, particularly the hydra of ideologies, which are inscribed in the discourse of globalisation need to be analysed critically, in order to avoid superficial and one-dimensional interpretation of the term. Using a critical discourse theory, we could argue that the teleological purpose of globalisation, in terms of the global economy, is to consolidate, maintain, expand and protect wealth, power, and privilege. In this way, it is legitimizing economic and social inequality (Milanovic, 2018). Some authors argued that globalisation is also propelled by a dominant neo-liberal and bourgeois hegemony, which reinforces and legitimates an ‘exploitative system’ (Apple, 1999; Klees, 2002b; Milanovic, 2018; Rizvi & Lingard, 2010). A number of factors, including neo-liberal ideology, with its logic of accountability, efficiency, performance indicators and profit-maximization have contributed to ‘high and rising inequality’, as reported in the 2019 Human Development Report. Growing economic inequality is causing ‘alarm in industrialized as well as developing countries’ (Krishna, 2020, p. 3). Both economic and social inequalities affect students and their access to quality education globally.

4

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

Standards-Driven and Outcomes-Defined Policy Change in Education Dominant models of motivation have been influenced significantly by global trends in education policies, defining desirable academic standards. Standards-driven metaideology of education represents a new paradigm shift in education, affecting the role and the context of motivational theories, impacting on education and policy reforms. A new paradigm shift in education is focusing predominantly on excellence, academic standards and students’ performance in schools. This was already addressed by Daun (2015), who argued that globalisation has promoted a new ‘global hegemonic meta-ideology’, which communicated strong elements of Western ideologies: ….principally individualism, the uniqueness of the individual, and so on, which are among the elements that neo-liberalism and modern communitarianism share, and this common denominator may be called the global hegemonic meta-ideology. Among other things, this meta-ideology largely consists of market ideas and ideas derived from human and citizen rights. Ideological adaptations towards this meta-ideology are taking place. (Daun, 2015, p. 34)

Furthermore, Daun (2015) explained that, as a dominant ideology, globalisation ‘wields hegemonic power, as it is presented as an inevitable and unavoidable process, and global competition as an indispensable feature for a society in order to survive or at least progress’ (Daun, 2015, p. 34). This view education policy tends to suggest a rather deterministic view of society and social change. Globalisation, marketisation and quality/efficiency driven reforms around the world since the 1980s have resulted in structural and qualitative changes in education and policy, including an increasing focus on the lifelong learning for all, or a ‘cradle-to-grave’ vision of learning and the knowledge economy in the global culture. Governments, in their quest for excellence, quality and accountability in education, increasingly turn to international and comparative education data analysis (Zajda & Rust, 2021). All of them agree that the major goal of education is to enhance the individual’s social and economic prospects. This can only be achieved by providing quality education for all. Students’ academic achievement is now regularly monitored and measured within the ‘internationally agreed framework’ of the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). This was done in response to the growing demand for international comparisons of educational outcomes (OECD, Education policy outlook 2022). The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is an international standardised education research study of selected randomly 15-year-olds. PISA 2022 results represented the eighth cycle of the OECD research programme, which began in 2000. Eighty-five countries, involving some 600,000 students took part in PISA 2022 survey. Students from different countries sat for a two-hour test to measure their skills and knowledge in science, reading, and mathematics. The top ten performers were: China, Singapore, Estonia, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Finland, Poland, Ireland, and the UK (USA was in the 21st place). By comparison,

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

5

the ten top performers in PISA 2018 were: China, Singapore, Macao (China), Hong Kong, Estonia, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Taiwan, and Finland (USA was in the 25th place). Yet, not all schools are successful in addressing the new academic standards imperatives, due to a number of factors, both internal and external. Some can be attributed to the failure of education reforms in various countries, due to the absence of relevant knowledge, concerning the PISA assessment of skills and knowledge in science, reading, and mathematics, ineffective school governance, and education leadership communicating to staff PISA defined specific assessment of skills and knowledge. More importantly, teachers’ lack of relevant knowledge and skills of PISA assessment criteria can affect their students’ PISA outcomes. One of the ubiquitous effects of forces of globalisation is that educational organisations, having modelled its goals, priorities and strategies on the entrepreneurial business model, are compelled to embrace the corporate ethos of the accountability, efficiency, transparency, and profit-driven managerialism. Hence, the politics of education reforms in the twenty-first century reflect this new emerging paradigm of standards-driven and outcomes-defined policy change (Zajda, 2021a). Some policy analysts have criticized the ubiquitous and excessive nature of standardization in education, which made it difficult, if not impossible, to implement the UNESCO 2015 Education for All (EFA) policy goals, promoting equity and quality education for all (de Vries & Egyedi, 2007; UNESCO, 2015; Zajda, 2022a).

Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting Schools There exists an overwhelming global consensus that motivation is one of the key factors in promoting students’ engagement, which improves their overall learning and performance in schools (Sivrikaya, 2019; Steinmayr et al., 2019; Wentzel, 2017; Zajda, 2023). In my books, with reference to motivation, and a sense of belonging, well-being, as well as students’ engagement in the classroom, I have used the term ‘engaging motivational environments’ (Zajda, 2021b, 2022a). Engagement has been defined as ‘a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigour, dedication, and absorption’ (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010). Some of the key concepts in motivation, include traits and states, anxiety and arousal, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and affect and interest (Duchesne et al., 2022). Loveless (2022) in his ‘The Complete Guide to Motivation in Education’, suggested that teachers’ attitudes towards their students played a major role in motivation in the classroom: At the heart of all teaching lies care for, interest in, and knowledge of students. What makes them tick, genuinely? (Loveless, 2022).

Research has demonstrated that teachers’ knowledge and support of their students, their cultural identities, their attitudes and values towards schooling, is one of the key

6

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

variables in effective teacher-student interactions in the classroom, which is likely to contribute to improved engagement, motivation, performance, and quality learning. There are numerous theories of motivation in education research globally. However, core educational psychology textbooks, which I have used in my Master of Teaching classes, discuss the following four theories of motivation: behavioural, cognitive, which includes achievement motivation theories, expectancy theory of motivation, self-determination theory, self-worth theory of motivation, attribution theories, and goal theories of motivation, social-cognitive, and humanist theories of motivation (Duchesne et al., 2022; Slavin, 2022; Woolfolk & Margetts, 2022).

Overview of Four Theories of Motivation in Education Research Behavioural Theory of Motivation In examining dominant models of motivation, I would like to start with analysing behavioural theory of learning, which uses operant conditioning, to activate behaviour modification. One of the advantages of the use of behavioural theory in the classroom, as discussed later, is its focus on measuring standards of performance for each lesson, and providing relevant strategies for teachers for effective classroom control and management. According to behaviourist perspective, learning is prompted by a series of external factors and takes place, when measurable, observable and permanent changes in particular behaviour occurs. Students tend to respond to learning new tasks, by changing, or repeating behaviour based on the external reward and reinforcement they receive. Such major psychologists as Pavlov, Watson, Skinner and Thorndike have done considerable research into behavioural views of learning. Skinner, on the basis of his research, suggested that immediate rewards and reinforcement are important and controlling factors in the operant conditioning (behaviourism) model of motivation (Skinner, 1953). According to Skinner and other behavioural psychologists, behavioural learning theories focus on explanations of the type of learning that emphasise only visible behaviour and observable changes in behaviour. They also focus on the ways in which ‘pleasurable and unpleasant consequences of behaviour change individuals’ behaviour over time’ (Slavin, 2022). For most behaviourists, reinforcement is a necessary condition for learning. For them, it is reinforcement that causes the SB-R model to form. In contrast, cognitive psychologists believe that learning occurs independently of reinforcement. Most behaviourists claim that learning is approached in accordance with its similarity to other problems individuals have experienced in the past. Cognitive psychologists, unlike behaviourists, believe that learners ‘think’ (reflect, construct) about the

Overview of Four Theories of Motivation in Education Research

7

problem, until they develop an insight, or a new idea. They also accept that the mind is active, not passive. Overall, behavioural theory of motivation follows the following steps: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

follows operant conditioning and behaviour modification procedures addresses specific objectives and learning outcomes (standards) in lesson plans uses lesson plans for teaching evaluates success and failure determines what and how much must be taught assesses students each lesson, by means of measurement of knowledge and skills treats learning as an event, rather than a process. focuses on developing mastery of knowledge.

The advantages of behavioural theory of motivation include its use of operant conditioning to improve students’ behaviour and enhance standards of performance. Standards are defined in all lesson planning. In addition, behavioural theory of motivation is very effective in the use of behaviour modification strategies in the classroom, to promote desirable behaviour, and relevant techniques for effective classroom control and management.

Cognitive Theories of Motivation Cognitive explanations of motivation are based on the belief that mental processes control one’s attitudes, behaviour, learning and knowledge acquisition. Consequently, cognitive theories focus on the way people acquire, process, and retain information and interpret meaning of particular situations. Cognitive theories of motivation explain the nexus between cognitive processes, meaningful learning, and achievement, or performance. Cognitive explanations of motivation also refer to why and how students think about the kind of knowledge acquired in the classroom, which ultimately influences their subsequent engagements, motivation, learning and behaviour. Cognitive theories of motivation assume that students need to be alert, engaged, and active in the classroom, and need to be involved in the meaning-making process, when confronted with new concepts and ideas. The six popular types of cognitive approaches to motivation include: ● ● ● ● ● ●

achievement motivation theories, expectancy theory of motivation, self-determination theory of human needs, self-worth theory of motivation, attribution theories, and goal theories of motivation.

8

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

Achievement Motivation Achievement motivation theory was initially postulated by McClelland in the 1940s. Later, achievement motivation was developed further by Atkinson and Feather (1966). Achievement motivation can be defined as ‘the ability of the individual to work toward their highest performance level’ (Jankielewicz, 2022). Achievement motivation also reflects one’s desire for excellence, or ‘the need for excellence and significant accomplishment’ (Hsieh, 2011). Achievement motivation denotes students’ goals and desires to improve their academic achievement. This perspective reflects the performing schools culture, affecting students, parents, teachers and school leaders alike. It is believed that achievement motivation was influenced by individuals’ two inner needs: desire to achieve success, or to avoid failure. Individuals, who have the need to achieve their goals, are likely to continue with the task, in order to demonstrate their success. However, individuals who wished to avoid failure were likely to select more modest, but achievable tasks, guaranteeing their realistic and moderate success. Expectancy theory of motivation, or expectance value-beliefs, refers to the assumption that individuals are likely to select activities that would result in success (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Prior success, or failure, will influence individuals’ choice of tasks to be performed. It is assumed that students’ belief in success on a given task ‘interacts with their perceived value of the task’ (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 329). This nexus between belief and success is likely to determine and influence students’ goals, and their selection of performance tasks. Self-determination theory of human needs refers to the notion that individuals seek to achieve a ‘close integration of their own internal psychological makeup’ (Duchesne et al. 2022, p. 324). The essence of self-determination theory consists of the following three basic human needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Furthermore, these three basic needs tend to influence individuals’ capacity for ‘growth, and are critical for social development and wellbeing’ (Duchesne et al. 2022, p. 324). Self-worth theory of motivation suggests that people desire self-acceptance, helped by their desired achievement (Covington & Beery, 1976). In explaining selfworth, Covington (1992) suggested that achievement motivation in schools can be explained in terms of ‘students’ attempts to maintain a positive self-image’ and avoid failure (Covington, 1992): For many students, expending effort is scary because a combination of effort and failure implies low ability. Students have a variety of techniques for avoiding failure, ranging from cheating to setting goals that are so easily achieved that no risk is involved...for many students risking the sense of defeat that comes from trying hard and not succeeding is too daunting. (Covington, 1992)

Covington (1992) also argued that learners, except those who are the most academically successful, are ‘driven by a need to avoid failure’ (see Duchesne et al. 2022,

Overview of Four Theories of Motivation in Education Research

9

p. 330). According to self-worth theory, there are four factors defining students’ selfworth: ability, effort, performance and self-worth (Ackerman, 2023). While ability, effort, performance and self-worth, define the self-worth theory of motivation, they are equally relevant to other major theories of motivation in the classroom. Attribution theories of motivation focus on students’ perceptions of their success or failure. Students’ success or failure is likely to affect their engagement, motivation and performance. Attributions have the power to control and shape students’ ‘subsequent emotions and motivations’ (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 332). Attributions theories were informed by many perspectives, and factors, including behavioural, social and cognitive psychology, personality, intelligence, emotions, behaviour, and internal and external factors. Heider (1958), a social psychologist, believed that all behaviour is ‘determined by either internal or by external factors’ (Gordon, 2002). Internal factors shaping internal attribution, consisted of the role of causality, which students use to select their goals and complete relevant performance tasks. This is the behavioural and cognitive relationship between cause and effect. Students want to perform well and this leads to improved performance. Goal theories of motivation suggest that students are likely to be engaged and motivated to learn and perform, if they have specific goals to achieve. Students, in general, have a choice to learn or not to learn, reminiscent of Shakespeare’s ‘To be or not to be?’ (Hamlet). Overall, the goal theories of motivation, affected by intrinsic motivation, focus mainly on mastery goals, and performance goals. Mastery goals refer to students’ need and desires to learn the topic well in order to achieve a degree of excellence. It is associated with ‘persistence and effort in academic tasks’ (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 334). Students’ performance goals are used to determine their desired performance in completing classroom tasks, quizzes and tests. Some researchers believe that performance goals are defined by extrinsic factors. In my books, based on recent research findings, I argued that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivations are interconnected (Zajda, 2021b, 2022a). Performance goals, like expectancy theory of motivation, and other theories above, may be influenced by students’ prior experiences of success or failure. In addition, performance goals, including performance-avoidance goals are derived from achievement motivation and achievement goal theory (Dweck, 1986; Senko, 2016). Consequently, students may select easier tasks, in order to demonstrate their abilities and competence. This is associated with failure-avoidance strategies or performance-avoidance goals.

Social-cognitive Theory of Motivation There was a major paradigm shift in cognitive views of learning during the 1970s, from dominant behavioural theories in the 1960s, to new social learning theories. Bandura (1977, 1986b), as a prominent theorist of social learning and self-efficacy, developed his new model of social cognitive theory, initially known as social learning theory, to emphasize the major role of individual, environmental, and social factors

10

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

influencing students’ learning and motivation. He focused on observational learning, and how students were learning from their role models: Fortunately, most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling: from observing others one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action. (Bandura, Social Learning Theory, 1977, p. 22)

Bandura’s (1977) four stages of social learning theory included: attention, retention, reproduction and motivation. Bandura also developed (1986b) the notion of ‘triadic reciprocal causation’, consisting of the following three domains: ● personal characteristics (including cognitive and affective factors, and personality) ● behavioural patterns ● environment. He also examined the relationship between cognitive, and effective learning, and the ability of students to become self regulated learners. Bandura (1986b) used his model of social cognitive theory to examine and explain how students were able to control and regulate their learning. His social cognitive theory included the concept of self-regulated learning (Bandura, 1991), which focused on the students’ self-efficacy, resulting in engagement, effort, motivation and improved performance. Bandura suggested that in order to be effective learners, students needed to exhibit and use their self control, self regulation and self efficacy. These attributes define students as logical and rational beings, who are seeking to achieve their performance goals in the classroom. Self control refers to controlling ones behaviour without external rewards or punishments Personal characteristics refer to students’ cognitive and emotional needs, such as their performance goals and anxieties. It also encompasses the notion of self-efficacy, or students’ beliefs in their learning abilities. Behavioural patterns refer to self-observation and self-evaluation. Environment factors refer to students’ social and physical environment.

Humanist Theories of Motivation Humanistic theories, emerged as a reaction against dehumanizing nature of behavioural theories, which emerged during the 1960s, like cognitive psychology, to emphasize the unique role of the individual to fulfil one’s potential to learn and achieve. Humanistic psychologists believed that it was necessary to study the person as a whole, especially as an individual grows and develops over the lifespan. Humanism believes that learners are free-willed, and capable of achieving their best when the ideal learning environment is produced. The ideal learning environment should cater to the social, emotional and cognitive needs of the learner. A humanist approach will have a strong focus on students’ emotional wellbeing, feelings, and potential to achieve knowledge at the highest level self-actualization. A humanist teaching strategy will have at least three constructs used in teaching:

Overview of Four Theories of Motivation in Education Research

11

Free will: Learners have free choice to do and think what they want; Emotions affecting learning: Learners need to be in a positive and balanced emotional state to achieve their best; Intrinsic motivation: Learners generally have an internal desire to develop and become their best selves. Key humanist theorists included Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers. Maslow (1962), and Rogers (1961) were the two humanists, who examined the nature of being, and suggested the ideas of self-concept and self-actualization as being part of the overall positive nature and development of people. Humanistic psychology tended to focus on individuals’ feelings and emotions. They believed that individuals should pay more attention to their emotions and ensure that they are feeling safe, positive, relaxed and comfortable. These are core emotions that will make individuals ready to learn (Fig. 1.1). The Humanist approach to learning requires the teacher to consider all needs of the student to create an effective and inclusive learning environment, with reference to: ● ● ● ● ●

social needs emotional needs mental needs cognitive needs individual differences needs.

Fig. 1.1 Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs (Source Adapter from Lefrancois [2000], Huitt [2011])

12

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

Maslow’s (1962) hierarchy of human needs has two types of needs: ● Basic needs: At the bottom of the pyramid are basic needs, or deficit needs or deprivation needs. When we don’t have these needs, we’re motivated to fulfil them by any means necessary. ● Growth needs: Once we have our basic needs satisfied, we work on growth needs or what we sometimes call being needs or esteem needs. These are the needs that have to be met to reach self-actualization. The need for self-actualization is the feeling that you want to become the best you can be, now that all your needs have been satisfied. You wish to go on to pursue creative activities and succeed to the best of your abilities. The final stage in Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs is transcendence. Transcendence, in terms of needs, denotes the final quest for individuals to go further and beyond self-actualization, in order to experience more knowledge and skills in metaphysical, existentialist, aesthetic, and spiritual dimensions: Transcendence refers to the very highest and most inclusive or holistic levels of human consciousness, behaving and relating, as ends rather than means, to oneself, to significant others, to human beings in general, to other species, to nature, and to the cosmos. (Maslow, 1971, p. 269)

Transcendence, as a construct, refers to a holistic and global awareness and consciousness of the world and the Universe.

Motivation and Its Impact on Students’ Identity, Engagement and Performance There exists a great deal of research evidence supporting the notion that motivation also plays a major role in influencing students’ identity, their self-concept, engagement and academic performance (Cohen et al., 2008; Landau et al., 2014; Meens, 2018; Peng, 2021; Ryan & Patrick, 2001; Saeed & Zyngier, 2012; Senior et al., 2018; Singh et al., 2022; Wentzel, 2017; Zajda, 2021b). Saeed and Zyngier (2012), used Ryan and Deci’s (2000) Self-Determination Theory to determine the ‘impact of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on students’ different engagement types’ concluded that ‘intrinsic motivation assisted authentic student engagement in learning’ (Saeed & Zyngier, 2012). Singh et al. (2022), in their study ‘Impact of cognitive-behavioural motivation on student engagement’, grounded in self-determination and engagement theories, discovered that student motivation was an ‘antecedent of engagement’, and that ‘adaptive cognition and behaviour’ were ‘positively related to engagement’ (Singh et al., 2022). Students’ level of motivation affects students’ disengagement and retention problems in educational settings globally. This was noted earlier by OECD (2019), Education at a glance, where it was stated that the average completion rate for university graduates was 67%, and some 24% of students did not complete the program. According to OECD (2022a), findings, some ‘14% of young adults

Motivation and Its Impact on Students’ Identity, Engagement …

13

across the OECD still left school without an upper secondary qualification’ (OECD, 2022a). In my book (2021b), Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning (Springer), I emphasized the major role that teachers perform, in supporting their students and providing engaging motivational environments. This was also documented by Ryan & Patrick (2001), who examined the nexus between classroom environment and students’ motivation and engagement. The results demonstrated that ‘students’ perceptions of teacher support, and the teacher as promoting interaction and mutual respect were related to positive changes in their motivation and engagement’ (Ryan & Patrick, 2001).

The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Identity The term ‘identity’ has numerous definitions. In his book National Identity (1991), Smith formulated his classical definition of the national identity, as ‘a named human population sharing an historic territory, common myths and historical memories, a mass, public culture, a common economy and common legal rights and duties for all members’ (Smith, 1991, p. 14). The origins and the usage of the term ‘identity’ can be traced to historical traditions in Western philosophy and intellectual thought, in particular to philosophers John Locke (1690) in his An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689) and David Hume (1739) in his Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man (1785). Locke (1690) wrote that identity consists of: ... nothing but a participation of the same continued Life...consciousness always accompanies thinking . ...in this alone consists personal Identity. (Locke 1690/2008)

Identity became a key word in the 1950s, when Carl Rogers (1902–1987), a noted humanistic psychologist, used the term. Eric Erickson (1902–1994), a prominent psychoanalyst, used the term to study adolescent personality/identity crises. Erikson, in Childhood and Society (1968), used a more holistic notion of ‘national identities’, which was his preferred term. Since then, there has been an incredible proliferation of the use of the term, across various disciplines and theoretical perspectives, referring to cultural identity, ethnic identity, racial identity, religious identity, sexual identity, gender identity, institutional identity, interest identity tribal identity, passport identity (as part of the documentation identity), identity credit cards, and identity politics, to name a few. At the same time, the construct of cultural identity is associated with a reification of culture (similar to Marx’s notion of ‘reification’), which becomes a defining feature of the dominant discourse on identity (Bauman, 1996). There exist the necessary nexus between students’ identity, the sense of belonging, and motivation to learn in classroom settings. Unless students are able to feel that they belong in the classroom, that they are accepted, and believe being supported by their peers and teachers, it is unlikely that they will feel being accepted for what they are. Here, students’ self-concept, self-esteem and self-efficacy represent intersecting

14

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

dimensions of cultural identities and individual differences. In order to be motivated, students need to develop and maintain a positive image of the self. Students’ selfconcept is greatly influenced by their peers and teachers. Unless they feel good about themselves, they may not be motivated to be engaged and to learn. One of the reasons why some students tend to disengage is due to some teachers’ lack of help, guidance and learning support, in cultivating the necessary engaging motivational atmosphere for all students (Zajda, 2022a).

The Relationship Between Identity, Motivation and Academic Achievement The association between self-identity and academic achievement was investigated by a number of scholars, including Awan et al. (2011), Van Bragt et al. (2011), Bakx (2018), Meens et al. (2018), Destin and Williams (2020), Toti et al. (2020), Zajda (2021b), Just and Lynch (2022) and others. Toti et al. (2020), in their study of the relationship between self-identity and academic achievement among secondary school students used the Self-Identity Instrument, to determine and measure the level of students’ self-identity, and its impact on their academic achievement. Results revealed that ‘students with a high level of self-identity are more likely to have better academic achievements’ (Toti et al. 2020). Similar findings were recorded in an earlier study by Awan et al. (2011), in ‘A study of relationship between achievement motivation, self concept and achievement in English and Mathematics at secondary level’. Their sample included some 336 Year 9 students, from eight schools, in the Sargodha district (Pakistan). The investigators concluded that the results demonstrated that ‘achievement motivation and self concept’ were significantly related to academic achievement (Awan et al., 2011). Kaplan and Flum (2009), in their introduction, ‘Motivation and identity: The relations of action and development in educational contexts’, suggested the potential of linking the motivation and identity research findings for advancing educational and psychological theory and research, as well as educational practice. The relationship between identity and academic achievement, was examined by Oyserman and Destin (2010) in their article ‘Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention’. They used their identity-based motivation model, to analyse the relationship between identity and school attainment, and argued that identities continue to be relevant to improve motivation, and school attainment. In another study, concerning identify and motivation, Meens et al. (2018), examined whether identity formation and motivation among prospective students at the moment of choosing a bachelor’s program (N = 8723) predicted their academic achievement in their first year. Their findings demonstrated that motivation was associated with academic achievement, whereas identity was not. On the other hand, Just and Lynch (2022), in their article ‘Identity-Based motivation: The impact on student identity during covid-19 at a small Midwestern University, argue that their results showed

Motivation and Its Impact on Students’ Identity, Engagement …

15

that identity appears to be a ‘driving factor of student motivation’ (Just & Lynch, 2022).

The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement in the Classroom There is no doubt that motivation plays a key role in classroom engagement. According to Parrish (2022), ‘Motivation is necessary for engagement’ (Parrish, 2022). In a 2018 Gallup study it was found that as students get older, they become less engaged, or ‘involved, enthusiastic, and committed’ and by ‘middle school, only half of students are engaged, and by high school the number of engaged students shrinks to about one-third’ (Parrish, 2022). This Gallup study also found that students, who strongly agreed with the following two statements, were 30 times more likely to report high levels of engagement with school: ● My school is ‘committed to building the strengths of each student.’ ● I have ‘at least one teacher who makes me excited about the future.’ The above demonstrated that engaged students tended to believe and accept that they have ‘the support of caring adults who are willing to partner with them in their learning’ (Parrish, 2022). There exists a necessary relationship between motivation and engagement. I discussed this point in my book Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning (2021). When we think of creating effective learning environments in schools globally, numerous ideas come to mind. I want to suggest that we start with the student’s self and cultural identity. To me, the most significant key ideas and concepts affecting all aspects of quality learning in schools globally begin necessarily with the student’s self-concept, cultural identity and active engagement. There is a great deal of research demonstrating the nexus between the self-concept, self-regulated learning (SRL), self-determination theory (SDT), and academic achievement (Ghazvini, 2011; Guay et al., 2003; Laryea et al., 2014; Marsh & Martin, 2011; Panadero, 2017; Pegalajar-Palomino, 2017; Zajda, 2021) and others. The selfconcept can be defined as the totality of a complex, organised, and dynamic system of learned beliefs, attitudes, values and opinions that each person holds to be true about his or her identity. Self-concept beliefs are hierarchical, and we have different perceptions of ourselves, depending on what we are discussing. Furthermore, self-regulated learning (SRL) is a central conceptual framework for understanding the cognitive, motivational, socio-cultural and emotional aspects of learning and engagement (Panadero, 2017). In addition to the student’s self-concept, we also need to think of time, place, school’s location, and country. Students globally, depending on where they are located and how they are shaped by major agencies of socialisation, are likely to display different attitudes, values, and behaviour patterns towards schooling. If you can imagine for one moment a Brunerian spiral curriculum,

16

1 Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting …

as a concept map, you can place the student’s self at the centre of this dynamic and pulsating spiral. Each level of the spiral will contain major agencies of socialisation in the following descending order: the family, the peers, the neighbourhood, the school, teachers, the media, and the community. In cognitive motivation theory, there exists a reciprocal link between student’s self-concept and self-determination theory (SDT). SDT is a broad framework for suggesting that individuals have three basic psychological needs, namely ‘autonomy, competence and relatedness’ (Ryan & Deci, 2020) or the ‘need to feel connected and a sense of belongingness with others’ (Self-Determination Theory, 2022). SDT attempts to offer knowledge and understanding of relevant factors affecting motivation, engagement and achievement.

Conclusion As demonstrated above, motivation, motivational theories and strategies play a significant role in students’ engagement, learning and academic performance in the school settings. Students, who are motivated to learn, and who persevere in the classroom, and put a great deal of effort into their learning, will continue to be engaged and improve their academic achievement. Teachers’ use of relevant motivation theories in schools will result in visibly improved students’ engagement, well-being, academic excellence, standards, equity and global competiveness. The overview of the theories of motivation demonstrates numerous ways for teachers and students to engage, and experience quality learning. Students’ cultural identities, their self-concepts, levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy represent one of the key factors in their engagement in the classroom, and performance, and resultant educational outcomes. Engaging and motivational cultures in the classroom generated by teachers, invariably impact on students’ identity, attitudes, values, their sense of belonging, engagement, well-being, and performance.

Chapter 2

Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance in Schools

Behavioural Theory in Schools: Introduction There are many theories of learning, used in educational psychology, and learning and teaching programs globally. Davis et al. (2015), in their ‘Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: A scoping review’, discussed some 82 theories of behaviour. Such a huge variety of theories of behaviour in learning, reflect a multi-theoretical, discipline diverse and multiple perspectives on learning and pedagogy. These theories range from behaviourist, cognitive, psychoanalytic, humanist, and social, to existentialist approaches to learning. In Chapter 1, we discussed four major and popular theories of motivation in education research, affecting pedagogy and schools globally. They consisted of behavioural, cognitive, social-cognitive and humanistic theories of motivations. They all play their part in promoting, in different ways, the concept of advancing quality engagement environments for all students. Behavioural theory of learning, as used in the classroom, is one of the keys in helping students, once motivated, to engage and perform, by completing designated activities and tasks. Behavioural theory of learning can be defined as a ‘theory of learning focusing on observable behaviours’ (Pritchard, 2009, p. 6). Behavioural theory is based, and regulated by the SBR model (stimulus, behaviour and response). Behavioural theory of learning focuses on how individuals learn, and how their visible behaviours can be observed and measured, in terms of performance. It assumes that all visible behaviours, which are influenced by the social environment, can be measured. The prominent researchers of scientific studies of behaviourism included Edward Thorndike, John Watson, Ivan Pavlov and B. F. Skinner. Thorndike (1905) was one of the pioneers in discovering the role of operant conditioning, and reinforcement in behavioural learning. He developed his Law of Effect, which held that if behaviour is followed by a favourable effect (reinforcement), it is likely to be repeated. Watson (1913), like Thorndike, established behaviourism, as field of learning, in his lecture at Columbia University titled ‘Psychology as the behaviourist views it.’ He criticized © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_2

17

18

2 Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance …

Sigmund Freud and his psycho analytic theory for his overwhelming emphasis on the subconscious drives affecting human behaviour. Instead, he stated the opposite view that all observable behaviour is due to conscious and deliberate action. Ivan Pavlov (1927), who won Nobel Prize for Physiology & Medicine in 1904, studied classical conditioning and discovered the concept unconditional responses and conditional responses, experimenting on dogs in the laboratory. Pavlov was able to condition the dog to form an association between the tuning fork, and the sound of the bell, if they were given food at the same time, resulting in a conditioned stimulus. Pavlov’s classical conditioning is the ‘process of repeatedly associating neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus’, in order to produce a conditioned response (Slavin, 2022). As such, classical conditioning, where behaviours are changed through the association of stimuli, like in Pavlov’s dogs, is totally different from operant conditioning, where behaviours are changed as a result of rewards. Classical conditioning is the result of involuntary behaviour, with a stimulus, whereas operant conditioning is the result voluntary behaviour, with a consequence, like in the Skinner’s SBR model (stimulus, behaviour and response) model. Skinner (1953) focused on the link between behaviour and consequences. His theory of operant conditioning was based on the use of reinforcement to control individual’s behaviour. Operant conditioning was totally dominated by the use of ‘pleasant or unpleasant consequences’ to control the occurrence of individual’s behaviour (Slavin, 2022).

Behavioural Theory in the Classroom In the performing culture, and performing schools atmosphere globally, focusing on academic standards of performance, behavioral theory, with its emphasis on behaviour modification and standards, as defined by teachers’ lesson plans, using behavioural objectives, and the use of Bloom’s taxonomy, plays a significant role in defining on-going relevant standards of academic performance in the classroom. According to behavioural theory, learning is totally influenced by external factors, and takes place when measurable, observable and permanent changes in particular behaviour are manifested. According to this theory, learners change, or repeat behaviour, based on the immediate and frequent rewards and reinforcement that they receive. As mentioned in my Chapter 1, of this book, Thorndike, Watson, Pavlov, Skinner and other behaviourists have completed extensive research into behavioural views of learning, focusing on the nexus between stimulus and response in measuring resultant behaviour. Behaviourists discovered and examined the nature of classical and operant conditioning, and their overall impact on individuals’ learning and performance. There are three key terms in operant conditioning: 1. Operants: Voluntary actions, usually goal directed 2. Respondents: Elicited or reflex reactions to a specific stimulus

Classroom Applications of Behaviourist Model

19

3. Reinforcement: Used to increasing or strengthening the likelihood of a behaviour recurring through use of immediate, relevant and frequent feedback. Reinforcement plays a major and key role in all behavioural views of learning. The whole theory of behaviourism is totally dependent on the effective use of reinforcement. Without the use of reinforcement, behaviourism simply could not work. Consequently, positive reinforcement becomes a ‘powerful method for controlling behaviour’ (Pritchard, 2009, p. 8). Positive reinforcement in the classroom settings includes teachers’ use of verbal praise, teachers’ written comments in students’ exercise books and symbolic rewards, such as gold stars, achievement sticker, animal stamps, and all part of token economies. On the other hand, negative reinforcement in the classroom is used to decrease undesirable behaviour, in order to promote desirable patterns of behaviour. In some cases, the ‘frequency of target behaviour is increased by the contingent removal or withdrawal of an aversive (negative) consequence’ (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, p. 210). For example, the teacher could say ‘If you finish you piano practice, you do not have to do wash the dishes’. Operant conditioning is the key idea in behavioural approaches to learning and teaching. Operant conditioning is totally governed by the use of positive (pleasant) or negative consequences (unpleasant) to control behaviour, and to increase desired behaviour. All behavioural objectives are also defined by the following three criteria: 1. Performance: Defining what the student will be able to do. 2. Conditions: The conditions under which performance occurs. 3. Standards of performance: An explicit description of acceptable performance. Behavioural objectives offer a very useful guide for writing lesson plans, as they define acceptable standards of performance in the classroom. According to Mager (1962), there were three main components of an effective behavioural objective: the performance, the conditions, and the criterion. Performance must be directly observable to be assessable. In order to assess performance, there are a set of conditions the student may be under, when demonstrating mastery of the objective. Conditions, governing performance, need to stated and explained. Standards of performance in lesson plans define acceptable standards of performance. An example of a behavioural objective defining standards would be: Given the list containing 10 mathematical problems, each student would be able to solve correctly at least 8 out of 10. For language, the objective would be: Given the list, containing 10 words, each student would be able to use at least 8 words correctly in their sentences.

Classroom Applications of Behaviourist Model In behavioural approaches to learning and teaching in the classroom, teachers have to define acceptable standards of performance, reflecting the culture of performing schools. I believe that behavioural theory, by defining behavioural objectives, with

20

2 Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance …

standards of academic performance, is very relevant and necessary for developing the performance culture in the classroom, based on defined academic standards in schools. There are at least two useful and popular models in operant conditioning: ABA (Applied Behaviour Analysis) and ABC (antecedent, behaviour, and consequence) model. ABA (Applied Behaviour Analysis) as a model of applied behaviourism, grounded in behavioural learning theory is specifically used to shape and change observable classroom behaviour. Applied behaviour analysis is defined by the following: . ‘Careful observation and identification of the target behaviours’ . ‘Clearly stated objectives for the targeted behaviour change’ . ‘A carefully sequence instructional plan that directly addresses the target behaviours’ . ‘A reward system for the learner’ . ‘Continuing monitoring of progress’ (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, pp. 206–207). ABA model focuses on the causes (events) that ‘precede and follow target behaviour’ (Cowan, 2021). ABA model, as shown above, is based on the use of behavioural principles to shape and change students’ behaviour, needing attention: . Targets the causes for students’ behaviour patterns in the classroom . Focuses on behaviour that is observable and quantifiable . Can be used for individual students and collaborative and cooperative groups. The main goal of ABA model is to change students’ observable behaviour, demonstrated by their behaviour in the classroom that is ‘socially important’ (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, p. 216). Some students’ behaviours are totally unacceptable (disrupting other students, loud talking, and misbehaving), as they do not follow the norms of acceptable classroom behaviour, based on rules defining good conduct in the classroom settings. The most immediate relevance of ABA model is for enhancing classroom control and management, especially the management of ‘challenging behaviours’ (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, p. 216). Such challenging behaviours include students, whose behaviours transgress the norms of acceptable and desirable behaviour patterns in the classroom. Examples of students’ challenging behaviours include being disruptive, both verbally and physically, exhibiting tantrums, being aggressive to other students (bullying), being rude to teachers, and refusing to follow teacher’s instructions, and, at times, bringing weapons to the school. These are isolated examples of extreme challenging behaviours in the classroom. Most students follow the rules and exhibit patters of good and acceptable behaviour. This may be due to their balanced patterns of cognitive, social, emotional and psycho-motor stages of development. Some teachers have been traumatized by challenging students’ aggressive and disruptive behaviour. Students’ disruptive behaviour contributes to teachers’ stress, levels of anxiety and mental health issue.

Classroom Applications of Behaviourist Model

21

Principles of ABA can be applied in all classroom settings, by rewarding desired behaviour and reducing undesired behaviour. The overall aim is creating an effective learning environment (Zajda, 2021b). The ABA model by focusing on observing and shaping students’ desirable behaviours in the classroom, leads logically to the ABC model, which also analyses students’ behaviour, and possible targeting behaviour that needs to be corrected and changed to a more desirable one. Behavioural model dictates that all voluntary behaviour is defined and controlled by ‘antecedents and consequences’ (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, p. 207).

Applying the ABA Model in the Classroom Applied behaviour analysis model can be traced to Ivar Lovaas, who, in the 1960s, played a significant role in developing ABA key principles. The goal of ABA, according to Cione-Kroeschel (2022), is to ‘change and improve socially significant behavior, improve communication skills, social skills, and learning skills’ (CioneKroeschel, 2022). An ABA model is also effective in the classroom for special needs students, including autistic students, and ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) students: …an ABA education has been found to be beneficial for children with attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder, traumatic brain injuries, obsessive compulsive disorder, and speech and language impediments, as well as autism spectrum disorder. Using ABA in the classroom can be effective for any behavior-related disorder or disease. (Cione-Kroeschel, 2022)

Cione-Kroeschel (2022) also suggested the following five useful and effective ABA teaching strategies: 1. ‘Discrete trial teaching (teachers break down skills into smaller components, and then teach each individual sub-skill separately. This allows for complex concepts to be more easily absorbed without becoming overwhelming’) 2. ‘Naturalistic teaching (Naturalistic teaching capitalizes on a child’s natural interests, needs, and abilities’). 3. ‘Pivotal response treatment (targets pivotal areas of a child’s development, instead of focusing on individual behaviours. These areas include motivation, responsivity, social initiations, and self-management’) 4. ‘Token economy (A token economy approach is all about reinforcers’) 5. ‘Contingent observation (Essentially, contingent observation is a mild form of timeout. This is used for young children often in preschool and day-care environments. The goal is to teach the child to play or work in a group without disrupting other children’(Cione-Kroeschel, 2022). Dorsey (2017) believes that Applied Behaviour Analysis has become the ‘most effective approach in reducing inappropriate behaviour and increasing communication, learning and appropriate social behaviour’ (Dorsey, 2017). His guidelines, for

22

2 Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance …

an effective use of ABA in the classroom, includes the notion that ‘the class philosophy must be based exclusively on the principals of Applied Behavior Analysis and utilize only Evidence-Based Practices’ (Dorsey, 2017). In general, ABA model of applied behaviourism is employed, as a classroom management technique, to shape and change students’ observable classroom behaviour, by using positive reinforcement to reward good behaviour, in the shape of relevant rewards. Positive reinforcement is the key of behavioural psychology. Positive reinforcement in the classroom settings relies on teachers’ immediate and frequent use of verbal praise, and token economies, such as achievement sticker, gold stars, animal stamps etc. The use of negative reinforcement in the classroom is to shape, control and decrease some students’ anti-social and disruptive patterns of behaviour.

Applying the ABC Model in the Classroom The ABC model demonstrates the logical connection between stimulus and response, or antecedent and consequence. The ABC model focuses on teachers’ use of antecedent strategies to correct disruptive students’ behaviour in the classroom. Antecedent strategies are mainly preventative strategies, used in the classroom to prevent and reduce the challenging behaviours in the classroom. In the ABC model there are three stages: Antecedent: An event that precedes a given behaviour. Behaviour: An action that is observable and measurable. Consequence: An event that follows an observable behaviour. In some cases, students’ challenging behaviour patterns are caused by their developmental differences in cognitive, social, emotional stages, and psycho-motor stages of development, resulting in emotional and behaviourally disruptive behaviours: Students with behavioral and emotional disorders characteristically demonstrate inconsistent responses to teacher requests and display behaviors that are disruptive to the classroom environment. (Banks, 2014)

According to Banks (2014), ‘antecedent interventions should be implemented as soon as behaviour challenges are noted’. This reflects the applications of behaviour modification, with the immediate and frequent use of reinforcement to change students’ behaviour. Kern and Clemens (2006) in their article ‘Antecedent strategies to promote appropriate classroom behaviour’ argued that teachers, by means of structured and positive environments in the classroom, have the power to use effective antecedent strategies to change behaviour and enhance students’ motivation: Antecedent intervention approaches focus on structuring the environment to prevent problems and enhance motivation. At the class-wide level, implementation of these strategies can create a structured and orderly environment to which most students are responsive. In the case of persistent behavior problems, specific events that precede problem behavior can be removed or modified to create individualized antecedent interventions. The empirical

Classroom Applications of Behaviourist Model

23

literature base supporting the value of this approach has witnessed rapid growth. (Kern & Clemens, 2006)

Research has demonstrated that the ‘use of antecedent interventions significantly reduce the likelihood of problematic behaviours’ (Cowan, 2021). Similar findings, concerning the positive effects of the appropriate use of antecedent interventions on students’ behaviours, were recorded by Kern and Clemens (2006), Haley, Heick and Luiselli (2010), Banks (2014), Wood et al. (2018), and Coppola (2022). Wood et al. (2018), in ‘Stopping behaviour before it starts: Antecedent interventions for challenging behaviour’, state that teachers have ‘difficulty in supporting students with challenging behaviour’: Many teachers have difficulty supporting students with challenging behavior. Students who shout out, are frequently off task, have a tantrum, or don’t follow directions can be disruptive and bring a teacher’s lesson to a halt. Other students may struggle to communicate their needs. As a result, these students may engage in challenging behavior to get what they want or to escape unpleasant environments or activities. Fortunately, there are evidenced-based practices for addressing challenging behavior. Some interventions help teachers stop problem behavior before it starts. These practices are called antecedent interventions .(Wood et al. 2018)

Unlike ABA model of applied behaviourism, which is employed to shape and change students’ observable classroom behaviour, the ABC model specifically focuses on the positive and effective use of antecedent strategies by teachers, to correct disruptive students’ behaviour in the classroom. Both models, being behaviourist in essence, depend on the use of reinforcement, particularly positive reinforcement, in order to model and promote desirable behaviour in the classroom.

Applying Behaviourism to Self-Regulated Learning Although operant conditioning aims to increase or decrease certain behaviours, students have the power to exercise their free-will, to take part in certain behaviours, or change the way they behave (depending on the content of reinforcement used). This is known as ‘self-regulated learning’, which is self-directed and voluntary in nature. Students’ self-regulated learning is part of their intrinsic motivation. Teachers, who use self-regulated learning strategies, also encourage qualities of self-control and self-determination in students’ learning, performance and academic achievement.

Applying Behaviourism in the Classroom to Change Students’ Behaviour There are at least 7 ways of applying behaviourism in the classroom to change students’ behaviour, and improve academic performance. First stage, define and state

24

2 Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance …

your realistic expectations for students’ behaviour and performance in the classroom. Unless desired expectations are stated at the beginning of each class, students are unlikely to engage in the desired manner, in order to achieve their ascribed tasks. This will also be used as a guide for evaluating students’ engagement and performance. Behavioural theory is totally governed by reinforcement. Second stage refers to the use of reinforcement, specifically positive reinforcement, be it immediate and frequent verbal praise, or symbolic rewards in terms of stickers, gold stars etc. Effective and relevant use of positive reinforcement is likely to support students’ learning needs and motivate them further to enhance their performance in the classroom. Craig (2019) listed five types in using positive reinforcement in the classroom: 1. ‘Direct reinforcement: this refers to a type of reinforcement that, as the name suggests, directly results from the appropriate behaviour’. 2. ‘Social reinforcers – these are mediated by others (e.g. teachers, parents, other adults, peers). They involve an expression of approval and praise for appropriate behaviour’ 3. ‘Activity reinforcers – involves allowing students to take part in their preferred activities if they behave appropriately. This is especially effective if they are allowed to choose a classmate with whom they can, for example, play a game or spend time on the computer with’. 4. ‘Tangible reinforcers – for example, edibles, toys, balloons, stickers, and awards. However, edibles and toys must be used mindfully… Instead, awards such as certificates, displaying work in the classroom, or a letter sent home to parents praising students’ progress can be used as reinforcement’. 5. ‘Token reinforcement – occurs when points or tokens are awarded for appropriate behaviour’ (Craig, 2019). Third stage covers core values in behaviourism in the classroom. These values include being a good student, being honest, being cooperative, helping others, etc. It is expected that students once they have learn the classroom rules defining appropriate behaviours will follow the rules, in order to model good behaviour. Fourth stage deals with the students’ use of relevant aspects of ABA, ABC models, and self-regulation skills, necessary for engagement and improved performance in the classroom. Self-regulation, drawing on behavioural and cognitive models of learning, denotes students’ abilities to ‘control their thinking, behaviour, reactions and emotions’ (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, p. 119). There are at least three types of self-regulation strategies used by students in the classroom: goal setting, motivation, and ability to ‘sustain attention towards goal’ (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, p. 119). Some researchers have added self-monitoring, or selfassessment, and self-reinforcement (Harris & Prater, 2021). Students’ self-regulation strategies are also influenced by an array of achievement motivation, expectance value-beliefs, self-determination theory, self-worth theory of motivation, attribution theories, and goal theories of motivation. These are all derived from cognitive theories of learning.

Classroom Applications of Behaviourist Model

25

Fifth stage covers teaching and learning strategies for students’ individual needs. Using positive reinforcement effectively, teachers can shape both behaviour and students’ attitudes towards learning. Teachers need to have relevant knowledge of students’ learning styles and learning modes and use it to build students’ self-esteem and self-efficacy. Sixth stage deals with teaching students to monitor their performance and assuming responsibility for their designated work in the classroom. Personal responsibility can be defined as people’s skill of ‘taking individual accountability for their decisions and actions, together with the outcomes they create and their impacts on others’ (Linley & Maltby, 2009, p. 685). Students’ skills in assuming responsibility is also informed by related components of cognitive psychology, such as self-determination theory of human needs (competence and autonomy), self-worth theory (achievement motivation and a positive self-image), goal theory (students setting themselves realistic and achievable goal, and attribution theory (students’ perceptions of their self-mage and performance). Teachers wishing to empower their students to improve in their learning need to explain to their students the nature ‘personal responsibility’ and related factors affecting their perception of responsibly for their learning. Seventh stage deals with teachers becoming a powerful role model of good practice, good behaviour, and supporting all students’ knowledge needs. Teaching manners is a good starting point. All teachers need to exemplify the good teacher model, in terms of attitudes and values. Teachers need to become effective role models, by their beliefs, values, knowledge, and skills, as demonstrated by their professional image projected in the classroom.

Academic Standards Promoted by Behavioural Psychology Behavioural theory of learning is the only theory of learning in educational psychology specifically focusing on academic standards, as demonstrated by the obligatory use of behaviour objectives in all classroom lesson plans. Other theories, such as cognitive, social cognitive or humanist do not necessarily address academic standards specifically, the way behavioural theory does. Behavioural theory of learning is well-known in global research for its studies of behaviour modification and operant conditioning. However, I want to emphasize that defining standards of performance in the classroom is a significant part in behavioural approach to learning, and academic achievement. Behavioural theory of learning achieves this goal by the constant use of behavioural objectives in teachers’ lesson plans. Once teachers define behaviours objectives, in terms of performance, conditions and standards of performance, they become behavioural teachers. There exists the nexus between teachers’ use of behaviour objectives and students’ improved academic performance. Students, by means of positive reinforcement, are encouraged to engage, persist, learn more, and perform better, by demonstrating their improved academic achievement.

26

2 Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance …

Classroom Discipline, Control and Management Students’ levels of engagement and motivation, leading to improved performance, can only take place in a carefully structured classroom, defined by a good discipline, motivation, student engagement, classroom rules, teachers’ effective communication skills, teachers’ self-efficacy, and teachers’ role in promoting engaging motivational atmosphere for all students. For this to happen, teachers need to develop the mastery of classroom control, classroom discipline and management. Behaviour modification strategies, as employed by ABA and ABC models, can be used effectively to shape students’ behaviour towards desirable patterns of behaviour in the classroom, affecting resultant dynamics of classroom control and discipline. Effective use of positive reinforcement also contributes to students’ motivation to engage and perform, in terms of their effort, persistence, self-efficacy, and achieving desired performance goals. Students, once rewarded for completing designated classroom tasks successfully, are likely to be motivated to continue to be engaged, and do more and better. The teachers’ use of immediate verbal praise and positive reinforcement enhances students’ confidence, their self-concept, self-esteem and sense of achievement, behaviour, and well-being.

Behaviourism as a Major Motivation Model Behavioural theories, based on Skinner’s SBR (stimulus-behaviour-response) model, and used extensively in ABA and ABC models, are most relevant to motivation and increasing engaging motivational atmosphere in the classroom settings. Behavioural theories, primarily study motives and how they result in behaviour change: The behavioristic approach examines how motives are learned and how internal drives and external goals interact with learning to produce behaviour. (Petri & Cofer, 2022)

I have argued in my book Globalisation and Education Reforms: Creating Effective Learning Environments (2021, Springer), that applications of behavioural approaches to motivation in the classroom settings require teachers to use ‘contingent rewards and punishment to reinforce student achievement’ so that desired behaviour is recurring, and to keep in mind that reinforcement to increase this behaviour motivates additional learning of this type and that student motivation is formed by prior reinforcing encounters. Teachers also need to understand that even though these approaches can have a positive impact on student motivation, they need to be aware of possible overuse and misuse of extrinsic rewards. To apply behavioural approaches to motivation in classroom settings, teachers need to: . ‘contingently reinforce students’ achievements to ensure that desired behaviour is repeated

Behaviourism as a Major Motivation Model

27

. remember that reinforcement to increase desired behaviour motivates further learning of this type . recognise that student motivation is shaped by previous reinforcing experiences’ (Zajda, 2021b). Research findings have demonstrated that teachers perform the key role in motivating students to engage and learn (Johnson, 2017; OECD, 2021; Petri & Cofer, 2022; Pelletier & Rocchi, 2016; Reeve & Su, Yu-Lan, 2013). In order for behavioural theories to affect students’ engagement and motivation, teachers need to perceive themselves as motivational master teachers, who have the power to influence students’ engagement and motivation in the classroom. Johnson (2017) argued that teachers, by encouraging ‘support of students’ autonomy’, can increase students’ motivation: The teacher’s role in encouraging support of students’ autonomy, relevance, and relatedness of the material increases motivation to learn. Additionally, the teacher’s ability to develop students’ competence, interest in subject taught, and perception of self-efficacy are all important factors that influence students’ motivation to learn. (Johnson, 2017)

There is a great deal of research dealing with the quality of teacher-student interaction (Johnson, 2017; Marylène Gagné, 2013; OECD, 2022c). Saeed and Zyngier (2012) research findings demonstrated that ‘good teacher-student relationship; clear instructions; group work; giving choice, planning engaging and interesting learning activities; and making learning important and valuable to students’ all result in promoting and enhancing student motivation and engagement in their learning (Saeed & Zyngier, 2012, p. 262). Teachers’ positive attitudes towards students, and establishing empathy, ‘trusting relationships’, and demonstrating their abilities to motivate students, will result in greater motivation and performance: Teachers’ positive, caring, and trusting relationships with their students can instigate students to learn. Teachers motivate their students to learn by providing them with positive feedback. (Johnson, 2017)

I have also demonstrated in my book Globalisation and Education Reforms: Creating Effective Learning Environments, that some teachers, in ‘terms of their attitudes, values, knowledge, skills and self-efficacy have a powerful influence on motivating their students to learn and perform better’ (Zajda, 2021b, see also OECD, 2021). Whatever the source of motivation for the student to perform in the classroom, whether intrinsic or extrinsic motivation—as a teacher it is immensely important to influence and motivate students to learn better and to improve academic achievement, so they eventually become intrinsically, rather than extrinsically motivated. It is important to realize that, ‘no single strategy will work to motivate all students’ (Schunk & Usher, 2012). This is due to variations of motivation, not only among students, due to cultural and individual differences, but also within the same student, depending on the task and context. Performing students do set for themselves personally challenging goals. However, they need to focus more on the task itself, rather than the outcome, or the grade. It is essential to engage, empower, and motivate students, so they can adapt and improve in academic achievement, and become

28

2 Behaviourism as a Major Motivational Model to Improve Performance …

lifelong learners. Furthermore, classroom learning strategies to improve motivation and academic achievement should be implemented carefully and thoughtfully, addressing individual and cultural differences and learning styles. In order to enhance their academic achievement, motivated students should aim to become ‘independent learners, using self-regulated learning strategies and taking responsibility for their own learning’ (Zajda, 2021b).

Discussion Behavioural theories, as used in the classroom, by focusing on shaping students’ observable behaviour, can improve students’ behaviour, attitudes towards learning, and performance. Behavioural theories, grounded in the use of operant conditioning, are totally dependent on teachers’ correct and meaningful application of reinforcement. Teachers’ positive reinforcement in the classroom settings includes the use of verbal praise, written comments, gold stars, and animal stamps, to name a few. Positive reinforcement, if used sensibly, has the power to increase students’ motivation and academic performance. The two major models of operant conditioning, namely ABA (Applied Behaviour Analysis) and ABC model (antecedent, behaviour, and consequence) model, extend further teachers’ effective use of behaviour modification in the classroom. The main goal of ABA model is to shape and change students’ observable behaviour, demonstrated by their behaviour patterns in the classroom. While ABA model focuses on the causes of students’ behaviour in the classroom, ABC model, on the other hand, addresses the teachers’ use of antecedent strategies to correct and change disruptive students’ behaviour in the classroom. As demonstrated above, teachers’ effective use of antecedent interventions significantly reduced socially unacceptable behaviours. Behaviour modification strategies, as employed by ABA and ABC models, have been used effectively in changing some students’ behaviour towards desirable patterns of behaviour in the classroom. Behaviour modification strategies also contribute to a new resultant dynamics of classroom control, management and discipline. Teachers’ effective use of positive reinforcement invariably contributes to improved students’ motivation, engagement and performance. The above analysis of the impact of behavioural theories on students’ motivation, and learning, demonstrates that, if administered correctly, they are likely to result in generating authentic engaging learning environments in inclusive classrooms, and improving students’ academic standards. In addition, behavioural theories of learning, by focusing on students’ observable behaviour that can be measured, are the only ones defining standards of performance, beginning with behavioural objectives in teachers’ lesson plans. Teachers, by defining acceptable standards of performance in the classroom in their lesson plans, reflect the ubiquitous culture of performing schools. As demonstrated earlier in this chapter, behavioural theories, by defining behavioural objectives and standards of performance, are most relevant for developing the performance culture in the classroom.

Conclusion

29

Conclusion Behavioural theories, as applied in schools, especially teachers’ effective use of behaviour modification strategies, as demonstrated by ABA and ABC models, have been employed globally to increase students’ engagement and motivation, and to improve their performance and academic achievement. The successes of applying behavioural theories meaningfully and effectively in the classroom are contingent on teachers’ ability, knowledge and skills in establishing, at the very beginning of their classes, a positive and welcoming atmosphere, which facilitates students’ sense of belonging, and well-being in the inclusive classroom. Developing and maintaining a positive and engaging environment, together with students’ wellbeing in the classroom is first and foremost and is completely dependent, to a large extent, on teachers’ mastery of knowledge, their self-esteem and self-efficacy, and the image of professionalism communicated in the classroom. Teachers, by visibly demonstrating their knowledge, self-efficacy, empathy, and trust, play a significant, and on-going role in generating desirable engaging motivational atmosphere in the classroom, which invariably contributes to students’ improved academic achievement and quality education.

Chapter 3

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments: Introduction Cognitive theories of motivation are based on the idea that individuals’ behaviour, thinking and actions are directly caused by the internal processes of the brain, which represent cognitive development stages, focusing on thinking, reasoning, and action. The brain has been explained as a ‘complex organ that controls thought, memory, emotion, touch, motor skills, vision, breathing, temperature, hunger and every process that regulates our body’ (John Hopkins Medicine, 2023). The brain is the seat of our ‘human consciousness, stores our memories, allows us to feel emotions, and gives us our personalities’ (National Institute of Health, 2007). The average adult human brain weighs approximately ‘1.4 kg and is about the size of a medium cauliflower. It contains around 100 billion nerve cells, called neurons, which are connected by 100 trillion connections, known as synapses’ (Nutricia Australia, 2022). Normally, neurons size is between 100 and 200 billion at birth (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 47). Neurons are in fact, the ‘building blocks of the brain network and the links between neurons are called Synapses’: Synapses are essentially the connections between neurons where one cell speaks to another. Electrical signals, together with chemical reactions that are passed between the synapses allow the brain to carry out its many important functions, like for example memory. (Nutricia Australia, 2022)

Neurons, or nerve cells, are the central part of the brain. The brain directs ‘the course of overall development and responds to environmental stimuli’ (Duchesne et al., 2022). It receives, processes, codes, and stores information. Cognitive theories of motivation represent internal mental processes, as the origins of thought processes, and leaning outcomes. As I explained earlier in my introductory Chapter 1, cognitive explanations of motivation refer to, by and large, as to why, what and how students think and understand new knowledge acquired in the classroom, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_3

31

32

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

and how it consequently influences their attitudes, values, engagements, motivation, learning and behaviour in the classroom. Cognitive theories of motivation assume that, in general, students are cognitively alert, engaged, and active in the classroom, and are involved in the on-going meaning-making process, when confronted with new concepts and ideas. The meaning-making process refers to constructivism and constructivist theory of motivation, to be discussed later. This is also relevant to inquiry-based learning and motivation. There are numerous examples of cognitive theories of motivation, which include: . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Identity theory of motivation, Inquiry-based learning of motivation achievement motivation theories, expectancy theory of motivation, self-determination theory of human needs, self-worth theory of motivation, cognitive dissonance theory cognitive evaluation theory metacognition constructivism discourse analysis and motivation self-efficacy attribution theories, and goal theories of motivation.

Identity and Motivation All motivational theories begin with the individual’s identity and the self-concept. In my recent books, Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning (Zajda, 2021b), Discourses of globalisation, cultural diversity and values education (Zajda, 2023a) and Discourses of globalisation and cultural identity (Zajda & Davidovich, 2022c), I focused on cultural identities and individual differences in learning in the classroom settings. Cultural identities are at the centre of all learning in educational institutions. In a modern sense, a cultural perspective of identity refers to local identities, defined by a particular culture, language, religion, values, and location (Zajda, 2022a). Within many local communities there is a widespread consensus on what characterises their local identity (Terlouw, 2017). National identity has certain core characteristics, which are emphasized at varying degrees from one nation to the next. As Smith (1991) explained, the six main attributes of ethnic community, as a foundation of national identity, are: 1. a collective proper name 2. a myth of common ancestry 3. shared historical memories

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments …

33

4. one or more differentiating elements of common culture 5. an association with a specific ‘homeland’ 6. a sense of solidarity for significant sectors of the population (Smith, 1991, p. 21). Hence, the defining elements of ‘national’ identity include one’s homeland, and common values: a. ‘territory, the homeland, or ‘historic land’ b. a community, or a patria, a community of laws and institutions with a single political will c. citizenship and associated sense of legal equality among the members d. common values, mass culture, civic ideology and traditions (including common historical memories, myths, symbols and traditions’ (Smith, 1991, pp. 9–11). During the 1980s, post-structuralist scholars popularized the idea of multiple identities and multiple subjectivities in post-modern research. This represented was a radical paradigm shift from structuralism, which accepted the single core identity. Current research has stressed that the individual is not simply defined by one identity, internalised in one’s culture and environment, but many other acquired identities. I want to argue, using sociological terminology of achieved status and ascribed status, that our identities, based on Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) bio-ecological model, are both ascribed and constructed identities, and embedded in our cultures. Ascribed identities represent characteristics we are born with, or genetically defined features such as race, ethnicity and sex. Achieved identities refer to gender, occupation, values, professional mobility, power, class, status, and education. According to Scheuringer (2016) one’s identity is ‘constructed and formed through contact with other individuals, groups and cultures in one’s socio-cultural environment’ and that there are ‘numerous identities in a society that are already fixed and established’ (Scheuringer, 2016). It could be argued that individuals, influenced by the ICTs, may develop multiple identities, based on place, environment, race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, education, occupation, and class. Sarah Gaither (2019) suggests that research needs to consider ‘dual identities’ that combine both traditional singular social categories, and other identities (see Zajda & Davidovich, 2022c). The above analysis of characteristic defining both constructs of identities and multiple identities indicates the complexity of the nexus between identity, environment and the ICTs and cognitive theories of motivation. It could be argued that Inquiry-based learning model of motivation, together with achievement motivation theories, self-efficacy, expectancy theory of motivation, self-determination theory of human needs, self-worth theory of motivation, metacognition, constructivism, and the role of discourse analysis in motivation, are all relevant to major discourses surrounding the role of identity in motivation.

34

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

Inquiry-Based Learning of Motivation Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) or Inquiry Approach (IA) model begins with students’ using prior knowledge and experiences and moves through a deliberate process to extend this knowledge further (Vygotskian perspective). Four most important qualities of inquiry are: . . . .

in-depth knowledge of subject matter critical thinking skills in processing information attitudes/reflections.

Inquiry-Based Learning occurs when the learner is interested in being engaged and motivated to complete the necessary learning tasks, in order to perform and achieve good results. Inquiry-Based Learning is associated with discovery learning, experiential learning, critical thinking and problem-solving. In IA model, teachers select and group learning experiences & activities and under the following 6 headings: . . . . . .

Tuning in (framing and focusing questions) Finding out (locating, organizing and analyzing evidence) Sorting out (evaluating and reporting findings) Going further (exploring the topic further) Making conclusion (summarising the findings) Taking action (doing something to address the issue).

Metacognition, constructivism, and critical thinking represent the necessary parts of Inquiry- Based Learning. Metacognition is often simply defined as ‘thinking about thinking’. Metacognition refers to higher order thinking, which involves active control over the cognitive processes engaged in learning. The term ‘metacognition’ is most often associated with John Flavell, (1993). According to Flavell, metacognition consists of both metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences, or regulation. Activities such as planning how to approach a given learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating progress toward the completion of a task are metacognitive. Metacognitive knowledge refers to acquired knowledge about cognitive processes, knowledge that can be used to control cognitive processes. Metacognitive strategies are sequential processes that one uses to control cognitive activities, and to ensure that a cognitive goal (e.g., understanding a text) has been met. These processes help to regulate and oversee learning, and consist of planning and monitoring cognitive activities, as well as checking the outcomes of those activities. For example, after reading a paragraph in a text a learner may question herself, or himself, about the concepts discussed in the paragraph. Her, or his cognitive goal, is to understand the meaning of the text. Self-questioning is a common metacognitive comprehension monitoring strategy. The three basic classroom metacognitive strategies are: ‘Connecting new information to former knowledge. Selecting thinking strategies deliberately.

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments …

35

Planning, monitoring, and evaluating thinking processes’ (Dirkes, 2010). Research shows that students’ use of relevant metacognitive strategies resulted in increases in both learning and academic achievement (de Boer et al. 2018; Gul & Shehzad, 2012). Constructivism, as part of Inquiry-Based Learning model, is an approach to learning focusing on cognitive structures, in which learners use new information as active participants. In general, it is a theory of learning, or meaning-making, when individuals create their own new knowledge, as a result of the interaction between what they already know and the new knowledge they learn in the classroom. There exists a causal relationship between constructivist pedagogy and students’ academic achievement. In one particular comparative and cross-cultural metaanalysis, Ayaz and Sekerci ¸ (2015) examined some 53 studies analysing the effects of constructivist pedagogy on students’ academic achievement and concluded that ‘the constructivist learning approach, compared to traditional teaching methods, has positive effects on the student’s academic achievement’ (Ayaz & Sekerci, ¸ 2015, p. 151). According to Shah, (2019), constructivism is not only popular, but resulted in ‘significant success’ in students’ academic achievement: Constructivism has been a very powerful contemporary model for explaining how knowledge is produced in the world, as well as how students learn new information. Moreover, constructivist pedagogy practices are becoming more prevalent in teacher education programs, as they demonstrate significant success in promoting student learning and academic achievement (Shah, 2019). In addition, constructivist pedagogy in the classroom facilitates a good deal of quality students’ engagement (Shah, 2019; Zajda, 2018a). Research has demonstrated that teachers with ‘constructivist’ beliefs about teaching are more likely to report good classroom disciplinary climate, associated with student performance and that self-efficacy is an important measure of teaching and learning effectiveness in many countries, but those who emphasise the ‘direct transmission’ of knowledge in instruction are more likely to teach classes with poorer disciplinary climate (OECD, 2009a). Within discourses of constructivism, Piagetian constructivism is viewed as a subset of a larger historical challenge to modernist notions of objective reality in general and the use of empirically validated methods of teaching specifically. Much of post-structuralist and constructivist thinking can be traced to the French philosophers, Jacques Derrida, who coined the term ‘deconstruction’ and Michael Foucault, who analysed the nexus between knowledge and power. Foucault, a philosopher of history, and like Derrida, was concerned about the problem of language, and its attempt to construct and understand reality. Foucault contended that social authority and power is itself created through language. As such, all human thought is trapped by the language in which it is encased. One of the key ideas of constructivist pedagogy is that student’s meaningful knowledge is actively constructed, in diverse ways, employing cognitive, cultural, affective and social dimensions, and that individual learning, in a constructivist sense, is a necessarily socially active process. This idea is most relevant to the process of

36

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

creating effective learning environments in schools globally. In addition, constructivist pedagogy promotes critical thinking and critical literacy. By comparison with traditional models of teaching, it also integrates more effectively students’ cognitive, social and emotional learning, offering a holistic approach in the classroom. It can be certainly used in learning and teaching as one approach, within the multiple pedagogical models and strategies, designed to maximise effective teaching, students’ engagement, learning environments, academic standards and quality learning for all. Research informed teachers tend to use constructivist pedagogy to improve meaningful and authentic learning. It is argued that the effectiveness of constructivist learning and teaching is dependent on students’ self-concept, cultural identity, cognitive, social and emotional development, and students’ academic achievement goals and their relevant learning strategies.

Achievement Motivation Theory Achievement motivation theory refers to the key role of the self and human personality in learning and achievement. Achievement motivation theory claims that individuals’ need for achievement is described as both intrinsic and extrinsic desire to succeed. Consequently, achievement motivation theory attempts to explain the reasons and associated cognitive processes that initiate, direct, and maintain achievement behaviour. Achievement motivation theory attempts to explain and predict behaviour and performance based on a ‘person’s need for achievement, power, and affiliation’ (Lussier & Achua, 2007, p. 42). Slavin (2022), argued that achievement motivation theory was the most important type of motivation. It is characterized by the ‘generalized tendency to strive for success and choose goal-oriented, success/failure activities’ (Slavin, 2022). Students, influenced by achievement motivation, especially high need achievers, are likely engage in activities in which success depends on both ability and effort. According to achievement motivation, high need achieving students (HINA) tend to be successful at completing classroom tasks. McClelland (1961) developed his Achievement Motivation theory, which was also called Three-Need Theory, where he examined the sources of motivation. According to this theory, individuals possess three major drives for motivation: achievement, affiliation, or power: Need for Achievement: Personal responsibility, Feedback, Moderate risk. Typical behaviours: High: Must win at any cost, must be on top, and receive credit. Low: Fears failure, avoids responsibility. Need for Power: Influence, Competitive. Typical behaviours: High: Demands blind loyalty and harmony, does not tolerate disagreement. Low: Remains aloof, maintains social distance. Need for Affiliation: Acceptance and friendship, Cooperative.

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments …

37

Typical behaviours: High: Desires control of everyone and everything, exaggerates own position and resources. Low: Dependent/subordinate, minimizes own position and resources. (McClelland, 1961)

Slavin (2022) believes that in achievement motivation, ‘Success breeds the desire for more success, which in turn breeds success’ (Slavin, 2022). However, not everyone, due to various individual difference and abilities, is capable of achieving designated level of success in the classroom. Students, who do not experience success in achievement settings, will tend to ‘lose the motivation to succeed in such settings and will turn their interest elsewhere (perhaps to social activities, sports… in which they might success’ (Slavin, 2022). To have a deeper understanding of achievement motivation theories, we need to refer to Bandura’s (1977b, 2001) concept of self-efficacy, in his social learning theory, which is also relevant to achievement motivation theories. Self-efficacy refers to individuals’ beliefs that they are competent, and able to be engaged, and complete certain tasks successfully. This can be linked to Attribution theories, Self-Determination Theories and Goal Orientation Theories affecting individuals’ engagement and the nature of motivation.

Attribution Theory of Motivation Attribution theory focuses on individuals’ explanations, or attributions, for their successes, or lack of success, and demonstrates how such attributions and beliefs influence subsequent engagement, behaviour and motivational strategies. As such it can be regarded as one of the ‘most prominent theories of motivation in the field of education research’ (Graham & Chen, 2020), as it examine the causes of success or failure. Ability and effort are among the most prominent perceived causes of success and failure. Attribution theory focuses on both antecedents and consequences of perceived causality. Antecedents or determinants of attributions may be beneficial or harmful, and they include teacher behaviors such as communicated sympathy, offering praise, and unsolicited help that indirectly function as low-ability cues. Seemingly positive teacher behaviors can therefore have unintended negative consequences if they lead students to question their ability. (Graham & Chen, 2020)

According to attribution theory, individuals tend to make sense of their environment through ‘ascribing causality to their behaviour and the behaviour of others and these attributions impact future behaviour’ (Gaier, 2015). Students try to understand logically the reasons for causes of success or failure on their ascribed classroom learning activities and tasks. Teachers have the power, by explaining reasons for success, or failure, as attributes, to significantly influence students’ confidence, and subsequent positive behaviour and learning, by both enhancing and promoting

38

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

engaging motivational atmosphere, resulting in improved academic standards of performance.

Self-Determination Theory of Motivation Self-Determination Theory, influenced by attribution theory, studied the perceived stability of causes which ‘influenced changes in expectancy of success’. Weiner’s (1985) theory analysed how the ‘structure of thinking affects the dynamics of feeling and action’ (Weiner 1985, p. 548). Self-Determination Theory (SDT) consists of a ‘broad framework for the study of human motivation and personality. SDT articulates a meta-theory for framing motivational studies, a cognitive theory that defines intrinsic and varied extrinsic sources of motivation, and a description of the respective roles of intrinsic and types of extrinsic motivation in cognitive and social development and in individual differences’ (Center for Self-Determination Theory, 2023). Of significance is the notion that SDT tends to focus on the nexus between social and cultural factors affecting individuals’ actions, and specifically, ‘how social and cultural factors facilitate or undermine people’s sense of volition and initiative, in addition to their well-being and the quality of their performance’ (Center for Self-Determination Theory, 2023).

Goal-Orientation Theory of Motivation Goal-Orientation Theory, on the other hand, focused on individuals’ mastery goal orientation, resulting in high academic achievement. According to goal-orientation theory, developed by Dweck and Leggett (1988), ‘goal orientation will affect the individual’s cognitive or emotional tendency toward events, which in turn will trigger behavioral responses’ (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Waskiewicz (2012) argued that the motivation to achieve, being a set of ‘affective, behavioral, and outcome-based actions’, is also a ‘combination of intrapersonal interest and the desire to perform better than others’, and that performance goal orientation tends to be ‘dominated by those who seek to gain competence by performing as well as possible relative to others’ (Waskiewicz, 2012). Goal-orientation theory, like achievement motivation theory, is very popular in educational settings and elsewhere.

Expectancy Theory of Motivation Expectancy theory was originally developed and formulated by Victor Vroom (1964) at the Yale School of Management. It was suggested that individuals’ behaviour was motivated by anticipated results, or consequences. Expectancy theory stated that

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments …

39

the ‘intensity of work effort depends on the perception that an individual’s effort will result in the desired outcome’ (Vroom, 1964). In some ways it is similar to behavioural theories, which attributed a great deal of significance to the role of consequences in motivating individual to perform. Individuals’ engagement and performance on designated tasks, was affected by the use of positive reinforcements, as rewards. Expectancy theory also maintains that individuals are motivated to perform if they know that their extra performance is recognized and rewarded (Vroom, 1964). In general, expectancy theory of motivation includes the following 3 key elements: 1. Expectancy 2. Instrumentality 3. Valence Expectancy is the individual’s belief and hope that increasing effort on a given task will result in desired outcomes, in this case, improved academic achievement. Expectancy beliefs consist of self-efficacy, goal difficulty and control. The individual’s self-efficacy is the belief in the ability and skills to complete certain tasks successfully. Goal difficulty is one’s perception of the task in terms of difficulty level. Control, on the other hand, is the individual’s power to use internal cognitive control, though metacognition and self-regulated learning, in order to improve performance. Instrumentality is the individuals’ belief that improved performance will result in desired reward. Valence, on the other hand, is the individual’s value and importance attached to designated class performance and the results to be achieved, producing an improved academic achievement.

Self-Worth Theory of Motivation The self-worth theory of motivation, influenced by achievement motivation theories, assumes that students’ perception of their abilities is significant in influencing their resultant ‘sense of worth, or personal value’ (Covington, 1984). The self-worth theory of motivation explains how an individual’s perception and beliefs of their abilities and competence results in the protection of their sense of self-worth, as the motive of avoiding failure. This reminds us of psychoanalytic theory, based on the idea of protecting the ego at all costs. In psychoanalytical theory developed by Sigmund Freud (1920) in his pioneering book A general introduction to psychoanalysis, it was explained that within the structure of the mind, consisting of the super ego, ego and id, as the three levels of awareness, the individual’s ego was engaged in protecting the ego from threats, in the form of anxieties, fears and phobias, by the use of relevant psychoanalytic devices, such as projection or denial. The notion of protecting the ego is equally relevant to a more meaningful understanding of the self-worth theory, where individuals, based on their belief concerning their abilities, be they true or false will decide to either perform in completing a designated task successfully, or selecting an easier task, guaranteeing success. The goal is to avoid failure, thus protecting the ego from stress.

40

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

Cognitive Dissonance Theory Cognitive dissonance, discovered by Festinger (1957), is based on the idea that two cognitions can be relevant, or irrelevant to each other (Festinger, 1957). Learning processes involve the ‘integration of new information into existing knowledge structures or schema’ (Adcock, 2012). As soon as new information is presented to learners that is ‘unfamiliar or contradictory to their existing knowledge or schema, this triggers a phenomenon referred to as cognitive dissonance’ (Adcock, 2012). As McLeod (2023), explains further ‘Cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs, or behaviours. This produces a feeling of mental discomfort’ (McLeod, 2023). In general, cognitive dissonance occurs when a person’s behaviour and beliefs do not complement each other or when they hold two contradictory beliefs’ (Villines, 2022). Cognitive dissonance theory offers some explanation why individuals experience ‘inconsistencies in their thinking and may adjust their thinking when their thoughts, words, or behaviours seem to clash with each other’. Cognitive dissonance takes place when one’s ‘thinking, attitude, behaviour, or previous internalized messages conflict’ with one’s ‘behaviour, or new information’ that acquired (Sweeney, 2023). Adcock, (2012) in her ‘Cognitive dissonance in the learning processes’, offers a useful example of cognitive dissonance: ...imagine being presented with evidence that the Earth revolves around the sun when your understanding is that the sun revolves around the Earth. From the educational psychology perspective, Piaget (1929) saw cognitive dissonance as a means to facilitate the cognitive processes of accommodation and assimilation, which are central to knowledge development. Accommodation and assimilation occur when learners are presented with new knowledge and must expend mental effort to integrate this information into their existing schema. (Adcock, 2012)

Overall, cognitive dissonance, in terms of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, is an attempt to solve mental conflict, with reference to prior knowledge and new knowledge in thinking and behaviour, which is inconsistent with original thoughts and beliefs (see also Wadsworth, 2004). Both assimilation, concerned with mental adjustment of an existing knowledge, or schema to fit new information, and accommodation, when ‘new information is used to the adjustment of an existing schema to fit a new experience’ help to restore the desired mental equilibrium, resulting in congruence between thinking and behaviour (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022).

Cognitive Evaluation Theory Cognitive Evaluation Theory postulated that there are two major types of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. Cognitive Evaluation Theory is concerned with the role of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation in motivating individuals to perform in the classroom, and to achieve desired successful outcomes. The theory was first developed by Deci (1975). Cognitive evaluation theory has been regarded as a forerunner

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments …

41

of self-determination theory (Moss, 2016). Cognitive evaluation theory was developed as a theoretical framework to determine the nature of factors that enhance or undermine intrinsic motivation (Thanh, 2020). It draws on self -determination theory, as explained earlier. In terms of antecedents, cognitive evaluation theory maintains that external events, affecting the individuals’ attitudes and behaviour in the classroom, could result in greater self-confidence, and increasing the levels of intrinsic motivation. Alternatively, individuals’ self-confidence may be decreased by certain classroom tasks, perceived to be difficult, thus reducing intrinsic motivation.

The Use of Constructivism for Creating Engaging Learning Environments Constructivism is an approach to learning focusing on cognitive structures, in which learners use new information as active participants. In general, it is a theory of learning or meaning-making, when individuals create their own new knowledge, as a result of the interaction between what they already know and the new knowledge they learn in the classroom. Constructivism focuses on the learner’s constructing meaning by processing it through cognitive structures. Constructivist views of learning mean that an effective learner actively monitors his/her learning process. This pedagogical approach has many associated terms (e.g., constructivist, student-centred, participatory, active), but generally draws on learning theories suggesting learners should play an active role in the learning process. Students use prior knowledge and new experiences to create knowledge. The teacher facilitates this process, but also creates and structures the conditions for learning by the use of cooperative and collaborative groups. Considerable research has promoted learner-centred pedagogy in recent years for social, cultural and cognitive reasons. Some research suggests that this approach can be very effective, but it is difficult to measure consistently. It is often challenging for teachers to shift from teacher-centred pedagogy to learner-centred pedagogy, and considerable support may be needed, if this is to be an important goal for a given classroom. Compared with traditional methods of teaching, constructivist pedagogy, due to its significant role in creating effective and engaging learning environment in schools, has become an increasingly popular and preferred pedagogy. One of the most obvious reasons for its popularity is that it offers to students much more social and cognitive interaction and engagement in collaborative and cooperative groups. Based on prolific research findings dealing with the nexus between constructivist pedagogy, quality teaching, and improvement in academic performance, I would like to suggest that effective learning environments need to offer continuous active engagement in the classroom globally. Constructivist pedagogy, based on psychological and social constructivism can become one of the effective classroom strategies for improving students’ engagement and academic achievement. Two main approaches in constructivist pedagogy include:

42

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

Cognitive constructivism, based on Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, emphasizes the development of meaningful learning by focusing on the cognitive processes that take place within individuals. Social constructivism, drawing heavily on Vygotsky’s social development theory, stresses the development of meaningful learning by focusing on culture and social interactions. In contrast to the cognitive constructivist, the socio-cultural constructivist perspective attributes mental processes to the individual and to on-going and meaningful social interaction. Learning, as sense of cognition, becomes primarily a process of dynamic and engaging social interaction. Constructivists believe that ‘knowing is a process and that learners must individually and actively discover and transform complex information and make it their own’ (Slavin, 2022). Bruner (1966a) argued that ‘knowing is a process not a product’ (Bruner, 1966a, p. 72). Overall, the key idea of constructivist pedagogy is that student’s meaningful knowledge is actively constructed, and maintained in diverse ways, employing cognitive, cultural, affective and social dimensions, and that individual learning, in a constructivist sense, is a necessarily socially active process. This idea is most relevant to the process of creating effective learning environments in schools globally. In addition, constructivist pedagogy promotes critical thinking and critical literacy. By comparison with traditional models of teaching, it also integrates more effectively students’ cognitive, social and emotional learning, offering a holistic approach in the classroom. It can be certainly used in learning and teaching as one approach, within the multiple pedagogical models and strategies, designed to maximise effective teaching, students’ engagement, learning environments, academic standards and quality learning for all. Research informed teachers tend to use constructivist pedagogy to improve meaningful and authentic learning. It is argued that the effectiveness of constructivist learning and teaching is dependent on students’ selfconcept, cultural identity, cognitive, social and emotional development, and students’ academic achievement goals and their relevant learning strategies.

Discourse Analysis and Enhancing Motivation The term ‘discourse’ was widely used by Michel Foucault in his writings between the 1960s and the 1980s. Foucault was a French historian and philosopher, and influenced by the structuralist and post-structuralist theories. Foucault developed his concept of discourse in his early work, namely in the Archaeology of Knowledge (1969). Foucault’s definition of discourse referred to ‘systems of thoughts, composed of ideas, attitudes, courses of action, beliefs and practices that systematically construct the subjects and the worlds of which they speak’ (Lessa, 2006). Hence, discourse, focused on specific ‘ways of constituting knowledge, together with the social practices, forms of subjectivity and power relations which inhere in such knowledge and relations between them’ (Weedon, 1987, p. 108). The term discourse, as used by Foucault (1967), involved the nexus of ideas, themes, forms of knowledge and also positions held by individuals in relation to these.

Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments …

43

Discourse in a philosophical sense is a form of critical questioning of the basic assumptions of knowledge, language and power. Discourse, derived from critical theory, is fundamentally a form of critical and deconstructive reading and interpretation of a text. Rea Zajda (1988) used discourse analysis in her work to examine the construction of the self, gender and identity. She argued that ‘Discourse is concerned with the social production of meaning’. These meanings, she argued, can be ‘embodied in technical processes, in institutions, in patterns for general behaviour, in forms for transmission and diffusion and in pedagogical forms’ (Zajda, 1988, p. 11). In this sense, Zajda (1988) argued ‘it can also refer to not only statements, but social or institutional practices through which the social production of meaning takes place or is embodied’ (Zajda, 1988, p. 11). She was one of the first researchers to examine discourses of the self and sexuality. More importantly, Zajda (1988) challenged the neutrality of knowledge and ideology in language and text. Zajda (1988) argued that the critical aspect of discourses challenges both ‘the accepted hierarchical structuring of authority concerning knowledge and the neutrality of knowledge and ideology. It asks questions about the historical and cultural conditions in which discourses emerged’ (Zajda, 1988, p. 12). Although many writers have used the concept of discourse, it was Foucault, argued Zajda, who investigated specifically the emergence of discourses relating to the modern self, reflecting subjectivity or individualism’ (Zajda, 1988, p. 12). Discourse, as demonstrated above, is a type of methodology which is concerned with a deconstructive reading and critical interpretation of text, with reference to dominant themes, images, the power of language in shaping the self and identity, and ideologies. This approach is likely to motivate individuals to use their metacognition and metacognitive strategies in their critical thinking and critical literacy. Foucault’s genealogy, as a form of discursive critique is normally used to analyse the power of knowledge and language. His analysis of the uses of power and how disciplinary knowledge was created in our societies, and with what purpose, or effect, is particularly useful for critical discourse analysis in critiquing culture, organizations and ideology and their impact on producing knowledge and text. His genealogy, attempted to reveal the ‘singularity of events’, by turning away from the spectacular, in favour of discredited, and the neglected knowledge which have been denied a history. Foucault’s intention was to challenge the centralising power of total or unitary theories and the institutions and practices to which they are linked. The critical aspect of discourses challenged the authority and neutrality of knowledge. As demonstrated above, researchers, employing discourse analysis attempted to identify and critique dominant themes and ideologies within the text itself. Consequently, discourse methodology can be used effectively and productively in cultural studies, text and language analysis, identity formation studies, especially in the media, educational research, comparative education, and elsewhere. As such, it is one of the most powerful critical research paradigms that can be used to critique the power of the language and inscribed dominant ideologies in the text, or hegemonies, which is not always addressed in other research methodologies, especially quantitative methodologies focusing on numerical data analysis. Discourse analysis specifically examines the power of the text, language and knowledge, in terms of reification. Individuals,

44

3 Cognitive Theories for Creating Engaging Learning Environments

located in certain moments of historical events, are either unable to understand critically social and economic conditions defining their lives, or perceive them uncritically, accepting them as a given, various organisational constraints affecting their work, lives, destinies and equality (Zajda, 2023a). The use of discourse analysis, and critical discourse analysis offers individuals a more meaningful, deeper and critical approach to the power of the language of the text, affecting cognitive, social and emotional spheres of the mind. It is likely to result in engaging motivational environment, where individuals are committed to solving serious issues confronting our societies globally.

Self-efficacy Theory of Motivation Self-efficacy, as a construct was developed by Albert Bandura (1977a, 1977b) to explain the role it played in his theory of social learning. In general, selfefficacy refers to an individual’s belief of having the ability to perform successfully behaviours necessary to produce specific performance attainments (Bandura, 1977). Self-efficacy reflects the individual’s confidence in the ability to have control over motivation, behaviour, and social environment. Bandura (1997b, 1982) proposed four sources of self-efficacy: . . . .

mastery experiences vicarious experiences verbal persuasion physiological and affective states.

Self-efficacy is also based on Bandura’s social cognitive theory. According to this theory, individuals can ‘intentionally influence, control and direct their actions to make things happen (Duchesne, McMaugh & Mackenzie, 2022, p. 140). Selfefficacy is, according to Schunk and Dibenedetto (2020) an important motivational construct that can affect individuals’ ‘choices, effort, persistence, and achievement’ (Schunk & Dibenedetto, 2020). Self-efficacy, as an individual’s belief in being able to complete designated activities successfully, is determined by cognitive, social, emotional and behavioural factors.

Conclusion As above demonstrates, cognitive theories for creating engaging learning environments are rich and varied in their complexities. I have selected 14 popular types of cognitive approaches to motivation, which include: Identity theory of motivation, Inquiry-based learning of motivation, achievement motivation theories, expectancy theory of motivation, self-determination theory of human needs, self-worth theory

Conclusion

45

of motivation, cognitive dissonance theory, cognitive evaluation theory, metacognition, constructivism, discourse analysis and motivation, self-efficacy, attribution theories, and goal theories of motivation. Students’ identity, together with their attitudes, values, self-concept, self-esteem and self-efficacy are likely to influence the level of their engagement, motivation, and resultant performance in the classroom. Both achievement motivational theories and goal theories of motivation, specifically target students’ need and desire to improve their academic performance. I strongly advocate the use of constructivist pedagogy, particularly social constructivist pedagogy in cooperative and collaborative groups in the classroom to enhance students’ meaningful engagement and academic achievement. Research findings have showed the existence of positive correlation between teachers’ use of social constructivist pedagogies in the classroom and improved students’ learning and performance. In addition, the meaning-making process, used in constructivism and constructivist theory of motivation, is most relevant for deepening students’ metacognition, and the level of their critical thinking and critical literacy. This is also relevant to the effective and relevant use of inquiry-based learning and motivation in the classroom.

Chapter 4

Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation

Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation: Introduction Explaining Motivation in the Classroom Motivation is completely dependent on the individual’s image and sense of the self. This subjective image of the self is also linked to related identity constructs, namely self-concept, self-esteem, and self-efficacy. Students’ active engagement in the classroom is affected by many factors, but foremost by their concept of the self. If they feel positive about themselves, they are likely to be motivated to be engaged in performing set classroom tasks. If their self-concept is negative, they are likely to disengage from schooling, as in the case of students being ignored or labelled and discriminated by some teachers, on the grounds of intelligence, abilities, race, and ethnicity. The type of students’ self-concept affects the nature and content of their self-esteem and selfefficacy. Self-esteem generally refers to how we value ourselves, and is defined as a ‘positive or negative orientation toward oneself; an overall evaluation of one’s worth or value’ (Self-esteem: What is it, 2022). Earlier, Rosenberg (1989) defined selfconcept as the ‘totality of the individual’s thoughts and feelings with reference to himself as an object’ (Rosenberg, 1989, p. 34). Students’ self-concept, in terms of preconceived ideas, beliefs and feelings will influence and affect their attitudes, and values towards engagement and performance in the classroom. As a motivational starting step, the nature of students’ self-concept will determine their decision to learn or not to learn. Self-concept affects one’s image and perception of self-esteem. Self-esteem, influenced by the self and self-concept, as a positive or negative image of the self, refers to our subjective views of our abilities to do certain tasks. Individuals with high levels of self-esteem are likely to be motivated to be engaged and achieve their best.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_4

47

48

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation

Motivation, as a key concept, was always a key feature of ‘social cognitive theory from the early modelling research to the current conception involving agency’ (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020). Social cognitive theory, derived from Bandura’s (1977a) social learning theory (SLT), focuses on the key role of observational learning, and indicates that learning occurs in a social settings, illustrated by a dynamic and reciprocal interaction of the person, environment, and behavior. However, in contrast to behavioural theories, which focused on observable behaviour in the environment only, Bandura argued in his social learning model, that behavioural, personal and environmental influences were the three necessarily interacting dimensions of cognitive and social learning. What makes Bandura’s (1977a) different and original from behavioural approaches to learning, is that he added personal and environmental characteristics to his model. In his book Social Learning Theory (1977a), Bandura argued that human behaviour was learned ‘observationally through modelling: from observing others one forms an idea of how new behaviours are performed, and on later occasions, this coded information serves as a guide for action.’ (Bandura, 1977a). Bandura’s social and behavioural modelling theory, was based on by observing attitudes and behaviour of others, as a form of knowledge and skills learning, was also characteristic of behaviourism, where, for instance, cubs learn from the polar bear mother how to catch fish. Another example of modelling, based on a real case study of a particular family known to the author, involved two sisters, one was 8, and the other was 6. Their grandmother bought them a piano for Christmas. The eight-year old immediately wanted to learn music notes to play the piano. The six-year old, by observing her sister learning to play the piano, also wanted to play the piano. The result of this observational learning case study was that both sisters were learning to play the piano.

Bandura’s (1977) Triadic Reciprocal Causation Model Behavioural, personal and environmental influences were captured in his model of social learning. Bandura’s (1977a) triadic reciprocal causation model is illustrated by Fig. 4.1. Individual’s personal characteristics (P) include perceptions, personality traits, age, gender, cognitive development, beliefs, values, emotional needs, anxieties, goals, learning abilities, and self-efficacy beliefs, to name a few. Behavioural variables (B) include actions, responses, skills, self-observation, self-evaluation etc. Environmental factors (E) include physical, social and cultural factors affecting individual’s learning, knowledge, and skills acquisition. Triadic reciprocal causation model assumes normal conditions operating in place. However, as the learners’ activities and settings change, the strengths and relevance of ‘certain P-B-E connections can be expected to change’ (Snowman et al., 2009, p. 305). Bandura suggested that in order to be effective learners, students

Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation …

49

Fig. 4.1 Bandura’s triadic reciprocal causation model: behavioural, personal and environmental factors (Source Snowman et al., 2009, p. 305)

needed to acquire and demonstrate such cognitive and social skills as self-control, self-regulation and self-efficacy. Self-control refers to controlling ones behaviour without external rewards or punishments. Self-regulation is the learner’s consistent use of self control in new learning and performance contexts. Self-efficacy refers to how one perceives one’s ability to complete a given activity and therefore influences self regulatory skills. These three factors, especially self-regulation, self-control, and self-efficacy, together with attribution, performance accomplishments, outcome expectations and goals were employed successfully by the author when writing his first major dissertation (Master of Arts, by major thesis). The author set a realistic and achievable goal, writing a least one page a day. It worked, and a 200 page thesis was completed in less than a year. The same strategy was also used for a doctoral dissertation, a thesis of over 300 pages, which was completed within two years on a doctoral scholarship and on full-time basis. Bandura’s (1977a) social learning theory was a complete departure from traditional behavioural views of motivation, which focused on visible behaviour only, and was completely depended on the use of reinforcement strategies, to elicit desired changes in behaviour. Bandura’s social learning theory has had a number of important implications in the field of social learning, namely that individual’ personal characteristics, together with environmental and behavioural factors, play a significant part in learning and academic achievement. In addition, the idea of learning by observing socially desirable models became the corner stone of Bandura’s social learning theory. Overall, Bandura’s social cognitive view of learning is both broader, and deeper than either Skinner’s operant conditioning model, or ‘information-processing theory’ (Snowman et al., 2009): Not only does Bandura acknowledge the role of internal cognitive and affective factors as well as a person’s behaviour in learning, he also includes the impact the social environment. (Snowman et al., 2009, p. 305)

Today, students, teachers and parents tend to accept the importance of social modelling of appropriate attitudes, values and behaviours, by observing and copying

50

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation

behaviour of socially desirable role models, regarded as ‘significant others’ in sociological theories of socialization. Social learning classroom strategies, such as motivating individuals to engage, learn, and perform, in order to build their self-esteem and self-efficacy, reflect major principles of social learning theory. It needs to be stressed that the concept of self-efficacy is one of the core variables in Bandura’s social cognitive theory. Bandura believed that individuals’ self-efficacy was likely to determine their engagement, motivation, possible course of action, effort, persistence and feelings. These actions were invariably influenced by individuals’ beliefs about their own abilities, and competence to perform certain behaviours successfully, in order to achieve desirable performance outcomes. For example, a student’s high self-efficacy for literacy tasks (P) directs the student to concentrate on literacy (B), instead of mathematics. The high level of self-efficacy is likely to make the student more persistent and motivated, by putting more effort in completing the task successfully. Bandura’s (1977a) social learning model was guided by his four fundamental principles: a. b. c. d.

Attention Retention Reproduction Motivation

Attention In order to learn, the learner had to be alert, engaged and pay attention. Anything that detracts one’s attention is going to have a negative effect on observational learning. If the model is relevant and interesting or there is a novel aspect to the situation, one is likely to exhibit one’s full attention to learning.

Retention The ability to store information is also an important part of the learning process. Retention can be affected by a number of factors, but the ability to retrieve the relevant information later and act on it is vital to observational learning.

Reproduction Once the individual has paid attention to the model and retained the information, it is time to actually perform the behaviour observed. Further practice of the

The Role of Self-Control, Self-Regulation and Self-Efficacy in Motivation

51

learned behaviour is likely to result in further improvement and knowledge and skill advancement.

Motivation Finally, in order for observational learning to be successful, one needs o be engaged and motivated to imitate the behaviour that has been modelled. Bandura (1977a), in his famous Bobo doll experiment, demonstrated that children learn and imitate behaviours they have observed in other people. The children in Bandura’s studies observed an adult acting violently toward a Bobo doll. When the children were later allowed to play in a room with the Bobo doll, they began to imitate the aggressive actions they had previously observed. Bandura identified three basic models of observational learning: a. ‘A live model, which involves an actual individual demonstrating or acting out behaviour. b. A verbal instructional model, which involves descriptions and explanations of a behaviour. c. A symbolic model, which involves real or fictional characters displaying behaviours in books, films, television programs, or online media’ (Cherry, 2022). Factors influencing observational learning normally include: 1. Developmental status (cognitive, social, emotional and psychomotor developments). 2. Learning from ‘significant other’ (role model). 3. Vicarious leaning. 4. Outcome expectations. 5. Self-efficacy. 6. Goals. 7. Self control, or an ability to control one’s actions in the absence of external reinforcement or punishment. 8. Self-regulation, or the consistent and appropriate application of self-control skills to new situations.

The Role of Self-Control, Self-Regulation and Self-Efficacy in Motivation Students’ Self-Control and Academic Achievement According to the American Psychological Association (APA), the construct ‘selfcontrol’ is the ability to be in control of your behaviour and restrain or inhibit your impulses. Self-control is characterized by the ability to exercise one’s power to control

52

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation

actions, impulses, emotions, or desires at the appropriate time. Duckworth et al. (2019), with reference to self-control and students’ academic achievement, define self-control as ‘the self-initiated regulation of thoughts, feelings, and actions when enduringly valued goals conflict with momentarily more gratifying goals’ (p. 373). Overall, self-control is one’s acquired skill and ability to regulate emotions, thoughts, and behavior in the face of impulses, distractions and temptations. In theory, selfcontrol is a ‘good’ and necessary skill. Individuals with greater self-control are able to resist short-term rewards in favour of long-term goals. In examining the nexus between self-control and academic achievement Duckworth et al. (2019), analyse the relevance of the personality research and cognitive neuroscience research concerning the self-concept. Accordingly, Duckworth et al. (2019), argue that in the personality literature, self-control is also a ‘facet of Big Five Conscientiousness—a broad collection of personality traits that encompasses the facets of orderliness, dependability, grit, and the tendency to comply with social norms’ and that the link between ‘self-control and Big Five Conscientiousness is particularly salient in the context of schoolwork’ (p. 376). In the cognitive neuroscience research, on the other hand, the term ‘executive function is sometimes used interchangeably with self-control’: The conceptual overlap between executive function and self-control is plain: Core executive functions include top-down inhibitory control, working memory, and the cognitive flexibility to switch perspectives when demands require doing so. Thus, while the basic mental processes that compose executive function no doubt lay the foundation for self-controlled behavior, it seems that doing what we know is in our long-term best interests despite momentary temptations also depends on learned strategies and habits that are not well assessed by executive function tasks. (Duckworth et al., 2019, p. 376)

As indicated above, student’s self-control is dependent, to a large degree, on acquired abilities to regulate thoughts, feelings, emotions, learning strategies and behavioural habits. Duckworth et al. (2019), also point out two other characteristics that distinguish self-control from related concepts, namely that self-control is ‘necessarily self-initiated’ and that self-control is only relevant to ‘choices in which one option is recognizably more valuable in the long run than the other’: Two features distinguish self-control from related concepts. First, self-control is necessarily self-initiated. Thus, if a student puts away their cell phone to concentrate on math, they are exercising self-control. In contrast, if their teacher takes away the phone, then the student is merely complying with authority (Eisenberg et al., 2014). Although the self in self-control is essential, this does not mean that exercising self-control is always conscious...self-control can take the form of habits, rules, and plans that were consciously self-initiated in the past but that, in the moment, take the form of automatic responses occasioned by situational cues. Second, self-control is only relevant to choices in which one option is recognizably more valuable in the long run than the other but in which, nevertheless, the less valuable option is momentarily more attractive (p. 376)

In analysing the concept of self-control, Hauser (2019) suggests that self-control ‘always involves conflict experienced and managed by the individual between shortand long-term goals’ (Hauser, 2019). This example was also provided by Snowman

The Role of Self-Control, Self-Regulation and Self-Efficacy in Motivation

53

et al. (2009), by stating that some students instead of taking immediate, but small reward, will ‘wait longer for a larger reward’ (p. 306). The concept of self-control is also related to self-efficacy. Self-efficacy denotes how capable we believe we are for completing a particular task successfully. Bandura (1986) defined self-efficacy as: ‘People’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances’. This belief was influenced by ‘past performance, verbal persuasion, emotions and observing models’ (Snowman et al., 2009, p. 307). Bandura (1977b) also believed that self-efficacy affects an individual’s choice of activities, effort, and persistence. As Artino (2012) explained ‘People who have low self-efficacy for accomplishing a specific task may avoid it, while those who believe they are capable are more likely to participate’. Self-efficacy theory postulates that people acquire information to evaluate their efficacy beliefs from four primary sources: ‘(a) enactive mastery experiences (actual performances); (b) observation of others (vicarious experiences); (c) forms of persuasion, both verbal and otherwise; and (d) ‘physiological and affective states from which people partly judge their capableness, strength, and vulnerability to dysfunction’ (Artino, 2012, p. 78). The concept of self-efficacy is one of the key ideas in Bandura’s (1982) theoretical framework. Bandura believed that individual choices, effort, and feelings concerning those choices are affected by individuals’ beliefs about their own abilities to perform certain behaviours, in order to achieve desired outcomes. Bandura was one the first researchers of social learning theory to make this connection between self-efficacy, behaviour, and academic achievement, in his social learning theory, which added to previous research on social modelling. According to Bandura (1982), self-efficacy beliefs predicted three educational outcomes, namely selection of activities, effort and persistence and quality of thinking and feeling. There exists a nexus between self-efficacy and self-regulation, as self-efficacy beliefs influence individuals’ use of self-regulated skills. Bandura (1977a) argued that self-efficacy is more powerful than behaviorism, which focused on reinforcement strategies, and behavior modification, based on the use of rewards or punishment. Students with high self-efficacy are more likely to use self-regulating skills. Students with low self-efficacy avoid challenging tasks, depend on others and reduce chances for developing self-regulation and self-efficacy, leading to self-fulfilling prophecy.

Factors Affecting Self-Efficacy Self-efficacy, as demonstrated by Fig. 4.2, shows that it can be affected by a number of factors, which in turn affect self-regulated behaviours (Snowman et al. 2009, p. 307). The Fig. 4.2 illustrates the nexus between antecedents and effects in learning. Factors influencing the individual’s concept of self-efficacy are defined as ‘antecedents’, and illustrated in Fig. 4.2. They include at least four major factors affecting self-efficacy:

54

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation

Fig. 4.2 Antecedents and effects of self-efficacy (Source Snowman et al., 2009, p. 308)

1. 2. 3. 4.

Performance accomplishments. Verbal persuasion. Emotional arousal. Vicarious experience.

Performance accomplishments, or enactive mastery experience, cover learners’ prior knowledge and experiences gained from performing tasks successfully: A sense of success and mastery provides us with an ‘I can do it’ attitude towards future tasks. Failing a task undermines this…belief and does not build self-efficacy. (Duchesne et al., 2022)

Verbal persuasion, as source of influence, mentioned by Bandura (1977a), refers to a positive impact that our words can have on someone’s self-efficacy. According to Bandura (1997), individuals form self-efficacy beliefs by interpreting information regarding their own capabilities. This cognitive and social information derives from four sources: mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and physiological and affective states. Emotional arousal, as noted by Bandura (1997), describes emotions that we feel when engaging in performing a task. Emotional arousal is influenced by the individual’s self-concept, self-esteem and self-efficacy, or the belief in being able to complete the task successfully. Individuals with high levels of self-efficacy result

The Role of Self-Control, Self-Regulation and Self-Efficacy in Motivation

55

in high need achievement. They feel confident, and eager to learn and perform. Individuals with low self-efficacy are likely to experience anxiety and stress. Vicarious experience, according to Bandura (1997) describes another aspect of self-efficacy, characterized by observing the ‘successes and failures of individual with whom we identity (Snowman et al., 2009, p. 308). In other words, by observing others closely, and how they deal with a problem, and watching them succeed reflects the context of vicarious experience. Types of cognitive and social behaviours affecting self-efficacy refer to selection processes, cognitive processes, motivational processes and affective processes. These are listed in Fig. 4.2, under effects. Selection processes describes the way an individual selects activities and achievement goals. Individuals with high self-efficacy and high need achievement will be engaged designated learning experiences in the classroom, and focus on high academic performance and achievement goals. Individual with low levels of self-efficacy are likely to be less confident in completing learning tasks successfully and will select modest goals, typical of low need achievers. Cognitive processes describes the way an individual performs in certain activities, by using advance cognitive skills and ‘higher level thought process’, such as metacognition, generic learning, rather than surface, or rote learning, self-regulated strategies, and social and emotional learning (SEL). Such individuals, influenced by their positive sense of self-concept and self-esteem, are likely to feel confident and successful in solving challenging learning tasks in the classroom. Motivational processes, influenced by the individual’s sense of the self, selfconcept, self-esteem and self-efficacy will result in either greater engagement or performance or low engagement. Individual with a positive sense of the sense are likely to select challenging activities in the classroom, will put more effort and will work ‘harder and longer to achieve a goal’ (Snowman et al., 2009, p. 310).

Affective Processes Affective processes—when faced with a challenge, high self-efficacy individuals experience excitement, curiosity; low self-efficacy individuals likely to feel anxiety, depression. Furthermore, social cognitive theory suggests that individual’s behaviour and actions reflect their values (Bandura, 1986b). In social cognitive theory, key internal motivational processes include goals and self-evaluations of progress, selfefficacy, social comparisons, values, outcome expectations, attributions, and selfregulation.

56

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation

Student’s Achievement Goals Individual’s leaning and performance goal are part on motivation. Meaningful and relevant learner’s goals, which include ‘specific performance standards are more likely to activate self-evaluations of progress and enhance motivational outcomes than are general goals’ (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020). On the other hand, learner’s short-term goals enhance outcomes better than do distant, long-term goals: Learners are more motivated to strive for goals that they perceive are difficult but attainable than goals they believe are too easy or difficult. Underlying these properties is the learner’s commitment to attempt the goal. Especially for difficult goals, a low sense of commitment can negatively affect motivational outcomes. (Zimmerman, 2015)

Individual’s thinking, as part of cognitive processes, is associated with selfevaluation, in terms of perceived progress, self-efficacy, and goal pursuit. This is ‘critical for motivation and learning’ (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020).

Student’s Self-Evaluation Student’s self-evaluation is the ability to use cognitive processes, such as selfregulation, and metacognition, to examine academic performance, in order to increase performance further and achieve desired performance goals. Brown & Harris (2013) defined self-assessment in the classroom, as a ‘descriptive and evaluative act carried out by the student concerning his or her own work and academic abilities’ (Brown & Harris, 2013, p. 368). Andrade (2019), in her ‘Critical review of research on student self-assessment’ examined 76 studies of student self-assessment, and concluded that there exists a connection between self-assessment and self-regulated learning. In addition, Andrade (2019) stated that student’s self-assessment is a need for internal feedback, and the purpose is improvement in learning and performance: ...the purpose of feedback is to inform adjustments to processes and products that deepen learning and enhance performance; hence the purpose of self-assessment is to generate feedback that promotes learning and improvements in performance. This learning-oriented purpose of self-assessment implies that it should be formative. (Andrade, 2019)

Student’s self-evaluation is associated with such internal cognitive process as selfregulation, and the reliance on the need for relevant feedback, regarding the progress of performance in the classroom, and school’s defined and stated performance goals.

Social Comparisons in the Classroom Social comparison forms a key concept of Bandura’s social learning theory, based on the notion of students imitating the behaviour and academic performance of ‘significant others’. Festinger (1957) advanced his theory of social comparisons, suggesting

The Role of Self-Control, Self-Regulation and Self-Efficacy in Motivation

57

that individuals tend to evaluate themselves, in order to construct a more acceptable ‘appraisals of themselves’ (cited in Dijkstra et al., 2008, p. 828). Social comparison in the classroom can be defined as ‘a student taking one or more classmates as comparison target in order to conduct an assessment of his/her own competence’ (Bouffard et al., 2014). Student’s social comparison in the classroom reflects essentially self-concept, especially academic and social self-concepts, with reference to performance, and achievement goals.

Student’s Outcome Expectations Student’s outcome expectations is based on the belief that given effort, the use of cognitive skills, such self-regulation, and action, required to complete designated learning activities in the classroom, will result in higher academic achievement and a positive outcome. Student’s outcome expectations are also affected by their sense of self-efficacy. They need to believe that they can complete their classroom work successfully, provided their outcomes expectations are based on their knowledge of the topic, skills, and the use of a relevant learning strategy. Student’s outcome expectations reflects the belief, effort and commitment to engage and complete set classroom activities, in order to be successful, in gaining a very good result. Luo et al. (2021), analysed self-efficacy and outcome expectations, with reference to STEM stereotypes, and concluded that student’ stereotypes has the ‘potential indirect effect’ on outcome expectations (Luo et al., 2021). Student’s outcome expectations are also influenced by teachers’ expectations (see Zajda, 2022a). Rubie-Davis et al. (2020) using socio-psychological outcomes, together with academic outcomes, reported on the nexus between teacher expectations for students with high or low expectation of achievement, and students’ achievement and outcome beliefs. Their structural equation modelling demonstrated that in reading achievement of 692 students, teacher expectations predicted students’ outcome expectations.

Student’s Attribution Student’s attribution is based on the notion of interpreting events affecting thinking and behaviour, and how it influences feelings of success or failure, and emotions. Attribution can be influenced by both internal and external factors. Internal factors refer to cognitive factors, such as metacognition, self-esteem, self-efficacy and selfregulation. By using self-regulation strategies resulting in motivation and effort, the student may be rewarded with excellent result in performance. External factors include environmental factors, such as luck, and behaviour and performance can be attributed to it. Attribution theory was developed by Heider (1958), and subsequently Weiner (1986) constructed a major theoretical framework of attribution. Weiner (1980) in

58

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation

motivational theory identified such variables as ability, effort, task, difficulty, and luck, as being the most important factors affecting attributions for achievement. Weiner focused his attribution theory on three things: achievement, motivation and emotions (Weiner, 1986). He identified ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck, as being the most important factors affecting attributions for achievement. Weiner (1980) argued that individual’s attributions influence and define attitudes towards ‘success and failure’: Causal attributions determine affective reactions to success and failure. For example, one is not likely to experience pride in success, or feelings of competence, when receiving an ‘A’ from a teacher who gives only that grade, or when defeating a tennis player who always loses…On the other hand, an ‘A’ from a teacher who gives few high grades or a victory over a highly rated tennis player following a great deal of practice generates great positive affect. (Weiner, 1980, p. 362)

It has been suggested that student’s attribution can be explained as a three-stage process: . behaviour is observed . behaviour is determined to be deliberate, and . behaviour is attributed to internal or external causes (Culatta, 2023). Culatta (2023) also stated that achievement can be attributed to four factors: . . . .

effort ability level of task difficulty, or luck.

Research findings confirm that attribution theory has been used widely to explain the difference in motivation and academic achievement between high and low achievers (Culatta, 2023; Weiner, 1980; Weiner, 1986; Zajda, 2022a). Consequently, students who think positively, who have a positive image of themselves, with higher levels of self-esteem, and as high-need achievers (HINAs) ‘tend to attribute success to internal, stable, uncontrollable factors such as ability’ (Culatta, 2023). Similarly, students with lower levels of self-esteem and, as low-need achievers (LONAs), will explain lack of success, or failure as: ...either internal, unstable, controllable factors such as effort, or external, uncontrollable factors such as task difficulty. For example, students who experience repeated failures in reading are likely to see themselves as being less competent in reading. (Culatta, 2023)

Both students with high levels of self-esteem, or low levels of self-esteem will behave and perform following the pattern in attribution theory, in performing successfully or underperforming, resulting, in some cases, in the self-fulfilling prophecy at work (Zajda, 2022a).

The Role of Self-Control, Self-Regulation and Self-Efficacy in Motivation

59

Student’s Self-Regulation Student’s self-regulation can be defined as a learning process, involving the ‘knowledge and awareness of one’s own ability to learn’, where ‘one manages their emotions, behaviours, and attitudes, to reach an ideal level of stimulation where they are best able to learn’ (Etkin, 2018, p. 35). Self-regulation, or self-regulated learning, refers to learning that ‘results from students’ self-generated thoughts and behaviours that are systematically oriented toward the attainment of their learning goals’ (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2003; see also Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011). In their analysis of self-regulated learning, Schunk and Zimmerman (2003) discuss five theoretical perspectives on self-regulation: operant theory, information processing theory, developmental theory, social constructivist theory, and social cognitive theory (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2003, p. 59). The operant theory perspective, derived from behavioural theory, concerns selecting relevant behaviour, by means of positive reinforcement, in order to achieve desired standards of performance. Information processing theories view learning as one of receiving, processing and the encoding of information in long-term memory (LTM), and where self regulation is equivalent to ‘metacognitive awareness’: Self-regulated learning requires learners to have knowledge about task demands, personal qualities, and strategies for completing the task. Metacognitive awareness also includes procedural knowledge or productions that regulate learning of the material by monitoring one’s level of learning, deciding when to take a different task approach, and assessing readiness for a test. Self-regulatory (metacognitive) activities are types of control processes under the learner’s direction. They facilitate processing and movement of information through the system. (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2003)

Developmental theorists perceived self-regulation in terms of ‘progressive cognitive changes in learners that allow them to exert greater control over their thoughts, feelings, and actions’ (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994), and involving such actions as ‘beginning and ending actions, altering the frequency and intensity of verbal and motor acts, delaying action on a goal, and acting in socially approved ways’ (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994). Social constructivist theory of self-regulation is also derived from theories of cognitive development, based on Piaget (1977) and Vygotsky (1978). Vygotsky, in his sociolcultural theory, developed in his books Thought and language (1973), and Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (1978), suggested the existence of the interaction between human development, the mind, thinking, environment and language acquisition. He believed that this was a socially mediated process, and, as a result, individuals acquired their specific patterns of thinking, language, beliefs, values and behaviour. Finally, in the social cognitive theoretical framework, self-regulation is perceived to be ‘situationally specific—that is, learners are not expected to engage in selfregulation equally in all domains’ (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2003), as explained below:

60

4 Social Cognitive Theories for Improving Engagement and Motivation This situational specificity is captured in Zimmerman’s (1994, 1998) conceptual framework comprising six areas in which one can use self-regulatory processes: motives, methods, time, outcomes, physical environment, and social environment. Self-regulation is possible to the extent that learners have some choice in one or more of these areas. When all aspects of a task are predetermined, students may learn, but the source of control is external (i.e., teachers, parents, computers). (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2003)

Teaching self-regulated learning and relevant self-regulated learning strategies offers students far more control over their learning in achieving their performance goals.

Evaluation of Bandura’s Social Learning Theory In Bandura’s (1986b), social cognitive theory, individual’s behaviour and performance is strongly influenced by self-efficacy, goals, outcome expectations, and social factors. Social cognitive researchers (Bandura, 1986b; Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020; Shunk & Zimmerman, 2003) emphasised two major factors that strongly influence individuals’ engagement and motivation to learn, namely ‘the models to which people are exposed’ and individuals’ sense of self-efficacy, or how capable they believe they are to handle a particular task’ (see Snowman, 2009). The strengths of social cognitive theory lie in the fact that unlike behaviourist theories, which focused only on observable behaviour, it accepted a variety of cognitive and social factors affecting individual’s learning and motivation. These included, both internal (cognitive and personal) and external (environmental influences). Above all, social learning theory recognized the ‘learner’s active contribution to behaviour change’ (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 260). Individuals, using cognitive processes of the brain have a power to control their own behaviour, engagement, leaning and performance. This idea had a ‘major influence on the study of motivation… the capacity of the human being for self-regulation of behaviour’ (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 260). Research, dealing with motivation and learning in the classroom, began to focus more on students’ use of self-efficacy and self-regulatory mechanisms in engagement, motivation, and performance goals. Schunk and DiBenedetto (2020) examined motivation from the perspective of Bandura’s (1986b) social cognitive theory, with reference to internal motivational processes, such as goals and self-evaluations of progress, self-efficacy, social comparisons, values, outcome expectations, attributions, and self-regulation. They suggested that critical issues confronting Bandura’s (1977a) social learning theories included ‘diversity and culture, methodology, and long-term effects of interventions’ (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020). While social cognitive theory stressed the significance of individuals’ learning from their social environment, one of its major shortcomings is not addressing individual differences and cultural diversity. Individuals, due to different stages of cognitive, emotional, and social, are likely to respond differently to modelling their

Conclusion

61

behaviour on perceived socially and academically desirable role models, or ‘significant others’. In addition, cultural diversity and cultural identities also affect students’ attitudes, knowledge, skills and behaviour in imitating desirable role models. Another limitation of Bandura’s (1986) theory is that not all social learning can be directly observed and recorded. The same limitation also applies to behavioural theories of learning. Some researchers have questioned the reliability of vicarious learning, with reference to individual and cultural differences (Bender et al., 2017; Duchesne et al., 2022: Zajda, 2023a). The global impact of ICTs on identities in particular, needs to be taken into account, especially the amount of violence, and negative stereotypes portrayed in the media. It produces fear, mistrust, bias, prejudice, discrimination, conflict and paranoia. The evolution of multiple cyber identities, tend to challenge Bandura’s notion of culturally-specific and singular identity. The emergence of cyber-bullying in the ubiquitous culture of ICT, is another example of violence, prejudice, and hate perpetuated by some individuals against others.

Conclusion Motivation has always been a major part of social cognitive theory. From a social cognitive theory perspective, motivation is completely dependent on the individual’s image and sense of the self, affecting the nature of self-concept, self-esteem, and selfefficacy. As demonstrated above, the strengths of Bandura’s (1977a) social learning theory is in developing the model, which combined behavioural, personal and environmental influences, as the three necessarily interacting dimensions of cognitive and social learning, unlike behavioural theories of learning, which focused on observable behaviour only. What makes Bandura’s (1977a) social learning theory so different from behavioural approaches to learning is, that he added personal and environmental characteristics to his model, and stressing that individuals’ behaviour was learned by observing others, through modelling. This idea, together with self-efficacy and self-regulation, as demonstrated above, was relevant to individuals’ engagement and motivation. Self-esteem, and self-efficacy play a significant role in social learning theory, which later evolved from observational learning into social cognitive theory. Even though Bandura’s social learning theory did not address cultural diversity, and individual differences, it still remains a popular model in all spheres of life, including the business sector.

Chapter 5

Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

Constructivism in Learning The History of Constructivism The idea of constructivism has its roots in the ancient world, beginning with Confucius (551–479 B.C.), Plato, Aristotle (384–322 B.C.), Socrates (dialogues with his followers, in which he asked his students questions that led his students to realize for themselves the weaknesses in their thinking), and Epicurus (who introduced a version of the Golden Rule) and many other great thinkers. The Socratic dialogue continues to be a powerful tool used in analysis and critical thinking, and is employed by teachers in constructivist pedagogy, and elsewhere to assess and evaluate students’ learning and plan new learning experiences. There exists a consensus among researchers studying constructivism that constructivism, as theory in educational psychology originated from the work of a Swiss developmental psychologist Jean Piaget (1936, 1977). According to Piaget, children perceive and construct an understanding of the world around them, in their own and unique way. For Piaget, knowledge arises from the individual’s activity, either cognitive or psychomotor. As a result, Piaget argued that ‘All knowledge is tied to action, and knowing an object or event is to use it by assimilating it to an action scheme’ (Piaget, 1967, pp. 14–15). The idea of a mental scheme, and the associated terms of assimilation and accommodation, is central to Piaget’s modern constructivist theory of knowledge. Schemes are cognitive structures that an individual uses to organize and categorize knowledge, objects and events to interpret the phenomena in the world. Adding to the work of Piaget, von Glasersfeld (1995) suggested that there were two key principles that establish the purpose of constructivism. Firstly, that knowledge is not passively received, but rather that it is built up by the cognizing subject, and secondly, that the function of cognition is adaptive and serves the organisation of the experiential world rather than the discovery of an ontological reality. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_5

63

64

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

The purpose of constructivism is, then, for the individual to construct her or his own meanings out of the elements of individual experience (see McLeod, 2019).

Constructivist Theory Constructivism as a view of learning, maintains that each person, using perception, and thinking, when examining new information, creates meaningful knowledge and interpretations of the world. In explaining constructivists’ theory Arends (1998) asserted like other researchers that constructivist theory of learning refers to individual’s cognitive construction of meaning through experience. Constructivism is a ‘theory of learning or meaning making’ (Richardson, 2003). This meaning making process takes place during an interaction between what individuals already know and new knowledge. Shor (1992), defined constructivism as a way of building knowledge about self, school, everyday experience, and society through reflection and meaning making (Shor, 1992). The three principles of constructivist learning are: . Learners are active participants in their learning, and learning by doing, or experiential learning is central to constructivist leaning in practice (Howe & Berv, 2000). . Learners are self-regulated and they construct and monitor their learning, where meta-cognition plays an important role in meaningful learning. . Social interactions is essential for meaningful learning. Thompson (2000) argued that constructivism is not a theory of learning but a model of knowing and constructivism can be used to build a theory of learning. Richardson (2003), however, argued that the view of constructivism as a learning theory has ‘guided most of the developments of constructivist pedagogy’ (Richardson, 2003, p. 1624). In constructivist learning, students, when confronted with new learning tasks, are actively engaged in the meaning-making process, by deciphering and constructing their own interpretation and knowledge of the world. The concept of meaning making was initially developed and explained by Postman and Weingartner (1969) as a dynamic and dialogical process, where the focus is on the individuality and the uniqueness of the meaning maker (p. 94). Constructivism focuses on the learner’s constructing meaning from input, by processing it through cognitive structures. Implicit in constructivist views of learning is the idea that effective learners actively monitor their learning and the meaningmaking process, where metacognitive, and self-regulation skills and reflection play an important role. Constructivists view learning as dependent on the degree to which learners can activate existing cognitive structures and construct new ones. Constructivist pedagogy of learning and teaching emphasizes that there are perceptual and cognitive differences in the way people perceive things and how they form ideas related to the linguistic, visual, logical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, environmental

Constructivist Approaches: Two Major Strands of the Constructivist …

65

and existentialist factors (see also Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligence, 1993, 1999).

Constructivist Approaches: Two Major Strands of the Constructivist Perspective Cognitive constructivism (or psychological constructivism) draws on earlier research of Piaget (1977), Kelly (1991) and others. This approach is informed by developmental or learning theories (cognitive), which suggest that learners actively construct the meaning around concepts they encounter. By contrast, social constructivism draws on Vygotsky (1936), Bruner (1963), Bandura (1963, 1977), Kolb and Fry (1975), Hirtle (1996), Howe and Berv (2000), Kukla (2000) and many other researchers globally. The theory of Social-cultural constructivism was initially developed by Lev Vygotsky (1896–1934). Vygotsky’s main relevance to constructivism derives from his theories about language and thought, and social interaction. Social constructivism emphasizes the importance of culture and environment in contributing to language development, and knowledge construction. This perspective is closely associated with many contemporary theories; most notably the socio-cultural and developmental theories of Vygotsky, Bruner, and Bandura’s social cognitive theory. Social constructivism is based on specific assumptions about reality, knowledge, and learning. Social constructivist perspectives focus is on the ‘interdependence of social and individual processes in the co-construction of knowledge’ (Palinccsar, 1998). Vygotsky (1978) was one of the first researchers who examined the nature and the role of social processes, as a cognitive and social tool for learning: The social dimension of consciousness is primary in time and in fact. The individual dimension of consciousness is derivative and secondary. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 30)

Vygotsky believed that individuals are born with four elementary mental functions: attention, sensation, perception, and memory. According to Vygotsky’ theory, mental operations of the individual is ‘not simply derived from social interaction; rather, the specific structures and processes revealed by individuals can be traced to their interactions with others’ (Palinccsar, 1998, p. 351). Vygotsky believed that individual development, including higher mental functioning, had its origins in one’s environment, consisting of cultural and social dimensions. This idea was developed further in his ‘genetic law of development’, namely that any function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first between people as an inter-psychological category, and then within the child as an intra-psychological category: Every function in the cultural development of the child comes on the stage twice, in two respects: first in the social, later in the psychological, first in relations between people as

66

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation an inter-psychological category, afterwards within the child as an intra-psychological category...All higher psychological functions are internalized relationships of the social kind, and constitute the social structure of personality. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 80)

Vygotsky was critical of Piaget’s theory, which defined maturation is as a precondition of learning, but never the result of it. Instead, Vygotsky, with his focus on external environment, argued that learning is influenced by one’s environment: Learning awakens a variety of internal developmental processes that are able to operate only when the child is interacting with people in his environment and with his peers..[L]earning is not development; however, properly organized learning results in mental development and sets in motion a variety of developmental processes that would be impossible apart from learning. Thus learning is a necessary and universal aspect of the process of developing culturally organized, specifically human, psychological functions. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 90)

In support of this perspective, as suggested by Palinccsar (1998), Vygotsky (1978) introduced his construct of the zone of proximal development (ZPD), as a ‘fundamentally new approach to the problem that learning should be matched in some manner with the child’s level of development’ (Palinccsar, 1998). Vygotsky believed that to understand the relationship between development and learning, there is a need to distinguish between two developmental levels: the actual and the potential levels of development. Martin and Sugarman (1999), offered a meaningful description of social constructivism, as an approach to both learning and teaching, based on engagement, social interaction and dialogue: We acquire, develop, convey, and confer upon others the symbolic cognitive tools through which we manage our psychological engagement with the world. (Martin & Sugarman, 1999, p. 8)

Judith Watson (2003) uses examples from classroom practice to demonstrate how, within a framework of social constructivism, small changes in teachers’ practice can promote effective teaching in pupils of all ages and levels of ability, across the curriculum. To understand and apply models of classroom pedagogy that reflect the social constructivism, there is a need to understand the assumptions concerning social constructivism, namely the nature of reality, knowledge, and learning: Reality: Social constructivists believe that reality is constructed through human activity. For the social constructivist, reality cannot be discovered: it does not exist prior to its social invention (Kukla, 2000). Knowledge: To social constructivists, knowledge is also a human product, and is socially and culturally constructed (Ernest, 1999; Gredler, 1997). Individuals create meaning through their interactions with each other and with the environment they live in. Learning: Social constructivists view learning as a social process. It does not take place only within an individual, nor is it a passive development of behaviours that are shaped by external forces (McMahon, 1997). Meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in social activities.

Constructivist Approaches: Two Major Strands of the Constructivist …

67

The major epistemological difference between social and cognitive perspective of constructivism is ‘one of focus’ as Richardson explained (2003). According to Richardson, social constructivism explains how one’s knowledge has been created within ‘power, economic, social and political forces’ (p. 1625). This reflects both culture and environmental factors affecting the nature of social constructivism. Cognitive or psychological constructivism states that knowledge is ‘actively constructed in the human mind’ (1625). Both perspectives suggest that knowledge is constructed internally in the mind. However, social constructivism stresses the external factors, or environmental influences, which follows Vygotsky’s theory of language acquisition and the meaning-making process. These two strands (or theories), cognitive constructivism and social constructivism, are different in emphasis, but they also share many common perspectives about teaching and learning. Before looking at the differences between cognitive and social constructivists, it might be worthwhile to look at what they have in common. Jonassen’s (1994) description of 8 pedagogical practices that differentiate constructivist learning from other learning environments is a succinct and practical summary of the constructivist perspective: 1. Constructivist learning environments provide multiple representations of reality. 2. Multiple representations avoid oversimplification and represent the complexity of the real world. 3. Constructivist learning environments emphasize knowledge construction instead of knowledge reproduction. 4. Constructivist learning environments emphasize authentic tasks in a meaningful context rather than abstract instruction out of context. 5. Constructivist learning environments provide learning environments, such as real-world settings or case-based learning instead of predetermined sequences of instruction. 6. Constructivist learning environments encourage thoughtful reflection on experience. 7. Constructivist learning environments ‘enable context- and content- dependent knowledge construction’. 8. Constructivist learning environments support ‘collaborative construction of knowledge through social negotiation, not competition among learners for recognition’. The above Jonassen’s summary of the constructivist perspective in the classroom defines both social and cognitive constructivist pedagogies. Most of these typify current approaches to classroom teaching globally. What then is the unique quality of constructivist pedagogy? To me the most significant tenant of constructivist pedagogy is the meaning making process in the classroom, which embraces both cultural diversity and multiple perspectives in learning and teaching. In research literature, the most frequently observed characteristic, defining constructivist learning, is learning by doing, ‘discovery learning’ or ‘experiential learning’, popularised by Bruner (1963) and Kolb (1975). Bruner believed that discovery learning helps students learn to relate ideas to each other and to existing knowledge, so that students are able to

68

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

independently solve problems in real situations. Similarly, David Kolb (1975) held that meaningful learning can only be prompted by experiential learning. He was also influenced by Dewey and Piaget. In the ancient Greece, it was Aristotle who said ‘For the things we have to learn before we can do them, we learn by doing them’ (Bynum & Porter, 2005). Furthermore, as Richardson (2003) explains, constructivist pedagogy is associated with the creation of classroom environments that are ‘grounded in a constructivist theory of learning, with goals that focus on individual students developing deep understandings…’ (Richardson, 2003, p. 1627). Richardson also presented five dimensions of constructivism: 1. Attention to the individual and respect for student’s background (informed by student-centred classroom pedagogy). 2. Facilitation of group dialogue, to create a consensus on understanding a key idea/ topic (focusing on cooperative learning). 3. Introducing knowledge via text, readings, activities and ICT. 4. Opportunities for students to engage in constructing their own new knowledge, based on activities. 5. Developing student’s meta-awareness of their own understanding (Richardson, 2003, p. 1626). In addition, constructivist pedagogy is also characterised by cooperative groups and collaborative groups leaning, reflection, metacognition, teacher-initiated teaching of knowledge, skills, thinking, and the use of multi-modal models in learning, together with multidimensional view of knowledge (or multiple representations of reality), instead of passive and uncritical knowledge reproduction. To apply meaningfully pedagogical models that are grounded in the philosophy of social constructivists, it is important to know the premises the three assumptions that inform them. First, social constructivists believe that reality is constructed through human activity (Kukla, 2000). For social constructivists, reality cannot be discovered: it does not exist prior to its social invention. Second, to social constructivists, knowledge is also a human product, and is socially and culturally constructed (Ernest, 1999). Individuals create meaning through their interactions with each other and with the environment they live in. This is reminiscent of Vygotsky’s ideas on social constructivism. Third, social constructivists view learning as a social process. It does not take place only within an individual, nor is it a passive development of behaviours that are shaped by external forces. Meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged with others in social activities.

The Use of Social Constructivism in Collaborative Groups According to social constructivist theory effective and successful teaching and learning is largely dependent on interpersonal interaction and discussion, with the primary focus on the students’ understanding of the discussion. The social context is

The Use of Social Constructivism in Collaborative Groups

69

the key to understanding of constructivist learning and teaching, particularly when the focus is on ‘ideas and not skills or strategies’ (Prawat, 1992). I have argued in my recent books on the importance of social constructivism, involving small collaborative groups, in order of increasing engaging motivational atmosphere, enhancing inclusive schooling, and improving academic achievement (Zajda, 2021b, 2023a, 2023b).

Collaborative and Cooperative Group Learning Collaborative and cooperative learning is a broad term that encompasses a variety of highly structured, yet flexible instructional strategies, management techniques, and assessment strategies that simultaneously build and enhance engagement, social and academic skills (Brady, 2006; Zajda, 2018). The notion of cooperative work is broadly defined as two or more people working together for the mutual benefit of all in ways that maximize everyone’s learning (Dillenbourg, 1999). It is different from individualistic learning and competitive learning. It demonstrates the shared benefits for both students and teachers. It refers to working towards shared goals and shared successes; and it is assessed on the whole group effort and group performances of particular tasks (Johnson & Johnson, 2008). While the use of cooperative and collaborative group work in educational settings is neither original nor unique to any particular education system, contemporary education has been significantly influenced by the study of group dynamics, behaviours and practices of various education theorists (Brady, 2006; Johnson & Johnson, 2008; Zajda, 2023). In general, collaborative groups and cooperative learning refer to a variety of structured classroom management techniques and grading systems developed and studied by many educational researchers, including Johnson and Johnson (2008), Kagan (1990), Slavin (1990, 1995), and others. Spencer Kagan (1990), for instance, in an article in Educational Leadership, provided an informative definition of cooperative learning, by looking at general structures, which can be applied in classroom pedagogy. His definition offered a global umbrella for the cooperative learning researchers. According to Kagan (1990), cooperative learning refers to: The structural approach to cooperative learning is based on the creation, analysis and systematic application of structures, or content-free ways of organizing social interaction in the classroom. Structures usually involve a series of steps, with proscribed behavior at each step. An important cornerstone of the approach is the distinction between ‘structures’ and ‘activities’. (Kagan, 1990)

Similarly, Nelson-LeGall (1992) captured the nature of the engagement process in cooperative learning, when she stated: Learning and understanding are not merely individual processes supported by the social context; rather they are the result of a continuous, dynamic negotiation between the individual and the social setting in which the individual’s activity takes place. Both the individual and the social context are active and constructive in producing learning and understanding. (Nelson-LeGall, 1992, p. 52)

70

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

There are literally hundreds of cooperative structures and numerous books available to help teachers to incorporate cooperative learning into their classrooms. The most common collaborative groups are think-pair-share, think-pair-square, and jigsaw collaborative groups, listed below:

Think-Pair-Share Think-pair-share cooperative group model, for groups of two students, was first developed by Lyman (1981). This collaborative discussion strategy was designed to ‘provide students with time to think and formulate their individual thoughts and ideas about a given topic or concept before forming a pair with a peer to share their thinking’ (S2 TEM Centers SC, 2012). Students think about ‘each question, pair off and discuss the question with a classmate, and share their answers with the class’ (https://srri.umass.edu/topics/collaborative-group-). Students reflect, then pair and share/discuss the question: Students individually THINK for a few moments about the prompt or question or observation the teacher provides to engage them. Students form a PAIR with another student to talk and compare their response to the prompt. They come to a consensus about a collective response to the prompt. Student pairs SHARE their thinking with the rest of the class as the teacher randomly calls on them or asks for volunteers to share. (S2 TEM Centers SC, 2012)

Think-Pair-Square Think-pair-square cooperative group is similar to think-pair-share, but it involves groups of four students. Students are presented with a learning activity in the classroom. They can be directed and to think for few minutes before sharing their ideas. One organised in a pair, a student shares with the person next to them. The pair of students is asked to think of the ‘best’ answer to the question. Students first discuss problem-solving strategies in pairs and then in groups of fours. Example 1 Discuss the meaning of ‘To be or not to be, that is the question’ Think: ‘To be or not to be, that is the question’. A student thinks for 30 s about this idea… Pair: The student then compares the idea with a partner next in the group. Square: Students in pairs join another pair and discuss the question. Share: What does it mean (group/class discussion) . The think-pair-share cooperative learning strategy is used to begin discussion, and then move on to groups of four, using the think-pair-square method etc. . In class, the think-pair-share and think-pair-square techniques are used to discuss and identify the strategies that each pair (and then each think-pairsquare cooperative group square) has in common.

Jigsaw in 10 Easy Steps

71

Jigsaw Collaborative Groups Jigsaw is a collaborative or cooperative grouping strategy, involving 4–5 students, who focus on an activity, such as new approaches to education for sustainability (EfS) and develop new ideas. Jigsaw activities make it possible for students to specialize in one area and construct their new knowledge and skills to solve the problem. Cognitive, social, and emotional benefits include: . Enhancing one’s aptitude by being involved in problem-solving tasks. . Increasing one’s analytical thinking, through the use of critical thinking and critical literacy. . Enhances social skill, by working with the group members. . Activates and the use of both sides of the brain. ‘The left side of the brain is used more for logical and analytical thinking and problem solving. The right side of the brain is more creative, visual, and emotional. It is used more when listening to music, recognizing people’s faces, and in our spatial awareness’ (see https:// www.chicagoacademic.com/bid/223417/Teaching). . Enhances one’ memory, both STM (short-term memory) and LTM (long-term memory). . Improves one’s analytical and problem solving skills.

Jigsaw in 10 Easy Steps The jigsaw classroom is very simple to use, following the steps below, as a guide: . ‘Divide students into 4- or 5-person jigsaw groups. The groups should be diverse in terms of gender, ethnicity, race, and ability. . Appoint one student from each group as the leader. Initially, this person should be the most mature student in the group. . Divide the class lesson into 5 or 6 segments. . Assign each student to learn one segment. . Give students time to read over their segment at least twice and become familiar with it. . Form temporary ‘expert groups’ by having one student from each jigsaw group join other students assigned to the same segment. Give students in these expert groups time to discuss the main points of their segment and to rehearse the presentations they will make to their jigsaw group. . Bring the students back into their jigsaw groups. . Ask each student to present her or his segment to the group. Encourage others in the group to ask questions for clarification. . Float from group to group, observing the process. If any group is having trouble (e.g., a member is dominating or disruptive), make an appropriate intervention. Eventually, it’s best for the group leader to handle this task. Leaders can be trained

72

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

by whispering an instruction on how to intervene, until the leader gets the hang of it. . At the end of the session, give a quiz on the material so that students quickly come to realize that these sessions are not just fun and games but really count’. (https:// www.jigsaw.org) Research findings have demonstrated that in well structured cooperative groups, students consistently learn many different subjects and topics better than students in traditionally structured classrooms (Amin, 2020; Hattie, 2009; Mendo-Lázaro et al., 2022; Slavin, 1990; van Wyk, 2012). Cooperative learning also has a number of significant cognitive, affective and ‘psychological and social advantages, such as being exposed to other points-of-view, learning how to cooperate’, learning how to develop more positive feelings about school, developing ‘more positive feelings about themselves and others, and wanting their classmates to do well’ (Retrieved from https://srri.umass.edu/topics/collabora tive-group).

Social Constructivism and Improving Academic Achievement Based on prolific research findings dealing with the nexus between constructivist pedagogy, quality teaching, and improvement in academic performance, I would like to suggest that effective learning environments need to offer continuous active engagement in the classroom globally. Compared with traditional methods of teaching, constructivist approach to learning and teaching has become increasingly popular and preferred pedagogy. One of the most obvious reasons for its popularity is that it offers to students much more social and cognitive interaction and engagement in collaborative groups. Constructivist pedagogy, based on psychological and social constructivism can become one of the effective classroom strategies for improving academic achievement (Adak, 2017; Alt, 2017; Akpan et al. 2020; Ayaz & Sekerci, ¸ 2015; Gupta & Tyagi, 2017; Kim, 2005; OECD, 2009; Puacharearn, 2004; Richardson, 2003; Sharma & Sharma, 2012; Zajda, 2023). There exists a causal relationship between constructivist pedagogy and students’ academic achievement. In one particular comparative and cross-cultural metaanalysis, Ayaz & Sekerci ¸ (2015) examined some 53 studies on the effects of constructivist pedagogy on students’ academic achievement and concluded that ‘the constructivist learning approach, compared to traditional teaching methods, has positive effects on the student’s academic achievement’ (Ayaz & Sekerci, ¸ 2015, p. 151). Elbaz (2015) discovered a positive correlation between constructivist approach and students’ academic achievement. Ahme Qarareh (2016) demonstrated that use of

Improving Constructivist Pedagogy: Learning and Teaching

73

constructivist strategies in the classroom had a positive impact on students’ academic achievement. Similarly, Adak (2017) demonstrated that the students exposed to the constructivist pedagogy ‘performed significantly higher than those exposed to the traditional teaching method in respect of their gained scores at every intelligence levels’, and that the constructivist approach strategy is capable of improving ‘student’s mastery of content at the higher order levels of cognition’ (Adak, 2017, p. 1074). Sunal and Haas (2017) showed that constructivist strategies of learning improved students’ academic achievement. Ardiansyah and Ujihanti (2018) also noted that the use of social constructivist pedagogy ‘significantly improved’ students’ ‘reading comprehension achievement and vocabulary mastery in the high and low classes’ (p. 463). According to Shah (2019), constructivism is not only popular, but promoted ‘significant success’ in students’ academic achievement: Constructivism has been a very powerful model for explaining how knowledge is produced in the world as well as how students learn. Moreover, constructivist teaching practices are becoming more prevalent in teacher education programs, while demonstrating significant success in promoting student learning. (Shah, 2019)

Akpan et al. (2020), in their study of social constructivism and learning, involving 154 secondary school students, concluded that their findings provided evidence of the effectiveness of the social constructivist instructional strategy in improving performance in algebra better than the conventional teaching method. Cano-García and Rojas-Cazaluade (2022) suggested, based on their research findings, that ‘Cooperative learning has positive effects on student motivation, participation, and performance’ (Cano-García & Rojas-Cazaluade, 2022). Earlier, Slavin (1980) concluded that cooperative learning produces ‘significantly better’ academic achievement, and that ‘cooperative learning techniques can achieve both cognitive and affective goals’ (pp. 337–338). In addition, constructivist pedagogy in the classroom facilitates a good deal of students’ interest, engagement and motivation (Hunter, 2015; Shah, 2019; Zajda, 2023; Zaphir, 2019). Constructivist pedagogy by its focus on critical thinking and problem-solving activities during group work, promotes students’ cognitive, social and emotional aspects of learning, as well as metacognition, critical literacy, and self-regulated learning strategies.

Improving Constructivist Pedagogy: Learning and Teaching To perceive constructivist learning and pedagogy critically, it is useful to contrast the two dominant approaches to classroom teaching: traditional teaching and constructivist teaching (see Table 5.1).

74

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

Table 5.1 Differences between traditional and constructivist classrooms Traditional classroom

Constructivist classroom

1.Teacher-dominated didactic learning

1. Teachers engaged in an interactive manner

2. Students learn new textbook material by rote

2. Students engaged in meaning-making activities

3. Prescribed curriculum defines learning

3. Curriculum is negotiated and dynamic

4. Students learn alone in a passive manner

4. Students learn in cooperative groups

5. Students learn for examinations

5. Students engage in self-directed mastery learning

6. Assessment to rank students, not improve learning

6. Assessment is to improve meaningful learning

7. Rigid bottom-up curriculum

7. Top-down curriculum and metacognition

The Most Effective Pedagogy in the Classroom The first thing a teacher needs to do is to get to know students and find out how much they already know. Next, the most challenging approach is that the teacher needs to cater to social, cultural and individual differences. One needs to be aware of different learning styles and modalities. If the teacher uses one way of teaching: direct instruction, collaborative learning, inquiry learning, constructivist learning, power point presentations, etc.), the students are unlikely to master knowledge and skills and maximise their cognitive potential. It is best to remember the ‘more ways one teaches the more intelligences one reaches’ (Kussrow, 2010, p. 95). Kussrow also suggested that perceptual differences (auditory, visual, tactile/kinaesthetic) affected more than 70% of learners (Kussrow, 2010, p. 98. See also Dunn et al., 1989, p. 51). More importantly, when examining major factors affecting academic achievement in schools, Hattie et al. (1996) have listed the following eight variables: school environment, social factors, instruction, teaching, students, method of teaching, learning strategies and the school. Their research findings demonstrated that the most significant factors impacting on students’ academic achievement are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Students’ learning strategies, specifically reinforcement (0.49 correlation). Teaching, specifically questioning techniques (0.47 correlation). Students’ cognitive development (0.44 correlation). Social and cultural factors at home (0.31 correlation). Teachers’ Feedback (0.31 correlation). Classroom environment and the school (0.20 and 0.12 correlations respectively). (Source: https://www.teachertoolkit.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/eff ect-of-learning-skills.pdf).

The above demonstrates that the top three factors affecting academic achievement are students’ learning strategies and positive reinforcement, the nature of teaching, specifically questioning techniques, cognitive development and social and

Improving Constructivist Pedagogy: Learning and Teaching

75

cultural factors at home. These variables need to be considered, when analysing the effectiveness of constructivist pedagogy in producing the desired quality teaching.

Effective Schools and Teachers McInerney (2016) has defined an effective school as ‘one that promotes the progress of its students in a broad range of intellectual, social and emotional outcomes, taking into account socio-economic status, family background and prior learning’ (see McInerney, 2016). In such schools, successful teachers tend to be friendly, enthusiastic, responsible, imaginative, systematic, understanding and warm. Current research suggests that effective pedagogues are those who: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

demonstrate a mastery of knowledge show enthusiasm set realistic lesson objectives and outcomes have high, rather than low, students’ expectations provide frequent positive reinforcement and feedback impose structure on the content to be covered present new material in an engaging, and a step-by-step manner have a well-managed classroom where children have the optimum opportunity to learn and interact maintain a positive and motivational environment communicate empathy and adjusting teaching to individual needs (teaching pace) use a variety of questioning techniques to motive students and to check for comprehension maintain a sense of balance (knowledge, skills, values and behaviour outcomes) use a variety of teaching styles and resources use student-centered approaches to learning (cooperative/collaborative learning strategies) use effective assessment tools—assessment to improve learning demonstrate the learning in ways that stress higher level skills and involve active engagement by students are effective classroom managers of authentic learning (see also OECD, 2013).

Slavin’s (1984) popular model of effective teaching, useful in constructivist pedagogy, is based on 4 core characteristics: 1. Quality of Instruction: The degree to which information or skills are presented so that students can easily learn them. Quality of instruction is largely a product of the quality of the curriculum and of the lesson presentation itself. 2. Appropriate Levels of Instruction: The degree to which the teacher makes sure that students are ready to learn a new lesson (that is, they have the necessary skills and knowledge to learn it), but have not already learned the lesson. In other

76

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

words, the level of instruction is appropriate when a lesson is neither too difficult nor too easy for students. 3. Incentive: The degree to which the teacher makes sure that students are motivated to work on instructional tasks and to learn the material being presented. 4. Time: The degree to which students are given enough time to learn the material being taught (Slavin, 1984). Furthermore, Slavin (2022) also summarises good and effective pedagogy in term of the following four characteristics: . Knowledge of subject and teaching resources . Knowledge of students and their learning (these are related to self-knowledge and self-regulation) . Critical thinking and problem-solving skills (reflection) . Communication skills and decision making In short, ‘What makes a great pedagogue in the classroom today? This can be summarised by the following 5 main characteristics: teacher’s self-efficacy, lesson structure, awareness of cultural diversity, positive motivational atmosphere, and mastery skills. These are described below: 1. Effective teachers have a sense of self-efficacy (the belief and confidence that they can successfully influence the learning of students. 2. Structure their lessons as constructivist and student-based learning experience (using advanced organisers, executive summaries, metacognition, etc.). 3. Sensitive to cultural diversity and employ global/cross-cultural perspective. 4. Maintaining positive classroom climate and positive expectations. 5. Exhibit mastery of teaching skills: high level of knowledge, excellent communicator, effective questioning and the use of motivational strategies. Thus, effective teaching is shaped by the teacher’s skills in regard to knowledge, organisation, clarity, classroom management, lesson planning, objectives, the use of engaging questioning techniques, and above all, showing students how to learn (see also David Fontana, Psychology for Teachers, 1995, p. 384).

How Do Students Learn Best? First, ask yourself, ‘How do I learn best?’ Do you learn better when someone tells you exactly how to do something, or do you learn better by doing it yourself? Many people are right in the middle of those two scenarios. This has led many educators to believe that the best way to learn is by having students construct their own knowledge instead of having someone construct it for them. Source: http://www.ndt-ed.org/TeachingResources/ClassroomTips/Constructivist%20_ Learning.htm

Suggestions for Constructivist Pedagogy

77

This belief is explained by the Constructivist Learning Theory. This theory states that learning is an active process of creating meaning from different experiences. In other words, students will learn best by trying to make sense of something on their own with the teacher as a guide to help them along the way (see also Shively, 2015).

Suggestions for Constructivist Pedagogy . Assess/determine students’ prior knowledge, understanding, skills and experiences about a concept/topic before teaching it to them. . Encourage student critical thinking and inquiry by asking them thoughtful, openended questions, and encourage them to ask questions to each other. . Encourage and accept student autonomy and initiative. . Try to use raw data and primary sources, in addition to manipulative, interactive, and physical materials. . When assigning tasks to the students, use cognitive and analytical terminology such as ‘classify’, ‘analyze’, ‘predict’, ‘evaluate’, and ‘create’. . Encourage communication between the teacher and the students and also between the students (cooperative groups) . Ask follow up questions and seek elaboration after a student’s initial response. . Put students in situations that might challenge their previous ideas. . Provide enough time for students to construct their own meaning when learning something new. (Adapted from Brooks & Brooks (1993). In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms, ASCD) http://www.ndt-d.org/TeachingResources/ ClassroomTips/Constructivist%20_Learning.htm The above suggestions are very useful, but we still need to consider macro and micro-sociological factors affecting the teaching and learning process as a whole. There are numerous assumptions here. Specifically, we need to consider teachers, students, classroom environments, schools, communities, SES, school resources, funding, and school leaders. Together, they influence significantly the quality of teaching and learning in schools (Zajda, 2015, 2023). I have used a combination of cognitive and social constructivism and critical literacy (grounded in discourse analysis) in my graduate classes, with great success, resulting in improved academic achievement.

78

5 Social Constructivism to Improve Students’ Motivation

Discussion One of the problems with understanding and discussing constructivism and classroom application is that this particular analytical construct draws on many diverse disciplines, philosophy, and pedagogies. The ontological, epistemological, and methodological differences between the competing paradigms of constructivism, is another issue (Au, 1998). Doolittle and Hicks (2003) stressed that constructivism, as a concept, is a diverse construct that lends itself to numerous interpretations, be they psychological, cultural or pedagogical: ...the concept of ‘constructivism’ is diverse, with varied interpretations. This diversity necessitates that the asserting of constructivist claims be made with caution and significant forethought. (Doolittle & Hicks, 2003, p. 81)

The other issue is that constructivism in teaching is discussed as a method only (a method is concerned with the ‘how’, rather than ‘why’ or ‘what’). We need to consider other parts of this curricular process, including culture and the ecology of the classroom. Social and cultural differences have a significant effect on schools, teachers, students and pedagogies employed (Zajda, 2010, 2023). The constructivist pedagogy, or any other classroom pedagogy, is likely to be affected by social, economic and cultural differences. Vygotsky’s learning theory stressed the social dimension in thought and language (Vygotsky, 1973, pp. 134–137). Hence, the Vygotskian prefix ‘socio’ added to the term ‘constructivism’ indicates the acknowledgement of cultural issues in learning, as opposed to cognitive approaches to learning. Since knowledge and skills are the most highly valued commodities in the knowledge society globally, teachers need to play a significant role in this process. The quality of teaching and learning will depend, not so much on the teaching style, as on the quality of its human capital—teachers, the quality of their professional knowledge, the quality of their training, and the type of incentives available (salaries, promotion, job opportunities and rewards for excellence in teaching). These muchneeded incentives would attract quality teachers to the profession, and increase their effort and improve their capacity to generate and transmit quality knowledge and skills to their students in culturally diverse classrooms (see OECD, 2007, 2013). As demonstrated above, the use of social constructivist pedagogy in the classroom has many learning advantages. These include improved students’ engagement and motivation. Social constructivist leaning enhances students’ cognitive, social and emotional skills, as they work together in small cooperative or collaborative groups. Social constructivist pedagogy increases students’ analytical thinking, and problemsolving skills, through the use of critical thinking and critical literacy. It improves students’ memory processes, especially long-term-memory, and the use of coding for retrieval, such as mnemonics, and enhances significantly students’ social skill, by working with the group members. Social constructivist pedagogy tends to activate the use of both sides of the brain. During problem-solving learning activities, the left side of the brain is used for logical and analytical thinking and problem solving, whereas, the right side of the brain, which represents creative, visual, and emotional dimensions, is used when listening to music, recognizing people’s faces etc. Social

Conclusion

79

constructivist pedagogy also enhances one’s aptitude, as students are involved in problem-solving tasks. It also promotes students’ well-being, by reducing levels of anxiety and stress.

Conclusion The key idea of constructivist pedagogy is that student’s meaningful knowledge is actively constructed, in diverse ways, employing cognitive, cultural, affective and social dimensions, and that individual learning, in a constructivist sense, is a necessarily cognitive and socially active process. This idea is most relevant to the process of creating effective and engaging learning environments in schools globally. In addition, constructivist pedagogy promotes critical thinking and critical literacy. By comparison with traditional models of teaching, it also integrates more effectively students’ cognitive, social and emotional learning, offering a holistic approach in the classroom. It can be certainly used in learning and teaching, as one approach, within the multiple pedagogical models and strategies, designed to maximise effective teaching, academic standards and quality learning for all. Research informed teachers tend to use constructivist learning to improve students’ engagement, motivation, and meaningful and authentic learning. It is argued that the effectiveness of constructivist learning and teaching is strongly dependent on both students’ and teachers’ self-concept, cultural identity, self-esteem, self-efficacy, cognitive, social and emotional development, students’ academic achievement goals and their relevant learning strategies. Teachers tend to use constructivist pedagogy to improve the quality of learning, and increase academic achievement for all students. The effectiveness of constructivist pedagogy is dependent, above all, on students’ self-concept, and self-efficacy, and their relevant learning strategies, which includes metacognition, self-regulated strategies, positive reinforcement, cognitive development and social and cultural factors at home, affecting their attitudes, values and motivation for leaning in the classroom.

Chapter 6

Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

Introduction As mentioned in Chapter 1, a humanist approach in the learning and teaching context, has strong focus on students’ identity, feelings, emotional wellbeing, and enhancing the achievement of knowledge at the highest level of cognitive, social and emotional stages of development, eventually culminating in knowledge of self-actualization, and transcendence. The term ‘humanist’ has been used to describe a ‘general orientation to life or a personal philosophy’ (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 280). Individuals tend to have their own perspectives on the meaning of life and existence, which is guided by their knowledge, experience, and levels of education, skills and priorities. Consequently, a humanist teaching strategy in the classroom will have at least three components used in cultivating humanistic philosophy to teaching, namely free will, emotions, and their overall impact on individuals’ learning, and intrinsic motivation. The Humanist approach to learning and teaching, based on focusing on students’ feelings, emotional wellbeing, requires the teacher to consider relevant learning needs of the student, in order to create an effective and inclusive learning environment, with reference to: . . . . . .

The self-concept Cultural differences Emotional needs Social needs Cognitive needs Individual differences needs in learning.

Since the focus of the pedagogy is on the whole person, humanistic pedagogy is informed by relevant core dimensions of cognitive, emotional and social developments, it will include designated values, active citizenship education, and the use of cognitive and social constructivist pedagogy, when working in small groups, such as cooperative and collaborative groups. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_6

81

82

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

With reference to values, for example, the nine values for Australian schooling were identified for the ‘National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools’. They were developed, as a result of series of conferences of the Australian school communities. They are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Care and Compassion Doing Your Best Fair Go Freedom Honesty and Trustworthiness Integrity Respect Responsibility Understanding, Tolerance and Inclusion (http://www.curriculum.edu.au › values).

The Significance of the Self-Concept in Classroom Learning The individual’s identity plays a key role in engagement and motivation in the classroom. In effective and meaningful learning and teaching in the classroom, everything begins with students’ cultural identity, and a sense of belonging. Student’s subjective perception of the self, either positive or negative, is likely to affect every aspect of self-esteem, self-efficacy, engagement and motivation. Some individuals, due to various positive influences form the family, peers, teachers etc. tend to develop positive feeling about themselves. We can use Bonfenbrenner’s (1995) bio-ecological model and Bandura’s (1977a) social learning model to have a better knowledge of factors affecting one’s self-concept. Bonfenbrenner suggested that one’s self-concept if influenced by major agencies of socialisation, beginning with the family. Bandura mainly focused on the role of imitation and copying desirable role-models, be they parents, teachers, or significant others in the media, pop stars, singers, or actors, in acquiring one’s self. There are many definition of the self-concept, including what an individual believes she/he is. Self-concept is more about one’s subjective perception and beliefs of the kind of person one is. It is developed, as demonstrated above, primarily through one’s interpretations of approval, or praises from socially significant others. These subjective beliefs become a stabilising mechanism, which also guides future behaviour. Depending on our identities, self-concept beliefs can be hierarchical. We have different perceptions of ourselves depending on how we see ourselves, in terms of who we are (i.e. I’m a good musician, but a bad son, good at music, but not so good in sport, like swimming (see Rosenberg, 1989; Schunk & Usher, 2012). G. H. Mead (1863–1931) suggested that the self is subject (of the ‘I’) and object (or ‘me’). One’s metal picture of me includes what one knows about one’s personality, abilities, feelings and emotions, and all other things, which give one the sense of being of who one is. But is it really you or a socially constructed label of needs,

The Significance of the Self-Concept in Classroom Learning

83

and desires? The self, in the culture of consumption, needs and desires, promoted by the media can become a consumerist commodity. Carl Rogers (1980), on the other hand, examined the self-as-object, or the ‘me’ aspect of the self. To explain the concept of the self, he used a phenomenological theory, being concerned with the person’s subjective experience of the world around them. Rogers (1980) believed, according to Mcleod (2023) that individuals live in a ‘world of our own creation, formed by our processes of perception’. As Rogers argued, “The only reality I can possibly know is the world as I perceive and experience it at this particular moment. The only reality you can possibly know is the world as you perceive and experience at this moment. And the only certainty is that those perceived realities are different. There are as many ‘real worlds’ as there are people!” (Rogers, 1980, p. 102). He also believed that in the idea of positive regard affecting the self. According to him, learners are born with a basic need for the positive regard, or the acceptance and approval of others. This need may well be the result of the main socialising force defining and shaping individuals’ values and behaviour. When these needs are met then the individual develops a self, which is in congruence (or harmony) with it. If not, there is incongruence or a gap between the ideal self and the real self, hence self-rejection, alienation and hostility towards the rest of the world and humanity in general. According to Rogers (1980), self-esteem, as a positive concept of self-regard, is concerned with the value we place upon ourselves, and features prominently in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Depending on the level of self-esteem, individuals can demonstrate high, medium or low self-esteem qualities. Rogers also used his unique Q-sorting technique, to measure one’s self. It was based on a number of cards, each one containing a self-descriptive statement (I work hard, I am good looking etc.). The Individual is asked to arrange the cards into five groups, ranging from most like oneself to least like oneself (between 25 and 100 cards are used). Like Rogers, Kelly (1955) was a phenomenologist, wishing to make sense of individuals’ own subjective experiences. Constructing meanings about reality and our lives lead Kelly to coin personal constructs, or the units of meaning individuals develop to make sense of the world. Individual have personal constructs about every phenomena of their lives, affecting their feelings, emotions, attitudes, values and behaviour.

Comparing Maslow and Rogers Maslow and Rogers believed, according to Mcleod (2023), that human beings were ‘born with the desire to grow, create and to love, and had the power to direct their own lives’. While both Rogers and Maslow agreed that personal growth and fulfilment in life represented the basic human needs and motives, they differed in their interpretations of human needs and self-actualization. For Maslow, individuals’ basic needs, as documented in his concept map of the hierarchy of human needs, had to be satisfied first, in order to advance further, to satisfy other needs, including belongingness and

84

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

love, self-esteem, cognitive (meaning and knowledge) and aesthetic (beauty, truth and justice). Rogers, on the other hand, believed that individuals could achieve their needs, and move towards self-actualization, if they had a positive view of themselves, or a sense of positive self-regard, as a result of experiencing ‘unconditional positive regard from others’: This can only happen if they have unconditional positive regard from others – if they feel that they are valued and respected without reservation by those around them (especially their parents when they were children).Self-actualization is only possible if there is congruence between the way an individual sees themselves and their ideal self (the way they want to be or think they should be). (Mcleod, 2023)

Classroom Application of Students’ Self-Beliefs Do students academic self-beliefs determine their academic achievement, or does academic achievement determine the self-beliefs? There are at least two types of motivation researchers, those who concentrate on the role of self-esteem in students’ engagement, motivation and academic achievement, and those who focus of skilldevelopment. Self-enhancement researchers think that self-concept beliefs are a primary cause of student achievement (we do well because we feel good) and so fostering students’ self-esteem should be number one priority in the classroom. Whereas skill-development researchers think that self-concept beliefs are a consequence rather than a cause of academic achievement (we feel good because we do well) therefore focusing on academic competence is more useful than focusing on self-beliefs. It has been impossible so far to determine which is right, as experiments and research in this area is difficult. Some researchers, both for selfconcept and self-efficacy, currently support the idea that both self-belief/efficacy and achievement have reciprocal influences on student motivation. One could argue that both self-concept and self-efficacy, like status and role, are the two sides of the coin. Current research shows that if students have learning difficulties in schools, this is due to their low self-esteem (APA, 2020; Pandy, 2012). Such students believe that they are unable to perform successfully. What does this mean for teachers? . . . . .

Empower the students with confidence, positive thinking, and self-assurance Set authentic, challenging tasks and meaningful activities that can be mastered Support development of self-regulatory practices (meeting deadlines etc.) Engage in effective modelling practices and promote peer modelling. Pay attention to learners perception of competence as much as their actual competence . Design appropriate achievement goals in the classroom . Provide students with authentic mastery experiences that have meaning in their culture and teach them to rely on their own initiative.

The Nexus Between Cultural Diversity and Humanistic Psychology

85

The Nexus Between Cultural Diversity and Humanistic Psychology Modern humanistic psychology can be traced to the 1960s, with major works from Maslow (1962), and Rogers (1961). Maslow (1962) in his book, Toward a Psychology of Being, examined humanistic psychology and its contribution to our understanding of the nature of being. Rogers (1961) in his book, On becoming a person, analysed individuals’ personalities during his counselling sessions with his clients. The first book defining and examining humanistic psychology was written in 1958 by John Cohenand, Humanistic Psychology, and in 1962, the American Association for Humanistic Psychology was founded (Source: https://web.cortland.edu/andersmd/ human/origin.html). Maslow (1962) described humanistic psychology as the ‘third force’ in psychology. The first force was behaviourism and the second force was psychoanalysis. Humanistic psychology emerged a as a movement which went beyond behaviourism and psychoanalysis. Since works on humanistic psychology appeared over 60 years ago, humanistic psychology was very much behind the rest of psychology, in accepting, addressing and promoting cultural diversity and multiculturalism. This is understandable, as the cultural milieu of the 1960s was vastly different culturally, socially and politically from the 1990s, when multicultural educators, like James Banks (1989), in his path-finding book, Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives, started addressing the reality of multiculturalism and multicultural education in schools affecting all Americans. We could argue, with reference to democracy, human rights and social justice, for the relevance and significance of cultural diversity in societal and educational settings, in promoting equality of access to quality education for all. Hoffman et al. (2015) argued for the importance cultural diversity in psychology: ‘Any approach to psychology that desires to be relevant in the twenty-first century must embrace the importance of diversity’ (Hoffman et al., p. 46). For humanistic psychology to continue to be relevant today, it is important to accept that ‘what has been accomplished thus far is only a beginning’: To succeed in actualizing the valuing of diversity, humanistic psychology must take responsibility for its current lack of diversity. If we are not actively engaged in helping humanistic psychology become more multiculturally sensitive or in challenging the status quo, then we are guilty of contributing to the perpetuation of a culturally insensitive psychology...Now is not a time to be satisfied with the progress in humanistic psychology but rather a time to take advantage of the emergent energy and opportunities to help transform humanistic psychology into a mature multicultural approach to psychology. (Hoffman et al., 2015, p. 52)

The way forward for humanistic psychology, which concentrated on the notion of the free will and the individual, is to re-imagine its philosophy, to reflect the current milieu of multiculturalism, and focus more on cultural diversity, rather than individualism. Michèle Ollivier (2008), in ‘Modes of openness to cultural diversity: Humanist, populist, practical, and indifferent’, suggested that cultural diversity can be articulated in at least ‘four different ways – humanist, populist, practical, and

86

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

indifferent – depending on the cultural domains to which it refers as well as to the cultural and material resources from which it is constructed’ (Ollivier, 2008). Recently, a number of researchers attempted to redefine humanistic psychology with reference to multiculturalism. Lillian Comas-Diaz (2012) in her article ‘Humanism and multiculturalism: An evolutionary alliance’, suggested that ‘Multiculturalism embraces humanistic values grounded in collective and social justice contexts’, and that examples of multicultural humanistic constructs include ‘contextualism, holism, and liberation’. Consequently, this multicultural-humanistic connection has become a necessary paradigm shift in re-imagining humanistic philosophy and psychology. Hoffman (2016) in ‘Multiculturalism and humanistic psychology: From neglect to epistemological and ontological diversity’, on the other hand, embraced a ‘deep diversity in humanistic psychology includes a broad, inclusive understanding of science as well as an embracement of ways of knowing that are embedded in culture’. He suggested the need for including and analysing epistemological and ontological diversity in humanistic psychology. Polomoshnov et al. (2019) in ‘Multiculturalism and humanism in the context of globalization’, examined the ‘humanistic potential of multiculturalism as a sociocultural integrational model’ and suggested the ways to improve humanistic dimension of multiculturalism, under the umbrella of globalization processes. The above examples of research dealing with the nexus between humanistic psychology, multiculturalism and cultural diversity suggest a new paradigm shift, representing a new epistemology and ontology of a ‘new aesthetics and a new ethos’ (Ollivier, 2008). At the same time, it becomes evident that multiculturalism reflects humanistic values, grounded in pluralist democracy, social justice, and human rights.

The Role of Emotions in Humanistic Psychology Emotion, defined by Solomon (2023), represents a ‘complex experience of consciousness, bodily sensation, and behaviour that reflects the personal significance’ (Solomon, 2023). Aristotle (384–322 BCE), believed that emotions represented ‘all those feelings that so change men as to affect their judgements, and that are also attended by pain or pleasure. Such are anger, pity, fear and the like, with their opposites’ (cited in Solomon, 2023). Overall, according to Solomon, emotions cover a ‘wide variety of important psychological phenomena. Some emotions are very specific, insofar as they concern a particular person, object, or situation. Others, such as distress, joy, or depression, are very general’: Some emotions are very brief and barely conscious, such as a sudden flush of embarrassment or a burst of anger. Others, such as long-lasting love or simmering resentment, are protracted, lasting hours, months, or even years (in which case they can become a durable feature of an individual’s personality). An emotion may have pronounced physical accompaniments, such as a facial expression, or it may be invisible to observers. An emotion may involve conscious experience and reflection, as when one ‘wallows’ in it, or it may pass virtually unnoticed and unacknowledged by the subject. An emotion may be profound, in

The Role of Emotions in Humanistic Psychology

87

the sense that it is essential to one’s physical survival or mental health, or it may be trivial or dysfunctional. (Solomon, 2023)

The study of emotions is also a part of ethics, and moral philosophy. Emotions have been associated with the nature of being, beauty and creativity. ...emotions are stimulated and provoked by beauty in the arts and nature, and there is no aesthetic sensibility without emotion. Emotions as well as the physical senses shape the basic processes of perception and memory and influence the ways in which people conceive and interpret the world around them (psychologists have long known that what one notices and remembers depends to a great extent on what one cares about). (Solomon, 2023)

Overall, emotions have been divided by psychologists into two categories: positive or negative emotions. The two core philosophical principles of humanism, namely the individual’s personal worth, and active nature of human beings, were embodied in emotions and rationality, as suggested by Frank Friedlander (2013) in his work ‘Emotions and rationality as a basis for humanism: can humanism encompass both intellect and spirit’. Emotions include such feelings such as ‘love, fear, insecurity, joy, and anguish’ (Friedlander, 2013). There is no doubt that emotions play a major role in humanistic psychology. With its emphasis on individual’s feeling and emotions, it was a significant epistemological and ontological shift from dominant behaviouristic, cognitive and social cognitive approaches to learning. Emotions were tabulated in the Affective Domain of Bloom’s third volume of the taxonomy in 1964. The first two volumes of taxonomies covered behavioural and cognitive domains in learning. The Taxonomy of the Affective Domain contains five levels, from ‘lowest to highest: receiving, responding, valuing, organization, and characterization’ Krathwohl et al. (1964). The affective domain describes learning objectives that emphasize a ‘feeling tone, an emotion, or a degree of acceptance or rejection’: Affective objectives vary from simple attention to selected phenomena to complex but internally consistent qualities of character and conscience. We found a large number of such objectives in the literature expressed as interests, attitudes, appreciations, values, and emotional sets or biases. (Krathwohl et al., 1964)

In the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy, the affective domain included the ways and the ‘manner in which we deal with things emotionally, such as feelings, values, appreciation, enthusiasms, motivations, and attitudes’ (Krathwohl et al., 1973). Below are descriptions of each step in the Affective Domain of Bloom’s taxonomy, starting at the most basic level, or receiving: Receiving is being aware of or sensitive to the existence of certain ideas, material, or phenomena and being willing to tolerate them. Examples include: to differentiate, to accept, to listen (for), to respond to. Responding is committed in some small measure to the ideas, materials, or phenomena involved by actively responding to them. Examples are: to comply with, to follow, to commend, to volunteer, to spend leisure time in, to acclaim.

88

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments Valuing is willing to be perceived by others as valuing certain ideas, materials, or phenomena. Examples include: to increase measured proficiency in, to relinquish, to subsidize, to support, to debate. Organization is to relate the value to those already held and bring it into a harmonious and internally consistent philosophy. Examples are: to discuss, to theorize, to formulate, to balance, to examine. Characterization by value or value set is to act consistently in accordance with the values he or she has internalized. Examples include: to revise, to require, to be rated high in the value, to avoid, to resist, to manage, to resolve. (Krathwohl, Bloom & Masia, 1973)

In humanistic psychology, the early works examining individuals’ emotional experiences included Rogers’s (1959) and Maslow (1962), who focused on the importance of being, and individuals’ feelings and emotions. Later, in humanistic psychology, Greenberg & Watson (2006) identified five distinct types of individuals’ emotion processes: a. b. c. d.

emotional awareness and engagement; arousal and enactment; emotional regulation and self-soothing; reflection on emotion and meaning-making, which involves enduring cognitive change; and e. emotional transformation, or changing emotion with emotion (Greenberg &Watson, 2006).

The above types of individuals’ emotion processes, combined with Bloom’s Taxonomy, the affective domain, offer a far deeper knowledge and understanding of the complexity of individuals’ feelings and emotions.

The Role of Social Needs in Humanistic Psychology Social needs are regarded by sociologists and others, as the fundamental needs of humans, defining them as social beings. Social needs, as used by Maslow (1962), and other humanistic psychologists, refer to the need ‘to have meaningful relationships with others. The need for love, companionship, friendship and belonging are among the major social needs’ (Social Need, 2022). Maslow (1962) believed that social needs were characterised essentially by need for love and belonging. Maslow (1962), as one of the founders of humanistic psychology, believed that the individual’s social needs represented an important stage of on-going psychological development, in resolving social and emotional issues. Social needs represent the third level in Maslow’s hierarchy, which refers to psychological, social and emotional needs. Social needs, as part of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, include love, acceptance, belonging, and intimacy. As described in Maslow’s (1962) model of Hierarchy of Needs, individuals’ social needs include the need for love and belonging, which represent intimacy, trust, friendship and a sense of connection. As soon as these

The Role of Social Needs in Humanistic Psychology

89

Fig. 6.1 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs (Source McMaugh & Mackenzie [2022]. Educational psychology for learning and teaching [7th ed., p. 282])

‘social needs are fulfilled, we feel a sense of well-being. When these needs are not met, it can cause suffering and despair’ (Rose, 2022) (Fig. 6.1). Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs illustrates the natural order of needs, starting with physiological and safety needs. Once these basic needs have been satisfied, the individual progresses to the next level of needs, belongingness and love, which represents the essence of social needs. John Spacey (2021) constructed a list of some 38 examples of social needs, regarded as necessary for one’s quality of life. They included affections, friendship, empathy, intimacy, love, belonging, verbal communication, etc. Overall, social needs define our necessary social existence needs in life, reflecting the nature of being, and social interactions with other people. As stated by Maslow (1962) earlier, belongingness and love, characterised by acceptance, affection, and affiliation are essential for one’s happy fulfilment in life, and leading to self-actualisation and transcendence.

90

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

Cognitive Development, Enactivism and Humanistic Psychology Cognitive Development Humanist psychologists regard learning as a function of the whole person, and believe that learning cannot take place unless cognitive, social and affective domains are activated. Hovhannisyan (2018) suggested the need to combine both humanistic psychology and cognitive psychology and create ‘humanistic cognitive science’, as ‘emerging interdisciplinary program that augments the insights of enactivism with those of humanistic psychology’ (Hovhannisyan, 2018). Enactivism, as part of cognitive psychology, suggests that human cognition is caused by a dynamic and on-going mental interaction between humans and their environment. This nexus between humans and environment was suggested by numerous scholars, including Hans Eysenck (1982), Vygotsky (1978) and Bronfenbrenner (1979), to name a few. Cognitive development focuses on mental processes concerning the individual’s ability to perceive phenomena, to think, to reason, and to process and store the information in the long-term memory. Cognitive development refers to the individual’s new knowledge acquisition and mastery and the use of cognitive skills, such as perception, ‘understanding, remembering, problem-solving and reasoning’ (Duchesne et al., 2022, p. 89). Social, cultural, individual and environmental factors affect the nature of one’s cognitive development. Different individuals are likely to experience different social interactions in their environment, within their families, the neighbourhood, peers, teachers, the media etc. Cognitive development is also affected by the individual’s genetic and environmental factors. They represent the on-going nature and nurture debate.

Social and Sociocultural Origins of Cognitive Development Social and sociocultural origins of cognitive development can be traced to Dewey (1916), Bruner (1963), Vygotsky (1973), Bonfenbrenner (1979) and others. Both Vygotsky and Bronfenbrenner studied the impact of environment on the individual’s identity, thoughts, And language acquisition. The term agencies of socialisation was used particularly in Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological model, detailing major agencies of socialization to explain how one’s identity and self-concept were formed and shaped by the environment and culture. The key idea in enactivisim is the individual’s ability of making sense of the world, and that the mind is actively engaged in constructing the reality of one’s environment. In short, enactivism, by drawing on neurological, physiological and ecological models, provides a more meaningful idea how individuals make sense of their environment:

Individual Differences Needs in Humanistic Psychology

91

To ‘make sense’ is to relate, to complete, to coordinate one thing with another so that ‘sense’ or understanding arises. The enactive knower is active in making sense of its environment as it creates its life. (Read & Szokolszky, 2020)

Enactivism, according to Colditz (2020), was a cognitive theory ‘describing cognition as a mental function that arises from the dynamic interaction of the organism with its environment’ (Colditz, 2020). The enactive approach in cognitive psychology was attributed to Maturana & Varela (1988), and Varela et al. (1993), who explained the nature of enactivisim. Varela et al. (1993) claimed (p. 173) that enaction means two things: (1) perception consist of perceptually-guided action; and that (2) cognitive structures emerge from the recurrent sensorimotor patterns that enable action to be perceptually guided (cited in Colditz, 2020). Developments in neuroscience research, concerning enactivisim, led to the idea of the free energy principle. The free energy principle (FER), developed by Friston (2010), was regarded as a major conceptual and epistemological theory, which combined ecological, neurological and physiological models in enactivisim. Holmes (2022) offers a succinct explanation of the energy principle: Energy equates to information, albeit physically embodied in patterns of neuronal impulses, synaptic transmission (‘fire together, wire together’) and the neurohormonal environment. (Holmes, 2022)

Furthermore, Read and Szokolszky (2020), in their article ‘Ecological Psychology and Enactivism: Perceptually-Guided Action vs. Sensation-Based Enaction’, argue that enactivisim and ecological psychology both challenged ‘representationist cognitive science’. In addition to enactivisim, as a theory describing cognition, and mental processes, it also can be said that enactivism, as a theory of embodied cognition, emphasizes the interrelationship of cognition and emotion in learning (Towers & Martin, 2017). Consequently, enactivisim, as a process of individual’s interaction with the environments and making sense of the world, and involving both psychological and social constructivist learning, suggests that constructivism plays a significant part in this process.

Individual Differences Needs in Humanistic Psychology When examining individual differences, we need to consider the aetiology of individual differences. I would like to suggest that we start with personality, as it is the core part of the person, in determining the person’s behaviour, emotions, and social interaction. Personality, as a concept, is the ‘relatively stable organisation of a person’s motivational dispositions, arising from the interaction between biological drives and the social and physical environment. The term…usually refers chiefly to the affective-connative traits, sentiments, attitudes, complexes and unconscious mechanisms, interests and ideals, which determine a human’s characteristic or distinctive behaviour and thought (Eysenck et al., 1975). More recently, APA (2022)

92

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

defined personality, as the ‘enduring characteristics and behaviour that comprise a person’s unique adjustment to life, including major traits, interests, drives, values, self-concept, abilities, and emotional patterns’ (APA, 2020). Various personality theories explain the structure and development of personality in different ways, but all agree that personality helps to shape and determine individuals’ attitudes, behaviour, thinking, feelings and action. There exists a consensus in personality researchers’ works that the four main theories are: behaviourist, trait perspective, humanistic and psychoanalytic. I want to focus on trait perspective theories of Raymond Cattell (1957), which were revised and updated by Costa & McCrae (1999) to the five major personality traits, and Hans Eysenck (1978, 1981). Trait theory in psychology is based on the assumption that individual differs from one another, based on the strength and intensity of basic trait dimensions. There are ‘three criteria that characterize personality traits: (1) consistency, (2) stability, and (3) individual differences’ (https://open.mar icopa.edu/culturepsychology/chapter/trait). Raymond Cattell (1957), initially identified 16 factors, or dimensions of personality, which were based on the original list of Gordon Allport’s (1936) personality traits, and were then ‘further reduced to fewer dimensions that underpin personality’ (Cherry, 2023). It resulted in the five-factor personality traits model. The big 5 personality traits, as a theory, was developed by by D. W. Fiske (1949), and later revised and expanded by a number of researchers, including Goldberg (1981, 1990), Costa & McCrae (1999), and McCrae & Costa (2003). The Big Five Personality Traits or the OCEAN model of personlity lists the following: Openness to experience. Sometimes called intellect or imagination, this represents the willingness to try new things and think outside the box. Traits include insightfulness, originality and curiosity. Conscientiousness. The desire to be careful, diligent and to regulate immediate gratification with self-discipline. Traits include ambition, discipline, consistency and reliability. Extroversion. A state where an individual draws energy from others and seeks social connections or interaction, as opposed to being alone (introversion). Traits include being outgoing, energetic and confident. Agreeableness The measure of how an individual interacts with others, characterised by degree of compassion and co-operation. Traits include tactfulness, kindness and loyalty. Neuroticism. A tendency towards negative personality traits, emotional instability and self-destructive thinking. Traits include pessimism, anxiety, insecurity and fearfulness. (https://blog.flexmr.net/ocean-personality-types) (Table 6.1)

Recent research suggests that four of the Big Five Personality Traits, such as extraversion, neuroticism, conscientiousness, and agreeableness tend to be relevant and reliable in describing changes in personality differences during developmental stages. Hans. J. Eysenck’s theory of personality, as part of the inferential theories of personality, which was based on measurable factors, such as traits, suggested that personality consisted of the three, biologically-based categories of temperament: 1. (E) Extraversion (introversion): The extrovert individual is oriented towards other people and experiences; the introvert shows qualities of irritability, persistence and shyness.

Individual Differences Needs in Humanistic Psychology

93

Table 6.1 The five-factor model of personality Factor

Low score description

High score description

Neuroticism

Calm, Even-tempered, Self-satisfied, Comfortable, Unemotional, Hardy

Worrying, Temperamental, Self-pitying, Self-conscious, Emotional, Vulnerable

Extraversion

Reserved, Loner, Quiet, Passive, Affectionate, Joiner, Talkative, Sober, Unfeeling Active, Fun-loving, Passionate

Openness to experience

Down-to-earth, Uncreative, Conventional, Prefer routine, Uncurious, Conservative

Imaginative, Creative, Original, Prefer variety, Curious, Liberal

Agreeableness

Ruthless, Suspicious, Stingy, Antagonistic, Critical, Irritable

Softhearted, Trusting, Generous, Acquiescent, Lenient, Good-natured

Conscientiousness

Negligent, Lazy, Disorganized, Late, Aimless, Quitting

Conscientious, Hardworking, Well-organized, Punctual, Ambitious, Persevering

Source McCrae and Costa (2003)

2. (N) Neuroticism (stability): Individual is prone to anxiety, obsessions and hysteria. 3. (P) Psychoticism: Associated with aggression, anger, recklessness, hostility, and nonconformity (linked with high levels of testosterone).

Stable extraverts tended to be outgoing, talkative, responsive, lively, carefree, leadership, easy going. Unstable extraverts were touchy, restless, impulsive, and irresponsible. Stable introverts seemed to be calm, even-tempered, reliable, controlled, peaceful, thoughtful, and passive. On the other hand, unstable introverts tended to be pessimistic, quiet, reserved, sober, rigid, anxious, and moody. Furthermore, Eysenck’s personality tests were used extensively to determine personality type (With such questions as: ‘Are you inclined to be moody? and ‘Do you prefer action to planning for action’? Overall, learners’ traits include: . . . . . . . .

Personality General mental abilities (intelligence) Primary mental abilities (products, operations, content) Cognitive controls (e.g. field dependence/independence) Cognitive styles: Information gathering (e.g. visualiser/verbaliser) Cognitive styles: Information organising Learning styles Prior knowledge.

The large number of traits affecting learning demonstrates the complexity of the individual learner and the learning process. As I mentioned in my Chapter 1, we need to remember the important role of individual’s identity, especially self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy, together with metacognition, self-regulation strategies, and social-emotional learning (SEL).

94

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

Kahler (1975) developed his unique Process Model Communication (PCM), which used his theory of six personality types, as six different ways of perceiving the world. According to PCM research, everyone was one of the following six main personality types: a reactor, workaholic, persister, dreamer, rebel, or promoter. Reactor, of the feeler, experienced the world and social intraction by feelings, and was sensitive, kind and warm. Workaholic (the thinker) was logical, responsible, organised, and goal-oriented. Persister (the believer) was dedicated, observant, conscientious and driven to excel in academic achievement. Dreamer (the imaginer) was imaginative, introspective, and reflective. Rebel (the fun person) was spontaneous, playful, creative, active, and hands-on learners or kinaesthetic. Promoter (the doer) was direct, decisive, resourceful, and adaptable, and action-oriented, and thrives in achieving short-term goals. Some researchers were able to connect personality types to learning and teaching in the classroom. This was accomplished by Pauley, Bradley & Pauley (2002), in their popular book Here’s how to Reach Me: Matching Instruction to Personality Types in Your Classroom, which adapted Kahler’s (1975) model specifically to the learning and teaching process. It proved to be a very successful strategy for effective teaching within the classroom. Although each person was perceived to be predominantly one of these six types, a person may have parts of all six, with varying degrees of dominance. The dominant type is the ‘base’ personality. The degree of other types may vary according to ‘phases’ or life events, which shape our lives. The base personality tends to remain the same. We can also use Gardener’s (1999) multiple intelligences model, which includes spatial/naturalistic, musical/kinaesthetic, linguistic, mathematical, interpersonal, and intrapersonal abilities, while addressing and meeting the needs of all personality types. Humanistic approaches for creating effective motivational environments, by focusing on individual differences, need to facilitate the creation of inclusive classroom atmosphere, where students feel they belong, accepted, supported, and engaged in positive motivational atmosphere.

Individual Differences and Learning Styles Individual differences also reflect differences in cognitive and learning styles. Cognitive styles refer to: . Knowledge acquisition, or cognition, and Information processing (conceptualization). . Related to mental behaviours, including constructivism and metacognition, when solving problems. . The way in which information is obtained, sorted, and utilized, utilising memory processes (sensory memory, short-term memory and long-term memory).

Individual Differences Needs in Humanistic Psychology

95

. Individual’s stable and persistent personality dimension influencing attitudes, values, and social interaction. Cognitive styles include the field-dependence-field-independence construct. Witkin et al. (1977) theorized that individuals were field dependent or field independent. Field dependent is a cognitive style that is related to perceiving terms, events or information as the integral part of a broader context (looking at broader picture). Field-dependent learning style is defined by a ‘relative inability to distinguish detail from other information around it’ (British Council, 2020, Field-dependent learners). Field dependent learners are better learners when in social settings and are more self motivated. Field dependent learners tended to rely on external cues and were less able to identify an embedded figure in an organized field. On the other hand Field independence is the tendency to perceive individual items and pieces of information analytically as distinct from the broader context’ (Witkin et al., 1977). Field independent learners tended to rely on internal cues and were more able to identify an embedded figure in an organized field. Understanding student cognitive processing abilities allows teachers to design broad lesson plans that encompass specific areas of learning, taught through varied teaching strategies: . . . .

Mind maps Imagery Colours Story telling etc. Learning styles, on the other hand refer to:

. Manner in which a learner perceives, interacts with and responds to the learning environment . Components of learning styles, which are cognitive, affective and physiological elements . Categories: Perceptual modality, information processing and personality patterns (visual, auditory and kinesthetic learners). Learning styles tend to reflect the following ‘three inter-related elements: . Information processing—habitual modes of perceiving, storing and organising information (for example pictorially or verbally) . Instructional preferences—predispositions towards learning in a certain way (such as collaboratively or independently) or in a certain setting (environment or time of day, for instance) . Learning strategies—adaptive responses to learning specific subject matter in a particular context (Becta, 2005). Learning style can refer to learning modalities, reflecting both perception and memory processes, and which includes such modalities as visual, auditory, and tactile/kinaesthetic. Neil D. Fleming (1987) originally developed his model of

96

6 Humanistic Approaches for Creating Effective Motivational Environments

students’ learning style preference of visual, aural, read/write, and kinaesthetic (VARK). Fleming (1987) believed that individuals as learners are all one of four main types of learners: visual, auditory, reading/writing, and kinaesthetic. Understanding cognitive psychology as to why and how individuals’ perceive, process and store information in the long-term memory is one of the keys for success in learning. Visual learners learn best from images, pictures, maps, or written text. Auditory learners prefer the spoken word, and kinaesthetic learners think in terms of actions and bodily movement. According to Sadler-Smith (2001), it may be that knowledge of learning styles makes students better able to adapt to different situations. Furthermore, SadlerSmith & Smith (2004) offered the ‘following recommendations for accommodating learners’ cognitive styles: . . . .

give a structured route through learning provide a global perspective of the content present information both visually and verbally (written or spoken) make the structure and scope of content, as well as its relationship to other topic areas, as explicit as possible (Sadler-Smith & Smith, 2004).

Student Intervention Plan (SIP) The Student Intervention Plan is a strategy used to eliminate distress behaviours in students, by meeting their individual needs. It identifies their personality structure (what type is most dominant) and identifies their strengths and weaknesses. It then identifies which cognitive, social, affective, and psycho-motor needs they have, and what is required in order to meet them. It also identifies the channel and distress behaviours (problems that inhibit their learning) The Student Intervention Strategy (SIS) is a way of monitoring the approach taken to solve this problem. It looks at the problem being addressed, the strategies used by the teacher, and the success/failure of this implementation. The most commonly used intervention strategies include: . . . . . . . .

Behavioural Interventions. Collaborative Interventions. One-to-One Interventions. Classroom-Based Interventions. Social, Emotional and Wellbeing Interventions. Peer Tutoring. Metacognition and Self-Regulation. Homework etc.

Conclusion

97

Conclusion This chapter has analysed current research findings in the use of humanistic theories in the classroom, in order to improve students’ emotions, engagement, well-being, and academic excellence. A humanist approach in the learning and teaching context, has a strong focus on students’ identity, feelings, emotional wellbeing, and enhancing the achievement of knowledge at the highest level of cognitive, social and emotional stages of development, eventually culminating in knowledge of self-actualization, and transcendence. As demonstrated above, the humanist approach to learning and teaching requires teachers to consider relevant and significant learning needs of the student, in order to create an effective and inclusive learning environment for all. Humanistic theories in the classroom include cultural differences, emotional needs, social needs, cognitive needs, self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy, and individual differences needs in learning. Since the focus of the pedagogy is on the whole person, humanistic pedagogy is informed by relevant core dimensions of cognitive, emotional and social developments, it will include designated values, active citizenship education, and the use of cognitive and social constructivist pedagogy, when working in small groups, such as cooperative and collaborative groups.

Chapter 7

The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

Discourse and the Power of Language Defining Discourse Analysis It is difficult to offer a single definition of discourse analysis (DA), as a research methodology. Hogan (2013) suggests that DA is a term ‘which has no single stable definition and is therefore used differently by different theorists’. Rather than providing a particular definition, DA has been characterized as a way of approaching and thinking about a critical analysis of language used in a text. As such, DA can be defined as a deconstructive reading and interpretation of a text. Discourse analysis (DA) is ‘the study of language in use. It is the study of the meanings we give language and the actions we carry out when we use language in specific contexts.’ (Gee & Handford, 2012, p. 1). DA has been used to study language in the social, cultural and political context in numerous disciplines, including media studies, sociology, history and education. DA, as employed by Foucault, examined the way language was used in texts, and the resultant nexus between language, knowledge and power. As mentioned already, in my Chapter 3, discourse analysis focuses on the power of the text, language and knowledge. Foucault’s genealogical works, exemplified how power and ideology were represented in the formation of discourse within specific historical periods. Researchers, employing discourse analysis wanted to identify dominant ideas, themes, and ideologies within the text itself. (See Wodak, 2008.) Discourse analysis specifically examines the power of the text, language and knowledge) in their critical discourse analysis (CDA), based on their research model, analysed the nexus between power and ideology, situated in language. Accordingly, CDA researchers understood discourse referring to ‘language as social practice’ (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997), and considered the ‘context of language use’ to be crucial. Wodak and Meyer (2009) provided a ‘very popular’ definition of discourse, among CDA researchers: © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_7

99

100

7 The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

CDA sees discourse – language use in speech and writing – as a form of ‘social practice’. Describing discourse as social practice implies a dialectical relationship between a particular discursive event and the situation(s), institution(s) and social structure(s), which frame it. The discursive event is shaped by them, but it also shapes them. That is, discourse is socially constitutive as well as socially conditioned – it constitutes situations, objects of knowledge, and the social identities of and relationships between people and groups of people... Since discourse is so socially consequential, it gives rise to important issues of power. Discursive practices may have major ideological effects – that is, they can help produce and reproduce unequal power relations between (for instance) social classes, women and men, and ethnic/ cultural majorities and minorities through the ways in which they represent things and position people. (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997, p. 258)

DA can be applied to any text under analysis. Since DA is basically an interpretative and deconstructing reading, there are no specific guidelines to follow. One could, however, make use of the theories of Jacques Derrida (1976), Michel Foucault (1969), Julia Kristeva (1980), or Fredric Jameson (1990), as well as of other critical and post-structuralist researchers. Specific types of discourse analysis can be found in Foucault’s books The Order of Things (1970), The Archaeology of Knowledge (1969), and Power/Knowledge (1980). Foucault (1972) argued that humans were influenced by the language and linguistic structures they used. Louw (2001) suggested, using Foucault’s discourse, that humans were ‘constituted within discursive practices’: However, for Foucault, we were constituted within discursive practices, and these practices are created by human agency within institutions. This Foucaultian shift was highly significant because it opened a space for human agency and struggle that was tied to a notion of institutionalized communication. (Louw, 2001, p. 10)

Derrida, in developing his deconstruction technique of language, was strongly influenced by Nietzsche, Freud and Heidegger. Like Heidegger, he adopted the technique of ‘sous rature’ (under erasure), which became an important tool of his deconstruction paradigm. In attempting to understand the many-layered language, Derrida turned to the study of the role of metaphors in the construction of the text or how these rhetorical and prosody devices shape our perception, knowledge, and judgements. The text, via language works by ‘means of transference from one kind of reality to another and is thus essentially metaphorical’ (Sarup, p. 47). What needs to be stressed here is that the rhetorical dimension of metaphor has also cultural and political implications, which also define the power relations—the power and politics of metaphors. Metaphors in the text are nor simply prosodic devices, or figures of speech, they represent one of the preferred, and culturally and politically correct, ways in which a given discourse is situated and constructed—thus powerfully influencing how we perceive and decipher the preferred knowledge, which is already politically, socially and economically inscribed in what Bakhtin (1963) referred to it as the podtekst (sub-text). As an influential post-structuralist philosopher, Foucault liked using his ‘geographic’ and spacial metaphors, such as landscape, region, position, displacement, site and field. Marx, on the other hand, used a metaphor of a building, the base, and superstructure, whereas Goffman (1956) preferred a stage, or ‘performance’ metaphor, where individuals in their organizational settings, were imagined as actors performing on stage, as players.

The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

101

Deconstruction Deciphering metaphors can also help us to understand the symbiotic (a biological metaphor) relationship between power, knowledge and stake-holders (an economic metaphor). It was Foucault who alerted us, in a post-structuralist sense, to the politics of the text and the knowledge-power connection. According to Foucault (1980, p. 68) Once knowledge can be analysed in terms of region, domain, implantation, displacement, transposition, one is able to capture the process by which knowledge functions as a form of power and disseminates the effects of power.

Close-Reading One of the favourite metaphors used by deconstructionists is that of the palimpsest— reading the text resembles the X-raying of pictures, which reveals, under the surface, another hidden layer. Derrida’s method of ‘close-reading’ a ‘text’ reveals a set of binary opposition and a number of taken-for-granted assumptions that are found ‘inscribed’ within the text. As Sarup (1993, pp. 50–51) explained: In each of the pairs, private/public, masculine/feminine, rational/irrational, true/false, central/ peripheral, etc, the first term is preferred.

The above examples of DA, especially the use of deconstruction, close-reading strategies and the importance of metaphors, representing the preferred ways of in which a given discourse is constructed, is relevant to a more meaningful and informative analysis of dominant theories of motivation.

The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation As an element of critical thinking, DA can offer a more meaningful understanding of the use of motivational theories in the classroom, and their cumulative effects on students’ identities, engagement and improved levels of performance. In our analysis, we will focus on the power of language, and questioning of the basic assumptions of knowledge, concerning the nexus between motivation and students’ identities, self-esteem, engagement and performance. Meyer & Turner (2002), in their article, ‘Using instructional discourse analysis to study the scaffolding of student self-regulation’, argued that since ‘Every classroom presents discourse practices that we must assimilate into the coding scheme or accommodate the coding scheme to reflect’. This is due to the fact, that ‘discourse analysis allows us to test theory in classrooms while inviting practice to inform theory’: One of the major advantages of discourse analysis is that it allows researchers to capture very complex episodes across several classroom instructional contexts... We also believe

102

7 The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

that a long overlooked aspect of the context is that of socioemotional support. The cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational processes in self-regulation are intertwined in social and emotional relationships. (Meyer & Turner, 2002, p. 24)

Meyer and Turner (2002) stressed that the use of DA in understanding students’ self-regulation, for instance, enables us to capture the complexity of the learning and teaching process in the classroom. Aprilia et al. (2020), in their article, ‘The effect of reading interest and achievement motivation on students’ discourse analysis competence’ examined the nexus between achievement motivation and its impact on students’ discourse analysis competence. The authors concluded that the discourse analysis competence was influenced by achievement motivation: The higher the achievement motivation, the better the students’ discourse analysis competence...Students who are fond of reading do not only obtain information and knowledge but also train their analytical competence so that in the end it will facilitate the process of analyzing discourses. (Aprilia et al., 2020, p. 372)

In another work, dealing with the use of discourse analysis in the study of values, Kivle and Espedal (2022), in their book chapter ‘Identifying values through discourse analysis’, suggested that values can be identified through three types of discourse analysis. As a result, the authors have used three approaches in their discourse analysis of values, namely structural-semantic discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis and discursive psychology. Structural-semantic discourse is derived from Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse analysis, namely that the written or spoken language is filled with signifiers. Critical discourse, which is the most popular approach for analysing discourses in texts, where the emphasis is on how ‘dominating values are powerfully executed through language and texts’ (Kivle & Espedal, 2022), and discursive psychology, as the study of psychological domain, from an individual’s perspective, such as emotions, and trust. In my analysis of the use of discourse analysis in understanding motivation, I will employ elements of structural-semantic discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis and discursive psychology. Let us begin with behavioural approaches to motivation in the classroom, and use of the power of the language and the key words. In my structural-semantic discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis and discursive psychology, I will focus on the content of the text. As mentioned in my Chapter 2, Davis et al. (2015), in their ‘Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: A scoping review’, discussed some 82 theories of behaviour. Despite such a huge variety of theories of behaviour, there exists a consensus that behavioural theories focus on observable behaviour, the use of behavioural objectives in lesson planning, and defined standards of performance for each lesson. Behavioural theory of learning can be defined as a theory of learning focusing on observable and measurable behaviours. Behavioural theory of learning is based on the SBR model, or stimulus, behaviour and response. It focuses on how individuals learn, and how their visible behaviours can be observed and measured, in terms of performance. Behavioural psychologists, having examined the nature of classical and

The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

103

operant conditioning, focused particularly on operant conditioning affecting learners’ motivation and performance. In all behavioural views of learning, reinforcement plays a major role. The whole theory of behaviourism is totally dependent on the effective use of reinforcement, and token economies. In terms of structural-semantic discourse, we can analyse the role of signifiers, as used in semiotics of written language, first proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, with reference to behavioural theories. It becomes apparent that the use of key words, such as the SBR model, behavioural objectives, and standards of performance, denote signifiers and signified. In this context, signifier refers to any word, and signified refers to the concept denoted by a signifier. The terms the SBR model, Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) and antecedent, behaviour, and consequence model (ABC), used as behaviour modification strategies, are signifiers, which represent their meanings, or what they signify. The use of critical discourse in understanding behavioural theories helps us to focus specifically on the power of language, and its dominant values. The above ideas of behavioural theories with its focus on measuring observable behaviour in order to define acceptable standards of performance already suggests a normative aspect of culture. In this case the norm is the correct use of behavioural objectives in lesson planning, to measure standards of performance. The dominant value is the power and validity of behavioural psychology, based on empirical evidence. In terms of discursive psychology, employed in behavioural theories, one could refer to the role of emotions and the self-concept affecting individuals’ engagement, motivation and performance. Students’ identity, and self-concept, together with selfesteem and self-efficacy affects their attitudes, emotions, behaviour, social interactions and resultant self-regulation strategies influenced by achievement motivation, goal theories of motivation, self-determination theory, and attribution theories, to name a few. Cognitive theories of motivation, add another perspective to behavioural theories, by representing an in depth perception of the makings of internal mental processes, as the origins of thought processes, and learning outcomes. In this sense, cognitive theories of motivation are based on the idea that individuals’ active behaviour, thinking and actions are directly caused by both external or environmental influences, and the internal processes of the brain, which represent cognitive development stages, focusing on thinking, reasoning, and action. First, I want to begin with the significance of learners’ identities in cognitive approaches to engagement and motivation in the classroom. I have argued in my recent books, that all motivational theories essentially begin with the individual’s identity and the self-concept (Zajda, 2021b, 2023a; Zajda & Davidovich, 2022c). A cultural perspective of identity refers to local identities, defined by a particular culture, language, religion, values, and location. Second, I want to critique, using structural-semantic discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis and discursive psychology, popular and dominant types of five cognitive approaches to motivation, which include: . Inquiry-based learning of motivation,

104

. . . .

7 The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

achievement motivation theories, attribution theories, expectancy theory, cognitive dissonance theory.

Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) of motivation is a popular model in cognitive psychology. IBL occurs when the learner is interested in being engaged and motivated to complete the necessary learning tasks, in order to perform and achieve good results. IBL is associated with discovery learning, experiential learning, critical thinking and problem-solving. Metacognition, critical thinking, and both cognitive and social constructivism represent the key parts of IBL. In general, it is a theory of learning or meaning-making when individuals create their own new knowledge, as a result of the interaction between what they already know, and the new knowledge they learn in the classroom. In terms of structural-semantic discourse, we can analyse the role of signifiers, as applicable to IBL. The term IBL denotes both signifier and signified. In this context, signifier refers to IBL, and signified refers to the concept denoted by a signifier. The use of critical discourse in understanding IBL helps us to focus specifically on the power of language, and its dominant values. The above ideas of IBL with its focus on constructivism and the meaning-making processes, together with metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences, already suggests another normative aspect of culture. In this case, the norm is the correct use of IBL of structuring learning in the classroom. The dominant value is the power and validity of IBL based, on proven practices globally (Zajda, 2023a). In terms of discursive psychology, employed in IBL, one could refer to the role the self-concept affecting individuals’ engagement, motivation, metacognitive strategies, and performance. Individuals’ attitudes, emotions, and self-efficacy are equally important in understanding different approaches to IBL in the classroom.

Achievement Motivation Theory I now want to evaluate briefly the importance of achievement motivation theory in individuals’ learning and performance in the classroom. The theory refers to the key role of the self in learning and achievement. According to achievement motivation theory individuals’ desire and need for achievement is prompted by both intrinsic and extrinsic goal to succeed. Slavin (2022), argued that achievement motivation theory, characterized by the ‘generalized tendency to strive for success and choose goal-oriented, success/failure activities’ was the most important type of motivation. Consequently, students, influenced and driven in competitive environments by achievement motivation, especially high need achievers, are likely engage in more challenging activities, where success depends on both ability and effort. However, not everyone, due to various individual difference and abilities, is capable of achieving desirable level of success in the classroom. Some students,

The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

105

who do not experience success in academic achievement in the classroom, tend to ‘lose the motivation to succeed in such settings and will turn their interest elsewhere (perhaps to social activities, sports… in which they might success’ (Slavin, 2022). Bandura’s (1977b, 2001) concept of self-efficacy, in his social learning theory, is also relevant to a deeper understanding of achievement motivation theories. Selfefficacy refers to individuals’ beliefs, based on self-concept and self-esteem, that they are able to be engaged, and complete certain tasks successfully. This can also be linked to attribution theories, self-determination theories and goal orientation theories affecting the nature and extent of individuals’ engagement and the nature of motivation. In terms of structural-semantic discourse, we can analyse the role of signifiers, as applicable to achievement motivation. The term achievement motivation denotes both signifier and signified. In this context, signifier refers to achievement motivation, and signified refers to the concept denoted by a signifier. The use of critical discourse in understanding achievement motivation helps us to focus specifically on the power of language, and its dominant values. The above idea of achievement motivation with its focus on performance goals, already suggests another normative aspect of culture and schooling. In this case, the norm is the correct use of achievement motivation theories in influencing students’ performance goals in the classroom. The dominant value is the power and validity of achievement motivation based, on research data globally (Zajda, 2023a). Using discursive psychology, employed in achievement motivation, one could refer specifically to the role the self-concept affecting individuals’ learning goals, engagement, motivation, metacognitive strategies, and performance. Individuals’ identities, attitudes, emotions, trust, and self-efficacy are equally important in understanding different approaches to achievement motivation in the classroom.

Attribution Theory of Motivation As already mentioned in my Chapter 3, attribution theory, which concentrates on individuals’ perceptions of the perceived abilities, and explanations, or attributions, for their successes, or lack of success, demonstrates how such attributions and beliefs, which are subjective, tend to influence subsequent engagement, behaviour, motivational strategies and learning outcomes. According to attribution theory, individuals, influenced by their environment, attempt to make sense of their environment. They do this, by accepting that their specific behaviour is affected by the environment and the classroom’s ethos of performing culture, and believing that these attributions will impact on their future behaviour, designed to achieve desirable standards of performance. As a result, students, in understanding logically the reasons for cause of success or failure on their ascribed classroom learning activities and tasks, attribute it to abilities and effort. Consequently, teachers have the power, by explaining reasons

106

7 The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

for success, or failure, as attributes, based on perceived abilities and effort, to significantly influence student subsequent behaviour and learning, by employing enhancing engaging motivational atmosphere, in order to improve students’ academic standards of performance. In terms of structural-semantic discourse, we can analyse the role of signifiers, as applicable to attribution theory of motivation. The term attribution denotes both signifier and signified. In this context, signifier refers to attribution, and signified refers to the concept denoted by a attributions, characterised by one’s perceptions of abilities and effort. The use of critical discourse in understanding attribution theory of helps us to focus specifically on the power of language, and its dominant values, concerning attributions. Attribution theory of motivation with its focus on performance goals, also suggests another normative aspect of culture. In this case, the norm is the students’ and teachers’ correct use of attribution theory of motivation theories in influencing students’ performance goals learning in the classroom. The dominant value is the power and validity of attribution theory of motivation, based on evidence (Zajda, 2023a). Using discursive psychology, employed in attribution theory of motivation, one could refer specifically to the role students’ emotions, and their self-concept. These are likely to influence their learning goals, engagement, motivation, metacognitive strategies, and academic achievement.

Expectancy Theory of Motivation According to expectancy theory, the individual’s attitude towards performing tasks in the work environment, to the perception that one’s effort was likely to desired outcomes. The expectancy theory suggested that individuals’ behaviour was essentially motivated by anticipated results, or consequences. In this senses, expectancy is the individual’s belief that increasing effort on a given task will result in improved and valued outcomes, in this case, higher academic achievement. Expectancy beliefs consist of self-efficacy, goal difficulty and control. Like behavioural theories, expectancy theory attributes a great deal of significance to the role of consequences, and positive reinforcement in motivating individuals to perform successfully. Furthermore, expectancy theory also maintains that individuals are motivated to perform if they know beforehand that their extra performance is recognized and rewarded. Using structural-semantic discourse, we can analyse the role of signifiers, as applicable to expectancy theory of motivation. The term expectancy denotes both signifier and signified. In this context, signifier refers to expectancy, and signified refers to the concept denoted by expectancy, characterised by one’s perceptions of anticipated results, or consequences, positive reinforcement, and the necessary effort. The use of critical discourse in understanding expectancy theory of motivation can help to focus specifically on the power of language, and its dominant values,

The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

107

concerning expectancy. Expectancy theory of motivation with its focus on performance goals, like the previous cognitive theories of motivation, suggests another normative aspect of culture. In this case, the norm is the students’ correct use of expectancy theory of motivation, in influencing their designated performance outcomes in the classroom. The dominant value here again is the power and validity of expectancy theory of motivation, affecting students in completing their prescribed tasks in the classroom (Zajda, 2023a). Using discursive psychology, employed in expectancy theory of motivation, one could refer specifically to the role students’ of emotions, their perceived positive reinforcement, effort, and their self-concept. Knowing beforehand that their extra performance is recognized and rewarded will determine their level of engagement, motivation and the effort required.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory Cognitive dissonance, in terms of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, is an attempt to solve mental conflict, with reference to prior knowledge and new knowledge in thinking and behaviour, which is inconsistent with original thoughts and beliefs. Both assimilation, concerned with mental adjustment of an existing knowledge, or schema to fit new information, and accommodation, when new information is used adjust the existing schema to fit a new experience, in order to restore the desired mental equilibrium, resulting in congruence between thinking and behaviour. As soon as new facts are presented to learners that are unfamiliar or contradictory to their existing knowledge or schema, it results in a phenomenon defined as cognitive dissonance. In general, cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting knowledge and beliefs, resulting in a feeling of mental conflict, and confusion. Using structural-semantic discourse, we can analyse the role of signifiers, as applicable to cognitive dissonance theory of motivation. The term cognitive dissonance denotes both signifier and signified. In this context, signifier refers to cognitive dissonance, and signified refers to the concept denoted by cognitive dissonance, characterised by disequilibrium, which occurs when new knowledge, and perceived to contain unfamiliar and conflicting facts, and threatening the identity, and the ego, are internalised in the cognitive domain of one’s mind. The use of critical discourse in understanding cognitive dissonance theory of motivation can help to focus specifically on the power of language, and its dominant values, concerning cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance theory of motivation, with its focus on maintaining cognitive equilibrium, in Piaget’s sense, focuses on resolving mental confusion and conflict, when new information is presented. The dominant value here again is the power and validity of cognitive dissonance theory of motivation, affecting students in achieving equilibrium in their cognition. Using discursive psychology, employed in cognitive dissonance theory of motivation one could refer specifically to Piaget’s notions of cognitive development, in solving mental conflict caused by new knowledge. Here, both assimilation, concerned

108

7 The Use of Discourse Analysis in Understanding Motivation

with mental adjustment of an existing knowledge, or schema to fit new information, and accommodation, when new facts are used to change and adapt the existing schema, in order to fit a new knowledge, and restore the equilibrium in one’s mind. The above critique of dominant types of five cognitive approaches to motivation, using structural-semantic discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis and discursive psychology, demonstrate some similarities and differences. Achievement motivation theory, like attribution, and expectancy theories of motivation tend to focus on the self, self-efficacy and its role in engagement, effort and performance, designed to produce desired and valued learning outcomes, characterised by high academic achievement. On the other hand, cognitive dissonance theory focuses on restoring cognitive equilibrium, by adjusting the existing mental schemas, in order to accommodate new knowledge.

Advantages and Disadvantages of DA DA, and its use of critical thinking, especially in analysing the language of major motivational theories has provided a new theoretical perspective, by offering a different, and a more critical way of theorising the existing, and taken for granted nexus between language, knowledge and power, as found in the text. DA, derived from critical theory, was a different way of critical and deconstructive reading and interpretation of a text (Zajda, 1988). Foucault used discourses to study the modern self, reflecting subjectivity or individualism. Overall, discourse, as one of the few critical theoretical perspectives, is concerned with the social production of meaning. DA questioned and critiqued the neutrality of knowledge and ideology in language and text. Zajda (1988) also reminded us that the critical aspect of discourses challenged both the hierarchical structuring of authority of knowledge and the neutrality of knowledge (Zajda, 1988, p. 12). More recently, critical discourse has been used in comparative education research to study such topics as education policy and reforms in comparative research, cultural identity formation, and international comparisons and rankings of the OECD PISA results, relevant to motivational research (Zajda, 2020a). The clear methodological advantage of using comparative findings in research dealing with major theories of motivation in discourse analysis is the focus on comparison, rather than a single unit. DA also critiques the nature of knowledge, in terms of epistemology and ontology, and a resultant ‘reification’ of life and existence in a given society. According to Berger & Luckmann (1966), ‘reification’ occurs when specifically human creations are misconceived as ‘facts of nature, results of cosmic laws, or manifestations of divine will’ (Berger & Luckmann, 1966, p. 89). Unlike Marx, who used the concept of reification in his Das Kapital (1867/1996) to demonstrate that it was an inherent and necessary characteristic of economic value, I use ‘reification’ in a broader sense, covering power, domination, social stratification, and control. Reification, in this sense, also connects with Baudrillard’s (1994) idea of signification, where perceived key concepts and social, political and economic societal goals have no independent

Conclusion

109

referent in any ‘reality’ except their own, which is subjective. This is particularly relevant for a better knowledge and understanding of the nexus between major theories of motivation in performing culture and academic achievement. One of the disadvantages of DA, as a paradigm, is the obvious lack of clear and acceptable definition of ‘discourse’ as a theoretical construct. As argued by some researchers, there is no single acceptable definition, and the term is often employed differently by different theorists, representing a multitude of approaches in different academic disciplines (Zajda, 2020). The other disadvantage in the use of DA is the conceptual and theoretical complexity of discourse as a qualitative methodology, and explained earlier in this chapter.

Conclusion Discourse, as demonstrated above, is a type of qualitative methodology, which is concerned with critical interpretation of text and a deconstructive reading, with reference to dominant themes, images, the power of language in shaping the self and identity, and dominant ideologies. The above has demonstrated that the relevance and effectiveness of the use of discourse analysis in understanding major theories of motivation in the classroom settings is largely dependent on students’ identities, their attitudes and values towards education, self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy, social and cultural diversity, level of engagement, and motivational strategies, and school’s location. In addition, students’ mastery of relevant knowledge and skills, and the quality of teachers are equally important factors. Major variables impacting on the quality of the individuals’ learning process and educational outcomes, include cognitive, social, emotional, and cultural dimensions. The critical aspect of discourses challenged, which was innovative at the time, the authority and neutrality of knowledge. As demonstrated above, researchers, employing discourse analysis attempted to identify and critique dominant themes and ideologies within major motivational theories. As such, when combined with critical thinking and critical literacy, it is one of the most powerful critical research paradigms that can be used to critique the power of the language and inscribed dominant ideologies in the text, or hegemonies, which is not always addressed in other research methodologies, especially quantitative methodologies, focusing on numerical data analysis. In addition, discourse analysis specifically examines the power of the text, its language and knowledge, in terms of reification. Individuals, located in certain moments of historical events, are either unable to understand critically social and economic conditions defining their lives, or perceive them uncritically, accepting them as a given, various organisational constraints affecting their work, lives, destinies and equality (Zajda, 2023).

Chapter 8

Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

Values Used in Inclusive Schools: Introduction We are all citizens of one world; we are all of one blood. To hate a man because he was born in another country, because he speaks a different language, or because he takes a different view on this subject or that, is a great folly. Desist I implore you, for we are all equally human…Let us have but one end in view, the welfare of humanity. Comenius (1592–1670)

Values can be defined as standards that people use to guide their lives’ and dominant beliefs concerning right and wrong aspects of behaviour held by a society or culture. Every society has its own rules defining behaviour and actions. This is a normative dimension of a society and its culture, consisting of norms, and values. Values refer to ideas held by individuals or groups concerning moral standards defining actions that are good or bad, or what is desirable and what is not desirable. Values are regarded as one of the most fundamental components (like ideology) of a group’s culture (Zajda, 2023a, 2023b). Some values deal with proper ways, or standards, of interacting with others, or being polite, cooperative, truthful, and accepting. Other values describe desirable states of existence to which we all aspire, including desire for work, happiness, and peace, love, fulfilling life. In general, values can be classified into: . . . . . . .

aesthetic personal family civic moral social economic political

Example of values include: altruism, asceticism, benevolence, hedonism, selfsacrifice, conscientiousness, selflessness, sincerity, humility, modesty, magnanimity, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_8

111

112

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

sympathy, tactfulness, diligence, nobleness. trust, self-mastery, solidarity, tolerance, optimism, mutual assistance, etc. Values generally represent the core of the ideological system, and provide individuals with values about their cultural and social identity, and which also define and characterise the social group and its membership. The Western and non-Western models of values act as dominant agencies of socialization for values education, social identity, and nation-building. Westerninformed international conventions provide value statements globally. The United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN, 1948) was a statement by the international community of the inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms for all human beings. In Article 26, Part 2 it stressed that education ‘shall be directed…to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedom. It shall promote understanding tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups…’ (UN, 1948, p. 7). Other specific value positions are found in various international and legal treaties. For example, the four major Council of Europe treaties protecting the human rights of children combined offer a policy direction for developing and promoting a global vision for a better childhood. The four principal treaties are the European Convention on Human Rights (1950), the European Social Charter (1996), the European Convention on the Exercise of Children’s Rights (1996) and the European convention on Contact Concerning Children (2003). Values associated with schooling are also found in the Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the twenty-first century, Learning: the Treasure Within (Delores, 1996) and its four essential pillars of education for the twenty-first century: Learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together and learning to be. Furthermore, the UNESCO Conference on Education for Shared Values and for Intercultural and Interfaith Understanding (2005) called on educational systems to incorporate common and agreed values into school curricula, to promote intercultural and interfaith understanding. In addition, UNESCO (2002) policy document developed a framework for action on values education in early childhood.

Paradigm Shifts in Values Education In terms of dominant ideologies, the impact of neo-liberal ideology on education policies has resulted in a major paradigm shift from humanistic-centred education, towards global and market-oriented imperatives of accountability, efficiency, performance, and standards in educational settings. The ascent of a neo-liberal and neoconservative education policy, has redefined education and training as an investment in human capital and human resource development policy reforms focuses on ‘meeting the needs of the market, technical education and job training, and revenue generation new emerging paradigm of accountability, ‘globalisation and academic capitalism’ (Delanty, 2001, p. 120), performance indicators and standards-driven policy change. Consequently, the ideals of humanistic education have been replaced by

Paradigm Shifts in Values Education

113

‘economic rationalism and neo-conservative ideology’, which have become a dominant ideology, in which education is seen as a ‘producer of goods and services that foster economic growth’, based on the key concepts ‘from the discourse of global economy, including productivity, competitiveness, efficiency and maximization of profits’ (Zajda, 2010, p. xiii). In short, neo-liberal ideology in education focused on accountability, efficiency, performance and performance indicators, transparency, standards-driven policy, global academic achievement syndrome (GAAS), the market logic of commodification, marketization of education, and profit-driven imperatives, together with global competiveness. Using a critical theory discourse, we could argue that the teleological purpose of the global economy in general, is to consolidate, maintain, expand and protect wealth, power, and privilege. Some authors argued that globalisation is also propelled by a dominant neo-liberal and bourgeois hegemony, which legitimates an ‘exploitative system’ (Apple, 1999; Klees, 2002a, 2002b; McLaren & Farahmandpur, 2005; Rizvi & Lingard 2010; Zajda, 2023a, 2023b). I am using both critical theory and critical discourse analysis in discussing values education in schools for empowerment, for teaching values of democracy, equality, and for promoting quality learning and equality for all. Both critical theory and critical discourse analysis continue to remain key theoretical and analytical frameworks in research for critical and informed analysis of democracy, inequality, human rights, and social justice (Zajda, 2022a, 2022b).

Standards-Driven and Outcomes-Defined Policy Change One of the effects of forces of globalisation affecting educational systems is that educational organisations, having modelled their goals, priorities and strategies on the entrepreneurial business model, are compelled to embrace the ‘corporate ethos of the efficiency, accountability and profit-driven managerialism’ (Zajda, 2022a, 2022b, p. xxiv). Hence, the politics of education reforms in the twenty first century reflect this new emerging paradigm of standards-driven and outcomes defined policy change (Zajda, 2021a, 2021b). Some policy analysts have criticized the ubiquitous and excessive nature of standardization in education, which has made it difficult, if not impossible, to implement the UNESCO 2015 Education for All (EFA) policy goals, promoting equity and quality education for all (Carnoy, 1999; UNESCO, 2023). The emerging challenges for education and policy reforms include a drive towards improving academic achievement in secondary schools. Our key findings indicate that current trends in most BRICS countries’ treatment of governance in education rely on the discourses of accountability, performance and output driven schooling, and that they are characterized by the new high-stakes testing through the final year tests in secondary schools (Dervin & Zajda, 2023). The drive for global competitiveness means that recent education policy reforms in secondary education tend to be standards- and (global) accountability- driven. BRICS governments’ and MoEs’

114

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

push for high academic achievement in secondary schools has been influenced by the emerging standardizing regimes of global educational governance such as the OECD PISA assessment.

Globalisation, Marketisation and Quality and Efficiency Driven Reforms Globalisation, marketisation and quality/efficiency driven reforms around the world since the 1980s have resulted in significant and major structural and qualitative changes in education and policy, including an increasing focus on the ‘lifelong learning for all’, or a ‘cradle-to-grave’ vision of learning and the ‘knowledge economy’ in the global culture. Governments, in their quest for excellence, quality and accountability in education, increasingly turn to international and comparative education data analysis. All of them agree that the major goal of education is to enhance the individual’s social and economic prospects. This can only be achieved by providing quality education for all. Students’ academic achievement is now regularly monitored and measured within the internationally agreed framework of the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). This was done in response to the growing demand for international comparisons of educational outcomes (OECD, Education policy outlook 2015: making reforms happen). Yet, not all schools are successful in addressing the new academic standards imperatives, due to a number of factors, both internal and external. Cohen (2011), for instance, attributed failure of education reforms in the USA due to fragmented school governance and the lack of coherent educational infrastructure. In order to measure levels of academic performance in the global culture, the OECD, in co-operation with UNESCO, is using World Education Indicators (WEI) programme, covering a broad range of comparative indicators, which report on the resource invested in education and their returns to individuals (OECD, 2020; Education at a Glance – OECD Indicators).

Factors Affecting the Nexus Between Values and Motivation in the Classroom There are numerous factors affecting students’ motivation and resultant performance in the classroom. I have divided them into four interrelated groups: cognitive, social cognitive, affective and psycho-motor domains. Cognitive domain includes such attributes as abilities, intelligence, personalities and metacognition. Social cognitive domain refers to students learning from other students and modelling their behaviours on their desirable role-models, or significant others. Affective domain represents emotions, and feelings. Psycho-motor domain cover students’ behaviour

Factors Affecting the Nexus Between Values and Motivation …

115

in the classroom, as they participate in the teaching and learning process in the classroom, and complete their designated learning tasks.

Cognitive Domain Cognitive development refers to thinking, reasoning, and remembering, involving mental processes that make sense of information, and sort the information before placing it in the long term memory. Cognitive processes consist of encoding, storage and retrieval. It also activates self-regulation, or capacity to control one’s thinking, executive functioning, which helps the individual stay focused by using the strategy to ‘self-regulate their thinking and behaviour’ (Duchesne et al., 2022), and metacognition, or thinking about thinking. All three parts of cognition, sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory work together in the meaning-making process.

Social Cognitive Domain Social cognitive domain refers to learning from the social environment, by observation. Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory suggested that learning could take place vicariously by observing a ‘model performing behaviours (Duchesne, 2022, p. 257). Bandura’s research focused on motivation, and self-efficacy. In social cognitive theory, self-efficacy, defined by individuals’ belief in their ability to successfully perform in a task, plays a key role in this process. Bandura (1977a, 1977b) suggested that self-efficacy was influenced by four major sources of information: ‘performance accomplishments, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological states, performance accomplishments, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological states’ (Bandura, 1977a, 1977b, p. 191). In general, self-efficacy have a powerful influence on individuals’ belief in their performance. Individuals with high self-efficacy were likely to be more engaged and motivated in completing challenging learning tasks in the classroom. On the other hand, individuals with low levels of self-efficacy were likely to lack confidence in their abilities to perform well, when completing their learning tasks. Bandura (2001), using his concept of reciprocal determinism, of the interactions between person, environment and behaviour variables, attempted to explain the nature of observational learning through modelling: Among the influential variables affecting one’s sense of agency are self-efficacy, outcome expectations, goals, and self-evaluations of progress. (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2023)

Bandura’s (1991) social cognitive theory suggested that self-efficacy and selfregulation, together with his triadic reciprocal causation model, showed that individuals had the will and the power, by using their cognitive, environmental and behaviour

116

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

factors, to determine, shape, and ‘control and regulate their behaviours’ (Duchesne, 2022, p. 259).

Affective Domain The affective learning domain involves individuals’ feelings and emotions toward learning. The affective domain taxonomy contains five levels in the following descending order: receiving, responding, valuing, organization, and characterization (Anderson et al., 2001). Emotions represent the major source for influencing and shaping the individuals’ self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy, self-regulation, and social and emotional learning (SEL). SEL has been defined as the process by which individuals acquire and apply their knowledge, attitudes and skills, in order to ‘develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions’ (Casel, 2022). Based on extensive research findings, the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) has identified ‘five interrelated competencies that are central to SEL: self-awareness, self management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making’ (Schonert-Reichl, 2017). Schonert-Reichl (2017, p. 137), argues that there is a need to organise classrooms with ‘warm teacher– child relationships support deep learning and positive social and emotional development among students’ and that teachers are ‘the engine that drives social and emotional learning (SEL) programs’ (Schonert-Reichl, 2017, p. 138): …when teachers poorly manage the social and emotional demands of teaching, students’ academic achievement and behaviour both suffer. If we don’t accurately understand teachers’ own social-emotional wellbeing and how teachers influence students’ SEL, we can never fully know how to promote SEL in the classroom. (Schonert-Reichl, 2017, p. 137)

Psycho-Motor Domain The psychomotor domain refers to physical movement, coordination, and use of the motor-skill areas. The seven major categories include the simplest behaviour to the most complex behaviour, including perception (the ability to use sensory cues to guide motor activity), guided response (the early stages in learning a complex skill that includes imitation and trial and error), and origination, or ‘creating new movement patterns to fit a particular situation or specific problem. Overall, psychomotor skills are determined and influenced by the individual’s mind, self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy, self-regulation, body co-ordination, and physical strength. Development and mastery of psychomotor skills requires effort and practice and is ‘measured in terms of speed, precision, distance, procedures, or techniques in execution’ (Clark, 2015).

Cognitive Domain and the Nexus Between Values and Motivation …

117

Cognitive Domain and the Nexus Between Values and Motivation in the Classroom Within the cognitive development and its impact on values and motivation in the classroom, I wish to focus on the role of intelligence, aptitude, attainment, personality and metacognition in affecting designated values in motivation in the classroom.

Intelligence Competing discourses on the nature of intelligence and intelligence testing demonstrate the on-going unresolved controversies surrounding conceptualization of intelligence and intelligence testing in society, especially its continuing use to measure a person’s cognitive ability and agility. Created more than a century ago, the intelligence tests are still widely used to measure performance on specific tasks, and especially potential academic achievement in schools. Binet (1908) produced a single common indicator, called intelligence quotient (IQ), which led to the notion of mental age (MA) versus chronological age. A six-year old child whose performance on a given intelligence test is that of a ten-year old has a mental age of a ten-year-old. Binet’s concept of MA was developed further by the American psychologist Lewis Terman (University of Stanford) in 1916, which lead to the construct of intelligence quotient (IQ), or the ratio of mental age (MA) to chronological age. Thus a five-year old child with a mental age of ten would have an IQ of 10/5 X 100 = 200 (or a genius). In 1927 Charles Spearman developed the concept of ‘g’—a model of intelligence. Spearman proposed his two-factor theory of intelligence (general intelligence factor, or ‘g’ and specific ability factors, or ‘s’ factors). The Stanford-Binet Scale, which was revised in 1988 (Fontana, 1995, p. 98) is another model of intelligence. Finally, Gardner & Hatch (1989, 2000) proposed 9 different multiple intelligences. Howard Gardner defined the first seven intelligences in Frames of Mind (1983). He added the last two, naturalist intelligence, and existential intelligence in Intelligence Reframed (1999). There are a number of major and competing in complexity theories of intelligence in existence, ranging from g-centric, to Cattell Gardner (1987) theory of multiple intelligences. Current developments in intelligence research involve the formation of more complex and diverse intelligence theories. Also, there is a corresponding trend to de-emphasise the use of standardized testing to measure intelligence. With the emergence of sophisticated genetic and neurological research methodologies, inspired by a ground-breaking discovery of the sequence of the human genome, new perspectives and dimensions on the conceptualising and measurement of the complexities of intelligence are being tested and developed. The Human Genome Project (HGP) was an international 13-year effort, 1990 to 2003. Primary goal was to locate the complete sequence of DNA bases in the human genome. As a result, the

118

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

Human Genome Project (2016) has revealed that there are probably about 22,300 human genes (and not the estimated 100,000 human genes in the 1980s). Michael Gardner (2012) was able to group intelligence theories into four major theory types: (1) psychometric theories; (2) cognitive; (3) cognitive-contextual; and (4) biological theories. He argued that psychometric theories of intelligence focused on individual differences specifically in academic achievement on cognitive tests. On the other hand, cognitive theories of intelligence focused on specific mental operations and various processes involved in performance. Globally, there is a great deal of research on intelligence testing and the effects of intelligence on academic achievement (Zajda, 2023a, 2023b). Some of the widely used aptitude/intelligence tests include: . Stanford-Binet Intelligence Quotient . Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISCIV) . Woodcock Johnson Test of Cognitive Ability Both the term intelligence and the notions of aptitude/intelligence testing, and by their nature of intended selection, exclusivity, distinction and social stratification, based on meritocracy and aptitude tend to undermine the egalitarian ethos of democracy and democratic practices in the classroom and divide the learning community. Defining a very small number of individuals as exceptionally able due to some intelligence factors or traits seems to create unnecessary painful and prejudicial social categories and meritocratic divisions in society. Intelligence/aptitude testing controversy, which categorizes individuals into most able versus least able, does reflect the unresolved tensions between the heredity (nature), cultural factors (language and perception in different cultures) and environment (nurture) discourses. Accepting the limitations imposed by one’s genetic code could lead to a re-invented geno-determinism—a new ‘regime of truth’ of the triumph of the genetic code over the free will.

Aptitude Aptitude can be defined as innate or learned ability or skill, which reflects an individual’s intellectual capacity to learn and attain a level of performance or academic achievement in a particular field/discipline. Aptitude is a key dimension in all definitions of intelligence. Aptitude is often associated with cognitive ability, and aptitude/ intelligence tests. Within the domain of the heredity/environment nexus intelligence has been defined as a ‘general aptitude for learning or an ability to acquire and use knowledge and skills’ (Slavin, 2022). Slavin argues that scholars do not share a consensus on the precise meaning of intelligence. They do agree, however, that intelligence is the ability to deal with abstractions, to solve problems, and to learn new knowledge, skills, and values.

Cognitive Domain and the Nexus Between Values and Motivation …

119

In re-thinking of the concept of aptitude, we need to refer to the legacy of Richard E. Snow (1936–1997) who researched extensively human aptitudes and learning environments. In his work, Snow provided a new definition of aptitude, which differed from the cognitive abilities, as it included conative (motivational) and affective (emotional) characteristics. He also coined “aptitude-complexes” theory, which explained the nexus between personal aptitudes and situational demands, which interact to determine the level of performance. Aptitude, together with metacognition and reflection plays an important role on problem solving. There are two opposing view of aptitude: those who maintain that aptitude is innate, like the ‘g’ factor, and those who believe that aptitude can be acquired over the years. The latter view represents the cognitive theory of aptitude for learning. Aptitude plays a key role in intelligence testing. Aptitude is one of the key words in Scholastic Aptitude Test Assessment (SATA), designed to measure different abilities. There are a number of competing views and models of intelligence, and aptitude tests, ranging from the Stanford-Binet Scale that measures four areas of abilities to multiple intelligences (MI) models. Binet’s Intelligence Testing and The Stanford-Binet Scale measure four areas of abilities: verbal reasoning, abstract/visual reasoning, quantitative reasoning and short-term memory. The first modern measure of intelligence was that of the French psychologist Alfred Binet and his co-researcher Theodore Simon in 1904/5, who were engaged by the Education Department in Paris to identify bright and ‘feeble-minded’ children (who could not be educated in normal schools and who needed help). Both aptitude and achievement tests measure development of different abilities. Aptitude tests are specifically designed to measure ‘abilities developed over many years and predict how well a student will do in the future at learning unfamiliar material’ (Margetts & Woolfolk, 2019). Achievement tests measure academic performance. The IQ test is one of the most influential and widely used aptitude tests. The IQ test is a measure of scholastic aptitude. If intelligence quotient defines intelligence as being a single measurable trait affecting all mental ability, aptitudes reflect a multi-modal mental ability, suggesting that they also differ in quality as well as quantity (Zajda & Zajda 2008a). More recently, the Colleges of Oxford University have introduced a History Aptitude Test (HAT) for use in the selection of candidates for all degree courses involving History. This test, which aims to examine the skills and potentialities required for the study of History at university, gives us an objective basis for comparing candidates from different backgrounds, including mature applicants and those from different countries. It is designed to be challenging, in order to differentiate effectively between the most able applicants for university courses, including those who may have achieved or can be expected to achieve the highest possible grades in their examinations.

120

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

Attainment Attainment can be defined as acquiring socially desirable knowledge and skills— defined by the school curriculum, or a local education body, or ministry of education. It refers to academic achievement in school, measured by test or examination result. This definition focuses on academic achievement and performance, which is used as a general indicator of attainment of prescribed body of knowledge, at a given level in school. It covers marks or grades awarded to the student for various assessable tasks, ranging from homework exercises, to class tests and final examinations. Educational attainment is one of the primary indicators of how schools perform across the nation. It is collected by various government bodies, including DfES, in England, to produce attainment or performance tables. This has lead to the contested and controversial performance ranking for schools, colleges and higher education institutions. Attainment tables, used as indicators of academic achieving, excellence and quality in education, recently marketed as ‘league tables’ in the UK, USA, and elsewhere, have serious implications for the funding formula and resources allocated to educational institutions. Institutions have been categorized and ranked, according to attainment in research and teaching. The political, social and economic value of attainment is such that it governs and defines the future well-being and success of both the individual and the institution. The concept of educational attainment, now increasingly defined and legitimated by the government-sponsored ‘league tables’ of performance, has come to be linked with the status, prestige, and distinction ascribed to a particular educational institution. Attainment, defined by league tables of school/college/university performance, produced by policy makers, higher education administrators, and the media, represent, at best, a rough and ready judgment of performance. Most of these observations surrounding attainment, as listed in the higher education leagues tables globally, mirror similar findings that can be seen in the case of UK universities, where Oxford and Cambridge always top the league tables, and thus are invariably cited as the best universities in the country. Attainment also reflects both norm-referenced and criterion-referenced test and examination results, as well as descriptions appropriate to formative and summative assessment in academic achievement. In students’ diaries teachers would often enter criterion-referenced comments, relating to attainment in a particular topic in a discipline, or curriculum area. The desire to raise standards of attainment in schools has been accompanied in many countries, by the development of descriptions of attainment in schools— externally prescribed standards and outcomes. Descriptions of levels of attainment formed a key part of the National Curricula in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and elsewhere. They were intended to be used for raising academic standards through setting appropriate benchmarks for the evaluation of student and school performance. This trend is global. Variables affecting attainment include income, relative poverty, remoteness, and economic inactivity. They may be sufficient by themselves to explain the lower levels

Cognitive Domain and the Nexus Between Values and Motivation …

121

of attainment in schools and the underachievement of boys and girls is different for many countries. Social, cultural and economic dimensions which influence levels of attainment in schools include SES, wealth, social class, parental level of education, gender, and ethnicity, and school’s location (Zajda & Zajda, 2008b).

Personality Personality has been defined as ‘all the traits that characterise an individual over a relatively long period’ (Macmillan Dictionary of Psychology, 1995, p. 334). Personality is the relatively stable organisation of a person’s motivational dispositions, arising from the interaction between biological drives and the social and physical environment. In general, personality can be also defined as enduring individual differences in patterns of cognition, behaviour, and affect. Jung coined the term persona, to describe the outer characteristics displayed by a person in an attempt to adapt to society and its demands. The term usually refers to the affective-conative traits, sentiments, attitudes, and unconscious mechanisms, interests and ideals, which determine a human’s characteristic, or distinctive behaviour and thought (Eysenck et al., 1975). The concept of ‘personality type’ was developed by Carl Jung (1875–1961), who observed that normal human behaviour was not random, but tended to reflect identifiable, predictable patterns. These patterns arise from the structure of the mind. The psychoanalytical theory of Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), as an alternative theory to Jung theory of personality, was essentially based on an approach to understanding human behaviour that focused on the role of unconscious thoughts, feelings, and memories. Freud postulated the existence of three aspects of personality: the id, the ego and the super-ego. According to the Freudian theory, the id is the component of personality that forms the basis of our most primitive impulses, and driven by the pleasure principle, or the desire for immediate gratification of our sexual and aggressive urges. The ego is the largely conscious controller or decision-maker of personality. The superego represents our sense of morality. The superego ‘tell us all the things that we shouldn’t do, or the duties and obligations of society. The superego strives for perfection, and when we fail to live up to its demands we feel guilty’. In addition, the ego serves as ‘the intermediary between the desires of the id and the constraints of society contained in the superego When the ego finds that the id is pressing too hard for immediate pleasure, it attempts to correct for this problem, often through the use of defence mechanisms, or unconscious psychological strategies used to cope with anxiety and maintain a positive self-image’ (The Origins of Personality, 2020). In short, ‘If the personality is not able to produce the appropriate balance between the id, ego and super-ego, then in Freud’s view a number of ego defence mechanisms are created’ (Fontana, 1995, p. 214). Freudian Ego Defence mechanisms consisted of:

122

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

. Denial: denying the seriousness of, or even the existence of a problem, or ‘individuals over-emphatically deny possessing those very motives or emotions which trouble them most’ (I am not killing, I am ‘neutralising’ the enemy). . Compensation: overcoming real/imaginary inferiority in one area, by overemphasising another kind of behaviour (I can’t cope with mathematics, but I will be the ‘best of the worst’). . Displaced Aggression: becoming angry at something/someone other than the direct cause of frustration (Your friend has made you unhappy, so you take it out in your family, etc.). . Fantasy: withdrawing from a potentially threatening situation, taking refuge in imaginary satisfaction in place of real ones (a feature of certain forms of schizophrenia). . Fixation: using immature defence mechanism. . Projection: ascribing our unconscious motivation to other people, or ‘accusing others of acts/thoughts that are of their own making’, sometimes paranoid disorders (You are a loser! Learners who think that the teachers are ‘picking’ on them). . Rationalisation: giving socially acceptable reasons for our conduct. . Reaction Formation: behaving in a manner directly opposite to an unconscious wish, impulse or drive (being kind instead of cruel, a minister in the short story ‘Rain’ who was attracted to the prostitute, or extreme protests or moral outrage at something quite mundane, a sexy person manifests an exaggeratedly moral behaviour). . Regression: retreating to an earlier form of coping behaviour, going back to earlier forms of immature behaviour which was successful in protecting the ego from disappointments, frustration and fears. . Repression: exclusion of unpleasant thoughts, feelings, memories, and experiences by the ego (eg. characteristic ‘amnesia’ of painful memories, repression of sexual desire becomes inexplicable anger and hostility towards the parents, superiors at work and the world in general). . Sublimation: basic drives, such as sex and aggression are channelled into socially approved activities (playing sport, writing romantic poetry to sublimate the sex drive). On the other hand, Eysenck’s (1981) personality theory tended to be focused on temperament, or innate, and genetically based personality differences, and largely controlled by biology and environment. Consequently, Eysenck defined three major personality dimensions, namely Extraversion (E) versus introversion, Neuroticism (N) versus stability, and Psychoticism (P): 1. Extraversion (E) versus introversion: The extrovert individual is oriented towards other people and experiences. Stable extraverts: outgoing, talkative, responsive, lively, carefree, leadership, easy going. Unstable extraverts: touchy, restless, impulsive, irresponsible. The introvert shows qualities of irritability, persistence and shyness. Stable introverts: calm, even-tempered, reliable, controlled, peaceful, thoughtful, passive. Unstable introverts: pessimistic, quiet, reserved,

Cognitive Domain and the Nexus Between Values and Motivation …

123

sober, rigid, anxious, and moody. By the age of eight there is a statistically positive relationship between extraversion and academic achievement. Ten years later the relationship is reversed, so that achievement is positively related to introversion. Introversion increases and becomes more advantageous than extraversion as the learner moves through secondary and into higher education. In most learners extraversion increases up to the age of 14, and then steadily declines. People become more introverted as they become older. 2. Neuroticism (N) versus stability: Individual is prone to anxiety, obsessions and hysteria. Anxiety is significant to academic achievement. Moderate levels of anxiety act as motivational energy bursts, which enhance performance. Children with high ‘N’ scores will perform best in relatively unstressful environments. Why? Children with lower ‘N’ scores will receive optimum motivation where the pressures are severe. Young adult learners with high ‘N’ scales tend to do better than those with low scales in higher education, where stresses are intense (e.g. exam and test times). 3. Psychoticism (P): Usually Associated with Aggression, Recklessness, Hostility and Non-Conformity (Linked with High Levels of Testosterone). High scores on ‘E’ indicate that the individual is oriented towards the other people and experiences. High scores on ‘N’ indicate the individual is prone to anxiety. A ‘stable extravert’ displays stability through a breezy, exuberant approach. A ‘stable introvert’ will do so through calmness and tranquillity. An ‘unstable extravert’ will display instability through mood swings and volatile over-reactions. An ‘unstable introvert’ will do so through brooding and depression. Eysenck’s personality theory was extended further by R. B. Cattell (1987) to 16 distinct traits or factors, such as strong super-ego, excitability, shyness, conscientiousness and guilt proneness. Overall, the trait-based approach to personality is popular among psychologists who use psychometry (psychological measurement) on a large scale. It was believed that bad-tempered children become bad-tempered adults. The disadvantage of the trait approach is the weak link between personality and other variables, and correlations are often very low.

Personality Traits and Learning The ‘Big Five’ personality constructs identified by McCrae & Costa (1987) through meta-analysis of other studies have been gaining acceptance for explaining personality differences in learning. Costa and McCrae (2008) have used their revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) to analyse the five-factor model. The five personality constructs assessed were: 1. Openness to Experience—reflected in aesthetic sensitivity, feelings, fantasy, ideas and action. 2. Conscientiousness—addresses the degree of organisation, persistence, achievement and goal-directed behaviour.

124

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

3. Extraversion—quantity and intensity of interaction. 4. Agreeableness—assesses one’s interpersonal orientation. 5. Neuroticism—assessing the degree of emotional stability. In general, research consistently shows that genetic factors play a significant role in human personality. Across a wide range of personality characteristics twins reared apart are almost as similar to each other as those reared together (the respective correlations are 0.49 and 0.51 for identical twins, and 0.21 and 0.23 for fraternal twins). As the child grows, temperament interacts with environment, with cognitive factors and other maturational variables, such as physique and physical appearance. All these and other variables shape personalities.

Metacognition ‘Metacognition’ is often simply defined as ‘thinking about thinking’. Metacognition refers to higher order thinking, which involves active control over the cognitive processes engaged in learning. Metacognition, or the ability to control one’s cognitive processes, or self-regulation, has been linked to intelligence. The term ‘metacognition’ is most often associated with John Flavell (1993). According to Flavell, metacognition consists of both metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences, or regulation. Sternberg (1984) refers to metacomponents as executive processes, in his triarchic theory of intelligence (Sternberg, 1984). Metacognitive knowledge refers to acquired knowledge about cognitive processes, and knowledge that can be used to control cognitive processes. Metacognitive experiences involve the use of metacognitive strategies, or metacognitive regulation (Brown, 1987). The three basic classroom metacognitive strategies are: . Connecting new information to former knowledge. . Selecting thinking strategies deliberately. . Planning, monitoring, and evaluating thinking processes. Some of the most common metacognitive strategies come in the form of mnemonics, including acronyms, or a word created by combining the first letter or syllable of each word in a phrase to create a new, single word. For example, power, occupation, class, status and educations, defining dimensions of inequality, becomes POCSE. Research shows that metacognitive strategies resulted in increases in learning/academic achievement. In general, metacognitive strategies are logical and sequential processes that one uses to control cognitive activities, and to ensure that a cognitive goal (e.g., understanding a text) has been met. These processes help to regulate and oversee one’s learning, and performance, and consist of planning and monitoring cognitive activities, as well as checking the outcomes of those activities. For example, after reading a paragraph in a text a learner may question herself about the concepts discussed in the paragraph. The cognitive goal is to understand the text. Self-questioning is a common

Evaluation

125

metacognitive comprehension monitoring strategy. The metacognitive strategy of self-questioning is used to ensure that the cognitive goal of comprehension is met. Cognitive strategies are normally used to help an individual to achieve a particular goal (e.g., understanding a text), while metacognitive strategies, are used to ensure that the relevant goal has been reached (e.g., checking on one’s understanding of that text). Activities, such as planning how to approach a given learning task, monitoring, comprehension, and evaluating progress toward the completion of a task represent metacognitive strategies. Metacognitive strategies are also associated with selfregulation theory, defining self-regulated learning, as a cognitive, social and affective process of conscious personal management that involves the process of guiding thinking, behaviour, and feelings, in order to learn, remember and perform. Selfregulation, involves controlling one’s attitudes, behaviour, emotions, and thoughts in achieving learning goals.

Evaluation The above discussion of paradigm shifts in values education, and cognitive, social cognitive, affective and psycho-motor affecting values in the teaching and learning process, especially the significance of intelligence, aptitude, attainment and personality in influencing values in the learning process, suggest the normative essence of terminology employed in educational psychology, dealing with motivation. Students, peers and teachers use such concepts, as intelligence, aptitude and personality to judge the individual’s attitudes, engagement and performance in the classroom. They ascribe relevant values in their understanding of a given student’s academic achievement. Those students, regarded as ‘clever’ are treated as such. Here, both intelligence and ability, defining a ‘clever’ student, represent dominant value-judgements. Overall, all terms employed above, are value-laden, as they represent rules and standards, defining desirable qualities of students’ engagement, motivation, and meaningful learning. In general, values refer to beliefs held by individuals or groups concerning moral standards defining actions that are ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, ‘good or bad’, and what is desirable and what is not desirable (Zajda, 2021a, 2021b). Some research findings had produced evidence of the nexus between values education and academic achievement. Berkowitz (2011) argued that recent empirical research demonstrated that fostering the development of ‘positive, ethical, pro-social inclinations and competencies in youth’ resulted in improvement in their achievement (Berkowitz, 2011). Similarly, Tarabashkina & Lietz (2011) in examining the impact of values and learning approaches on student achievement, confirmed findings of earlier research about the relationship between personal values and approaches to learning. In addition, Tarabashkina & Lietz (2011), discovered the existence of a very strong positive effect which emerged from the achievement value, demonstrating that students who identified strongly with the achievement value also displayed high levels of strategies and motivation that characterize achieving approach to learning (Tarabashkina & Lietz, 2011).

126

8 Dominant Values Used in Motivation in Inclusive Schools

The effects of values education on enhancing students’ academic achievement was also noted by Lovat et al. (2011), who argued in their research dealing with the impact of students’ values on academic achievement, that it enhanced students’ achievement. In addition, Lovat (2017), having evaluated current research finding, dealing with values education and academic achievement, suggests that values education, properly implemented, is likely to impact positively on a range of educational goals, emotional, social, moral and academic. There is also a new insight regarding the nexus between neuroscience, feelings, emotions and values education. Research findings show that that good practice pedagogy must be directed to the whole person. Furthermore, it is the process of cognition that activates a range of emotional, social and moral impulses. Lovat et al. (2010) suggested that a contemporary understanding of values education, or values and wellbeing pedagogy, fits well with recent neuroscience.

Conclusion The chapter has examined the impact of neo-liberal ideology on education policies has resulted in a major paradigm shift from humanistic-centred education, towards global and market-oriented imperatives of accountability, efficiency, performance, and standards in educational settings. The chapter discussed shifts in values education and the impact of cognitive, social cognitive, affective and psycho-motor domains on values, used to motivate students to improve their performance in the classroom. Within the cognitive domain, the chapter analyses the significance of intelligence, aptitude, attainment and personality in influencing values in the learning process. As demonstrated above, values education in schools globally continue to play a significant role in promoting democracy and active citizenship education. Values education has a potential to affect and change individuals in every sphere: cognitive, social, emotional, moral and educational. Values education in schools ought to represent our quest for the ideal of the morally good society, in order to promote a deeper, meaningful and critical understanding of democracy, equality, human rights and social justice for all.

Chapter 9

The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance

The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance: Introduction As discussed in my Chapter 1 of this book, I have argued of the ubiquitous influence of motivation in every sphere of life, and organizations, affecting different individuals, in different ways, in performing their work and designated tasks. We tend to use the concept of motivation constantly in our everyday language. Both teachers and students use relevant motivation theories and strategies to improve their learning and academic achievement. Hannah Hawthorne (2021) suggested that motivation plays a key role in both learning and teaching. Students, who are motivated are ‘much more likely to achieve their potential and find success’ and results in ‘more positive behaviour’ and promotes students’ ‘greater sense of well-being’ (Hawthorne, 2021). In short, effective use of motivation and motivational strategies in the classroom results in students’ greater engagement, positive behaviour, well-being, and improved academic achievement. There exists a global consensus that both engagement and motivation plays ‘central role in shaping students’ ability to master academic subjects’ (OECD, 2021): Students need to be engaged, motivated, willing to learn new things and feel they can succeed; without those dispositions, they will be unable to translate their raw potential into highlevel skills, no matter how intelligent and gifted they are, no matter how much effort and professionalism teachers put into their jobs, and no matter how many resources countries devote to education (OECD, 2021).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_9

127

128

9 The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance

The Role of Identity in Influencing Motivation in the Classroom Before we begin our discussion of students’ motivation, we need to consider students’ cultural identities, with reference to the self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy and engagement. It represents the obvious start in identity and motivation motivation discourses. According to Oyserman et al. (2017), identity-based motivation theory is a ‘social psychological theory of motivation and goal pursuit (self-regulation)’, and which differs from ‘other theories of self-regulation by highlighting three components: dynamic construction of identity, interpretation of experience, and actionreadiness’ (Oyserman et al., 2017). As a result, identity-based motivation theory, presents a more dynamic and reciprocal interaction between identity, motivation and self-regulated learning (SRL) . In addition, it was discovered that professional identity had a ‘positive effect on intrinsic motivation, which in turn was positively associated with SRL, indicating that intrinsic motivation partially mediated the relationship between professional identity and SRL’ (Oyserman et al., 2017). The findings demonstrated that developing a ‘professional identity can enhance student engagement, wellbeing, and intrinsic motivation’ (Oyserman et al., 2017). This research has stressed the significance of identity in increasing students’ engagement, their use of intrinsic motivation, and its impact on their wellbeing. There exists a great deal of evidence, demonstrating the nexus between identity and motivation. As mentioned in my Chapter 1, there is no doubt that students’ cultural identities perform a significant role in their attitudes and behavior towards schooling, engagement and motivation. When examining the identity-based motivation in the classroom, and student outcomes Horowitz et al. (2018) argued that changing students’ identity-based motivation (IBM) could improve their academic outcomes, by helping them experience school as ‘the path to their adult future identities’: We found that most classrooms (88%) and students (89%) received IBM intervention ator-above threshold standard, implying that teacher-based IBM delivery is viable. (Horowitz et al., 2018)

Kaplan et al. (2019) in Identity and Motivation in a Changing World: A Complex Dynamic Systems Perspective, argued that motivation theory and research face serious theoretical challenges, as they concentrated only on the nexus between motivation and academic performance in tests, rather than adaptive motivation, reflecting a ‘complex dynamic system (CDS) that is based in the person’s identity’ (Kaplan et al., 2019). Adaptive motivation, as part of the Adaptive Motivation Model, refers to understanding the nature of wellbeing, by its focus on ‘four related layers of wellbeing: objective, experiential, reflective, and narrative’ (Rusk, 2022). Oyserman and Destin (2010), in their article ‘Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention’, used an integrative culturally sensitive framework entitled identity-based motivation (IBM), to offer a better a more meaningful and deeper knowledge of the nexus between identities, motivation and performance. The authors suggested that individuals, when performing their set learning tasks,

The Role of Identity in Influencing Motivation in the Classroom

129

tended to use their currently active identities, especially identity-congruent, rather than identity-incongruent actions: When action feels identity-congruent, experienced difficulty highlights that the behaviour is important and meaningful. When action feels identity-incongruent, the same difficulty suggests that the behaviour is pointless and ‘not for people like me.’ (Oyserman & Destin, 2010)

On the other hand, Meens et al. (2018), in their sample of some 8723 students in bachelor’s program, analysed the association of identity and motivation with students’ academic achievement. Their results indicated that motivation was associated with academic achievement, rather than students’ identity. More importantly, their findings resulted in tabulating five new combined motivation-identity profiles: ‘moderately positive, amotivated, moderately negative, autonomously achieved, and controlled & troubled diffused’, which predicted academic achievement: In general, the moderately positive profile was positively and both the ‘amotivated’ and ‘controlled & troubled diffused’ profiles were negatively associated with academic achievement, respectively. (Meens et al., 2018)

It needs to be stressed that students’ cultural identities are continually shaped, constructed and formed by external and internal factors. External factors include environmental and cultural influences, as Bronfenbrenner and Ceci (1994) explained in their bio-ecological model, which focused on major agencies of socialization shaping identity. Internal factors refer to the individual’s thinking and behaving, to name a few. In my Chapter 1, I have also examined four major theories of motivation affecting students’ identities, their engagements, and academic achievement, namely: Behavioural theories of motivation Cognitive theories of motivation Social-cognitive theories of motivation Humanist theories of motivation

Behavioural Theory of Motivation Students’ engagement and performance can be influenced and defined by behavioural theory of motivation. For behaviourists, learning is caused by external factors. The most common version of the behaviour theory of motivation is operant conditioning, developed by Skinner (1953). Behavioural learning theories tend to emphasise only observable changes in behaviour. Behavioural theories are totally dependent on the use of reinforcement as a necessary condition for learning. As the reinforcement theory, it represents one of the most well-known process theories of motivation. It is reinforcement that activates and validates the S-B-R model. Unless students experience, for instance, teachers’ positive reinforcement, in terms of positive words and immediate rewards, promoting desirable standards of learning outcomes, be they

130

9 The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance

verbal or symbolic, the S-B-R model would not work. Negative reinforcement is used in changing and shaping behaviour, by deliberate removal of undesirable stimuli, affecting attitudes and behaviour, and reinforcing the desirable target behaviour. As such, the model is totally based on operant conditioning principles and behaviour modification procedures. In order to understand the principles of S-B-R model, there is a need to acknowledge the role of operant conditioning in motivating the student, as explained by Seifert and Sutton (2012): …a student learns by operant conditioning to answer questions during class discussions: each time the student answers a question (the operant), the teacher praises (reinforces) this behaviour. In addition to thinking of this situation as behavioural learning, however, you can also think of it in terms of motivation: the likelihood of the student answering questions (the motivation) is increasing because of the teacher’s praise (the motivator). (Seifert & Sutton, 2012)

Behavioural theories of motivation are the only theories in educational psychology defining and specifying standards of performance. This is stated in all lesson plans, with behavioural objectives defining acceptable standards of performance. Rewarding students for their performance in the classroom is based on extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation often includes grades, teacher, and parental performance expectations. In short, external motivation plays a major role initially for encouraging students to engage and perform, in order to receive rewards. By stressing standards of performance, behavioural theory of motivation was also similar to achievement motivation theory in cognitive psychology.

Cognitive Theories of Motivation Students’ engagement in the classroom and performance can be also defined and influenced by cognitive theories, which, unlike behavioural theories, focus on mental operations, and the way individuals acquire, process, and retain information. Cognitive theories of motivation explain the nexus between cognitive processes, meaningful learning, and academic achievement. One of the most popular cognitive theories of motivation used in schools by both students and teachers is the achievement motivation. It is associated with one’s needs and desire to be successful in achieving specific goals. This perspective also reflects the performing schools culture, affecting students, parents, teachers and school leaders. Achievement motivation is defined by students’ knowledge, ability and competence, and skills, to achieve their performance goals, in order to improve their academic achievement. Even though the achievement motivation theory was first developed by McClelland (1961), it was developed further by Atkinson & Feather (1966) in their book, A theory of achievement motivation. This theory coined the constructs of high need and low need achievers. Students, who perceived themselves as high need achievers tended to engage in more challenging learning tasks. On the other hand, low-need achievers preferred less demanding learning tasks, which guaranteed success.

The Role of Identity in Influencing Motivation in the Classroom

131

Achievement motivation may come from an internal or external source. It can be either extrinsic or intrinsic. Achievement motivation can be extrinsic, when students are expected to be rewarded with good marks, or praise from teachers and parents. Achievement motivation can be intrinsic, when students perform the task successfully, because they are enjoying it, and they feel good within themselves, and do not need extrinsic rewards. The reward itself in intrinsic motivation is enjoying performing the task successfully. According to Ryan and Deci’s 2000 Self-Determination Theory (SDT), the majority of students who indicated that their motivation type was either intrinsic or integrated regulated motivation also demonstrated that they were authentically engaged in their education (Schlechty, 2002, 2012). Ryan and Deci (2000) examined key factors that enhance, or undermine intrinsic motivation, self-regulation, and well-being. Their findings have led to the postulate of three innate psychological needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness, which, when satisfied, ‘yield enhanced self-motivation and mental health’ and when thwarted lead to ‘diminished motivation and well-being’ (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Achievement motivation is also similar to goal theory of motivation, which suggests that if students have specific goals to achieve, they are more than likely to be engaged and motivated to learn and perform. Overall, the goal theories of motivation, affected by intrinsic motivation, focus mainly on mastery goals, and performance goals. Mastery goal refers to students’ need and desires to learn the topic well in order to achieve a degree Achievement motivation theory and achievement goal theory suggest that students are likely to be engaged and motivated to learn and perform, if they have specific goals to achieve. Chazan et al. (2021) in their review of achievement goal theory suggested that it is ‘one of the most popular theoretical frameworks in motivation research’. The authors’ Google Scholar search of ‘achievement goal theory students’ returned 2,850,000 possible references (March 23, 2021). Furthermore, researchers ‘largely agree upon the construct of competence as being central to the theory. In this case, competence is viewed as the ability to do something effectively, sufficiently, or successfully’. According to achievement goal theory, achievement goals are cognitive representations of desired outcomes. Hulleman et al. (2010) analysed the items used to measure achievement goals, which they coded as being ‘goal relevant (futurefocused, cognitively represented, competence-related end states that the individual approaches or avoids)’. They reviewed some 243 correlational studies of self-reported achievement goals comprising a total of 91,087 participants. Their findings indicated that ‘achievement goal–outcome and goal–goal correlations differed significantly depending on the goal scale chosen, the individual items used to assess goal strivings, and sociodemographic characteristics of the sample under study’: For example, performance-approach goal scales coded as having a majority of normatively referenced items had a positive correlation with performance outcomes (ˆr = .14), whereas scales with a majority of appearance and evaluative items had a negative relationship (ˆr = −.14). Mastery-approach goal scales that contained goal-relevant language were not significantly related to performance outcomes (ˆr = .05), whereas those that did not contain goal-relevant language had a positive relationship with performance outcomes (ˆr = .14). (Hulleman et al., 2010)

132

9 The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance

In their findings, Hulleman et al. (2010) specifically observed that performanceapproach goal scales had a positive correlation with performance outcomes. They concluded that achievement goal researchers are using the ‘same label for conceptually different constructs’: This discrepancy between conceptual and operational definitions and the absence of goalrelevant language in achievement goal measures may be preventing productive theory testing, research synthesis, and practical application. (Hulleman et al., 2010)

Research has demonstrated, according to Urhahne & Wijnia (2023), that the most commonly cited six theories of academic motivation, include expectancy-value theory, social cognitive theory, self-determination theory, interest theory, achievement goal theory, and attribution theory. These have been examined and explained in my Chapter 1.

Social-Cognitive Theory of Motivation Social cognitive theory of motivation emphasizes ‘learning from the social environment’ (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Bandura (1986) in his book Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, presented his model of reciprocal interactions among personal, behavioural, and environmental factors. This model became his theory of reciprocal determinism, where he used the term ‘triadic reciprocal causation’, to describe the reciprocal interaction between three variables: environment, behaviour, and personal. His social learning theory emphasizes the importance of observing, modelling, and imitating the behaviours of desirable role models, suggesting that observation and modelling alone play a major role in how and why individuals learn. Key motivational processes, according to Schunk and Usher (2019) are ‘goals and self-evaluations of progress, outcome expectations, values, social comparisons, and self-efficacy’. People set goals and evaluate their goal progress. The perception of progress sustains self-efficacy and motivation. Individuals act in accordance with their values and strive for outcomes they desire. Social comparisons with others provide further information on their learning and goal attainment. Self-efficacy is an especially critical influence on motivation and affects task choices, effort, persistence, and achievement. (Schunk & Usher, 2019)

More importantly, Bandura (1977a, 1977b) coined the term self-efficacy. Selfefficacy refers to an individual’s belief in possessing capacity to execute behaviours necessary to produce specific performance attainments (Bandura, 1977a, 1977b). The construct self-efficacy is part of personal factors domain, which also contains cognition, values, emotions and expectations (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020). Consequently, when examining the role of identity in motivation in the classroom, we need to refer to Bandura’s model of personal, behavioural, and environmental factors.

Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation

133

Humanist theories of motivation Humanistic theories, like cognitive psychology, emphasized the role of the individual in fulfilling one’s potential to learn and achieve. Humanistic psychologists believed that it is necessary to study the person as a whole, especially as an individual develops over the lifespan. A humanist philosophy has a strong focus on students’ feelings, emotions, and emotional wellbeing. Furthermore, humanistic theories tend to focus on the uniqueness and the positive aspects of individual. Humanistic theories of motivation are also based on the idea that individuals have the need, based on their strong cognitive, social, behavioural and emotional factors, to perform and achieve desirable outcomes, including self-actualization. Maslow’s (1943) construct of his hierarchy of needs was first developed in his article ‘A theory of human motivation’. As such, he was a pioneer of the nexus between motivation and human needs. The concept of the hierarchy of human needs was further described in Maslow’s (1962) hierarchy of needs, which listed various levels of needs and motivations. His five-stage model of hierarchy of needs can be divided into deficiency needs and growth needs. Moving from the bottom of the hierarchy upwards, the needs are: ‘physiological (food and clothing), safety (job security), love and belonging needs (friendship), esteem, and self-actualization’ (McLeod, 2023). Maslow (1962) believed that deficiency needs, which included basic survival needs, such as the need for air, water, food, shelter, sleep, clothing, sleep, and reproduction. These had to be met first, before individuals could progress to their growth needs, or higher needs. In short, Maslow’s model of hierarchy of human needs is relevant to understating of the complexity of the role of identity in motivation in the classroom, especially the students’ use of intrinsic motivation.

Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Extrinsic motivation The construct of operant conditioning is based on the reciprocal relationship between a stimulus (antecedent), response, and resultant behaviour, as defined by Skinner’s S-B-R (stimulus, behaviour, response) model. The basic idea of operant conditioning is one of shaping students’ desirable attitudes and behaviour in the classroom, while completing their learning activities. Furthermore, extrinsic motivation, which is based on external rewards, includes teachers’ verbal praise, teachers’ written comments, and marks, to name a few. Extrinsic motivation is an essential part of operant conditioning in behavioral psychology. Operant conditioning is totally dependent on the meaningful and relevant teachers’ use of reinforcers, both positive and negative, in the classroom. Extrinsic motivation is also a type of identified motivation, used to achieve personally endorsed goals (Deci & Ryan, 1987). An example of identified motivation is

134

9 The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance

studying for an exam or a test. Students’ endorsed goal is to achieve a good result. Examples of the use of extrinsic motivation, as rewards, are present in every organizational setting globally. Generally, individuals are motivated to perform their work, by such powerful and significant incentives, as money, promotion, status, acclaim and fame. Other examples of extrinsic motivation include: . . . . . .

‘Competing for a trophy or prize, such as in a sporting event Doing schoolwork to earn a good grade Working hard at a task or project to receive praise and recognition Shopping with a store loyalty card to gain points, discounts, and prizes Doing homework to earn a reward such as a special treat or toy Performing tasks at work that you dislike in order to keep getting a steady pay check’ (Cherry, 2022a, 2022b)

When teachers use operant conditioning, as part the behavioural theory of motivation in the classroom teaching and learning process, they necessarily promote the value of extrinsic motivation, based on reinforcement. Ryan and Deci (2000), when examining the principles of Self-determination theory, suggested the existence of four types of extrinsic motivation: external regulation, introjected regulation, identification, and integrated regulation. The first type of extrinsic motivation is external regulation, which denotes behaviour performed to receive an external reward. The second type of extrinsic motivation is introjected regulation, when behaviour is performed to get approval from others or themselves (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The third type of extrinsic motivation is identification, occurring when individual have identified with the personal importance of a behaviour and has thus accepted its regulation as their own. The fourth type of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation, when behaviour is done because it matches a person’s values and beliefs; the value of doing behaviour is integrated into one’s beliefs (Ryan & Deci, 2000). According to Korb (2012), the ‘most positive type of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation’. Examples include: …going to school because she values being educated or studying English grammar because she values sophisticated communication. A student who studies hard because they value excellence also has integrated regulation. (Korb, 2012, p. 5)

One could argue, on the basis of the principles of operant conditioning, that all four types of extrinsic motivation, especially external regulation, when students are rewarded for their desirable performance, are valid for a better knowledge and understanding of motivation in the classroom.

Intrinsic Motivation Intrinsic motivation is defined as the ‘inherent desire to engage one’s interests and to exercise and develop one’s competence and relatedness’ (O’Donnell et al., 2019). Intrinsic motivation is the ‘most autonomous type of motivation’ (Meens et al.,

The Significance of Cultural Capital in Students’ Motivation

135

2018). Earlier, Ryan and Deci (2000), perceived intrinsic motivation to be ‘doing of an activity for its inherent satisfactions rather than for some separable consequence’ (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Meens et al. (2018) argued that since both intrinsic motivation and identified motivation are characterized by a ‘sense of volition’, it can be also linked to autonomous motivation (Meens et al., 2018, p. 56). They argued that intrinsic motivation is not the ‘only form of motivation, or even of volitional activity, but it is a pervasive and important one’, and that ‘intrinsic motivation exists within individuals, in another sense intrinsic motivation exists in the relation between individuals’: People are intrinsically motivated for some activities and not others, and not everyone is intrinsically motivated for any particular task. Because intrinsic motivation exists in the nexus between a person and a task, some authors have defined intrinsic motivation in terms of the task being interesting while others have defined it in terms of the satisfactions a person gains from intrinsically motivated task engagement. (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 56)

In general, intrinsic motivation is internal, unlike extrinsic motivation, which is external, and based on rewards. It refers to motivation ‘arising from internal factors, such as …excitement, confidence, and satisfaction when performing a task’ (Duchesne et al., p. 317). When students are intrinsically motivated, completing the task or activity becomes its own reward. In general, intrinsically motivated students tend to experience pleasure and satisfaction, when performing a task. In my case, my two granddaughters, 11 and 9 respectively, play the piano, whenever I visit my family. When I said to one, I am going to give you a ‘gold star’; she replied ‘I don’t need it. I do it for myself, as it makes me feel good, and I want to make you happy’. As above demonstrates, that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation play a significant role in influencing students’ attitudes, beliefs, values, behavior, engagement, belonging, well-being and academic performance. In my books, based on recent research findings, I have argued that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivations are interconnected in influencing students’ attitudes, behavior, and performance (Zajda, 2022a, 2021b).

The Significance of Cultural Capital in Students’ Motivation In most current research dealing with various theories of motivation and classroom application, there is not much reference to the role of students’ cultural and social capitals in motivation and engagement in the classroom. I would like to discuss briefly the relevance and significance of students’ cultural capital to their engagement, behavior, and motivation in the classroom. The scholar, most responsible for linking cultural capital with education and society, was Bourdieu (1977). On the other hand, John Coleman (1966) examined earlier the role of social capital in education and society. Coleman (1966), in his report Equality of Educational Opportunity, examined social capital and its impact on schooling in the USA. Coleman in his research during the 1960s was interested in different types of capital and their interaction, namely human, physical and social capitals. Cultural capital, first coined and

136

9 The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance

investigated by French thinker Pierre Bourdieu in the 1970s, refers to the social and cultural knowledge that can help a student to succeed in learning. The initial documented use of the concept of ‘cultural capital’ occurred in the works of Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) in their research on French university students. According to Bourdieu (1986), the term capital is ‘accumulated labour….which, when appropriated on a private, i.e., exclusive, basis by agents or groups of agents, enables them to appropriate social energy in the form of reified or living labour’ (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 241). In addition, Saha (2021) argued of the importance of culture as a form of capital which can be ‘converted to other forms of capital, such as economic or occupational capital, has been found to be more or less a universal process’ (Saha, 2021). Saha (2021) noted the contributions of DiMaggio 1982 De Graaf 1986 Post and Pong (1998), and others, who investigated the impact of cultural capital on schooling. DiMaggio (1982), using the data from a survey of about 3000 grade 11 students, discovered that cultural capital variables had a highly significant impact on student grades. In Hong Kong, Post and Pong (1998) analysed the impact of declining family size on the sex differences in educational attainment. Using census data, they found that between 1981 and 1991 the differences between boys and girls decreased. They attributed this decline to the increased educational attainment of mothers, which they argued represents ‘an omnibus measure of culture capital’ (Post & Pong, 1998, p. 108). Saha (2021) also argued that in many Asian societies such as ‘Japan, Taiwan and China, there are rich traditional cultural practices which guide the daily lives of people’, and that the ‘knowledge of these cultural practices constitute a form of cultural capital which can be converted into other forms of capital’ (Saha, 2021). In short, the above examples tend to support Bourdieu’s (1986) idea that cultural capital can be converted into scholastic capital, which lead to education success and attainment (Saha, 2021). Consequently, it could be argued, that cultural capital represents an important concept in understanding the complexities of educational, economic and social stratification in all societies globally.

Evaluation Cultural capital, as a construct, needs to be understood within the forces of globalisation, affecting societies, education systems and individuals, both locally and globally. Globalisation, as a concept, has become dominant paradigm in major critical discourses. The concept describes a condition, were the world is seen as becoming more homogeneous with respect to a wide range of economic, cultural, and social processes. It refers to the quantum leap in global exchange of goods, services, and capital. As a dominant ideology, globalisation is associated with neo-liberalism and technocratic solutions to economic reforms.

Evaluation

137

It is difficult to imagine another time in history when globalisation has had such a greater cultural, economic, and technological impact on societies and educational systems. The increased importance of the knowledge industry, innovations in information and communication technologies, and a strong orientation toward the market economy, and global competitiveness, affect every sector of education globally. At the same time, globalisation has acquired a new meta-ideology, or the global hegemonic meta-ideology, that carries strong elements of Western ideologies. One of the most significant macro-social policy responses of the education sector, both locally and globally, to the market forces and global competitiveness, are the competitivenessdriven reforms, or reforms due to shifting demands for jobs, skills, commodities and emerging markets. Globally, neo-liberalism in education policy reforms has been characteristic of capitalist societies. One of the effects of economic forces of globalisation is that educational organisations, having modelled its goals and strategies on the entrepreneurial business model, are compelled to embrace the corporate ethos of the efficiency, accountability and profit-driven managerialism (Zajda, 2021a, 2021b). The politics of education reforms in the twenty-first century reflect this new emerging paradigm of standards-driven and outcomes-defined policy change affecting educational systems globally. Students’ academic achievement is now regularly monitored and measured within the internationally agreed framework of the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). This was done in response to the growing demand for international comparisons of educational standards. To measure levels of academic performance in the global culture, the OECD, in co-operation with UNESCO, is using World Education Indicators (WEI) programme, covering a broad range of comparative indicators, which report on the resource invested in education and their returns to individuals (OECD, 2022 Education at a Glance – OECD Indicators). As a result, cultural capital is likely to be affected by the paradigm of standards-driven and outcomes-defined policy change, informed by OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), measuring 15-year-olds’ ability, to use their reading, mathematics and science knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges. There is no doubt, that the global paradigm of standards-driven imperatives and outcomes-defined policy has affected the evolving and changing construct of students’ cultural capital, as educational systems and students embrace the imperatives of standards-driven outcomes in the performing schools culture. In this sense, Bourdieu’s (1986) original idea that cultural capital can be converted into scholastic capital, which leads to forms of education success and attainment, may well be relevant towards a better knowledge and understanding of the complex nexus between cultural capital, educational standards and students’ performance, both locally and globally.

138

9 The Impact of Motivation on Students’ Engagement and Performance

Conclusion The chapter has demonstrated both the need and relevance for considering students’ cultural identities, with reference to the self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy, and engagement in the classroom. Students’ identities represent the key idea in identitymotivation discourses. As shown above, there exists a great deal of evidence, demonstrating the nexus between identity and motivation. The chapter has argued that there exists a global consensus that both engagement and motivation plays ‘central role in shaping students’ ability to master academic subjects’ (OECD, 2021). The chapter has analysed the overall impact of motivation theories on students’ engagement, well-being, academic excellence, standards, equity and global competiveness. It has examined the role of motivation theories impacting on students and their academic achievement in the classroom. The chapter has evaluated values education in motivational theories, and the overall impact of cognitive, social cognitive, affective and psycho-motor domains, used to motivate students to improve their performance in the classroom. Within the cognitive theories of motivation, it was demonstrated that achievement motivation, similar to goal theory of motivation, was one of the most popular theories in motivational research. Achievement motivation suggests, as shown earlier, that if students have their own specific goals, they will be more motivated to achieve successfully their performance goals. In addition, achievement motivation by its focus specifically on students’ mastery goals, and performance goals, tends to promote intrinsic, rather than extrinsic motivation. Within the cognitive domain, the chapter reviewed the significance of intelligence, aptitude, attainment and personality in influencing students’ engagement and performance. It also examined the role of motivation theories impacting on students’ attitudes, beliefs, values and academic achievement in the classroom. Finally, the chapter examined critically the relevance and significance of students’ cultural capital to their engagement, motivation and academic performance in the classroom.

Correction to: Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories Affecting Schools

Correction to: Chapter 1 in: J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_1 The original version of the book was updated with the belated corrections in Chapter 1, page 7, line 8. The book and the chapter have been updated with the changes.

The updated version of this chapter can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_1 © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1_10

C1

References

Ackerman, C. (2023). What is self-worth and how to build it? https://positivepsychology.com/selfAdak, S. (2017). Effectiveness of constructivist approach on academic achievement in science at secondary level. Educational Research and Reviews, 12(22), 1074–1079. Adams, P. (2006). Exploring social constructivism: Theories and practicalities. Education 3–13, 34(3), 243–257. Ahme Qarareh. (2016). Review of constructivism and social constructivism. Journal of Social Sciences, Literature and Languages, 1(1), 9–16. Akpan, J., & Beard, B. (2016). Using constructivist teaching strategies to enhance academic outcomes of students with special needs. Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 392–398. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1089692.pdf Akpan, V., et al. (2020). Social constructivism: Implications on teaching and learning. British Journal of Education, 8(8), 49–56. Alexander, T., et al. (2011). Factors affecting career choice: Comparison between students from computer and other disciplines. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 300–315. American Psychological Association. (2020). Students Experiencing Low Self-esteem. https://www. apa.org/ed/schools/primer/self-esteem American Psychological Association. (2022). Personality. https://www.apa.org/topics/personality Amin, F. (2020). Positive classroom environment, cooperative learning strategy, reading comprehension achievement: A correlational study. Language-Education, 9, 1–14. Anderman, E. (2020). Achievement motivation theory: Balancing precision and utility. https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361476X20300291 Anderson, L. W., et al. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy. Longman Publishing. Andrade, H. (2019). Critical review of research on student self-assessment. https://www.frontiersin. org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087/full Aprilia, F., et al. (2020). The effect of reading interest and achievement motivation on students’ discourse analysis competence. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 7(4), 368–372. Apple, M. (1999). Rhetorical reforms: Markets, standards, and inequality. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 1(2), 6–18. Ardiansyah, W., & Ujihanti, M. (2018). Social constructivism-based reading comprehension teaching design at Politeknik Negeri Sriwijaya. https://awej.org/social-constructivism-basedreading-comprehension-teaching-design-at-politeknik-negeri-sriwijaya/ Arends, R. (1998). Learning to teach. McGraw Hill. Ariely, G. (2012). Globalization and the decline of national identity? An exploration across sixtythree countries. Nations and Nationalism, 18(3), 461–482. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1

139

140

References

Atkinson, J. W., & Feather, N. T. (Eds.). (1966). A theory of achievement motivation. Wiley. Au, K. (1998). Social Constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Literacy Research, 30(2), 297–319. Awan, R., et al. (2011). A Study of relationship between achievement motivation, self concept and achievement in English and Mathematics at secondary level. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ EJ1066527.pdf Ayaz, M., & Sekerci, ¸ H. (2015). The effects of the constructivist learning approach on student’s academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 14(4), 143–156. Ayish, N., & Deveci, T. (2019). Perceptions of responsibility for their own learning and for supporting peers’ learning in a project-based learning environment. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 31(2), 224–237. Bakx, A. (2018). The association of identity and motivation with students’ academic achievement in higher education. https://www.academia.edu/80508698/The_association_of_identity_and_mot ivation_wi Bandura, A. (1977a). Social learning theory. General Learning Press. Bandura, A. (1977b). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. Bandura, A. (1977c). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Pychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. Bandura, A. (1978). The self-system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33, 344– 358. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122– 147. Bandura, A. (1986a). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1986b). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Clinical and Social Psychology, 4, 359–373. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman. Bandura, A. (1999). A social cognitive theory of personality. In L. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality (pp. 154–196). Guildford Publications. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. Banks, T. (2014). Creating positive learning environments: Antecedent strategies for managing the classroom environment & student behavior. Creative Education, 5, 519–524. https://doi.org/10. 4236/ce.2014.57061 Becta. (2005). Learning styles—An introduction to the research literature. http://www.becta.org.uk Bender, A., Beller, S., & Medin, D. L. (2017). Causal cognition and culture. In M. Waldmann (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of causal reasoning. Oxford University Press. Boissicat, N., et al. (2021). Social comparison in the classroom: Priming approach/avoidance changes the impact of social comparison on self-evaluation and performance. Educational Psychology, 92(2), 594–609. Bouffard, T., Pansu, P., Boissicat, N., Vezeau, C., & Cottin, F. (2014). Questionnaire de la comparaison de soi scolaire pour enfants et adolescents. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 46, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028429 Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage. Brady, L. (2006). Collaborative learning in action. Pearson Education.

References

141

Breyer, R. (1983). The relationship of Atkinson’s theory of achievement motivation to programmed instruction [Doctoral dissertation]. https://www.google.com/search?q=Breyer%2C+R.+The+ relationship+of+Atkinson%E2%80 British Council. (2020). Field-dependent learners. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/professio nal-development/teachers/knowing-subject/d-h/ Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619–648). American Psychological Association. Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nuture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: A bioecological model. Psychological Review, 101(4), 568–586. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-295X.101.4.568 Bronfenbrenner, U., & Evans, G. W. (2000). Developmental science in the 21st century: Emerging questions, theoretical models, research designs and empirical findings. Social Development, 9(1), 115–125. Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development. Brooks, M., & Brooks, J. (1999). The courage to be constructivist. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 18–24. Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanism. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21–32. Bruner, J. S. (1963). The process of education. Vintage Books. Bruner, J. S. (1966a). Toward a theory of instruction. Belkapp Press. Bruner, J. S. (1966b). The process of education. Vintage Books. Cano-García, E., & Rojas-Cazaluade, Ó. (2022). Increase in academic performance due to the application of cooperative learning strategies: A case in construction engineering. Journal of Technology and Science Education JOTSE, 12(3), 578–595. Carnoy, M. (1977). Education as cultural imperialism. Longman. Carnoy, M. (1999). Globalization and educational reform: What planners need to know? UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning. Carnoy, M., & Rhoten, D. (2002). What does globalization mean for educational change? A comparative approach. Comparative Education Review, 46(1), 1–9. Casel. (2022). Fundamentals of SEL. https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/ Cassidy, S. (2004). Learning styles: An overview of theories, models and measures. Educational Psychology, 24(4), 419–444. Castells, M. (1989). The informational city information technology, economic restructuring, and the urban-regional process. Blackwell. Castells, M. (2000). Toward a sociology of the network society. Contemporary Sociology, 29(5), 693–699. https://doi.org/10.2307/2655234 Castells, M. (2006). Globalisation and identity. A comparative perspective. https://llull.cat/IMA GES_175/transfer01-foc01.pdf Castells, M. (2010). The power of identity (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. Cattell, R. (1987). Intelligence: Its structure, growth and action. Elsevier. Center for Self-Determination Theory. (2023). https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/theory/ Chazan, D., et al. (2021). Achievement goal theory review: An application to school psychology. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08295735211058319#:~:text=According%20to% Cherry, K. (2022a). What is extrinsic motivation? https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-extrin sic-motivation-2795164 Cherry, K. (2022b). How social learning theory works. https://www.verywellmind.com/social-lea rning-theory-2795074

142

References

Cherry, K. (2023). Cattell’s 16 personality factrors. https://www.verywellmind.com/cattells-16-per sonality-factors-2795977 Chiu, S., et al. (2014). The effects of family cultural capital and reading motivation on reading behaviour in elementary school students. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/014303 4314528488?journalCode=spi Cione-Kroeschel, J. (2022). Applied behaviour analysis. https://www.appliedbehavioranalysisedu. org/2021/11/aba-inCohen, D. (2011). Why education reform keeps failing. The Washington Post. https://www.washin gtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-education-reform-keepsCohen, G., et al. (2008). Identity, belonging, and achievement: A model, interventions, implications. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467Cohen, J. (1958). Humanistic psychology. George Allen & Unwin. Colditz, I. (2020). A consideration of physiological regulation from the perspective of Bayesian enactivism. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/enactivism Coleman, J. S. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity (PDF) (Report). U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare/U.S. Office of Education/U.S. Government Printing Office. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Supplement), 95–121. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2013). Guide: effective social and emotional learning programs: Preschool and elementary school edition. CASEL. Comas-Diaz, L. (2012). Humanism and multiculturalism: An evolutionary alliance. Psychotherapy, 49(4), 437–441. Conti, G. (2015). Eight motivational theories and their implications for the classroom. https://gia nfrancoconti.com/2015/07/27/eight-motivational-theories-andConversation. (2019). Explainer: The ideas of Foucault. https://theconversation.com/explainer-theideas-of-foucaultCoppola, M. (2022). Using antecedent strategies to minimize challenging behaviors with autistic students. https://blog.stageslearning.com/blog/using-antecedent-strategies-to-minimize-challe nging-behaviors-with-autistic-students Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (2008). The revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R). In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment, Vol. 2. Personality measurement and testing (pp. 179–198). Sage Publications. Covington, M. V. (1984). Self-worth theory of achievement motivation: Findings and Implications. Elementary School Journal, 85(1). https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/461388 Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173582 Covington, M. V., & Beery, R. G. (1976). Self-worth and school learning. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Cox, A. (2022). Motivation in education. https://study.com/learn/lesson/motivation-education-the ory-impact.html Cox, R. (1996). A perspective on globalization. In J. Mittelman & T. Sinclair (Eds.), Approaches to world order (pp. 21–300). Cambridge University Press. Cowan, J. (2021). Behavior Intervention 101: Antecedent Interventions. https://thinkpsych.com/ blog/antecedent-interventions-to-reduce-challenging-behavior/ Craig, H. (2019). 5 positive reinforcement activities to use in the classroom. https://positivepsychol ogy.com/positive-reinforcementCulatta, R. (2023). Attribution theory. https://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/attribution-the ory/ Daun, H. (2015). Globalization and the governance of national education systems. In J. Zajda (Ed.), The international handbook of globalisation and education policy research. Springer. Daun, H. (2021). Globalisation, hegemony and education policies. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Third international handbook of globalisation, education and policy research. Springer. Davis, B., & Francis, K. (2022). Cognitive motivation theories. In Discourses on learning in education. https://learningdiscourses.com

References

143

Davis, R., et al. (2015). Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: A scoping review. Health Psychology Review, 9(3), 323–344. de Boer, H., et al. (2018). Long-term effects of metacognitive strategy instruction on student academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 24, 98–115. De Graaf, P. M. (1986). The impact of financial and cultural resources on educational attainment in the Netherlands. Sociology of Education, 59, 237–246. de Vries, H., & Egyedi, T. (2007). Education about standardization: Recent findings. https://www. igi-global.com/article/education-standardization-recent-findings/2585 Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. Plenum Press. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024–1037. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. University of Rochester Press. Delanty, G. (2001). Challenging knowledge: The University in the knowledge society. Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The treasure within; report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century. UNESCO. Dervin, F., & Zajda, J. (2023). Governance in education: Diversity and effectiveness. UNESCO. Dijkstra, P., et al. (2008). Social comparison in the classroom. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 828–879. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Elsevier. DiMaggio, P. (1982). Cultural capital and school success: The impact of status culture participation on the grades of US high school students. American Sociological Review, 47, 189–201. Dirkes, M. A. (2010). Metagnition: Students in charge of their thinking. Roeper Review, 8(2), 96–100. Doolittle, P. E., & Hicks, D. E. (2003). Constructivism as a theoretical foundation for the use of technology in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 31(1), 71–103. Dorsey, M. (2017). The top 10 features of a good ABA classroom. https://vlsblog.endicott.edu/aba/ aba-in-the-classroom Duchesne, S., McMaugh, A., & Mackenzie, E. (2022). Educational psychology for learning and teaching (7th ed.). Cengage Learning. Duffy, T., & Jonassen, D. (1992).Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Laurence Erlbaum Associates. Dunn, R., Beaurdy, J., & Klavas, A. (1989). Survey of research on learning styles. Educational Leadership, 46(6), 50–58. Duckworth, A., et al. (2019). Self-control and academic achievement. The Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 373–399. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256 Elbaz, F. (2015). The teacher’s ‘practical knowledge’: Report of a case study. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 43–71. Ellithorpe, M. (2020). MODE model. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345737325_ MODE_Model/citations Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. W. W. Norton. Etkin, J. (2018). Understanding self-regulation in education. BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 10(1), 35–39. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1230272.pdf Expectancy Theory of Motivation: Guide for Managers. (2023). https://www.indeed.com/careeradvice/career-development/expectancy-theory-of-motivation Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Personality and learning. In S. Murray-Smith (Ed.), Melbourne studies in education. Melbourne University Press.

144

References

Eysenck, H. J. (1981). A model for personality. Springer. Eysenck, H. J. (1982). Inheritance of intelligence. New Education, 4(1), 1–8. Eysenck, H. J., Arnold, W., & Meili, R. (1975). Encyclopedia of psychology. Wiley. Eysenck Personality test online: http://similarminds.com/cgi-bin/eysenck.pl, http://www.trans4 mind.com/personality/EPQ.html Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Row & Peterson. Fiske, D. W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44(3), 329–344. Flavell, J. H. (1992). Cognitive development: Past, present, and future. Developmental Psychology, 28(6), 998–1005. Fleming, N., & Baume, D. (2006). Learning styles again: VARKing up the right tree! Educational Developments, SEDA, 7(4), 4–7. Fontana, D. (1995). Psychology for teachers. Palgrave Macmillan. Fontana, D. (1996). Teaching and personality. Basil Blackwell. Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. S. (2005). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. Teacher’s College Press. Foucault, M. (1967). Madness and civilization. Tavistock. Foucault, M. (1969). The Archaeology of knowledge. Routledge. Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things. Tavistock. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. Penguin. Foucault, M. (1979). The history of sexuality. Volume 1: An introduction (R. Hurley, Trans.). Penguin. Foucault, M. (1980). Power knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977 (G. Gordon, Ed.). Harvester Press. Freud, S. (1920). A general introduction to psychoanalysis. Horace Liveright. Friston, K. J. (2010). The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 127–138. Gaier, S. (2015). Understanding why students do what they do: Using attribution theory to help students succeed academically. Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 31(2), 6–19. Gaither, S. (2019). Considering your multiple identities: Awareness of various identities has an impact on creativity and social thinking. https://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2019/07/mul tiple-identities Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st Century. Basic Books. Gardner, M. (2012). Theories of intelligence. In M. Bray & T. Kehle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of School Psychology. http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/978019 5369809.001.0001/oxfo Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford University Press. Giddens, A. (2000). Runaway world: How globalization is reshaping our lives. Routledge. Gilpin, R. (1987). The political economy of international relations. Princeton University Press. Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(1), 141–165. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216–1229. Goldstein, S., Naglieri, J. A. (Eds.). (2011). Encyclopedia of child behavior and development. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_31 Gopalan, V., et al. (2017). AIP Conference Proceedings 1891. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5005376 Gordon, J. (2022). Attribution theory explained. https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/manage ment-leadership-organizational-behavior/attribution-theory-definition Graham, S., & Chen, X. (2020). Attribution theories. https://oxfordre.com/education/display/10. 1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acreforeGray, A. (1997). Contructivist teaching and learning [Master’s thesis]. University of Saskatchewan.

References

145

Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (3rd ed.). Prentice-Hall. Greenberg, L. S., & Watson, J. C. (2006). Emotion-focused therapy for depression. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11286-000 Guillén, M. (2000). Is globalization civilizing, destructive or feeble? A critique of six key debates in the social-science literature. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 235–260. http://www.web.pdx. edu/~mev/pdf/Globalization_Guillen.pdf Gul, A. (2016). Constructivism as a New Notion in English Language Education in Turkey [Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University]. Gul, F., & Shehzad, S. (2012). Relationship between metacognition, goal orientation and academic achievement. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281202650X#:~:text= Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996, Summer). Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 99–136. https://www.teache rtoolkit.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/effect-of-learning-skills.pdf Hauser, M. (2019). Patience! How to assess and strengthen self-control. https://www.frontiersin. org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2019.00025/full#B7 Hawthorne, H. (2021). Understanding the importance of motivation in education. https://www.hig hspeedtraining.co.uk/hub/motivation-in-education Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1037/106 28-000 Hirtle, J. (1996). Social constructivism. English Journal, 85(1), 91. https://search.proquest.com/ docview/237276544?accountid=8194 Hoffman, L., Cleare-Hoffman, H., & Jackson, T. (2015). Humanistic psychology and multiculturalism: History, current status, and advancements. In K. J. Schneider, J. F. Pierson, & J. F. T. Bugental (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 41–55). Sage Publications. Hoffman, L., et al. (2019). Humanistic approaches to multiculturalism and diversity: Perspectives on existence and difference. Routledge. Hoffman, L., et al. (2020). Humanistic approaches to multiculturalism and diversity: Perspectives on existence and difference. Routledge. Holmes, J. (2022). Friston’s free energy principle: New life for psychoanalysis? Bjpsych Bulletin, 46(3), 164–168. Horowitz, E., et al. (2018). Identity-based motivation in the classroom. Teachers can do it: Scalable identity-based motivation intervention in the classroom. https://www.researchgate.net/public ation/324866098_ Hovhannisyan, G. (2018). Humanistic cognitive science. The Humanistic Psychologist, 46(1), 30– 52. https://doi.org/10.1037/hum0000074 Howe, K., & Berv, J. (2000). Constructing constructivism, epistemological and pedagogical. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education (pp. 19–40). The National Society for the Study of Education. Hsieh, P. H. (2011). Achievement motivation. Encyclopedia of child behavior and development (pp. 20–21). Springer. Haley, J. L., Heick, P. F., & Luiselli, J. K. (2010). Use of an antecedent intervention to decrease vocal stereotypy of a student with autism in the general education classroom. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 32(4), 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317107.2010.515527 Harris, K., & Prater, M.-A. (2021). Self-regulation: A foundation for wellbeing and involved learning. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-01/SelfRegulationAFoundationFo rWellbeing.PDF Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of meta-analyses in education. Routledge. Hulleman, C., et al. (2010). A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422–449. Indeed Editorial Team. (2022). Learning goals vs. performance goals: Difference and advantages. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/learning-goals-vs-performance

146

References

Jankielewicz, R. (2022). What is achievement motivation? https://study.com/learn/lesson/achiev ement-motivation-theoryJohn Hopkins Medicine. (2023). Brain anatomy and how the brain works. https://www.hopkinsme dicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/anatomy-of-the-brain Johnson, D. (2017). The role of teachers in motivating students to learn. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ful ltext/EJ1230415.pdf Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1990). Cooperation and competition. Theory and research. AddisonWesley. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2009). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (10th ed.). Pearson Education. Jonassen, D. (1994). Thinking technology. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34–37. Just, R., & Lynch, J. (2022). Identity-based motivation: The impact on student identity during COVID-19 at a Small Midwestern University. https://thescipub.com/pdf/jssp.2022.39.45.pdf Kagan, S. (1990). The structural approach to cooperative learning. https://www.semanticscholar. org/paper/The-Structural-Approach-to-Cooperative-Learning.Kahler, T. (1975). Drivers: The key to the process of scripts. Transactional Analysis Journal, 5(3), 280–284. Kahler, T. (2008). The process therapy model: The six personality types with adaptations. Aibi Kahler Associates, Incorporated. Kanselaar. (2002). Constructivism and socio-constructivism. http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/fss/ 2005-0622-183040/12305.pdf Kaplan, A., & Flum, H. (2009). Motivation and identity: The relations of action and development in educational contexts—An introduction to the special issue. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 73–77. Kaplan, A., et al. (2019). Identity and motivation in a changing world: A complex dynamic systems perspective. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S0749Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15, 192–238. Kelly, G. A. (1991). The psychology of personal constructs: Volume one—A theory of personality. Routledge. Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/SocialConstructivism.htm Kivle, B. M. T., & Espedal, G. (2022). Identifying values through discourse analysis. In G. Espedal, G., et al. (Eds.), Researching values. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-03090769-3_10 Klees, S. (2002a). Privatization and neo-liberalism: Ideology and evidence in rhetorical reforms. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 1(2), 19–26. Klees, S. (2002b). World Bank education policy, new rhetoric, old ideology. International Journal of Educational Development, 22(5), 451–474. Kobrin, S. (1998). Development after industrialization: Poor countries in an electronically integrated global economy. Paper presented at the workshop on The Globalization of Multinational Enterprise Activity and Economic Development, University of Strathclyde. Koenka, A. (2020). Academic motivation theories revisited: An interactive dialog between motivation scholars on recent contributions, underexplored issues, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361476X 19304369#:~:text=Five%2 Kolb, D. A., & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (ed.) Theories of group process. John Wiley. Krishna, A. (2020). Inequality, social mobility and career ladders UNDP Human Development Report. Background paper no. 5-2020. United Nation. Kruger, A. M., et al. (2015). Setting the stage for academic success through antecedent intervention. Psychology in the Schools, 53(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21886 Kukla, A. (2000). Social constructivism and the philosophy of science. Routledge.

References

147

Kussrow, P. (2010). The Routine of classroom discrimination. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Learning and Teaching (pp. 93–100). James Nicholas Publishers. Kusurkar, R. A., Ten Cate, T. J., & Vos, C. M. P. (2013). How motivation affects academic performance: A structural equation modelling analysis. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 18, 57–69. Landau, M., et al. (2014). The college journey and academic engagement: How metaphor use enhances identity-based motivation. Journal of Personality and Social, 106(5), 679–698. Lantolf, J. (2004). Introducing sociocultural theory. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/286 88958/0-19-442160-0-aLepper, M., et al. (2005). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in the classroom: Age differences and academic correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 184–196. Lessa, I. (2006, February). Discursive struggles within social welfare: Restaging teen motherhood. The British Journal of Social Work, 36(2), 283–298. Linley, A. P., & Maltby, J. (2009). Personal responsibility. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.), The encyclopedia of positive psychology (p. 685). Blackwell Publishing. Loveless, B. (2022). The complete guide to motivation in education. https://www.educationcorner. com/motivation-in-education/ Luo, T., et al. (2021). STEM stereotypes predict students’ STEM career interest via self-efficacy and outcome expectations. IJ STEM Ed, 8, 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00295-y Lussier, R., & Achua, C. (2006). Leadership: Theory, application, & skill development. Thomson/ South-Western College Publishing. Lyman, F. (1981). The responsive classroom discussion. In A. S. Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming Digest. University of Maryland College of Education. Lynch, M. (2016). Social constructivism in education. https://www.theedadvocate.org/social-con structivism-in-education/ Maehr, M., & Sjogren, D. (1971). Atkinson’s theory of achievement motivation: First step toward a theory of academic motivation? Review of Educational Research, 41(2), 143–161. Mager, R. (1962). Preparing instructional objectives. Fearon Publishers. Mager, R. (1975). Preparing instructional objectives (2nd ed.). Fearon-Pitman Publishers. Marr, M. B. (2006). Clearning: A brief review. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/105 7356970130102 Margetts, K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2019). Educational Psychology. Pearson. Martin, J., & Sugarman, J. (1999). The psychology of human possibility and constraint. Albany: SUNY. Mashinchi, A. (2020). The educational model of social constructivism and its impact on academic achievement and critical thinking. https://www.academia.edu/80463746/The_Educat ional_Model_of_Social_Constructivism Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. Maslow, A. H. (1962). Toward a psychology of being. Princeton. Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. Penguin Books. Matthews, M. (2000). Constructivism in science and mathematics education. In C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education, Ninety-ninth yearbook of the national society for the study of education, Part 1 (pp. 159–192). University of Chicago Press. Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1988). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Shambhala Publications. Maypole, J., & Davies, T. (2001). Students’ perceptions of constructivist learning in a Community College American History 11 Survey Course. https://doi.org/10.1177/009155210102900205 McClelland, D. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton. McClelland, D. (1988). Human motivation. Cambridge University Press. McCollum, D., & Kajs, L. (2007). Applying goal orientation theory in an exploration of student motivations in the domain of educational leadership. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ792868. pdf

148

References

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3820081/ McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 139–153). Guilford Press. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. McInerney, D. (2016). Educational psychology: Constructing learning. Pearson. McLaren, P., & Farahmandpur, R. (2005). Teaching against global capitalism and the new imperialism. Rowman & Littlefield. McLeod, S. A. (2007). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. http://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow. html McLeod, S. A. (2019). Constructivism as a theory for teaching and learning. https://www.simply psychology.org/constructivism.html McLeod, S. (2023). What is cognitive dissonance? Definition and examples. https://simplypsycho logy.org/cognitive-dissonance.html Meens, E. (2018). Motivation: Individual differences in students’ educational choices and study success. Ipskamp. Meens, E., et al. (2018). The association of identity and motivation with students’ academic achievement in higher education. Learning and Individual Differences, 64, 54–70. Mendo-Lázaro, S., et al. (2022). The impact of cooperative learning on university students’ academic goals. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.787210/full Meyer, D., & Turner, J. (2002). Using instructional discourse analysis to study the scaffolding of student self-regulation. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 17–25. Milanovic, B. (2005a). Worlds apart: Global and international inequality 1950–2000. Princeton University Press. Milanovic, B. (2005b, April). Can we discern the effect of globalization on income distribution? Evidence from household budget surveys. World Bank Economic Review, 1, 21–44. Milanovic, B. (2018). Global inequality: A new approach for the age of globalization. Harvard University Press. Moore, T. C., Maggin, D. M., Thompson, K. M., Gordon, J. R., Daniels, S., & Lang, L. E. (2018). Evidence review for teacher praise to improve students’ classroom behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 21, 3–18. Morin, A. (2018). Positive reinforcement to improve a child’s behavior. https://www.verywellf amily.com/positive-reinforcement-child-behavior-1094889 Moss, S. (2016). Cognitive evaluation theory. https://www.sicotests.com/newpsyarticle/Cognitiveevaluation-theory Mundy, K., Green, A., Lingard, B., & Verger, A. (Eds.). (2016). Global education policy. Wiley Black. National Academies of Sciences. (2018). How people learn: Learners, contexts, and culture. National Academies Press. National Framework: Nine Values for Australian Schooling. (2010). http://www.curriculum.edu. au/values Nelson-Le Gall, S. (1985). Help-seeking behavior in learning. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10. 3102/0091732X012001055 Niemiec, C. P., Ryan, R. M., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133–144. Noguera, I., Albó, L., & Beardsley, M. (2022). University students’ preference for flexible teaching models that foster constructivist learning practices. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 22–39. https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/view/7968 O’Donnell, A., et al. (2019). Educational psychology. Wiley. OECD. (2007). Equity and quality in education. OECD.

References

149

OECD. (2009a). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First Results from TALIS. OECD. OECD. (2009b). The schooling for tomorrow. OECD, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. OECD. (2012a). Equity and quality in education. OECD. OECD. (2012b). Equity and quality in education supporting disadvantaged students and schools. OECD. OECD. (2013). Synergies for better learning: an international perspective on evaluation & assessment. www.oecd.org/edu/school/Evaluation_and_Assessment_Synthesis_Report.pdf OECD. (2018). Education at a glance 2018: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. https:// www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/education-at-a-glance-2018_eag-2018-en OECD. (2019). Education at a glance. OECD indicators. OECD. OECD. (2021). Student engagement and motivation. OECD. OECD (2022a). Education at a glance. OECD indicators. OECD. OECD. (2022b). Education policy outlook: Transforming pathways for lifelong learners. OECD. OECD. (2022c). Effective Learning Environments (ELE). https://www.oecd.org/education/effect ive-learning-environments OECD. (2022d). Students’ well-being. OECD. Oldfather, P., West, J., White, J., & Wilmarth, J. (1999). Learning through children’s eyes: Social constructivism and the desire to learn. American Psychological Association. Ollivier, M. (2008). Modes of openness to cultural diversity: Humanist, populist, practical, and indifferent. Poetics, 36(2–3), 120–147. Oyserman, D., & Destin, M. (2010). Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(7), 1001–1043. Oyserman, D., & Destin, M. (2015). Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(3), 431–448. Oyserman, D., et al. (2017). An identity-based motivation framework for self-regulation. Psychological Inquiry, 28(2–3), 139–147. Packer, M., & Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35(4), 227–241. Pandy, R. (2012). Learning disabilities and self-esteem. https://opus.govst.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=1126&context=capstones Parrish, N. (2022). To increase student engagement, focus on motivation. https://www.edutopia.org/ article/to-increase-student-engagement-f Pauley, J., Bradley, D., & Pauley, J. (2002). Here’s how to reach me: Matching instruction to personality types in your classroom. Brookes Publishing Company. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex [G. V. Anrep, Trans. and Ed.]. Oxford University Press. Pelletier, L. G., & Rocchi, M. (2016). Teachers’ motivation in the classroom. In W. Liu, J. Wang, & R. Ryan (Eds.), Building autonomous learners: Perspectives from research and practice using Self-Determination Theory. Springer. Peng, C. (2021). The academic motivation and engagement of students in English as a foreign language classes: Does teacher praise matter? https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ fpsyg.2021.778174 Petri, H., & Cofer, C. (2022). Behavioristic approaches to motivation (2020). https://www.britan nica.com/topic/motivation/Behavioristic-approaches-to-motivation Phillips, D. (2000). An opinionated account of the constructivist landscape. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education, Ninety-ninth yearbook of the national society for the study of education, Part 1 (pp. 1–16). University of Chicago Press. Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child. Routledge & Kegan Paul. Piaget, J. (1967). Biologie et connaissance [Biology and Knowledge]. Gallimard. Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology [W. Mays, Trans.]. Basic Books.

150

References

Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures [A. Rosin, Trans.]. The Viking Press. Piaget, J. (1957). Construction of reality in the child. Routledge & Kegan Paul. Pintel, L. (2006). The effect of positive reinforcement on the achievement of 3rd grade students’ spelling [Theses and Dissertations, 923]. http://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/923 PISA. (2018). PISA 2018. OECD. PISA. (2022). PISA 2022. OECD. Polomoshnov, A., et al. (2019). Multiculturalism and humanism in the context of globalization. https://www.europeanproceedings.com/article/10.15405/epsbs.2019.12.04.288 Post, D., & Pong, S.-L. (1998). The waning effect of sibship composition on school attainment in Hong Kong. Comparative Education Review, 42(2), 99–117. Postman, N., & Weingartner, C. (1969). Teaching as a subversive Activity. Penguin Books. Powell, C. K., & Kalina, J. C. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241–250. Pritchard, A. (2009). Ways of learning (2nd ed.). Routledge. Read, C., & Szokolszky, A. (2020). Ecological psychology and enactivism: Perceptually-guided action vs. sensation-based enaction. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020. 01270/full Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1623–1640. Riding, R., & Raynor, S. (1998). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behaviour. David Fulton Publishers. Rizvi, F. (2017). Globalization and the neoliberal imaginary of educational reform. UNESCO. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing Education Policy. Routledge. Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy; its current practice, implications, and theory. Houghton Mifflin. Rogers, C. R. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships: As developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science. Formulations of the person and the social context (Vol. 3, pp. 184–256). McGraw Hill. Rose, S. (2022). Social needs. https://steverosephd.com/a-theory-of-social-needs/ Rosenberg, M. (1989). Self-concept research: A historical overview. Social Forces, 68(1), 34–44. Rowe, K. (2006). Effective teaching practices for students with and without learning difficulties: Constructivism as a legitimate theory of learning AND of teaching? https://research.acer.edu. au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=learning_processes Rowley, C., & Harry, W. (2011). Managing people globally. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/ social-sciences/expectancy-theory Rubie-Davies, C., et al. (2020). Achievement and beliefs outcomes of students with high and low expectation teachers. Social Psychology of Education, 23, 1173–1201. Rumfola, L. (2017). Positive reinforcement positively helps students in the classroom [Education and Human Development Master’s Theses, 786]. http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/ehd_the ses/786 Rusk, R. (2022). An adaptive motivation approach to understanding the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of wellbeing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9566260/#:~:text=The%20Adap tive%20Motivation Ryan, A., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. The Guilford Press. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.

References

151

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 Sadler-Smith, E. (2001). The relationship between learning style and cognitive style. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 609–616. Sadler-Smith, E., & Smith, P. J. (2004). Strategies for accommodating individuals’ styles and preferences in flexible learning programmes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 39–412. Saeed, S., & Zyngier, D. (2012). How motivation influences student engagement: A qualitative case study. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1081372.pdf Saeed, N., et al. (2022). Impact of constructive pedagogy on students academic achievements at Secondary School Level in Kotli AJ&K. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35206374/ Saha, L. (2021). Cultural and social capital in global perspective. In J. Zajda (Ed.), 3rd International handbook of globalisation, education and policy research. Springer. Scheuringer, B. (2016). Multiple identities: A theoretical and an empirical approach. Cambridge University Press. Schlechty, P. C. (2002). Working on the work an action plan for teachers, principals and superintendents (1st ed.). Jossey Bass. Schlechty, P. C. (2012). Engaging students: The next level of working on the work (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass. Schneider, K., Pierson, F., & Bugental, J. (Eds.). (2015). The Handbook of humanistic psychology. Sage. Schonert-Reichl, K. (2017). Social and emotional learning and teachers. Future of Children, 27(1), 137–155. Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020a). Self-efficacy and human motivation. https://www. researchgate.net/publication/346894235_Self-efficacy_and_human_motivation Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020b). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/ pii/S0361476X19304370 Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2023a). International encyclopedia of education (4th ed.). Elsevier. Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2023b). Social cognitive theory. In R. Tierney, F. Rizvi, & K. Ercikan (Eds.), International encyclopaedia of education (4th ed.). Elsevier. Schunk, D. H., Meece, J. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (2014). Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications. Pearson Education. Schunk, D. H., & Usher, E. L. (2012). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 13–27). Oxford University Press. Schunk, D. H., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 11–26). Oxford University Press. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. (2003). Self-regulation and learning. In W. M. Reynolds, & G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 7): Educational Psychology (pp. 59–78). Wiley. Schürmann, L., Gaschler, R., & Quaiser-Pohl, C. (2020). Motivation theory in the school context: Differences in preservice and practicing teachers’ experience, opinion, and knowledge. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36, 739–757. Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. (2012). Sociocultural theory. http://www.education.com/reference/article/ sociocultural-theory/ Seifert, K., & Sutton, R. Educational psychology. Published by the Saylor Foundation. https://www. saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Educational-Psychology.pdf Self-Determination Theory. (2022). https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/community-health/patientcare/self-determination

152

References

Self-esteem. (2022). https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/types-of-mental-health-pro blems/self-esteem/about-selfSelf-esteem: What Is It? (2022). https://socy.umd.edu/about-us/self-esteem-what-it Semerci, C., & Batdi, V. (2015). A meta-analysis of constructivist learning approach on learners’ academic achievements, retention and attitudes. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276 406418_A_MetaSenior, R., et al. (2018). “The rules of engagement”: Student engagement and motivation to improve the quality of undergraduate learning. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2018. 00032/full Senko, C., & Dawson, B. (2017). Pe-approach goal effects depend on how they are defined: Metaanalytic evidence from multiple educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(4), 574–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000160 Shah, R. K. (2019). Effective constructivist teaching learning in the classroom. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 7(4), 1–13. Shively, J. (2015). Constructivism in music education. Arts Education Policy Review: Constructivism, Policy, and Arts Education, 116(3), 128–136. Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. University of Chicago Press. Simpson, E. J. (1972). The classification of educational objectives in the psychomotor domain. Gryphon House. Singh, M., et al. (2022). Impact of cognitive-behavioral motivation on student engagement. https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9264003/ Sivrikaya, A. (2019). The relationship between academic motivation and academic achievement of the students. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1216482.pdf Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Macmillan. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Prentice-Hall. Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–342. Slavin, R. E. (1983). Cooperative learning. Longman. Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Prentice-Hall. Slavin, R. E. (1995). A model of effective instruction. The Educational Forum, 59(2), 166–176. Slavin, R. E. (2014). Cooperative learning and academic achievement: Why does groupwork work. Annals of Psychology, 30, 785–791. Slavin, R. E. (2022). Educational psychology: Theory and Practice (13th ed.). Pearson. Smith, A. (1991). National Identity. Penguin Books. Smith, A. (1995). Nations and nationalism in a global era. Polity. Smith, A. (2002). When is a nation. Geopolitics, 7(2), 5–32. Smith, A. (2007). Nationalism in decline. https://books.google.com.au/books?id=dU0dEAAAQ BAJ&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=Smith Snowman et al. (2009). Psychology applied to teaching. Wiley. Social Need. (2022). https://the-definition.com/term/social-need Solomon, R. (2023). The variety and complexity of emotions. Retrieved from significance https:// www.britannica.com/science/emotion%20of Souders, B. (2019). 20 most popular theories of motivation in psychology. https://positivepsychol ogy.com/motivation-theories-psychology/ Srivastava, S. (2016). Social learning of employee. https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=3151&context=luc_diss Steinmayr, R., et al. (2019). The importance of students’ motivation for their academic achievement—Replicating and extending previous findings. https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/707921/ overview Sunal, C. S., & Haas, M. E. (2017). Social studies for the elementary and middle grades: A constructivist approach. Allyn and Bacon. Sutton. J. (2021). What is Bandura’s social learning theory. https://positivepsychology.com/sociallearning-theory-bandura/

References

153

Sweeney, E. (2023). 7 signs you’re experiencing cognitive dissonance. https://www.menshealth. com/health/a43373873/7-signs-youre-experiencing-cognitive ´ atkowski, W., & Dompnier, B. (2021). When pursuing bad goals for good reasons makes it even Swi˛ worse: A social value approach to performance-avoidance goal pursuit. Social Psychology of Education, 24, 653–677. TeachThought Staff. (2023). Bandura’s 4 principles of social learning theory. https://www.teacht hought.com/learning/principles-of-social-learning-theory/ Terlouw, K. (2017). Local identities and politics. Negotiating the old and the new. Routledge. Thanh, H. N. (2020). Cognitive evaluation theory: What nurtures our intrinsic motivation? https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/343612491_Cognitive_Evaluation_Theory_What Thompson, E. (2007). Look again: Phenomenology and mental imagery. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6, 137–170. Thompson, P. (2000). Radical constructivism: Reflections and directions. In L. P. Steffe & P. W. Thompson (Eds.), Radical constructivism in action: Building on the pioneering work of Ernst von Glasersfeld (pp. 412–448). Falmer Press. Tollefson, N. (2000). Classroom applications of cognitive theories of motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 63–83. Toti, Z., et al. (2020). Self-identity and academic achievement among secondary school students in Malaysia. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=103441 UN. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-dec laration-of-human-rights UN. (1965). International convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-conventionelimination-all-forms-racial UN. (1967). The UN international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights. https://treaties. un.org/doc/treaties/1976/01/19760103%2009-57%20pm/ch_iv_03.pdf UN. (1989). The UN convention on the rights of the child (1989). https://www.unicef.org/child-rig hts-convention UN. (2020a). Inequality: Bridging the divide. https://www.un.org/en/un75/inequality-bridgingUN. (2020b). Universal, inclusive education ‘non-negotiable’. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/ 06/1066942 UNESCO. (1996). Learning: The treasure within; report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century. UNESCO. UNESCO. (2002). Framework for action on values education in early childhood. OECD. UNESCO. (2014). Quality education. http://www.unescobkk.org/education/efa/efa-goals/qualityeducation/ UNESCO. (2023, January 24). UNESCO Bulletin: Transforming lifelong learning for better future. https://www.google.com/search?q=UNESCO+(2023%26oq=UNESCO+(2023% 26aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30l9.1653j0j15%26sourceid=chrome%26ie=UTF-8 Urhahne, D., & Wijnia, L. (2023). Theories of motivation in education: An integrative framework. Educational Psychology Review, 35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09767-9 Valls, M. (2022). Gender differences in social comparison processes and self-concept among students. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.815619/full#:~:text=Speci Valsiner, J. (1987). Culture and the development of the children’s action, a cultural-historical theory of developmental psychology. Wiley. Van Bragt, C., et al. (2011). Why students withdraw or continue their educational careers: A closer look at differences in study approaches and personal reasons. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 63(2), 217–233. van Wyk, M. M. (2012). The effects of the STAD-cooperative learning method on student achievement, attitude and motivation in economics education. Journal of Social Sciences, 33, 261–270. Vanner, A. (2021). Self-determination theory, motivation and your classroom. https://teachanyw here.byu.edu/self-determination-theory-motivation-and-your-classroom

154

References

Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1993). The embodied mind. The MIT Press. Villines, Z. (2022). Cognitive dissonance: What to know. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/art icles/326738 Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley. Vroom, V. H. (2005). On the origins of expectancy theory. In Great minds in management: The process of theory development. Oxford University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1973). Thought and language [A. Kozulin, Trans. and Ed.]. The MIT Press. (Originally published in Russian in 1934.) Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Wadsworth, B. J. (2004). Piaget’s theory of cognitive and affective development: Foundations of constructivism. Longman. Walinga, J. (2014). 2.4 Humanist, cognitive, and evolutionary psychology. https://opentextbc.ca/int roductiontopsychology/chapter/2-4-humanist-cognitive-and-evolutionary-psychology/ Wallerstein, I. (1974a). The Modern world system, capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world economy in the sixteenth century. Academic Press. Wallerstein, I. (1974b). The rise and future demise of the world capitalist system: Concepts for comparative analysis. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 16(4), 387–415. Wallerstein, I. (2004). The ecology and the economy: What is rational? The Environment and World History, 27(4), 273–283. Ward, D., Silverman, D., & Villalobos, M. (2017). Introduction: The varieties of enactivism. Topoi, 36, 365–375. Waskiewicz, R. (2012). Achievement goal orientation and situational motivation for a low-stakes test of content knowledge. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(4), 65. Watson, J. (2003). Social constructivism in the classroom. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/ 10.1111/1467-9604.00206 Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20, 158–177. Weedon, C. (1997). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory (2nd ed.). Blackwell. Weiner, B. (1980). Human motivation. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573. Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. Springer-Verlag. Wentzel, K. R. (2017). Peer relationships, motivation, and academic performance at school. In A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation: Theory and application (pp. 586–603). The Guilford Press. Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A development perspective. Educational Psychologist, 6(1), 49–78. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015 Wigfield, A., Muenks, K., & Eccles, J. S. (2021). Achievement motivation: What we know and where we are going. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 3(1), 87–111. https://doi. org/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-050720-103500 Witkin, H. A., Cox, P. W., Friedman, F., Hrishikesan, A. G., & Siegel, K. N. (1974). Supplement No. 1, Field-dependence-independence and psychological differentiation: Bibliography with index (Research Bulletin 74–42). Educational Testing Service, 1974; see also Supplement No. 2 (Research Bulletin 76–28). Educational Testing Service, 1976. Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977, Winter). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1–64. Woolfolk, A., & Margetts, K. (2022). Educational psychology (5th ed.). Pearson Education.

References

155

Wyatt, T. (1996). School effectiveness research: Dead end, damp squib or smouldering fuse? Issues in Educational Research, 6(1), 79–112. http://education.curtin.edu.au/iier/iier6/wyatt.html Yolcu, H., & Turner, D. (Eds.), Neoliberal education reforms: A global analysis (pp. 164–183). Taylor & Francis/Routledge. Yussif. (2023). Behaviorism learning theory in the classroom. https://classroommanagementexpert. com/blog/behaviorism-learning-theory-in-the-classroom/ Zajda, J. (2007). Credentialism in the 21st century: The importance of qualifications. Educational Practice and Theory, 29(2), 61–79. Zajda, J. (2014a). Ideology. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational theory and philosophy. Sage. Zajda, J. (2014b). Globalisation and neo-liberalism as educational policy in Australia. In D. A. Turner & H. Yolcu (Eds.), Neo-liberal educational reforms: A critical analysis (pp. 164–183). Routledge. Zajda, J. (2015a). Globalisation and its impact on education and policy. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Second international handbook of globalisation, education and policy research (pp. 1–13). Springer. Zajda, J. (2015b). Globalisation, ideology and education reforms. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Globalisation, ideology and politics of education reforms (Vol. 14). Springer. Zajda, J. (2018a). Motivation in the classroom: Creating effective learning environments. Educational Practice & Theory, 40(2), 85–103. Zajda, J. (2018b). Effective constructivist pedagogy for quality learning in schools. Educational Practice & Theory, 40(1), 67–80. Zajda, J. (2019). Research on discrimination and self-fulfilling prophecy in schools globally. Education & Society, 37(1), 59–77. Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2020a). Globalisation, ideology and education reforms: Emerging paradigms. Springer. Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2020b). Globalisation, ideology and neo-liberal higher education reform. Springer. Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2020c). Human rights education globally. Springer. Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2020d). Globalisation, ideology and education reforms: Emerging paradigms. Springer. Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2021a). 3rd International handbook of globalisation, education and policy research. Springer. Zajda, J. (2021b). Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning. Springer. Zajda, J. (2022a). Globalisation and education reforms: Overcoming discrimination. Springer. Zajda, J. (2022b). Discourses of race, ethnicity and gender in education: Emerging paradigm. Springer. Zajda, J. (2023a). Discourses of globalisation, cultural diversity and values education. Springer. Zajda, J. (2023b). Globalisation and inclusive schooling: Engaging motivational environments. Springer. Zajda, J., & Davidovich, N. (2022). Discourses of globalisation and cultural identity. Springer. Zajda, J., & Majhanovich, S. (Eds.). (2021). Globalisation, cultural identity and nation-building: The changing paradigms. Springer. Zajda, J., & Majhanovich, S. (2022). Discourses of globalisation, ideology, education and policy reforms. Springer. Zajda, J., & Rust, V. (2021). Globalisation and comparative education. Springer. Zajda, J., & Zajda, R. (2008a). Aptitude. In G. McCulloch & D. Crook (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education. Routledge. Zajda, J., & Zajda, R. (2008b). Atainment. In G. McCulloch & D. Crook (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education. Routledge. Zajda, R. (1988). ‘The Calculable Woman’. Discourses of the self and sexuality in the Australian Women’s magazine Cleo. Thesis. University of Melbourne.

156

References

Zimmerman, B. J. (2015). Self-regulated learning: Theories, measures, and outcomes. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 541–546). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.26060-1 Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Self-regulated learning and performance: An introduction and an overview. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 1–12). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Index

A ABA (Applied Behaviour Analysis) model, 20, 21, 23, 28, 103 ABC (antecedent, behaviour, and consequence) model, 20, 22, 23, 28, 103 Academic achievement, 2, 14–16, 28, 29, 39, 52, 57, 74, 106, 108, 113, 125, 127, 138 Academic performance, 16, 23, 72 Academic self-beliefs, 84 Academic standards, 3, 16, 20, 25, 28, 36, 120 imperatives, 4 of performance, 106 Accommodation, 107 Accountability, 5 Achieved identities, 33 Achieved status, 33 Achievement goal theory, 131, 132 Achievement motivation, 102, 103, 130, 138 Achievement motivation theories, 7, 8, 32, 33, 36, 104, 108 Achievement tests, 119 Achua, C., 36 Ackerman, C., 8 Active citizenship education, 126 Adak, S., 72 Adaptive motivation, 128 Adaptive Motivation Model, 128 ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), 21 Affective Domain, 87, 114 Affective learning domain, 116

Ahme Qarareh, 72 Akpan, V., 72, 73 Allport, G., 92 American Association for Humanistic Psychology, 85 American Psychological Association (APA), 51, 91 Amin, F., 72 Anderson, L.W., 116 Andrade, H., 56 Antecedent strategies, 22, 23 Apple, M., 3, 113 Aprilia, F., 102 Aptitude, 117–119, 138 Archaeology of Knowledge, 42, 100 Ardiansyah, W., 73 Arends, R., 64 Arnold, W., 91 Ascribed identities, 33 Ascribed status, 33 Assimilation, 107 Atkinson, J.W., 130 Attainment, 117, 120 Attention, 50 Attribution theories of motivation, 7, 8, 32, 37, 105, 132 Au, K., 78 Awan, R., 14 Ayaz, M., 35, 72

B Bakhtin, M., 100 Bakx, A., 14

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. Zajda, Globalisation and Dominant Models of Motivation Theories in Education, Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research 39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42895-1

157

158 Bandura, A., 9, 37, 44, 48, 53–55, 60, 61, 65, 82, 105, 115, 132 Banks, J., 85 Banks, T., 22 Basic needs, 11 Baudrillard, J., 108 Becta, 95 Beery, R.G., 8 Behavioural objectives, 18, 19 Behavioural theories of motivation, 6, 24, 26, 29, 129 Behavioural theory of learning, 17 Behavioural variables (B), 48 Behaviourism in classroom, 23 values in, 24 Behaviour modification, 18, 22 Behaviour modification strategies, 26, 28 Bender, A., 61 Berger, P., 108 Berv, J., 65 Big Five’ personality constructs, 123 Big Five Conscientiousness, 52 Big Five Personality Traits, 92 Binet, A., 117 Binet’s Intelligence Testing, 119 Bio-ecological model, 33, 82, 90, 129 Bloom, B., 87 Bloom’s Taxonomy, 87 Bonfenbrenner, U., 82 Bouffard, T., 57 Bourdieu, P., 135 Bradley, D., 94 Brady, L., 69 BRICS countries, 113 British Council, 95 Bronfenbrenner, U., 33, 90, 129 Brooks, J., 77 Brooks, M., 77 Brown, A.L., 124 Bruner, J., 65, 67, 90 Bruner, J.S., 42

C Cano-García, E., 73 Carnoy, M., 3, 113 Castells, M., 2, 3 Cattell, R., 92, 117, 123 Chazan, D., 131 Chen, X., 37 Cherry, K., 92, 134 Childhood and Society (Erikson), 13

Index Cione-Kroeschel, J., 21 Classical conditioning, 18 Classroom disciplinary climate, 35 Classroom discipline, 26 Close-reading strategies, 101 Cofer, C., 27 Cognitive constructivism, 42, 65, 67 Cognitive development, 40, 90, 115, 117 Cognitive dissonance, 40 Cognitive dissonance theory, 32, 40, 107, 108 Cognitive domain, 114 Cognitive equilibrium, 108 Cognitive evaluation theory, 32, 40 Cognitive needs, 81 Cognitive processes, 115 Cognitive processing abilities, 95 Cognitive psychologists, 6 Cognitive psychology, 10 Cognitive theories of learning, 24 Cognitive theories of motivation, 7, 15, 31, 103, 129, 130 Cohen, D., 114 Cohen, G., 12 Colditz, I., 91 Coleman, J., 135 Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), 116 Collaborative groups, 78, 97 Collaborative groups leaning, 68 Comas-Diaz, L., 86 Constructivism, 32, 34, 35, 41, 64, 78 Constructivist Learning Theory, 77 Constructivist pedagogy, 35, 41, 64, 68, 72, 73, 75, 78, 79 Constructivist teaching, 73 Constructivist theory, 64 Constructivist theory of motivation, 45 Constructivist thinking, 35 Constructivist views of learning, 41 Consumerist commodity, 83 Cooperative group learning, 69 Cooperative groups, 68 Cooperative learning, 72 Coppola, M., 23 Costa, P., 92, 93, 123 Covington, M., 39 Covington, M.V., 8 Cowan, J., 20, 23 Cox, A., 2 Cox, R., 3 Craig, H., 24 Critical discourse, 103–107

Index Critical discourse analysis (CDA), 43, 44, 103, 113 Critical discourse theory, 3, 113 Critical literacy, 45, 73, 78, 109 Critical theory, 108, 113 Critical thinking, 34, 45, 78, 101, 108, 109 Culatta, R., 58 Cultural capital, 135–137 Cultural differences, 81 Cultural diversity, 61, 109 Cultural identity, 13, 16, 32, 36

D Daun, H., 4 Davidovich, N., 32, 33, 103 Davis, R., 17, 102 De Boer, H., 35 Deci, E.L., 2, 8, 15, 40, 131, 133, 134 Deci, S.J., 129 Deconstruction, 35, 101 Deconstruction paradigm, 100 De Graaf, P.M., 136 Delanty, G., 112 Delores, J., 112 Derrida, J., 35, 100, 101 Dervin, F., 113 De Saussure, F., 103 Destin, M., 14, 128 De Vries, H., 5 Dewey, J., 90 DiBenedetto, M., 44, 48, 56, 115 Dijkstra, P., 57 Dillenbourg, P., 69 DiMaggio, P., 136 Dimensions of personality, 92 Dirkes, M.A., 35 Discourse analysis (DA), 42–44, 99, 101, 102 and motivation, 32 Discourse, definition of, 109 Discourses of globalisation and cultural identity, 32 Discourses of globalisation, cultural diversity and values education, 32 Discursive psychology, 103–107 Dominant ideologies, 3, 109, 112 Doolittle, P.E., 78 Dorsey, M., 21 Duchesne, S., 5 Duckworth, A., 52 Dunn, R., 74 Dweck, C.S., 9, 38

159 E Eccles, J.S., 8 Economic inequality, 3 Educational attainment, 120 Effective learning environments, 36 Effective motivational environments, 94 Effective pedagogy, 76 Ego, 121 Egyedi, T., 5 Elbaz, F., 72 Emotional development, 36 Emotional needs, 81 Emotional skills, 78 Emotions, 87, 116 Empathy, 29 Enactive approach, 91 Enactivisim, 90 Engagement, 2, 127 Engaging motivational atmosphere, 106 Engaging motivational environments, 5 Environmental factors (E), 48 Equality of Educational Opportunity, 135 Erickson, E., 13 Espedal, G., 102 Essay Concerning Human Understanding, An (Locke), 13 Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man (Hume), 13 Etkin, J., 59 European convention on Contact Concerning Children (2003), 112 European Convention on Human Rights (1950), 112 European Convention on the Exercise of Children’s Rights (1996), 112 European Social Charter (1996), 112 Expectancy beliefs, 39, 106 Expectancy theory of motivation, 7, 8, 32, 38, 106 Expectancy-value theory, 132 External motivation, 130 Extraversion, 92, 122 Extrinsic motivation, 12, 40, 130, 133, 134, 138 Eysenck, H., 90, 91, 121 Eysenck, H.J., 92, 122, 123 F Fairclough, N., 99 Farahmandpur, R., 113 Feather, N.T., 130 Feelings, 116 Festinger, L., 40

160 Field dependent, 95 Field independent, 95 Flavell, J., 34, 124 Fontana, D., 76, 121 Foucault, M., 35, 42, 99–101 Frames of Mind, 117 Freudian ego defence mechanisms, 121 Freud, S., 39, 100, 121 Friedlander, F., 87 Friston, K.J., 91 Fry, R., 65 G Gagné, Marylène, 27 Gaier, S., 37 Gaither, S., 33 Gardner, H., 65, 94, 117 Gardner, M., 118 Genealogy, 43 Genetic factors, 124 Geno-determinism, 118 Giddens, A., 2 Gilpin, R., 3 Global academic achievement syndrome (GAAS), 113 Global competitiveness, 16, 113 Globalisation, 2–4 discourse of, 3 Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning, 12, 15, 32 Globalisation and Education Reforms: Creating Effective Learning Environments, 26, 27 Goal orientation theories of motivation, 37 Goal-orientation theory of motivation, 38 Goal theories of motivation, 7, 9, 24, 25, 32, 131, 138 Goffman, E., 100 Good practice pedagogy, 126 Gordon, J., 9 Governance in education, 113 Graham, S., 37 Gredler, M.E., 66 Growth needs, 11 Guillén, M., 3 Gul, F., 35 H Haas, M.E., 73 Haley, J.L., 23 Hamlet, 1, 9

Index Harris, K., 24 Hattie, J., 72, 74 Hauser, M., 52 Hawthorne, H., 2, 127 Heick, P.F., 23 Heidegger, M., 100 Heider, F., 9, 57 Here’s how to Reach Me: Matching Instruction to Personality Types in Your Classroom, 94 Hicks, D.E., 78 Hierarchy of human needs, 133 High need achievers, 130 Hirtle, J., 65 History Aptitude Test (HAT), 119 Hoffman, L., 85, 86 Holmes, J., 91 Horowitz, E., 128 Hovhannisyan, G., 90 Howe, K., 65 Hulleman, C., 131 Human capital, 112 Human Genome Project (HGP), 117 Humanist approach, 81 Humanistic-centred education, 126 Humanistic education, 112 Humanistic pedagogy, 97 Humanistic psychology, 85, 88 Humanistic theories, 97 Humanist psychologists, 90 Humanist teaching strategy, 10, 81 Humanist theories of motivation, 10, 129, 133 Human needs, 11 Hume, D., 13

I Identity, 13, 14, 32, 90, 103, 109 Identity-based motivation (IBM), 14, 128 Identity politics, 13 Identity theory of motivation, 32, 44 Inclusive classroom, 29 Individual differences, 32, 61, 91, 94, 118 Individual differences needs, 81, 97 Individual’s identity, 32, 103 Inquiry Approach (IA), 34 Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL), 32, 34, 104 Inquiry-based learning of motivation, 32, 44 Intelligence, 117, 118, 138 Intelligence Reframed, 117 Intelligence testing, 117 Interest theory, 132

Index Intrinsic motivation, 10, 40, 128, 131, 134, 135

J Jameson, F., 100 Jankielewicz, R., 7 Jigsaw collaborative groups, 71 John Hopkins Medicine, 31 Johnson, D., 27 Johnson, D.W., 69 Johnson, F.P., 69 Jonassen, D., 67 Jung, C., 121 Just, R., 14

K Kagan, S., 69 Kahler, T., 94 Kaplan, A., 128 Kelly, G.A., 65, 83 Kim, B., 72 Kivle, B.M.T., 102 Klees, S., 3, 113 Kobrin, S., 3 Koenka, A., 2 Kolb, D.A., 65, 67 Korb, A., 134 Krathwohl, D., 87 Krishna, A., 3 Kristeva, J., 100 Kukla, A., 65, 66, 68 Kussrow, P., 74

L Laclau, E., 102 Landau, M., 12 Law of Effect, 17 Learning styles, 95 Leggett, E.L., 38 Lessa, I., 42 Level of engagement, 109 Lingard, B., 3, 113 Linley, A.P., 25 Locke, J., 13 Lovaas, I., 21 Lovat, T., 126 Loveless, B., 5 Low-need achievers, 130 Luckmann, T., 108 Luiselli, J.K., 23 Luo, T., 57

161 Lussier, R., 36 Lyman, F., 70 Lynch, J., 14

M Mackenzie, E., 5, 89 Macmillan Dictionary of Psychology, 121 Mager, R., 19 Maltby, J., 25 Margetts, K., 1, 6, 119 Marsh, C., 15 Martin, J., 66, 91 Maslow, A.H., 1, 10, 11, 85, 88, 133 Maturana, H.R., 91 McCaughey, A., 5 McClelland, D., 36, 130 McCrae, R., 92, 93, 123 McInerney, D., 75 McLaren, P., 113 McLeod, S., 40, 64, 83 McMaugh, A., 89 Mead, G.H., 82 Meens, E., 12, 14, 129, 134 Meili, R., 91 Mendo-Lázaro, S., 72 Metacognition, 32, 34, 39, 45, 56, 57, 68, 73, 79, 93, 104, 114, 115, 117, 119, 124 Metacognitive experiences, 104 Metacognitive knowledge, 104, 124 Metacognitive strategies, 34, 105, 106, 124 Meta-ideology, 137 Metaphor, 100 Meyer, D., 101 Milanovic, B., 3 Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, 59 Mnemonics, 78 Moral philosophy, 87 Moss, S., 41 Motivation, 1, 2, 13, 16, 47, 50, 61, 117, 127 behavioural approaches to, 26 models of, 3 theories of, 5, 16 Motivational strategies, 109, 127 Motivational theories, 103 Multiculturalism, 86 Multiple identities, 33 Multiple intelligence, 117

162 N National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools, 82 National identity, 13, 32 National Identity (Smith), 13 Nature of intelligence, 117 Nelson-LeGall, S., 69 Neo-liberal ideology, 112, 126 NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R), 123 Neurons, 31 Neuroticism, 93, 122 Nietzsche, F, 100 O Observable classroom behaviour, 22 Observational learning through modelling, 115 OCEAN model of personlity, 92 O’Donnell, A., 134 OECD, 12, 27, 35, 72, 78, 114, 127, 138 Ollivier, M., 85, 86 On becoming a person, 85 Operant conditioning, 19, 23, 49, 129, 134 Order of Things, The, 100 Origins of Personality, 121 Outcomes-defined policy, 5, 137 Oyserman, D., 14, 128 P Palimpsest, 101 Pandy, R., 84 Parrish, N., 14, 15 Passeron, J., 136 Patrick, H., 12 Pauley, J., 94 Pavlov, I., 17 Pelletier, L.G., 27 Peng, C., 12 Performance goals, 9 Personal characteristics (P), 48 Personality, 91, 117, 121, 138 Personality tests, 93 Personality theory, 92, 122, 123 Petri, H., 27 Phenomenological theory, 83 Piaget, J., 59, 63, 65, 66 PISA 2022, 4 Pleasure principle, 121 Podtekst (sub-text), 100 Polomoshnov, A., 86 Pong, S.-L., 136

Index Positive behaviour, 127 Positive reinforcement, 22, 24, 28, 74, 79, 129 Post, D., 136 Postman, N., 64 Power/Knowledge, 100 Power of language, 106 Power of the text, 43, 99, 109 Prater, M.A., 24 Pritchard, A., 17, 19 Process Model Communication (PCM), 94 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), 4, 114, 137 Psychoanalytical theory, 121 Psychological constructivism, 65 Psychometric theories, 118 Psychomotor domain, 114, 116 Psychoticism, 93, 122, 123

Q Quality education, 3, 29 Quality education for all, 85 Quality learning, 16, 36 Quality teaching, 72, 78

R Read, C., 91 Reciprocal determinism, 132 Reification, 108 Reification of culture, 13 Reinforcement, 6, 19, 24 Reproduction, 50 Retention, 50 Rhoten, D., 3 Richardson, V., 64, 67, 68, 72 Rizvi, F., 3, 113 Rocchi, M., 27 Rogers, C., 10, 13, 83, 85 Rojas-Cazaluade, O., 73 Rosenberg, M., 47, 82 Rose, S., 89 Rubie-Davis, C., 57 Rusk, R., 128 Rust, V., 4 Ryan, A., 12 Ryan, R.M., 2, 8, 15, 131, 133, 134

S S2 TEM Centers SC, 70 Sadler-Smith, E., 96 Saeed, S., 12, 27

Index Saha, L., 136 Sarup, M., 100, 101 SBR (stimulus, behaviour and response) model, 18 Scheuringer, B., 33 Schlechty, P.C., 131 Scholastic Aptitude Test Assessment (SATA), 119 Schonert-Reichl, K., 116 Schunk, D., 44, 48, 56, 115 Schunk, D.H., 1, 27, 59, 60, 82, 132 Seifert, K., 130 Sekerci, ¸ H., 35, 72 Self-actualization, 10, 12, 97, 133 Self-concept, 10, 13, 15, 16, 32, 36, 47, 55, 61, 79, 81, 82, 84, 90, 93, 97, 103, 109, 116, 128, 138 Self-control, 49, 51, 53 Self-determination theories of motivation, 37, 38 Self-determination theory (SDT), 15, 24, 25, 41, 131, 132, 134 of human needs, 7, 8, 32 Self-efficacy, 10, 16, 25–27, 29, 32, 33, 39, 44, 47, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 60, 61, 76, 79, 84, 93, 97, 103, 105, 106, 108, 109, 115, 116, 128, 132, 138 Self-efficacy theory of motivation, 44 Self-esteem, 16, 25, 47, 50, 55, 57, 58, 61, 79, 83, 93, 97, 101, 103, 109, 116, 128, 138 Self-fulfilling prophecy, 58 Self-identity, 14 Self-regulated learning (SRL), 10, 15, 39, 60, 128 strategies, 23, 28, 60, 79 Self-regulation, 49, 51, 56, 57, 61, 116, 125, 128, 131 Self-regulation strategies, 93 Self, The, 108, 109 Self-worth theory of motivation, 7, 8, 24, 25, 32, 39 Senior, R., 12 Senko, C., 9 Sense of belonging, 13 Shah, R.K., 35, 73 Shakespeare, W., 1 Shehzad, S., 35 Shively, J., 77 Shor, I., 64 Singh, M., 12 Sivrikaya, A., 5 Skinner, B.F., 6, 17, 26, 129

163 Slavin, R., 1, 6, 18, 36, 42, 69, 72, 73, 75, 76, 104, 118 Smith, A., 13, 32, 33 Smith, P.J., 96 Snowman, J., 48, 53, 55 Snow, R.E., 119 Social and emotional learning (SEL), 55, 116 Social capital, 135 Social cognitive domain, 114 Social-cognitive theories of motivation, 9, 129 Social cognitive theory, 60, 61, 132 Social cognitive theory of motivation, 132 Social comparison, 56 Social constructivism, 65, 67, 77, 104 Social constructivist leaning, 78 Social constructivist pedagogy, 78, 97 Social constructivist theory, 59, 68 Social-cultural constructivism, 65 Social-emotional learning (SEL), 93 Social inequality, 3 Socialisation, agencies of, 90 Social justice, 126 Social learning model, 82 Social learning theory (SLT), 9, 48, 49, 61, 105 Social needs, 81 Social stratification, 3 Socio-cultural constructivist perspective, 42 Solomon, R., 86 ‘Sous rature’ (under erasure), 100 Spacey, J., 89 Spiral curriculum, 15 Standardization in education, 5, 113 Standards-driven imperatives, 137 Standards-driven policy, 112 Standards of academic performance, 20 Standards of performance, 7, 28, 102, 130 Stanford-Binet intelligence quotient, 118 Stanford-Binet Scale, 117, 119 Steinmayr, R., 5 STEM stereotypes, 57 Sternberg, R., 124 Structural-semantic discourse, 103–107 Structural-semantic discourse analysis, 103 Student Intervention Plan, The, 96 Student Intervention Strategy (SIS), 96 Students’ academic achievement, 35, 72, 125, 129 Student’s attribution, 57 Students’ cultural capital, 135, 138 Students’ cultural identities, 128, 129

164 Students’ engagement, 5, 16, 36, 78, 128, 130, 138 Students’ identity(ies), 13, 16, 103, 109 Students’ individual needs, 25 Students’ learning strategies, 74 Students’ levels of engagement, 26 Students’ motivation, 114 Student’s outcome expectations, 57 Students’ performance, 137 Student self-assessment, 56 Student’s self-control, 52 Student’s self-evaluation, 56 Student’s self-regulation, 59, 102 Students’ sense of belonging, 29 Student values, 109 Sugarman, J., 66 Sunal, C.S., 73 Superego, 121 Sutton, R., 130 Szokolszky, A., 91 T Teacher-student interaction, quality of, 27 Terlouw, K., 32 Terman, L., 117 Terminator, The, 1 Think-pair-share cooperative group model, 70 Think-pair-square cooperative group model, 70 Thompson, P., 64 Thorndike, E., 17 Thought and language, 59 Toti, Z., 14 Toward a Psychology of Being, 85 Transcendence, 12, 97 Triadic reciprocal causation model, 48 Triarchic theory of intelligence, 124 Turner, J., 101 U Ujihanti, M., 73 UNESCO, 112, 113 UNESCO 2015 Education for All (EFA), 5, 113 UNESCO Conference on Education for Shared Values and for Intercultural and Interfaith Understanding, 112 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN), 112 Urhahne, D., 132 Usher, E.L., 27, 82, 132

Index V Valence, 39 Values, 111, 112, 117, 125 example of, 111 Values education, 113, 125, 138 Van Bragt, C., 14 Van Wyk, M.M., 72 Varela, F.J., 91 Verbal praise, 24 Vicarious experience, 55 Villines, Z., 40 Von Glasersfeld, E., 63 Vroom, V., 38 Vygotskian perspective, 34 Vygotsky, L., 42, 65, 78 Vygotsky, L.S., 59, 66, 90

W Wadsworth, B.J., 40 Wallerstein, I., 2 Waskiewicz, R., 38 Watson, J., 17, 66 Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISCIV), 118 Weedon, C., 42 Weiner, B., 38, 57 Weingartner, C., 64 Wellbeing pedagogy, 126 Wentzel, K.R., 5, 12 Wigfield, A., 8 Wijnia, L., 132 Witkin, H.A., 95 Wodak, R., 99 Woodcock Johnson Test of cognitive ability, 118 Woolfolk, A., 1, 6 Woolfolk Hoy, A., 119 World Education Indicators (WEI), 114, 137

Z Zajda, J., 2–5, 9, 12–14, 21, 27, 32, 33, 35, 44, 57, 58, 69, 72, 73, 77, 78, 103–105, 107–109, 111, 113, 118, 119, 121, 125, 135, 137 Zajda, R., 43, 119, 121 Zimmerman, B.J., 56, 59, 60 Zone of proximal development (ZPD), 66 Zyngier, D., 12, 27