Abstract
Majority of studies that examined achievement goals utilized a variable-level approach that looked at how students’ goals influenced school outcomes. This approach ignored the possible constellation of traits within each student. The use of variable-centered approach classifies students into homogenous groups with similar profile across various dimensions of goals. From the framework of Personal Investment Theory (Maehr, 1984), the aim of this study was to investigate how different goal clusters, each characterized by distinct goal profile, relate to sense of self, facilitating conditions, engagement, and achievement. Four empirically derived achievement goal profiles emerged through cluster analysis: predominantly extrinsic (n = 143, 8.44 %), high mastery-performance-extrinsic (n = 598, 35.30 %), high multiple goals (n = 748, 44.16 %), and low goals (n = 205, 12.10 %). These clusters were compared in terms of sense of self (sense of purpose, self-reliance, positive self-concept, and negative self-concept), learning engagement (university intention, school valuing, and affect to school), facilitating conditions (teacher support, parent support, peer help, negative parent influence, negative peer influence), and achievement (chemistry achievement). MANOVA results indicated that differences exist among four clusters. Post hoc analyses indicated that the most favorable outcomes were associated with two clusters: the high multiple goals and high mastery-performance-extrinsic goal profile. Findings are discussed in relation to improving academic engagement and achievement of Filipino students.
Author Notes
This research was supported by a Faculty Development Program Grant to the first author by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), Philippines
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals and classroom motivational climate. In J. Meece & D. Schunk (Eds.), Students’ perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327–348). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Bear, G. G. (2013). Teacher resistance to frequent rewards and praise: Lack of skill or a wise decision? Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 318–340. doi:10.1080/10474412.2013.845495.
Bernardo, A. B. I. (2008). Individual and social dimensions of Filipino students’ achievement goals. International Journal of Psychology, 43, 886–891. doi:10.1080/00207590701837834.
Chan, K., & Lai, P. (2007). Revisiting the trichotomous achievement goal framework for Hong Kong secondary students: A structural model analysis. The Asia Pacific Education Researcher, 16, 11–22.
Chang, W. C., & Wong, K. (2008). Socially-oriented achievement goals of Chinese university students in Singapore: Structure and relationships with achievement motives, goals and affective outcomes. International Journal of Psychology, 43, 880–895. doi:10.1080/00207590701836398.
Dela Rosa, E., & Bernardo, A. B. I. (2013a). Are two achievement goals better than one? Filipino students’ achievement goals, deep learning strategies, and affect. Learning and Individual Differences, 27, 97–101. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.07.005.
Dela Rosa, E. D., & Bernardo, A. B. I. (2013b). Testing multiple goals theory in an Asian context: Filipino students’ motivation and academic achievement. International Journal of School and Educational Psychology, 1, 47–57.
Dowson, M., & McInerney, D. M. (2003). What do students say about their motivational goals? Towards amore complex and dynamic perspective on student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 91–113. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00010-3.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273. doi:10.1037/0033259X.95.2.256.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (5th ed., Vol. III, pp. 1017–1095). New York: Wiley.
Elliot, A. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologists, 34, 169–189. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3403_3.
Elliot, A. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 52–72). New York: Guilford Press.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218–232. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.1.218.
Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 968–980. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.461.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, A. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.501.
Ganotice, F. A., & Bernardo, A. B. (2010). Validating the factors of the English and Filipino versions of the sense of self scale. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 43, 81–99.
Ganotice, F. A., Bernardo, A. B. I., & King, R. B. (2012). Testing the factorial invariance of the English and Filipino versions of the Inventory of School Motivation with bilingual students in the Philippines. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 298–303. doi:10.1177/0734282911435459.
Ganotice, F. A., Bernardo, A. B. I., & King, R. B. (2013). Adapting the facilitating conditions questionnaire (FCQ) for Bilingual Filipino adolescents: Validating the English and Filipino versions. Child Indicators Research, 6, 237–256. doi:10.1007/s12187-012-9167-1.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2009). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 16.0 update (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Hair, J. F., & Black, W. C. (2004). Cluster analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding more multivariate statistics (pp. 147–205). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hau, K. T., & Ho, I. T. (2008). Editorial: Insights from research on Asian students’ achievement motivation. International Journal of Psychology, 43, 865–869. doi:10.1080/00207590701838030.
Hofstede, G. (1983). Dimensions of national cultures in fifty countries and three regions. In J. B. Deregowski, S. Dziurawiec, & R. C. Annis (Eds.), Expiscations in cross-cultural psychology. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlanger.
King, R. B., Ganotice, F. A., & Watkins, D. (2014). A cross-cultural analysis of achievement and social goals among Chinese and Filipino students. Social Psychology of Education. doi:10.1007/s11218-014-9251-0.
King, R. B., McInerney, D., & Watkins, D. (2010). Can social goals enrich our understanding of students’ motivational goals? Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 11, 1–16.
King, R., & Watkins, D. (2010). Socializing achievement goal theory: The need for social goals. Psychological Studies, 57(1), 112–116. doi:10.1007/s1246-011-0140-8.
Kitayama, S., & Uchida, Y. (2004). Interdependent agency: An alternative system for action. In R. Sorrentine, D. Cohen, J. M. Olson, & P. Zanna (Eds.), Culture and social behavior: the Ontario symposium (Vol. 10, pp. 137–164). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbraum.
Ku, L., Dittmar, H., & Banerjee, R. (2014). To have or to learn? The effects of materialism on British and Chinese children’s learning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 803–821. doi:10.1037/a0036038.
Li, J. (2002). A cultural model of learning: Chinese “heart and mind for wanting to learn.”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 248–269. doi:10.1177/0022022102033003003.
Luo, W., Paris, S. G., Hogan, D., & Luo, Z. (2011). Do performance goals promote learning? A pattern analysis of Singapore students’ achievement goals. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 165–176. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.02.003.
Maehr, M. L. (1984). Meaning and motivation: Toward a theory of personal investment. In R. E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 1, pp. 115–144). New York: Academic.
Maehr, M. L., & Braskamp, L. A. (1986). The motivation factor: A theory of personal investment. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Maehr, M. L., & McInerney, D. M. (2004). Motivation as personal investment. In D. M. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisited (pp. 61–90). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.98.2.224.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (2010). Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 420–430. doi:10.1177/1745691610375557.
McInerney, D. M., & Ali, A. (2006). Multidimensional and hierarchical assessment of school motivation: Cross-cultural validation. Educational Psychology, 26, 717–734. doi:10.1080/01443410500342559.
McInerney, D. M., & Liem, G. A. D. (2009). Achievement motivation in cross cultural context: Application of personal investment theory in educational settings. In A. Kaplan, S. A. Karabenick, & E. DeGroot (Eds.), Culture, self, and motivation: Essays in honour of Martin L. Maehr (pp. 213–241). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
McInerney, D. M., Yeung, A. S., & McInerney, V. (2001). Cross-cultural validation of the Inventory of School Motivation (ISM): Motivation orientations of Navajo and Anglo students. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2, 134–152.
Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487–503. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258.
Ng, C. H. (2000). A path analysis of self-schemas, goal orientations, learning approaches, and performance. Journal of Psychology for Chinese Societies, 1(2), 93–121.
Pastor, D. A., Barron, K. E., Miller, B. J., & Davis, S. L. (2007). A latent profile analysis of college students’ achievement goal orientation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 8–47. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.10.003.
Pekrun, R., Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2006). Achievement goals and discrete achievement emotions: A theoretical model and prospective test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 583–597. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.583.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 544–555. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.544.
Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Goals and self-regulatory processes (Vol. 7, pp. 371–402). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Rhodewalt, F. (1994). Conceptions of ability, achievement goals, and individual differences in self-handicapping behavior: On the application of implicit theories. Journal of Personality, 62, 67–85. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00795.x.
Urdan, T. (2004). Can achievement goal theory guide school reform? In P. R. Pintrich & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 13, pp. 361–392). Stanford, CA: JAI Press.
Urdan, T., & Maehr, M. L. (1995). Beyond a two-goal theory of motivation and achievement: A case for social goals. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 213–243. doi:10.3102/00346543065003213.
Wang, C. K. J., Biddle, S. J. H., & Elliot, A. J. (2007). The 2X2 achievement goal framework in physical education context. Psychology of Sports and Exercise, 8, 147–168. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2005.08.012.
Watkins, D., & Hattie, J. (2012). Multiple goals in a Hong Kong Chinese educational context. An investigation of developmental trends and learning outcomes. Australian Journal of Education, 56(3), 273–286. doi:10.1177/000494411205600306.
Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 211–238. doi:10.1016/S10416080(96)90015-1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ganotice, F.A., Yeung, S.S.S. (2016). The Conjoint Influence of Achievement Goals on Filipino Students’ Sense of Self, Facilitating Conditions, and School Outcomes: A Personal Investment Theory Analysis. In: King, R., Bernardo, A. (eds) The Psychology of Asian Learners. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-576-1_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-576-1_23
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-575-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-576-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)