Relationship between motivation, performance, and test achievement

MOTIVATION PERFORMANCE & ACHIVEMENT

The Relationship between Motivation, Performance and Achievement: Doing Good on a Test

Dennis Suritis

Psychology

This brief study addresses the relationship between motivation, performance and achievement, through research of the interactive nature of the three on test taking success and/or failure. The work determined that there is a significant correlation between the three with regard to overall success on exams. 50 students were split into two groups; and each group was given a different motivation scale for the completion of the exam, and the outcome was tested. Those who were told that the results on the test mattered for the extra credit scored 25% higher than those who had less motivation. It would seem that piqued motivation precipitated the development of piqued interest in materials being tested and greater interest in choosing correct answers.

The Relationship between Motivation, Performance and Achievement:

Doing Good on a Test

Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are often identified by students and educators as the building blocks of student success and/or failure in a lifetime of learning. (Ofoegbu, 2004, p. 81) (Thompson & Thornton, 2002, p. 785) Though there is a clear sense that intrinsic motivation is primary to extrinsic (reward or punishment) motivation the development of a balance between the two may be an essential marker for overall success in academics as well as in life. (Cameron & Pierce, 2002, p. 70) Through this balance the desire to help validate intrinsic motivational growth in children and adults has been the highlighted goal of all "good" teachers. Some of the ways in which this can be developed is through a program that attempts to offer extrinsic motivational factors as positive (i.e. reward) rather than negative (penalties and/or failure) and to do so in such a way that the individual feels some sense of control over the outcome. (Thompson & Thornton, 2002, p. 785)

This work attempts to separate the learning curve (materials the individual is already familiar with), aspect of such a theory, as well as removing high or low level intrinsic motivational students by developing a scenario where materials are novel to the tester until such time that the exam is begun and students are screened for high and low level motivation. Motivation is a multifaceted factor in achievement, (Martin, 2003, p. 88) and therefore this sample attempts to isolate students with moderate levels of intrinsic motivation and a single extrinsic motivation factor for testing. With this the only difference between the test groups would be the motivation to do well on the exam, based on the extrinsic goal of receiving a higher level of extra credit in a beginning psychology class.

Literature Review

It has long been suspected that motivation is the key to performance success and/or failure with regard to academic testing and many other aspects of educational attainment, such as resulting high grades and an overall desire by students to succeed and more importantly learn. Students who are highly motivated to succeed, by intrinsic or extrinsic forces are much more likely to achieve greater results when tested, in almost any scenario, than those who show moderate to low levels of motivation, either by scenario or self report. (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002, p. 313) Many educators in fact stress that self-motivation and therefore behavioral and developmental strategies sucha s self-talk and others support the development of more successful students. (Dembo, 2000, p. 4) Though self-efficacy and change can be essential to long and short-term success among adult and young learners there is also a need to identify how educators can contribute to success and motivation by creating extrinsic scenarios for perceived success. Extrinsic motivation coupled with moderate intrinsic motivation seems to be an essential element of balance in the classroom and elsewhere. (Boggiano, 1986, p. 218) second important assumption of social cognitive models of motivation is that motivation is not a stable trait of an individual, but is more situated, contextual, and domain-specific. In other words, not only are students motivated in multiple ways, but their motivation can vary depending on the situation or context in the classroom or school. Although this assumption makes it more difficult for research and assessment efforts, it means that student motivation is conceived as being inherently changeable and sensitive to the context. This provides hope for teachers and school psychologists and suggests that instructional efforts and the design of classrooms and schools can make a difference in motivating students for academic achievement. (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002, p. 313)

It is therefore clearly established that intrinsic and extrinsic (context) associated motivation work together to create the ultimate goal of educators, i.e. life long learners, who are more likely than not to demonstrate a desire to learn, that goes beyond the very basic (subsistence) requirements of educational attainment. It is for this reason that this work will test both intrinsic motivation, through a motivation scale and extrinsic, though undefined, reward motivation.

Method

Participants

All beginning psychology students are informed by their instructor in materials and lecture that extra credit can be earned by participation in non-invasive psychology experiments approved and supported by the department and the university human subjects committee. The students are not informed of the total amount of extra credit but are instead told it is discretionary, according to the department and the instructor and that participation is looked upon highly by both.

Students are screened for participation in two ways, one they must be active (non audit) students in a beginning psychology class where such participation would generate extra credit. The term of class has just begun so students are unaware of the grade they have or will have with regard to the need for supplementation with extra credit. The students are first screened with a standard motivation scale, Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) developed by Pintrich & DeGroot, (1990, pp. 33-40). (see Appendix 1) Students who scored high or low on the scale were excluded from the study, in an attempt to develop an average sample.

Testing

Of the 78 students screened 10 scored very low on the MSLQ and 12 scored very high and were then excluded from the test sample. The remaining 56 were then asked if they had ever been told by any previous educational professional that they had a significant reading comprehension problem, six reported such was the case and were also excluded from the testing sample, leaving a remainder of n 50, who then went on to be grouped into groups of 25 and tested with the differing extrinsic motivation factor of greater extra credit for a higher score or participation as the only determinant factor for the amount of extra credit they would receive.

The remaining 50 students, split into the two groups, then took a basic reading comprehension exam. The material consisted of a 2-page case study reading (see appendix 2) and 50 corresponding questions which were based on content rather than reaction or interpretation. The exam was proctored by the researcher and all students in the blind groups were seated according to number. This number was the only identifying factor used to compile the study at a later date. The student groups were mixed so as not to create disunity among behavior during the testing procedure. The test was administered in a packet and students were told by the proctor that they had the opportunity to underline, highlight or otherwise note what they believed would be asked later in the test questions. (by number this behavior was noted by the proctor) Additionally, students were told that they could, at any time refer back to the case study to help them answer the questions. (again this behavior was noted by the proctor during the exam, as he or she watched the students take the test) Students were told that the proctor was multitasking and might therefore seem distracted, so note taking would seem like intrinsic behavior and the proctor was asked not to look directly at the students as he or she was taking notes on behavior during the test. Student testers (n 50) asked to take a brief exam associated with materials which did not correlate to an existing class or subject, i.e. novel materials, in the form of a case study reading with corresponding 50 questions. Prior to the completion of the exam the testers were split into two groups, with one being told that they would receive extra credit in their psychology class by simply taking the exam, no matter the outcome. The second group was informed that test results would determine the amount of extra credit they received to elicit motivation to do well.