The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations is one of long-standing interest in education. Intrinsic motivation refers to engaging in a task for its own inherent rewards whereas extrinsic motivation refers to engaging in a task in order to attain some separable outcome—such as approval from authority figures or special privileges in the classroom. Researchers have often operationalized these two constructs as mutually exclusive, such that an individual high in intrinsic motivation would necessarily be low in extrinsic motivation. However, recent studies suggest that these two types of motivation can, in fact, coexist and perhaps even work together to motivate task engagement (see Harter 1981; Gillet et al. 2009; Lepper et al. 2005; Ryan et al. 1995). An essential direction for research, then, is to identify naturally-occurring combinations of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations and their academic consequences. For instance, is it optimal for students to have high levels of both types of motivation, or are they better served by a pattern of high intrinsic motivation coupled with low extrinsic motivation? Understanding how different types of motivation may operate in tandem is a critical issue not only for motivational theorists but also practitioners, who must respond to the complexities of individual students.
Canadian Psychology 2008
Canadian Psychology 2008
This paper is intended to provide a comprehensive solution to what ails the current public school system and its place in societal development – a system that is failing badly in the face of ever complex fundamental challenges to our survival, let alone our thriving as a species. What follows is a ‘big’ proposal. Once started the ‘four drivers’ feed on each other as a system in motion. Most important, the timing is right.
The purpose of this study was to examine a proposed motivational model of science achievement based on self-determination theory. The study relied on U.S. eighth-grade science data from the 2007 Third International Mathematics and Science Study to examine a structural model that hypothesized how perceived autonomy support, perceived competence in science, intrinsic motivation, and science achievement related to each other. Mother’s education and student gender were used as controls. Findings showed that the hypothesized model provided a good fit to the data. The strongest direct effect on science achievement was students’ perceived competence in science. Student intrinsic motivation was shown to have a surprisingly negative effect on science achievement.
‘Whole system reform’ is the name of the game and ‘drivers’ are those policy and strategy levers that have the least and best chance of driving successful reform. A ‘wrong driver’ then is a deliberate policy force that has little chance of achieving the desired result, while a ‘right driver’ is one that ends up achieving better measurable results for students. Whole system reform is just that – 100 per cent of the system – a whole state, province, region or entire country. This paper examines those drivers typically chosen by leaders to accomplish reform, critiques their inadequacy, and offers an alternative set of drivers that have been proven to be more effective at accomplishing the desired goal, which I express as … the moral imperative of raising the bar (for all students) and closing the gap (for lower performing groups) relative to higher order skills and competencies required to be successful world citizens.
Geoff Masters, Australian Council for Educational Research February 18, 2021
I handed down the final report of a two-year review of the New South Wales school curriculum in June 2020. One of the review’s key recommendations was to introduce what I called “untimed syllabuses”. This is where students who need more time for their learning are given it, and those ready to move on to the next stage are able to do so.
The NSW government has agreed to trial this recommendation over the coming years.
I made this recommendation in response to a problem teachers had identified. They explained the current curriculum lacks flexibility. It expects every student of the same age to learn the same things at the same time. This sounds fair, and it might be if all students began the school year ready for the year’s curriculum.
In reality, as the Gonski report observed, evidence from testing programs shows the most advanced students in each year of school are about five to six years ahead of the least advanced students. Instead of beginning on the same starting line, students begin each school year widely spread on the running track.