See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/289703486

The motivation, learning environment and school achievement

Article  in  The International Journal of Learning Annual Review · January 2011

CITATIONS READS

15 8,769

3 authors, including:

Loredana Diaconu-Gherasim Simona Butnaru

Universitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza Universitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza
34 PUBLICATIONS   226 CITATIONS    16 PUBLICATIONS   101 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Learning environment and school adjustment View project

Contextual factors related to adolescents' emotional and academic adjustment View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Loredana Diaconu-Gherasim on 21 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

T H E I N T E R N AT I O N A L

JOURNAL
of LEARNING

Volume 17

The Motivation, Learning Environment and School

Achievement

Loredana Ruxandra Gherasim, Simona Butnaru

and Luminita Iacob

www.Learning-Journal.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING
http://www.Learning-Journal.com

First published in 2011 in Champaign, Illinois, USA

by Common Ground Publishing LLC
www.CommonGroundPublishing.com

ISSN: 1447-9494

© 2011 (individual papers), the author(s)

© 2011 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground

All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism
or review as permitted under the applicable copyright legislation, no part of this work may
be reproduced by any process without written permission from the publisher. For
permissions and other inquiries, please contact
<cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com>.

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING is peer-reviewed, supported by

rigorous processes of criterion-referenced article ranking and qualitative commentary,
ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance and highest significance is
published.

Typeset in Common Ground Markup Language using CGPublisher multichannel

typesetting system
http://www.commongroundpublishing.com/software/
The Motivation, Learning Environment and School
Achievement
Loredana Ruxandra Gherasim, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University,
Romania
Simona Butnaru, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania
Luminita Iacob, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania

Abstract: Previous researchers report that the relationship between motivational beliefs and school
achievement is mediated by some school and individual factors (e.g. students’ perceptions of the
classroom’s goal structure, teacher support, attributional style, and expectancy level). The present
study examined to which extent motivational beliefs contribute to the prediction of school achievement
and perceived competence among secondary school students in interaction with learning environment.
The sample included 350 seventh grade students. Children completed scales for the achievement goal
orientations, the intrinsic motivation, the learning environment and the perceived competence. The
regression analysis showed that mastery and performance-approach goals predicted school achievement
and perceived competence. Classroom cohesiveness and task orientation explained a significant
variance of school achievement, whereas cohesiveness and cooperation were significant predictors
of perceived competence. In the light of these findings, we discuss the importance of motivation in
educational contexts.

Keywords: Achievement Goal Orientations, Intrinsic Motivation, Learning Environment, School

Achievement, Perceived Competence

Introduction

S
CHOOL ACHIEVEMENT REFLECTS student’s attainment of knowledge and
skills established by learning goals in the school curricula. It is an important indicator
of the adolescents` adjustment. School achievement may serve as an important pre-
dictor of adolescents’ well-being, future professional career opportunities or attainment
of social status (Oswald, 1997). Researchers have paid considerable attention to the identi-
fication of the relevant factors that contribute to the students’ higher achievement. They
found that both psychological factors (temperament, personality, and motivation) and envir-
onmental characteristics (parenting, school resources and values rooted in culture) influence
school achievement (Corpus, McClintic-Gilbert & Hayenga, 2009).
In the present study we explored how motivational beliefs and learning environment may
influence school achievement and perceived competence of early adolescents. We focus on
two school-related motivational constructs: motivational and achievement goal orientations.
Both these motivational beliefs describe the reasons underlying individuals’ behavior and
represent a contrast between activity-driven and instrumental engagement (Lepper, 1988).
However, achievement goals are largely cognitive and serve to direct motivational energy,

The International Journal of Learning

Volume 17, 2011, http://www.Learning-Journal.com, ISSN 1447-9494
© Common Ground, Loredana Ruxandra Gherasim, Simona Butnaru, Luminita Iacob, All Rights Reserved,
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

while intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations are the affective source of motivational
energy itself (Pintrich & Garcia, 1991).

Achievement Goal Orientations and School Achievement

Goals are cognitive representations directing students to specific objectives in learning and
achievement situations (Elliot, McGregor & Gable, 1999). These are based on students’ beliefs
about what is important in an achievement situation (Ames, 1992). Achievement goal theories
posit that students’ behavior in an achievement setting is guided by the goals they construe
for learning and these goals determine their approach to, engagement in, and evaluation of
performance in school learning (Ames, 1992; Pintrich, 2000). In literature, two major goal
orientations have been identified that function in an achievement situation: mastery and
performance goal orientations (Ames, 1992; Dweck, 1986). Mastery goals focus on the de-
velopment of skills and abilities and define competence self-referentially, while performance
goals focus on the demonstration of ability and define competence normatively (Ames, 1992;
Nicholls, 1984). The goal theorists divide performance orientation into two dimensions:
performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. This distinction is fundamentally
based upon whether students want to look competent or avoid looking incompetent in their
schoolwork (Harackiewicz, Barron & Elliot, 1998; Middleton & Midgley, 1997).
A number of studies showed that the mastery goals are positively related to adaptive
learning strategies (Ames & Archer, 1988), self-efficacy and interest (Middleton & Midgley,
1997), persistence on difficult tasks and perceived competence (Williams & Gill, 1995;
Pintrich, 2004). The studies examined the relation between performance goals and cognitive
engagement, reported mixed results. On the one hand, researchers have found that perform-
ance-approach goals are linked to effort, positive exam performance, high perceived compet-
ence (Church, Elliot & Gable, 2001; Pintrich, 2000), high levels of aspiration and intrinsic
motivation (Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999). On the other hand, performance-avoidance
goals exhibited a negative impact on intrinsic motivation, achievement and competence ex-
pectancies (Church, Elliot & Gable, 2001; Middleton & Midgley, 1997).
Recent studies suggest that learning environment may have a strong influence on the goals
that students adopt (Ames & Archer, 1988; Anderman & Maehr, 1994). If the classroom
activities emphasize relative ability, grades, and performance, then students are likely to
adopt performance-focused goals. In contrast, in classrooms where task-mastery, effort, and
improvement are stressed, students are more likely to adopt mastery-focused goals (Ames
& Archer, 1988; Meece, Blumenfeld, & Hoyle, 1988).

Intrinsic Motivation and School Achievement

Intrinsic motivation has been recognized as a central aspect of adaptive self-regulation in
the achievement domain (Gottfried, 1990; Ginsburg & Bronstein, 1993). Intrinsic and ex-
trinsic motivation continued to be characterized as opposing poles of a single dimension.
Students with intrinsic motivation are motivated to explore and extend their knowledge and
skills, showing increased effort, persistence and adaptive emotional reactions faced with the
difficulties (Harter, 1981; Gottfried, 1990; Pintrich & Zusho, 2002). Intrinsically oriented
students view failures as a constructive tool to reevaluate their knowledge, strategies and
behaviors (Pintrich & Zusho, 2002). Conversely, students with an extrinsic motivation gain
 LOREDANA RUXANDRA GHERASIM, SIMONA BUTNARU, LUMINITA IACOB

pleasure from the outcome of the activity, such as receiving satisfactory grades, teacher ap-
proval, or peer acceptance (Harter, 1981; Lepper, Corpus, & Iyengar, 2005). They performed
worse both on standardized tests and in regular classroom assessments compared with students
with intrinsic motivation (Ginsburg & Bronstein, 1993; Lepper, Corpus, & Iyengar, 2005).
The researchers found a positive correlation among intrinsic motivation and competence
beliefs within domains (Harter, 1981; Gottfried, 1990). Moreover, intrinsic motivation predicts
an increase in perceived academic competence (Boggiano, 1998).
Recent studies found that the relationship between intrinsic motivation and students`
achievement and perceived competence changed throughout the investigated time period
(Spinath & Spinath, 2005; Harter, 1981). There are some possible explanations for these
results. The first explanation could be the fact that certain experiences, like receiving unfa-
vorable feedback, impacts both on competence beliefs and on intrinsic motivation at the
same time but in different ways. Competence beliefs could decrease after negative feedback,
but intrinsic motivation can stay at the same level when students are convinced that their
effort will help to overcome the difficulties (Spinath & Spinath, 2005; Harter, 1981). The
second explanation might be the students’ age. Motivation researchers found that children
in their early primary years display intrinsic motivation but by middle to late childhood (from
5th to 7th grades), they developed predominantly extrinsic motivation (Gottfried, 1990;
Harter, 1981). The learning environment represents the third possible explanation. Studies
have shown that intrinsic motivation and academic achievement levels decline dramatically
during early adolescence (Eccles, Lord & Midgley, 1991; Schneider, Tomada, Normand,
Tonci & de Domini, 2008). Researchers suggested that the decline could be explained by a
misfit between students’ developmental stage needs and the opportunities offered to them
in school (Eccles, Lord & Midgley, 1991; Barber & Olsen, 1997; Anderman & Maehr, 1994).
In this study we analyzed how the relationship between motivational beliefs and achievement
is mediated by the learning environment in a school transition period.

The Learning Environment

The learning environment refers to the social, psychological, and pedagogical context in
which learning occurs and which affects students’ cognitive, motivational, emotional, and
behavioral outcomes (Fraser & Fisher, 1982; Ludtke, Robitzsch, Trautwein & Kunter, 2009).
The learning environment can be conceptualized in terms of observable characteristics (school
buildings, materials used for instruction, and externally observed interactions between and
among learners and instructors) and in terms of the teachers’ or students’ subjective percep-
tions of their learning setting (Fraser & Fisher, 1982; Frenzel, Pekrun & Goetz, 2007). Re-
searchers found considerable variability in students’ perceptions of the learning environment,
and consequently, they argued that the students` interpretation of the classroom environment
is predictive of students’ motivation, cognition and behavior (Ames & Archer, 1988; Wentzel,
1998).
Teacher support is important for students, because teachers could facilitate students’
learning and achievement, engaging them in different behaviors to facilitate and regulate
students’ behaviors while completing their learning activities (Vermunt & Verloop, 1999;
Shuell, 1996). Empirical studies showed that perceptions of positive teacher-student relation-
ships and feelings of school belonging both relate to academic motivation, achievement and
the pursuit of social responsibility goals (Wentzel, 1998; Wentzel & Battle, 2001). In contrast,
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

the students who perceive teachers as harsh and cold have a poor social behavior and achieve
lower academically, in comparison with their peers (Wentzel & Battle, 2001). Perceived
support from peers is another important predictor of school achievement. Peer support mo-
tivates children to cooperate, to be socially responsible and to follow classroom rules
(Wentzel, 1998; Gregory & Weinstein, 2004). Students’ perceptions of their peers as sup-
portive have been linked to attention regulation, stress at school and absenteeism
(Kochenderfer & Ladd, 1996).
Research suggests that the perception of learning environment changed along with students`
school transition. The literature suggests that school transitions, such as graduation from
middle to high school, influence negatively students’ motivation, achievement and perception
of the learning environment (Schneider et al., 2008; Wigfield, Eccles, Mac Iver, Reuman &
Midgley, 1991). The declining motivation and achievement could be explained by a misfit
between students’ developmental stage needs and the school environment (Eccles, Lord &
Midgley, 1991; Schneider et al., 2008). The learning environment from middle schools is
characterized by excessive rules, poor student-teacher relationships and fewer opportunities
for students to make decisions, while adolescents need autonomy, independence, and social
interaction (Anderman & Maehr, 1994; Wigfield et al., 1991). The transition to a less sup-
portive environment related to the dimensions of teacher caring, peer interaction in academic
work have been linked to graders’ decreases in motivation, engagement, and achievement
(Barber & Olsen, 1997; Ryan & Patrick, 2001).

The Present Study

Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation are similar in that both describe the reasons
underlying students’ academic behavior. However, achievement goals are largely cognitive,
while motivational orientations are the affective source of behaviors (Pintrich & Garcia,
1991). Researchers found that achievement goals are important predictors of students`
achievement and perceived competence (Williams & Gill, 1995; Church, Elliot & Gable,
2001; Middleton & Midgley, 1997). Also, previous studies showed that intrinsic motivation
is an important predictor of school achievement and perceived competence (Pintrich &
Zusho, 2002; Lepper, Corpus & Iyengar, 2005). No study analyzed the impact of achievement
goals and intrinsic motivation, both measured in the same period of time, on students` school
behavior. Consequently, the first goal of this study was to examine which motivational belief,
achievement goals or intrinsic motivation is more powerful in predicting students` achieve-
ment and perceived competence.
Although numerous studies demonstrated the impact of learning environment on students`
achievement (Ludtke et al., 2009; Wentzel & Battle, 2001), few studies examined how
learning environment interact with motivational beliefs in predicting school achievement
and competence. This research suggests that the mastery goal environment promotes an in-
trinsic motivation and high achievement, while performance goal environment promote an
extrinsic orientation and it is associated with the desire for good grades (Anderman &
Midgley, 1997; Corpus, McClintic-Gilbert & Hayenga, 2009). Based on previous findings,
the second goal of the study was to explore whether the effects of achievement goals and
intrinsic motivation on school achievement and competence are mediated by the learning
environment in early adolescents. We chose early adolescence because it is described as a
period of decline in school achievement and motivation (Eccles, Midgley, Buchanan,
 LOREDANA RUXANDRA GHERASIM, SIMONA BUTNARU, LUMINITA IACOB

Flanagan, Mac Iver, Reuman & Wigfield, 1993). Also, it is a period when adolescents perceive
their parents and teachers as less supportive (Eccles, Lord & Midgley, 1991). Thus, early
adolescence is a good period to study the effect of motivational beliefs on achievement with
particular emphasis on the learning environment.

Method

Participants
Four hundred and twenty students were recruited from three schools of the same town,
comprising children from various socioeconomic backgrounds, in the winter of their seventh-
grade. Consent forms were sent to the parents of all the seventh-graders from the participating
schools. The students who were absent on one of the days of testing or provided incomplete
data were excluded from the analyses. The final sample consisted of 350 seventh-graders
(189 girls and 161 boys; average age: 13 years and 2 months).

Measures

Intrinsic Motivation
Students completed the Harter’s (1981) Scale of Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Motivation in the
Classroom. The scale is a 30-item instrument assessing the extent to which children report
an extrinsic versus intrinsic orientation toward learning. This scale assesses the extent to
which students see themselves as either more intrinsically or more extrinsically motivated
in school by asking them to report on their usual motivations for a variety of classroom be-
haviors. The scale employs a structured alternative format. Each item presents two statements
describing two kinds of children. Students indicate which type of child is more like them
and the extent to which that is true and subsequently indicate whether that is really true or
sort of true. Items are scored on a 4-point scale (from 1 - maximum extrinsic response to 4
- maximum intrinsic response). In this study, we used the children’s composite score of all
these motivational dimensions. The Cronbach alpha for the entire scale was .78.

Achievement Goals
Goals were measured using a scale derived from the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey
(PALS; Middleton & Midgley, 1997). Mastery goals (five items) reflect striving to develop
one’s skills and abilities or advance one’s learning and understanding of the material. Per-
formance-approach goals (five items) entail focusing on attaining normative competence.
Performance-avoidance goals (five items) entail focusing on avoiding normative competence.
All ratings were made on 5-point scales (1 - not at all true to 5 - very true). On the basis of
factor analysis with Varimax rotation, a three-factor structure was identified. An examination
of items loaded on the factors revealed that the items were divided into three primary goals
- mastery, performance-approach and performance-avoidance - accounting for 16.99%,
16.84% and 15.06% of the total variance, respectively. The factor structure was highly
similar to the structure found by Middleton and Midgley (1997), except one item from the
Performance-Avoidance subscale which was eliminated because it had a low correlation
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

with this scale. The Chronbach’s alpha reliability for these factors ranged from .74 to .78.
For the subsequent analysis of this study, composite mean scores were calculated for each
of these three achievement goals.

Learning Environment
To assess classroom environment, five scales from the What Is Happening In this Class?
(WIHIC) instrument were selected. The WIHIC is a widely-used questionnaire in classroom
environment research (Aldridge & Fraser, 2000; Dorman, 2003). The WIHIC consists of 56
items assigned to 7 underlying scales (8 items per scale). Each item employs a 5-point Likert
response format (from 1 - almost never, to 5 - almost always). In this study we used data
collection on four facets of classroom life for students (Student Cohesiveness, Teacher
Support, Task Orientation and Cooperation). The average scores were calculated for each
dimension. In our study, the Cronbach alpha coefficients of these dimensions ranged from
.79 to .89.

Perceived Competence
Students completed the Perceived Competence Scale for Children (Harter, 1982). This 28-
item scale assesses students` perceived competence in four fields: Cognitive, Social Accept-
ance, Physical, and General Self-worth. This scale employs the same structured alternative
format as the intrinsic motivation scale. The children first chose the description of the type
of kids most like them, and then made judgments about whether they were just “sort of like”
those kids or “really like” those kids. Using a 4-point response scale, students then decided
which child they resembled most and indicated if it was really or sort of true for them. A
global score was computed, reflecting the extent to which the child likes himself or herself
as a person globally. Higher scores are reflective of greater perceived self-worth. The
Cronbach alpha coefficient for the entire scale was .78.

School Achievement
We collected the participants’ grades for each of the eight subjects (Mathematics, Physics,
Chemistry, Biology, Romanian, History, Geography and English). The Romanian grading
scale ranges from 1 (poor) to 10 (outstanding). The overall average grade across the eight
subjects was computed.

Procedure
Questionnaires assessing the intrinsic motivation, achievement goals and learning environment
were administered to all the students at the beginning of the second semester of the seventh
grade (Time 1). At the end of the seventh grade, 3 to 4 months after Time 1, students filled
in the perceived academic competence questionnaire (Time 2). Also, the students’ grades
for eight subjects in the second semester were collected from the school record office.
 LOREDANA RUXANDRA GHERASIM, SIMONA BUTNARU, LUMINITA IACOB

Results
Table 1 shows descriptive statistics of the analyzed variables. The school achievement was
positively correlated with mastery and performance-approach goals, as well as with learning
environment dimensions, but negatively with the performance-avoidance goals. Perceived
competence positively correlated with the performance-approach goals, learning environment
dimensions as well as with the school achievement, but negatively with the performance-
avoidance goals. The intrinsic motivation did not significantly correlate with the achievement
and competence.

Two hierarchical multiple regression analyses (Cohen & Cohen, 1983) were used to test the
interaction effects between motivational beliefs and learning environment dimensions. Indi-
vidual variables within a given set were not interpreted unless the set as a whole was signi-
ficant. In the first prediction, with the school achievement as the criterion, achievement goals
and intrinsic motivation were entered in the equation in Step 1; teacher support, classroom
task orientation, cohesiveness and cooperation were entered in the equation in Step 2; and
the interactions between the predictors were entered in the Step 3. The results, which are
summarized in Table 2, showed that performance and mastery goals (β=.14, β=-.17, β=.12,
p<.05) measured at Time 1 are significant predictors of the achievement at the end of the
semester. The classroom cohesiveness and task orientation (β=.15, β=.25, p<.01) are signi-
ficant predictors of the students` grades. Those students who reported more performance-
approach and mastery goals or less performance-avoidance goals at Time 1 were more likely
to report higher grades at Time 2. Also, the students who reported a higher level of cohesive-
ness or task orientation environment at Time 1 were more likely to report higher grades at
Time 2. There were no significant interactions between motivational beliefs and the learning
environment in predicting the school achievement.
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

In the second prediction, with the perceived competence as the criterion, achievement goals
and intrinsic motivation were entered in the equation in Step 1; teacher support, classroom
task orientation, cohesiveness and cooperation were entered in the equation in Step 2; and
the interactions between the predictors were entered in the Step 3. The results (see Table 2)
indicated that the performance-avoidance and mastery goals (β=.18, β=-.24, respectively,
p<.01) predicted the perceived competence. Those students who reported less performance-
avoidance goals or more mastery goals at Time 1 were more likely to report a higher level
of competence. The classroom’ cohesiveness and cooperation (β=.31, β=.12, p<.05) were
significant predictors of the competence. The students who reported a higher level of
classroom cohesiveness or cooperation at Time 1 were more likely to report a higher level
of competence at Time 2. There were no significant interactions between motivational beliefs
and the learning environment in predicting perceived competence.

Discussion
The first goal of this study was to examine which motivational factor (achievement goals or
intrinsic motivation) is more powerful in predicting students` achievement. Our findings
indicated that achievement goals are the most significant predictors. Students who reported
more performance-approach goals at Time 1 were more likely to report better grades at Time
2. Also, the students who reported more mastery goals and less performance-avoidance goals
at Time 1 were more likely to have a higher level of achievement and competence beliefs
three months later. These findings are in concordance with previous research results which
highlight that the mastery and performance-approach goals have a fostering effect on
achievement, task persistence and perceived competence (Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999;
Williams & Gill, 1995), while performance-avoidance goal prone students give up when
faced with difficult work or confronted with failure (Pintrich, 2004).
Contrary to the findings of previous research which showed that children with intrinsic
motivation performed better in regular classroom assessments and reported an increase in
perceived academic competence (Boggiano, 1998; Pintrich & Zusho, 2002; Lepper, Corpus,
 LOREDANA RUXANDRA GHERASIM, SIMONA BUTNARU, LUMINITA IACOB

& Iyengar, 2005), in our study intrinsic motivation did not predict both achievement and
competence. These results may be explained by the participants` age. We selected students
from the early adolescence period. As previous studies indicated, in this period the relationship
of intrinsic motivation with both achievement and perceived competence decreased (Gottfried,
1990; Schneider et al., 2008). A misfit between students’ developmental stage needs and
the opportunities offered to them in school could be a possible explanation of these insigni-
ficant relationships between intrinsic motivation and achievement (Eccles, Lord & Midgley,
1991; Barber & Olsen, 1997). Our results may suggest that in the early adolescence period
achievement goals may be more important motivational beliefs in predicting school
achievement than intrinsic motivation.
The second goal of our study was to explore whether the effects of motivational beliefs
are mediated by the learning environment. As hypothesized, the classroom cohesiveness,
task orientation and cooperation were significant predictors of students` achievement and
perceived competence. These findings support the research that suggests that working in a
climate of cohesiveness and cooperation ensures belongingness and security feelings to
children, more than working in competition conditions (Wentzel, 1998; Wentzel & Battle,
2001). The security feelings could motivate adolescents to follow norms and rules, allow
them to take an autonomous initiative in completing learning tasks and this promotes the
increase of their competence and, consequently, attaining higher levels of self-perceived
competence and performance (Gregory & Weinstein, 2004).
The effects of motivational beliefs were not mediated by the learning environment. The
assessment of classroom environment could explain these findings. This scale was based on
students self-report related to teacher and peers relationships. A number of potentially other
important aspects of this environment were not directly assessed - such as classroom structure,
goal structures in the classroom or instructional practices that could mediate the impact of
motivational beliefs on students’ school achievement and competence. Future research must
assess how these omitted classroom environment variables interact with motivational beliefs
in predicting school achievement and perceived competence.
Despite the above limitations the finding that really stands out in this study is the import-
ance of the learning environment and the motivational beliefs regarding students’ competence
and achievement. For this reason, teachers should make more effort to foster the development
of high involvement classrooms, putting more emphasis on the mastery goals and less on
the performance goals and applying cooperative classroom practices. In addition, they should
encourage class cohesion and positive self-beliefs as components of developing academic
and social skills, and avoid strategies that are likely to undermine students’ self-perceptions.

Acknowledgment
This work was supported by CNCSIS–UEFISCDI, project number 849 PNII_IDEI 2026/2008.

References
Aldridge, J. M. & Fraser, B. J. (2000). A cross-cultural study of classroom learning environments in
Australia and Taiwan. Learning Environments Research, 3, 101-134.
Ames, C. A. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 84, 261–271.
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and
motivational processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
Anderman, E. M., & Maehr, M. L. (1994). Motivation and schooling in the middle grades. Review of
Educational Research, 64, 287-309.
Anderman, E. M., & Midgley, C. (1997). Changes in achievement goal orientations, perceived academic
competence, and grades across the transition to middlelevel schools. Contemporary Educa-
tional Psychology, 22, 269-298.
Barber, B. K., & Olsen, J. A. (1997). Socialization in context: Connection, regulation, and autonomy
in the family, school, and neighborhood, and with peers. Journal of Adolescent Research,
12, 287-315.
Boggiano, A. K. (1998). Maladaptive achievement patterns: A test of a diathesis-stress analysis of
helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1681-1695.
Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J. & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement
goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 43-54.
Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral
sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Corpus, J. H., McClintic-Gilbert, M. S. & Hayenga, A. O. (2009) Within-year changes in children’s
intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations: Contextual predictors and academic outcomes.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 154-166.
Dorman, J. P. (2003). Cross national validation of the What Is Happening In this Class questionnaire
using confirmatory factor analysis. Learning Environments Research, 6, 231-245.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist. 41, 1040-
1048.
Eccles, J. S., Lord, S. & Midgley, C. (1991). What are we doing to early adolescents? The impact of
educational contexts on early adolescents. American Journal of Education, 99, 521-542.
Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Buchanan, C. M., Flanagan, C., Mac Iver, D., Reuman, D., & Wigfield, A.
(1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage/ environment fit. American
Psychologist, 48, 90-101.
Elliot, A.J., McGregor, H. A. & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, Educational
and Psychological Measurement, 64, 365-382.
Fraser, B. J. & Fisher, D. L. (1982). Predicting students’ outcomes from their perceptions of classroom
psychosocial environments. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 498-518.
Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R. & Goetz, T. (2007). Perceived learning environment and students’ emotional
experiences: A multilevel analysis of mathematics classrooms, Learning and Instruction,
17, 478-493.
Ginsburg, G. S. & Bronstein, P. (1993). Family factors related to children’s intrinsic/extrinsic motiva-
tional orientation and academic performance. Child Development, 64, 1461-1474.
Gottfried, A.E. (1990). Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 82, 525-538.
Gregory, A. & Weinstein, R. S. (2004). Connection and regulation at home and in school: Predicting
growth in achievement for adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 405-427.
Harackiewicz, K. E., Barron, K. & Elliot. A. (1998). Rethinking achievement goals: When are they
adaptive for college students and why? Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 179-201.
Harter, S. (1981). A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom:
Motivational and informational components. Developmental Psychology, 17, 300-312.
Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Development, 53, 87-97.
Kochenderfer, B. J. & Ladd, G. W. (1996). Peer victimization: Cause or consequence of children’s
school adjustment difficulties? Child Development, 67, 1293-1305.
Lepper, M. R. (1988). Motivational considerations in the study of instruction. Cognition and Instruction,
5, 289-309.
 LOREDANA RUXANDRA GHERASIM, SIMONA BUTNARU, LUMINITA IACOB

Lepper, M. R., Corpus, H. J. & Iyengar, S. S. (2005). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivational Orientations
in the Classroom: Age Differences and Academic Correlates, Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 97, 2, 184-196.
Ludtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U. & Kunter, M. (2009). Assessing the impact of learning envir-
onments: How to use student ratings of classroom or school characteristics in multilevel
modeling, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 120-131.
Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C. & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students’ goal orientations and cognitive en-
gagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514-523.
Middleton, M. J. & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the Demonstration of Lack of Ability: An Underex-
plored Aspect of Goal Theory, Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 4, 710-718.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Conceptions of ability and academic motivation. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.),
Research on motivation in education: Vol. 1. Student motivation. Orlando, Fl: Academic
Press.
Oswald, A. J. (1997). Happiness and economic performance. Economic Journal, 107, 1815-1831.
Pintrich, P. & Zusho, A. (2002). The development of academic self-regulation: The role of cognitive
and motivational factors. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement
motivation (pp. 249-284). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and
achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 544-555.
Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning
and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667-686.
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 (Vol. 7,
pp. 371-402). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’
motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal,
28, 437-460
Schneider, B. H., Tomada, G., Normand, S., Tonci, E. & de Domini, P. (2008) Social support as a
predictor of school bonding and academic motivation following the transition to Italian
middle school, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25, 287-299.
Shuell, T. J. (1996). Teaching and learning in a classroom context. In D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee
(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 726–764). New York: Macmillan.
Spinath, B., & Spinath, F. M. (2005). Longitudinal analysis of the link between learning motivation
and competence beliefs among elementary school children. Learning and Instruction, 15,
87-102.
Vermunt, J. D. & Verloop, N. (1999). Congruence and friction between learning and teaching.
Learning and Instruction, 9, 257-280.
Wentzel, K. & Battle, A. (2001). Social relationships and school adjustment. In T. Urdan and F. Pajares
(Eds.), Adolescence and education/General issues in the education of adolescence (pp. 93-
118). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Wentzel, K.R. (1998). Social support and adjustment in middle school: The role of parents, teachers,
and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 202-209.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Mac Iver, D., Reuman, D., & Midgley, C. (1991). Transitions at early ad-
olescence: Changes in children’s domain-specific self-perceptions and general self-esteem
across the transition to junior high school. Developmental Psychology, 27, 552–565.
Williams, L. & Gill, D.L. (1995).The role of perceived competence in the motivation of physical
activity, Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 17, 4, 363 - 378.
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

About the Authors

Dr. Loredana Ruxandra Gherasim
Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania

Dr. Simona Butnaru

Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania

Dr. Luminita Iacob

Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania

View publication stats