Impact of Academic Intrinsic Motivation Facets

on Students’ Academic Performance

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

of Master of Arts in Education Major in School and Community Development

Venjie N. Oclaret

La Consolacion University Philippines

April 2021
 ii
Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate the impact of academic intrinsic motivation

(AIM) factors on students’ academic performance. The study also investigated the

relationship of the subscales of AIM to students’ academic performance. A descriptive

method was adopted for the study. Intrinsic motivation was assessed using AIM survey,

which measures motivational factors on a seven-point Likert scale. AIM survey has

reliability coefficients of .7748 and .8627 determined using test-retest method. The six

subscales of AIM are as follows: (1) mastery orientation; (2) need for achievement; (3)

power motivation; (4) fear of failure; (5) authority expectations; and (6) peer acceptance.

The first two account for intrinsic factors, while the next four account for extrinsic factors.

A total of 180 senior high school students in SY 2019-20 in Quezon City were administered

the AIM survey. The academic performance of the students was measured by obtaining

their final grades according to the standards of the Department of Education stipulated in

DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015. Data generated was analyzed with the aid of IBM SPSS

Statistics 25. Also, regression analysis was utilized to determine the extent of impact the

predictor variables (AIM factors) cause on the criterion variable (academic performance)

to test the hypothesis at 0.05 level of significance. The study concluded that AIM factors

had strong positive impact on students’ academic performance. Furthermore, significant

differences were found between intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors of the AIM scale.

Finally, the study found that senior high school students who have high mastery orientation

and need for achievement AIM have a high likelihood of getting high final grades.

Implications of the findings are discussed.

 iii
Table of Contents
Page
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………… viii
List of Figures ………………………………………………………………... ix
List of Appendices …………………………………………………………… x

Chapter 1: The Problem and Its Background

Introduction……………………………………………………..……… 1
Significance of the Study…………………………………………….… 4
Theoretical/ Conceptual Framework……………………….…………... 5
Statement of the Problem…………………………………………….… 9
Hypothesis of the Study………………………………………………... 10
Definition of Terms………………………………………………….…. 10
Scope and Delimitation of the Study…………………………………... 11

Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature

Intrinsic Motivation……………..……………………………………… 13
Academic Performance……………………………………..………….. 19
Impact of Intrinsic Motivation on Academic Performance……………. 21

Chapter 3: Methodology of the Study

Methods and Techniques Used………………………………………… 30

Respondents of the Study…………………………………..………….. 31
Instrument of the Study……………………………………………..….. 32
Data Gathering Procedures…………………………………………..… 34
Data Processing and Statistical Treatment…………………….……….. 35
Ethical Considerations…………………………………………………. 36

Chapter 4: Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data

Level of Students’ Intrinsic Motivation………………………...……… 38

Level of Students’ Academic Performance………………...………….. 47
Impact of Intrinsic Motivation on Students’ Academic Performance..... 48
Implications Drawn from the Findings of the Study…………………… 54

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

Summary of Findings …….……………………………………….….... 56
Conclusion...……………….………………………………………….... 63
Recommendations ………………….………………………………...... 64
 iv

References …….……………………………………….…................................ 67

Appendices ……………….………………………………………………….... 73

Curriculum Vitae ………………….…………………………...…………...... 79

 v
List of Tables
Page
1. Respondents Distribution of the Study ……………………………………... 32
2. Level of Students’ Overall Academic Intrinsic Motivation ………………... 40
3. Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation per Subscale …………... 41
4. Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Mastery
Orientation ………………………………………………………………….. 43
5. Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Need for
Achievement ………………………………………………………………... 43
6. Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Power
Motivation ………………………………………………………………….. 44
7. Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Fear of
Failure ……………………………………………………………………… 45
8. Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Authority
Expectations ………………………………………………………………... 46
9. Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Peer
Acceptance …………………………………………………………………. 46
10. Level of Students’ Academic Performance…………………………………. 47
11. Regression Analysis of AIM Factors as Predictors
of Academic Performance…………………………………………………... 53
 vi
List of Figures
Page
1. Conceptual Model of the Study………………………………………….…. 9
2. Intrinsic Motivation Factors vs. Extrinsic Motivation Factors…………….. 40
3. Intrinsic Motivation and Academic Performance Scatterplot……………… 49
 vii
List of Appendices
Page
A Permission Letter……………………………………………...……… 73
B Approval Letter from the SDO ……………………………………….. 74
C Instrument of the Study ……………………………………………….. 75
D Permission to Use Instrument of the Study……………………………. 78
E Curriculum Vitae ……………………………………………………… 79
 Chapter 1

The Problem and Its Background

Introduction

Research has shown that the lack of motivation toward academic activities is one

of the most prominent academic problems plaguing teenage youth today (Gupta & Mili,

2017). According to the Philippine Department of Education or DepEd (2018), more than

3.5 million of the population are considered out-of-school children and youth (OSCY),

accounting for 9.1 percent of the 39 million people 6 to 24 years. A quarter of the OSCY

population cited lack of personal interest as a reason to quit school and is most pronounced

in the 12-15 age group, where 2 out of 3 dropped out of school due to lack of interest. The

main reasons for these children and young people being out of school to have less to do

with school accessibility than with personal and domestic reasons (DepEd, 2018).

According to Heck (2013), incompetent teachers, bullying and social problems,

home issues, and lack of parental involvement are just a few of the reasons some students

leave or struggle to excel in school. Nevertheless, despite conditions that put them at risk

or failure, Heck (2013) also found that other students were still thriving in the school

setting, leading to graduation and excellence in one or more academic and extracurricular

areas. What gives is the intrinsic motivation of the students, which is linked to learning,

academic performance, and success in school. They have a sense of intrinsic motivation

when students believe and want to learn information, achieve a goal, or perform a task

simply because they take pleasure in doing so and see the value therein (Center on

Education Policy or CEP, 2012).

 2
Interest in intrinsic motivation continues to develop as educational thinkers see it

as crucial in identifying factors contributing to students’ academic performance and

predicting their academic success (Asif, 2018). According to Adamma et al. (2018), there

has been a growing global concern in the education sector to ensure students learn at school

optimally and attain academic excellence in their academic pursuits. According to Awan

et al., as quoted in Adamma et al. (2018), motivating students to learn in school is a topic

of great concern to educators today, and motivating students to succeed in school is one of

this century’s most significant challenges.

The goal of many researchers back then and now has been to expand understanding

of the connection between intrinsic motivation and academic performance. Over the past

decades, self-determination theory or SDT-led experimental and field research has found

intrinsic motivation for predicting enhanced learning, performance, creativity, optimum

development, and psychological wellness (Di Domenico & Ryan, 2017). Intrinsic

motivation is believed to be the most powerful form of motivation, according to Fabien

(2015). If a student is intrinsically driven, things like peer pressure, complacency, or

indecisiveness are less likely to discourage them (Fabien, 2015). Research also shows that

students are less intrinsically motivated to learn and less likely to engage in critical thinking

when rewards are attached to standardized test results (Amrein & Berliner, as cited in

Tybus, 2010).

Nevertheless, research also exists that has produced no correlation between

intrinsic academic motivation and academic performance. Citing Bouffard, Marcoux et al.

(2020) concluded that changes in perceived competence and intrinsic motivation, and inter-

correlations between years, were observed to differ according to academic and gender
 3
domains. Intrinsic motivation has made no significant contribution to academic

achievement at grade school or in any academic domain.

Liao et al. (2012) explored how intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and self-

regulated learning effectiveness affected international and domestic community college

students’ academic performance. Results showed that motivation did not directly impact

academic performance for both foreign and domestic students. Also, as cited in Mahato

and Barman (2019), Niebuhr found that many motivational variables had no significant

impact on academic performance. Htoo (2014) cited Davis, who found no statistically

significant correlations between intrinsic motivation and academic performance in a

sample of African American college students either.

For this study and in the light of the studies mentioned earlier, the researcher aimed

to zero in on the research gap and find out if academic intrinsic motivation will have a

positive or significant impact on academic performance. The researcher primarily aimed

to investigate whether intrinsic motivation affects the academic performance of senior high

school students in Quezon City, Philippines. The researcher also hoped that this

undertaking would provide useful insights for learners and parents, the Department of

Education, educational thinkers, and educational stakeholders in the Philippines to

advocate for a more loving and encouraging atmosphere in schools and at home where

students will be able to discover a passion for learning, develop their potential and create

relevant partnerships.
 4
Significance of the Study

The researcher has determined the following groups of individuals to be the primary

beneficiaries of the study:

Learners. It is foreseen that the research findings will provide better and clearer

comprehensibility of Filipino senior high school students’ intrinsic motivation and its

impact on their academic performance. The study will benefit the learners as it provides

educationists and relevant stakeholders a window to students’ learning and proffers

suggestions for enhanced academic performance in senior high school education.

Parents. The results will be an eye-opener for parents to participate in their

children’s educational progress. Research findings have shown that an academically

favorable home environment will likely increase the child’s motivation to achieve

academic success, which in turn will contribute to good school performance (Muola, 2010).

It is recommended that parents provide motivation, guidance, appropriate learning

facilities, and inspire their children to explore and strive to achieve their interests and

personal goals.

Teachers. The study’s findings will inform teachers of the impact and relationship

of intrinsic academic motivation to students’ academic performance. This will hopefully

translate to teachers becoming more intentional in lesson planning and classroom teaching.

They provide more varied tasks and activities that are engaging, inspiring, and motivating

to the students. According to Adelman and Taylor, as cited in Wery and Thomson (2013),

a student’s lack of school achievement may result from teacher factors or perceiving the

teachers and activities as threats to their self-determination, competence, or sense of

relatedness. With this in mind, Adelman and Taylor suggested that intervention should
 5
focus on strategies to replace threatening or intimidating situations and tasks. Hence, the

results of the study may illumine teachers to the importance of building a caring

community, a classroom climate where there are rapport and healthy connections between

teachers and students that will enable students to remain intrinsically motivated.

School Heads. The study results will inform school heads to curate topics for

capacity building teacher training, aka INSET, that inform and equip classroom and subject

teachers with strategies and techniques on how to motivate their students intrinsically to

increase students’ academic performance. The results may also give insights to school

heads in encouraging their teachers to provide their students with life-giving lessons that

address and match students’ interests and passions for learning.

Curriculum Developers. The study results will help stimulate curriculum

developers to develop and design a curriculum and instructional materials that trigger

learners’ interest and curiosity. The findings may also help curriculum developers to

develop an instructional design that considers students’ varying ability levels, individual

characteristics, and motivational orientation. Studying intrinsic motivation may contribute

valuable insight and theory into the successful implementation of motivational strategies

for students.

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

Shia (1998) developed an instrument for calculating academic intrinsic motivation

(AIM) in college students that considered four extrinsic motivation factors and two

intrinsic motivation factors. Via correlation and reliability research, the study’s findings

were found to be accurate and consistent. Shia (1998) discovered that students with higher

AIM scores often had higher GPA scores. Shia’s AIM survey was one of the few studies
 6
to examine both intrinsic and extrinsic variables in Academic Intrinsic Motivation. An

updated version of Shia’s AIM survey was used in another study (Uyulgan & Akkuzu,

2014) to assess the probability that student teachers will pursue teaching professionally.

While there is a large body of research on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and

educational outcomes, the relationship between academic intrinsic motivation and student

success is unclear. The current study takes advantage of the limited studies on the

relationship between the intrinsic and extrinsic factors presented in Shia’s AIM survey and

students’ academic performance.

The study also took into account Ryan and Deci’s Self-Determination Theory

(SDT), which provides a fundamental theoretical basis for understanding academic

motivation. According to this theory, self-determination mirrors the fundamental human

attribute to organize and direct behavior toward specific outcomes and goals. Intrinsic

motivation is one of the facets of motivation in SDT and is defined as the doing of an

activity for its inner satisfaction.

SDT maintains that people are active organisms that can be creative, innovative,

and resourceful (Deci & Ryan, as cited in Heck, 2013). Because of these presumed traits,

people can accept challenges, and while working on those challenges, hone their skill sets

to be able to master what is before them and also move to higher levels of achievement.

They then will use these experiences to develop an in-depth sense of self. SDT claims that

humans are most deeply engaged and do their best work when they are genuinely interested

and are focused because of their desire. Their actions are based on their own meaningful

goals and ideologies driving their work (Heck, 2013).

 7
Examining the six subscales used in Shia’s AIM, as well as the commonly accepted

constructs of SDT, will allow for the integration of previous research with the study’s

research emphasis. The subscales are as follows: (1) mastery orientation; (2) need for

achievement; (3) power motivation; (4) fear of failure; (5) authority expectations; and (6)

peer acceptance. The first two account for intrinsic factors, while the other four accounts

for extrinsic factors of the AIM survey.

According to Shia (as cited in Uyulgan & Akkuzu, 2014), intrinsic motivation

would entail perseverance and effort put forth by a student. Students with intrinsic

motivation would develop goals oriented on learning and achieving. Mastery orientation,

defined as the desire to gain an understanding of a topic, has been found to correlate with:

effective learning strategies; positive attitudes toward school; the choice of challenging

tasks as opposed to a simple task; perceived ability; effort; concern for future

consequences; self-regulation; initiative; persistence; achievement; choice; and the use of

deep cognitive processes.

Mastery or task orientation refers to the student who engages in an activity to gain

knowledge, skill or contributes to the field of knowledge. This type of motivation can be

seen as a non-need approach to education: the motive behind task engagement is not to

fulfill a personal need. However, later studies found that intrinsic motivation could stem

from the organism’s need to be competent and self-determining (Shia, as cited in Uyulgan

& Akkuzu, 2014). With this in mind, another factor was proposed that makes up for the

task orientation (rather than a learning orientation) involving a need to prove competence

to oneself: the need for achievement. This leaves the intrinsic factors of intrinsic academic
 8
motivation to be made up of two factors: mastery orientation (the need to know) and

achievement (the need to achieve).

Shia (1998) clarified that authority expectations affect intrinsic academic

motivation as an extrinsic factor. She clarified that an external consideration for academic

intrinsic motivation is the desire to please teachers and parents and win their appreciation.

Peer acceptance is also an external factor that influences academic intrinsic motivation.

According to Shia (1998), power motivation is an external factor of academic intrinsic

motivation that is often confused with the need to succeed because both forms of

motivation have been linked to higher academic performance. The fear of failure is the

final external element of academic intrinsic motivation, according to Shia (1998), which

has a connection to lower academic performance. She attributes this to amotivation, which

happens when students encounter negative learning feelings such as test anxiety or a loss

of self-efficacy. This leaves the extrinsic factors of academic intrinsic motivation to be

made up of four factors: power motivation, fear of failure, authority expectations, and peer

acceptance.

Figure 1 presents the conceptual framework which will be utilized in the study. The

independent variable of the study is Academic Intrinsic Motivation (AIM) and its six

factors, namely: (1) mastery orientation (the need to know); (2) need for achievement (the

need to achieve); (3) authority expectations; (4) peer acceptance; (5) power motivation;

and (6) fear of failure. The dependent variable, on the one hand, is academic performance.

Using this model, the researcher attempted to uncover the impact of the independent

variable on the dependent variable.

 9

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Academic Intrinsic
Motivation
Academic
 mastery orientation
Performance
 need for achievement
 power motivation (Final Grades)
 fear of failure
 authority
expectations
 peer acceptance

Figure 1. Conceptual Model of the Study

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to determine the impact of academic intrinsic motivation on

students’ academic performance. Specifically, this study sought answers to the questions:

1. How may the level of senior high school students’ intrinsic motivation be

described in terms of the following factors:

1.1 mastery orientation;

1.2 need for achievement;

1.3 power motivation;

1.4 fear of failure;

1.5 authority expectations;

1.6 peer acceptance?

2. How may the level of students’ academic performance be described?

 10
3. Does intrinsic motivation exert a significant impact on students’ academic

performance?

4. What implications may be drawn based on the findings of the study?

Hypothesis of the Study

The following null hypothesis was tested at a 0.05 level of significance to achieve

the objectives of the study:

H0: Intrinsic motivation does not exert a significant impact on students’ academic

performance.

Definition of Terms

The following terms below are defined in the context of the proposed study for

common understanding:

Intrinsic Motivation. It is defined as a student’s reasons and desire to excel. It is

personally rewarding, not for an external reward, as demonstrated by their engagement in

class, completion of classroom tasks and activities, study efforts, and grades academically

(CEP, 2012). Operationally, the researcher defines intrinsic motivation as a person’s inner

desire to engage in activities or tasks for inherent satisfaction specifically oriented on two

goals: to learn and to achieve.

Academic Performance. It refers to the extent to which a student meets the

standards of assessment set by the Philippine Department of Education or DepEd in the K

to 12 Curriculum for the senior high school program. In this study, specifically, academic

performance refers to the final grade (FG) determined by the average of two consecutive
 11
semesters (first and second). Both the end-of-semester grades and FG are expressed in

percentages; 75 percent and above is the passing grade.

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

This study aimed to determine the impact of intrinsic motivation on students’

academic performance. The impact of intrinsic motivation on students’ academic

performance was assessed in terms of the six subscales used in Shia’s AIM survey.

Students’ academic performance was evaluated using the final grades of the participants

obtained from the first and second semester of the school year (SY) 2019-2020.

A reliably validated, standardized structured questionnaire was used as the primary

tool in data gathering for this research. Typically, the Academic Intrinsic Motivation (AIM)

survey developed by Shia (1998), which assessed academic motivation in a classroom

setting, has 59 items. Shia performed reliability and validity testing on the AIM survey

with 75 students (N of cases) at first. Since questions 5 and 53 were the same, this

questionnaire has 59 questions. Shia (1998) conducted a reliability study and found a

coefficient alpha score of 0.7748, indicating that the test was reliable.

Nevertheless, after Shia’s first test, even though the proposed inventory produced

reliable results, the coefficient alpha score was not high. Furthermore, some items had

negative correlations with all of the other items, implying that the particular question was

assessing a distinct construct. A revision of the inventory became necessary due to these

constraints. Hence, Shia performed another reliability analysis on the subscales to exclude

items that did not associate favorably with the other subscale items. After completing this

phase on all subscales, Shia ran a reliability analysis on the entire inventory again. Any
 12
items that did not correlate positively were also eliminated, which decreased the number

of items in the AIM survey to 28 items. The reliability results after this process reveal a

coefficient alpha score of .8627 (N of cases = 78), which was higher than the 59 items that

yielded 0.7748.

AIM is a survey that determines whether students have a high or low level of

intrinsic motivation. Shia (1998) set the parameter for interpreting AIM: one who rated

himself or herself highly on intrinsic statements was considered a student with high

intrinsic motivation. Conversely, one who rated himself or herself highly on extrinsic

factors was considered a student with low intrinsic motivation. The researcher modified

words like college and professor to senior high school and teacher to fit the items to the

senior high school respondents.

The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic factors of academic intrinsic motivation on

students’ academic performance is the subject of this research. This study aims to see if the

relationships between intrinsic and extrinsic factors of academic motivation impact

academic performance in senior high school students. This research attempts to decide

whether and how academic performance is impacted by academic intrinsic motivation by

looking at both intrinsic and extrinsic factors.

 13
Chapter 2

Review of Related Literature

This section presents the research literature and studies relevant to the variables of

the study and provides background and basis in conducting it. References such as published

theses and dissertations and online resources are included in this review. When researching

for this study, the EBSCO database was used to gather articles. These materials are related

to the present study in one way or another. This section synthesizes existing research to

gain a better comprehension of intrinsic motivation and its impact on academic

performance.

Intrinsic Motivation

The Oxford Online Dictionary (2020) broadly defines motivation as “the reason

someone does or acts in a particular way.” Figuratively, motivation is comparable to a fuel

that allows an engine to work. However, human motivation is much more complicated than

that as it includes various factors such as beliefs, expectations, principles, desires, behavior,

and personal and cultural backgrounds.

One specific domain of motivation studies concentrates on academic motivation,

which Mahato and Barman (2019) defined as the internal impulse that brings a student to

complete an action. The action they referred to pertains to activities, projects, assignments,

and other academic tasks whose primary purpose is for students’ cognitive, affective, and

psychomotor learning and enrichment. Afzal et al. (2010) also characterized academic

motivation as the “element that leads students’ attitude toward the learning process.”
 14
Gredler et al. (as cited in Mahato & Barman, 2019) broadly defined academic motivation

as the attribute that moves a student to do or not to do something. Celikoz (as cited in Gupta

& Mili, 2017) referred to academic motivation as the student’s effort to accomplish their

tasks, dedicating the needed effort, and continuing it. Brophy, as cited in Tybus (2010),

viewed motivation as the intention of acquiring the knowledge or skills that the activities

are intended to develop and a willingness to engage in lessons and learning activities.

Motivation is also defined as referring to the reasons underlying behavior (Guay et al.,

2010). Denhardt et al. (as cited in Heck, 2013) stressed that motivation is not directly

observed as they pointed out that it is an inner feeling that made people act in a particular

way to achieve a given goal and purpose.

Scholars have varying definitions of academic motivation. Maybe the same can be

identified with teachers whose interpretations in the classroom depend on their respective

contexts and experiences, plus the fact that each student has different academic

motivations. Despite the variety of definitions, these studies seem to be unanimous in

treating academic motivation as an essential subject in education since it is one of the

predictors of the academic performance of students and their success later in their

professional lives.

Many researchers have proposed various theories to explain the connection

between academic motivation and academic performance. One of these theories is Ryan

and Deci’s SDT, which provided a fundamental theoretical basis for understanding

academic motivation (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2013). It is a “macro-theory of human

motivation, emotion, and development that takes an interest in factors that either facilitate

or forestall the assimilative and growth-oriented processes in people” (Niemiec et al.,

 15
2010). The theory postulates that self-determination reflects the fundamental human

capacity to organize and direct behavior toward specific goals and outcomes. According to

SDT, there are three facets of motivation: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and

amotivation.

When dealing with academic motivation, scholars usually classify it into two major

types: intrinsic and extrinsic. Extrinsic motivation refers to working to achieve a goal

because it will produce a specific result (CEP, 2012). Extrinsic motivation is a concept that

is relevant whenever an activity is done to get some reward. Extrinsic motivation involves

engaging in an activity for external reasons, such as achieving separable desired outcomes

or avoiding undesired outcomes like punishments (Ryan & Deci, as cited in Hendijani et

al., 2016). If a learner is extrinsically motivated, his or her orientation toward learning is

characterized by a concern with external reasons for behaving or working on a task, such

as the judgment of others regarding one’s performance, grades, or some due reward.

On the other hand, intrinsic motivation refers to self-motivation, or a student’s

desire to learn information, achieve a goal or perform a task simply because the student

takes pleasure in doing so and sees the value in it (CEP, 2012). For example, a student may

enjoy playing basketball for the experience rather than for an award. It is a curiosity or

satisfaction in the task itself and exists within the individual rather than counting on

external pressures or a desire for consideration. In other words, intrinsic motivation occurs

when the activity is done out of the free choice of the individual.

Intrinsically motivated behaviors are seen when no other apparent reward except

the activity itself (Ryan & Deci, as cited in Hendijani et al., 2016). Intrinsic motivation is

an internal emotional state that provokes learning-related behaviors and determines the
 16
direction, level, and intensity of those behaviors (Kim, cited in Kim et al., 2016).

Intrinsically motivated activities are enjoyable and purposeful and are pursued for inherent

reasons rather than as a separable object of value (Pink, 2011).

Since the early 1970s, intrinsic motivation has been studied. It was first

acknowledged within experimental studies of animal behavior. In these studies, it was

evident that the organisms would engage in playful and curiosity-driven behaviors in the

absence of reward. Intrinsic motivation is a natural motivational tendency and is a critical

element in cognitive, social, and physical development (Ryan & Deci, cited in Dörnyei &

Ushioda, 2013).

Intrinsic motivation stems from one’s desire to attain or achieve a goal. It is more

natural and enjoyable to follow tasks and objectives when one is profoundly driven to

achieve a specific task. The person is more interested in learning rather than the target.

Competence emotions do not increase intrinsic motivation unless there is a sense of

autonomy. In situations where choices, feelings, and opportunities are present, intrinsic

motivation is increased because people feel a greater sense of autonomy. Offering people

choices, responding to their feelings, and opportunities for self-direction have been

reported to enhance intrinsic motivation via increased autonomy (Deci & Ryan, as cited in

Heck, 2013).

Over the last decades, experimental and field research guided by SDT has found

intrinsic motivation to predict enhanced learning, performance, creativity, optimal

development, and psychological wellness (Di Domenico & Ryan, 2017). Intrinsic

motivation is believed to be the most powerful type of motivation (Fabien, 2015). When a

student is intrinsically motivated, they are less likely to be deterred by factors such as peer
 17
pressure, complacency, or indecisiveness (Fabien, 2015). Research indicates that students

are less intrinsically motivated to learn and less likely to engage in critical thinking when

rewards are attached to these standardized test results (Amrein & Berliner, as cited in

Tybus, 2010).

Enthusiasm proves to be a paramount factor in promoting intrinsic motivation.

When the teacher seems excited, passionate, and noticeable enthusiastic, this may ignite

the curiosity and interest of students, giving their intrinsic motivation a spark (Patrick et

al., cited in Siegle et al., 2014). By presenting activities in meaningful contexts that appeal

to children and becoming visibly excited about them, teachers can inspire students to

realize these facts are essential to learning (Hansen, as cited in Tybus, 2010). When Hansen

(cited in Tybus, 2010) conducted a study within her class, she found that when she

displayed vigor and energy before administering a writing assignment, students gave her

more eye contact. Their writing products were completed more independently. Students

asked for less help with spelling words, had less trouble getting started, and showed a

decline in approval and praise-seeking behavior (Hansen cited in Tybus, 2010).

Intrinsic motivation is also increased when students have a choice in the activities

that they do. Studies have shown that allowing students to choose learning activities

increases their internal motivation (Lowman, cited in Siegle et al., 2014). When students

are given a choice, they are given some control over their learning (Dev, as cited in Daniel

& Cooc, 2018). What interests one student may not appeal to another; therefore, giving

them a choice or a decision in the learning process will better link the student to the

information (Kearney, cited in Daniel & Cooc, 2018). In generating intrinsically motivated

learners, it would be beneficial if the task was viewed as engaging and something of interest
 18
(Coutts, as cited in Daniel & Cooc, 2018). Kohn (as cited in Pink, 2011) found that a group

of third and fourth graders remembered more of what they were asked to read when they

were allowed to pick the passage’s topic. In fact, how interested the students were in

reading proved to be thirty times more important than how readable it was (Kohn, as cited

in Pink, 2011). Hansen (as cited in Tybus, 2010) agreed that when allowed to make choices

in their learning, students could indeed be motivated for the intrinsic value of what they

had chosen to work at. Furthermore, by taking students’ opinions and applying them to the

lessons, teachers can better motivate them to learn.

Another principle for building intrinsic learners is allowing students to work

together collaboratively. When students work in well-functioning cooperative groups,

students feel more confident about themselves, show positivity regarding the content being

studied, and become more accepting of each other (Kohn, cited in Pink, 2011). As cited in

Tybus (2010), Hansen saw an apparent difference in her n class from her students reading

alone and when they read a book of their choice in small groups. Students who previously

had struggled, flipped mindlessly through pages, and not reading the text for any

comprehension, when paired in a group, were sitting quietly, relying on group members

for help, and showed disappointment when the time was up. Hansen (as cited in Tybus,

2010) cited Deci in that competition has been shown to decrease intrinsic motivation while

cooperative learning settings are intrinsically motivated. Therefore, when students work

together to learn and expand their knowledge, they are more likely to become invested and

motivated to do the work.

According to Porter (as cited in Pink, 2011), intrinsically motivated students are

not concerned with external rewards but want to do well for themselves. Research has
 19
suggested that students are likely to be successful in school if they are intrinsically

motivated to do their best (Guay et al., 2010). Students who are extrinsically motivated

may show engagement in school not because they take pleasure in doing so but because

they want a high grade or do not want to upset their parents. In other words, external

reasons such as rewards and appraisals are associated with extrinsic motivation. In contrast,

intrinsic motivation highlights personal enjoyment, inner desire to succeed, self-esteem,

and resilience, among others (Pink, 2011).

Interests in the study of academic motivation, especially intrinsic motivation,

continue to grow as educational thinkers consider it critical in identifying factors that lead

to students’ academic performance and in predicting their future success. Around the

world, numerous studies on intrinsic motivation have been conducted as a way to evaluate

the effectiveness of curriculum and instruction and to understand students’ attitudes toward

academic learning to construct truly student-centered interventions (Adamma et al., 2018).

According to Awan et al. (2011), intrinsically motivating students to learn in school is a

topic of great concern for educationists today. Motivating students to succeed in school is

one of the most significant challenges of this century.

Academic Performance

Academic performance refers to the extent to which a student will meet standards

of assessment set by the Philippine Department of Education or DepEd in the K to 12

Curriculum for the senior high school program. In this study, specifically, academic

performance refers to the final grade (FG) determined by the average of two consecutive

semesters (first and second). Academic performance refers to the quality of students’
 20
completed classroom activities, tests, and other assignments (Pintrich & Groot, cited in

Mansson, 2016).

Academic performance has been defined and explained by several authors.

According to Abaidoo (2018), academic performance determines the human capital

development of an economy. Academic performance is the knowledge gained, assessed by

marks by a teacher, and educational goals set by students and teachers to be achieved over

a specific period (Narad & Abdullah, 2016). They added that these goals are measured by

using continuous assessment or examination results. Annie et al. (as cited in Arshad et al.,

2015) also indicated that academic performance measures education outcomes. They

stressed that it shows and measures the extent to which an educational institution, teachers,

and students have achieved their educational goals.

Similarly, Yusuf et al. (as cited in Abaidoo, 2018) opined that academic

performance is a measurable and observable behavior of a student within a specific period.

He added that it consists of scores obtained by a student in an assessment such as class

exercise, class test, mid-semester, mock examination, and end of semester examination.

Martha, as cited in Abaidoo (2018), emphasized that the academic performance of students

is defined by a student’s performance in an examination, tests, and course work. It enables

students and parents to know the current academic state of their students, and it determines

the failure and success of an academic institution (Narad & Abdullah, 2016).

The definitions given by those mentioned above showed that academic

performance is based on measurable outcomes such as class exercise, tests, and

examination results. Based on this, the operational definition of academic performance

used in this study is the mean of two semesters obtained by a student at the end of a school
 21
year. Per this study, academic performance refers explicitly to the final grade (FG)

determined by the average of two consecutive semesters (first and second); and the

percentage pass is 75 percent and above.

Impact of Intrinsic Motivation on Academic Performance

Of the two significant types of motivation, educators consider intrinsic motivation

to be more desirable and result in better learning outcomes than extrinsic motivation (Deci

et al., cited in Lai, 2011). There is an abundance of studies that corroborates the significant

correlation between intrinsic academic motivation and academic performance (You &

Lim., 2016). Studies of Han et al. and Eccles and Wigfield (cited in Tybus, 2010) have

suggested that students’ intrinsic motivation and academic performance are interrelated.

According to works cited in Tybus (2010), an intrinsically motivated student will

persist with the assigned task, even though it may be difficult and will not need any type

of reward or incentive to initiate or complete a task. The researcher also added that the

intrinsically motivated student is also more likely to retain the concepts learned and to feel

confident about tackling unfamiliar learning situations. The challenge for teachers then is

providing meaningful opportunities and exciting learning experiences that increase

students’ intrinsic motivation and sustain it. According to Hansen, cited in Tybus (2010),

teachers often find building intrinsic motivation in students daunting because they cannot

control what a student feels or thinks. What may be interesting to one student may not be

as relevant to the next. Hansen (cited in Tybus, 2010) also asserted that how the teacher

introduces the information is a significant factor in whether the students will be intrigued

and stimulated.
 22
Goodman et al. (2011) investigated the relationship between 254 South African

university students’ intrinsic motivation and performance. The empirical results obtained

from their data, using Pearson correlation coefficients, indicated a significant relationship

between the two variables. Furthermore, intrinsic motivation is the strongest predictor of

academic performance is revealed in the multiple regression analysis of the data.

In a study involving 342 Pakistani university students to examine the influence of

intrinsic motivation on academic performance, Afzal et al. (2010) found a positive and

mutually causal relationship between the two variables. They found that this relationship

is reciprocal, meaning students who are more intrinsically motivated perform better, and

students who perform better become more motivated. From their findings, it is also

concluded that students who are intrinsically motivated perform much better academically

than extrinsically motivated students. Bakar et al. (2010) also conducted a similar study

examining the relationships between Malaysian university students’ attitudes toward

learning, achievement motivation, and academic performance. The findings of their work

revealed a significant positive correlation between students’ attitudes toward learning and

achievement motivation. More importantly, the study also revealed that students’ intrinsic

motivation and academic achievement were correlated positively.

Kim et al. (2016), to investigate medical students’ career choice motivation and its

relationship with their academic interest and performance, conducted a cross-sectional

study on 207 medical students at a private medical school in Korea. In the study, the

findings showed that the intrinsic group outperformed the extrinsic group in their GPAs.

The intrinsic group showed significantly higher levels of academic interest and academic

performance.
 23
Hesek (as cited in Phillips, 2017), in a study involving 46 fourth grade students in

New York, examined whether lesson plans that included choice and autonomy support

would affect students’ intrinsic motivation for the task and improve learning retention over

time. The findings of her work revealed that intrinsic motivation was positively correlated

with the students’ change in scores from pre-test to post-test, indicating a positive

relationship between intrinsic motivation and information learned and retained over time.

Other research also demonstrated a relatively consistent relationship between

intrinsic motivation in reading and math (Broussard & Garrison, as cited in Muola, 2010).

Intrinsically motivated first-grade students tend to have higher achievement in these

subjects than extrinsically motivated students, and intrinsic motivation predicts reading and

math achievement, whereas extrinsic motivation does not. Lai (2011) reported that

intrinsically motivated students in third grade through fifth grade tend to have higher

academic self-efficacy, exhibit higher levels of mastery behavior, and have higher reading

and math achievement.

Liu et al. (2019) examined the possible long-term effects of intrinsic motivation on

educational outcomes in a longitudinal study involving 18,132 students in the mathematics

domain and 16,684 students in the science domain. The results showed that intrinsic

motivation was a long-term and active enhancement agent on the subsequent academic

performance, self-efficacy, identity, and course effort. Moreover, in their most recent

study, Liu et al. (2020) examined possible differences in the mutual reinforcement effect

between intrinsic motivation and instrumental motivation on academic performance across

different cultures from eight representative countries. Results showed that students in both
 24
Confucian and Western cultures with high intrinsic motivation had better mathematics

performance than students with low intrinsic motivation.

Hong et al. (2017) collected data from 78 Chinese language students who

participated in their study. The results yielded that the intrinsic motivation of Chinese

learning predicted students’ learning progress. In a longitudinal study aimed at examining

how intrinsic motivation contributes to the academic achievement of 47 Latino students in

sixth through eighth grades, Niehaus et al. (2012) revealed that intrinsic motivation is

positively associated with the students’ GPAs and math achievement. A similar study

conducted on Bangladeshi college students by Chowdhury and Shahabuddin (as cited in

Sommer, 2013) found statistically positive correlations between intrinsic motivation and

academic performance.

Tripathi and Tripathi (2018) sought to find out in their research the extent of

association between intrinsic motivation and academic performance of Indian student-

teachers and to examine in any manner if it contributed toward the fulfillment of the

objective of quality education. The findings indicated that intrinsic motivation factors such

as creativity and self-efficacy have a strong association with performance. The results

focused on the importance of intrinsic motivation. They suggested that educational

institutions should develop a supportive environment in which student-teachers can utilize

their inner attributes and contribute to the growth of quality education.

On the contrary, there is also a body of research that has yielded no correlation

between intrinsic academic motivation and academic performance. According to Hendijani

et al. (2016), the relationship between intrinsic motivation and performance has not been

addressed by researchers. This is due to the reliance on the implied assumption made by
 25
cognitive psychologists that intrinsic motivation is an inherent interest in task

accomplishment. As a result, it will automatically improve overall motivation and

performance (Ryan & Deci, as cited in Hendijani et al., 2016).

Liu et al. (2020) conducted a longitudinal study of 13,799 participants to examine

the effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on Chinese students and their academic

performance. The findings showed that intrinsic motivation only had a low positive effect

on students’ academic performance. For Chinese learners, according to the study, interest

is not the only key motive to learn, and learning is seen as their duty and obligation to

society and their parents. The researchers further noted that extrinsic reasons, not intrinsic

motivation, could facilitate students’ learning when they are not interested in the subject.

A longitudinal study on changes in self-perceptions of competence and intrinsic

motivation among elementary school children by Bouffard et al. (as cited in McBride,

2020) concluded that changes in perceived competence and intrinsic motivation between-

year intercorrelations were observed to differ according to academic domains and gender.

Intrinsic motivation did not significantly contribute to academic performance at either

school grade or in any academic domain. In contrast, perceived competence was related

significantly to each school grade in both reading and mathematics.

Jurisevic et al., as cited in Salta and Koulougliotis (2015), in a study involving 140

participants, focused on the intrinsic motivation for learning chemistry and its correlation

to students’ academic performance in chemistry. The results showed that students are more

or less equally motivated for chemistry than any other subject. The intrinsic motivation

plummets as the level of abstraction in individual subjects, such as chemistry and

mathematics increases. The correlation found between intrinsic motivation and the
 26
knowledge test results is not strong, while the correlation between intrinsic motivation and

the mark achieved in chemistry is statistically not significant.

Cheng (2019), to determine intrinsic and extrinsic motivations among college

students, conducted an online survey to collect 310 American and 686 Taiwanese college

student respondents’ self-reported motivation and academic performance. Data showed

that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations function differently in varying cultures such as

Taiwan and the U.S., where Taiwanese college students’ extrinsic motivation was stronger

than American college students. In contrast, intrinsic motivation may function differently

regarding predicting academic performance. The study demonstrated that intrinsic

motivation is diverse in different cultures and may not be a universal predictor of academic

performance.

Sultan and Hussain (2012) conducted a prospective study on a sample consisted of

300 students using SDT to ascertain the relationship between intrinsic motivation and

academic performance based on the respondents’ perceived teachers’ humanistic vs.

authoritarian orientations in the classroom. The study revealed that students’ intrinsic

motivation and academic performance are negatively related to the authoritarian

orientation of teachers. A result about gender differences also implied that female students

reported higher intrinsic motivation and academic performance than male students.

Liao et al. (2012) also examined how intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and

self-regulated learning efficacy influence the academic performance of international and

domestic community college students. Results show that for both international and

domestic students, intrinsic motivation did not directly affect academic performance.
 27
Dawson-Brew and Nyarko-Sampson (2017) investigated the influence of academic

motivation on the performance of 854 undergraduate distance learners in Ghana. The

analyses indicated that extrinsic motivation positively correlated with the academic

performance of learners in Ghana. However, the results showed that there was no

correlation between intrinsic motivation and the academic performance of students.

Arce (2017) investigated the extent to which intrinsic motivation predicted

academic performance and academic achievement among 120 non-traditional

undergraduate students. Students with interruptions in educational programs are generally

referred to as non-traditional students. The study results showed that intrinsic motivation

did not significantly predict self-reported academic performance and academic

achievement.

Areepattamannil (2014) examined the relationship between intrinsic motivation

and academic performance in mathematics among 363 Indian adolescents in India and 355

Indian immigrant adolescents in Canada. The results of the study showed that intrinsic

motivation was not statistically significantly related to mathematics academic performance

among Indian immigrant adolescents in Canada. Unlike the Indian immigrant adolescents

in Canada, intrinsic motivation was not predictive of mathematics achievement for the

Indian adolescents in India. Intrinsic motivation was not linked to academic performance

in mathematics among Indian adolescents in India.

Triyanto (2019) investigated the intrinsic motivation of 60 Papua and West Papuan

undergraduate students in Indonesia and how it translated to their academic performance.

Based on the results, students’ intrinsic motivation did not significantly correlate with their

academic performance. The study also found that extrinsic motivation of Papuan students,
 28
dominated by the desire to be accepted by friends and groups, was more dominant than

intrinsic motivation. The low intrinsic motivation is based on the lack of understanding of

the importance of education and the essence of learning itself (Triyanto, 2019).

Additionally, Niebuhr, as cited in Mahato and Barman (2019), found that several

variables of motivation had no significant effect on academic performance. He also found

in the study that the elements of both school climate and family environment have a more

substantial direct impact on academic performance. Hasan and Sarka (2018) conducted the

same study as Niebuhr’s with 200 participants to verify the relationship between

achievement motivation and academic achievement. The study also found a non-significant

relationship between the variables among the secondary level students of Uttar Dinajpur

District of West Bengal.

Sarangi (2015) studied the effect of intrinsic motivation on the academic

performance of 200 high school students of tribal and nontribal communities about their

sex and locale. It showed no significant relationship between intrinsic motivation and

academic performance of tribal boys and rural students.

Adom et al. (2014) investigated the relationship between academic motivation

types and academic performance among 120 high school students. The findings showed

that there was no significant correlation between academic motivation types and academic

performance.

Htoo (2014) cited Davis, who, in a sample of African American college students,

also found no statistically significant correlations between motivation and academic

performance. Davis, as cited in Htoo (2014), suggested that when these students were

socially isolated or marginalized in the educational setting, it would be harmful to their

 29
academic performance, regardless of motivation. Areepattamannil (2014), in a study

examining the relationship between intrinsic motivation and mathematics achievement

among 363 Indian adolescents in India, found that intrinsic motivation was not statistically

significantly related to mathematics achievement.

Most research has suggested that students with higher academic intrinsic

motivation perform more effectively academically. There are, however, other research that

yielded otherwise. For this study and in the light of the studies above-mentioned, the

researcher aimed to zero in on the research gap and figure out if intrinsic motivation has a

significant impact on students’ academic performance. More specifically, the researcher

aimed to examine how intrinsic motivation impacts the academic performance of senior

high school students in Quezon City, Philippines. The researcher also hoped that this

undertaking would provide meaningful insights to learners and parents, the Department of

Education, educational thinkers, and stakeholders in the field of education in the

Philippines to advocate for a more caring and encouraging environment in schools and at

home where students can discover a love for learning, harness their potentials, and

construct relevant connections between what they learn in school and real-life applications.
 30
Chapter 3

Methodology of the Study

This chapter presents the methods and techniques, the population and sample of the study,

the instrument of the study, data gathering procedures, and the data processing and statistical

treatment applied in data analysis.

Methods and Techniques Used

The study made use of a descriptive method through the use of survey research

design in gathering the data required and in ascertaining the impact of academic intrinsic

motivation on students’ academic performance. The instrument used for this study is the

28-item Academic Intrinsic Motivation inventory produced by Regina Shia in 1998. The

study focused on the six subscales of the AIM questionnaire. The subscales were (1)

mastery orientation, (2) need for achievement, (3) power motivation, (4) fear of failure, (5)

authority expectations, and (6) peer acceptance.

Descriptive research is a procedure for organizing and summarizing data to

communicate and describe the essential characteristics of the data and is useful for

investigating various educational problems (Guay et al., 2010). The primary aim of

utilizing the descriptive method is to describe the nature of a situation as it exists at the

study time and explore the cause of particular phenomena.

By utilizing a descriptive research study, the researcher attempted to describe and

examine the impact of academic intrinsic motivation factors on students’ academic

performance.
 31
The study employed a quantitative research approach in the treatment, analysis, and

understanding of data collected. The primary data gathering tool utilized is a standardized

self-report assessment questionnaire on AIM’s intrinsic and extrinsic factors. A random

sampling technique was used in the selection of the sample.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study were senior high school students in the Division of

Quezon City. The respondents were enrolled in SY 2019-2020. Table 1 shows the

distribution of respondents in each corresponding senior high school track and strands. Of

the 534 students, 33.71% or 180 students were randomly chosen as the sample of the study.

The sample size was determined utilizing Raosoft® sample size calculator with a

5% margin of error and a 50% response distribution. According to its website, the Raosoft®

sample calculator is software that primarily calculates or generates the sample size of a

research or survey. It offers both sample size confidence interval calculation to minimize

frustrations encountered during research. This software also takes into account the margin

of error, the confidence level, and response distribution. It also offers to show viz-a-viz

what the margin of error would be like with various sample sizes.

The sample size of 180 senior high school students was randomly selected for the

study. The sample comprising Academic (ACAD) track and its strands (Humanities and

Social Sciences or HUMSS, Accounting and Business Management or ABM, General

Academic Strand or GAS) and Technical-Vocational and Livelihood (TVL) track and its

strands (Industrial Arts or IA, Home Economics or HE, and Information and

Communications Technology or ICT) were randomly selected.

 32

Table 1

Respondents Distribution of the Study

Senior High School Population Sample

Track and Strand N n (33.71%)
ACAD-ABM 73 24
ACAD-HUMSS 151 51
ACAD-GAS 57 19
TVL-HE 100 34
TVL-IA 97 33
TVL-ICT 56 19
TOTAL 534 180

Instrument of the Study

A structured questionnaire on motivation was administered to randomly selected

respondents. The academic Intrinsic Motivation (AIM) survey developed by Shia (1998)

was used for data collection. AIM survey is an inventory that assesses academic intrinsic

motivation in a classroom setting. Initially, Shia performed reliability and validity testing

on the AIM survey with 75 students at first. Since questions 5 and 53 were the same, this

questionnaire has 59 questions. Shia (1998) conducted a reliability study and found a

coefficient alpha score of 0.7748, indicating that the test was reliable.

Nevertheless, after Shia’s first test, even though the proposed inventory produced

reliable results, the coefficient alpha score was not high. Furthermore, some items had

negative correlations with all of the other items, implying that the particular question was

assessing a distinct construct. A revision of the inventory became necessary due to these

constraints. Hence, Shia performed another reliability analysis on the subscales to exclude

items that did not associate favorably with the other subscale items. After completing this

phase on all subscales, Shia ran a reliability analysis on the entire inventory again. Any
 33
items that did not correlate positively were also eliminated, which decreased the number

of items in the AIM survey to 28. The reliability results after this process reveal a

coefficient alpha score of .8627 (N of cases = 78) which was higher than the 59 items that

yielded 0.7748 (a Cronbach’s alpha of .70 and above is good, .80 and above is better, and

.90 and above is best).

The AIM survey is based on Ryan and Deci’s Self-Determination Theory and

comprises six subscales or factors—two intrinsic and four extrinsic. Intrinsic factors

include mastery orientation and the need for achievement. Extrinsic factors include

authority expectations (family and professor), peer acceptance, power motivations, and fear

of failure.

AIM is a survey that determines whether students have a high or low level of

intrinsic motivation. Shia (1998) set the parameter for interpreting AIM: one who rated

himself or herself highly on intrinsic statements was considered a student with high

intrinsic motivation. Conversely, one who rated himself or herself highly on extrinsic

factors was considered a student with low intrinsic motivation. The researcher modified

words like college and professor to senior high school and teacher to fit the items to the

senior high school respondents.

The inventory comprises 28 items, and respondents were expected to give

themselves a rating for each on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = does not describe me; 7= strongly

describes me). Respondents were advised to rate themselves accordingly if they described

themselves as somewhere in the middle. As per the parameters set by Shia (1998), one who

rates himself or herself highly on intrinsic statements is considered a student with high
 34
intrinsic motivation. Conversely, one who rates himself or herself highly on extrinsic

factors is considered a student with low intrinsic motivation.

Because it represented their overall class performance, the final grade (FG) was used to

measure students’ academic performance. The final grades of the sample were obtained

with permission from the school registrars.

Data Gathering Procedures

In the conduct of the study, the survey questionnaire method was the mode of data

gathering. Specifically, data collection consisted of the following procedural steps:

1. The researcher obtained institutional clearance, in a letter form, from the Graduate

Studies Department of La Consolacion University Philippines (LCUP).

2. The acknowledged and approved institutional clearance was then sent to the

Schools Division Office of Quezon City (SDO-QC) to formally request from the

Schools Division Superintendent permission to conduct the proposed study.

3. Upon receipt of SDO-QC approval, the researcher brought the approval letter to the

senior high school principals to observe proper protocol and acknowledgment of

the research in the respective schools.

4. The researcher, to save cost and exemplify eco-saving practice, created an online

version of the questionnaire via Google Forms and distributed the survey

questionnaires to the participants through the help of fellow module writers and

language evaluators in the division.

5. The researcher obtained, with permission, the final grades (FGs) of the participants

from the school registrars.

 35
6. The researcher collected the questionnaires from the respondents via Google Forms

and inspected if all the parts are answered or if there were missing data. Survey

forms were complete, so all data were included. The data collected were then

subjected to statistical treatment.

Data Processing and Statistical Treatment

The data collected via Google Forms were tabulated and treated using IBM SPSS

Statistics 25. The following statistical procedure was utilized to analyze and interpret the

data:

1. The students’ ratings were aggregated and quantified using the original

parameters set by Shia (1998) for the AIM survey. Each respondent gave

themself a rating for each question on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = does not

describe me; 7 = strongly describes me). Respondents were advised to rate

themselves accordingly if they described themselves as somewhere in the

middle. One who rated themself highly on intrinsic statements and lows on

extrinsic statements was considered a student with high intrinsic motivation.

Conversely, one who rated themself highly on extrinsic factors and low on

intrinsic factors was considered a student with low intrinsic motivation.

2. The computed final grade, i.e., the average of the accumulated percentage

from the first and second semester of SY 2019-2020, was used to determine

students’ academic performance. DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015 was used to

categorized students’ final grades:

 36

Grading Scale Verbal Interpretation

90 – 100 Outstanding

85 – 89 Very Satisfactory

80 – 84 Satisfactory

75 – 79 Fairly Satisfactory

Below 75 Did Not Meet Expectations

3. Regression analysis was then utilized to determine the impact of intrinsic

motivation on students’ academic performance.

Ethical Considerations

In response to society’s expectations of greater accountability, the level of attention

on ethical conduct (the actions that are personal, professional, and during research activity)

has both increased and expanded (Zegwaard et al., 2017). The Graduate Studies

Department of La Consolacion University Philippines has recently introduced the inclusion

of ethical considerations in any thesis and dissertation to ensure that ethical requirements

are complied with to protect the dignity and safety of research participants. Hence, the

researcher secured institutional clearances and permission from both LCUP’s Graduate

Studies Department and the Department of Education’s Schools Division Office of Quezon

City to conduct the study.

The following ethical considerations were put into place for this research

undertaking:

1. The dignity and wellbeing of students were protected. They were not harmed in any

form or placed in an uncomfortable position.

 37
2. The researcher obtained informed consent that included essential information (such

as who the researcher is, the study’s intent, the data to be collected, level of

commitments). Respondents were also informed that participating in the study is

voluntary, ensuring no coercion or deception in participation.

3. The research data remained confidential throughout the study. The researcher

obtained the students’ permission to write their real names on the survey to navigate

their academic records at the registrar’s office more conveniently. They were also

informed that their names would not appear in the thesis.

 38
Chapter 4

Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data

This chapter presents analyzes and interprets the data collected in the study. For an

organized presentation and consistent discussion, the data are presented following the order

or sequence of the questions raised in Chapter I as follows: (1) level of senior high school

students’ academic intrinsic motivation in terms of the six factors of academic intrinsic

motivation: mastery orientation; need for achievement; power motivation; fear of failure;

authority expectations; and peer acceptance; (2) level of senior high school students’

academic performance; (3) impact of intrinsic motivation on academic performance of the

students; and (4) implications drawn from the findings of the study.

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation

Intrinsic motivation refers to self-motivation or a student’s desire to learn

information, achieve a goal, or perform a task simply because the student takes pleasure in

doing so and sees the value in it (Ryan & Deci, as cited in CEP, 2012). Shia (1998) defines

intrinsic motivation as participation in an activity purely out of curiosity or a need to know;

the desire to engage in an activity purely for the sake of participating and completing a

task; and the desire to contribute. The researcher, in conjunction with these definitions,

operationally defines intrinsic motivation as a person’s inner desire to engage in activities

or tasks for inherent satisfaction specifically oriented on two goals: to learn and to achieve.

This definition is diametrically aligned with the early and current researchers’ definitions

of intrinsic motivation.
 39
The following data in Table 2 shows the survey results administered to 180

randomly selected senior high school students to determine their academic intrinsic

motivation. The 28-item Academic Intrinsic Motivation (AIM) survey developed by Shia

(1998) assesses academic motivation in a classroom setting. Also, it yields data on the six

subscales of the AIM survey: (1) mastery orientation; (2) need for achievement; (3) power

motivation; (4) fear of failure; (5) authority expectations; and (6) peer acceptance. As in

Burgess (2016), test variables were created for each subscale by aggregating the AIM

variables indicated in Shia’s study. The researcher modified words like college and

professor to senior high school and teacher to suit the items to the senior high school level

of the respondents.

Intrinsic factors of AIM include mastery orientation and need for achievement;

extrinsic factors include authority expectations, peer acceptance, power motivations, and

fear of failure. Citing several studies, Burgess (2016) posited that the context of extrinsic

motivation is essential in determining if the extrinsic motivation will reduce or increase

intrinsic motivation for an activity, and the AIM survey does precisely that by

incorporating extrinsic factors in the questionnaire.

As per Shia (1998), interpreting AIM is set: one who rates himself or herself highly

on intrinsic statements is considered a student with high intrinsic motivation. One who

rates himself or herself highly on extrinsic factors is considered a student with low intrinsic

motivation.

The results of the analysis of data in Table 2 show that both intrinsic and extrinsic

factors of AIM equally have consistent scores. Both factors also garnered fairly high
 40
ratings, but it is intrinsic factors that received a higher average score of 5.69 than extrinsic

factors’ average of 4.95. The result reveals that the respondents are more highly intrinsic

than extrinsic in their motivational orientation.

Table 2

Level of Students’ Overall Academic Intrinsic Motivation

Academic Intrinsic Motivation Mean

Intrinsic Factors 5.69
Extrinsic Factors 4.95

As can be gleaned from Figure 2, respondents generally positively rated themselves

in both intrinsic and extrinsic factors of the AIM survey. Nevertheless, it is worth noting

that intrinsic factors yielded higher average scores than the four extrinsic factors.

Figure 2. Intrinsic Factors and Extrinsic Factors of AIM

An overview of the means and standard deviations is presented in Table 3. As cited

in Burgess (2016), Shia, using the SDT framework, described mastery orientation as the

need to prove one’s competency to oneself. This is an intrinsic factor of motivation, she
 41
explained, since motivation stems from the intrinsic value of learning: learning for the sake

of learning. According to Shia (1998), the need for achievement is a manifestation of the

desire to demonstrate one’s competence to others. This was dubbed an intrinsic factor of

academic intrinsic motivation by her. Table 3 revealed students’ intrinsic motivation

according to the mean scores for mastery orientation and need for achievement as 5.55 and

6.01, respectively.

Shia (1998) clarified that authority expectations affect academic intrinsic

motivation as an extrinsic factor. She clarified that an external consideration for academic

intrinsic motivation is the desire to please teachers and parents and win their appreciation.

Peer acceptance is also an external factor that influences academic intrinsic motivation.

According to Shia (1998), power motivation is an external factor of academic intrinsic

motivation that is often confused with the need to succeed because both forms of

motivation have been linked to higher academic performance. The fear of failure is the

final external element of academic intrinsic motivation, according to Shia (1998), which

has a connection to lower academic performance. She attributes this to amotivation, which

happens when students encounter negative learning feelings such as test anxiety or a loss

of self-efficacy. Conversely, as shown in Table 3, extrinsic motivation factors also yielded

fairly positive mean scores in power motivation (4.94), fear of failure (4.95), authority

expectations (5.16), and peer acceptance (4.70).

Table 3

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation per Subscale (N=180)

Academic Intrinsic Motivation Mean SD

Intrinsic Factors
 42
Mastery Orientation 5.55 0.84
Need for Achievement 6.01 0.93
Extrinsic Factors
Power Motivation 4.94 1.06
Fear of Failure 4.95 1.01
Authority Expectations 5.16 0.89
Peer Acceptance 4.70 1.09

Table 4 shows the analysis of data obtained from the indicators of mastery

orientation. Shia, as cited in Burgess (2016), described mastery orientation as the need to

prove one’s competency to oneself. This is an intrinsic factor of motivation, she explained,

since motivation stems from the intrinsic value of learning: learning for the sake of

learning. Respondents’ mastery orientation returned an average of 5.55 in terms of

spending time reading about things interesting (5.55); trying to learn from a class despite

liking or disliking it (5.79); trying to do best in every assignment (5.66); feeling that

challenging assignments can be great learning experiences (5.49); enjoying learning about

various subjects (5.30); doing more than required for an assignment for better

understanding of the material (5.05). While one indicator, ‘senior high school helps me

gain valuable knowledge,’ received the highest rating of 6.03 mean score.

According to Fisher, as cited in Burgess (2016), intrinsic motivation is linked to

personal control and competence, with intrinsic motivation rising as these feelings arise

and falling as personal control and competence fall. Intrinsically motivated behaviors

encourage people to feel confident and self-determined; actions that allow people to feel

competent and self-determined become intrinsically motivating. The result suggests that

the respondents have high positive regard for senior high school education and that students
 43
see it as a venue where they can prove their competence and self-determination to

themselves while at the same time enjoying learning for the sake of learning.

Table 4

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Mastery Orientation

Indicators Mean
I like to spend time reading about things that interest me. 5.55
No matter how much I like or dislike a class, I still try to learn from it. 5.79
I try to do my best on every assignment. 5.66
I feel that challenging assignments can be great learning experiences. 5.49
Senior high school helps me to gain valuable knowledge. 6.03
I enjoy learning about various subjects. 5.30
Sometimes I do more than I have to for an assignment to help me understand the 5.05
material better.
Average 5.55

Table 5 shows the analysis of data obtained from the indicators of the need for

achievement. According to Shia, as cited in Burgess (2016), the need for achievement is a

manifestation of the desire to demonstrate one’s competence to others. This was dubbed

an intrinsic factor of academic intrinsic motivation by her. Respondents’ need for

achievement yielded an average of 6.01 in terms of feeling good about oneself when

finishing a difficult project (6.07); setting high goals for oneself (6.04), and wanting to

learn everything one needs to learn (5.93). This result suggests that respondents have high

internal value on the satisfaction and self-fulfillment one obtains from accomplishing tasks

and achieving personal goals.

Table 5

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Need for Achievement

Indicators Mean
I feel good about myself when I finish a difficult project. 6.07
 44
I set high goals for myself. 6.04
I want to learn everything I need to learn. 5.93
Average 6.01

Table 6 shows the analysis of data obtained from the indicators of power

motivation. According to Shia, as cited in Burgess (2016), power motivation is an external

factor of academic intrinsic motivation that is often confused with the need to succeed

because both forms of motivation have been linked to higher academic performance.

Respondents’ aggregated rating on power motivation yielded an overall average of 4.94 in

terms of not feeling bothered when others perform better oneself on a test (5.10); feeling

good about oneself when others do not understand the material that is clear to oneself

(4.19), and being satisfied with an average grade as long as one learns from mistakes (5.53).

Table 6

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Power Motivation

Indicators Mean
It does not bother me when others perform better than I do on a test. 5.10
I feel good about myself when others do not understand the material that is clear to 4.19
me.
I am satisfied with an average grade as long as I learn from my mistakes. 5.53
Average 4.94

Table 7 shows the analysis of data obtained from the indicators of fear of failure.

The fear of failure is an extrinsic element of academic intrinsic motivation, according to

Shia (1998), which has a connection to lower academic performance. She attributes this to

amotivation, which happens when students encounter negative learning feelings such as

test anxiety or a loss of self-efficacy. Respondents’ aggregated rating on power motivation

yielded an overall average of 4.95 in terms of expecting to fail before expecting to do well

when facing a difficult test (5.05); being afraid that one did something wrong or forgot
 45
something after finishing an exam first (5.01); feeling ashamed when receiving a low grade

(4.89); not feeling confident even when one studied for hours (4.79); getting nervous when

the teacher’s hands backtest (4.88); and getting frightened of mental blocks when taking a

test (5.09).

Table 7

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Fear of Failure

Indicators Mean
When faced with a difficult test, I expect to fail before I expect to do well. 5.05
Finishing an exam first leaves me afraid that I did something wrong or forgot 5.01
something.
I feel ashamed when I receive a low grade. 4.89
Even when I have studied for hours, I don’t feel that I have studied enough. 4.79
I get nervous when my teacher begins to hand backtests. 4.88
I get frightened that I will not remember anything when I take a test. 5.09
Average 4.95

Table 8 shows the analysis of data obtained from the indicators of authority

expectations. Shia (1998) noted researchers had studied factors such as family expectations

and teacher expectations, which are extrinsic factors that interact with motivation, all of

which involve proving one’s competence to another. She also clarified that authority

expectations affect academic intrinsic motivation as an extrinsic factor. She clarified that

an external consideration for academic intrinsic motivation is the desire to please teachers

and parents and win their appreciation. And this can be gleaned in the respondents’

aggregated rating on authority expectations which yielded an average of 5.16. The highest

among the indicators is believing that being in school provides opportunities to prove to

one’s family that one can achieve something (5.68). It is followed by completing

assignments the way teachers want them completed (5.66), trying to live up to teacher’s
 46
expectations in the classroom (4.92), feeling of letting down the teacher when doing poorly

on an exam (4.79), and feeling that one should be recognized when demonstrating one’s

abilities in the classroom (4.74).

Table 8

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Authority Expectations

Indicators Mean
Being in senior high school gives me the opportunity to prove to my family that I 5.68
can achieve something.
It is essential to complete assignments the way that my teacher would want them 5.66
completed.
When I do poorly on an exam, I feel that I let my teacher down. 4.79
I try to live up to what my teacher expects out of me in the classroom. 4.92
I feel that I should be recognized when I demonstrate my abilities in the classroom. 4.74
Average 5.16

Table 9 shows the analysis of data obtained from the indicators of peer acceptance.

Peer acceptance is also an external factor that influences academic intrinsic motivation.

Respondents’ aggregated rating on power motivation yielded an overall average of 4.70 in

terms of feeling more accepted by others when receiving a good test grade (5.04); liking to

be one of the most recognized students in the classroom (4.69); feeling that the smarter one

gets, the more accepted one will be by other students (4.63); and having the same attitude

toward senior high school as one’s friends (4.42).

Table 9

Level of Students’ Academic Intrinsic Motivation in terms of Peer Acceptance

Indicators Mean
I feel more accepted by others when I receive a good grade on a test. 5.04
I like to be one of the most recognized students in the classroom. 4.69
I have the same attitude toward senior high school as my friends. 4.42
I feel that the smarter I am, the more accepted I will be by other students. 4.63
 47
Average 4.70

Level of Students’ Academic Performance

Academic performance refers to the extent to which a student meets standards of

assessment set by the Philippine Department of Education or DepEd in the K to 12

Curriculum for the senior high school program. In this study, specifically, academic

performance refers to the final grade (FG) determined by the average of two consecutive

semesters (first and second). According to DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015, Grade 11 and Grade

12 (senior high school levels) are graded on written work, performance tasks, and quarterly

assessment (two per semester). These three are given specific percentage weights that vary

according to the nature of the learning area.

The study respondents are senior high school students in the Division of Quezon

City enrolled in the school year 2019-2020. Their obtained final grades from the registrar

were tabulated using the corresponding descriptors, grading scale, frequency, and

percentage in Table 10. From the sample (N=180), 37 (21%) had outstanding final grades,

56 (31%) were very satisfactory, 49 (27%) satisfactory, 30 (17%) fairly satisfactory, while

8 (4%) did not meet expectations, i.e., the students will repeat the school year. The data

shows 84.36 as the mean or the average final grade, with a 5.73 standard deviation. In other

words, the average of students’ academic performance is ‘satisfactory’ as categorized in

DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015 and as manifested in the analysis of data.

Table 10

Level of Students’ Academic Performance

Descriptor Grading Scale Frequency Percentage

 48
Outstanding 90 – 100 37 21%
Very Satisfactory 85 – 89 56 31%
Satisfactory 80 – 84 49 27%
Fairly Satisfactory 75 – 79 30 17%
Did Not Meet
Below 75 8 4%
Expectations
Total 180 100%
(M=84.36, SD=5.73, N=180)

Impact of Intrinsic Motivation on Student’s Academic Performance

In the conduct of the study, the stated null hypothesis is that intrinsic motivation

does not exert any significant impact on students’ academic performance at the senior high

school level. To reject or accept the null hypothesis, the data collected were subjected to

regression analysis to determine the extent of impact the predictor variables cause on the

criterion variable.

Figure 3 shows a scatterplot for intrinsic motivation (X-values) and academic

performance (Y-values). Data in the scatterplot reveal an uphill pattern from left to right,

which indicates a positive relationship between X and Y. This positive relationship means

that as intrinsic motivation increases (move right), academic performance tends to increase

(move up). In short, a linear relationship between intrinsic motivation and academic

performance exists, as shown in the pattern where X- and Y-values resemble a line with a

positive slope.
 49

Figure 3. Intrinsic Motivation and Academic Performance Scatterplot

To test the hypothesis that intrinsic motivation does not exert a significant impact

on students’ academic performance, regression analysis was employed. The relationship

between academic performance (FG) and AIM was examined using the F-statistic to

determine if the null hypothesis should be rejected. The decision to reject the null

hypothesis will be made if p<0.05.

The aggregate of all six subscales was used to examine academic intrinsic

motivation. The relationship between academic intrinsic motivation and academic

performance (FG) was found to be significant. Table 11 reveals that the F-statistic value of

67.929 is visibly greater than the p-value of p<.001 (sig.), which is less than the alpha value

of .05. This indicates that students’ academic intrinsic motivation bears a significant impact

on their academic performance when considering all the predictor variables. The p-value

indicates that the R-squared .702 is significantly greater than zero and shows that 70.2% of
 50
the variance in academic performance is explained by the variance in the AIM factors. In

other words, the predictors, once again taken as a group, predict a significant amount of

variance in academic performance. The overall regression model was significant, F (6, 173)

= 67.929, p<.001, R2 = .702.

Also, the coefficients in Table 11 reports the effect of predictor variables (the six

AIM factors) over the criterion variable (academic performance). The table looks at the six

subscales, whether each one on its own is a significant predictor of academic performance.

The table reports that when the predictor variables are constant, the t-statistic value is

27.190 with a p-value of p<.001 (sig.). This is statistically significant because p<0.05

alpha.

Moreover, the unstandardized beta (B) represents the slope of the line between the

predictor variables and the criterion variable. Unstandardized coefficient measures reveal

the extent to which the predictor variables can predict the criterion variable. From the

table, when the six predictor variables are constant, students’ academic performance was

predicted to increase by 50.256 (B).

The relationship between mastery orientation and academic performance was found

to be significant. Analysis of the coefficient table shows that mastery orientation has a t-

statistic value of 10.713 with a p-value of p<.001 (sig.). This indicates that mastery

orientation and academic performance are statistically significant, p = p<.001, p<0.05

alpha. Additionally, the coefficient measures show the extent to which mastery orientation

predicts academic performance. For every unit increase in mastery orientation, academic

performance increases by 4.812 (B). There is a difference in academic performance for

 51
students who rate themselves high on mastery orientation and students who rate themselves

low on mastery orientation.

The relationship between the need for achievement and academic performance was

found to be significant. Need for achievement has a t-statistic value of 5.268 with a p-value

of p<.001 (sig.). This indicates that the need for achievement and academic performance

are also statistically significant, p = p<.001, p<0.05 alpha. The coefficient measures also

show the extent to which the need for achievement predicts academic performance. For

every unit increase in the need for achievement, academic performance increases by 1.695

(B). There is a difference in academic performance for students who rate themselves high

on the need for achievement and students who rate themselves low on achievement.

The relationship between power motivation and academic performance was found

to be insignificant. Power motivation yielded a t-statistic value of -1.051 with a p-value of

.295. This indicates that power motivation and academic performance are statistically

insignificant, p = .295, p>0.05 alpha. The coefficient measures also show the extent to

which power motivation predicts academic performance. For every unit increase in power

motivation, academic performance decreases by -.281 (B). There is no difference in

academic performance for students who rate themselves high on power motivation and

students who rate themselves low on power motivation.

The relationship between fear of failure and academic performance was found to

be insignificant. Fear of failure yielded a t-statistic value of -.093 with a p-value of .926.

This indicates that fear of failure and academic performance are statistically not significant,

p = .926, p>0.05 alpha. For every unit increase in fear of failure, academic performance
 52
decreases by -.027 (B). There is no difference in academic performance for students who

rate themselves high on fear of failure and students who rate themselves low on fear of

failure.

The relationship between authority expectations and academic performance was

found to be insignificant. Extrinsic factor authority expectations revealed a t-statistic value

of -.021 with a p-value of .983. This indicates that authority expectations and academic

performance are statistically not significant, p = .983, p>0.05 alpha. For every unit increase

in authority expectations, academic performance decreases by -.008 (B). There is no

difference in academic performance for students who rate themselves high on authority

expectations and students who rate themselves low on authority expectations.

Lastly, the relationship between peer acceptance and academic performance was

found to be insignificant. Peer acceptance showed a t-statistic value of -.918 with a p-value

of .360. This also indicates that peer acceptance and academic performance are statistically

not significant, p = .360, p>0.05 alpha. For every unit increase in peer acceptance,

academic performance decreases by -.266 (B). There is no difference in academic

performance for students who rate themselves high on peer acceptance and students who

rate themselves low on peer acceptance.

The standardized Beta coefficients work similarly to a correlation coefficient: the

closer the value is to 1 or -1, the stronger the relationship. Of the six predictor variables,

mastery orientation with a Beta coefficient of .704 is closer to 1 than the need for

achievement’s Beta coefficient of .274. It can be concluded; therefore, that mastery

orientation has the strongest relationship and impact on academic performance.

 53
Based on the obtained results, the null hypothesis stating that intrinsic motivation

does not impact students’ academic performance at the senior high school level is rejected.

The findings revealed that students’ academic intrinsic motivation factors, mastery

orientation, and need for achievement have a significant positive impact on their academic

performance. Similarly, the findings also revealed mastery orientation and the need for

achievement serve as good predictors of students’ final grades.

These findings corroborate other prior studies presented in the review of related

literature that intrinsic motivation exerts a significant positive impact on students’

academic performance (Afzal et al., 2010; Aronson & Steele, 2005; Bakar et al., 2010;

Burgess, 2016; Fabien, 2015; Goodman et al., 2011; Heck, 2013; Hong, Hwang, Tai, &

Lin, 2017; Kim, Hwang, & Kwon, 2016; Lai, 2011; Liu, Hau, & Zheng, 2020; Muola,

2010; Niehaus, Rudasill, & Adelson, 2012; Phillips, 2017; Sommer, 2013; Tripathi &

Tripathi, 2018; Turner, Chandler & Heffer, 2009; Tybus, 2010; You & Lim, 2016).

Table 11

Regression Analysis of AIM Factors as Predictors of Academic Performance

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Variables
Std.
B Error Beta t Sig.
(Constant) 50.256 1.848 27.190 .000
Mastery Orientation 4.812 .449 .704 10.713 .000
Need for Achievement 1.695 .322 .274 5.268 .000
Power Motivation -.281 .268 -.052 -1.051 .295
Fear of Failure -.027 .290 -.005 -.093 .926
Authority Expectations -.008 .378 -.001 -.021 .983
Peer Acceptance -.266 .290 -.051 -.918 .360
R-squared = .702
 54
F-value = 67.929
p-value = p<.001
alpha = .05

Implications Drawn from the Findings of the Study

The following were the implications drawn from the findings of the study:

1. The respondents being highly intrinsic in their motivation orientation suggests

how they view education and its role in their self-betterment. This also implies

that even amidst their socio-economic status or other circumstances unknown

to the researcher, the students still find joy in learning, desire to engage in

academic activities for the sake of completing and participating in them, and

seek to achieve a higher level of knowledge to prove competence to oneself.

2. Students’ self-assessment also provides teachers understanding of the

student’s motivation in a classroom setting. The students generally portray

high intrinsic motivation in terms of mastery orientation and need for

achievement. This may imply that the school administration and faculty have

been providing students opportunities to enjoy learning using varied teaching

strategies and techniques and encouraging students’ desire for personal

excellence.

3. The strong positive relationship between intrinsic motivation and students’

academic performance reflects not only students’ mindset and consciousness

in action but also the synergy of supportive stakeholders. This implies that

there may be a functioning caring community in the school and/or at home that

set an atmosphere where students are positively encouraged and given

opportunities for personal discovery and achievement.

 55
4. The impact of intrinsic motivation on students’ academic performance

highlights the importance of positive collaboration and coordination between

and among stakeholders involved in the education of the students. Students

who have higher intrinsic motivation are likely to perform well in academics,

as revealed in their final grades. Students’ intrinsic motivation is a product of

self-determination, but this does not discount the vital role of the home, the

school, and the community in laying the groundwork for students’ self-

determination. Curriculum writers and planners placing student context at the

curriculum, school administrators supporting students’ personal and academic

growth through a variety of thoughtful opportunities, teachers reflectively

training on the student-centered and holistic type of teaching and learning,

parents partnering with teachers in their children’s academic and personal

pursuits, and classroom lessons and activities encouraging long-term

meaningful and experiential learning are essential avenues to strengthen

students’ intrinsic motivation.

 56
Chapter 5

Summary of Findings, Conclusion, and Recommendations

This chapter summarizes the observations, conclusions, and recommendations on

the impact of intrinsic motivation on the academic performance of senior high school

students in Quezon City. To evaluate the study’s presumed hypothesis within a .05 level

of significance, a descriptive template was used. To evaluate the data and address the

study’s hypothesis, various statistical methods such as mean, standard deviation, and

regression analysis were used.

The present study aimed to examine the intrinsic motivation of senior high school

students and its impact on academic performance.

Summary of Findings

Problem 1: Level of senior high school students’ academic intrinsic motivation

Academic Intrinsic Motivation. Both intrinsic and extrinsic factors of AIM equally

have consistent scores. Both factors also garnered high ratings, but it is intrinsic factors

that received a higher average score of 5.69 than extrinsic factors’ average of 4.95. The

result reveals that the respondents are more highly intrinsic than extrinsic in their

motivational orientation.

AIM Factors. Intrinsic factors of AIM yielded high average scores for mastery

orientation (5.55) and need for achievement (6.01). Extrinsic factors also yielded fairly

positive mean scores in power motivation (4.94), fear of failure (4.95), authority

expectations (5.16), and peer acceptance (4.70).

 57
1.1 Mastery Orientation. Respondents’ mastery orientation returned an average of

5.55 in terms of spending time reading about things interesting (5.55); trying to

learn from a class despite liking or disliking it (5.79); trying to do best in every

assignment (5.66); feeling that challenging assignments can be great learning

experiences (5.49); enjoying learning about various subjects (5.30); and doing

more than required for an assignment for better understanding of the material

(5.05). While one indicator, ‘senior high school helps me gain valuable

knowledge,’ received the highest rating of 6.03 mean score. This finding

indicates a difference in academic performance between students with higher

levels of mastery orientation and students with lower levels of mastery

orientation. The implication of this finding is significant and is supported by

previous research (Ryan & Deci, 2008), which explained that the mastery

orientation is a basic curiosity and innate desire to prove competence to oneself;

this factor of academic intrinsic motivation is significantly linked to academic

performance. The literature has shown higher levels of mastery orientation are

positively related to academic performance. This study concludes with similar

findings as other research (Aronson & Steele, 2005; Burgess, 2016; Turner,

Chandler, & Heffer, 2009). There is a relationship between mastery orientation

and academic performance.

1.2 Need for Achievement. Respondents’ need for achievement yielded an average

of 6.01 in terms of feeling good about oneself when finishing a difficult project

(6.07); setting high goals for oneself (6.04); wanting to learn everything one

needs to learn (5.93). This finding indicates a difference in academic

 58
performance between students with higher levels of need for achievement and

students with lower levels of need for achievement. This finding implies that

the correlation between the need to achieve and academic performance is

significant, and this is supported by previous researchers who have found that

the need for achievement is associated with higher levels of academic

performance (Aronson & Steele, 2005; Burgess, 2016; Pekrun et al., 2011;

Turner, Chandler, & Heffer, 2009).

1.3 Power Motivation. Respondents’ aggregated rating on power motivation

yielded an overall average of 4.94 in terms of not feeling bothered when others

perform better oneself on a test (5.10); feeling good about oneself when others

do not understand the material that is clear to oneself (4.19), and being satisfied

with an average grade as long as one learns from mistakes (5.53). This finding

indicates no difference in academic performance between students with higher

levels of power motivation and students with lower levels of power motivation.

1.4 Fear of Failure. Respondents’ aggregated rating on power motivation yielded

an overall average of 4.95 in terms of expecting to fail before expecting to do

well when facing a difficult test (5.05); being afraid that one did something

wrong or forgot something after finishing an exam first (5.01); feeling ashamed

when receiving a low grade (4.89); not feeling confident even when one studied

for hours (4.79); getting nervous when the teacher’s hands backtest (4.88); and

getting frightened of mental blocks when taking a test (5.09). This finding

indicates a difference in academic performance between students with higher

levels of fear of failure and students with lower levels of fear of failure.
 59
1.5 Authority Expectations. Respondents’ aggregated rating on authority

expectations yielded an average of 5.16. The highest among the indicators is

believing that being in school provides opportunities to prove to one’s family

that one can achieve something (5.68). It is followed by completing

assignments the way teachers want them completed (5.66), trying to live up to

teacher’s expectations in the classroom (4.92), feeling of letting down the

teacher when doing poorly on an exam (4.79), and feeling that one should be

recognized when demonstrating one’s abilities in the classroom (4.74). This

finding indicates no difference in academic performance between students with

higher levels of authority expectations and students with lower levels of

authority expectations.

1.6 Peer Acceptance. Respondents’ aggregated rating on power motivation yielded

an overall average of 4.70 in terms of feeling more accepted by others when

receiving a good test grade (5.04); liking to be one of the most recognized

students in the classroom (4.69); feeling that the smarter one gets, the more

accepted one will be by other students (4.63); and having the same attitude

toward senior high school as one’s friends (4.42). The finding indicates no

difference in academic performance between students with higher levels of peer

acceptance and students with lower levels of peer acceptance.

Problem 2: Level of senior high school student’s academic performance

Of the sample (N=180), 37 (21%) had outstanding final grades, 56 (31%) were very

satisfactory, 49 (27%) satisfactory, 30 (17%) fairly satisfactory, while 8 (4%) did not meet
 60
expectations. Overall, 84.36 was the mean or the average final grade. In other words, the

average of students’ academic performance is Satisfactory as categorized in DepEd Order

No. 8, s. 2015.

Problem 3: Impact of academic intrinsic motivation on students’ academic

performance

The F-statistic value of 67.929 is visibly greater than the p-value of p<.001 (sig.),

which is less than the alpha value of .05. This indicates that students’ academic intrinsic

motivation bears a significant impact on their academic performance when considering all

the predictor variables. The p-value indicates that the R-squared .702 is significantly

greater than zero and shows that 70.2% of the variance in academic performance is

explained by the variance in the AIM factors. In other words, the predictors, once again

taken as a group, predict a significant amount of variance in academic performance. The

overall regression model was significant, F (6, 173) = 67.929, p<.001, R2 = .702.

The relationship between mastery orientation and academic performance was found

to be significant. Analysis of the coefficient table shows that mastery orientation has a t-

statistic value of 10.713 with a p-value of p<.001 (sig.). This indicates that mastery

orientation and academic performance are statistically significant, p = p<.001, p<0.05

alpha.

The relationship between the need for achievement and academic performance was

found to be significant. Need for achievement has a t-statistic value of 5.268 with a p-value

of p<.001 (sig.). This indicates that the need for achievement and academic performance

are also statistically significant, p = p<.001, p<0.05 alpha.

 61
Concisely, there is a difference in academic performance for students who rate

themselves high on mastery orientation and need for achievement. Students who rate

themselves low on mastery orientation and need for achievement.

The relationship between power motivation and academic performance was found

to be insignificant. Power motivation yielded a t-statistic value of -1.051 with a p-value of

.295. This indicates that power motivation and academic performance are statistically not

significant, p = .295, p>0.05 alpha.

The relationship between fear of failure and academic performance was found to

be insignificant. Fear of failure yielded a t-statistic value of -.093 with a p-value of .926.

This indicates that fear of failure and academic performance are statistically not significant,

p = .926, p>0.05 alpha.

The relationship between authority expectations and academic performance was

found to be insignificant. Extrinsic factor authority expectations revealed a t-statistic value

of -.021 with a p-value of .983. This indicates that authority expectations and academic

performance are statistically not significant, p = .983, p>0.05 alpha.

The relationship between peer acceptance and academic performance was found to

be insignificant. Peer acceptance showed a t-statistic value of -.918 with a p-value of .360.

This also indicates that peer acceptance and academic performance are statistically not

significant, p = .360, p>0.05 alpha.

Concludingly, there is no difference in academic performance for students who rate

themselves high on power motivation, fear of failure, authority expectations, and peer
 62
acceptance and students who rate themselves low on power motivation, fear of failure,

authority expectations, and peer acceptance.

Problem 4: Implications are drawn from the findings of the study

4.1 The respondents being highly intrinsic in their motivation orientation suggests

how they view education and its role in their self-betterment. This also implies

that even amidst their socio-economic status or other circumstances unknown

to the researcher, the students still find joy in learning, desire to engage in

academic activities for the sake of completing and participating in them, and

seek to achieve a higher level of knowledge to prove competence to oneself.

4.2 Students’ self-assessment also provides teachers understanding of the student’s

motivation in a classroom setting. The students generally portray high intrinsic

motivation in terms of mastery orientation and need for achievement. This may

imply that the school administration and faculty have been providing students

opportunities to enjoy learning using varied teaching strategies and techniques

and encouraging students’ desire for personal excellence.

4.3 The strong positive relationship between intrinsic motivation and students’

academic performance reflects not only students’ mindset and consciousness

in action but also the synergy of supportive stakeholders. This implies that there

may be a functioning caring community in the school and/or at home that set

an atmosphere where students are positively encouraged and given

opportunities for personal discovery and achievement.

4.4 The impact of intrinsic motivation on students’ academic performance

highlights the importance of positive collaboration and coordination between

 63
and among stakeholders involved in the education of the students. Students

who have higher intrinsic motivation are likely to perform well in academics,

as revealed in their final grades. Students’ intrinsic motivation is a product of

self-determination, but this does not discount the vital role of the home, the

school, and the community in laying the groundwork for students’ self-

determination. Curriculum writers and planners placing student context at the

curriculum, school administrators supporting students’ personal and academic

growth through a variety of thoughtful opportunities, teachers reflectively

training on the student-centered and holistic type of teaching and learning,

parents partnering with teachers in their children’s academic and personal

pursuits, and classroom lessons and activities encouraging long-term

meaningful and experiential learning are essential avenues to strengthen

students’ intrinsic motivation.

Conclusions

In light of the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. A strong relationship between students’ academic intrinsic motivation and

academic performance has been revealed. The level of intrinsic motivation was

reported to have a significant impact on students’ academic performance as

reflected in their end-of-school-year final grades.

2. The students are found to be more intrinsically motivated than extrinsically. They

take up or perform well academically for their interest or curiosity and their

learning. It may be concluded that these students are interested in learning and in
 64
achieving high goals. The findings also yielded higher aggregate scores for mastery

orientation and need for achievement. There is a difference in academic

performance for students who rated themselves higher in mastery orientation and

need for achievement and students who rated themselves lower in these factors.

3. There is no difference in academic performance for students who rate themselves

higher in power motivation, fear of failure, authority expectations, and peer

acceptance. Students who rate themselves lower in these factors.

4. The findings drew several implications that may help curriculum planners, school

administrators, teachers, parents, and other stakeholders relevant to the personal

and academic growth of students the need for intentionally meaningful lessons and

school activities (co-curricular and extracurricular) that scaffold students to

increase their intrinsic motivation, i.e., allowing the students to prove their

competence to themselves and demonstrate it to others.

5. From the results and analysis, this study concludes that students’ academic

performance is positively and significantly impacted by intrinsic motivation. The

null hypothesis that intrinsic motivation does not have a significant impact on

students’ academic performance has been rejected.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusion of the study, the following recommendations

are hereby offered:

1. That students, parents, and educators can use the results of this study to understand

better the effects of and relationships between AIM factors and academic
 65
performance. Students, parents, and educators will empower students with self-

awareness about their academic intrinsic motivation levels and empower them to

increase the positive influencing factors while decreasing the negatively

influencing factors with a better understanding of the essential positive and negative

associations between factors of AIM and academic performance.

2. That, by having an understanding of the results of this study, educators would be

able to recognize the importance of these motivational factors when interacting with

students in classrooms and adjust their teaching methods to consider the

relationship between these factors of intrinsic academic motivation and student

performance. That teacher should be intentional in creating learning opportunities

that are engaging and motivating to reduce the number of students at risk of

dropping out and increase students’ level of academic performance.

3. That school administrators work collaboratively with the teachers by providing the

latter regular in-service training and practical seminars to equip the teachers with

teaching ideas and educational technology tools that help build up or boost

students’ intrinsic motivation.

4. School administrators support students’ holistic growth by offering a wide range of

co-curricular and extracurricular activities that bring out students’ potentials and

give them appropriate diversion from academics.

5. That parents give encouragement, support, and proper learning facilities to enhance

their children’s motivation. According to Muola (2010), a caring favorable home

environment is likely to contribute to a child’s intrinsic motivation and good

performance in school.
 66
6. Further research is required to ascertain or find answers as to how students’ intrinsic

motivation can be increased.

 67
References

Abaidoo, A. (2018). Factors contributing to academic performance of students in a Junior

High School. GRIN Verlag.

Adamma, O. N., Ekwutosim, O. P., & Unamba, E. C. (2018). Influence of extrinsic and
intrinsic motivation on pupils’ academic performance in mathematics. Online
Submission, 2(2), 52-59.

Adom, E.A., Emmanuel, A.O., Josephine, B., &Solomon, F.K. (2014). Achievement
Motivation, Academic Self-Concept and Academic Achievement among High
School Students. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational
Sciences, 2(2), 24-37.

Afzal, H., Ali, I., Aslam Khan, M., & Hamid, K. (2010). A study of university students’
motivation and its relationship with their academic performance. Available at
SSRN 2899435.

Arce, A. L. (2017). The Impact of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation on the Academic
Achievement of Non-Traditional Undergraduate Students [ProQuest LLC]. In
ProQuest LLC.

Areepattamannil, S. (2014). Relationship between academic motivation and mathematics

achievement among Indian adolescents in Canada and India. The Journal of general
psychology, 141(3), 247-262.

Arshad, M., Zaidi, S. M. I. H., & Mahmood, K. (2015). Self-Esteem & Academic
Performance among University Students. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(1),
156-162.

Aronson, J., & Steele, C. M. (2005). Stereotypes and the fragility of academic competence,
motivation, and self-concept. Handbook of competence and motivation, 436-455.

Asif, S., Kamal, A., Fahim, M., Naveen, N., & Yousaf, F. (2018). Exploring Gender
Differences in Academic Motivation among Adolescents. Ophthalmology Update,
16(4), 918–922.

Awan, R, Noureen, G., Naz, A. (2011). A study of relationship between achievement

motivation, self-concept and achievement in English and mathematics at secondary
level. International Education Studies, 4(3), 72 – 78.

Bakar, K. A., Tarmizi, R. A., Mahyuddin, R., Elias, H., Luan, W. S., & Ayub, A. F. M.
(2010). Relationships between university students’ achievement motivation,
attitude and academic performance in Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 2(2), 4906-4910.
 68
Burgess, B. L. (2016). Understanding the Desire to Learn: A Study of Academic Intrinsic
Motivation in Students Attending a 4-Year Institution for Higher Learning
(Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University).

Center on Education Policy. (2012). Academic motivation: An overlooked piece of

educational reform. Retrieved from http://files.eric.gov/fulltext/ED532666.pdf

Cheng, W. (2019). How Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations Function among College
Student Samples in Both Taiwan and the U.S. Educational Psychology, 39(4), 430–
447.

Daniel, J. R., & Cooc, N. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions of academic intrinsic motivation
for students with disabilities. The journal of special education, 52(2), 101-112.

Dawson-Brew, E., & Nyarko-Sampson, E. (2017). Relationship between Motivation and

Academic Performance of Undergraduate Students of College of Distance
Education, University of Cape Coast, Ghana. Zimbabwe Journal of Educational
Research, 29(2).

Department of Education. (2018). Enhanced Basic Education Information System (EBEIS)

SY 2018-2019. Learner Information System (LIS) Data. Generated on 10
December 2018.

Di Domenico, S. I., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). The Emerging Neuroscience of Intrinsic

Motivation: A New Frontier in Self-Determination Research. Frontiers in human
neuroscience, 11, 145. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2017.00145

Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2013). Teaching and researching: Motivation. Routledge.

Fabien, J. (2015). Motivation: Factors affecting academic motivation. Retrieved from

http://joyettefabien.hubpages.com/hub/Selfmotivationforsuccess

Goodman, S., Jaffer, T., Keresztesi, M., Mamdani, F., Mokgatle, D., Musariri, M., Pires,
J., & Schlechter, A. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between students’
motivation and academic performance as mediated by effort. South African Journal
of Psychology, 41(3), 373-385.

Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C. F., Marsh, H. W., Larose, S., & Boivin, M. (2010).
Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young
elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 711–
735.

Gupta, P. K., & Mili, R. (2017). Impact of academic motivation on academic achievement:
A study on high school students. European Journal of Education Studies.
 69
Hasan, M., & Sarka, R. (2018). Achievement motivation and academic achievement of
secondary level students in Uttar Dinajpur district. International Journal of
Multidisciplinary Research, 3(10), 249-252.

Heck, D. M. (2013). Developing Intrinsic Motivation: Student Perceived Autonomy,

Relatedness and Competence and the Relationship to Achievement [ProQuest
LLC]. In ProQuest LLC.

Hendijani, R., Bischak, D. P., Arvai, J., & Dugar, S. (2016). Intrinsic motivation, external
reward, and their effect on overall motivation and performance. Human
Performance, 29(4), 251–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2016.1157595

Hong, J. C., Hwang, M. Y., Tai, K. H., & Lin, P. H. (2017). Intrinsic motivation of Chinese
learning in predicting online learning self-efficacy and flow experience relevant to
students’ learning progress. Computer assisted language learning, 30(6), 552-574.

Htoo, H. D. D. M. (2014). Academic motivation and academic achievement of Karen

refugee students. Scholar: Human Sciences, 6(2).

Kim, K. J., Hwang, J. Y., & Kwon, B. S. (2016). Differences in medical students’ academic
interest and performance across career choice motivations. International journal of
medical education, 7, 52.

Kyong-Jee Kim, Jee Y. Hwang, & Bum S. Kwon. (2016). Differences in medical students’
academic interest and performance across career choice motivations. International
Journal of Medical Education, 7, 52–56. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.56a7.5124

Lai, E. R. (2011). A research report, motivation: Literature review. Retrieved from

https://images.pearsonassessments.com%2Fimages%2Ftmrs%2FMotivation_Revi
ew_final.pdf/

Liao, H. A., Ferdenzi, A. C., & Edlin, M. (2012). Motivation, self-regulated learning
efficacy, and academic achievement among international and domestic students at
an urban community college: A comparison. The Community College Enterprise,
18(2), 9.

Liu, Y., Hau, K. T., Liu, H., Wu, J., Wang, X., & Zheng, X. (2020). Multiplicative effect
of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on academic performance: A longitudinal
study of Chinese students. Journal of Personality, 88(3), 584-595.

Liu, Y., Hau, K. T., & Zheng, X. (2019). Do both intrinsic and identified motivations have
long-term effects?. The Journal of Psychology, 153(3), 288-306.

Liu, Y., Hau, K. T., & Zheng, X. (2020). Does instrumental motivation help students with
low intrinsic motivation? Comparison between Western and Confucian students.
International Journal of Psychology, 55(2), 182-191.
 70

Mahato, A., & Barman, P. (2019). Academic Achievement Motivation and Academic
Performance of SC, ST Community Students in the District of Purulia. American
Journal of Educational Research, 7(11), 872-877.

Mansson, D. (2016). Exploring College Students’ Expressed Concern about Their

Academic Performance. College Student Journal, 50(1), 121–129. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN=114159652&sit
e=ehost-live

McBride, J. L. (2020). Self-Concept and Academic Achievement Influencing Occupational

Identity of Adolescents (Doctoral dissertation, Oral Roberts University).

Muola, J. M. (2010). A study of the relationship between academic achievement motivation

and home environment among standard eight pupils.

Narad, A., & Abdullah, B. (2016). Academic performance of senior secondary school
students: Influence of parental encouragement and school environment. Rupkatha
Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities Special Issue, 3(2), 12-19.

Niehaus, K., Rudasill, K. M., & Adelson, J. L. (2012). Self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation,
and academic outcomes among Latino middle school students participating in an
after-school program. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 34(1), 118-136.

Niemiec, C. P., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Self-determination theory and the
relation of autonomy to self-regulatory processes and personality development.

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Barchfeld, P., & Perry, R. P. (2011). Measuring
emotions in students’ learning and performance: The Achievement Emotions
Questionnaire (AEQ). Contemporary educational psychology, 36(1), 36-48.

Phillips, R. (2017). Identification of gifted students at risk of underachievement using ROC

curve analysis; using an understanding of the relationships and patterns of social
coping, attitude toward school, and self-efficacy to identify underachieving gifted
students: An Australian sample.

Pink, D. H. (2011). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. Penguin.

Salta, K., & Koulougliotis, D. (2015). Assessing motivation to learn chemistry: adaptation
and validation of Science Motivation Questionnaire II with Greek secondary school
students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), 237-250.

Sarangi, C. (2015). Achievement Motivation of the High School Students: A Case Study
among Different Communities of Goalpara District of Assam. Journal of Education
and Practice, 6(19), 140-144.
 71
Shia, R. (1998). Academic intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and metacognition. Assessing
academic intrinsic motivation: A look at student goals and personal strategy.
Wheeling Jesuit University.

Siegle, D., Rubenstein, L. D., & Mitchell, M. S. (2014). Honors students’ perceptions of
their high school experiences: The influence of teachers on student motivation.
Gifted child quarterly, 58(1), 35-50.

Sommer, M. (2013). Psychosocial factors predicting the adjustment and academic

performance of university students (Doctoral dissertation, University of South
Africa).

Sultan, S., & Hussain, I. (2012). Humanistic versus Authoritarian Teachers: A Reflection
on Students’ Academic Motivation and Performance. Journal on Educational
Psychology, 5(3), 35–40.

Tripathi, A., & Tripathi, A. P. (2018). Analyzing the Association of Intrinsic Factors of
Motivation and Academic Performance of Teachers. Purusharta, 11(1), 50–58.
https://doi.org/10.21844/pajmes.v11i1.14609

Triyanto. (2019). The Academic Motivation of Papuan Students in Sebelas Maret

University, Indonesia. SAGE Open, 9(1), 2158244018823449.

Turner, E. A., Chandler, M., & Heffer, R. W. (2009). The influence of parenting styles,
achievement motivation, and self-efficacy on academic performance in college
students. Journal of college student development, 50(3), 337-346.

Tybus, R. (2010). Academic motivation: the impact intrinsic motivation and extrinsic
rewards have on elementary students. Theses and Dissertations, 25. Retrieved from
https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/

Uyulgan, M. A., & Akkuzu, N. (2014). An Overview of Student Teachers’ Academic

Intrinsic Motivation. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(1), 24-32.

Wery, J., & Thomson, M. M. (2013). Motivational strategies to enhance effective learning
in teaching struggling students. Support for learning, 28(3), 103-108.

You, S., Dang, M., & Lim, S. A. (2016). Effects of student perceptions of teachers’
motivational behavior on Reading, English, and Mathematics Achievement: The
mediating role of domain specific self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation. Child &
Youth Care Forum, 45(2), 221–240. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1092072&si
te=ehost-live

Zegwaard, K. E., Campbell, M., & Pretti, T. J. (2017). Professional Identities and Ethics:
The Role of Work-Integrated Learning in Developing Agentic Professionals’,
 72
Work-Integrated Learning in the 21st Century (International Perspectives on
Education and Society, Volume 32).
 73
Appendix C

Instrument of the Study

Dear Respondent:

Peace and blessings!

The undersigned invites you to participate in a research study entitled Impact of Academic
Intrinsic Motivation Facets on Students’ Academic Performance. Your participation in this
research project is completely voluntary.

If you agree to participate in this research, please answer the questions as best you can.
There are no right and wrong answers.

Your honest response will be treated with the highest level of confidentiality. Thank you
for your assistance in this important endeavor.

Respectfully,

Venjie N. Oclaret
Researcher

Academic Intrinsic Motivation

Read each question carefully and choose the number that best describes you. There are no
right and wrong answers, simply choose 1 if the sentence does not describe you at all; 7 if
the sentence strongly describes you. If you describe yourself as somewhere in the middle,
please rate yourself accordingly. Choose the number that best describes you.

Subscale 1 – Mastery Orientation

1 I like to spend time reading about things that interest me. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

No matter how much I like or dislike a class, I still try to

2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
learn from it.

3 I try to do my best on every assignment. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

 74
I feel that challenging assignments can be great learning
4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
experiences.

5 Senior high school helps me to gain valuable knowledge. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6 I enjoy learning about various subjects. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sometimes I do more than I have to for an assignment to

7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
help me understand the material better.

Subscale 2 – Power Motivation

It does not bother me when others perform better than I

8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
on a test.

I feel good about myself when others do not understand

9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
material that is clear to me.

I am satisfied with an average grade, as long as I learn

10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
from my mistakes.

Subscale 3 – Need for Achievement

11 I feel good about myself when I finish a difficult project. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

12 I set high goals for myself. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

13 I want to learn everything I need to learn. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Subscale 4 – Fear of Failure

When faced with a difficult test, I expect to fail before I

14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
expect to do well.

Finishing an exam first leaves me afraid that I did

15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
something wrong or forgot something.

16 I feel ashamed when I receive a low grade. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Even when I have studied for hours, I don’t feel that I

17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
have studied enough.

18 I get nervous when my teacher begins to hand back tests. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

I get frightened that I will not remember anything when I

19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
take a test.
 75
Subscale 5 – Authority Expectations

Being in senior high school gives me the opportunity to

20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
prove to my family that I can achieve something.

It is important to complete assignments the way that my

21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
teacher would want them completed.

When I do poorly on an exam, I feel that I let my teacher

22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
down.

I try to live up to what my teacher expects out of me in

23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
the classroom.

I feel that I should be recognized when I demonstrate my

24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
abilities in the classroom.

Subscale 6 – Peer Acceptance

I feel more accepted by others when I receive a good

25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
grade on a test.

I like to be one of the most recognized students in the

26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
classroom.

I have the same attitude toward senior high school as my

27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
friends.

I feel that the smarter I am, the more accepted I will be by

28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
other students.

Reliability Coefficient N of Items = 28

Alpha = .8627

Reference:
Shia, R. (1998). Running Head: Academic Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation and
Metacognition. Assessing Academic Intrinsic Motivation: A Look at Student. Goals and
Personal Strategy.