Motivation

EXPECTANCY-VALUE THEORY Expectancy is defined by Schunk et al. (2008) as “people’s beliefs and judgments about their capabilities to perform a task successfully.” When an individual believes that the task is manageable and success is possible, motivation level in that particular individual in performing and engaging in the task will be higher. In the other hand, if the task is view as difficult and possibility of success is low, individuals will not want to be involved in it. Also, even when a student is much interested in a particular task, after repeated failure and failure is opt to happen, student will give up engaging in the task eventually. Value is “the beliefs students have about the reasons they might engage in a task” (Schunk et al., 2008). This will answer the question “Why should I do this'”, “What will I get after all the hard work'” or “Is all the hard work worth it'” There might be all sorts of reason for someone to get himself or herself to be engaged in a task. A student may read up the whole book so that he/she will be brought to the zoo, but the other student might think that a zoo trip might worth only a chapter of reading. The value depends on the individual, some may work hard for a small reward, and some may only agree to work when a big value is seen. Both Expectancies & Values are important for teachers. By being able to understand this theory and applying it in the classroom setting, teachers will be able to predict their students’, future choice behaviour, academic task engagement, persistence and also their actual achievement. Also, by knowing this theory, teachers will be able and will know the ways in getting the students motivated in their studies and class participation. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON EXPECTANCY-VALUE THEORIES Back to the early years when motivation was firstly studied, researchers explain motivation in a behavioural perspective. Theorist studied motivation by experimenting it on animals and they came out with the concept of stimuli, behaviour and habits. However, the behaviourists were challenged by the saying that, without the cognitive notion of expectancy, behaviour does not occur with merely the stimuli. Tolman, (1932) for an example, it was proposed that stimuli and behaviour does not associate automatically, and that even animals learn to expect things to happen on them after a certain behaviour is performed (Schunk et al., 2008). “Tolman is chiefly responsible for urging acceptance of the idea that what psychologist mean by ‘response’ is molar action” (Atkinson, 1965), and “Lewin is chiefly responsible for urging acceptance of the idea that ‘what causes’ molar actions is a much more complicated question than early Stimuli-Response psychologists ever believe it to be” (Atkinson, 1965). These arguments aids in noting that molar actions involved characteristics such as, selectivity, vigor and persistence. Like other theories, Expectancies-value theory was not concluded over a night. It was studied and developed by several theorists in a baby step pace. “Tolman is chiefly responsible for urging acceptance of the idea that what psychologist mean by ‘response’’ is molar action” (Atkinson, 1965). “Lewin is chiefly responsible for urging acceptance of the idea that ‘what causes’ molar actions is a much more complicated question than early Stimuli-Response psychologists ever believe it to be” (Atkinson, 1965) The two main perspective that are worked out before the full idea was presented is, Lewin’s level of aspiration and Atkinson;s achievement motivation. Lewin’s Level of Aspiration Firstly, Lewin’s level of aspiration was defined as “the goal or standard that individuals sets for themselves in a task, based on past experience and familiarity with the task” (Schunk et al., 2008). With this definition, it explains that past experiences and familiarity plays an important role before the decision of how much effort to be put in the task was made. For example, when one is challenged to perform a task that has been performed before, he will be more motivated to set a higher goal for him/herself rather than if the task has not been performed before. It was proposed that “the construct of level of aspiration could capture the cognitive decision-making process by incorporating both expectancy and value components” (Schunk et al., 2008). In Lewin’s study, a traditional game called the “Ring Toss Game” was used to measure the level of aspiration. His research participants are asked to toss the ring to the peg at different distance from the peg. The further the participants are from the peg, the higher the value was. Participants are given a trial period and after the trial, participants are asked to set their goals for the next ten (10) tosses. In Lewin’s research, participants are aware of the distance of the peg and the value of it in order to expect and value the game. After a great deal of repetition, with this method, researchers found out that, participants felt more successful from meeting the goals they set for themselves than from attaining an objective level (Schunk et al., 2008). This explains that, after their personal experience in the game, participants set their own goal and succeed instead of reaching the goal that is set generally by the researchers, and in classroom settings, this research proposed that students will be able to success in reaching their own goal instead of the overall result set by the teachers or the schools. Also, it was found that the level of aspiration was related to prior experience with the task(Schunk et al., 2008), so, with prior success level of aspiration will increase and students will be more motivated in engaging in the task again in future. Lastly, it was found out that there are individual and group differences in level of aspiration (Schunk et al., 2008). Goals set by five separate individuals tend to be different when they are grouped together with the influence of the peers and expectations. However, the research done with the use of Ring Toss game was criticized that it limits the generalization of result to more ecologically valid settings such as class rooms (Schunk et al., 2008). And also, the research placed too much importance on level of aspiration, and had minimizes the other potential influenced of other cognitive variables such as values and expectancies on capabilities. It was proposed that, to explain motivation in a better way, other variables should be taken into consideration in future. Atkinson’s Achievement Motivation With Lewin’s researches and findings, Atkinson had made used of the concept of valence, “the value a person attaches to an object in the environment” (Schunk et al., 2008). Atkinson (1965) stated that “Lewin called the Valence of the goal (Vag) – that is, its attractiveness to a particular individual in a particular situation—is called Demand for the goal by Tolman, Utility of the consequences in Decision Theory, and would be represented as the product of Motive and Incentive (MG X IG) in a general statement of the theory suggested in studies of achievement motivation. And lastly, with these definitions, Atkinson had come out with the formulated theory. This theory combines the three elements, needs, expectancies and also values. This theory, which was labelled as “expectancies motivation” looks deeply into the motives, probability of success and also the incentive value. In Atkinson’s study, there are two types of motives: Motive to approach success and motive to avoid failure. The motive for success was assumed to represent individuals’ hope for or anticipation of success and reflected their capacity to experience pride in accomplishment (Atkinson. 1965). Motive to avoid failure in the other hand represented “individuals’ capacity to experience shame and humiliation when they fail” (Schunk et al., 2008). In Atkinson’s definition of motives, the two types of motives stand independently, however, subsequent researches proposed that the two motives are inter-linked and operate as related. With the inter-linked between the two motives, researchers came out with a table which explains the different types of people, having different level of motives. The success-oriented individuals are high in motive for success and low in fear of failure. These people think only about being successful. After times and times of trial and error, all these people focus is solely on the day that they will achieve success and they do not mind all the failure before they get to the point. In the other hand, the failure avoiders spend all the life, trying to avoid being fail. As they are always trying to avoid failure, they do not engage much in achievement work. Researches had been done mostly on these two groups of people. Of course, besides the success oriented students and the failure avoiders, we have the other two groups of individuals, who are, the over strivers and the failure acceptors. Over strivers are those who pay full attention in both the motives. These are the students who do well in their academic task, but they are normally over concern with their grades. Lastly, failure acceptors are those who are low in both motives. Usually, these are the students who do not care much on their performance. This motive of attempting success and avoiding failure is mainly about the internal and personal contribution to motivation in Atkinson’s theory. [pic] Figure 1: A quadripolar madel of need for achievement From “Self-worth and College Achievement” by M. V. Covinton and B. Roberts in student Motivation, Cognition, and Learning (p.160) as stated in Schunk et al., 2008 To measure the both motives, Atkinson had used the Thematic Apperception Test that was found in 1935 by Henry Murray, Christiana Morgan, and their colleagues at the Harvard Psychological Clinic (Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders, 2010). TAT is designed to be used as a projective measure intended to evaluate a person's patterns of thought, attitudes, observational capacity, and emotional responses to ambiguous test materials. However, Atkinson had altered the test by using different materials in order to measure ones’ motive to approach success. In the test, participants are showed a picture and asked to make up a story with the picture that they’ve been shown. For example, by showing a picture of a man holding a tool near a machine, different stories can be made up depends on the level of motive in approaching success. As for motives in avoiding failure, the studies conducted by Taylor, Spence, and others at Iowa which have employed the Manifest Anxiety Scale (MAS) developed by Taylor (1953) was done by Atkinson (1965). “These studies have to do with the implications of considering the anticipatory emotional reaction called fear, or anxiety, as a source of non-specific drive” (Atkinson, 1965). Then, Test Anxiety Questionnaire (TAQ) by Mandler & Sarason was studied and used. This test is mainly done to measure the level of anxiety when they are in crucial situations such as examinations and tests. Questions such as “how worried are you when you were having the Intelligent Test'” are asked in the instrument. To apply what had been mentioned above into classroom setting, it can be said that, students with high motive of success and/or students who are low in fear for failure will tend to choose task of intermediate level of difficulty. Whereas students who are low in motive of success and/or those who are high in fear of failure will then choose task of both extreme ends, either the very easy task or very difficult task. For easy task, it can be easily understand that students will want to minimize the fear of failure. As for those who choose the extreme difficult task, this is because, these students know that people will focus more on the task rather than the effort that the students had put in to manage the task. Atkinson’s next element, expectancies, or probability of success is “similar to Tolman’s association of responses and rewards” (Schunk et al., 2008). Researches had been done on human participants instead of having it done in the past researches on animals in study this element as “expectancies construct was cognitive in nature and reflected a person’s subjective belief about the probability of success” (Schunk et al., 2008). For this element, Atkinson had used the Ring Toss Game developed by Lewin and also puzzles that had been given to the participants. Participants as mentioned are asked to set a goal for themselves before starting the game. The subjective beliefs of the participants were assumed to represent the influences on the motivation. The last element in Atkinson’s theory, the incentive value of success was defined as “an affect – specifically, pride in accomplishment” (Schunk et al., 2008). Usually, task that are too easy does not stands a value as by being successful in an easy task does not generate pride in an individual. Tasks that are more difficult in the other hand, means more value to individuals and by succeeding in such tasks, people tends to feel proud and think highly of themselves. For example, by solving and easy math task, one will not feel as glad as if a challenging task is solved. Probability of success covaries inversely with task difficulty but is inversely related to incentive value of success. In short, success is high in an easy task but that makes the incentive value of success low as well. In the other hand, even when success is low as the task is difficult, the incentive value of success will be high. To put the theory in numbers, Atkinson had defined incentive value as 1.0 minus the probability of success. This means, if probability of success is high (eg. 0.8), therefore, the incentive value will be as low as 0.2. But, if the probability of success is low (eg. 0.3), the incentive value will be high (0.7). As for the resultant of motivation, Atkinson proposed that the probability of success and incentive value to be multiplied. And with this formula, Atkinson concluded that at an intermediate level of task difficulty where probability of success is 0.5, motivation level remains the highest. (eg. .5 x .5 = .25). In conclusion, early research on expectancy and value construct focused the roles of both cognition and beliefs, in contrast to overt behaviours, drives, needs, and habits which are heavily studied by the behaviourists. The development of cognitive psychology had moved motivational psychology away from a dependence on a simplistic stimulus-response (S-R) psychology to a more cognitive paradigm (Schunk et al., 2008). To formulate motivation, it was important to have both expectancy and value. Without anyone of it, one may not feel as motivated as if both are present. One may expect oneself to do well in a task but not value the success and will less likely to get engaged in it. In the same way, even when one thinks highly of a task but expectation of success is low; one will not want to get involve in it. CURRENT PERSPECTIVE ON THE EXPECTANCY-VALUE THEORIES [pic] Figure 2: A social cognitive expectancy0value model of achievement motivation in Schunk et al., 2008 Researches focus on academic achievement in classroom settings are done by Eccles, Wigfield and their colleagues as a continuous study to Atkinson’s work. The studies done are mainly focus on the students’ expectancies for success academically and their perceived value for academic tasks. Their findings are then concluded into a graph as shown in Figure 2, having the two most important variables being task value and expectancy which was placed in the middle of the graph. Unlike Atkinson, current researchers do not highlight motive but had remained the other two component studied by Atkinson, Expectancy as the probability of success and task value as incentive value in the previous model. However, motives in Atkinson’s model can be part of Affective memories in the new model as it may have the same impact in giving rise to cognitive task value beliefs. The next motivational component shown in the graph will be students’ goals and self-schemas which include students’ short term and long term goals and general self-schemas. As it can be seen in the graph, there is a fine dash line between achievement behavior and motivational beliefs as they are internal, cognitive beliefs of the individual. As for students’ beliefs, it was studied and concluded that perception of social environment and interpretations and attributions for past events has huge influence in the beliefs. Lastly, as the external influence on students’ beliefs, it stands cultural milieu, socializers’ behaviors and past performances and events which were separated in the graph by another dash line. Although how students construct their motivational beliefs is emphasized by the general model, it is assumed that their beliefs are grounded in the larger social and cultural contexts that make up the students’ world (Schunk et al., 2008). The Role of expectancies and Self-perceptions of Ability There are several outcomes and variables that need to be looked into when one is studying on the expectancies and self-perceptions of ability. The three general outcomes that are largely discussed will be, the achievement that includes the students actual performance in their studies and academic tasks; cognitive engagement, how cognitively engaged is the student in the given task, including metacognition, and also self-regulatory regulations. Lastly, choice is another important outcome that discuss on types of choice students make in their academic life, such as, course to be taken, major and enrolment. There are many researches done, with large-scale correlation and they have consistently shown that the strongest predictors of students’ grades in mathematics and English are actually, their self-perceptions of ability and their expectancies for. It was proven that self-perceptions is even more accurate to be used to predict students’ grades instead of using previous grades as a predictors. As the second result of the studies done, researchers have connected students’ expectancies and self-perceptions of ability to their cognitive engagement. And these engagements are not solely about completing the task, but deep processes to be done in learning process. The Role of Task Value Beliefs Unlike Atkinson who examine incentive value as the inverse of probability of success, Battle (1965, 1966) defined attainment value independently as “the importance to the individual of achievement in a given task…[that] should determine the length of his persistence in working at it” (Schunk et al., 2008). Battle had indentified two types of value, Absolute Attainment Value, and Relative Attainment Value. Absolute attainment value will be the importance of the task overall. For example, to complete and succeed in a Science project has its value that stands alone; getting a pass means an internal value to the student. As for relative attainment value, it means the importance of the task relative to the other tasks. Getting As in all the Sciences might value to a particular student as his/her main goal is to be a Scientist and to be a good one, he/she needs to do well in the subjects. According to Battle, Crandall, Katkovsky, and Preston (1962), and also research done by Wigfield and Eccles(1992) both expectancies and attainment values are positively related to persistence (Schunk et al., 2008). Contradicting to Atkinson’s model, Battle found that expectancy and attainment value were positively correlated instead of being inversely correlated. Therefore, he rejected the formula, Incentives value=1.0- Probability of success (Schunk et al., 2008). To argue with that, it was said that students tend to value task that they are able to do well and they expect themselves to do well in those task that the students think as important and valuable. Feather’s Model According to Rokeach (1979), general values were “core conceptions of the desirable within every individual and society” (Schunk et al., 2008). With this, feather integrated it with traditional achievement motivation expectancy-value theory. In Feather’s expectancy-value model, personal values are viewed as the large, general values used to determine the values individuals have for specific tasks, called task values. And in fact, task values should determine achievement behaviours like choice, persistence, and actual performance. All in all, by understanding personal values of students teachers and educators will be able to understand the students and get to know how should things be done and ways of interaction between the individuals in order to generate motivation. Researches done by Feather are mainly on Mathematics and English. As a result, it was found out that students who were high in restrictive control personal values – high importance ratings of clean, obedient, polite, responsible and self controlled personal values have higher task value in Mathematics. And in the other hand, students who were high in prosocial concern – high importance ratings of forgiving, helpful, and loving personal values tends to have higher task value in English. Current Perspective on Task Values Eecles and Wigfield (1995) offered a current perspective on task values and defined achievement task value in terms of four components: Attainment Value, Intrinsic Interest, Utility Value and lastly, Cost Belief. Similar to Battle, Eecles and Wigfield defined attainment value as “the importance of doing well on a task” (Schunk et al., 2008). For example, a student who sees herself as someone who does well in Mathematics and that is her personal value and beliefs, therefore, the attainment value for Mathematics in her will be higher than others who does not see themselves as people who are good in the particular subject. The other component for task value, the intrinsic interest is defined as the enjoyment people experience when doing task, or their subjective interest in the content of a task. (Eecles & Wigfield as stated in Schunk et al., 2008). People who are intrinsically interested in a particular task tend to enjoy the process of completing the task instead of the end result of the completion. These are the people who are persistent and able to do well in the task. Also, tasks are valued more when it is understood that the completion of the task will be useful in the future. For example, one will value piano lessons, practices and examinations as he/she knows that, to become a famous pianist, one needs to go through all the hard work. Lastly, the final component of task value is the cost belief of the students, defined as “the perceived negative aspects of engaging in the task” (Schunk et al., 2008). To perform a task, one normally needs to give up the other task, and in that case, one needs to measure the importance of both the task before selecting the final choice. For example, in order to complete an assignment, the student will not be able to help the father out in gardening, which stands a value for her. In this situation, the student will need to measure which task ‘cost’ more and by giving up either one of the task, what will happen. All four components are assumed to work together to determine the achievement value a task might have for an individual. DEVELOPMENTAL DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTANCIES AND VALUES Expectancy-value research has corroborated two essential generalizations. First, student more possibly to learn more, perform better and exercise more effort, persist longer on academic tasks when they have positive self perceptions of their competence and positive expectancies of success. Second, student who value and are interested in academic tasks are more adaptively engaged in the task, more likely to perform better, learn more and select similar tasks in the future (Schunk et al., 2008). Level and Accuracy of Self-Perceptions of Competence Research had shown a decrease in the mean level of self-perceptions of competence as children move into adolescence (Wigfield, 1994; Watt, 2004). In the cross-sectional survey studies of children's competence beliefs in various academic and non-academic domains, both Eccles et al. (1993) and Marsh (1989) describe linear decreases in children's self-perceptions of competence across the elementary school years, especially in the academic achievement domains. Eccles et al. (1993) found that the largest decrease between sixth grade year and seventh grade year, it is mean that when students move into secondary school from primary school level even though Marsh (1989) reported lowest point to be in eighth or ninth grade. There are a number of explanations for the drop in ability perception as children grow older. First, there is a simple methodological explanation. According to Pintrich and Schunk (1996), most students’ self-perception of competence measurement use some version of a Likert scale that students rate themselves on one of numerous numerical scales from the lowest level of self perceived ability (1) to highest level of self perceived ability (4, 5, 7, 11, or another value depending on the scale). Young children (early to middle elementary grades) are more likely to use endpoint of Likert scale particularly the higher end of the scale (Schunk et al., 2008). The second explanation for the developmental differences in self-perceptions of competence is more substantive and related to internal cognitive psychological mechanisms. There are two issues correlated to the explanation; one is about the accuracy of self-perceptions which refers to how well their self-perception to match with some external, more opposition principle. Another concern is the overall optimistic self-perceptions of younger children (Schunk et al., 2008). Pintrich and Schunk (1996) explained for those who overrated their ability were more likely to perform better and achieve at higher level compare to those who underrated their ability were less perform, more likely to avoid tasks and feel anxiety. Most studies also showed that four and five year old children’s expectancies for success are quite optimistic (Wigfield, 1994). They usually believe that they will do well on the next task, even if they have constantly failed the task. Younger children have less information processing skills to assimilate the information and make social comparison. Besides, they use less comparative standards to judge ability in contrast to older children and adults who use more relative standards (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). For examples, younger children are more focus on task completion (I can write) and older children are more likely to do comparison (I can write faster than other students) while do judging of their competence. Third explanation for decrease in self-perceptions of competence is focus on the changing developmental environmental. Environmental elements that changes are the nature of schools and classroom. Researches showed difference in term of organizational and structural ways will influence students’ self-perceptions of ability (Eccles et al., 1993). Elementary teachers are more in self-contained classroom thus make it more likely to know students better, compare to middle grade teachers are often subject-matter specialists and typically instruct a much larger number of students (Schunk et al., 2008). In Malaysia, some students face culture shock when move into secondary school especially those from different background. Furthermore, change in term of evaluation. Grade of students in junior and senior high classrooms are determine in reference to how other students performed. Student had been assigned to classroom on the basis of competence or result of exam. In contrast, elementary teachers use a simple criterion-mastery system to grade students whereas students are graded based on their performance on tests, projects, worksheets without reference to how others perform (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Eccles et al. (1993) argued that adolescents require reasonably safe and intellectually challenging environment as new opportunities to grow. Developmental Changes in Values Eccles and their colleagues have mentioned some issues in their research in terms of developmental differences in values. First issue is how the difference of the value constructs over the course of development. Eccles and Wigfield (1995) explained that fifth through twelfth graders distinguish among three components: importance, interest and utility. However, their research on 1992 showed children can distinguish two components only – interest and utility/importance in the early elementary grades. Second issue is developmental importance concerns the change in the level of children’s achievement task value (Schunk et al., 2008). Elder children rate the importance, interest and utility for school subjects lower than younger children (Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). Students distinguish expectancy and value beliefs for different domains. For instance, elder children rated sports as more important and interesting to them compare to music, reading, and computer activities. There are two general explanations for the drop in children’s task value beliefs. First explanation is cognitive developmental which focus on internal changes in student’s beliefs and strategies (Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). For instance, belief about the nature of ability change from a more incremental view of ability as changeable to a more realism view of ability as stable and unchangeable whereas children getting elder (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). If students not perform in certain subject such as English, and trait remain the same then they might decrease the perception of the value of English to protect their overall self-worth. Students grow to be more attracted in social comparison with others as students get elder. The second explanation is more experiential and contextual argument about the autonomy of the classroom. Eccles et al. (1993) argued that the desire for autonomy is increasing when children develop to be adolescents. Thus, they suggested give students more opportunity to emphasize higher level of cognitive strategies and exercise self-control when they are in junior high schools. GROUP DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTANCIES AND VALUES Although researchers have found gender and ethnic differences in self-perceptions of competence and value belief, though the trends for gender and ethnic differences in expectancies and values are harder to generalize. Problem faced such as difficulty to evaluate the relative contributions of gender and ethnicity in the samples or analyses in the research which influence by socioeconomic status (SES). Most of the researches were done to compare lower income African American students with middle or upper middle income Caucasian students (Schunk et al., 2008). There is a need for more theoretically based research on gender and ethnic differences. In most cases, when a gender difference is found for self-perceptions of competence it tends to follow gender norms and stereotypes (Schunk et al., 2008). For instances, the research investigated Australian students in grades 7 through 11 which done by Watt (2004) showed boys were good in mathematics and girls were favoring in English. Females do seem to have lower self-perception than males at early stages. Research shows some gender differences in task value but findings vary across studies and age groups (Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). However, there is not much variation in ethnicity for differences in task value. Research done by Graham and colleagues (1998) established some ethnicity and gender effects. Findings showed African American, Hispanic American, and European American girls more admired high-achieving girls. Nevertheless, African American & Hispanic American boys more respected low-achieving boys. In contrast, pattern of European American boys were same with girls whereas more admired high-achieving students. APPLICATION IN EDUCATION A number of researches have done on expectancy, efficacy beliefs and competence which provide diverse suggestions for teachers to apply in classroom. Implications such as helping students develop realistic expectancies for success, changing students’ beliefs about learning and developing positive values (Schunk et al., 2008). Helping Students Develop Realistic Expectancies for Success Teacher help students maintain moderately accurate but high expectations and efficacy and avoid the illusion of incompetence (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Students are motivated to work hard in the tasks and achieve while they believe they can accomplish the task. Help students in developing rational perceptions of their ability by providing accurate feedback to students. For instance, teacher wrote comment on students’ assignment and praise for those doing well in their tasks. At the same time, remain communicate that their skills and competence will continue to build up. Besides, teacher can give assignments and tasks to students at a relatively challenging level but reasonably difficulty. Even though practice on easy tasks is good to build automaticity of skills, children also need to be challenged to be motivated and to learn new skills. Assignment or tasks that given in the classroom should be at a level of difficulty where most of students need to give some effort to complete it. They should be neither too easy nor too difficult (Slavin, 2009). Motivation of students will not achieve a maximum level if they believe that they are likely to get an A no matter what they do. In the same way, motivation of students will be minimal if they feel certain to fail no matter what they do. For example, teachers provide different types of activities over the years such as group assignment, homework, projects, discussion and case studies with differing levels of challenge. Changing Students’ Beliefs about Learning Teachers should encourage students the belief that ability or competence is a controllable and changeable aspect of development (Schunk et al., 2008). Teachers communicate positive high expectation for all students regardless of gender, age, ethnicity and ability level. Naturally there have some children will take longer time than others to master the skills or knowledge. If students believe that they can master the skills with some extra effort or time, they will be more likely to work hard on it. Different types of learning strategies, level of efforts and amount of time spending in study are not same for each individual. For instance, student A has to study in a silent environment while student B has to study in environment with music. In addition, teachers should reduce the amount of relative ability information that is presented to students in public (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Some teacher facilitate social comparison through calling out students’ test scores in classroom or post students’ grades and scores on bulletin board. For those who do not perform well, it is not surprising that they begin to lower their self-perceptions of ability. Suggest keeping the grading information private and using it in assigning final class grade and individual student portfolios for management purposes. Developing Positive Values Helping students to develop positive values about school learning is important to build their interest in the learning, guide them toward taking additional courses and build their expectancies for success indirectly (Schunk et al., 2008). First, recommend justifications for schoolwork that include discussion of the importance and utility value of the learning or task given. Teachers can transmit the messages about the value of the learning to students in classroom. For instances, discuss with students regarding how importance of learning science and mathematics are, not just for learning in school but understanding life outside school and also for keeping certain career options open. Science and mathematics are the compulsory subjects for those who would like to work as engineers and scientist. Moreover, teachers model the interest and value in the content of the unit or lesson. Teachers can model cognitive aspects of a duty, in addition to motivational aspects of both value and interest (Schunk et al., 2008). For instance, Amy is teaching history subject in a high school and the unit she is focusing on includes Independence Day of Malaysia. During the lesson, she tries to link the issues to present-day life and try to think different ways of handling these issues. Finally, teachers try to stimulate students’ interest throughout the chances for choice and control. Interest in learning can be developed while teachers offer the chances for students to implement some choice and control over their learning. For instance, provide different range of topic, difficulty levels of books to students read. BIBLOGRAPHY Atkinson J.W. (1965). An Introduction to Motivation. University of Michigan. New Jersey: D.Van Nostrand. Eccles, J. S. & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 215-225. Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Midgley, C., Reuman, D., Mac Iver, D., and Feldlaufer, H. (1993). Negative effects of traditional middle schools on students’ motivation. The Elementary School Journal, 93(5), 553-574. Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. (2010). Thematic Apperception Test. As retrieved on 28 January 2010 in the world wide web: http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Thematic-Apperception-Test.html Graham, S., Taylor, A. Z., & Hudley, C. (1998). Exploring achievement values among ethnic minority early adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 606-620. Marsh, H. W. (1989). Age and sex effects in multiple dimensions of self-concept: Preadolescence to early adulthood. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 417-430. Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Merrill. Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R. & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. Slavin, R. E. (2009). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (9th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson. Watt, H. M. G. (2004). Development of adolescents’ self-perceptions, values, and task perceptions according to gender and domain in 7th- through 11th-grade Australian students. Child Development, 75(5), 1556-1574. Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49-78. Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12, 265-310.