text:
Motivation and emotion/Book/2010/Student motivation theories

Overview
Student motivation is essential in facilitating a desire to begin to engage in and pursue educational goals (Elliott, Hufton, Willis & Illushin, 2005; Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, 2004; Reeve, 2006). Student motivation is defined as a process where the learners' attention becomes focused on meeting their scholastic objectives and their energies are directed towards realising their academic potential (Christophel, 1999; Lepper, Greene & Nisbett, 1973). Hence, the study of student motivation attracts much attention from the theoretical realm found within the areas of human behavioural analysis (Pintrich, 2003) and education (Deci & Ryan, 1999).

Therefore, this chapter firstly explores theory development as applied to student motivational behaviour. Secondly, major historical contributions in this area are examined, leading to the most prominent advances in student motivational theories seen today. The chapter concludes with a brief summation noting the practical recommendations student motivational theories generate, followed by links and references.

The Vital Process of Theory Construction
Proposed theories can follow one of three options: rejection, acceptance or modification (Fiske, 2004; Kruglanski & Higgins, 2004). Specifically, in considering a proposed theoretical model of student motivation, researchers investigate phenomena that have yet to be considered and generate further exploration and postulate theories in a self-perpetuating cycle (Fiske, 2004). For the ease of explanation, Figure 1 demonstrates the cyclical process of theory development through hypothesis testing.

What Makes a Good Theory?
Fiske (2004) outlines seven criteria in the evaluation of a theoretical model: (1) posits causal relationships (2) is coherent, clear and understandable (3) communicates effectively with logic (4) is parsimonious (5) poses testable hypotheses (6) generates further research and postulates new insights, and (7) has heuristic value when applied practically (Fiske, 2004).

Methods of Empirically Testing Hypotheses Relating to Student Motivation
Table 1 summarises past studies, highlighting the different student motivational research methodology. Additionally, Table 1 underscores the vast amount of interest in the area of student motivation. Table 1 also highlights student motivational research which exclusively focuses on assessing a learner's behaviour via task engagement, behavioural observation and self-report measures. However, research that narrowly focuses on these specific kinds of behaviour has led to much criticism (Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, 2004). Although these methods of assessing behaviour have been described as overly subjective in assessing motivational behaviour (Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, 2004) they are nevertheless the most preferred methods that adhere well to the demands found within educational settings (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Table 1. Measurements Used in Student Motivational Research

{{Hide in print|

Quiz
{What were three of the seven components outlined by Fiske (2004) when considering the notion of good theory development for psychology: - Be convoluted, be pragmatic and posit complicated relationships. - Be clear, spur on further research and posit complicated relationships. + Be parsimonious, hold heuristic value, and communicate ideas effectively. - None of the above.
 * type=""}

{One noticeable research method of assessing student motivation as describe in Table 1 was... - Researchers used brain imagery/neurological techniques to assess levels of motivation. - Researchers used task engagement as a main method to assess levels of student motivation. + Researchers used behavioural measures to assess levels of student motivation. }} {{Hide in print|
 * type=""}

Feature Box
}}

Common Misconceptions Involving Student Motivation
Christophel (1990) highlighted five commonly held misconceptions about the notion of student motivation as well as empirically based research that addressed each belief in order to demystify these somewhat erroneous misconceptions. Hence, Table 2 consolidates Christophel’s (1990) important information together with current research addressing these five inaccurate (but commonly held) notions surrounding student motivation.

Table 2. Misconceptions about Theories Relating to Student Motivation Note. Adapted from "The relationship among teacher immediacy behaviours, student motivation and learning", by D. M. Christophel, 1990, Communication Education, 39, 323-340.

Andragogy and Pedagogy
Developmental differences in the regulatory processes and goal-directed behaviour a student demonstrates is largely determined by the educator’s understandings of andragogy and pedagogy (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Pew, 2007; Tolutiene & Domarkiene, 2010). Andragogy and pedagogy operate primarily on philosophical principles (Pew, 2007). Andragogy has been defined as the teaching strategy utilised to educate adult learners (Pew, 2007) including high-school and college level students (Tolutiene & Domarkiene). Pedagogical practice is the process involved in the teaching of younger students (Tolutiene & Domarkiene). Researchers Deci and Ryan suggest differences in an individual’s motivation occur not only due to obvious physiological and psychological differences seen among learner's needs, but to a large extent are mediated by the ways in which teachers address their differing physiological needs successfully. For example, the neural capacities that younger children possess are quite limited compared to older college students (Stellar, 1994). However, as neural development progresses the integration of the child’s cortical responses and growth in hypothalamic, amygdala, temporal and frontal cortical areas demonstrate enhanced synaptic activity (Stellar). The neural growth translates to motivational behaviour as the growing students now display a greater capability to concentrate, to persist, to focus and to direct their energies towards educational tasks. Consequently, functional theories that account for the wide variance seen in student motivational processes often demonstrate an understanding of the importance of andragogy and pedagogy in stimulating student motivational behaviour among their learners and have greater applicability and versatility (Pew).

Specifically, Pew’s (2007) theoretical supposition concerning student motivation observes the principles of andragogy as originally posited by Germane-educated [[w:Alexander Kapp|Alexander Kapp] in 1833, and proposes five concepts that are hypothesised to prompt and then support learning processes observed among older students (see Table 3). Additionally, Table 3 includes concepts that relate to Knowles' (1973) Andragogic Theory of Student Motivation as they correspond with the ideas presented by Pew.

In contrast, a pedagogical framework of motivation analysis of younger children’s learning shows students are more likely to engage in educational tasks because of the intrinsic value they offer (Chan, 1994; Lepper, Corpus & Iyengar, 2005). Younger learners operate on pleasure seeking principles that primarily aim to satisfy their physiological needs and psychological desires (such as interest) and hence this is reflected in the way in which they use motivational behaviour to approach educational tasks (Chan). Therefore, the pedagogical implications for younger students are aimed at using younger students' natural curiosities to motivate their learning whilst at school (Lepper, Corpus & Iyengar, 2005). Furthermore, as learners develop, the motivational style they demonstrate has an inverse relationship to that of extrinsic motivation (Lepper, Corpus and Iyengar, 2005). That is, older students, when compared to their younger counterparts, are more inclined to focus on extrinsic incentives such as achieving a certain grade compared with engaging in academic tasks because of the intrinsic value they hold. Hence, older rather than younger students are more inclined to become susceptible to the costs involved with not achieving their desired outcome, such as learned helplessness.

Learned helplessness is a concept that pertains to a student’s amotivational state, where there is a demonstrable stagnancy in learner’s efforts to pursue their educational objectives (Peterson & Seligman, 1984). Additionally, learned helplessness is seen as the polar opposite of the notion of student motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Clearly, it is crucially important for student motivation theorists to consider teaching methodologies such as andragogy and pedagogy with practical applications for educators and students. Pew’s (2007) theory is built on the premise that andragogy and pedagogy are of genuine interest when referring to student motivational behaviour, and provide important concepts for consideration for future research in model formulations.

Table 3. A Merging of Pew (2007) and Knowles' (1973) Assertions Related to Theories Concerning Student Motivation

''Note. Adapted from "Andragogy and Pedagogy as Foundational Theory for Student Motivation in Higher Education", by S. Pew, 2007, Student Motivation, 2'', 14-25.

Early Perspectives on Student Motivation Theories: The Grand Theories
Historically, many theories have shaped our knowledge of students' goal-directed energies, the focus and persistent efforts students demonstrate, and choice behaviour observed when engaging with and performing educational tasks. Figure 3 demonstrates a concise picture of the major historical contributions in the areas of both psychology and education and helps to outline important notions concerning student motivational behaviour.

Philosophical Origins
In early 300 BC Socrates taught his understandings of human agency to his student Plato (Cooper, 1984). However, it was a student motivational process that Plato facilitated within Socrates which led to the development of such notions as the reciprocity of human learning (Cooper, 1984). Aristotle offered explanations as to why people engage in an activity in terms of its intrinsic value compared to the gains of completing the activity (Reiss, 2004). Aristotle's approach is seen as an early definition of the motives that explain human agency by using a means versus ends analysis (Reiss). There is much similarity between Aristotle’s philosophical stance introducing the concept of motives and the later theoretical development of internal versus external drives (Reiss).

Although, by today’s standards these early philosophical concepts seem somewhat out-dated, the philosophical ideas have provided important foundations for the area of motivation analysis (Cooper, 1984) and in particular in the area of student motivational behaviour (Reiss, 2004). For example, Reiss noted that these early foundations lead to the theoretical movement that tried to specifically differentiate between internal versus external motives, and to his own theoretical postulation outlining 16 internalised drives. Therefore, these early philosophical models are introduced as the necessary starting point from which to begin the exploration into theories of student motivation.

 Three Philosophers and Their Early Contributions to Student Motivation Theories  Note. Adapted from "Plato’s Theory of Human Motivation", by J.M. Cooper, 1984, History of Philosophy Quarterly, 1, 3-21, and from "Multifaceted Nature of Intrinsic Motivation: The Theory of 16 Basic Desires", by S. Reiss, 2004, Review of General Psychology, 8, 179-193.

Drive and Instinct Theories
Drive theories (Hull, 1931; Freud, 1922) reject the notion of free-choice behaviour and suggest that more primitive mechanisms operate to drive individuals to fulfil an internal state of equilibrium (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001). Drive theory was originally introduced by Hull but the sentiment of the motivational processes he outlined has been carried forth into other drive theories of motivation as it pertains to learning, and does not directly pertain to theories of student motivation. In fact the early studies on drive theory were carried out on goal-directed activities observed in rats (Hull). In situations where a reward was present (versus non-reward conditions), rats proceeded to learn the route of the maze faster (Hull). Hull inferred the rats’ behaviour was a motivational response stimulated by the rats’ desire for satiation and inferred that receiving the reward, the rat returned to a state of inner homeostasis. The idea that reward (versus non-reward) conditions help facilitate the learning process is evident in the current theory of achievement motivation of student learning (Meece & Miller, 1999). Arguably, achievement theory is mainly concerned with outcomes rather than directly relating to the process of student motivation (Meece & Miller, 1999).

Similar theoretical sentiments of motivational theories are exemplified by Freud (1922). Freud generally stated that people are motivated to fulfil instinctual drives once they become psychologically aware of them. However, there are many questions concerning the empirical validity of unconscious drives that were presented by Freud (e.g. Pintrich, 2003; Westen, 1998). Clearly, there is difficulty in testing students' unconscious motives as they are largely unaware of them (Pintrich). Additionally, the conjecture concerning some of the motives presented in Freud’s theory prompted theorists within the field of education to question whether there are possibly different processes at play that better explain the behavioural motivational response an individual experiences (Westen). Although, generally, the broad field of human motivational behavioural analysis has reaped the benefits of such theoretical postulations (Westen), the area that strictly pertains to achievement motivation as observed in student behaviour, does not.

Arousal Theory Applied to Student Motivation
Arousal theory as applied to student motivation follows a similar line of thinking to that found in drive theories of motivation (Covington, 2000). That is, individuals reach a state of internal disequilibrium because of the basic need for intellectual arousal which serves to prompt a behavioural response that is focused on returning the person to a state of inner harmony (Covington, 2000). However, unlike previous drive theories, arousal theories do translate to the area of student motivation in explaining why students persist with their studies in the face of many distractions and over many years (Dornyei, 2000). Furthermore, concepts that arousal theory asserts have been used to explain motives such as curiosity, learning and play (Reiss, 2004). These behaviours, according to arousal theory, all stem from a basic instinctual drive and are the necessary requirements for student motivation (Reiss, 2004). Therefore, arousal theory is one of the more practically applicable theories that have been offered within the area of drive theory.

Behaviourist Perspectives
In 1911, Edward Thorndike presented the principle of the law-of-effect and re-focused theoretical efforts to explain the influence of outcomes on shaping behaviour (Tolman, Hall & Brenall, 1932). The law-of-effect proposes that organisms are motivated to express goal-directed behaviour following an experience of trial and error learning in which the outcome of their initial response is either successful (satisfying) and increases motivation or annoying and hence motivation slowly diminishes (Tolman, Hall & Brenall, 1932).

Later, it was the behavioural theorist Skinner’s (1968) animal learning experiments that became the crux of the motivational strategies utilised by teachers to stimulate student engagement and goal-accomplishment (Deci, Koestner & Ryan, 1999). Skinner (1968) proposed the notion of extrinsic reinforcement to facilitate motivated behaviour among learners. This was expanded further by Frank Logan (Spence & Spence, 1967). During this time, research indicated that external rewards or incentives were strong and necessary elements to prompt a motivational response among students (Spence & Spence). This process was coined extrinsic motivation (Spence & Spence). Extrinsic motivation is defined as the means by which an external incentive is applied to enhance a student’s desire to learn (Pew, 2007). Skinner believed that intrinsic motivation was a difficult process to objectify and test and, within his school of thought known as radical behaviourism, rejected the notion that internal mechanisms can be measured empirically (Skinner). Therefore, it was thought through external stimulus and overt behavioural response associations that the student motivational process can be empirically measured and tested (Skinner). It is important to note the contributions gained from these early understandings. It is only through these processes that we can hope to build solid theories of student motivational behaviour.

The Influence of Humanism
Humanism perceives human beings as active participants within their own environment (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Humanism views behaviourist theories on motivation as reductionist by reducing intricate behavioural processes to stimulus-response associations (Tomal, 2007). The psychoanalytic theorists examined unconscious motives that were seemingly impossible to scientifically verify, and had very little practical application in settings such as schools (Tomal). Therefore, humanist theorists began the third wave of psychology following that of behaviourism and psychoanalysis (Baumeister & Leary). Humanistic theorists incorporated a holistic understanding of human nature and provided strategies that not only facilitated student motivation but importantly could be practically implemented (Elliott, Hufton, Willis & Illushin, 2005).

John Dewey prompted the theoretical development in the humanist field related to educational psychology and existential psychology in the late 1960s (Tomal, 2007). However, the most significant contribution to the humanistic perspective was developed by Maslow (1970) with his notion of the hierarchy of human needs. Figure 4 illustrates Maslow's (1970) hierarchy of needs detailing each stage in terms of the desires individuals must satisfy. Maslow grouped these five levels into two further clusters of deficiency needs (including those needs at levels two and three of the pyramid) and growth needs (the upper three levels of needs).

Maslow (1970) argues that when one is faced with complexities of life, we may at times be forced to satisfy previously unmet desires. Although Maslow proposed we are all motivated towards the peak of the pyramid in a bid to reach the fifth and final stage known as self-actualisation, not many people are able to fulfil this last desire, as lower level needs often resurface.

Maslow’s (1970) principles, have wide spread applications especially in educational settings (Elliott, Hufton, Willis & Illushin, 2005). Additionally, educators who want to facilitate student motivation understand that at times pupils move forwards and backwards within the levels as needs arise (Elliott et al, 2005). A modern day example of the application of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in schools is seen in the provision of breakfast clubs for students whose hunger may challenge their capacity to sustain attention and energy when trying to engage and complete an educational activity (Tomal, 2007). Another example of using the hierarchical organisation of needs is demonstrated by teachers providing opportunities for students to work collaboratively on class projects, as their needs for belonging and acceptance are met (Baumeister & Leary, 1995).

Maslow’s (1970) theory provides conspicuous and distinct understandings of general motivational processes, as well as a means of empirically investigating the ideas within the theory and offers rewarding insights into student motivational behaviour in a practical sense. However, like most theoretical models of motivation, Maslow provided future scope for further research (Kiel, 1999).

Early Social-Cognitive Concepts within Theories of Student Motivation
The notion of oneself in reflection of one’s social place in the world is a social-cognitive rather than cognitive perspective and was originally introduced by theorist William James in the late 1800s (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001). The notion of self-efficacy serves as the intermediary functional device in an individual’s use of self-regulated mechanisms and is largely considered a metacognitive construct (Zimmerman & Schunk). Self-efficacy involves the self-evaluation of an individual’s perceived skills in reflection of the situation they are experiencing (Bandura). Bandura is the most notable contributor in postulating ideas within the social learning theoretical framework that are applicable to the notion of student motivation (Lancellotti & Thomas, 2009).

Bandura (1982) presupposes there is a rich interplay within the dynamic process of motivation as the social environment helps in providing feedback about an individual’s successful (or unsuccessful) attempts to use their skills. The three part process outlined by Bandura (1999) is known as reciprocal determinism and is illustrated in Figure 5.

Self-efficacy can be conceptualised along a continuum with self-doubt at the opposing end to self-efficacy (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001). Students are presupposed to move along the continuum according to the many different experiences they encounter in reaction to their perceived skills (Bandura, 1999). Researchers indicate self-efficacious beliefs are a powerful influence on the motivational process (Lancellotti & Thomas, 2009). University students who believe that they possess the necessary skills as specified in course description have greater likelihood of attaining higher than average grades on competition of the unit (Lancellotti & Thomas). Researchers' findings suggest self-efficacious beliefs, student motivation and course descriptions are good indicators for predicting student effort because they stimulate attitudinal processes that are future-oriented towards achievement outcomes (Lancellotti & Thomas). Additionally, other research supports Lancellotti and Thomas’ notion that self-efficacious cognitions feed a person’s beliefs concerning self-competence to such a large degree that approach-behaviour toward goals is highly correlated (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Social feedback is one means by which students gather information as to their skill success during a collaborative learning process (Reeve & Deci, 1996). Hence, self-efficacy is both a social and cognitive requirement.

Self-Determination Theory
The theory of self-determination emerged from the ashes of behaviourism (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Self-determination theory revolves around behaviourists' notion of intrinsic motivation with a strong positive relationship between students’ feelings of autonomy and perceptions of choice, perceived competence, and relatedness to experiences (Reeve & Deci, 1996). Although there is much conjecture over the reliance of perceived choice as a predictor of a student’s self-determination behaviours (Reeve, Nix & Hamm, 2003), other researchers have found a strong positive correlation exists between self-determination and internal locus of causality and volitation as influenced by students’ perceived choice (Reeve, et al. 2003). For example, the concept known as locus of causality as it pertains to motivational drives, parallels the process of autonomy as outlined in the self-determination theory (Grolnick & Ryan, 1987) while the concept of competence (within self-determination theory) strikes a remarkable similarity to that of self-efficacy as proposed by Bandura (1999). Nevertheless, research findings consistently demonstrate that self-determination is the vital ingredient that prompts a student’s motivational response in postulating such a unified theory relating directly to the area of student motivation (Reeve & Deci, 1996). The three main psychological needs outlined by Ryan and Deci in formulating the self-determination theory of motivation remains firstly autonomy, secondly relatedness and thirdly perceived competence (see Figure 6).

Self-determination theory asserts the major problem currently seen within schools is over-dependence on extrinsic motivational devices, which has led to the current erosion of students’ natural intrinsic drives. As such, students today are often forced to look towards outcomes and as such have become teacher-dependent, awaiting instruction and constant approval from the educator (Ryan & Deci, 1996). Students no longer seem to be able to just enjoy the process of learning out of natural curiosity and inquisitiveness while regulating their own development and hence many students display off-task behaviour (Reiss, 2004, Ryan & Deci, 2006).

Grolnick and Ryan (1987) examined the motivational influences of autonomy among 91 fifth grade primary school children. The researchers noted the influence of controlling versus non-controlling teachers in regard to a learning exercise (Grolnick & Ryan). Children in the non-controlling environment were allowed the freedom to choose from a select group of tasks after receiving the initial teacher-direction, conducive to the notion of autonomy (Grolnick & Ryan). Conversely the children who were subjected to a teacher-led and teacher-monitored rote learning exercise provided an environment that was more controlling (Grolnick & Ryan). Results from this study indicated that students' perceived choice over their learning experience fuelled their psychological need for autonomy (and relatedness) as assessed by learning outcomes of the experiment and children’s self-report measures (Grolnick & Ryan). In contrast, the group of children who experienced the controlling environment subsequently rated the learning experiences as highly stressful. The children in the controlling condition had slower progress toward the learning objective and performed at a less than average standard within the task (Grolnick & Rya). Other studies have recorded similar results and support the theory of self-determination which is currently regarded as being the most practically applicable for educators (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Reeve, Bolt & Cai, 1999; Reeve & Jang, 2006; Reeve, Jang, Carrell, Jeon & Barch, 2004).

Attribution Theory
Attribution theory posits that motivational drives operate from within our cognitive processes (Weiner, 1985).

Table 4. Weiner's (1965) Attributional Concepts and Examples

Note. Adapted from "An Attributional Theory of Achievement Motivation and Emotion" by B. Weiner, 1985, Psychological Review, 92, 584-573.

Table 5. Weiner's Theory Presented According to Perceived Locus of Causality and Attribution Regarding Controllability

Note. Adapted from "An Attributional Theory of Achievement Motivation and Emotion", by B. Weiner,1985, Psychological Review, 92, 548-573.

Heider in 1958, then [[w:Attribution_theory|Weiner in 1974] offered the first cognitive perspective of achievement, known as attribution theor (Weiner, 1985). Attribution theory states that an individual's thoughtful interpretations of event experiences give the individual insight into whether they are successful in mastering their environment (Weiner). This led to the development of concepts related to self and cognitive perspectives of control over one’s environment as posed by Rotter (1990) in his theory of locus of control and White’s (1959) earlier notions of mastery control. Hence, attribution theory pertaining to the process of student motivation has historical origins in other psychological theories of motivational behaviour.

Weiner’s (1985) attributional theory regarding student motivation suggests that individuals perceive successes and failures in terms of casual structures that share common elements and are mediated by emotional responses and direct motivational energies. The common elements include locus, stability, controllability, intentionality and globality (Weiner, 1985) and are presented in Table 5.

Researchers have argued that it is difficult to discern the exact cognitions that lead to the establishment of longer-lasting thoughts concerning how an individual predicts their future learning experiences (Kelley & Michela, 1980). However, there is much conjecture about this (Tolman, Hall & Bretnall, 1932). Theorists have included behavioural measures in repostulating the attributional processes and this offers a method of assessing the cognitive processes (Kelley & Michela, 1980). Additionally, researchers Kelley and Michela (1980) diagrammatically outline the range of theoretical postulations differentiating attribution from attributional theories of motivational processing.

Table 6 shows a matrix demonstrating how Weiner’s (1985) causal elements influence a student’s thinking and hence their motivation to approach and engage in learning while at school.

Table 6. Practical Examples of Excuses Student's Give for Failure Depending on their Attributional Style Note. Adapted from Educational Psychology (p.423), by J.W. Santrock, 2004, New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.

Weiner’s (1985) two most influential elements of locus of control are compared with the individual’s belief in their sense of personal control. For example, in educational settings students may perceive they have both ability and control in a situation and hence are defined as motivated students (Weiner). However, if students perceive that no matter what effort they put into a learning task it is ultimately left to luck, fate or the teacher’s current mood to determine their grade, they may feel less motivation to engage in an educational activity (Weiner). Weiner’s notions of the level of task difficulty in negating student motivation is perhaps one of the more interesting aspects Deci and Ryan (2000) adopt in their self-determination theory. Similar to Deci and Ryan’s notion of competence, Weiner states that if a student thinks he/she lacks the skills needed to achieve a set task but is left feeling responsible for favourable outcomes, the feelings of anxiety that are generated decrease his/her motivational response.

Another similarity in the notion of attributions in influencing approach behaviours is seen currently in Csikszentmihalyi’s (1997) concept of positive psychology and the notion of flow as applied to the study of learning and student motivation. Flow is defined as a condition in which an individual feels there is a close match between their perceived skills and the level of challenge an activity offers (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). Similar to Weiner’s (1985) hypothesised outcomes illustrated within attribution theory, Csikszentmihalyi (1997) presents flow as one of many outcomes that arise from a balance between challenge and the necessary skills to deal with such a challenge.

One of the practical implementations of such a theory could be for educators to be wary of the level of task difficulty of activities they pose, the self-perceptions of abilities that students may hold and find a means to match student activities to their needs in these two very important areas. Tomal (2007) suggests using attribution theory to help students who demonstrate low task-engagement. A child who experiences success may then be able to readjust their perceptions of their skill level and perceived control and are more likely in future to demonstrate motivated behaviour than a child who continually experiences failure (Tomal). Weiner’s (1985) theory gives educators rich insights into the motivational processes and hence, attributional theory has wide application to the area of student motivational behaviour. {{Hide in print|

Quiz
{If a young student, Amy, had the attributions of no control and perceptions she was reliant on an external locus to influence her decisions, she would be highly influenced by: + chance/luck. - her ability that she thought she could depend on. - the amount of effort she thought she put into a task. - none of the above.
 * type=""}

{The level of task difficulty can... + determine task-engagement and effect self-perception of student skills. - have no effect on student motivation. - only effect quality of student scholarship. }}
 * type=""}

Implications for Educators and Students
Table 7 Transforming Theories into Practice

Note. Adapted from "Educational Psychology" by J.W. Santrock, 2004, New York, USA: McGraw-Hill Publications.

Summary

 * There is a broad field of motivational theories and numerous theories on student motivational behaviour which are equal in scope but narrower in focus.
 * There are practical ramifications which propel behavioural process theories for both adult and child learners.
 * The development of the theoretical process is cyclical and necessary to provide scope for future research and a further means of gaining practical recommendations.
 * Students need opportunities to reach their fullest potential as contributing human beings. Theories of student motivation offer insight for educators to make the learning process engaging and desirable and to thereby maximise positive school experiences for students.

Historically
 * There are many theories within psychology that focus on student motivational processes.
 * From philosophical origins, behaviouristic perspectives such as Skinners’ radical behaviourism, to Maslow's (1970) hierarchy of needs and self-actualisation revealed insights into the needs-based components of students' motivations which are currently in use today.
 * Behaviourists paved the way for future research (and theoretical postulation) in investigating the notion of extrinsic/intrinsic drives in student motivation
 * Self-efficacy is a major social and cognitive component necessary for the student motivational process and developed from and added to Bandura’s (1999) theory of reciprocal determinism

Current Theories
 * A number of previously defined concepts (such as locus of causality and self-efficacy mechanisms), parallel those concepts presented within the self-determination theory of student motivation.
 * Autonomy has been found to strongly relate to the idea of perceived-choice.
 * Competence is heavily reliant upon feedback, which implies that the social environment can facilitate motivational responses among students and educators.
 * Attributional theory, as proposed by Weiner (1997), is applicable today in helping students approach, engage and pursue tasks by creating attitudinal responses that facilitate motivational behaviours.
 * Attributional theory demonstrates similarities to the notion of optimal flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997) and self-efficacy (Bandura, 1982) in that perceived beliefs are maintained by students' reflections of their skills and influences their subsequent motivational patterns.
 * Attributional theory illustrates a means of unifying related concepts to explain student motivational behaviour.

Test Your Understandings of Student Motivation Theories
These open-ended questions are designed to prompt your thinking around those concepts previously mentioned within the area of student motivation theories. The answers can be found within the text after you have digested the material presented.

{{Hide in print|
 * 1) Why is it beneficial to investigate student motivational theories?
 * 2) What is Socratic questioning and how can it facilitate a motivational response from students?
 * 3) What is an external motive?
 * 4) What is intrinsic motivation?
 * 5) What is the difference between student motivation and the learning processes?
 * 6) How does the notion of self-efficacy help promote a motivational response among student?
 * 7) Define the three concepts presented in the theory of self-determination.
 * 8) How do you think self-efficacy relates to attributional theory?

Key Terms
The following are some key terms for you to define. For example the concept of the Law-of-Effect has been defined in the following way: Law-of-effect: ''Edward Thorndike’s law states that responses that produce a satisfying or pleasant state of affairs in a particular situation are more likely to occur again in a similar situation. Conversely, responses that produce a discomforting, annoying or unpleasant effect are less likely to occur again in the situation.''

Define the following:

Amotivation:

Autonomy:

Attribution Theory:

Behaviouristic Perspective:

Competence:

Drive:

External Incentive:

Extrinsic Motivation:

Flow:

Humanistic Perspective:

Intrinsic Motivation:

Learning:

Learned helplessness:

Optimal experience:

Self-Efficacy:

Student Motivation:

Student Engagement:

Task Engagement:

Theory:

Click here to see definitions of the key terms

Links
Australian Government Website on Student Motivation Self-determination Theory Self-Efficacy in School Helping Facilitate Motivational Behaviours Among Students Attribution Theory }}
 * 1) Student Motivation Chapter Overview: 5 Minute Overview on Student Motivation Theories as Presented in this Chapter
 * 2) Youtube Presentation Advertising Digital Media for Use Among Students 5 Seconds of this clip appears in the online multimedia presentation summary of this cahpter (abovementioned)
 * 3) Australian Government Website on Student Motivation:
 * 1) Self-Determination Theory:
 * 1) Self-Efficacy in School:
 * 1) Practical Ideas on Facilitating Motivational Behaviour Among Students:
 * 1) Weiner’s (1985) Attribution Theory:


text:
User:Rachelle21

E-portfolio (blog)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User:Rachelle21


text:
User talk:Rachelle21

 Hello Rachelle21, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. Jtneill - Talk - c 10:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

 Hi! Our name is Vicky-Verity. We are twins and are Wikiversity mascots. We think Wikiversity is a great place to learn and make friends (when we aren't sleeping). Leave us a message!

Motivation and emotion
Hi. Welcome to the unit and to Wikiversity! I look forward to learning with you and I hope you find the topic and the unit rewarding. Please feel free to let me know if you have any suggestions or would like help at any point along the way. Sincerely, James Neill, -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:15, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rachelle21


text: Template:User vi

title: Template:User vi


text:
Category:User vi

cs:Kategorie:User vi

title: Category:User vi


text:
Category:User vi-N

cs:Kategorie:User vi-N

title: Category:User vi-N


text:
User talk:Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy

 Hello Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy 11:05, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy


text:
User:Mixie

Tutorial 1
Well here I am, yet another new learning experience. Yet another set of computer jargon I need to familiarise myself with! Hopefully this all works as I am the sort of person that "flies by the seat of my pants!"

I am here as part of my unit on Motivation and Emotion and even though doing this is not an extremely emotional experience for me, (in terms of the computer stuff - not the unit itself) the emotional part is challenging in terms of expressing my personal learning journey in a public forum.

So this is my hello and I will be back later to add more, this was just a test to see how I went! hi Cyber buddies!!

Well here I am back again. I am having a very frustrating time with this whole wikiversity thing - just a huge learning curve in terms of trying to navigate around totally unfamiliar territory. Maybe someone can give me some clues on how to easily access my book chapter so I can contribute, then find my way back here easily....I'm so used to menu driven things, user friendly things....

In the meantime I will post my contributions on tutorial 1. As always in a new class, there is difficulty in getting to know new people very quickly. We had a welcome and an overview of how the tutorials would run. Then we were broken up into groups according to thumb size, how long at UC, favorite fast food, who we voted for and how we had felt emotionally that day.

The first threee questions were OK, but the voting one I felt awkward as voting is a very personal thing, and I am one of those people that doesn't necessarily like to disclose such information. As for how we felt emotionally that day, I was not very happy as I had attended a funeral that day, however I knew I would feel better after interacting with other people which would take my mind off things.

Once we got into small groups, we had an interesting discussion about motivation and self sabotage. Why do people who have potential and talent self sabotage? Are they afraid they will be too good? Afraid of success? We were asked to define motivation and emotion and came up with some great definitions.

We came up with: motivation is: directed energy (to do something important), to desire, want or need something. to accomplish/achieve something, to feel a certain way,it can be intrinsic or extrinsic. Also can vary in strength according to priorities.

Emotion is: A state of mind, thoughts that affect feelings, extrinsic forces and events affect how you feel, also is in different strengths and can have a physiological effect.

Both emotion and motivation are interchangeable, change in intensity, the effect of one can change the other. sorry, gotta get used to signing off...Mixie 03:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Tutorial 2
We had a discussion about Maslow and the needs heirarchy. Our discussion was around what happens if the most important needs are taken away, are all the others forgotten? Organisations of needs What conceptualisations or organisations of needs are there? e.g., Maslow's hierarchy of needs

What are the weaknesses of such "hierarchical models"?

At the top of Maslow's list (or the bottom of the triangle) are the physiological needs. the things all organisms needs purely to function in it's most basic form. We all need food, water, shelter, air, sleep and I would add here freedom from pain.

Then, this is where I think Maslow has it right,but in my opinion we need companionship, love and safety before we need money and employment. Money can buy material things, but without some companionship or close relations, it would end up being pretty lonely as humans are social creatures. If one has someone to share the wealth with, it makes it much more worthwhile. I think humans are very motivated by material things (or money) and praise and recognition.

Another example of this is how important does family become when everything else is taken away, say in a natural disaster like the Victorian bushfires, or Hurricane Katrina? The Katrina victims huddled in a huge football dome as it was the only place where they could shelter while they waited to be rescued. As events unfolded, their safety and the safety of their families took priority, especially when there was no police to control looters and rapists. The innocent were at the mercy of the gangs and those who thought it was their right to take everything, including other people's dignity - no one was spared, even children.

Ways of creating hyperlinks in Wikiversity:
 * External link
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_Hurricane_Katrina_in_New_Orleans
 * Effects of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans
 * Internal link
 * Effects of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans
 * Effects of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans
 * More info Help:Links

It seems incredible to me how a city so modern can fall apart very quickly when everything is thrown into chaos. it really did become survival of the fittest. Mixie 01:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC) What are needs?

Define and discuss Organisations of needs

What conceptualisations or organisations of needs are there? e.g., Maslow's hierarchy of needs Maslow's hierarchy of needs.png

Brain structure and motivation
 * 1) Handout: Diagram of the brain showing the anatomic position of key brain structures involved in motivation and emotion (mid-saggital)
 * 2) Identify specific neural structures and their motivational function - in order to explain the neural bases of as many motivational states as you can. Do this individually, discuss as a small group, and then share key points with class (see answers):
 * 3) Reticular formation
 * 4) Medial forebrain bundle
 * 5) Hypothalamus
 * 6) Amygdala
 * 7) Septal area
 * 8) Hippocampus
 * 9) Cerebral cortex (Frontal lobes)

Neurotransmitters and motivation Identify the motivational role of key hormones.
 * 1) Dopamine: Generates good feelings associated with reward
 * 2) Dopamine is released when anticipating future pleasant events.
 * 3) Dopamine release decreases when events unfold worse than they were expected to.
 * 4) Dopamine release continues if things go well.
 * 5) Dopamine release increases when things go better than expected.
 * 6) Serotonin: Influences mood and emotion
 * 7) Norepinephrine: Regulates arousal and alertness
 * 8) Endorphin: Inhibits pain, anxiety and fear by generating good feelings to counter these negative feelings (Reeve, 2009, p. 63)

We did a puzzle to match the correct areas of the brain in the appropriate spot.

Hormones and motivation Identify the motivational role of key hormones.
 * 1) Cortisol: “Stress hormone”: Associated with poor intellectual functioning, negative affect, and poor health outcomes
 * 2) Testosterone: Associated with high sexual motivation: Underlies the mating effort
 * 3) Oxytocin: Motivates seeking the counsel, support, and nurturance of others during times of stress: Bonding hormone “Tend and befriend stress response”

Physiological needs
 * 1) Review and discuss key points from the "Physiological needs" chapter and lecture
 * 2) Need
 * 3) Need Structure
 * 4) Fundamentals of Regulation
 * 5) Physiological Need
 * 6) Psychological Drive
 * 7) Homeostasis
 * 8) Negative Feedback
 * 9) Multiple Inputs/Multiple Outputs
 * 10) Intra-Organismic Mechanisms
 * 11) Extra-Organismic Mechanisms
 * 12) The Homeostatic Mechanism: The Wisdom of the Body
 * 13) Thirst
 * 14) Physiological Regulation
 * 15) Environmental Influences
 * 16) Hunger
 * 17) Short-Term Appetite
 * 18) Long-Term Energy Balance
 * 19) Comprehensive Model of Hunger Regulation
 * 20) Environmental Influences
 * 21) Set Point or Settling Points?
 * 22) Sex
 * 23) Physiological Regulation
 * 24) Facial Metrics
 * 25) Sexual Scripts
 * 26) Sexual Orientation
 * 27) Evolutionary Basis of Sexual Motivation
 * 28) Failures to Self-Regulate Physiological Needs

Psychological needs
 * 1) Review and discuss key points from the "Psychological needs" chapter and lecture
 * 2) Psychological Needs
 * 3) Organismic Approach to Motivation
 * 4) Person-Environment Dialectic
 * 5) Organismic Psychological Needs
 * 6) Autonomy
 * 7) The Conundrum of Choice
 * 8) Supporting Autonomy
 * 9) Benefits from Autonomy Support
 * 10) Two Illustrations
 * 11) Competence
 * 12) Involving Competence
 * 13) Supporting Competence
 * 14) Relatedness
 * 15) Involving Relatedness: Interaction with Others
 * 16) Satisfying Relatedness: Perception of a Social Bond
 * 17) Communal and Exchange Relationships
 * 18) Internalization
 * 19) Putting It All Together: Social Contexts that Support Psychological Needs
 * 20) Engagement
 * 21) What Makes for a Good Day?
 * 22) Vitality
 * 23) Discussion: What are your favourite "flow" experience activities? What are the subjective qualities (e.g., emotions, cognitions) of your flow states? Discuss with your group, identifying the skill level and challenge level for these activities? Do you think your experience is consistence with the "flow theory" (optimal balancing of skill and challenge).

Social needs
 * 1) Review and discuss key points from the "Social needs" chapter and lecture
 * 2) Acquired Needs
 * 3) Quasi-Needs
 * 4) Social Needs
 * 5) How Social Needs Motivate Behavior
 * 6) Achievement
 * 7) Origins of the Need for Achievement
 * 8) Atkinson's Model
 * 9) Dynamics-of-Action Model
 * 10) Conditions that Involve and Satisfy the Need for Achievement
 * 11) Achievement Goals
 * 12) Integrating Classic and Contemporary Approaches to Achievement	Motivation
 * 13) Avoidance Motivation and Well Being
 * 14) Implicit Theories
 * 15) Different Implicit Theories Mean Different Achievement Goals
 * 16) Meaning of Effort
 * 17) Affiliation and Intimacy
 * 18) Conditions that Involve the Affiliation and Intimacy Needs
 * 19) Conditions that Satisfy the Affiliation and Intimacy Needs
 * 20) Power
 * 21) Conditions that Involve and Satisfy the Need for Power
 * 22) Power and Goal Pursuit
 * 23) Leadership Motive Pattern

I have copied and pasted the format of our tutorials and will put my reflections in amongst it all.....Mixie 02:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Well after a bit of a break - well, not really, I just got overwhelmed with other stuff, including other assignments, I am now back and ready to go. Even though I am enjoying this unit, at times like this I find it extremely difficult to get motivated - especially when I feel I haven't got a clue what I am doing! Help!

Am I supposed to make new pages as I put this whole textbook chapter together or do I just keep on adding on to the end of the last section I edited? Mixie 03:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Commons category with Charles Darwin book images

This tutorial was a discussion about needs. I was thinking in that moment what my needs were - the need to know how I was going to climb the mountain in front of me (the textbook chapter) without even being able to navigate around Wiki!!!!My amygdala was working overtime..... We discussed our chapter outlines and I already had some ideas on what I wanted to do. the groups we were put in quickly disintegrated, people just didn't turn up so the idea of small learning groups didn't really work. Anyway, I was not deterred and proceeded to work on what I needed to get done. The biggest needs I have aside from the ones discussed in the tutorial is being able to organise everything in order to get through this (and my other) unit(s).

I have to prioritize everything in order of importance, otherwise I would not get through. So I addressed my immediate needs which were to get as much information as possible about what I needed to do. I have found in the past the key to success was good time management and this semester was the biggest time management test of all, due to doing other units and having a multitude of other responsibilities at home. These factors all cause considerable stress, but I just press forward.

So I picked my topic for the chapter which I was really looking forward to doing and then I hit my first hurdle - the dreaded Wiki formatting! I admit, the formatting itself is not complicated (now that I know what to do) but I found I had to find shortcuts where I could. It is a different operating system to the old WORD, doesn't have spell check, lots of other little things I found I couldn't do which amounted to a great deal of frustration! Not to mention trying to keep up with the reading! the whole exercise was a valuable learning experience but very time intensive and if you can't put the necessary time in, it becomes extremely difficult. Anyway, I got my chapter outline sorted and asked lots of questions - at least I got some feedback from other students that were too scared to ask....they got the benefit of the answers!

We also did the GCOS questionnaire. It asked for responses in hypothetical situations.* The General Causality Orientations Scale (GCOS)Mixie 08:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, forgot to add we discussed self determination theory, we discussed the pre-programmed - innate- self growth, social development and psychological well being. We talked about te hassumption tht we are always in some sort of goal directed activity. If we have autonomy (a feeling of control over your environment) ,competence and relatedness (the need to bond), if all threee are satisfied we should be happy and experience psychological growth.

The concept of failure tolerance is one that resonates with me (that we make mistakes to optimize learning) because all too often we are penalised for making mistakes, but it is exactly that process that teaches us. We drew up a chart which showed how high engagement (skill level) showed we had flow, high challenge level caused anxiety, low challenge causes apathy (challenge level axis) due to lack of engagement (how I feel in my current job) and low engagement (skill level axis) causes relaxation.

I know when I perform at my best when I am doing what I love doing, then I experience what could be described as flow, and at that point in time I am at my happiest.Mixie 00:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Tutorial3
This week the handouts were
 * Handouts:
 * 1) Tutorial notes
 * 2) Student motivation
 * 3) 1 double-sided page
 * 4) 1 single-sided page
 * 5) Learned Optimism Test (from Seligman, 1990)
 * 6) LEQ-H and outdoor education results
 * 7) 2 double-sided pages

We did another questionnaire:

University student motivation
 * 1) Relates more broadly to intrinsic-extrinsic motivation which is a textbook chapter and a lecture topic.
 * 2) Although the intrinsic-extrinsic motivational dimensional is widely recognised and accepted, it risks being an overly simplistic notion (i.e., that motivations can be cleanly divided between internal and external, when motivations behind behaviour are often more multiple, nuanced, and complex).
 * 3) For example, consider the motivations behind going to university: "Why are you at university?" - or more generally - “Why do students go to uni?”
 * 4) Develop a class map of the main underlying motivation for attending university. Respond honestly - why are students really at university? Answers are likely to cover a wide range of human motives, but will probably fall within:
 * 5) Career/Qualifications - for the degree, so I can get a better job etc.
 * 6) Self-Exploration/Learning - for the learning, curiousity, knowledge-seeking etc.
 * 7) Social Opportunities - to meet people, make and explore friendships, enjoy social enviroment
 * 8) Altruism - to become better able to help people, help society, help the planet etc.
 * 9) Social Pressure - expectations of family, friends, society etc.
 * 10) Rejection of Alternatives - better option than doing nothing, working etc. (Note: Factor analytic research by Neill (2008) has not found psychometric support for this factor, but it has for the other five factors).
 * 11) Complete the University Student Motivation survey (handout) and the University Student Outcomes survey (handout)
 * 12) Plot your motivation responses against the average results for University of Canberra students (as collected by the third year Survey research and design in psychology in 2008) - see handout (this also includes on overall satisfaction item).
 * 13) Plot your outcome responses using a different colour.
 * 14) Note and discuss:
 * 15) Where do you differ notably in your motivational profile from the university average? Who has a notable discrepancy that they would like to share?

We plotted our answers against the average and I fell way above average on Q1 about qualification, career, acquire skills, etc. Q2 I was also way above average on improve myself, love learning etc. Q3 average on the social opportunities question, this is because i don't really spend a lot of time at UNI except at class and I only interact/make friends with a few people tha tare doing the same units as me. Socializing is not a big motivator for me, if I was much younger then it probably would be, but I am here to study not to socialize. I acknowledge though, that others love the interpersonal interactions with other students - I find it difficult sometimes because I am only here part time, so the mix of students I meet is quite broad. Q4 I got higher than average on the contribute to society question, Q8 I got way below average because I am not here to please others. More soonMixie 08:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

 * 1) Related to the Personal control textbook chapter and lecture topic
 * 2) Whilst the lecture and reading content for personal control focused on learned helplessness, here we turn our attention to learned optimism. The development of both these areas was by Martin Seligman, University of Pennsylvania.
 * 3) Define learned helplessness vs. learned optimism
 * 4) Complete and score Learned Optimism test (Seligman, 1991)
 * 5) The dimensions and scoring are:
 * 6) Permanence: e.g., for pessimism - bad events are permanent and good events are temporary (opposite for optimism)
 * 7) PmB (Permanent Bad - 5, 13, 20, 21, 29, 33, 42, 46) - low scores = optimistic, high scores = pessimistic
 * 8) PmG (Permanent Good - 2, 10, 14, 15, 24, 26, 38, 40) - low scores = pessimistic, high scores = optimistic
 * 9) Pervasiveness (Specific vs. Universal - across time and space (situation)):
 * 10) PvB (Pervasive Bad - 8, 16, 17, 18, 22, 32, 44, 48) - low scores = optimistic, high scores = pessimistic
 * 11) PvG (Pervasive Good - 6, 7, 28, 31, 34, 35, 37, 43) - low scores = pessimistic, high scores = optimistic
 * 12) Hope (HoB) = PvB + PmB (Hope for Bad Events - low (0, 1, or 2) is hopeful - high (12, 13, 14, 15 or 16) is hopeless (This is the single most important score)
 * 13) Personalisation (Internal vs. External - locus of causality)
 * 14) PsB (Personalisation Bad - 3, 9, 19, 25, 30, 39, 41, 47) - low scores = high self-esteem, high scores = low self-esteem
 * 15) PsG (Personalisation Good - 1, 4, 11, 12, 23, 27, 36, 45) - low scores = pessimistic, high scores = optimistic
 * 16) Total B (Bad) = PmB + PvB + PsB
 * 17) 3 to 6 = Marvellously optimistic
 * 18) 6 to 9 = Moderately optimistic
 * 19) 10 to 11 = Average
 * 20) 12 to 14 = Moderately pessimistic
 * 21) 14 + = Cries out for change
 * 22) Total G (Good) = PmG + PvG + PsG
 * 23) 19 + = Very optimistic
 * 24) 17 to 18 = Moderately optimistic
 * 25) 14 to 16 = Average
 * 26) 11 to 13 = Quite pessimistic
 * 27) 10 or less = Greatly pessimistic
 * 28) Overall Optimism = G - B
 * 29) 8 + = Very optimistic
 * 30) 6 to 7 = Moderately optimistic
 * 31) 3 to 5 = Average
 * 32) 1 or 2 = Moderately pessimistic
 * 33) 0 or below = Very pessimistic
 * 34) Discuss Seligman's ABCDE solution (Adversity, Beliefs, Consequences, Disputation, Energisation):
 * 35) * A is for adversity: When we encounter adversity, we react by thinking about it.
 * 36) * B is for beliefs. Our thoughts rapidly congeal into beliefs.
 * 37) * C is for consequences. These beliefs .... have consequences.
 * 38) * D is for disputation. We find evidence against the negative beliefs, alternatives to our negative reasoning, and limit the implication of the beliefs. Seligman writes that "Much of the skill of dealing with setbacks ... consists of learning how to dispute your own first thoughts in reaction to a setback."
 * 39) * E is for energisation. We feel energised after we've disputed our false, negative beliefs.
 * 40) Note: Almost all students completing the LOT in tutorials indicate that their score suggests that they are much more pessimistic than they believe themselves to be. There seems to be a problem with the calibration of the interpretation scale - and an apparent lack of normative data.

We did the learned optimism test. The interesting thing about my results were that I was way lower on the optimism scale than I expected -I always thought myself a reasonably optimistic type of person. It all was tied into self esteem and learned helplessness.

Since my textbook chapter was on animals, this was of particular interest to me since Seligman discovered the phenomenon. the concept that someone (or an animal) can become so defeated or broken spirited that they feel they have no control over their environment is actually very sad. It is reassuring to know that therapy can help (both humans and animals) who feel there are no options, that they have no control over what happens to them.

I love the whole idea of positive psychology, how we can take control of our lives by doing small things and addressing the big ones that are our personal barriers to where we really want to be in life. I know where I want to be and I know I have many barriers to cross, but my ticket to where I want to be begins with finishing my degree, which I'm hoping will goive me a lot more scope in better employment so I can enjoy what I really want to be doing a lot more. In my opinion it's no good just thinking about whewre your goals are then not taking action - action is probably the scariest thing to do, especially when you have many responsibilities and other people will affect.

However, I also feel that in denying one's true purpose that we back ourselves into a corner and never self actualize, how can we when we don't allow ourselves to reach our full potential? I guess a lot of decision we make are based on fear or guilt, because of the social pressures we place on ourselves - we don't wanbt to be selfish and do our own thing, yet deep down we know that it is exactly what we want to do!

So my philosophy on getting what I want out of life is that it is a mountain, but even a mountain can be moved shovel by shovel....I just gotta start.....Mixie 00:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Self (life effectiveness)
 * 1) Self-constructs: Brainstorm, discuss and distinguish amongst self-constructs, including self-esteem, self-concept, self-worth, self-efficacy etc.
 * 2) Present and discuss notion of life effectiveness - handout - for more info, see http://wilderdom.com/leq
 * 3) Related concepts: Practical intelligence, self-concept etc.
 * 4) Definitions of generic life effectiveness skills
 * 5) Describe the eight life effectiveness (LEQ-H) dimensions
 * 6) Present and discuss outdoor education results from http://wilderdom.com/phd
 * 7) Highlight the general trend of a small drop between pre-program and first day (due to situational threat), the substantial increase during the program (probably inflated by post-group euphoria at program end), and the partial loss of gains during the follow-up period (typical of interventions). Of potential concern is that the 1st day to last day snapshot (typical of many evaluations) may over-estimate the amount of change during the program due to the initial depression and end-of-program euphoria. Thus, longitudinal research with a control group is preferable.

we did the life effectiveness questionnaire (LEQ_H) and all my scores were at the extreme upper end of the scale. I am not sure how this relates to my life effectiveness but I think i work effectively in most situations - at least I try to make the best of any situation - even if it isn't ideal.

What I found interesting was the questionnaire for youth at risk. I am very interested in this field as I would like to use equine therapy on youth at risk as it has been shown in the USA and some other places that the interactions between humans (prisoners) and wild horses make huge chanhges in the prisoners. The prisoners are given a horse (they know nothing about horses to begin with) and they have to try to build a relationship with that horse and get to a point where they can ride it so it cn be rehomed. There is already a similar scheme in the US where prisoners train dogs, which has been shown to be effective as well.

Considering the prisoners are used to doing things a certain way, they need to change their strategy with horses because equines are bigger, stronger and faster, and will defend themselves if they have to. The results (Strimple, 2003) are that they learn self control, patience and they become empowered in a skill they never thought possible. Here is a website that also does similar therapy....[] Mixie 01:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

References Strimple, E. O. (2003). A history of prison inmate-animal interaction programs. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(1), 70.

Tutorial 4

 * 1) Hand-out the List of specific emotions (per group) with scissors - cut up the emotion words - need lots of table space
 * 2) Conduct an emotion Q sort - in small groups, sort, discuss and agree on an organised model of the emotions (into underlying clusters or families). Try not to be restricted or overly-guided by previous theory.
 * 3) Share and discuss each groups' model with the rest of the class
 * 4) Colour-code/label each major grouping - photograph and upload the results
 * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Emotion_Q-sort_Group_1

So we sorted our emotions into groups and found that we felt some of them weren't emotions (such as greedy or obnoxiousness) which is more of a attitude) so we had a separate group for that. We also had some emotions that were related to others so we tried to demonstrate how they crossed over. We also felt there was a cognitive aspect to most emotions - sometimes the cognitive affected the emotion, other times the emotion affected the cognitive.

We filled out another questionnaire:

 * 1) Complete and score the 20-item PANAS
 * 2) Compare with SMU undergraduate norms
 * 3) Discuss forms and psychometrics

My scores on the PANAS scale were average so nothing I felt stood out here.Mixie 01:31, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Tutorial 5

 * Handout
 * Happiness and Personality - Happiness/Unhappiness - Extraversion/Neuroticism - BAS/BIS
 * Arousal: Arousal, Optimal Arousal and Sensation Seeking
 * Control: Perceived control and Desire for control
 * Sensation seeking is a personality trait which has been identified and described by Marvin Zuckerman (1971). Zuckerman was a student participant in sensory deprivation experiments who became intrigued by people who were least able to tolerate a lack of stimulation.
 * Sensation seeking scale (Wikipedia)
 * Online versions: BBC, RTA
 * Other versions: SSS with scoring instructions

Sensation seeking scale

There are four factors:
 * 1) Thrill and adventure seeking (10 items) - desire to engage in sports or activities involving some physical danger or risk such as mountain climbing, parachute jumping, scuba diving, speeding in a car, etc.
 * 2) Experience seeking (10 items) - desire to seek new experiences through the mind and senses by living in a nonconforming life style with unconventional friends, and through travel.
 * 3) Disinhibition (10 items) - need to disinhibit behaviour in the social sphere by drinking, partying and seeking variety in sexual partners.
 * 4) Boredom susceptibility (10 items) - aversion for repetitive experience of any kind, routine work, or even dull or predictable people. Other items indicate a restless reaction when things are unchanging.

Complete the SSS (online or from handout), score your total and factor scores, and then contribute your data to the class graph and data sheet (if willing).

Discuss the constructs and distributions.

We did the scale and discussed the outcomes of our scores. My scores surprised me since I thought I was extremely intolerant of boring activites and I found the opposite to be true. The overall sensation seeking scale was interesting since those in the class who scored high were all in their 20's. I also observed that if I was asked the identical questions when I was 20 or so, then my answers would have also been different. I never used to be nervous about thrill seeking activites, but now I am much more reserved and I feel it relates to my age and the fact that I have caring responsibilities. Mixie 01:39, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Tutorial 6
Problems for discussion

 * 1) Do you know a self-actualised and/or fully functioning individual?  What gives you this impression?

Yes, I believe I do...this person is living the life she dreamed of and is also financially free, her job is her life's passion and she married the right man who has the same passion. She has it made.Mixie 02:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

 * 1) Do you know someone in whom the actualisation tendency is particularly weak? (e.g., someone who consistently pursue external validation and adopts a facade when interacting with others?) What gives you this impression?

 * 1) In general, does evil reside in human nature or is it a product of a sick culture?

I believe evil has potential to be everywhere but is more a product of environment.Mixie 02:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

100% evil = ___ % human nature + ___ % environmental engineering
 * 1) As a parent raising a child who expresses a somewhat socially undesirable temperament, which option would you recommend - Explain/defend your answer:
 * 2) raise the child in his or her natural temperament or
 * 3) raise the child to conform to the more socially-desirable temperament?

I believe children have their innate characteristics which should be nurtured, howver I do not believe any child is born evil, but evil is a product of their environment. That said, I believe that certain traits make them more prediposed to evil, but if the environment is right, they should never fall into the "evil" trap. So they should be raised in their natural temperament but in a positive, nurturong environment, and they should learn to conform to live in a socially desirable way, otherwise they will always be outcast. They can learn appropriate coping skills if they have problematic traits, given the right approach.

 * 1) Do you mostly agree or mostly disagree with the following statement by Rogers: Learning does not follow from teaching.  Rather, learning follows having one’s interests identified, facilitated, and supported.
 * 2) Explain the following concepts:
 * 3) growth-seeking and validation-seeking.
 * 4) Maslow’s distinction between growth and deficiency needs.
 * 5) Rogers’ distinction between congruence and incongruence.
 * 6) Autonomy and control causality orientations.
 * 7) Disuss what types of social interactions
 * 8) support growth-seeking, growth needs, congruence, and an autonomy causality orientation?
 * 9) lead to validation-seeking, deficiency needs, facades, and a control causality orientation.

Discuss self actualization

 * 1) Complete and discuss - Characteristics of a self-actualizing person or rate yourself on each characteristic below from 1 (Not like you) to 10 (Very much like you). The highest total you can receive is 160 points. How close are you? What is it that has given you a higher score? What might you do to make your score higher on any given characteristic?
 * 2) MASLOW'S CHARACTERISTICS OF SELF-ACTUALIZED PEOPLE

A. PRIORITY OF VALUES LIKE TRUTH, LOVE, AND HAPPINESS B. INTERNALLY CONTROLLED C. HIGH INVOLVEMENT, PRODUCTIVITY, AND HAPPINESS
 * 1) Acceptance of self, of others, of nature--"not complaining about water because it is wet." Stoic style of calmly accepting even the worst.
 * 2) Identification with the human species--identification with all of humanity versus just their own family, friends, culture, or nation.
 * 3) Emphasis on higher level values--self-actualizing persons seem to spend less of their time concentrating on the lower values (safety, belongingness, etc. listed above) and more of their time being concerned primarily with higher values or metavalues.
 * 4) Perception of reality--greater perceptual accuracy of reality. Superior ability to reason and perceive the truth and understand people at a deeper level.
 * 5) Discrimination between means and ends, between good and evil--Clearer and more focused upon ends than most people; though they view their experiences and activities more as ends in themselves than most people.
 * 6) Resolution of dichotomies (conflicts). Resolved conflicts that plague most people, because of their highly developed, accepting philosophy of life.
 * 1) Autonomy and resistance to enculturation.
 * 2) Detachment and desire for privacy--high enjoyment of privacy and solitude. Calm and at peace with themselves.
 * 3) Spontaneity, simplicity, naturalness--reflects integration of values and habits. Open, integrated values and habits.
 * 1) Problem-centering--easily forget self and easily absorbed in tasks they love and/or feel are extremely important.
 * 2) Creativeness--retain an almost childlike fresh, naive, and direct way of looking at life. May be partly a result of other factors such as problem-centering.
 * 3) Freshness of appreciation and richness of emotional reactions--ability to intensely focus on the present and highly involved in it. Very accepting of emotions.
 * 4) High frequency of peak experiences.

D. HIGH QUALITY INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS
 * 1) (Intimate) Interpersonal relations--"deeper and more profound interpersonal relations than any other adults." However, these very close relationships are often limited to a very few people. They tend to be kind, patient, affectionate, friendly, and unpretentious; but can be direct and assertive when needed.
 * 2) Democratic character structure--a person's status is unimportant to them. They do respond to differences in values and character.
 * 3) Philosophical, unhostile sense of humor.

Discuss a sense of meaning

 * 1) Compare and contrast Maslow's characteristics of self-actualization with Carl Rogers' The fully functioning person (Wikipedia)

 * 1) Viktor Frankl, sense of meaning and logotherapy

I read this book a few years ago and it moved me deeply, I never forgot it. I do believe that everyone needs a purpose or needs to feel they have a purpose on this earth to be really complete. That life is never as bad as it seems for there is always someone better or worse off than you. Gratitude for what we have is important, this includes family or friends, since you don't realise what you have until it's gone....especially if they are taken from you before their time....... Mixie 02:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Scale               M       SD      Skew     Kurtosis Overall SOC	       4.19	0.78	-0.36	 0.29 Comprehensibility	3.96	0.90	-0.02	-0.19 Manageability	       4.71	0.94	-0.38	-0.10 Meaningfulness	5.01	1.06	-0.62	 0.22
 * 1) Antonovsky, salutogenesis and sense of coherence (SOC).
 * 2) SOC is “The extent to which one has a pervasive, enduring though dynamic, feeling of confidence that one’s environment is predictable and that things will work out as well as can reasonably be expected.” It has three components – comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness.
 * 3) A sense of comprehensibility:
 * 4) Do you feel that you can understand things, that things make sense and are not confusing?
 * 5) Do you feel that things are predictable or can be expected? In other words, do you feel like you know what’s going to happen next, or that you know what’s coming?
 * 6) A sense of manageability:
 * 7) Do you feel that things are manageable or within your control, that things can be handled or taken care of?
 * 8) Do you feel you have the skills or ability, the support, the help, or the resources necessary to take care of things?
 * 9) A sense of meaningfulness:
 * 10) Do you feel that things are interesting or fascinating, a source of pleasure or satisfaction?
 * 11) Do you feel that things are really worth it, that there is good reason or purpose to care about what happens?
 * 12) Complete the SOC13 and compare with UC student item means (SOC29, Abou-Abou-Hamdan, 2008, N = 355):

Practical exercises Choose one of the following out-of-classroom "happiness exercises" from positive psychology therapy to try and report about your experience and the results in your e-portfolio:
 * 1) Gratitude visit. Write a letter or visit and share about your gratitude to someone who has been especially kind to you but never really thanked.
 * 2) Three good things in life. Each day, write down three things that go well and identify the cause of each.
 * 3) You at your best. Write about a time when you functioned at your best. Reflect on the personal resources that made that functioning possible.
 * 4) Identify signature strengths. Identify up to five personal signature strengths (from a list such as the one in Reeve, 2009, Table 15.3) and find a way to use each in a new way.

We discussed mostly about the concept of evil in children and the conversation turned to rehabilitation of children who commit adult crimes (the Jamie Bulger story) and how as adults, how we thought the two murderers could never be rehabilitated. One was recently reported to have been found with porn material as an example. The scary thing is, could it have been prevented, were these two as children exposed to such a terrible upbringing that caused them to have no empathy for a weaker, smaller individual? Did they plan it or did they just snap in the moment and regret it later? What scares me is the number of children these days committing such horrendous crimes and that I believe for the most part, that they can be prevented by being brought up in the right environment. Prevention is always better than cure!

The happiness exercises were interesting, I liked number three as I can think of a time when I was at my best an now I so want to get back to that "happy place". I had plenty of family support at the time, no financial worries, everything was looking up. Boy how life changes!!Mixie 02:30, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

In conclusion,

Looking back over the earlier material, one that struck a chord with me was motivating others. I am thinking about what I learned from this unit that can help me help them. When I look at the senstion seeking scale and think of someone very close to me, they exhibit all of the thrill seeking behaviours (I'm sure it is all age related) and I am thinking about ways to motivate them to become more autonomous and do less self destructive behaviours. I am gettig them involved in something they love and encouraging them to stop being self destructive because they will never achieve their goals if they continue on the path they are on. A part of achieving goals is being in good health and being fit. They feel a state of learned helplessness at the moment so I am helping them build autonomy and the ability to make their own decisions in a supportive environment. The concepts and theories I learned about in the unit (such as learned helplessness) I found fascinating and fun to learn.

Being self motivated to engage in the book chapter was he best part abut this unit, I really enjoyed it because it is a topic of great interest to me. I also love the idea of using animals in therapy, I feel it is a very powerful tool. I also like the idea that I can use the strategies I have learned throughout the unit and apply them to raising my own children without an authoritarian apporach but a collaborative one, where they have a say in what they want to do in their lives.

Even though it was a steep learning curve, I enjoyed learning how to use WIKI as a resource and a learning tool - also Screenr for presentations...even though 5 minutes is not very long! Mixie 04:47, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User:Mixie


text:
User talk:Mixie

 Hello Mixie, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. Jtneill - Talk - c 11:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

 Hi! Our name is Vicky-Verity. We are twins and are Wikiversity mascots. We think Wikiversity is a great place to learn and make friends (when we aren't sleeping). Leave us a message!

Motivation and emotion
Hi. Welcome to the unit and to Wikiversity! I look forward to learning with you and I hope you find the topic and the unit rewarding. Please feel free to let me know if you have any suggestions or would like help at any point along the way. Sincerely, James Neill, -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Textbook chapter plan
Hi Mixie, I've had a look over your textbook chapter Motivation and emotion/Textbook/Motivation and emotion/Animals and "wikified" it for you (by adding headings). Make sure to also identify and incorporate relevant peer-reviewed psychological research literature, but otherwise the structure looks solid. You will probably need to distinguish between what's essential for this topic (and focus on that) and what's "nice to have" (but not essential). Hope this helps. Sincerely, James. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * FYI, I've added some feedback about this chapter so far to its discussion page - Talk:Motivation and emotion/Textbook/Motivation and emotion/Animals. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:52, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Emotion Q-sort
FYI, I've uploaded the photos of your group's Emotion Q-sort to here: commons:Category:Emotion Q-sort Group 1. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Animal video
Lion thanks rescuer - http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=430598599645 -- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mixie