Cluster analysis on Malaysian student’s achievement goals orientation in mathematics from multiple goal perspective

  • Authors

    • Mohd Rustam Mohd Rameli
    • Azlina Mohd Kosnin
    • Yeo Kee Jiar
    • Zakiah Mohamad Ashari
    2018-04-02
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.10.10967
  • Achievement Goals Orientation, Multiple Goals, Cluster Analysis

  • Abstract

    This study examined students’ achievement goal orientation by applying multiple goals perspective in learning Mathematics. This person-centered approach study involved 969 Malaysian upper secondary school students from 20 selected schools.  Results of correlational analysis showed that all the four goal orientations (mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance) correlated moderately (r=.151-.475) to each other.  This suggests that students could adopt more than one goal orientation simultaneously.  By means of cluster analysis, the notion of simultaneous adoption of goal orientations is supported from which five distinct clusters were extracted, namely mastery-oriented (mean value is higher for the mastery-approach and mastery-avoidance goal), approach-oriented (mean value is higher for mastery and performance-avoidance goal), avoidance-oriented (mean value is higher for mastery and performance-approach goal), demotivated (low mean value for all types of goals) and success-oriented (high mean value for all types of goals).  Success-oriented cluster had the highest frequency of students (f=271, 28.0%) while only 3.6% (f=35) of the students were in the demotivated cluster.  This study extends the knowledge of how students adopt multiple goals in Mathematics learning.  The results have significant impact on mathematics education context of Malaysia.

     

  • References

    1. [1] Pajares F (2001), Toward a positive psychology of academic motivation. The Journal of Educational Research 95(1), 27-35.

      [2] Pintrich PR & Schunk D (1996), Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

      [3] Steinmayr R & Spinath B, (2009a). The importance of motivation as a predictor of school achievement. Learning and Individual Differences 19, 80–90.

      [4] Muraven M & Baumeister RF (2000), Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle? Psychological Bulletin 126, 247–259.

      [5] Boekaerts M (1997), Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction 7(2), 161–186.

      [6] Tuominen-Soini H, Salmela-Aro K & Niemivirta M, (2008), Achievement goal orientations and subjective well-being: A person-centred analysis. Learning and Instruction 18, 251–266.

      [7] Somuncuoglu Y & Yildirim A (1999), Relationship between achievement goal orientations and the use of learning strategies. The Journal of Educational Research 92(5), 267-277.

      [8] Wolters CA (1998), Self-regulated Learning and college students' regulation of motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 90(2), 224-235.

      [9] Elliot AJ (1997), Integrating the ‘‘classic’’ and ‘‘contemporary’’ approaches to achievement motivation: A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. In Maehr, M.L & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.). Advances in Motivation and Achievement (pp. 143–179). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

      [10] Elliot AJ (1999), Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist 34(3), 169–189.

      [11] Molden DC & Dweck CS (2000), Meaning and motivation. In C. Sansone, & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 131–159). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

      [12] Maehr ML & Zusho A (2009), Achievement goal theory: The past, present, and future. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 77–104). New York: Taylor Francis.

      [13] Harackiewicz JM, Barron KE, Pintrich PR, Elliot AJ & Thrash TM (2002), Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of Educational Psychology 94, 638–645.

      [14] Lieberman DA & Remedios R (2007), Do undergraduates' motives for studying change as they progress through their degrees? British Journal of Educational Psychology 77, 379−395.

      [15] Putwain DW & Daniels RA (2010), Is the relationship between competence beliefs and test anxiety influenced by goal orientation? Journal of Learning and Individual Differences 20, 8–13.

      [16] Putwain DW, Sander P & Larkin D (2013), Using the 2 × 2 framework of achievement goals to predict achievement emotions and academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences 25, 80–84.

      [17] Elliot AJ & McGregor HA (2001), A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80(3), 501–519.

      [18] Tuominen-Soini H, Salmera-Aro K & Niemivirta M (2011), Stability and change in achievement goal orientation: A person-centered approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology 36, 82-100.

      [19] Tuominen H, Salmela-Aro K, Niemivirta M & Vuori J (2004), Adolescents’ achievement goal orientations, goal appraisals, and subjective well-being: A person- centered approach. Proceedings of the Third International Biennial SELF Research Conference: Self-Concept, Motivation and Identity, Where to from here, Berlin, Germany.

      [20] Tuominen-Soini H, Salmela-Aro K & Niemivirta M, (2008), Achievement goal orientations and subjective well-being: A person-centred analysis. Learning and Instruction, 18, 251–266.

      [21] Senko C, Durik AM, Patel L, Lovejoy CM & Valentiner D (2013), Performance-approach goal effects on achievement under low versus high challenge conditions. Learning and Instruction 23, 60-68.

      [22] Kaplan A & Maehr ML (2007), The contributions and prospects of goal orientation theory. Educational Psychological Review 19, 141–184.

      Senko C & Miles KM (2008), Pursuing their own learning agenda: how mastery- oriented students’ jeopardize their class performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology 33, 561-583

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Rustam Mohd Rameli, M., Mohd Kosnin, A., Kee Jiar, Y., & Mohamad Ashari, Z. (2018). Cluster analysis on Malaysian student’s achievement goals orientation in mathematics from multiple goal perspective. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(2.10), 113-116. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.10.10967

    Received date: 2018-04-02

    Accepted date: 2018-04-02

    Published date: 2018-04-02