CLASSROOM GOAL STRUCTURE, STUDENT MOTIVATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION

Our focus in this chapter is to critically examine relevant literatures that would assist in explaining the research problem and furthermore recognize the efforts of scholars who had previously contributed immensely to similar research. The chapter intends to deepen the understanding of the study and close the perceived gaps.

Precisely, the chapter will be considered in three sub-headings:

• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework and
• Empirical Review

2.1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Classroom

A classroom is a space provided in a school where students gather and the teacher meets them for lectures. It is a room designated for teaching and learning. Classroom is a room set aside and specifically designed and furnish for the purpose of teaching and learning (Akinwumiju & Agabi 2008) in (Agabi, et al., 2013). A classroom is one of the facilities a school must have. Agabi, Onyake and Wali succinctly put: a school is not complete without at least one block of classroom to facilitate organized teaching and learning. A classroom is very important because it facilitate teaching and learning. A conducive classroom environment increases the desire for knowledge and heightens creativity in learners, (Agabi et al., 2013). The classroom protects learners from the erratic weather condition such as rain, wind, and extreme weather conditions (Agabi et al., 2013). The classroom, with the aid of its facilities such as: the writing board, classroom seats and instructional materials, enhances teaching and learning. For the classroom to be useful for the purpose it was meant to serve, teaching and learning, it has to be organized and maintained. This brings about the concept of classroom management. Classroom management refer to the sum total of plan of actions taken by the teacher in the classroom to bring about a conducive classroom environment that supports teaching and learning leading to success and achievement. Mecreary (2010) in Agabi, Onyeieke and Wali, (2013) defined classroom management as the process and strategies an educator uses to maintain a classroom environment that is conducive to students learning and success. Similarly, Dollad and Christensen (1996) defined classroom management as the action a teacher takes to bring about an environment that support and make easy instructions, academic, social and emotional learning.

Teachers in the classroom are the managers of the classroom activities. He is concerned with maintaining order, regulating the sequence of events and directing his own attention towards achieving educational goals. Classroom management plays a very important role in the teaching and learning process. Marzono (2003) said a classroom that is well managed will provide an environment in which teaching and learning can flourish. The success of any educational system depends largely on the effectiveness of classroom management. Classroom management techniques have been divided into two major components, behavioral management and instructional management (Martin & Sass, 2010).

Academic Achievement

Academic achievement is the extent to which a student, teacher or institution have achieved their short or long term educational goals. It is commonly measured through examination or continuous assessment for instance, Number of credit obtained at a sitting in WAEC or NECO examination represents academic performance of the candidate. Students’ academic performance is contingent upon a number of factors including: previous educational outcome, socio economic status of the parents, parent educational background, self- effort and self -motivation of students, learning preferences, standard and type of educational institution in which student get their education and the school in which they study, amongst others. Durden and Ellis (1995) observe that, the measurement of student’s previous educational outcomes are the most important indicators of student future achievement, that is, the higher previous appearances, the better the students’ academic performance in future endeavors. However, Roddy and Talcott (2006) disagree with the assumptions that future academic performance are determined by preceding performance. In their research on the relationship between previous academic performance and subsequent achievement at university level; they found that student learning or studying at graduate level and the score secured did not predict any academic achievement at university level. Graetz (1995) conducted a study on socio economic status of the parent of students and concluded that the socio economic background has a great impact on student academic performance. Main source of educational imbalance among students and students’ academic success hinged very strongly on parents socio-economic status. Having the same view as Graetz (1995), Considine and Zappala (2002) in their study on the influence of socio economic disadvantages in academic performance of schools, in addition, noticed that these parents make available sufficient psychological and emotional shore up to their children by providing good education and learning environment that produce confidence and the improvement of skill needed for success. Standard and type of education institution in which students get their education, strongly affect student learning outcome and educational performance. The education environment of the school one attends sets the parameters of students learning outcomes. Sparkles (1999) in Considine and Zappala (2000) showed that schools environment and teachers expectation from their students also have strong influence on students’ academic performance. Teachers, teaching in poor schools or schools having poor basic facilities often have low performance expectation from their students and when students know that their teacher have low performance expectations from them, it leads to poor performance by the students. Kwesiga (2002) asserts that students performance is also influenced by the school in which they study and that the number of the facilities in school offers usually determine the quality of the school which in turn 948 affect the performance and accomplishment of its students. In his own argument, he also asserts that schools influence educational process in content organization, teacher and teaching and learning and in the end evaluation of all. It is generally agreed that schools put strong effect on academic performance and educational attainment of students. Students from elite schools perform better because these elite schools are usually very rich in resources and facilities. Hence the ownership of school and the fund available indeed influence the performance of the students. Adetayo, (2008) confirms this position when they noticed that school ownership, provision of facilities and availability of resources in school is an important structural component of the school. Private school due to better funding, small size, serious ownership, motivated faculty and access to resources such as computers perform better than public schools. These additional funding resources and facilities available in private schools enhance academic performance and educational attainment of their student.

Academic performance or "academic achievement" is the extent to which a student, teacher or institution has attained their short or long-term educational goals. Completion of educational benchmarks such as secondary school diplomas and bachelor's degrees represent academic achievement.

Furthermore, there are inconclusive results over which individual factors successfully predict academic performance, elements such as test anxiety, environment, motivation, and emotions require consideration when developing models of school achievement.

Factors influencing academic achievement

Individual differences influencing academic performance

Individual differences in academic performance have been linked to differences in intelligence and personality. Students with higher mental ability as demonstrated by IQ tests and those who are higher in conscientiousness (linked to effort and achievement motivation) tend to achieve highly in academic settings. A recent meta-analysis suggested that mental curiosity (as measured by typical intellectual engagement) has an important influence on academic achievement in addition to intelligence and conscientiousness.

Children's semi-structured home learning environment transitions into a more structured learning environment when children start first grade. Early academic achievement enhances later academic achievement.

Parent's academic socialization is a term describing the way parents influence students' academic achievement by shaping students' skills, behaviors and attitudes towards school. Parents influence students through the environment and discourse parents have with their children. Academic socialization can be influenced by parents' socio-economic status. Highly educated parents tend to have more stimulating learning environments. Further, recent research indicates that the relationship quality with parents will influence the development of academic self-efficacy among adolescent-aged children, which will in turn affect their academic performance.

Children's first few years of life are crucial to the development of language and social skills. School preparedness in these areas help students adjust to academic expectancies.

Studies have shown that physical activity can increase neural activity in the brain, specifically increasing executive brain functions such as attention span and working memory; and improve academic performance in both elementary school children and college freshmen.

Non-cognitive factors

Non-cognitive factors or skills, are a set of "attitudes, behaviors, and strategies" that promotes academic and professional success, such as academic self-efficacy, self-control, motivation, expectancy and goal setting theories, emotional intelligence, and determination. To create attention on factors other than those measured by cognitive test scores sociologists Bowles and Gintis coined the term in the 1970s. The term serves as a distinction of cognitive factors, which are measured by teachers through tests and quizzes. Non-cognitive skills are increasingly gaining popularity because they provide a better explanation for academic and professional outcomes.

Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy is one of the best predictors of academic success. Self-efficacy is the belief of being able to do something. Stajković et al. looked at the Big Five traits on academic success as well and saw that conscientiousness and emotional stability were predictors of self-efficacy in over half of their analyses. However, self-efficacy was more indicative of academic performance than personality in all of the analyses. This suggests that parents who want their children to have academic achievement can look to increase their child's sense of self-efficacy at school.

Motivation

Motivation is the reasoning behind an individual's actions. Research has found that students with higher academic performance, motivation and persistence use intrinsic goals rather than extrinsic ones. Furthermore, students who are motivated to improve upon their previous or upcoming performance tend to perform better academically than peers with lower motivation. In other words, students with higher need for achievement have greater academic performance.

Self-control

Self-control, in the academic setting, is related self-discipline, self-regulation, delay of gratification and impulse control. Baumeister, Vohs, and Tice defined self-control as "the capacity for altering one's own responses, especially to bring them into line with standards such as ideals, values, morals, and social expectations, and to support the attainment of long-term goals." In other words, self-control is the ability to prioritize long-term goals over the temptation of short-term impulses. Self-control is usually measured through self completed questionnaires. Researchers often use the Self-Control Scale developed by Tangney, Baumeister, & Boone in 2004.

Through a longitudinal study of the marshmallow test, researchers found a relationship between the time spent waiting for the second marshmallow and higher academic achievement. However, this finding only applied for participants who had the marshmallow in plain sight and were placed without any distraction tactics.

High locus of control, where an individual attributes success to personal decision making and positive behaviors such as discipline, is a ramification of self-control. High locus of control has been found to have a positive predictive relationship with high collegiate GPA.

Extracurricular activities

Organized extracurricular activities have yielded a positive relationship with high academic performance including increasing attendance rates, school engagement, GPA, postsecondary education, as well as a decrease in drop out rates and depression. Additionally, positive developmental outcomes have been found in youth that engage in organized extracurricular activities. High school athletics have been linked with strong academic performance, particularly among urban youth. However, involvement in athletics has been linked to increased alcohol consumption and abuse for high school students along with increased truancy.

While research suggests that there is a positive link between academic performance and participation in extracurricular activities, the practice behind this relationship is not always clear. Moreover, there are many unrelated factors that influence the relationship between academic achievement and participation in extracurricular activities (Mahoney et al., 2005). These variables include: civic engagement, identity development, positive social relationships and behaviors, and mental health (Mahoney et al., 2005). In other research on youth, it was reported that positive social support and development, which can be acquired through organized after school activities is beneficial for achieving academic success (Eccles & Templeton, 2002). In terms of academic performance there are a whole other group of variables to consider. Some of these variables include: demographic and familial influences, individual characteristics, and program resources and content (Mahoney et al., 2005). For example, socio-economic status has been found to plays a role in the number of students participating in extracurricular activities (Covay & Carbonaro, 2010). Furthermore, it is suggested that the peer relationships and support that develop in extracurricular activities often affect how individuals perform in school (Eccles & Templeton, 2002). With all these variables to consider it is important to create a better understanding how academic achievement can be seen in both a negative and positive light.

In conclusion, most research suggests that extracurricular activities are positively correlated to academic achievement (Mahoney et al., 2005). It has been mentioned that more research could be conducted to better understand the direction of this relationship (Eccles & Templeton, 2002). Together this information can give us a better understand the exact aspects to consider when considering the impact that participation in extracurricular activities can have on academic achievement.

Successful educational actions

There are experiences analysed by research projects that show how the incorporation of Successful Educational Actions (SEAs) in schools with high absenteeism are contributing to the improvement of academic achievement.

Concept of Motivation in education

According to Harin (1972), motivation is difficult to define. The word “motivation” comes from a Latin word “movers” which means to move. Bernard (1983) defines motivation as those phenomena which are involved in the stimulation where there were little or no movement towards goals. Jibrin (2008) defines motivation as inner state of need or desire that activates an individual to do something that will satisfy that need or desire. Brown (2001) defines motivation based on behaviouralistic and cognitive definition. Based on behaviouralistic, Brown defines motivation as anticipation of reinforcement which is powerful concept for the classroom. Based on cognitive definition, Brown classified motivation definition into three categories. First, based on drive theory, motivation stems from basic innate drives. So motivation has been in existence since we are born. Second, based on hierarchy, motivation is something that comes from individual needs. Third, based on self-control theory, motivation is something that appears if there is opportunity to make some one to make own choices about what to pursue and what not to pursue (self-control) (Brown, 2001:73-75).

So, motivation is one of the influential factors in learning that drives learners to struggle to reach their goals in learning process and can become a stimulus in learning process. For example, a learner who is motivated to study Economics because he wants to get a gift from his teacher will try to study hard to get the gift, that is, as a stimulus in the learning process. Therefore, motivation is one of the most influential factor in teaching and learning process.

Bernard (1983) defined motivation as those phenomena which are involved in the stimulation where there were little or no movement towards the goals. Akinson (1982) define motivation as the arousal of tendency to act to produce one or more effects. Ryan and Deci (2000) stated that to be motivated means to be moved to do something. In other related definitions, Gagneand Medsker (1996) defined motivation as “Cognitive persistence, the drive, tendency or desire to undertake or complete a task, expand effort, and do a quality job” (p. 168).

Definitions of motivation were gleaned from a variety of psychology textbooks and reflect the general consensus that motivation is an internal state or condition sometimes described as a need, desire or want that serves to activate or energize behaviour and give it direction (Kleinginna and Kleinginna, 1981).

Summarily, motivation in relation to this present study means arousing the interest of the learner.

The Role of Motivation on the Academic Performance Students

According to Theall (1996), teachers have a lot to do with their students’ motivational level. A student may arrive in class with a certain degree of motivation, but the teacher’s behaviour and teaching style, the structure of the course, the nature of the assignments and informal interactions with students all have a large effect on student’s motivation. We may have heard the utterance, “My students are so unmotivated”, and the good news is that there is a lot that we can do to change that, which include:

1. Giving frequent, early, positive feedback that support students’

beliefs that they can do well.

1. Ensuring opportunities for students’ success by assigning tasks that are neither too easy nor too difficult.
2. Helping students find personal meaning and value in the

materials.

1. Creating an atmosphere that is open and positive.
2. Helping students feel that they are valued members of a learning community.

According to McMahon and Kelly (1996), some recurring themes about students’ motivation drawn from the educational

literature are as follows:

1. Provide choices: Students can have increase motivation when they feel some sense of autonomy in the learning process, and that motivation declines when students have no voice in the class structure.
2. Balance the Challenge: Students perform best when the level

of difficulty is slightly above their current ability level. If the task

is too easy, it promotes boredom and may communicate a message of low expectations or a sense that the teacher believes the student is not capable of better work.

1. Seek role models: If students can identify with role models they may be more likely to see the relevance in the subject matter.
2. Adopt a supportive style: A supportive teaching style that allows for students’ autonomy can foster increased students interest, enjoyment, engagement and performance. Supportive teacher behaviour include listening, giving hints and encouragement, being responsive to students’ questions.
3. Strategize with struggling students: When students are struggling with poor academic performance, low self-efficacy or low motivation, one strategy that may help is to teach them how to learn. That is, to outline specific strategies for completing an assignment, note-taking or reviewing for an exam.

Strategies of Motivating Students

According to Meador (1989), strong and lasting memory

connected with the emotional state and experiences of the learners depend on the strategies used in teaching and learning. Keller (1980) suggested and developed three strategies aimed at ensuring motivation in teaching and learning. The three categories devised by Keller are as follows:

1. Interest refers to whether the learner’s curiosity is aroused and whether this arousal is sustained appropriately over time.
2. Relevance refers to the learner’s perception of personal need, satisfaction in relation to the instruction, or whether a highly desired goal is perceived to be related to the instructional activities.
3. Expectancy refers to the perceived likelihood of success and the extent to which success is under learner control.

These three categories were eventually translated into the ARC Model of instructional motivation design in which interest was changed to ‘Attention’ and Expectancy to ‘Confidence’ with Relevance retaining its title.

Teacher’s Attention on the Learners

Gagne and Driscoll (1988), detailed three actions that can be used to enhance learners’ attention. These are:

1. Vary the appearance or sound of instructional materials;

ii. Use concrete examples for every abstraction that is presented; and iii. Surprise the learner with novelty and incongruity.

The intent of these actions is to avoid designing instruction that becomes mundane or predictable for the learner. Many authors caution, however of becoming too creative to the point the learner becomes confused with too much “flash”, particularly with actions intended to stimulate the perceptual curiosity of the learner.

Gagne and Medsker (1996) suggest that the first consideration for establishing epistemic curiosity is the development of clear outcomes, objectives and success criteria. Clarity, they point out, reduces fear-born of ambiguity.

They suggested breaking complex objectives into more manageable sub-objectives which are then associated with chunked parcels of learning. Strategies recommended by Keller (1983) to gain learner attention and raise curiosity include asking questions or making a statement that creates an unusual perspective in the mind of the learner. The extent of the question or statement is to put the learner in a problem-solving mode that raises cognitive activity. He also suggests using anecdotes to create an emotional element in what would otherwise be purely intellectual material.

Barnhart and Barnhart (1986:26) added that discussion forums and chat rooms ideally lend themselves to synectic interactions under the watchful eye of the instructor. Keller (1983) suggests that synectics can be used to help make the “strange familiar and the familiar strange.”

The final strategy for maintaining learner attention suggested by Keller (1983) is to use of inquiry as a means of fostering epistemic curiosity. Inquiry learning is intended to help learners further develop cognitive skills by having them seek out answers to questions themselves rather than hearing the answers provided. With this strategy, learners are provided with some investigative techniques and then allowed to search for answers to specific questions with the instructor’s guidance. The instructor’s role is to maintain learner curiosity and to resolve learner frustration in the event the learner becomes confused or overwhelmed while searching for answers to questions presented.

Relevance of the Lesson

Keller (1983), suggests that learners need to perceive that important personal needs are being met by the learning situation if motivation is to be sustained over the long term. Important personal needs translate into the relevance of the current learning experience to past experiences and to what learners consider worthwhile in the future.

Strategies suggested by Gagne and Driscoll (1988) for assuring instructional relevance includes the followings:

• Ensuring that content relates to the learner’s past experience and stored knowledge,
• Explaining the present worth of the skills,
• Taking steps to convince the learner of the value of what is learned for future activities that are valued.

Personal needs related to relevance can be enhanced by showing learners that their success is a direct consequence of their efforts when a moderate degree of risk is involved in the learning process and adequate feedback is provided attesting to the learners’ efforts. Keller (1983) stressed that care needs to be taken with the introduction of competition, however, to ensure much stronger students do not disenfranchise weaker students during the learning experience.

Providing students with a measure of control over their learning can also help increase the relevance of what is being learned. Providing choice and allowing students to take responsibility for their learning gives them a sense of pride for accomplishment and achievement. Learner control, however, conjures up different meaning depending on the perspective of the individual designer.

Building of Confidence on Students

To build learner’s confidence, Gagne and Medsker (1996) advocate attribution moulding intended to reinforce the notion that successful learning depends, in the large part, on effort and learning strategies as opposed to external forces. They suggest allowing learners to assume a certain measure of control over their learning as a means of enhancing self-attribution and, by extension, promoting an internal locus of control and self efficiency.

Gagne and Driscoll (1988) suggest the following strategies to promote learner’s confidence:

• Communicate clear and definite learning objectives;
• Sequence successive lessons or learning tasks so that each can be readily mastered;
• Permit learners to take an increasing degree of control over the sequence of learning and over the attainment of successful outcomes.

Gagne and Driscoll (1996) also suggest creating a challenging setting in which learners “perform something that they are not quite capable of performing on their own, but can perform with assistance or practice.” Keller (1983) cautions, however, that the learning situation should begin with activities that relax students and build confidence early in the learning process. He also suggests instructors make an effort at the outset of a learning situation to establish personal contact with the learners as a means of putting the learner at ease. Personal motivation increases with personal expectancy for success, a character trait that is affected in large part by success or failure with previous learning experiences, locus of control and personal causation.

Feedback is an important element for building learner confidence, but not just any feedback. Feedback must emphasize the relationship between learner effort and the results achieved. If it is evident the learner put great effort into a particular assessment vehicle, but achieved poor results, the feedback resulting from this assessment must balance the need for critique with acknowledgement of the effort used up by the learner.

Keller (1983) points out that the feedback should endeavour to increase learner’s expectancy for success by providing suggestions on how the same amount of effort can improve results by using certain technique unknown to the learner.

Creating Satisfaction on the Learners

Gagne and Driscoll (1988) suggest that attainment of learner satisfaction is perhaps the easiest of the attention, relevance and confidence (ARC) components to achieve. Satisfaction is attained using feedback to bring about reinforcement. By using a thorough feedback process with many learning iterations, satisfaction with a single learning experience develops into a self management skill (actually, a cognitive strategy) that give support to learner’s confidence, maintains attention and the relation of learning activities to long-term goals” (Gagne and Driscoll, 1988). Gagne and Driscoll (1996) again note the importance of establishing clear learning objectives at the outset of learning and the negative impact on learner motivation that can occur if those objectives are inconsistent with what is provided in the accompanying instruction.

They also suggest providing instruction as close as possible to the direct application of that instruction so the knowledge or training gained can be employed immediately.

Media Selection for Teaching

Media selection is a very important consideration in determining how a learning intervention will be presented to those who will eventually use the instruction. Today, media relies heavily on technology to transmit and present instruction. However, technology does not always add learning value to the instruction and can, in some cases, have a detrimental learning effect if learners have difficulty in understanding the technology or problems arise when the technology is used.

Heinich et al. (1999) define medium (plural: media) as “a channel of communication, derived from the Latin word meaning

“between”, the term refers to anything that carries information between a source and a receiver” (p. 8). Examples include video, television, diagrams, printed materials, computers and instructors. These are considered instructional media when they carry messages with an instructional purpose.

Providing Feedback to Students

The importance of timely and constructive feedback to the promotion and maintenance of learner motivation has already been mentioned. However, the importance of this motivational tools cannot be over emphasized and deserve further examination.

Keller (1983) makes a distinction between motivational feedback, which should be delivered immediately following a related performance, and formative feedback, which should be delivered before the next performance so the feedback will be useful.

Motivational feedback relates to those elements affecting learner control and self-efficacy. It deals extensively with encouraging the learner as well as providing constructive criticism.

Keller and Burkman (1993) stress that during the learning process, it is very demotivating for learners to never know how well they are performing. People with a high need for achievement, who are already intrinsically motivated have a strong desire for feedback regarding how well they are progressing.

Types of Motivation

According to Smythe (2008), the various types of motivation are as follows:

1. Achievement Motivation: it is the drive to pursue and attend goals. An individual with achievement motivation wishes to achieve objectives and advance up on the ladder of success.
2. Affiliation motivation: It is a drive to relate to people on a social basis. Persons with affiliation motivation perform work better when they are complemented for their favourable attitudes and cooperation.
3. Competence motivation: It is the drive to be good at

something, allowing the individual to perform high quality work. Competence motivated people seek mastery, take prides in developing and using their problem solving skills and strive to be creative when confronted with obstacles.

1. Power motivation: it is the drive to influence people and change situations. Power motivated people wish to create an impact on their organization and are willing to take risk.
2. Attitude motivation: Attitude motivation is how people think and feel. It is their self confidence, their belief in themselves, their attitude to life. It is how they feel about the future and how they react to the past.
3. Fear motivation: Fear motivation coercions a person to act against will. It is instantaneous and gets the job done quickly. It is helpful in the short run.

The Importance of Motivation on Students Performance

According to Dev (1997), there is an assumption that motivation and learning are directly connected to each other and which is supported by teachers, researchers and psychologists for a long period of time. They have pointed out that motivation can be regarded as the key issue in teaching and learning processes, thus students motivation must be preserved, elaborated or even heightened. In order to achieve this lofty mission, teachers and instructors have to make use of various strategies for motivation. Most motivation theorists assume that motivation is involved in the performance of all learned responses, that is, a learned behaviour will not occur unless it is energized.

Maslow (1968) postulated that there is a hierarchy of needs that people must satisfy in search of life’s fulfillment. Once needs of safety, belonging, love, respect, and self-esteem are met, people look to satisfy their need for self-actualization. At this point, they seek to actualize their potential, capacities and talents by developing a fuller knowledge of “and acceptance of, the person’s own intrinsic nature, as an increasing trend toward unity, integration or synergy within the person.” He noted that as people realize self-actualization and find gratification in their accomplishments, their motivation heightens and grows.

Gagne and Driscoll (1988) stated that as act of learning continues over time, several factors influence motivation to continue learning, not the least of which is the learning experience and the quality of the learning products experienced. Keller and Burkman (1993) stated that learner motivation colours all that follows in the learning event and therefore requires the attention of the instructional designer if learning is to be successful. They go on to note that motivation must be a consideration throughout the entire teaching and learning process and not simply an embellishment selectively included at certain stages of the process. Gagne and Driscoll (1988) note that individual exhibiting the need for achievement have been variously described as possessing a universal positive motivation for competence and effective.

Wlodkowski (1999) points out that if two people of identical ability decided to take the same course under identical conditions, the motivated person will invariably do better on the course than the unmotivated person. Attending to elements of social cognitive learning theory during instructional design can only result in a more motivated learner.

Cannon (2001) postulated, however, that students’ motivation upon entering a programme shapes their expectations for the content of the programme and the support they expect to receive once engaged in the course of study. The suggestion being that an unmotivated learner experiencing a learning environment that does not cater to enhancing learner motivation will only serve to substantiate the learner’s expectations.

Blues (1999) observed that when learners are motivated, communication between instructor and student flows smoothly, anxiety associated with learning decreases and learning creativity and engagement is more in evidence. Learners who complete an exciting and rewarding learning experience leave “feeling motivated to seek future learning opportunities and to use what they have learned.”

Perhaps, the most all encompassing view of motivation in the context of learning is provided by Russell (1971). Although he uses the typical classroom environment to contextualize his summary of learner motivational elements, the same context can be applied to distance education.

Russell determined the following:

• The motivation that produces behaviour is the result of a complex array of interrelated motives.
• A teacher cannot know the sources and levels of each motive but can observe the behaviour resulting from the totality.
• Natural tendencies of the student to imitate, explore, manipulate and master his environment are the strongest motives available for school learning;
• Successful experience intensifies the anticipation and expectancy of future success and this experience constitutes a major thrust into and through new learning.
• Setting goals and standards of excellence for themselves increases students’ motivation for achievement.
• Students have characteristic arousal levels, which they seek to maintain.

Macher (1984) observed that performance is a product of a variety of factors, including a combination of the motivational patterns and is, at best, a crude measure of motivation. Keller points out in quoting Kuhl (1985) that, whatever extrinsic motivation energized the learner to act needs to be nurtured during the learning intervention in order to sustain the learner’s intended actions. He stressed that when learning is perceived to be relevant and meets the learner’s needs, it is likely that learner motivation will increase.

Classroom Goal Structures

In addition to enable a framework for investigating the personal differences in student motivation, achievement goal theory is also helpful to analyze the effects of classroom environments on students’ learning patterns and their motivation (Meece,

Anderman, & Anderman, 2006). Because achievement goal theory supported that motivation of students is affected by their individual characteristics, beliefs, and previous academic achievement, as well as by the context in which they learn (Anderman & Patrick, 2012). During the time, which was spent by students in classrooms, they build their own schemas and meaning systems reflecting their aims, experiences, and perceptions regarding to what is underlined in the classroom. These perceptions of what is underlined refer to the concept of classroom goal structures (Ames, 1984, 1992b). In other words, the classroom goal structure can be defined as instructional approach given in a certain classroom (Ames & Archer, 1988). More specifically, classroom goal structures involve students’ aims for their engaging in schoolwork and personal perceptions about the academic tasks, competence, and achievement (Anderman & Patrick, 2012). When viewed from achievement goal theory, classroom goal structures serve as an effective empirical tool, which can be used to investigate the influence of classroom contexts on students’ engagement and motivation (Meece, Anderman, & Anderman, 2006). Therefore, much research has conducted to define the classroom structures that may affect motivation variables (e.g., Ames & Archer, 1988; Ames, 1992a, 1992b; Maehr & Midgley, 1991; Rosenholtz & Simpson, 1984)

Learning environments such as classrooms have often been defined in accordance with specific sorts of instructional requirements, situational restraints, or psychosocial properties regarding to several cognitive and affective results in students. On the other hand, there is a lack of systematic analysis research on the actual classroom structures investigating how specific structures in the classroom can provide different goals to be prominent (Ames, 1992c). However, several instructional strategies have been suggested to encourage the improvement of mastery goals (Palmer, 2005). For example, Epstein (1988) recommended six dimensions of classrooms that influence motivation. These six components can be controlled in the classroom by the teachers. These dimensions are stated as follows: The nature and definition of the tasks (T)which are supposed to be performed by student;presence of autonomy (A)created by teachers during learning processes; in what way teachers recognize (R) students; grouping procedure (G) employed by teachers; forming evaluation (E) which are used; time (T) schedule planned for learning. To represent these dimensions the acronym TARGET has been used.

TARGET system was also used by Ames (1992a, 1992b) to distinguish between mastery oriented and performance oriented classrooms. Mastery oriented classrooms are related to positive influences on motivation whereas, the performance oriented classrooms are negatively related or unrelated o motivational and cognitive elements (Ames, 1992a; Ames, 1992b; Ames & Archer, 1988). Ames (1992c) investigated which classroom environment structures cause a mastery goal orientation, and potential effects of these structures on how students adopt and engage in learning. His literature review (e.g., Brophy, 1987; Epstein, 1988; Marshall, 1988; Marshall & Weinstein, 1984, 1986; Mac Iver, 1987, 1988; Meece, 1991; Rosenholtz & Rosenholtz, 1981; Rosenholtz & Simpson, 1984; Stipek & Daniels, 1988) revealed that there is a consensus about description of specific structures which were found to affect motivational components, specifically how students perceive their abilities and the extent to which ability becomes the classroom’s evaluative dimension. These structures comprise, but are not restricted to, the organization of learning activities and tasks, forms of evaluation practices, and authority and responsibility distribution have great importance in student related outcomes. In the following sections, each of these three dimensions is explained in detail.

Student Achievement in relation to Perceptions of Classroom Goal Structures

Research on the student achievement in relation to classroom goal structure perceptions revealed that students’ perceptions of classroom goal structures predict students' cognitive, emotional, motivational, and behavioral engagement both directly and indirectly by the mediation of some motivational factors (i.e., personal achievement goals, self-efficacy, and perceived instrumentality) (Ames, 1992b; Badiee et al., 2014; Roeser et al., 1996; Rostami et al., 2011; Wolters, 2004). Indeed,

According to Ames (1992c), if students’ cognition, affects, motivation, and behaviors are investigated, their learning environment perceptions should also be added as a factor. She also stated that teacher behaviors affect students' learning environment perceptions. For this reason, teachers' beliefs and behaviors may determine students' motivation, cognition, affect, and behaviors. If teachers provide students with autonomy, and meaningful tasks , or consider students’ errors as a piece of learning process, or center on learning and acquiring new skills, and they can create an environment that stresses mastery goals. Such learning environments are found to be related to more adaptive student outcomes such as better cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagement (Anderman & Patrick, 2012; Gonida, Grigoris, & Kiosseoglou, 2009). However, if they encourage students’ ability, or high succeed with little effort, etc., they can create an environment that stresses performance goals (Ames, 1992b; Garner, 1990; Kaplan et al., 2002; Meece et al., 2006; Nicholls, 1989). Learning environments with performance goals emphasis are generally found to be linked to “students’ beliefs and behaviors that are less conducive and often detrimental, to learning and achievement” (Anderman & Patrick, 2012, p.183).

For example, Patrick et al. (2007) proposed a conceptual model to investigate the relations among perception of the classroom social environment, student engagement, motivational beliefs, and achievement. Accordingly, they conducted their study in the following three key areas: First, students’ perception of the classroom social environment in terms of teacher support, student support, and the promotion of interaction, and its relationship with student engagement (selfregulation and task-related interaction) were examined. Second, motivational beliefs, which involve mastery goals and self-efficacy, were investigated to see whether they serve as a mediator between the classroom environment perceptions and engagement. Lastly, the relationship between student engagement and academic achievement in mathematics was explored. A total of 602 fifth- grade students in Illinois participated in the study. Structural equation modeling was designed. According to results, it can be concluded that if the classroom environment facilitate students to feel supported in classroom, they tended to more engage in tasks. Moreover, students’ motivational beliefs serve as a mediator between students’ classroom environment perceptions and their engagement. The study showed that practicing self-regulation strategies were related to grades in math significantly, so researchers deduced that using selfregulation strategies enhances achievement subject to the assessment’s nature.

Indeed, relevant literature concluded that students’ perceptions of classroom goal structures are also associated with students’ cognitive engagement, which involves students’ utilization of various cognitive and metacognitive strategies. To illustrate, Young (2007) investigated the influences of perceived classroom goals on students’ strategy use. The results showed that students who perceive the learning environments as a place in which learning and understanding of science tasks are stressed tend more to use further cognitive strategies. In the same manner, Ames and Archer (1988) examined the association between the achievement goals that are stressed in the classroom environment as well as utilization of effective learning strategies. The findings showed that there is a positive relationship between using learning strategies and students’ perceptions of mastery goals. Namely, students perceiving mastery goals in the classroom have tendency to utilize more effective learning strategies.

Discipline and Academic Performance of the Students

Webeter’s New encyclopedic dictionary define discipline among others as a training that corrects, mold or perfects the mental faculties or moral character. It is a control gained by enforcing obedience or order. Discipline, according to Galabawa, (2001) is an activity of subjecting someone to a code of behavior, that there is wide spread agreement that an orderly atmosphere is necessary in school for effective teaching and learning to take place. Discipline involves the preparation of an individual to be a complete and efficient member of a community; and a disciplined member of a community is one that knows his/her rights and obligation to the community. That is, the individual must be trained to have self- control, respect, obedience and good manners. Okumbe (1998) identity two types of disciplines, Positive and negatives discipline. The positive discipline also known as self- discipline comes from the aim and desires that are within the person, where there is no element of fear. Okumbe (1998) connects positive discipline with preventive discipline, providing gratification in order to remain committed to a set of values and control individual responsibility in the management of time, respect for school property, school rules and authority and good relation between students and teacher. Punishment in schools are considered as a disciplinary measure and therefore used as a means to maintain good discipline, referring to conformity and order in schools. Punishment as a social institution is intended to control, correct or bring into desired line, the individual or group of individuals behavior. In line with this opinion, Okumbe (1998), said punishment in school is meant to instill discipline and is meted on students who violates the school rules and regulations and that it is administered to bring about the desired change in behavior and improve school discipline if commensurate with the offence committed. Viewing from the angle of accountability, Cotton (2006) opined that punishment in the school system are expected to teach students accountability for their mistakes, that is, to teach them the relationship between their behaviors and the outcome. However, Omari (2006) argued that punishment does not teach the correct behavior, that it destroys even the opportunity to demonstrate the acceptable behavior. He asserts that from the age of eighteen years onwards, there is a growing opposition to any use of physical force in disciplining the individual. This argument brings us to the negative form of discipline which according to Okumber (1998) occurs when our individual is force to obey orders blindly or without reasoning. In which, he continued, the individual may pretend to do the right thing or behave well when the superiors are present but turned the other way round when his/her superiors are absent. He illustrated his argument with a situation where a student may behave well when the teacher is present but resort to mischief as soon as the teacher is out sight. 951 This discipline, the positive discipline, also referred to as self-discipline, boost academic achievement. Time management not only an element of discipline but an indicator of self - discipline is an essential ingredient in goal attainment, academic outcome inclusive. In their view, Eilam and Aharon (2003) stressed that time management can be viewed as a way of monitoring and regulating self as regards the performance of multiple tasks within a certain time period and, therefore, for a better academic outcome, the students’ self -attitude and participation is required as a principle of time management practice. Success can only be achieved when students discipline themselves and show a good management of time. Kelly (2004) expresses similar view and argued that efficient use of time on the part of the students and school administrators directly associated with increased academic performance. However, some disciplinary actions are counter academic achievement. Canter, (2006) argues that although discipline is one of the most common problems for teachers, some punishment such as corporal punishment should not be used because no evidence suggests that they have produced better result academically, morally or that it improves school discipline. Corporal punishment may instill fear in the mind of the student or it may lead to physical injury if not well administered by the teacher. Both situations may lead to absconding or absence from school and consequently reducing the academic performance of the student. Hence, it is important that teachers need always realize the appropriateness of a punishment before meting out on the student. It is important to ensure that the best behavior and conditions are established, inculcated and maintained for effective learning to take place in our secondary schools. This could be achieved through the teacher’s effective classroom management and advanced planning by the school administrator and the teacher. Effective teaching and learning is correlated with higher academic outcome and this is better achieved in a disciplined school environment in which the student and teachers know that they are on the same side working together to achieve higher academic outcome.

Effective Teaching and Academic Performance of the Students

Teaching is an art and the quality of teaching depends on the love, dedication, devotion, training and the experience of the teacher towards the subject of knowledge. It is he who plans, organizes, designs, directs, motivates and inspires others to learn, using standard teaching techniques to impart knowledge (Okolocha & Onyeneke, 2003). Teaching involves human resource development for individual and economic growth, done systematically by professionals who have acquired some skills and knowledge through training and or experience. In Akinmusire (2012) opinion, to make desirable impact, teaching must aim at total development of the individual, that is, to enhance intellectual capabilities, developmental and cognitive intellectuality, foster psychosocial skills and draw out neuro-physical talent of the learners. These facts obviously show that teaching is very important hence schools give high priority to developing effective teaching and solving teaching challenges. According to Okolie (2014), effective teaching may include high level of creativity in analyzing, synthesizing and presenting knowledge in new and effective ways. He continued that, it should instill in the learners the ability to be analytical, intellectually curious, culturally aware, employable and capable of leadership. Omoifo and Urevbu (2007) expressed similar opinion and said, effective teaching implies the use of clearly formulated objectives by the teacher, illustrated instruction that will enable students to acquire desired knowledge content, apply the knowledge to classroom and other related problem, think and take independent decisions and the use of evaluation technique by the teacher. 952 Akomolefe (2010) established some of the characteristics of effective teaching, they include: attention on students achievement, quality teaching responsive to students learning process, effective and efficient learning opportunities, pedagogical practices that create cohesive learning community, feedback on students task engagement amongst others. Teaching will be said to be effective when it impacted upon the character of the learner, leading to transformation of the learner. Holding similar view, Adegbile (2008) said the object of effective teaching includes assisting learners to conceptualize ideas, process thoughts and develop their potentials, contribute to thinking and creativity in the subject, nurture and sustain student, suit the circumstances of teaching and learning and suit the individual teachers’ ability and interest. He also describe an effective teacher as efficient, reliable and courteously equipped with professionalism, creative in imagination, busting ingenuity and depth of experience necessary for optimal performance and achievement of goal. An effective teacher is able to utilize appropriate technique to gain and maintain the attention of students. He is able to show requisite pedagogical insight and professional qualities and use same to direct the teaching and learning process to the point of achieving stated educational objective. It is not possible to guarantee a meaningful academic outcome without effective teachers to translate the laudable academic curriculum into practice in the classroom. Teachers obviously are the hub of the educational system. According to Okolocha, and Onyeneke, (2013), teachers are the most important factor in students learning next to students themselves. Still stressing on teachers effectiveness, Okolocha and Onyeneke (2013) said the importance of teachers, the application of pedagogical knowledge into classroom oriented plan of action constitute the most essential fabric upon which the success of the school, its administration and the entire education system rest. Similarly, Ademola (2007) opined that an educational system with low quality teachers will produce students with poor inspiration and aspiration. Such students he said, will not grasp enough of the subject matter and cannot learn with ambition. Babalola (2009) posited that experience in Nigeria has revealed that students’ academic achievement in secondary schools largely depend on the competence and dedication of the teacher who has a significant role to play in the reshaping of the creative potentials and ability of students. From these facts, it becomes clear that students’ academic performance is to a great extent dependent on the effectiveness of the teacher. According to Afe (2001), teachers have been shown to have important influence on students’ academic achievement and they also play a crucial role in educational attainment because the teacher is ultimately responsible for translating policy into action and principles based on practice during interaction with students. Although, teachers strong effect would significantly influence students’ academic achievement, other intervening variables such as socio economic background, family support, intellectual aptitude of student, personality of students, self-confidence and previous instructional quality have been found to also influence students examination score either positively or negatively (Starr, 2002).Even though, students’ academic score are not the only predictors of teachers effectiveness but students, administrators, colleagues and teachers self -evaluation has been used to evaluate teachers’ effectiveness. Barnett (2003), Imhanlahini and Aguele, (2006) indicated that studies have shown that students rating are valuable indicators of teachers effectiveness. As indicated by Barnett (2003) above, several studies including: Adu and Olatundun (2007) Adeliwura and Tayo (2007) Schecter and Thum (2004) Starr (2002) Lockhead and Knomenan, (1998) and others have been conducted on the influence of teachers teaching on the learning outcome of students as measured by students’ academic performance and the studies suggested that effective teaching is a significant predictor of students’ academic achievement. 953 Therefore, effective teachers should produce students of higher academic performance. The literature reviewed indicates that effective teachers positively influence the academic achievement of students. However, students related factors were also identified as being capable of influencing students’ academic performance positively or negatively.

2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Social-cognitive Theory

We take a social-cognitive approach to motivation (see also Pintrich et al., 1993; Elliot and Church, 1997; Wigfield and Cambria, 2010). This approach emphasizes the important role of students’ beliefs and their interpretations of actual events, as well as the role of the achievement context for motivational dynamics (see Weiner, 1992; Pintrich et al., 1993; Wigfield and Cambria, 2010). Social cognitive models of achievement motivation (e.g., expectancy-value theory by Eccles and Wigfield, 2002; hierarchical model of achievement motivation by Elliot and Church, 1997) comprise a variety of motivation constructs that can be organized in two broad categories (see Pintrich et al., 1993, p. 176): students’ “beliefs about their capability to perform a task,” also called expectancy components (e.g., ability self-concepts, self-efficacy), and their “motivational beliefs about their reasons for choosing to do a task,” also called value components (e.g., task values, goals). The literature on motivation constructs from these categories is extensive (see Wigfield and Cambria, 2010). In this article, we focus on selected constructs, namely students’ ability self-concepts (from the category “expectancy components of motivation”), and their task values and goal orientations (from the category “value components of motivation”).

According to the social cognitive perspective, students’ motivation is relatively situation or context specific (see Pintrich et al., 1993). To gain a comprehensive picture of the relation between students’ motivation and their academic achievement, we additionally take into account a traditional personality model of motivation, the theory of the achievement motive (McClelland et al., 1953), according to which students’ motivation is conceptualized as a relatively stable trait. Thus, we consider the achievement motives hope for success and fear of failure besides students’ ability self-concepts, their task values, and goal orientations in this article. In the following, we describe the motivation constructs in more detail.

Students’ ability self-concepts are defined as cognitive representations of their ability level (Marsh, 1990; Wigfield et al., 2016). Ability self-concepts have been shown to be domain-specific from the early school years on (e.g., Wigfield et al., 1997). Consequently, they are frequently assessed with regard to a certain domain (e.g., with regard to school in general vs. with regard to math).

In the present article, task values are defined in the sense of the expectancy-value model by Eccles et al. (1983) and Eccles and Wigfield (2002). According to the expectancy-value model there are three task values that should be positively associated with achievement, namely intrinsic values, utility value, and personal importance (Eccles and Wigfield, 1995). Because task values are domain-specific from the early school years on (e.g., Eccles et al., 1993; Eccles and Wigfield, 1995), they are also assessed with reference to specific subjects (e.g., “How much do you like math?”) or on a more general level with regard to school in general (e.g., “How much do you like going to school?”).

Students’ goal orientations are broader cognitive orientations that students have toward their learning and they reflect the reasons for doing a task (see Dweck and Leggett, 1988). Therefore, they fall in the broad category of “value components of motivation.” Initially, researchers distinguished between learning and performance goals when describing goal orientations (Nicholls, 1984; Dweck and Leggett, 1988). Learning goals (“task involvement” or “mastery goals”) describe people’s willingness to improve their skills, learn new things, and develop their competence, whereas performance goals (“ego involvement”) focus on demonstrating one’s higher competence and hiding one’s incompetence relative to others (e.g., Elliot and McGregor, 2001). Performance goals were later further subdivided into performance-approach (striving to demonstrate competence) and performance-avoidance goals (striving to avoid looking incompetent, e.g., Elliot and Church, 1997; Middleton and Midgley, 1997). Some researchers have included work avoidance as another component of achievement goals (e.g., Nicholls, 1984; Harackiewicz et al., 1997). Work avoidance refers to the goal of investing as little effort as possible (Kumar and Jagacinski, 2011). Goal orientations can be assessed in reference to specific subjects (e.g., math) or on a more general level (e.g., in reference to school in general).

In Young’s (1997) longitudinal study, she investigated how to increase effectiveness of middle school students' learning through goal orientation theory perspective. To do this, she examined the relationships among effective learning, motivation, cognition over time, and perceptions of students' classroom context. Data were collected from 316 (169 males, 137 females) students at two times, one (Time 1) was in sixth grade and the other one (Time 2) was in the seventh grade. To assess students’ personal motivational beliefs (task-focused goal orientation, extrinsicfocused goal orientation, and relative ability-focused goal orientation), strategy use, and perceptions of the classroom goal structures (performance-focused and taskfocused), a survey, which contains original items from the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey (PALS) (Midgley, Maehr, & Urdan, 1993) and other sources, were administered. All these dimensions were estimated in English and mathematics courses.According to results, goal orientation and strategy use showed stability. Namely, students who have a great task-focused goal orientation in the 6th grade tended more to have stronger task-focused goal orientation in the 7th grade. Results revealed also that students’ perceptions of the classroom goal structure have influence on personal goals and strategy use. Students’ perceptions of the classroom as task goal structured correlated with deeper strategy use positively and significantly. Thus, it appeared that task (mastery) oriented classroom goal structures are positively linked to cognitive engagement.

Similarly, Lyke and Young (2006) investigated the following relationships:

(1) between students’ goal orientations (intrinsic or extrinsic) and their cognitive strategy use (2) between students’ goal orientation and their perceptions of the classroom goal structure (task or performance structured) (3) between students’ perceptions of classroom goal structure and their cognitive strategy use. A total of 322 college students were attended in the study. The Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey (PALS) (Midgley et al., 1996) was administered. Results were consistent with the earlier work. Firstly, a positive relationship between intrinsic goal orientation and use of deep cognitive strategies was found. Secondly, results showed that students’ perceptions of classroom environment were significantly related with students’ goal orientations. Lastly, there was a positive relationship between students’ perceptions of classroom task structure and utilize of deep cognitive strategies as well as use of rehearsal. However, there was no association between students’ perceptions of classroom performance structure and use of either cognitive strategy.

In another study, Wolters (2004) examined the relations among different goal structures and goal orientations, as well as how these constructs were related students’ academic functioning (motivational engagement, cognitive engagement, and achievement in mathematics. A total of 525 junior high school students (272 female, and 253 male; 299 seventh grade, and 226 eighth grade) participated in the study. He used a seven point Likert-styled survey which contains three subscale; students’ personal motivational beliefs and attitudes; students’ use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies; and students’ perceptions of mathematics classroom. To measure students’ perceptions of the mastery and performance classroom goal structures, items adapted from Midgley et al. (1998) were utilized. To determine students’ personal motivational beliefs (three personal achievement goal orientations, and perceived self-efficacy) items from Midgley et al. (1998) were utilized. To determine students’ motivational engagement, four scales (choice, effort, persistence, procrastination) were developed. To assess students’ cognitive engagement (strategy use, metacognitive strategies) items from Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, and McKeachie

(1993) were used. Finally, to assess students’ achievement, their grades scored in math class were utilized. Findings from the hierarchical regressions predicting students’ motivational engagement showed that students who found their mathematics class as more mastery structured had tendency to show more motivational engagement. When it comes to predicting students’ use of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies, findings revealed that mastery structure positively predicted both types of strategies. Moreover, results showed that when students perceived their classroom as underlining mastery goals (β=.22 and .16, p < .01, respectively) and when they adopted mastery goals for themselves (β=.47 and .47, p < .01, respectively), they tended to use both cognitive and metacognitive strategies. However, the other motivational predictors did not explain these dimensions of cognitive engagement. Moreover, mastery goal structure and mastery goals were important predictors for achievement. In conclusion, it was suggested that mastery structure and mastery orientation were associated with adaptive outcomes in all areas.

Based on the multiple goal perspective of goal orientation theory, Lau and Lee (2008) investigated students’ achievement goals and their relations with classroom environment perceptions, and strategy use. The sample consisted of 925 (502 boys and 423 girls) 8th grade students from junior secondary students schools in Hong Kong. To assess the classroom environment perceptions related to motivating tasks, autonomy support, and mastery evaluation, a scale obtained from the Survey of

Classroom Goals Structures was used. To measure the students’ achievement goals, as well as strategy use, scales taken from the Motivation and Strategy Use Survey (Greene et al., 2004) were used. They hypothesized that students’ classroom environment perceptions would affect mastery goals, performance-approach goals, and perceived instrumentality and, in turn, would affect their strategy use. Besides the indirect effects, it was also hypothesized that classroom environment perception would have direct effects on students’ strategy use. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was employed to test the proposed model. Results showed that students’ classroom environment perceptions (.26) were significantly and positively associated to their strategy use. Moreover, there were also indirect effects (.29) on students’ strategy use through the effect of achievement goals. Especially, the perception of mastery-oriented classroom environment was intimately associated with students’ mastery goals, and the best predicting variable of strategy use was found as having a mastery goal.

In the earlier study of Lau and Lee (2006), in the same vein, relations among students’ perceived classroom environment, achievement goals, and strategy use were examined. The sample consisted of 1522 (805 boys and 717girls) 5th and 8th grade students from Hong Kong. Students’ classroom environment perceptions were evaluated with respect to motivating tasks, autonomy support, and mastery evaluation via Survey of Classroom Goals Structures (Greene et al., 2004). Together with students’ strategy use, achievement goals (mastery goal, performance-approach goal, and perceived instrumentality) were also measured through Motivation and Strategy Use Survey (Greene et al., 2004). Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was conducted to investigate the hypothesized relationships among students’ perceived classroom environment, goal orientation, and strategy use. The model proposed that students’ classroom environment perception had influence on their goal orientations and their goal orientations, in turn, had effects on their strategy use. Apart from these indirect effects, classroom environment was also hypothesized to affect students’ strategy use directly. Results showed that students’ classroom environment perceptions were significantly related to their personal achievement goals and strategy use. In addition to the direct effects (.26), findings also revealed the indirect effects (.42) of classroom environment perception on strategy use mediated through their mastery goals. Despite the strongest predictor of strategy use was mastery goal, perceived instrumentality and performance-approach goals also related with strategy use and mastery goals. Researchers suggested that adding perceived instrumentality to motivation researches should also be highlighted.

The influence of classroom goal structure on students’ behavioral engagement has also been studied by several researchers. For example, Karabenick’s study (2004) investigated the relationships among students’ help seeking as part of behavioral engagement, their classroom goal structure perceptions and their achievement goals in a two-stage study. Study1 included 883 college students, and 852 college students were participated in Study 2. The results of study1 showed that help seeking is identified by students’ demand to get guiding help from teachers and avoidance patterns such as threat, avoidance intentions, seeking expedient help. The results of study 2 revealed that students’ help-seeking approach is positively predicted by their perception of mastery goal structure, whereas help-seeking avoidance patterns are negatively predicted.

In a longitudinal study, Turner et al. (2002) examined the relationship among students’ avoidance strategies (handicapping themselves, avoiding of help seeking), their perceptions of classroom goal structures (performance goal structure and a mastery goal structure) and teachers’ use of instructional discourse in mathematics with regard to motivation of instruction and regulating the classroom activities and time. The sample of the study was 1,197 sixth-grade students. Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered. Results showed that students’ mastery goal structure perceptions negatively predicted each of the avoidance strategy (avoiding novelty, avoiding seeking help and self- handicapping strategies). In other words, when students are in a class emphasizing understanding, learning, effort, and enjoying, they use less avoidance strategies. The findings also revealed that student exhibited less avoidance strategies in their classrooms where their teachers supported their learning with both instructional and motivational support. Specifically, teachers in these classrooms assisted them to understand topics, created chances for them to show new competencies, and presented significant motivational support to learn. Authors suggested that if students are in a performance goal structure, they tend to demonstrate avoidance behavior (i.e. less behavioral engagement).

Similarly, Ryan, Gheen, and Midgley (1998) investigated how students’ perceptions of classroom goal structures are corresponded to their help seeking avoidance. A total of 516 elementary school students were participated in the study. Results of the hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) showed that a perceived emphasis on self-improvement (students' perceptions of a mastery classroom goal structure) were related to lower level of help avoidance; otherwise, a perceived emphasis on relative skill (students' perceptions of performance goal structure) was associated with to higher levels help avoidance. Further, students’ avoidance of help seeking was associated with their academic efficacy negatively. On the other hand, it was found that students' avoidance from seeking help was not strongly associated with their academic efficacy in classrooms where their teachers thought that students' social and emotional needs should be taken into consideration.

Gonida, Voulala, and Kiosseoglou (2009) examined the predictive roles of students’ perceived goal structures and parent goals on students’ goal orientations as well as their emotional and behavioral engagement. In addition, they searched if students' goal orientations mediate the links between perceived school or parent goals and engagement. Two hundred and seventy one students (134seventh graders and 137 ninth graders) participated in the study. Student engagement was assessed using the questionnaire developed by Wellborn and Connell (1987). Students’ perceived school goal structures assessed by the survey developed by (Midgley et al., 1995). To assess students' perceived parent goals the survey ‘Perceptions of Parents, Home Life, and Neighborhood’ developed by Midgley et al. (2000) was used. Path analyses were conducted. Results showed that behavioral engagement was predicted by perceived mastery goals directly and indirectly through its effect on student mastery goal orientation, whereas emotional engagement was not predicted. In addition, students’ mastery goal orientations predicted behavioral engagement and emotional engagement.

Likewise, Reeve, Jang, Carrell, Jeon, and Barch (2004)conducted a research to test (1) whether or not high school teachers benefit from a workshop experience to develop their existing motivating styles, and (2) how students’ engagement would be affected from such an experimentally initiated alteration in their teacher’s motivating style. To test first hypothesis, they organized a workshop which aimed to expose teachers to information on how to be autonomy supportive. The data were collected from a sample of 20 high school teachers (9 women and 11 men). A rating sheet, which contained items concerning teachers’ autonomy support, two aspects of student engagement (engagement measure1: task involvement; and engagement measure 2: influence attempts), teachers’ provision of structure, and teachers’ provision of involvement was prepared. It was a 10-week period study. During the first week, raters observed each teacher. After this, one half of the teachers were randomly assigned into an experimental group, and the other half was into a control group. During weeks 3–5, the experimental group attended an informational session and engaged in independent study concerning ways of being autonomy supportive toward students. During week 5, all 20 teachers were observed by raters again. During weeks 6-8, the control group were exposed to get the informational session, and participated in independent study. Finally, all teachers were observed by the raters for third time. In order to test hypothesis 1, they used analysis of covariance.

Teachers’ autonomy-supportive behaviors during the second observation was used as the dependent measure, whereas their autonomy-supportive behaviors during the first observation as the covariate. Results showed that the experimental group showed significantly more autonomy-supportive behaviors (Adj.M = 4.57) than the control group (Adj.M = 2.91), F(1, 17) = 11.68, d = 1.94, p < .01. In order to find the extent to which teachers’ enhanced use of autonomy-supportive behaviors predicted students’ engagement (Hypothesis 2), two sets of hierarchical regressions were conducted. As the outcome measure, students’ engagement during the second observation was used in the first part, whereas students’ engagement during the third observation was used in the second part of regressions. According to results of first part, teachers’ autonomy support affected both measures of engagement uniquely and significantly (for engagement measure 1, F (1, 16) = 9.63, p < .01 (β = .59); and for engagement measure 2, F (1, 16) = 6.74, p < .01 (β = .59). The results from the second part of regressions showed that teachers’ autonomy support during the third observation predict the engagement outcomes significantly: For engagement measure 1, F(1, 16) = 14.70, p < .01 (β = .61); and for engagement measure 2, F(1, 16) = 10.04, p < .01 (β = .54). These results revealed that teachers who were informed about how to support students’ autonomy through an informational session could be better in teaching and motivating their students in terms of more autonomysupportive ways. They also concluded that autonomy support had positive effect on students’ engagement.

In a similar study, Shih (2008) investigated the relationships among students’ perceptions of autonomy support as an important component of classroom goal structures, achievement goal orientations, and self-regulatory styles. Additionally she examined how much these concepts could predict students’ emotional and behavioral engagement. They worked with a sample of 343 (169 boys, 174 girls) eighth-grade

Taiwanese students. In order to assess students’ achievement goal orientations, she developed a questionnaire. To measure students’ autonomy supportive perceptions, Learning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ; Williams & Deci, 1996) was utilized. To determine the degree to which students perceived themselves as autonomously against extrinsically motivated, the Self- Regulatory Style Questionnaire-Academics (Ryan & Connell, 1989; Connell & Ryan, 1987) was utilized. Finally, to measure the degree to which students behaved in specific ways or felt specific feelings in classroom (Miserandino, 1996), the scales from the Rochester Assessment of Intellectual and Social Engagement (RAISE) were used. Hierarchical Regression analysis was conducted. Results indicated that perceived autonomy support significantly predicted each aspect of behavioral engagement (for involvement, β =.55, p < .001; for persistence, β= .39, p <.001; for avoiding, β= -.18, p <.01; for ignoring, β=-.34, p < .001; for participation, β= .46, p < .001). Results of the regressions predicting students’ emotional engagement were showed that perception of autonomy support was a meaningful positive predictor for emotions such as curiosity (β=.56, p < .001) and enjoyment (β= .54, p < .001), whereas negative predictor for anxiety (β= -.29, p < .001) and boredom (β=-.42, p < .001). Moreover, to determine if motivational profiles of behaviorally engaged students had effect on their emotional engagement, multivariate analysis of variance was conducted. Results supported that emotionally engaged students perceive their teachers as more autonomy supportive than did behaviorally engaged students. Moreover, behaviorally as well as emotionally engaged students showed higher levels of identified regulation, and mastery-approach goal orientation, intrinsic motivation than behaviorally but not emotionally engaged students. Additionally, this study suggested that besides the benefits of autonomy-related concepts for students’ engagement, there were also beneficial influences of mastery approach goals on engagement.

In another study, Jang, Reeve, and Deci, (2010) examined the relation between two components of teachers’ instructional methods: autonomy support, and structure. Structure concerns the extent to which teachers clearly communicate the expectations and ways of successfully fulfilling desired educational outcomes

Additionally, they wondered how each of these aspects of teachers’ styles predicted students’ engagement. Based on the related literature, they hypothesized that autonomy support as well as structure would have positive supports on students’ engagement. The study was assessed by two ways (a measure scored by trained raters, and a measure self-reported by students). 133 teachers and their 2,523 (9th, 10th, and11th grade) students were participated in study. Teachers’ instructional styles and students’ behavioral engagement was assessed by trained observers with a rating sheet, which was a 1–7 Likert scale. In this scale, there were six aspects of students’ behaviors at the classroom (attention, effort, verbal participation, persistence, positive emotion, and voice) to assess behavioral engagement. In addition to this, a self-report questionnaire, four worded items from work of Fredricks et al. (2004), was used to measure the degree to which students were behaviorally engaged during class. Correlational and hierarchical linear modeling analyses were conducted. The hierarchical linear modeling analyses showed that autonomy support significantly predicted both measures of students’ behavioral engagement, while structure significantly predicted just students’ collective behavioral engagement (not students’ self-reported measure). According to correlation results, two components of teachers’ methods (autonomy supportive and structure) correlated positively and significantly with each other r (133) = .60, p < .01, as well as the two engagement measures. Therefore, they concluded that both of the autonomy support and structure predicted students’ behavioral engagement.

Additionally, Thaliah and Hashim (2008) conducted a study to investigate how autonomy support affected student’s classroom engagement. A total of 378 students (199 boys and 179 girls) from Malaysia were the sample of the study.

According to the results, teachers’ autonomy supportive style was a meaningful predictor for students’ cognitive and behavioral engagement in ESL classroom.

Providing a support for the abovementioned literature, Reeve and Lee (2014) stated that if teachers create a mastery-oriented classroom climate, their students will pay more attention to exerting effort; focus on emotions of pleasure from hard work; use deeper cognitive strategies; and see other people as sources of knowledge, help and support. In other words, these students will concentrate on their all aspects of engagement (i.e., behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic). The reason is that agentic engagement occurs when students can easily reflect their opinions or feelings during an activity as an active participant (Ainley, 2012; Assor, 2012; Brooks, Brooks, & Goldstein, 2012; Hipkins, 2002). As noted in Reeve and Lee’s study

(2014), the way of teachers’ determination of classroom evaluation criteria, such as reactions to students’ mistakes, orient may lead students to have higher or lower behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic engagement.

In the relevant literature, in addition to studies concerning relationships between classroom goal structures and student engagement, some studies concerning the relationships among the each aspects of the student engagement have been existed. Moreover, while conceptualizing the student engagement researchers mentioned that aspects of student engagement (behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic) are interrelated (Reeve & Tseng, 2011; Reeve, 2012; Reeve, 2013). Nevertheless, there is a gap in the relevant literature about how engagement aspects are related with each other (Li & Lerner, 2013). There has been no affirmed model in the literature to predict the interrelationships among all aspects of student engagement. On the other hand, some evidence concerning one or two pairs of associations such as behavioral- emotional, or emotional-cognitive have been existed (Li & Lerner, 2013). For example, Ladd et al., (2000) revealed that the kindergarten students who like school (emotional engagement) are likely to more involve in classroom activities cooperatively (behavioral engagement) during the school year. Skinner et al. (2008) also noted that theories defining how engagement aspects affect each other over time are existing, but have not been fully tested or determined clearly yet.Therefore, they conducted a longitudinal study, which showed that there are significant links from behavior to emotion, and from emotion to behavior; however, the significant effects of emotional engagement on changes in behavioral engagement were stronger.Likewise, Li et al., (2010) also revealed that young adolescents’ emotional engagement result in behavioral engagement. In addition, some studies based on motivational framework proposed that emotional engagement and cognitive engagement provide active participation and cause increases in behavioral engagement (Deci & Ryan 1985; Skinner et al. 2008). By this means, thoughts and emotions can awake or prevent the action (Heckhausen, 2000). Yet, there is no evidence concerning how cognitive engagement related to behavioral or emotional engagement, and therefore there is insufficient knowledge about whether deeper strategy use provides more intense attendance or more positive emotions toward school (Li & Lerner, 2013). Additionally, to investigate the interrelationships among the three components of student engagement (behavioral, emotional, and cognitive) over three years, Li and Lerner (2013) conducted a study. According to results, there is a bidirectional relationship between behavioral and emotional engagement. Moreover, behavioral engagement affects cognitive engagement; however, reverse of this link is not supported.

In sum, aforementioned studies revealed that students’ perceptions of classroom goal structures are related their engagement to classroom activities. In addition to direct effects, relevant studies also revealed indirect effects of classroom goal structures on student engagement mediated through motivational constructs such as mastery goals and self- efficacy. There is evidence that students who perceive the classroom as autonomy supportive are likely to engage in activities behaviorally, emotionally, cognitively and agentically than other source of mastery oriented classroom goal structures (i.e., mastery evaluation and motivating tasks). Although there is relatively limited evidence in the literature, it can be deduced that mastery evaluation and motivating tasks are related to students’ behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. Among the engagement variables, cognitive engagement is the most investigated component of engagement construct. Although, studies on the agentic engagement is relatively new and incomplete, the present study predicts that there is an relationship between perceived classroom goal structures and agentic engagement because, when students perceive the classroom as autonomy supportive, they can share their opinions about how to improve the classroom practices or express their preferences easily. Similarly, if students perceive that the evaluation practices focus on learning and fair, they may enthusiastically ask questions to improve their learning. Finally, if students perceive the tasks as interesting and motivating, they may recognize what they are interested in and they may explain these to their teacher.

McClelland et al. (1953) distinguish the achievement motives hope for success (i.e., positive emotions and the belief that one can succeed) and fear of failure (i.e., negative emotions and the fear that the achievement situation is out of one’s depth). According to McClelland’s definition, need for achievement is measured by describing affective experiences or associations such as fear or joy in achievement situations. Achievement motives are conceptualized as being relatively stable over time. Consequently, need for achievement is theorized to be domain-general and, thus, usually assessed without referring to a certain domain or situation (e.g., Steinmayr and Spinath, 2009). However, Sparfeldt and Rost (2011) demonstrated that operationalizing achievement motives subject-specifically is psychometrically useful and results in better criterion validities compared with a domain-general operationalization.

2.3 EMPIRICAL REVIEW

In a related study, Etuck (1980) carried out a research work on motivation and job satisfaction among workers in Cross River State. The objective of the study was to determine the influence of motivation on the performance of Nigeria workers. To achieve the aim of the objectives, four (4) research questions were raised. Survey design method was adopted for the study and the population of the study stood at 3,200. Simple percentage was adopted for data analysis. The result of the respondents revealed that:

• Motivating workers through payment of salaries and other

benefits will enhance staff performance.

• Promoting staff welfare and provision of needed facilities and equipment has a significant role on staff motivation.

Although the research tried and the work was used for the present study, more especially in the area of organization and literature review, but it was observed that the sample for the study was not mentioned in the study.

Lass (2009) conducted a research work titled “The Role of Motivation on Teaching and Learning of Economics Subject in Zaria Local Government of Kaduna.” The objectives of the study include to:

• examine the attitude of students towards Economics subject in Zaria Local Government of Kaduna State.
• identify the role of motivation in teaching and learning of Economics subject in Zaria Local Government of Kaduna State.

To achieve the objectives of the study, four research questions were raised in line with the objectives of the study. Survey design method was adopted for the study. Population of the study stood at 360 respondents comprises of teachers and students of Economics courses. 40% (140) were randomly selected to represent the entire population. Four Likert structured questionnaire was used for the study. The researcher distributed the questionnaire personally and results collected were subjected to statistical analysis using simple percentage. The results revealed among others that:

• Students have positive attitudes on Economics subjects in Government Secondary Schools in Zaria metropolis.
• There is need for motivation in teaching and learning of Economics subjects.
• If students were well motivated, it will help to enhance students’ interest and promote their performance.

The researcher recommends among others that government and voluntary agencies should help to provide Economics textbooks, teaching equipments and facilities that will help in motivating both the teachers and students. Teachers should use different methods of teaching and learning. This will help in motivating students’ performance. The researcher did a nice work, however, the sample for the study is inadequate, thus, the result cannot be generalized.

Akinsola (1994) investigated the relationship among college students’ learning and performance goal orientation, drawing on questionnaire data from ages 17-22 of college students’ total 312. It was reported that students who had a learning profile motivation had completed more semesters. They concluded that the younger students who were externally motivated tended to posses more irrational beliefs while other internally motivated students tended to be more involved in learning. George wills (1990) hypothesised that conceptions of success of achievement goal affect both the inclination to and actual performance. This was tested in a sample of 673 Chinese adolescents. Sex differences were found in the conception of success. As part of larger project concerned with motivation factors in educational attainment Sinna et.al. (1998) focussing on Asian girls, 985 secondary school students in London and England found that Asian students of both sexes rated parents and friend as more important in contributing to academic success. Yoloye (1976) carried out a descriptive survey on the cause of poor academic achievement in Northern Nigeria. He reported that majority of the children who were labelled as backward or unintelligent to school were good, but they were handicapped by physical characteristics such as defective vision, learning defect and other preventable diseases. Bridgeman (1978) reported that standard school achievement test is somewhat predictive of later academic performance. Bank and Finlapson (1980) found that successful students were found to have significantly higher motivation for achievement than unsuccessful students. Moreover, (Johnson, 1996; Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2004) revealed significant relationship between academic performance and motivation. In Nigeria, a study carried out by Akinsola (1994) on academic motivation using 276 students revealed that there is an agreement between academic performance and motivation.