THE EFFECTS OF DIVORCE ON THE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF STUDENTS IN NIGERIA SOCIETY

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

2.1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Divorce

Patricia Diedrick defines divorce “as a highly disruptive life event creating effects that range from devastation to relief”(1991).

Stinett and Walters in Kitching (2008)sees divorce “as a way of terminating a marriage situation in which one or both partners cannot relate to each other in a satisfying manner or cannot interact together without psychological injury to one or both.

The Heinemann (1987)English dictionary again sees divorce “as the ending of a marriage by a court decree or any complete separation .

It is a painful and traumatic experience when a once happy marriage falls apart. It hurts even more when the marriage ends up in the divorce court. Harvey and Judith Rosenstock (1988) says, “divorce is a juncture in the life cycle that directly affects tens of thousands in America daily and, by extension –parents, relatives, friends and associates-hundreds of thousands” . The Afrikaans Sunday newspaper, Rapport, connects with the above when it declares that, “in 2008, 186’ 522 marriages were solemnized in South Africa.” The article, further, reveals that from the above figure, “28’924 marriages” end up in the divorce court and that in “2009, 1’150 people divorced for the third time” (December, 2009). It is thus comprehensible that divorce is not confined to one particular geographical area, but is a social ill which impacts people’s lives on a global scale. Many marriages breakdown and end in divorce because people do not recognize the early warning signs that the marriage are in trouble. Literature review on divorce demonstrates a number of common causes that lead to divorce in many families. Craig highlights eight main causes which cause divorce in marriage. They are: 

1. Low commitment to marriage; 
2. Unrealistic expectations; 
3. Boredom; 
4. Interpersonal incompetence; 
5. An affair; 
6. A developmental or situational crisis; 
7. An imbalance in the relationship; 
8. Poor communication craig(2004).

COMMON CAUSES WHICH LEAD TO DIVORCE IN MARRIAGE

low commitment to marriage

According to the Heinemann (1985) English dictionary, commitment “is the act of committing, or is the state of being committed or a promise to do something. The Merrian dictionary defines commitment “as a responsibility or obligation to do something. The above sentiments clearly describe the importance of marital commitment in the covenantal relationship. Craig (2004) is correct when he says that “when couples get married, they make a commitment to three things: Their partner; The relationship; A belief in the permanence of marriage as a covenant relationship.” He further says, “If they are not totally committed in all three areas, the relationship will suffer. It is, thus, clear where there is lack of commitment in the marriage bond; the relationship will not only suffer but will eventually lead to divorce. It is also a known fact when couples “over commit themselves to work or church, or go after things such as sport, or friends, and are not totally invested in making the marriage their first priority, emotional distance, mistrust, and feelings of betrayal begin to emerge” (Craig 2004). Where the marriage vows are, for some couples, just a ceremony, the conditions under which such marriage was first established may also undermine a commitment to the marriage. Craig is right, and I agree with him, when he says “if couples are immature and marry too young, if they carry a lot of unresolved issues from their family origin, or if they get married for all the wrong reasons (e.g. to escape, to avoid loneliness, because of social pressures, or pregnancy), these can affect the level of bonding and commitment necessary for a stable relationship”

unrealistic expectations

Couples who lack a sense of realism about their marriage relationship “and hang on to romantic notions of love frequently expect unattainable standards and demand levels of intimacy and togetherness that stifles the relationship and create feelings of frustration and alienation” (Craig 2004). Each couple brings to the marriage setting his/her own unique human traits (individuality) which can enhance the marriage bond. Craig is correct when he points out that, “when married couples collude to avoid facing their differences, they maintain the myth of oneness that negates a balance between connectedness and separateness. This process will lead to misunderstanding, communication breakdown, and finally divorce

Boredom

It is a well known fact that a great tendency exists for marriage partners to take their mate for granted and become complacent about their relationship. Masters points out that, “Complacency is one of the deadliest enemies of love. So too, self-absorption, neglect, and condescension are insidious ways of undermining love” masters(1944). Thus, when one partner in the marriage bond drifts along and refuses to deal with these attitudes, the other partner frequently ends up being bored and may end up losing interest in the marital relationship, and thus opts out of the marriage.

Interpersonal incompetence

Many couples fall in love, marry, and assume that the job is completed. They tend to feel that everything else will work out automatically. However, hardly anything can be further from the truth. Craig is right, and I agree with him, when he exclaims that, “a happy marriage depends on two people having the skill to communicate effectively with each other and negotiate their way out of difficulties.” He further says, “Partners with low self-esteem or little or no assertiveness skill cannot contribute strongly and positively to the relationship and often fail to get what they need from the marriage” craig(2004). Van Pelt connects beautifully when she says, “A successful marriage does not come spontaneously or by chance. Instead, a happy marriage- the successful marriage- involves two people, working out small difficulties as well as the big ones” . When married couples fail to deal with jealousy, in-laws, finances, personal issues and sexuality, it often leads to an enfeeblement of the marriage bond and rob the relationship of its energy, joy and wealth. Some marital partners, who feel inadequate or cannot face the responsibility of sustaining the relationship, resort to abusive and addictive behaviours rather than developing the personal skills necessary for marital growth. (Willemse 2008, Craig 2004). These destructive behaviours normally have a very negative effect on the marriage bond and, in the end, lead to separation and finally, divorce.

An affair

Craig reports that: “up to 25 percent of marriages end because of an affair by one of the partners” craig(2004). Infidelity statistics connects with the above and says that: “up to 53 percent of marriages in the United States end because of an affair by one or both of the partners” (http://www.Infidelity.com 2006). Today, in our post-modern era, there are many factors which set in motion or pull individuals towards marital infidelity. These factors are:  Attraction; Novelty; Excitement;Risk; Challenge; Curiosity; Enhancing self-esteem; A desire to escape or find relief from a painful relationship; Boredom; Feeling neglected; A desire to prove one’s worth of attraction; A desire for attention; A desire to punish a partner (Craig 2004).Researchers are of the opinion that, “working couples are at greater risk of having affairs than any other group” (Andrews 2000). It is, thus, vital for marital partners (pastoral families as well) to strike a balance between their work life and their marriage lives in order to keep their marriages as healthy as possible to avoid divorce and its consequences.

A developmental or situational crisis

It is common knowledge that many marriages, especially those in our postmodern age, do not survive the emotional onslaught that occurs when crisis situations demolish the marital setting. Craig reports that, “situational crisis such as illness, death, or serious accidents to a partner or family member, depression, unemployment, or bankruptcy are difficult events to survive for many couples” craig(2004). Such difficulties have the potential to destabilize a marriage and cause it to dissolve into divorce. Wimberley is correct, and I agree with him, when he says “as clergy families we are not immune to the ravages and trauma of unseen events and the difficult task of managing our lives in their aftermath”wimberly (2007). There are also other causes that can destabilize a marriage and cause it to crumble and break up during the normal developmental stages of the family cycle. According to Craig, these include “having children, parenting teenagers, dealing with mid-life. All of the above can have a huge impact on the marriage bond.

An imbalance in the relationship

It is a known fact that as a marriage relationship grows, deepens and changes, there is a change in the balance of power and these cause marital partners to realign their roles and responsibilities. Craig is correct when he observed that “marriages can see-saw out of control when issues arise such as educational inequality, personal dominance and control, differences in earning capacity, a wife turning to the workforce and becoming more economically independent, or an imbalance in the power and decision-making process within the couple’s relationship” (2004: 196). All of the above can have a severe effect on the marriage bond which can lead to marital distress and in the end divorce.

Poor communication

Nancy van Pelt says “the heart of marriage is in its communication system.” She further says: “it can be said that the success and happiness of any married pair is measurable in terms of the deepening dialogue which characterizes their union” Nancy(1986). It is, thus, obvious that the success and wholeness of any marriage is vested in its communication. Researchers are of the view that one of the most serious problems in marriage and a prime cause of divorce lies in the inability or reluctance of marriage partners to communicate. Craig is, thus, correct when he observes that: “couples who indulge in using vague and unclear ways of communicating and who speak indirectly to each other as a way of avoiding closeness and conflict set the stage to misunderstanding, frustration, and hurt.” He further cites a survey by The Institute of family Studies, which in 1993 found that “70 percent of people surveyed whose marriage had fallen apart nominated lack of communication and the resultant lack of companionship, love and affection, as the main cause of their relationship failure” craig (2004). The researcher believes that for marriage to survive, marital partners need to be able not only to love each other and negotiate a resolution of their personal differences, but they must be willing to adapt to the many demands and challenges that impact on their relationship in our post-modern age both from within and from the society at large.

Stages in the divorce process

It is a known fact that the psychological impact of divorce on those who must endure it, is as severe as that of death in the immediate family. Emery says that, “Elizabeth Kübler-Ross, a pioneer in the hospice movement, first described the stages of grieving about and recovering from a major trauma such as death or divorce.” The word “grief” itself comes from a Latin root meaning “weighed down” or afflicted by heavy wrong” (Taylor 1983: 222). Thus, a person who grieves is one who feels deep sorrow, distress, or misery. These stages, according to Kübler-Ross are: Denial;Anger and resentment;  Bargaining; depression, acceptance.

The impact of divorce on children

Children caught in the divorce process undergo a lot of trauma. It is, thus, obvious that the divorce phenomenon manifest itself as a major crisis in the lives of children. Emery reports that, “experts on divorce tend to fall into one of two camps.” He further says, “There are those who contend that divorce inevitably and invariably devastates children and sets the stage for a life time of emotional problems, period. In the other camp are those experts who assert that divorce is one of life’s challenges that ultimately has little substantial emotional impact on most children” Emery(2004). However, “the truth is much more complex and subtly shaded than either extreme” (Ibid 2004). The fact is that many children are pained greatly by the onslaught of the divorce phenomenon on their family life. When divorce enters a family a constellation of emotions surface. Feelings of abandonment rage, psychological pain, and enormous anger are but a few of the overwhelming feelings children experience. Thus, divorce has the potential to damage children badly and the parsonage is no exception. Emery points out four painful divorce stresses which impact negatively on children’s daily routine. The following needs our attention:

Divorce introduces huge changes into the lives of most children: direct involvement in parental conflict, economic hardship, changes in residence and school, and damaged parent-child relationships, because of lost contact, lost love, and lost parental authority;  Divorce is a great loss for most children. The centre of their world is shattered through their family been torn apart. As a result, children must not only grieve, but they must also search for a new foothold as they battle to come to grasp with the loss of security, they once had in their lives; Divorce increases the risk for psychological, social, and academic problems among children. This increased risk is a legitimate concern for children, parents and the community; Divorce is painful. Despite one’s fervent desire to protect one’s children, one cannot prevent them from feeling the pain of divorce. No matter how hard one tries, no matter how much one sacrifices, no matter what one may want, no matter what one is willing to do, this is going to hurt one’s children Emery(2004). The following statistic, pertaining to the impact of divorce on children, needs our attention. Emery compared children who are in stable marriages with those whose parents are divorcing. The outcome was that they are: 

1. Twice as likely to see a mental health professional; 
2. Up to twice as likely to have problems managing their behavior;
3. Perhaps 1.25 to 1.5 times as likely to have problems with depressed moods; 
4. Twice as likely to drop out of high school before graduation; 
5. Up to 1.25 to 1.5 times more likely to get divorced (2004).

Thus, from the above, we can clearly deduce that for most children, divorce is bad news in itself and impacts negatively on them.

Psychological effect of divorce on children

Trauma, which masquerade as stress and anguish, is in many instances the first to manifest in a child, causing them to feel despair, hopeless, and lost. Emery is correct when he says that, “divorce is correlated with more psychological problems among children” Emery(2004). When the child suffers such devastating personal loss resulting from the divorce of his/her parents, depression and the erosion of self-esteem, is usually the first to occur. Van Wyk is quite correct when he says that, “in many instances the child blames him/herself for the demise of the family union and is overwhelmed with grief” Van Wyk(1984). It is a well known fact that the traumatic experience of divorce for children can produce oppressive feelings such as: Sadness; Recurring anger; Self-blame;And, even violence ( Willemse 2008).

The above clearly indicates the negative effect that the divorce phenomenon has on the personhood of children. Children exposed to the painful occurrence of divorce are inevitably deeply affected in their inner being. It is also worth sharing with the reader a national study conducted by the department of Health and Human Services in the United States of America in the late 1990’s, which has concluded that: Children under the age of 18 suffer 40% more anxiety as a result of their parents’ divorce, and the rate is doubled if the parents divorce multiple times;After a child is diagnosed with depression, there is a fifty percent chance of recurrence if the problem is not ameliorated; and, Three quarters of children under the age of 18 who were polled stated they would rather live with a relative than endure the stress and trauma or another divorce or combative parents (http://www.Divorce Source, Inc, 2007).

Many children who are exposed to divorce grapple alone with related over powering thoughts and feelings. Pastoral counseling as a therapeutic means is an effective way of affording assistance and help to children who are traumatized by divorce; especially those within a pastoral marital setting. Here, the role of the local parish and; especially the denomination of the Volkskerk van Afrika (Peoples Church of Africa), as custodian of pastoral care, is critical. Taylor’s shepherding method is therapeutic, here. He admonishes the church when he says, “a shepherd guide his (sic) flock to good pastures and save resting places. He leads the sheep and provide for all their needs, seeing that they have water to drink and keep the shepherd fold in good repair. He guides his flock and protects it from wild animals, or thieves, or other danger, even when this involves danger to the shepherd self. He searches for any sheep that strays or gets lost, until it is found, even if it means going into difficult and dangerous places, however, dark the night or bad the weather. He knows and names each sheep individually, so that they too know his voice and follow when he calls. He carefully tends any sheep that are sick or weak, and takes special care of nurturing ewes and young lambs” (Taylor,1995). Thus, being a shepherd means taking a deep personal interest in the welfare of the flock, as a whole, and looking after each individual in the sheepfold. Here, the denomination of the V.V.A (P.C.A) is the shepherd and the children of the pastoral family is the flock that needs care and nurture all the time. They are the young lambs which needs special care; especially during the stressful occurrence of divorce.

Academic achievement

The complexity of the academic achievement starts from its conceptualization. Sometimes it is known as school readiness, academic achievement and school performance, but generally the difference in concepts are only explained by semantics as they are used as synonyms. Conventionally, it has been agreed that academic performance should be used in university populations and school performance in regular and alternative basic education populations. We will point out just a few because there is a diversity of definitions. Several authors agree that academic performance is the result of learning, prompted by the teaching activity by the teacher and produced by the student. From a humanistic approach, Martinez (2007) states that academic performance is “the product given by the students and it is usually expressed through school grades” (p. 34). Fifteen years ago, Pizarro (1985) referred to academic performance as a measure of the indicative and responsive abilities that express, in an estimated way, what a person has learned as a result of a process of education or training. For Caballero et al. (2007), academic performance involves meeting goals, achievements and objectives set in the program or course that a student attends. These are expressed through grades which are the result of an assessment that involves passing or not certain tests, subjects or courses. On their part, Torres and Rodríguez (2006 quoted by Willcox, 2011) define academic performance as the level of knowledge shown in an area or subject compared to the norm, and it is generally measured using the grade point average,

Purpose Of The School Or Academic Achievement

This is to achieve an educational goal, learning. In this regard there are several components of the complex unit called performance. They are learning processes promoted by the school that involve the transformation of a given state, into a new state, and they are achieved with the integrity in a different unit with cognitive and structural elements. Performance varies according to circumstances, organic and environmental conditions that determine skills and experiences. The academic performance involves factors such as the intellectual level, personality, motivation, skills, interests, study habits, self-esteem or the teacher-student relationship. When a gap between the academic performance and the student’s expected performance occurs, it refers to a diverging performance. An unsatisfactory academic performance is the one that is below the expected performance. Sometimes it can be related to

teaching methods. (Marti, 2003, p. 376). To the present, the expansion of educational opportunities in Latin America has not helped to compensate for the inequalities of a socioeconomic and cultural background. Although it is true, today millions of children and young people, previously excluded from education, enter the educational process K-12 (which term includes preschool, primary and secondary education), on average of one half does not complete it, and the other half continues highly dissimilar paths from the point of view of educational quality. In fact, among those who complete secondary education a condition to avoid the risk of falling below the poverty line in Latin America - at age 15 an average of 50% have failed to achieve a minimum proficiency in learning skills defined by the PISA assessment (Brunner, 2013). The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has published the results of the international PISA 2012 with the participation

of Peru among other 65 countries or territories.

School Failure

This is not tackled with exams and school systems do not improve by taking tests nonstop. Failure and success are market concepts which have never been considered in the educational world and we have to avoid the strong negative component they both imply. We observed a positivist bias that Marin (2013) describes with these words: “It is studied what fits best in the method, which is best measured, while what it is not so easily quantifiable is invisible.” In this case, PISA has the positive aspect of explicitly stating its approach, and thus it doesn’t intend to evaluate education as a whole, it doesn’t even intend to make of it assessment the most important fact in education. What is really important and useful is to define the educational goals we want to achieve, to analyze the contexts and difficulties we encounter, and to create proposals and mechanisms of action that will allow us to achieve these goals.

It is known that during adolescence remarkable physical and psychological transformations occur, especially in personality. These transformations could affect school achievement; therefore, teachers must be prepared to positively channel these changes; otherwise, they might take an adverse course. Similarly, we should go for flexible teaching interactions and methods, capable of adapting to students with very different personalities. We should also consider that if impulsivity affects the ability to learn, it may only affect the individual’s crystallized intelligence, not his/her fluid intelligence. This is because first one depends more on teaching-learning processes, while the fluid intelligence refers to the ability to establish relationships regardless of prior knowledge acquired. In this regard Llorente states that improving the educational situation implies to implement, strengthen and apply in all the educational centers, all the various measures that have been proven useful when dealing with

diversity: such as splitting, individualized tutoring, the Initial Professional Qualification Program (IPQP), school activities programs, interdisciplinary and/or globalizing methodological proposals such as working in areas or projects, intervention of two teachers in a classroom at the same time, classroom organization in cooperative groups, mediation, negotiation and commitments, coordinating support teams, banks of resources and material, the lack of concentration of disadvantaged students in the same classroom or educational center.Also, a good educational monitoring system should promote a change in attitudes in teachers from certain sectors, beginning with awareness and conviction, rather than imposition. These are attitudes aimed at improving educational practices in the classroom or verification of the curriculum compliance.

2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

A Self-Determination Theory

Various theoretical approaches have been used to define and operationalize motivation. Researchers have used motivational approaches, such as expectancy-value theory (e.g., Berndt & Miller, 1990), goal theory (e.g., Meece & Holt, 1993), and selfefficacy theory (e.g., Zimmerman, Bandura, & Martinez-Pons, 1992) to examine the relationship between academic motivation and academic achievement. Another perspective that appears promising and pertinent for the study of academic achievement is Deci and Ryan’s (1985, 1991, 2000) motivational approach— the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Indeed, this theoretical perspective has generated a considerable amount of research in the field of education (see Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991) and has been used recently to better understand educational outcomes. SDT is an approach to human motivation that highlights the importance of the psychological need for autonomy (Ryan, Kuhl, & Deci, 1997). Autonomy implies that individuals experience choice in the initiation, maintenance, and regulation of their behaviors (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). Central to the theory is the distinction between autonomous and controlled motivation. Autonomous motivation involves acting with a full sense of volition and choice, and it encompasses both intrinsic motivation and well-internalized (i.e., integrated) extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). Controlled motivation, in contrast, involves acting with a sense of pressure or demand and includes regulation by external contingencies and by contingencies that have been partially internalized (i.e., introjected; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). Only autonomously motivated behaviors are considered fully self-determined because these motivations are either innate to the active organism—that is, are part of the inherent, core self—or have been fully assimilated with the core self through the process of organismic integration (Deci & Ryan, 2002). SDT proposes that humans have an innate desire for stimulation and learning from birth, which is either supported or discouraged within their environment (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). The degree to which this natural drive, or intrinsic motivation, is realized is contingent on the fulfillment of one’s psychological needs. Therefore, SDT delineates three types of psychological needs: the need for competence, the need for autonomy, and the need for relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). The need for competence is the need to experience satisfaction in improving one’s abilities (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000), and competence is a facilitator of intrinsic motivation. The need for autonomy is the need to engage in self-directed behavior (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000), and it is also a facilitator of intrinsic motivation. Finally, the need for relatedness, another facilitator of intrinsic motivation, is the need to feel related to significant others (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). All in all, the satisfaction of these three psychological needs is indispensable for facilitation of self-determined motivation. Furthermore, the multidimensional motivation orientation encompasses three global types of motivation: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation. While applying SDT to academic motivation, intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation are the two primary types of motivated academic behavior (Cokley, 2003). Intrinsic motivation is the drive to pursue an activity simply for the pleasure or satisfaction derived from it (Deci, 1975). Therefore, intrinsic motivation is the most selfdetermined form of motivation (Vallerand & Ratelle, 2002). For instance, students who enjoy doing their homework are intrinsically motivated. Initially, theorists argued that intrinsic motivation was unidimensional in nature. Later, Vallerand and his colleagues (Vallerand, 1993; Vallerand, Blais, Briere, & Pelletier, 1989; Vallerand et al., 1992) proposed a tripartite taxonomy of intrinsic motivation: intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to accomplish, and intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation. Intrinsic motivation to know refers to the desire to perform an activity for the enjoyment one receives while exploring, learning, and understanding new things (Vallerand, 1997). Intrinsic motivation to accomplish refers to the desire to perform an activity for the pleasure and satisfaction that one receives from accomplishing or creating new things. Finally, individuals who participate in an activity for the pleasure and satisfaction derived while experiencing pleasurable intellectual or physical sensations are intrinsically motivated to experience stimulation. Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, “refers to a broad array of behaviours having in common the fact that activities are engaged in not for reasons inherent in them, but for instrumental reasons” (Vallerand & Ratelle, 2002, p. 42). SDT also posits different types of extrinsic motivation (i.e., extrinsic motivationexternal regulation, extrinsic motivation-introjected regulation, and extrinsic motivation-identified regulation), which vary in the degree of self-determination of the behavior, where more internalized or more integrated behaviors produce a greater sense of selfdetermination (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 1991). In other words, SDT maintains that these types of behavioral regulation can be situated along a self-determination continuum, with external regulation representing a complete lack of self-determined motivation and intrinsic motivation representing the fullest type of self-determined motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 1991, 2000, 2002). Extrinsic motivation-external regulation, the least selfdetermined type of extrinsic motivation, refers to behavior that is determined through means external to the individual. In other words, rewards and constraints regulate these behaviors. For example, a student who performs an activity to satisfy external demands (e.g., a tangible reward or punishment) or social contingency is externally regulated. Next along the autonomy continuum is the construct of extrinsic motivation-introjected regulation. These behaviors are controlled in part by the environment but also by internalreward/punishment contingencies (e.g., ego enhancement, guilt, shame, or obligation). An example is students who perform their schoolwork because they do not want to let their parents down. Hence, introjected regulation encompasses a moderately low degree of self-determination. Further along the self-determination continuum, extrinsic motivationidentified regulation refers to behaviors that are performed by choice because the individual judges them to be important. For instance, a student with identified regulation engages in a particular behavior as long as she or he perceives the usefulness or instrumental value of doing so. In contrast to introjected regulation, identified regulation encompasses a moderately high degree of self-determination. Therefore, identified regulation is a relatively autonomous form of extrinsic motivation. The final concept posited by SDT is amotivation, the lowest level of autonomy on the self-determination continuum, which relates to the lack of intentionality and, therefore, refers to the relative absence of intrinsic as well as extrinsic motivation (Guay, Mageau, & Vallerand, 2003). When individuals are amotivated, they do not perceive a contingency between their behaviors and outcomes (Vallerand et al., 1992). “A highly probable consequence of academic motivation is to quit the activity toward which the individual is amotivated” (Vallerand & Ratelle, 2002, p. 43). Because the students who are amotivated are neither intrinsically motivated nor extrinsically motivated, they may decide to drop out of school. Considerable research in the educational realm (Black & Deci, 2000; Deci et al., 1991; Noels, Clement, & Pelletier, 2001; Vallerand et al., 1993) suggests that positive indices of student functioning are associated with high levels of autonomous motivations, whereas negative indices are associated with high levels of controlled motivations and amotivation (see Deci & Ryan, 2000, for a review). The conspicuous absence of an instrument to evaluate all aspects of the self-determination continuum encouraged Vallerand et al. (1992, 1993) to propose an integrative theoretical framework for the multidimensional estimation of motivation within SDT. As a result, Vallerand et al. (1992, 1993) developed the Academic Motivation Scale (AMS) to assess all three dimensions of motivation that range from least to most determined by the self. The AMS includes three intrinsic motivation factors (knowledge, accomplishment, and stimulation), three external motivation factors (external, introjected, and identified), and an amotivation factor. Indeed, the AMS is one of the most frequently used scales to measure intrinsic and extrinsic academic motivation (Grouzet, Otis, & Pelletier, 2006). Researchers have integrated the AMS into empirical models, which include both the determinants and consequences of academic motivation (e.g., Guay & Vallerand, 1997; Lavigne, Vallerand, & Miquelon, 2007; Pelletier, Séguin-Lévesque, & Legault, 2002; Vallerand, Fortier, & Guay, 1997), providing support for its construct and predictive validity (Grouzet et al., 2006). Although academic motivation based on SDT has received little attention in the study of immigrant adolescents’ academic outcomes, recent research based on SDT suggests that self-determined motivation is closely related to important behavioral outcomes (see Cokley, 2003; Vallerand & Ratelle, 2002). Undoubtedly, students who are more intrinsically motivated are more likely to stay in school than students who are less intrinsically motivated (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Much research substantiates that intrinsic motivation is linked to positive academic performance (Deci et al., 1991; Vallerand et al., 1993), more enjoyment of academic work and more satisfaction with school (Vallerand et al., 1989), greater conceptual learning (Benware & Deci, 1984), and higher self-esteem (Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman, & Ryan, 1981). On the other hand, students who are more extrinsically motivated experience greater anxiety and a poorer ability to cope with failures (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In addition, a variety of both correlational and experimental research (see Reeve, Deci, & Ryan, 2004, for an overview) has documented the advantages of autonomous compared with controlled motivation for studying among school student populations. These include higher well-being (Levesque,Zuehlke, Stanek, & Ryan, 2004), deep-level learning (Grolnick & Ryan, 1987), higher grades (Black & Deci, 2000), greater persistence with learning a second language (Noels et al., 2001), and lower dropout rates (Hardre & Reeve, 2003).