Asia-Pacific Edu Res DOI 10.1007/s40299-013-0169-7
REGULAR ARTICLE
The Relationship Between Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement in Hong Kong: The Role of Context Wei-Wen Chen • Yi-Lee Wong
Ó De La Salle University 2014
Abstract Previous research has examined how goal orientations relate to a wide range of contextual variables. However, there is surprisingly little research examining the relationship between achievement context and students’ goal orientations, or the cultural variations in such relationships. The purpose of the present study was, therefore, to explore the relationships among students’ goal orientations, their college GPAs, and their average scores in high school form 7. A total of 312 college students in Hong Kong participated in the present study. A survey was administered to collect information on students’ beliefs about their goal orientations, their college GPAs, and their average scores in high school form 7. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling. The results showed that goal orientations have different associations with students’ college GPAs and their past performance in high school. Mastery goals and performanceapproach goals were positively associated with students’ college GPAs, whereas performance-avoidance goals were negatively associated. However, both performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals were positively associated with average scores in high school, whereas mastery goals showed no association with high school performance. Cultural factors are discussed to clarify the findings. Keywords Goal orientations Academic achievement Achievement contexts W.-W. Chen (&) Faculty of Education, University of Macau, Av. Padre Toma´s Pereira Taipa, Macau, China e-mail:
[email protected] Y.-L. Wong Department of Educational Administration and Policy, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong
Introduction Achievement goal orientation, which refers to the purpose of actions and behavior in achievement situations, has emerged as the leading framework for explaining students’ motivation and achievement. In recent years, research has further suggested that contextual and situational factors play an important role in students’ goal orientations (Salili and Lai 2003). Previous research has examined how goal orientations relate to a wide range of contextual variables, from broader ones such as cultural values of learning (Hau and Ho 2008; Ho and Hau 2008), to more specific ones such as school environment (Midgley et al. 1995; Salili and Lai 2003) and classroom atmosphere (Lau and Lee 2008; Urdan 2004; Urdan et al. 1998). However, given the numerous studies of how achievement context (e.g., high stakes) influences students’ motivation (Amrein and Berliner 2003; Roderick et al. 2002; Ryan et al. 2012; Wise and DeMars 2005), there is surprisingly little research examining cultural variability in the relationship between achievement context and students’ goal orientations. The purpose of the present study, therefore, was to investigate the role of context in the relationship between students’ goal orientations and their achievement, specifically in a Chinese cultural setting. Over the decades, the concept of goal orientation has continued to evolve and has kept pace with progress in the field of educational psychology (Elliot 2005). Originally grounded in a distinction between mastery and performance dimensions of competence-related motivation, the achievement goal orientation framework recently incorporated an approach-avoidance dimension to describe accurately the multidimensional nature of mastery and performance goals (Elliot 1999; Elliot and Covington 2001; Harackiewicz et al. 1998; Urdan 1997). This 2 9 2
123
W.-W. Chen, Y.-L. Wong
framework recognizes four types of goal orientations: performance approach, where the objective is to outperform others, as shown in grades and scores; performance avoidance, where the aim is to avoid the perception of relative incompetence or inferiority; mastery approach, where the focus is on acquiring and understanding knowledge, mastering skills and capabilities; and mastery avoidance, where the focus is on avoiding loss of one’s skills and competence. As mastery-avoidance goals appear to be less relevant to academic settings than the other three goal types—although more applicable to research in the elderly (Elliot 2005)— and because the 2 9 2 framework is relatively new and has not been much used in academic settings (Payne et al. 2007), we chose to use a three-component conceptualization of goal orientations in the present study. The published literature provides evidence for the impact of goal orientations on students’ learning and academic achievement. Students with mastery-approach goals tend to display self-regulated learning, which facilitates their academic performance (Blackwell et al. 2007). In contrast, students with performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals are more likely to experience thoughts unrelated to learning or thoughts about escaping from learning, which has a detrimental effect on academic success (Brophy 2004; Button et al. 1996; DeShon and Gillespie 2005; Kanfer and Ackerman 1996). Other studies have also shown that performance-approach goals in particular while not necessarily having a negative impact nonetheless have no positive association with learning or academic achievement (Harackiewicz and Sansone 1991; Payne et al. 2007). However, while research has suggested that achievement context affects students’ motivation and learning e.g., high-stakes achievement contexts decrease motivation (Amrein and Berliner 2003), it is still unclear how the relationship between goal orientations and academic achievement is affected by the nature of the achievement context, i.e., whether students’ goal orientations function differently in different achievement situations. Moreover, current hypotheses about the relationships between goal orientations and achievement are all based on studies conducted in Western—North American and European—societies and the question of whether the findings hold true for other societies remain unanswered. Despite the recent success of Chinese students in international academic assessments (e.g., PISA and TIMMS) and the growing interest in understanding Chinese students’ motivation and learning, research into the relationship between goal orientations and academic performance among the Chinese is still lacking (Hau and Ho 2008). The purpose of the present study, therefore, was to explore how Chinese students’ goal orientations contribute to their academic achievement in two different achievement contexts (high schools and colleges).
123
Some recent studies were indeed intended to address Chinese students’ goal orientations, but most of the goal orientation research in the Chinese cultural context, including studies conducted in Hong Kong and Singapore, has examined the associations between goal orientation and students’ learning styles and strategies (Chan and Lai 2006; Liem et al. 2008; Salili and Lai 2003). Although Lau and Lee (2008) confirmed the trichotomous framework of goal orientations in Hong Kong students, findings both consistent and inconsistent with the Western literature emerged regarding goal orientation and its relationship with academic achievement among Chinese students. In accordance with studies in Western societies, mastery-approach goals were found to be positively related to academic achievement among Hong Kong adolescents, whereas performance-avoidance goals were negatively related to academic achievement (Hau and Ho 2008; Ho and Hau 2008). However, based on the empirical studies conducted mostly in Hong Kong and Singapore, two characteristics attributable to the unique cultural values embedded in the Chinese cultural context emerged from the literature on Chinese goal orientations. Firstly, there is a high, positive correlation between mastery and performance-approach goals. Like mastery goals, performance-approach goals were positively associated with adaptive learning (Chan and Lai 2006; Lau and Lee 2008; Lau et al. 2010; Liem et al. 2008) and academic achievement (Hau and Ho 2008; Ho and Hau 2008; Salili et al. 2001; Salili and Lai 2003). Owing to the collectivist culture, as well as the strong emphasis in Confucian philosophy on the utility and importance of education, Chinese educational contexts are typically highly competitive and examination-oriented. Students are pushed to succeed academically by demonstrating their competence in terms of test scores and grades (Hau and Ho 2008). As a result, the cultural context may predispose Chinese students to set performance-approach goals for education, and thus contributes to their academic achievement. Contrary to previous findings in Western populations, in a Chinese context, performance-avoidance goals are not necessarily negative, as the positive association between performance-avoidance and both mastery-approach goals and performance-approach goals has demonstrated (Lau and Lee 2008; Shih 2005). According to Lau and Lee (2008), the relationships among the three types of goal orientations may reflect a complicated but pragmatic studyrelated mindset in Chinese students. Confucian beliefs, the highly competitive and achievement-oriented learning environments in Chinese cultural contexts, multiple motivational goals—including satisfying internal needs for learning, outperforming others, and avoiding poor performance—may all play important roles in Chinese students’ academic achievement. Whereas in the Western literature, performance-avoidance goals are typically associated with
Relationship Between Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement
a lack of incentives for achievement, in a Chinese context they may reflect a fear of failure in school. Future studies are needed to validate further the conceptualization and effect of performance-avoidance goals among Chinese students. Whereas academic achievement is seen as a legitimate index of students’ performance and capabilities; the measures used in research to assess students’ academic achievement are still open to debate. The limited number of studies exploring the relationship between goal orientations and Chinese academic achievement has mostly used scores on standard achievement tests or on term-end examinations in specific subjects to index students’ academic achievement (c.f. Ho and Hau 2008; Salili and Lai 2003; Liem et al. 2008). More general indicators of students’ progress and achievement in school, such as GPA or average scores, appear to be more valid and reliable indices of academic achievement than subject-specific standardized test scores due to their cumulative and holistic nature (Fan and Chen 2001). GPA is also more sensitive to motivation because unremitting effort is required to maintain a good record (Keith et al. 1998). More importantly, some achievement contexts may be high stakes in that performance in a given context may play a critical role in determining a student’s subsequent educational career and future. High-stakes contexts have been defined as learning environments that are intended to motivate students to perform to high standards (Amrein and Berliner 2003). For example, due to the pressure to excel in college entrance examinations, the learning environment in Hong Kong high schools is a competitive and examination-oriented educational context in which students are pushed to excel academically (Salili and Lai 2003). Students’ academic performance in high school will be a decisive factor in admission to university, other types of further education, or even occupational positions. Such high-stakes contexts, which usually evoke a high level of anxiety among students, may constitute a very particular achievement context. Although no specific hypothesis has been empirically tested, several researchers (Roderick et al. 2002; Ryan et al. 2012) have speculated on the potential effect of achievement context on the relationship between goal orientation and academic achievement. On the one hand, rewards and threats of sanctions are believed to boost students’ motivation (Ryan et al. 2012); yet when such high stakes are attached to performance and achievement, students’ intrinsic motivation to learn may be reduced (Amrein and Berliner 2003). Little research has examined empirically the impact of achievement contexts on students’ goal orientations. The relationship between students’ goal orientations and their academic achievements may differ according to context. The objective of the present study was, therefore, to explore how students’ goal
MasteryApproach Goal College GPA
PerformanceApproach Goal
Average Score in High School PerformanceAvoidance Goal
Fig. 1 The conceptual model
orientations contribute to their college GPA and related to their average scores in high school form 7. The conceptual model presented in Fig. 1 is based on a review of previous studies. As shown in the figure, we hypothesized that the three types of goal orientation have an impact on students’ college GPA and average scores in high school form 7. Errors among the three goals were freely correlated to indicate the dynamic interplay between the three types of goal orientation.
Method Participants The participants in the present study were college students in Hong Kong, who completed the survey during the 2011–2012 school year. They were freshmen and sophomores from two universities with which the authors of the present study were affiliated. The students completed the questionnaires voluntarily. A total of 312 Hong Kong students (125 male and 187 female) were recruited in the present study; their mean age was 19.88 years with a standard deviation of 1.3 years. The response rate was 96 %. Measures The surveys were in the traditional Chinese. A backtranslation procedure was used to ensure the equivalence of the English and Chinese versions of the instruments. The first author translated the questions from English to Mandarin Chinese and then a bilingual professor in the English department translated them back into English. The author and the back translator engaged in detailed discussion of
123
W.-W. Chen, Y.-L. Wong Table 1 Means, standard deviations, and correlation matrix for variables Measure
1
2
1. Theories of intelligence
–
2. Mastery-approach goals
0.28**
3. Performance-approach goals
0.32**
3
4
5
6
– 0.40**
4. Performance-avoidance goals
0.12*
0.24**
0.48**
5. College GPA
0.15*
0.15**
0.43**
6. Average Score in High School
0.13*
0.08
0.33**
0.09 0.27**
M
16.68
16.88
14.99
15.07
2.85
71.62
SD
4.68
3.00
3.70
3.70
0.40
8.14
* p \ 0.05; ** p \ 0.01
the texts to evaluate their consistency, and carefully corrected the discrepancies between the original and translated versions.
expectation maximization. Missing values were random, indicating that this method was appropriate (Acock 2005).
Goal Orientations
Results
Elliot and Church’s (1997) Achievement Goals Scale was used to assess students’ goal orientation along three dimensions: mastery goals, performance-approach goals, and performance-avoidance goals. Each goal type was assessed by 6 items measured on a five-point Likert scale. A sample item for mastery goals was: ‘‘I want to master completely the material presented in the class.’’ A sample item for performance-approach goals was: ‘‘I am motivated by the thought of outperforming my peers in class.’’ A sample item for performance-avoidance goals was: ‘‘I worry about the possibility of getting a bad grade in the class.’’ A higher score on a measure indicated a higher level of the relevant goal orientation. Cronbach’s alpha for the scale in the present study was 0.82 for mastery goals, 0.86 for performance-approach goals, and 0.70 for performance-avoidance goals.
Preliminary Analyses
Academic Achievement The students’ cumulative college GPAs and average scores in high school form 7 were used as indicators of academic achievement in two different achievement contexts. In the present study, the students’ current college GPAs ranged from 0 to 4 and their average scores in high school form 7 ranged from 0 to 100. Data Analysis Structural equation modeling (SEM) was adopted to test the hypothetical structural model in the present study. The analysis of moment structure (AMOS) 17.0 software package was used (Arbuckle 2008) for data analysis. To optimize the sample size, missing values were estimated using
123
Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and correlation matrix for the variables. The results of an independent samples t test indicated that gender had a significant effect on students’ current GPA (t = -0.10, p \ 0.05) and high school GPA (t = -3.22, p \ 0.05), with female students scoring significantly higher than male students on both measures of academic achievement. We, therefore, controlled for gender in the subsequent analyses. The results of a one-way ANOVA showed that neither paternal nor maternal level of education had a significant effect on students’ current GPAs (paternal education: F = 0.44, p [ 0.05; maternal education: F = 0.71, p [ 0.05) or their average scores in high school form 7 (paternal education: F = 0.76, p [ 0.05; maternal education: F = 1.41, p [ 0.05). The variables in the present study were significantly correlated, as hypothesized in the structural model. The three goal orientations were positively correlated with each other (r = 0.40, p \ 0.01 between mastery and performance-approach goals; r = 0.24, p \ 0.01 between mastery and performance-avoidance goals; and r = 0.48, p \ 0.01 between performance-approach and performanceavoidance goals). The students’ GPAs were positively correlated with mastery (r = 0.15, p \ 0.01) and performance-approach (r = 0.43, p \ 0.01) goals, but not with performance-avoidance goals (r = 0.09, p [ 0.05). However, students’ average scores in high school form 7 were positively correlated with performance-approach goals (r = 0.33, p \ 0.01) and performance-avoidance goals (r = 0.36, p \ 0.01), but not with mastery goals (r = 0.08, p [ 0.05).
Relationship Between Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement Fig. 2 The structural model (standardized coefficient estimates are shown within parentheses)
res 1
MasteryApproach Goal
.14 (.34)***
College GPA
-.60 (-.07) n.s. .51 (.65)*** .19 (.37)*** PerformanceApproach Goal
.20 (.32)***
3.02 (.29)**
Average Score in High School
.28 (.57)*** PerformanceAvoidance Goal
-.13 (-.21)** 2.96 (.23)** res 2
Controlled Variable: Gender
Testing the Measurement Models First-order confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to validate the latent constructs in the hypothetical structural model. The 18-item Goal Orientations measurement model showed a poor fit with the data. Cross-loading items (standardized residual covariance larger than 2.58) and items that had low factor loadings (critical ratio estimates smaller than 1.96) were deleted according to modification indices (Byrne 2010). A final measurement model of Goal Orientations with 12 items resulted in a good fit (v2 = 134.81, df = 51, CFI = 0.95, NFI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.062 with 90 % confidence interval of 0.050–0.075, GFI = 0.95, AGFI = 0.92, and PNFI = 0.71).
three goal orientations were all positive and significant (/ = 0.65 between Mastery Goal and Performance-Approach Goal, / = 0.57 between Performance-Approach Goal and Performance-Avoidance Goal, and / = 0.32 between Mastery Goal and Performance-Avoidance Goal; all at p \ 0.001). Mastery Goal (b = 0.34, p \ 0.001) and Performance-Approach Goal (b = 0.37, p \ 0.001) contributed positively to GPA, but Performance-Avoidance Goal contributed negatively to GPA (b = -0.21, p \ 0.01). Only Performance-Approach Goal (b = 0.29, p \ 0.01) and Performance-Avoidance Goal (b = 0.23, p \ 0.01) contributed positively to average scores in high school. The structural model accounts for 32 % of the variance in students’ current GPAs and 18 % of the variance in students’ average scores in high school.
Testing the Structural Model The structural model hypothesized in the present study was examined with psychometrically sound measurement models of Goal Orientations. The items in the latent constructs of the final measurement model served as indicators of the same latent constructs in the hypothetical structural model. The hypothetical model resulted in an excellent fit with an overall v2(142) = 252.65, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.96, and RMSEA = 0.050 with 90 % confidence interval of 0.040-0.60, SRMR = 0.052, GFI = 0.92, AGFI = 0.90, and PNFI = 0.77. This model was, therefore, used in the interpretation of the data. As shown in Fig. 2, all structural paths in the final structural model were significant, except for the path from Mastery Goal to HSGPA. The covariances between the
Discussion There is considerable research exploring the relationship between goal orientation and students’ academic achievement in the literature on Western populations (Blackwell et al. 2007; Brophy 2004; Button et al. 1996; DeShon and Gillespie 2005; Harackiewicz and Sansone 1991; Kanfer and Ackerman 1996; Payne et al. 2007). Although there have been only a limited number of studies of goal orientations in Chinese populations, it is clear that although some results are consistent with findings in Western populations, the particular interpretations of learning embedded in the Confucian cultural context have also resulted in observations of some culturally specific goal orientation
123
W.-W. Chen, Y.-L. Wong
patterns. However, research has so far failed to examine whether the nature of the achievement context plays a role in explaining the relationship between goal orientations and students’ academic achievement. Adopting a sociocultural perspective, the present study bridges this gap in research by investigating the differences between the relationship of students’ goal orientations to their college GPAs and to their average scores in high school form 7. The results indicated that both mastery and performanceavoidance goals were differently related to students’ academic achievement in the high school learning context and to their current college GPA. Consistent with most of the goal orientation literature on Chinese students (Hau and Ho 2008; Ho and Hau 2008; Salili et al. 2001; Salili and Lai 2003), the present study confirmed the positive association between performanceapproach goals and students’ academic achievement, regardless of the context of achievement. Due to the strong emphasis on education in Confucian philosophy, students’ academic performance is strongly connected to an individual’s accomplishments and social status in a Chinese context (Chen et al. 1996; Hau and Salili 1996). Confucian philosophy also regards academic achievement as a filial duty. Chinese students are expected to outperform others academically in order to meet parental expectations, to avoid disappointing their parents, to honor or repay their parents’ investment and sacrifice, and to avoid bringing shame to the family (Mordkowitz and Ginsburg 1987; Salili and Lai 2003; Hau and Salili 1996). As in studies of Western populations, the present study found that students’ mastery goals had a positive association with their college GPAs, whereas performanceavoidance goals were negatively associated with college GPA. However, the relationship between these two goal orientations and students’ academic achievement appeared completely different when academic achievement was indexed by average scores in high school form 7. Mastery goals were non-significantly associated with academic achievement, whereas performance-avoidance goals were positively associated with students’ average scores in high school form 7. Similar findings were found in some goal orientation research involving high-stakes achievement. Whereas Malpass et al. (1999) reported that mastery goals were not related to high-stakes achievement in mathematics in gifted high school students, Ryan et al. (2012) speculated that threats of sanctions (e.g., grade retention or denial of college admission) present in high-stakes examinations may boost students’ motivation to avoid failure. In Hong Kong, the pressure to pass the college entrance examinations may mean that performance-avoidance goals have a more positive influence in a high-stakes context. Rather than reflecting a lack of incentives to succeed or desire to escape learning tasks as in the traditional goal
123
orientation literature, in the Hong Kong context performance-avoidance goals may reflect students’ motivation to avoid bad performance or the negative aftermath of academic failure. This is an alternative way of conceptualizing performance-approach goals (approaching good performance). Given the emphasis on the utility of education in the Chinese cultural context, academic failure in high school, which implies a greater risk of failure in college entrance examinations, may have several severe consequences (e.g., the end of one’s educational career, bringing shame on one’s family, and psychological toll due to the failure) for Chinese students. Chinese students, therefore, try hard not to fail—rather than to excel—in high school. As a result, the fear of failure implicit in performanceavoidance goals can be a positive motivator for Chinese students’ in high school. Martin et al. (2008) argued that different goal orientations may be more or less adaptive at different stages in students’ academic careers, but there is relatively little empirical research on university and college students, which addresses their hypothesis. The effects of goal orientations may hinge on the nature of the learning context, such that mastery goal-oriented contexts (e.g., contexts that emphasize learning and individual progress) evoke a higher mastery orientation, whereas performance goal-oriented contexts (e.g., contexts that emphasize achievement and social comparisons) evoke a higher performance orientation (Urdan et al. 1998; Urdan 2004). Compared with the learning contexts in high schools, the learning contexts in college and university are more mastery goal oriented, and consequently result in more mastery-oriented and fewer performance-oriented students (Martin et al. 2008). The results of the present study lend support to the hypotheses, as shown by the stronger coefficient for performance-approach goals with average score in high school form 7 than on college GPA, and the stronger coefficient for mastery goals with college GPA than on average score in high school form 7. The learning environments in high schools are very different from those in universities due to the examination-oriented context in Hong Kong. The learning environment in Hong Kong high schools is geared toward preparation for examinations in that curricula and teaching focus mainly on rote learning and test-taking skills (Watkins and Biggs 1996). Because of the pressure to pass college entrance examinations, high schools tend to be highly competitive, as well as putting great emphasis on social comparisons and academic performance (Ho and Hau 2008). Students’ performance-approach goals, therefore, play a more decisive role in promoting their academic achievement in high school. On the other hand, learning at university is more self-directed. Students choose to enroll and can select courses and subjects within a discipline according to their interests and skills. Students’ perceived
Relationship Between Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement
control over their own education is greater and they have more autonomy in learning, which is consistent with the intrinsic nature of mastery goals (Martin et al. 2008). The high-stakes context prevalent in Hong Kong high schools may lead to students having less intrinsic motivation to learn (Amrein and Berliner 2003), an explanation which could also account for the present results: a stronger relationship between mastery goals and college GPA than between mastery goals and average score in high school form 7. Some limitations inherent in the present study should be kept in mind. First and most importantly because the data in the present study are correlational, causal inferences about goal orientations and students’ academic achievement cannot be made, regardless of the strong theoretical framework and causal sequence implied by the SEM. While the role of achievement context in the relationship between goal orientation and students’ academic achievement has rarely been mentioned in previous research, the design of the present study means that our results remain tentative and preliminary. Because goal orientation was measured only once, it is difficult to determine whether students’ goal orientations are stable across time— throughout high school and college. The present study can only indicate that students’ current goal orientations related differently to their past academic performance—in high school—and their current academic performance in college. Longitudinal studies that collect data on students’ goal orientation and academic achievement contemporaneously in two different time periods and achievement contexts are strongly recommended to bolster further the ecological validity of the theoretical model. Secondly, the sampling method used in the present study recruited a self-selected sample of college students, who may constitute a group with relatively better academic performance and a preference for a particular goal orientation. Future research should adopt a random sampling strategy to examine further the relationship between goal orientation and academic achievement among late adolescents. It should be also noted that there may be some important regional differences within Chinese society. Students’ goal orientations may vary with contextual and economic factors across geographical areas. The findings in the present study may apply only to Chinese students in Hong Kong. Regional differences in Chinese students’ goal orientations and motivation may merit future research. A final limitation of the study lies in the use of students’ current college GPAs as the outcome variable for students’ college academic achievement. Although validated as a representative indicator of students’ academic achievement (Fan and Chen 2001), GPA scores may still constitute an unstandardized measurement of students’ academic performance due to variability in curricula and evaluation
standards across different subjects and universities. Future studies should include or refer to other standardized achievement test results to cross-validate the use of GPA scores as an index of academic achievement. Cultural and contextual factors may influence students’ adaptation to their learning environment and their preferred goal orientation. The results of the present study suggest that the goal orientations of Chinese students contribute differently to their average scores in high school form 7 and their college GPAs. Such differences reveal the important role of societal values and achievement contexts in explaining students’ learning and academic success. The present study may contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between goal orientations and academic achievement in the literature on motivation.
References Acock, A. C. (2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and family, 67, 1012–1028. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2003). The effects of high-stakes testing on student motivation and learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 32–38. Arbuckle, J. L. (2008). AMOS (Version 17.0) [Computer program]. Chicago: SPSS. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263. Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students to learn (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 26–48. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Chan, K.-W., & Lai, P.-Y. (2006). Revisiting the trichotomous achievement goal framework for Hong Kong secondary students: A structural model analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the Australia Association for Research in Education, Adelaide, Australia. Chen, C.-S., Lee, S.-Y., & Stevenson, H. W. (1996). Academic achievement and motivation of Chinese students: A crossnational perspective. In S. Lau (Ed.), Growing up the Chinese way: Chinese child and adolescent development (pp. 69–91). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. De Shon, R. P., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2005). A motivated action theory account of goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1096–1127. Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34, 149–169. Elliot, A. J. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 52–72). New York: Guilford Press. Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218–232.
123
W.-W. Chen, Y.-L. Wong Elliot, A. J., & Covington, M. V. (2001). Approach and avoidance motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 73–92. Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 1–22. Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., & Elliot, A. (1998). Rethinking achievement goals: When are they adaptive for college students and why? Educational Psychologist, 33, 1–21. Harackiewicz, J. M., & Sansone, C. (1991). Goals and intrinsic motivation: You can get there from here. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 7, pp. 21–49). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Hau, K.-T., & Ho, I. T. (2008). Editorial: Insights from research on Asian students’ achievement motivation. International Journal of Psychology, 43(5), 865–869. Hau, K.-T., & Salili, F. (1996). Achievement goals and causal attributions of Chinese students. In S. Lau (Ed.), Growing up the Chinese way: Chinese child and adolescent development (pp. 121–145). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. Ho, I. T., & Hau, K.-T. (2008). Academic achievement in the Chinese context: The role of goals, strategies, and effort. International Journal of Psychology, 43(5), 892–897. Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1996). A self-regulatory skills perspective to reducing cognitive interference. In I. G. Sarason, G. R. Pierce, & B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Cognitive interference: Theories, methods, and findings (pp. 153–171). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Keith, T. Z., Keith, P. B., Quirk, K. J., Sperduto, J., Santillo, S., & Killings, S. (1998). Longitudinal effects of parent involvement on high school grades: Similarities and differences across gender and ethnic groups. Journal of School Psychology, 36(3), 335–363. Lau, K.-L., & Lee, C. K. (2008). Validation of a Chinese achievement goal orientation questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 331–353. Lau, S., Liem, A. D., & Nie, Y. (2010). Task- and self-related pathways to deep learning: The mediating role of achievement goals, classroom attentiveness, and group participation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 639–662. Liem, A. D., Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 486–512. Malpass, J. R., O’Neil, H. F., & Hocevar, D. (1999). Self-regulation, goal orientation, self-efficacy, worry and high-stakes math achievement for mathematically gifted high school students. Roeper Review, 21(4), 281–288. Martin, A. J., Marsh, H. W., Debus, R. L., & Malmberg, L.-E. (2008). Performance and mastery orientation of high school and university/college students: A Rasch perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(3), 464–487.
123
Midgley, C., Anderman, E., & Hicks, L. (1995). Differences between elementary and middle school teachers: A goal theory approach. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15, 90–113. Mordkowitz, E. R., & Ginsburg, H. P. (1987). Early academic socialization of successful Asian-American college students. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 9(2), 85–91. Payne, S. C., Youngcourt, S. S., & Beaubien, J. M. (2007). A metaanalytic examination of the goal orientation nomological net. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 128–150. Roderick, M., Jacob, B. A., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). The impact of highstakes testing in Chicago on student achievement in promotional gate grades. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(4), 333–357. Ryan, K. E., Ryan, A. M., Arbuthnot, K., & Samuels, M. (2012). Students’ motivation for standardized math exams. Educational Researcher, 36(1), 5–13. Salili, F., Chiu, C. Y., & Lai, S. (2001). The influence of culture and context on students’ motivation orientation and performance. In F. Salili, C. Y. Chiu, & Y. Y. Hong (Eds.), Student motivation: The culture and context of learning (pp. 221–247). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Salili, F., & Lai, M. K. (2003). Learning and motivation of Chinese students in Hong Kong: A longitudinal study of contextual influences on students’ achievement orientation and performance. Psychology in the Schools, 40(1), 51–70. Shih, S. S. (2005). Taiwanese sixth graders’ achievement goals and their motivation, strategy use, and grades: An examination of the multiple goal perspective. Elementary School Journal, 106, 39–58. Urdan, T. C. (1997). Achievement goal theory: Past results, future directions. In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 243–269). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Urdan, T. C. (2004). Using multiple methods to assess students’ perception of classroom goal structures. European Psychologist, 9, 222–231. Urdan, T. C., Midgley, C., & Anderman, E. M. (1998). The role of classroom goal structures in students’ use of self-handicapping strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 101–122. Watkins, D. A., & Biggs, J. B. (1996). The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological, and contextual influences. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Wise, S. L., & DeMars, C. E. (2005). Low examinee effort in lowstakes assessment: Problems and potential solutions. Educational Assessment, 10(1), 1–17.
