According to self-determination theory (SDT), the three previously identified psychological needs affect motivation. As previously identified, learner motivation is either intrinsic or extrinsic; with some learners being a-motivated (experience no motivation). However, Deci and Ryan (2002) suggest that SDT encourages intrinsic motivation in all learners. As autonomy is central to this theory of self, Deci and Ryan argue learners have needs and desires, which results in an intrinsic locus of motivation. They proceed to argue that underachievement is a result of the classroom regiment and time schedule; which occasionally results in teachers rejected learners ' requests for assistance (deCharms, 1983). This is problematic for students with low
…show more content…
SCT, like expectancy-value and attribution theory, emphasises an intrinsic locus of motivation. However, SCT recognises the importance of social interactions and their influence of motivation. Furthermore, SCT is a social cognitive expectancy x value approach to motivation, reflective of Eccles and Wigfield’s (2001;2002) model of the expectancy value theory. Similar to attribution theory, SCT determines that motivation is influenced by the environment and interactions with others and how these influence learners’ attributes and judgements. Conversely, SCT is unique as it determines that motivation and behaviour is influenced through observation and cognition, disregarding Blooms (1956) domains of affective and psychomotor; However, SCT accepts and addresses the antecedents for low-motivation in students. Self-regulation is a recent development in SCT. Like SDT, self-regulation comprises of two categories, with learners being self-regulated or not. According to this theory, underachievement occurs when a learner does not know himself or herself, and are unable to motivate or encourage themselves, i.e self-regulate. (Woolfolk et al. …show more content…
KS4 students are a heterogeneous group, with a diverse range of needs, personal beliefs and socio-cultural factors that influence locus of motivation and academic achievement (PISA, 2009; DfE, 2014). The). Bronfenbrenner’s ecological validity (1989) gives reason to the diverse individual needs and experiences of individuals at KS4. Like SCT, it determines that the environment has influence over a learners ' behaviour. Though the Bronfenbrenner’s model uses five systems, the microsystem, which is the classroom, peers and teachers is mostly relevant to learners motivation and students do not behave the same way in each system. His theory is supported by Rahal (2010) who suggest numerous social-cultural factors influence underachievement and identifies the need for strategies to effectively address these. Over the past few decades, practitioners and theoreticians in the field of education, began using the term social justice education in increased numbers (Enns and Sinacore 2005; Adams, et al. 2007; 2010; Sensoy and DiAngelo 2011). These argue that without integrating elements of social justice education into models aimed at reducing, managing, and resolving the diverse and conflicting socio-cultural factors KS4 students’ experience, academic underachievement within this learner group will persist. Consequently, the concept intersectionality as a framework can be used to effectively address the individual and
SCT, like expectancy-value and attribution theory, emphasises an intrinsic locus of motivation. However, SCT recognises the importance of social interactions and their influence of motivation. Furthermore, SCT is a social cognitive expectancy x value approach to motivation, reflective of Eccles and Wigfield’s (2001;2002) model of the expectancy value theory. Similar to attribution theory, SCT determines that motivation is influenced by the environment and interactions with others and how these influence learners’ attributes and judgements. Conversely, SCT is unique as it determines that motivation and behaviour is influenced through observation and cognition, disregarding Blooms (1956) domains of affective and psychomotor; However, SCT accepts and addresses the antecedents for low-motivation in students. Self-regulation is a recent development in SCT. Like SDT, self-regulation comprises of two categories, with learners being self-regulated or not. According to this theory, underachievement occurs when a learner does not know himself or herself, and are unable to motivate or encourage themselves, i.e self-regulate. (Woolfolk et al. …show more content…
KS4 students are a heterogeneous group, with a diverse range of needs, personal beliefs and socio-cultural factors that influence locus of motivation and academic achievement (PISA, 2009; DfE, 2014). The). Bronfenbrenner’s ecological validity (1989) gives reason to the diverse individual needs and experiences of individuals at KS4. Like SCT, it determines that the environment has influence over a learners ' behaviour. Though the Bronfenbrenner’s model uses five systems, the microsystem, which is the classroom, peers and teachers is mostly relevant to learners motivation and students do not behave the same way in each system. His theory is supported by Rahal (2010) who suggest numerous social-cultural factors influence underachievement and identifies the need for strategies to effectively address these. Over the past few decades, practitioners and theoreticians in the field of education, began using the term social justice education in increased numbers (Enns and Sinacore 2005; Adams, et al. 2007; 2010; Sensoy and DiAngelo 2011). These argue that without integrating elements of social justice education into models aimed at reducing, managing, and resolving the diverse and conflicting socio-cultural factors KS4 students’ experience, academic underachievement within this learner group will persist. Consequently, the concept intersectionality as a framework can be used to effectively address the individual and