Chapter 10 page 198
Larry also raises his hand when the teacher says, “OK, here is a very hard question, and maybe none of
you will be able to answer it, but let’s give it a try.” Here, there is little unpleasantness if failure occurs,
even though the expectancy of failing is high, so Larry can raise his hand. Motivation to avoid = 0 x 10 =
0.
Larry does not raise his hand on moderately difficult questions. Why? Because the degree of
unpleasantness is moderately high, and the expectation of failing is moderately high. Motivation to avoid =
5 x 5 = 25, which is high enough to keep Larry from raising his hand.
So the theory predicts that success-seeking individuals will prefer medium-difficult problems, whereas
failure-avoiding individuals will prefer to work on very easy or nearly difficult problems.
Learning Goals versus Performance Goals. Students with learning goals want to master material, to
improve, to do as well as they can. These students are intrinsically motivated. When they work on tasks,
they are task-involved learners. That is, they are heavily focused on the task and not concerned about what
others think about how they are doing. Errors may be seen as a natural part of learning.
Students with performance goals perform tasks not because they want to master the material but
because they want to get recognition or rewards for completing tasks. These students have extrinsic
motivation. They are motivated not by learning but by grades, praise from teachers or parents, recognition
by peers, and so on. Students with ego goals are ego-involved learners, more concerned with enhancing
their self-image than with learning and understanding.
Students with learning goals and students with performance goals use different kinds of cognitive
strategies. Students with learning goals use strategies such as detecting inconsistencies, monitoring
understanding, and self-explaining. Students with performance goals are likely to use short-cut strategies
to get good grades, such as memorizing without understanding.
The following are examples of behaviors that are indicative of a student who has ego goals (see Woolfolk,
2000).
--uses short cuts to complete tasks
--cheats/copes classmates’ papers
--seeks attention for good performance
--only works hard on graded assignments
--is upset by and hides papers with low grades
--compares grades with classmates
--chooses tasks that are most likely to result in positive evaluations
--is uncomfortable with assignments that have unclear evaluation criteria
--is unwilling to do extra work
--doesn’t follow up on anything learned on his/her own time
--willingness to memorize to get good grades, rather than to self explain for real understanding
Attribution Theory. According to attribution theory, the key to understanding how students learn
is to find out what they attribute success or failure to.
For example, suppose that a student succeeds at a test (i.e., gets an A on a test). What could the
student attribute success to?
--general ability (e.g., high IQ)
--knowledge (e.g., knows a lot about history already)
--strategies (i.e., good learning strategies)
--effort (e.g., lots of studying)
--luck
--easy test