Perceived Relatedness as a Predictor of Perceived Relatedness as a Predictor of Academic Motivation and Performance after Academic Motivation and Performance after

the Transition into Junior High Schoolthe Transition into Junior High School

Jonathan D. TempleJonathan D. Temple

Hanover CollegeHanover College

IntroductionIntroduction

How do students’ relationships affect their How do students’ relationships affect their adjustment after the transition to junior high?adjustment after the transition to junior high?

Possible decline in academic motivation and Possible decline in academic motivation and performance performance (Eccles et al., 1993)(Eccles et al., 1993)

Relationships may be important Relationships may be important (Lynch & Cicchetti, 1997)(Lynch & Cicchetti, 1997)

Self-Determination Theory Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 1994; Deci et al., 1991)(Deci & Ryan, 1985; 1994; Deci et al., 1991)

Motivational theory—experience of choice Motivational theory—experience of choice drives motivationdrives motivation– 3 types of motivation:3 types of motivation:

IntrinsicIntrinsicExtrinsicExtrinsicAmotivationAmotivation

– 3 basic needs:3 basic needs:AutonomyAutonomyCompetenceCompetenceRelatednessRelatedness

Introduction, cont.Introduction, cont.Focus on relatedness within academic Focus on relatedness within academic environment environment (Stults, 2001)(Stults, 2001)

Relationships, academic motivation, and Relationships, academic motivation, and performance in generalperformance in general– Teacher Teacher (Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989)(Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989)

– Parent Parent (Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994; Wentzel, 1998)(Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994; Wentzel, 1998)

– PeerPeer (Furman & Buhrmester, 1992)(Furman & Buhrmester, 1992)

HypothesesHypotheses

Involvement

•Adult

•Peer

Relatedness

•Teacher

•Parent

•Peer

Motivation

•Intrinsic

•Extrinsic

GPA

Adapted from Vallerand & Losier (1999)

MethodMethod

121 Participants (116 used)121 Participants (116 used)– 77thth grade junior high school students grade junior high school students– 2 public and 1 parochial school2 public and 1 parochial school– 66 females, 50 males; ages 12-1566 females, 50 males; ages 12-15– Primarily CaucasianPrimarily Caucasian

MaterialsMaterials– Adapted Academic Motivation Scale Adapted Academic Motivation Scale (Vallerand et al., 1992)(Vallerand et al., 1992)

– Adapted Perceived Relatedness Scales Adapted Perceived Relatedness Scales (Richer & Vallerand, (Richer & Vallerand, 1999)1999)

– Parental and Peer Academic Involvement ScaleParental and Peer Academic Involvement Scale

Method, cont.Method, cont.

ProcedureProcedure– Contacted schoolsContacted schools– Parental consent lettersParental consent letters– Collected data over 2 week period Collected data over 2 week period – 11stst semester grade point averages (4=A, 1=D) semester grade point averages (4=A, 1=D)

obtained from schoolsobtained from schools

ResultsResults

MotivationMotivation GPAGPA

Adult InvolvementAdult Involvement .44**.44** .22*.22*

Peer InvolvementPeer Involvement .45**.45** .24**.24**

Teacher PRTeacher PR .61***.61*** n.s.n.s.

Parent PRParent PR .51***.51*** .38***.38***

Peer PRPeer PR .23*.23* n.s.n.s.

*p< .05; **p< .01; ***p< .001

Results, cont.Results, cont.

MotivationMotivationBetaBeta tt pp

Adult Adult InvolvementInvolvement .10.10 1.041.04 n.s.n.s.

Peer Peer InvolvementInvolvement .17.17 2.102.10 <.05<.05

Parent PRParent PR .23.23 2.502.50 <.05<.05

Peer PRPeer PR .00.00 -.01-.01 n.s.n.s.

Teacher PRTeacher PR .41.41 4.894.89 <.001<.001

F (5,107)= 19.54, p<.05

Results, cont.Results, cont.

Grade Point Average Grade Point Average (GPA)(GPA)

BetaBeta tt pp

MotivationMotivation .21.21 1.861.86 n.s.n.s.

Adult InvAdult Inv -.06-.06 -.50-.50 n.s.n.s.

Peer InvPeer Inv .08.08 .81.81 n.s.n.s.

Parent PRParent PR .28.28 2.352.35 <.05<.05

F (4,107)= 5.84, p< .05F (4,107)= 5.84, p< .05

DiscussionDiscussion

Importance of relationships after the Importance of relationships after the transitiontransition– Teacher relatedness and motivationTeacher relatedness and motivation– Parent relatedness, motivation, & GPAParent relatedness, motivation, & GPA– Peer involvement and motivationPeer involvement and motivation

LimitationsLimitations– Homogenous sampleHomogenous sample– Teachers assessed “on average”Teachers assessed “on average”

Future researchFuture research

THANK YOU!

Correlation MatrixCorrelation Matrix Teacher

PR Parent

PR Peer PR

Adult Involvement

Peer Involvement

Motivation Amotivation GPA

Teacher PR --- .40** .34** .35** .40** .61*** -.25* n.s.

Parent PR --- n.s. .59** .33** .51*** -.43*** .38***

Peer PR --- .20* .36** .23* -.10* n.s.

Adult Involvement

--- .36* .44** -.37** .22*

Peer Involvement

--- .45** -.42*** .24*

Motivation --- -.53** .36***

Amotivation --- -.41***

GPA ---

*p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001

Results, cont.Results, cont.

Involvement

•Adult

•Peer

Relatedness

•Teacher

•Parent

•Peer

Motivation

•Intrinsic

•Extrinsic

GPA