One of the more interesting issues to consider in schooling is that of motivation. Teachers often lament about students' lack of motivation. Psychology has been interested in motivation for some time, and many theories have been developed as a means of trying to explain and enhance motivation. However, these theories seldom seem to find their way into classroom practice in an explicit way. Good teachers, though, seem to have an intuition about students' motivation that is consistent with these theories. The following article shows how one teacher has struggled with implications of the ideas from psychology in her classroom.

Timothy L. Seifert

In reflecting on an eleven year teaching career I have tried to come to terms with one question that everyone asks: How do you motivate your students? Most of the time I laugh it off and say, "I have no idea". However, I have come to realize that I do know how I motivate my students. I do not motivate them: they motivate themselves. What I do is give them the kind of classroom environment that fosters their motivation. Therefore, to answer the question "How do you motivate students", I have to analyze my teaching strategies, classroom environment, instructional strategies, and goals as well as my students' self-efficacy/self-worth, cognitive strategies, evaluation processes, attributions, and their interpretation of belongingness in my classroom.

There are a variety of ways to accomplish this mammoth task: (1) understand the interaction of students and their interactions with others; (2) interpret the perceptions of students; i.e. their perceptions of teaching and other students; (3) develop personal goals for a classroom and allow the students the same right; (4) develop a form of evaluation for all the stakeholders, and (5) encourage students to develop a sense of self-esteem and worth, a love for learning and the experience of new challenges, and a greater understanding of how they as individuals add to the classroom environment. In order to attain this very important task teachers also need to focus on their own emotions and those of their students. We are teaching students a love of learning and a "way of being" (Seifert, 1996).

In order to develop a motivational atmosphere in any classroom one must have a definition or understanding of what educational motivation actually means. According to Weiner (1990), motivation consists of various cognitions that are interrelated. He lists five such cognitions; casual ascriptions, efficacy, control beliefs, helplessness, and goals for which one may strive. However, I also believe that Atkinson's (1964) theory of emotions, Covington & Beery's (1976) theory of self-worth, and Dweck's (1988) goal theory are highly relevant to developing a motivational classroom and must be included in a working definition of motivation. In our classroom we use the following definition for motivation: "Classroom achievement motivation is a students' and teacher's set of beliefs and behaviours that guide both in a social environment to interact with teaching and learning".

The next step is to take the classroom environment and link it to what current research has to say regarding motivation. The five motivational theories of attribution, self-worth, self-efficacy, self- determination, and goal (social cognition) are, I believe, the most important in developing a motivational classroom. Each theory adds another dimension to a classroom environment and the beliefs and methods of teachers and students. If teachers can understand and find ways to implement what the theories propose in their classroom practices, then teachers will have ample data to develop motivational strategies for their classrooms.

First Strategy for a Motivational Classroom

As a new teacher I never paid attention to how students interpreted their learning outcomes. I attached no value to how they felt about their normative evaluations. I never believed that success or failure mattered much to future learning. If students passed it was good; if they failed, they would try harder the next time or I would try to encourage them to review their test for future reference. I did, however, write comments regarding their performance. I never asked the question "What caused this student to do well and that student to do poorly"? After reading Weiner's Theory of Attribution I can now answer such a question with some degree of knowledge and comprehension.

Weiner's theory (1984) proposed that students try to understand and uncover why a happening has occurred. For example; "Why did I fail this test"? Students will attribute the cause of failure or success to either effort, ability, others, emotions, task difficulty, or luck. What we as teachers have to do in our classrooms to enhance motivation and continue success is to help the students develop healthy attributions about their successes and failures. We have to help the students interpret the event in a positive way so they can maintain their sense of the value of the learning experience. How do we do this, one might ask. I focus on the positive aspects of the performance. If a student did poorly in a particular test I would find a way to put it in a positive light. For example, I would ask questions to ascertain if the student's knowledge was adequate to complete the assignment successfully or if their study skills were effective. We have to help students develop a sense of control over their successes and failures.

Second Strategy for a Motivational Classroom

Any motivational classroom must have incorporated a strategy for developing and fostering a sense of self-worth and self-esteem in students. When we discuss a definition of students' self-worth we need to understand that students' perceptions of value and their ability are primary activators of achievement behaviour. Covington's self-worth theory (1984) proposed that there is a direct link between ability and effort, performance and self-worth. Covington and Omelich (1982) asked first year college students to rate their successes and failures to their feelings of self-worth in the courses. A path analysis showed that the grades the students received accounted for one-fourth of the feelings of self-worth and that perceived ability, independent of grades, accounted for one-half of the feelings of self-worth. I believe that high school students are no different from first year college students; therefore, the research carried out by Covington and Omelich would apply to a high school classroom.

The first question to be asked is "How do teachers affect students' self-worth?" I believe that teachers have great influence regarding students' self-worth through perceptions of and interactions with students. Teachers therefore need to be cognizant of the fact that what is said and done will greatly affect students. Research (Ames 1977, Kelly 1971, Schnur 1982, Covington 1984) has shown that high school students and young adults perceive that ability is the most important causal factor in their achievement. It behooves us as teachers to make sure that we try to help students develop a sense of value in our classrooms regardless of their academic achievement. We must give students the control they need for their learning but it must not be a conditional control. Like unconditional love, unconditional value is of the utmost importance in developing students' sense of belonging and self-worth.

To develop a self-worth motivational strategy a teacher needs to focus on the individual student. This must be done in the beginning weeks of class. Using ice breaker strategies like "getting to know you bingo" will help all members of the class come to know one other. Having all classroom participants set guidelines for the year also shows the students that they have some control over their learning. Setting up in-class-helpers for various tasks allows all individuals to feel they are part of the development of the classroom activities, be it just as motivators or timekeepers. All of these classroom practices help foster self-worth and well being. If we focus on self-worth based on belonging and value in the class and believe that all students have that value and belonging, regardless of academic achievements, then student's self-worth will grow in a positive direction. Self-worth can be accomplished while maintaining standards and goals. We must remember that all students have various degrees of ability, so we need to set, at the beginning of the year, standards based on the goals the students have set for themselves.

Third Strategy for a Motivational Classroom

When students make personal judgements regarding their performance capabilities in any subject they are using what Bandura (1977) termed the "Self Efficacy Theory". As teachers we need to understand how a student's self-efficacy works in our classrooms and how it affects a student's achievement. According to Schunk (1985), self-efficacy is believed to have very diverse effects on motivation, achievement, performance and the choices of activities for the student. Bandura (1981) also proposed that students gather information about their self-efficacy in any domain from evaluations, experiences, social interactions, and physiological states. It is very important for teachers to know this because if we give students the wrong information regarding any one of the elements of this theory then we are going to influence a student's sense of self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy can develop in a negative or positive direction. Collins (1982) found that students, regardless of their ability on standardized tests, would try more mathematical problems and solve more problems correctly if they had a high self-efficacy. This finding helps teachers understand that if students' judgements regarding their performance is high then, even if their abilities are not as high as others, they will persist longer and expend greater energy in trying challenging activities. Students with high self-efficacy are not afraid to try new activities. While this is not the solution for all low ability students, if we can help develop a student's self-efficacy then we can give them the foundation to try and perform to their full capability. Schunk's (1985) studies have shown that the effects of any student's performance on self-efficacy can be changed by the cues derived from a teacher's educational practices. If we as teachers do not engage in positive feedback during and after instruction then students may feel their performance is lacking and if their expectations and the teacher's do not match then the chances are that students will develop a low self-efficacy or not maintain the high level of self-efficacy they had before starting the class. If teachers at the beginning of the year asked students how they weigh their learning and performance cues, then the classroom learning goals and activities can be developed to suit the various cues. However, learning goals for students must also be viewed as a very important component in developing a motivational classroom.

Fourth Strategy for a Motivational Classroom

According to Seifert (1995), recent research has shown that when it comes to achievement motivation goal theory emerges as the predominant explanation of students' motivation and behaviour. Again the first question that teachers need to address concerns what goal theory means. Dweck (1986) argues that students pursue two very different types of goals. These are performance goals (wanting to gain other people's good judgements about performance) and mastery goals (wanting only to learn to gain competence). In any given classroom students are motivated for various reasons to attain these two very different types of goals.

Teachers need to be aware of the goals their student engage in during classroom activities. If teachers know in advance what type of goals their students engage in, they can find ways and means to help students become mastery learners (wanting to learn for competence). This training will be a skill needed for life long learning and the processes that the teacher and students go through will be a valuable experience for both. How does a teacher ever get to know what their students' goals are? According to Dweck (1986) a teacher has only to develop goals that focus on mastery rather than on performance of a task. Students need to internalize that it is more important to focus on if and how they learned and not on whether they did better then their classmates. Consequently, the focus shifts from a performance goal to a mastery goal. Teachers, therefore need to develop goals orientated toward developing students' abilities and not toward adequacy of their abilities. Feedback from teachers during the task is very important in developing a motivational classroom that focuses on goal theory.

Fifth Strategy for a Motivational Classroom

Regardless of all the principles derived from the last four theories, students who feel in control of their learning and who have choices in their learning do much better in classroom activities (Deci & Ryan 1987). This is the proposition advanced by Self-Determination Theory. There are two dimensions in self-determination: they are intention and choice. An intention is generally thought of as a determination to engage in a behaviour (Atkinson,1964). For a teacher, this implies that students have personal causation and this motivates the student to act. When students engage in a task, their behaviour plays a role in the initiation and regulation of the learning outcome. Students will have a desire to achieve positively valent outcomes or avoid negatively valent ones (Deci & Ryan, 1987).

According to Deci & Ryan (1987), one way to enhance motivation and learning is to give students the opportunity to choose some of the tasks they want to do. This is not that difficult to accomplish. Teachers and students have to design from the very beginning what activities can be carried out in class, how they can be carried out, and how are they evaluated. When classroom environments' accomplish this task the students are given a choice over three important elements of learning. Several studies (Pintrich, Roeser and De Groot, 1992) reported that high school students were more likely to focus on learning and mastery if they were in a positive focused classroom. Students were found to have high levels of task interest and value for the course material when the classroom environment provided the students with some choice of tasks, the work was interesting, the teacher provided good explanations, and allowed the students to work with each other. This classroom environment also fostered high levels of self-efficacy and low levels of test anxiety. Students also engaged in cognitive and self-regulated strategies.

Sixth Strategy for a Motivational Classroom

The final element in developing a motivational classroom environment encompasses the emotions of teachers and students. In 1983 Weiner wrote "Affective reactions and affective anticipations, in conjunction with expectancy of success, are assumed to influence a variety of motivational indexes, including persistence of behaviour, choice, and approach or avoidance of tasks and other people" (p. 531). This statement is very significant for teachers, students and the development of classroom environments. Studies conducted by Dweck (1975), Reimer (1975), Weiner (1971), supported the findings that a theory of motivation must take into account the full range of the self, including the emotions of the self. Atkinson (1983) developed the emotion motivation formulation which states that a student will approach or avoid a goal depending on the affective elements of pride, shame, anger, gratitude, guilt, and pity. Teachers have to take into account all these emotions and feelings that they and their students possess in planning feedback, classroom activities and evaluation. If we do not consider the students' emotions then we are not providing a motivational classroom. Weiner (1985) developed a theory consisting of emotion and motivation. The theory has five elements: causal antecedents, casual ascriptions, causal dimensions, psychological consequences and behaviour consequences. Under the elements of causal dimensions, psychological consequences and behaviourial consequences fall in Weiner's opinion (1985) the four determining motivational factors of controllability, expectancy, affective involvement and persistence.

If teachers would take the time in the beginning of the year to talk to the students about their emotions and feelings that arise in a classroom, the students would be knowledgeable about the emotions that may effect their motivation and achievement. We have to remember that students do not try and fail, that what they do is try to be or look successful by maintaining their self-worth. This is accomplished in ways and means that are either beneficial or not beneficial to their future successes and learning. Some educators may believe that teachers do not need to be concerned with all of these theories and findings, that theory and practice just do not equate to a learning environment. However, research has shown time and time again that a nurturing caring attitude develops and fosters a motivational learning environment.

When a teacher steps into the classroom at the beginning of the year there is always high hopes that all will go well, that students will be motivated to work and achieve success. Students are human beings and because of that fact they have just as much right to dignity and worth as do teachers. If we give them that dignity and worth from the beginning we will be sending a message that they have value in our classroom, that they add another dimension to our teaching. Our motivational classroom would not be the same without them; therefore they belong and have value in the teaching/learning paradigm. If we can realize these beliefs, then we help students maintain their academic success, self-worth, self-efficacy, a set of positive attributional beliefs, self-determination and a set of goals that foster mastery learning. All of these elements need to be individualized and if they are then it is not the teacher who motivates the student but it is the students who motivate one another.

Adjusting the Course Part II, (1995). Queen's Printer, Confederation Building, St. John's, NF.

Amabile, T. (1979). Effects of external evaluations on artistic creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 221-233.

Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.

Ames, C. & Ames, R. (1984). Systems of student and teacher motivation: Toward a Qualitative definition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 535-556.

Anderson, C.A. (1983). The causal structure of situations: The generation of plausible causal attributions as a function of type of event situation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 185-203.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unified theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1981). Self-referent though: A developmental analysis of self-efficacy. In J.H. Flavell & L. Ross (Eds), Social cognitive development: Frontiers and possible futures (pp. 200-239). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Bandura, A. (1982b). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 18, 122-147.

Benware, C., & Deci, E. (1984). The quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 755-765.

Boggiano, A. & Barrett, M.(1985). Performance and motivational deficits of helplessness: The role of motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1753-1761.

Brophy, J. (1983). Conceptualizing student motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 200-215.

Butler, R. & Nisan, M. (1986). Effects of no feedback, task-related comments, and grades on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 210-216.

Collins, J. (1982). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behaviour. Paper presented in March, The American Educational Research Association, New York, New York.

Conroy, J. (1977). Enemies of exploration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 35, 459-477.

Covington, M. (1984). The motive for self-worth. Research on Motivation in Education, 1, 77-113, Orlando, Florida, Academic Press.

Covington, M., & Omelich, C. (1979). It's best to be able and virtuous too: Student and teachers evaluative responses to successful effort. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 688-700. (b)

Covington, M. & Beery, R. (1976). Self-worth and school learning. New York: Rienhart, & Winston.

DeCharms, R. (1968). Personal Causation: The internal affective determinants of behaviour, New York: Academic Press.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (1987). The support of autonomy and control of behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1024-1037.

Diener, C., & Dweck, C. (1980). An analysis of learned helplessness: II. The processing of success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 940-952.

Dweck, C., & Elliott, E. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5-12.

Dweck, C. & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychology Review 95, 256-273.

Dweck, C. (1986). Motivation processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.

Farrell, E., & Dweck, C. (1985). The role of motivational processes in transfer of learning. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Feather, N. & Simon, J. (1971). Attribution of responsibility and valence of outcome in relation to initial confidence and success and failure of self and other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 173-188.

Fisher, C. (1978). The effects of personal control, competence and extrinsic reward systems on intrinsic motivation. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 21, 273-288.

Harackiewicz, J., Abrahams, S. & Wageman, R. (1987). Performance evaluation and intrinsic motivation: The effects of evaluative focus, rewards, and achievement orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1015-1023.

Holt, J. (1964). How children fail. New York: Dell.

Kast, A. (1983). Sex differences in intrinsic motivation: A developmental analysis of the effects of social rewards. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, New York.

Kelly, H. (1971). The process of causal attribution. American Psychology, 28, 107-128.

Koestner, R., Ryan, R., Bernieri, F., & Holt, (1984). Setting limits in children's behaviour: The differential effects of controlling versus informational styles on intrinsic motivation and creativity. Journal of Personality, 52, 233-248.

Law, G. (1970). Co-operative Education: Handbook for Teachers-Coordinators. New York: American Technical Society.

Licht, B., & Dweck, C. (1984). Determinants of academic achievement: The interactions of children's achievement orientations with skill area. Developmental Psychology, 20, 628-636.

Littlefield, A. (1985). The power of Co-operation. Ontario Secondary School Teacher's Foundation Letter, Sept/Oct.

Locke, E., Shaw, K., Saari, L., & Latham, G. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1969-1980, Psychology Bulletin, 90, 125-152.

Maehr, M., & Stallings, W. (1972). Freedom from external evaluation. Child Development, 43, 177-185.

Mason, R., & Haines, P. (1972). Co-operative Occupation Education and Work Experience the Curriculum. San Diego: Interstate Printers and Publishers

Meichenbaum, D. (1971). Examination of model characteristics in reducing avoidance behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 298-307.

McGraw, K. & McCullers, J. (1979). Evidence of a detrimental effect of extrinsic incentives on breaking a mental set. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 285-295.

McGraw, K. (1978). The detrimental effects of reward on performance: A literature review and a prediction model. In M. Lepper & D. Greene (Eds.), The hidden costs of rewards (pp. 33-60). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pintrich, P. & De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.

Pintrich, P., Roesser, R. & De Groot, E. (1992). Classroom influences on student and self-regulated learning. Paper presented in April. The American Educational Research Association Convention, San Francisco, California.

Roeser, R., Aberton, A. & Anderman, E. (1993). The relations among teacher beliefs and practices and students motivation across the school year. Paper presented in April, The American Educational Research Association Convention, Atlantic Georgia.

Ryan, R. & Grolnick, W. (1986). Origins and pawns in the classroom: Self-report and projective assessments of individual differences in children's perceptions. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 50, 550-558.

Schunk, D. (1985). Self-efficacy and classroom learning. Psychology in the Schools. 22, 208-223.

Schunk, D. (1983). Reward contingencies and the development of children's skills and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 511-518.

Schunk, D. (1984). Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behaviour. Educational Psychologist, 19, 48-58.

Silberman, C. (1970). Crisis in the classroom. New York: Random House.

Seifert, T. (1996). The stability of goal orientations in garde five students: comparison of two methodologies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 73-82.

Seifert, T. (1996). Characteristics of ego- and task-orientated students: a comparison of two methodologies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 125-138.

Seifert, T. (in press). Academic goals and emotions: results of a structural equation model and a cluster analysis.

Stipek, D. (1988). Motivation to Learn from Theory to Practice. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Swann, W., & Pitmann, T. (1977). Initiating play activity of children: The moderating influences of verbal cues on intrinsic motivation. Child Development, 48, 1128-1132.

Weiner, B. (1990). History of Motivational research in education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 616-622.

Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychology Review, 92, 548-573.

White, R. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: the concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297-333.

Winne, P., & Marx, R. (1982). Students' and teachers' views of thinking processes for classroom learning. Elementary School Journal, 82, 459-518.

Zimmerman, B., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.

Zuckerman, M., Porac, J., Lathin, D., Smith, R., & Deci, E. (1978). On the importance of self-determination for intrinsically motivated behaviour. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 443-446.