«L., Ratsameemonthon El Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised (AGQ-R) para estudiantes universitarios tailandeses y el contexto asiático Electronic ...»
Electronic Journal of Research in
Universidad de Almería
El Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised (AGQ-R) para estudiantes universitarios
tailandeses y el contexto asiático
Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, vol. 13, núm. 36, septiembre,
2015, pp. 369-386
Universidad de Almería
Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=293141133008
Cómo citar el artículo Número completo Sistema de Información Científica Más información del artículo Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal Página de la revista en redalyc.org Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto El Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised (AGQ-R) para estudiantes universitarios tailandeses y el contexto asiático Ratsameemonthon L.
Didyasarin International College, Hatyai University, Hatyai, Songkhla, Thailand Tailandia Correspondencia: Ratsameemonthon L. Didyasarin International College, Hatyai University, Thailand.
e-mail: email@example.com © Education & Psychology I+D+i and Ilustre Colegio de Psicología de Andalucía Oriental (Spain) Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 13(2), 369-386. ISSN: 1696-2095. 2015, no. 36 - 369http://dx.doi.org/10.14204/ejrep.36.14078 Ratsameemonthon L.
Resumen Introducción. Las cuatro dimensiones (2x2) de metas de logro son la última versión del AGQ-R para explicar las razones o propósitos para alcanzar sus objetivos individuales. En Tailandia el marco 2x2del AGQ-R no ha sido suficientemente investigado. Por consiguiente, es necesario desarrollar una versión tailandesa del AGQ-R para valorar las metas de logro de los alumnos con el fin de investigar como utilizan sus metas de logro para alcanzar sus objetivos académicos y a su vez evaluar si las metas de logro desarrolladas desde una perspectiva occidental se podría aplicar en un contexto tailandés.
Método. La versión tailandesa del AGQ-R fue administrada a 988 estudiantes de 3 universidades situadas en la provincial de Songkhla, Tailandia. El análisis factorial exploratorio (EFA) fue usado para explicar la relación común de cada variable, mientras el análisis factorial confirmatorio (CFA) fue usado para confirmar los factores estructurados identificados mediante EFA.
Resultados. Los resultados del análisis factorial exploratorio (EFA) y la confirmación del factor análisis (CFA) corroboraron los 4 factores de la versión tailandesa del AGQ-R demostraron ser la misma que en la escala original. La traducción a la versión tailandesa del AGQ-R demostró una aceptable veracidad y validez.
Discusión y conclusión. La perspectiva teórica aboga a la separación de las estructura 4factores del AGQ-R y podría superar las diferencias culturales de personas viviendo en diferentes culturas teniendo el mismo factor estructural propiedad del AGQ-R. Para investigaciones futuras se debería reproducir en otro año académico o con otro nivel educativo u otras localidades para aumentar la validez y veracidad de esta valoración.
Palabras clave: traducción, validación, metas de logro, cuestionario de metas de logros, estudiantes universitarios.
Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised for Thai College Students and Asian Context Abstract Introduction. The four dimensions (2x2) of achievement goal are the latest versión of achievement goal questionnaire to explain reasons or purposes of individuals pursuing their goal. In Thailand the 2x2 framework of achievement goal questionnaire to examine a student’s achievement goal in the Thai Language version may not have been sufficiently researched. Therefore, it is necessary to develop achievement goal in the Thai version to assess students’ achievement goal in order to investigate how they utilize their achievement goal to achieve in their academic performance as well as to examine whether an achievement goal assessment developed from Western perspective could apply in Thai context.
Method. The Thai version of AGQ-R was administered to 988 students from three selected universities located in Songkhla province Thailand. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to explain a common relationship of each variable, whereas, CFA was used to confirm the factor structure identified via EFA.
Results. The result of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed the four-factor structure of the Thai version of AGQ-R appeared to be the same as that of the original scale. The translated Thai version of AGQ-R demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity.
Discussion and conclusion. Theoretical perspective advocated a separation of the four-factor structure of achievement goal and could bridge the cultural gap of people living in different cultures having the same factor structural domain of achievement goal. Future research should be replicated with other academic years or with other educational levels or other locations to increase validity and reliability of this assessment.
Keywords: translation, validation, achievement goal, achievement goal questionnaire, college students.
Many researchers have been trying over the years to explain and predict people’s behaviors and their aspirations to accomplish tasks in different situations. Some people face burdens with a sense of challenge and joy whereas other people engage difficult tasks with a sense of helplessness and anxiety. One of the most important psychological constructs that influence people to achieve success is achievement goal (Elliot, 1999).
Achievement goal proposed within the concepts of Social Cognitive Theory of Motivation (SCTM) is a view of human agency in which individuals are agents proactively engaged in their own development including a possession of self-belief to direct their performance (Bandura, 1986). Therefore, an achievement goal can perform as a motivational belief or reason for individuals to regulate their own behaviors in pursuing their goals (Elliot, 2005).
The achievement goal construct was introduced in the late 1970s and early 1980s through the independent and collaborative work of Carol Ames, Marol Dweck, Mary Maehr, and John Nicholls (Elliot, 1999). However, Dweck and Nicholls were the two pioneers that many researchers often referred to because their conceptualizations influenced many current works (Elliot, 2005). At the beginning, achievement goal had been separated into two types: learning goal or mastery goal and performance goal. According to the two initiators’ conception, Dweck and Nicholls, individuals espousing a mastery goal believe their intelligence is malleable and can be improved. Therefore, they utilize internal referencing of a successful outcome in a past situation to regulate their performance to achieve a goal. On the other hand, individuals espousing a performance goal believe their intelligence and performance are fixed. Consequently, they apply external reference by comparing performance with others to motivate themselves to complete their goal. However, mixed results have been continuously shown in the dimension of performance goal. As a result, Elliot and his colleagues (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996; Elliot & Church, 1997) proffered that performance goal needs to be separated into approach and avoidance domains because they could have both negative and positive consequences on achievement-relevant processes and outcomes (Elliot, 1999). The conceptual distinction of approach and avoidance as derived from classic achievement motivation theory refers to the psychological concept of human behavior that brings about the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain (Aristippus, 430-360 B. C., as cited in Elliot, 1999). Later, the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain was used to explain a motivation of human success
under the term “need for achievement and the desire to avoid failure” in achievement motivation theory. To support this idea, Elliot and Harackiewicz (1996) and Elliot and Church (1997) confirmed a separation of achievement goal into three dimensions: mastery goal, performance-approach goal, and performance- avoidance goal. After distinguishing performance goals, Elliot (2005) proposed a 2x2 achievement goal framework which stipulates approachavoidance dimensions of mastery goal as well as of performance goal. Therefore, a mastery goal in the form of avoidance was presented.
Moreover, an achievement goal could motivate students by utilizing reasons or purposes to achieve academic goals (Elliot & Church, 1997). According to Elliot (2005), mastery-approach goal refers to “the development of competence or the attainment of task mastery” (p. 61). Individuals adopting mastery-approach goal strive to develop their skills and abilities, advance their learning, understand material, or master a task in order to support an intensive search for information to acquire much deeper knowledge (Elliot & Church, 1997).
As a result, it appears to be more positively related to task involvement and intrinsic motivation than merely the academic grade (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996; Elliot & Church, 1997;
Elliot & Murayama, 2008). Furthermore, Elliot (2005) introduced the concept of masteryavoidance goal to distinguish some cognitive avoidance within a mastery-approach goal. A mastery-avoidance goal is described as a focus on avoiding self-referential or task-referential incompetence. An individual with a mastery-avoidance goal strives to avoid losing one’s skills and abilities. Therefore, a mastery-avoidance goal may relate to maladaptive learning styles and negative self-motivational beliefs because individuals employing masteryavoidance in their goals are only concerned with not being incorrect; therefore, they may be less able to apply adaptive help-seeking and instead tend towards more dependant helpseeking (Pintrich, 2000).
A performance goal also consists of two approach-avoidance dimensions. Individuals endorsing a performance goal perceive intelligence as fixed–an innate ability–and fear of others’ negative judgment undergirds a performance goal. Fear of failure is activated in both dimensions of a performance goal, but they express fear of failure differently. Individuals espousing a performance-approach goal express fear of failure to augment their ability to achieve positive recognition by others in order to protect self-worth; therefore, fear of failure is described as a drive for students espousing a performance-approach goal to make more effort in pursuing a high score. In contrast, individuals adopting a performance-avoidance goal
convey their fear of failure from others’ judgment by escaping failure and avoid doing or postponing the completion of tasks. As a result, performance-avoidance goals are reported to be more highly associated with low academic performance and procrastination (Elliot & Church, 1997; Wolters, 2004).
According to the above information, all of the four dimensions (2x2) of achievement goal associated with academic achievement function differently depending on reasons or purposes of individuals pursuing their goal. It may imply that assessing a student’s achievement goal may enlighten us to understand reasons or purposes of students pursuing their academic goals. However, currently in Thailand the 2x2 framework of achievement goal questionnaire to examine a student’s achievement goal in the Thai Language version may not have been sufficiently researched. It has only an instrument measuring teachers’ achievement goals studied by Putharaksa, (2008). The achievement goal for teachers in the Thai version used the translation method and tested the qualities of evaluation tools in terms of validity and reliability with 768 teachers in schools under the Department of Education, Bangkok metropolis.
The results found that the value of content validity, reliability, and construct validity reported within an acceptable range.
Significance of study Utilizing previously developed instruments with accurate psychometric properties can save time and effort (Cha, Kim, & Erlen, 2007). However, almost all of the instruments were developed from a Western perspective. Therefore, before investigating Western-developed instruments, it is necessary to obtain a valid translated instrument in order to have content in the other language which is equivalent to the original version as well as being relevant to the participants’ language and culture. From the Eastern perspective, it has been reported that students’ learning strategies differ from Western students’ strategies which may be derived from many sources. For example, previous studies (e.g. Thongnoum, 2002) found that Thai students reported using a surface-learning process rather than a deep-learning process because the Thai educational system encourages students to apply rote memorization more than the processes of creative and critical thinking (Kaewdang, 1999 cited in Thongnoum, 2002).
Moreover, Bong (2008) found that Korean students applied a performance-oriented goal more than a mastery-oriented goal because the performance-approach goal showed a greater positive relationship with academic grade than the mastery-approach goal did. Asian students try their best to attain high-grade scores because educational success is linked to the importance
of bringing honor to one’s family in Asian cultures (Oyserman & Sakamoto, 1997). This may imply that Asian students might endorse achievement goal in a way that is different from Western students as a consequence of differing educational systems and cultural values.
Objective Taken together, therefore, it is necessary to develop achievement goal in the Thai version to assess students’ achievement goal in order to investigate how they utilize their achievement goal to achieve in their academic performance as well as to examine whether an achievement goal assessment developed from Western perspective could apply in Thai context.
Method Participants Participants were 988 undergraduate students who enrolled in three universities located in Songkhla province, Thailand which were chosen in order to obtain a representation of different types (public/private) and sizes (large/medium/small) of universities in the area.