Self-Esteem and Motivation for Learning among Minority Students: A Comparison between Students of Pre-Academic and Regular Programs

doi:10.4236/ce.2012.38204

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Creative Education

2012. Vol.3, No.8, 1397-1403

Published Online December 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ce) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.38204

Self-Esteem and Motivation for Learning among Minority

Students: A Comparison between Students of Pre-Academic and

Regular Programs

Khawla Zoabi

The College of Sakhnin of Teacher Education, Sakhnin, Israel

Email: Khawla_zoabi2011@hotmail.com

Received October 6th, 2012; revised Novem be r 8th, 2012; accepted November 22nd, 2012

Motivation for learning, which explains the impulses and motives for an individual to act to achieve his or

her goals, is of great importance for students, particularly students of pre-academic preparatory programs.

The literature suggests a relationship between self-esteem and motivation, yet there is a lack of studies

that consider self-esteem among students in pre-academic preparatory programs and its relationship to

motivation for learning. The main question of this study is whether there are differences in the motivation

for learning among students in preparatory programs and regular students. Thus, it examines the relation-

ship between self-esteem and motivation for learning among pre-academic preparatory program students

and among regular students in their first year of study. Data collection was based on a questionnaire. The

sample included 175 students who were enrolled in courses at Sakhnin College. Of these students, 43%

were in the pre-academic program and 57% were in their first year of study in other departments. The

findings show a positive relationship between self-image and motivation for learning among the two

populations. The findings have theoretical implications as well as practical implications. They indicate

that pre-academic students are not “lost”; they have motivations similar to the regular students. The prac-

tical pedagogical implications suggest that pre-academic students should be exposed to academic subjects

beyond the core subjects and should be treated as equal to other students at various levels of the academic

system.

Keywords: Motivation for Learning; Self-Esteem; Arab Minority in Israel; Pre-Academic Program

Introduction

Pre-academic preparatory programs offer a helpful frame-

work; they provide a “second chance” for students to obtain a

high school diploma, and they provide opportunities for further

academic studies for students who initially failed to achieve.

These opportunities affect the expectations of students and their

families. Therefore, students who study in this framework must

be highly motivated to learn to overcome their lack of achieve-

ment and low expectations. This paper focuses on the relation-

ship between self-esteem and motivation for learning among

pre-academic preparatory program students. To understand the

position of these students in terms of academic integration, this

study compared students in a pre-academic preparatory pro-

gram with regular academic first-year students in various de-

partments. The rationale for comparing regular first-year stu-

dents and pre-academic students is that first-year students are

academically similar to pre-academic preparatory program stu-

dents, which facilitates a comparison of the education of pre-

academic students. It is important to explore this issue to iden-

tify differences between these two groups that may be helpful

in promoting success among pre-academic students.

There are 46 pre-academic programs for the Jewish popula-

tion in Israel. These programs enroll 11,383 students, of which

only 5.5% are Arabs (CBS, 2008). Unfortunately, there was no

specific pre-academic preparatory program among the Arab

population until 2010, when an Arab college, Sakhnin College,

established a new pre-academic p ro gr am.

The Arab minority in Israel was approximately 1.6 million

people in 2012, about 20% of the entire population (see Jaba-

reen, 2006, 2008, 2009; Zoabi & Awad, 2012; Zoabi & Savaya,

2012). No program is adequate for young Arab, who constitute

20% of the general population of the state, and only a few stu-

dents consider these tracks a solution for them (Awad, 2012).

According to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, 43.6%

of Arabs who attempted to enter the university in 2006 were

rejected. This is more than twice the percentage of Jews re-

jected, which was 20.5%. Failure to provide equal opportunities

for Arabs, the lack of programs for the pre-academic Arab po-

pulation, and the required level of achievement for acceptance

to universities prevent Arab high school students from adequa-

tely integrating into academic studies in Israel (Awad, 2009).

Moreover, pre-academic preparatory programs have the abil-

ity to bridge the gaps between different ethnic gr oups and among

high school students of the same ethnic group. These programs

also have the power to strengthen capabilities and improve the

conditions for students to enter higher education and use their

potential. The greatest advantage of preparatory programs is

that they are framed as “corrective” programs that provide stu-

dents with the tools to allow them to pursue higher education.

A preparatory pre-academic educational program offers a sec-

ond chance for students who could not succeed during their first

opportunity and prepares these students for the requirements to

eventually obtain an academic degree. In addition to the goal of

reducing educational gaps, these programs have social goals of

KH. ZOABI

reducing social gaps and integrating students of low socio-eco-

nomic status into higher education. The findings of previous stu-

dies have shown that the most important role of social and pre-

paratory programs is to increase the number of students who

can take advantage of the help offered by these academies to

obtain a college degree (Arieli, 1997).

Previous studies have shown that most applicants for the pre-

academic programs belong to low-middle class households, and

their parents have low achievement in education (Hyosh, 2000).

Preparatory studies blur the differences arising from social

inequality in society. However, despite these preparatory studies,

pe r s o n al a n d s c h o l a s t i c d i f f e r e n c e s r e m a i n ( A w a d , 2009).

In sum, pre-academic preparatory programs provide a second

chance for disadvantaged and low-income groups. Preparatory

programs provide students with a way to attain their social mo-

bility goals and to integrate equally into higher education (Hyo-

sh, 2000).

To promote and increase the number of Arab students in the

academy, Sakhnin College established its Preparatory Academy

Program in 2010. Sakhnin College is an academic institution

that is supervised and financed by the Ministry of Education

and is accredited by the Council for Higher Education to award

the Bachelor’s in Education (B.Ed.) and teaching certificates in

early childhood, special education, English, mathematics and

computer science. The main purpose of the Preparatory Acad-

emy Program in Sakhnin is to increase access to higher educa-

tion for high school graduates from the Arab minority popula-

tion and to provide a second chance for students who wish to

acquire academic education and who, for various reasons, did

not complete their high school education.

The Preparatory Academy Program of Sakhnin has achieved

great success in terms of the growth of its student enrollment,

from 80 students at the beginning of 2010 to 200 enrolled stu-

dents in 2012. Based on this success, the main topic of inter-

est in this paper is the motivation for learning and self-esteem

among these students.

This paper examines the relationship between self-esteem

and motivation for learning among Arab students studying at

the Preparatory Academy Program in Sakhnin College. The stu-

dy involved two groups. The first group includes pre-academic

students studying for a diploma to replace their matriculation

scores. These students completed 12 years of schooling but, for

various reasons, do not have a full matriculation certificate or

have very low matriculation scores. They want to complete their

high school diploma or upgrade their achievements to an appro-

priate level for ac ademic institutions.

Despite the importance of this topic, the literature review

shows that very few studies have examined this relationship

between self-esteem and motivation for learning, particularly

among Arab students. Thus, this paper aims to fill this gap and

to contribute to the accumulated knowledge in this field by as-

suming that an individual’s self-esteem is related to his or her

motivation for learning, a s explained below. Specifically , this

paper aims to examine the relationship between self-esteem and

motivation for learning among pre-academic preparatory stu-

dents and regular students.

Motivation for Learning

Motivation is a theoretical concept that refers to an individ-

ual’s impulses and motives for action. Motivation describes

how a person responds to a need or a general desire and initi-

ates various actions to achieve his/her goals (Elliot & Thrash,

2001). Motivation is the underlying cause of behavior (Guay et

al., 2010), the factor that moves a person to do or not do some-

thing (Broussard & Garrison, 2004). Learning motivation is

culturally and socially constructed, and it has different mean-

ings in different cultures and societies (Salili & Hoosain, 2007).

In recent decades, studies have emphasized the importance of

motivation for learning in students’ adaptation to studying and

ability to manage difficulties and failure (Endler, Rey, & Butz,

2001). In the educational context, motivation is the most im-

portant factor in helping educators improve learning (Williams

& Williams, 2011) and in explaining the levels at which a stu-

dent shows interest and ability in various occupations (Brophy,

2004).

Scholars’ perceptions of educational goals vary, and these

perceptions affect the definition of motivation for learning

among students (Valle et al., 2003). For example, the psycholo-

gical achievement approach sees the urge for action as the un-

conscious motivation of an individual in his/her first years of

life and that is influenced by family, society and culture (Elliot,

2006; Furtner & Rauthmann, 2011; McClelland, 1961, 1965;

McClelland, Koestner, & Weinberger, 1989; Robbins et al.,

2004).

Self-determination theory (SDT) emphasizes the universal

tendency to develop one’s inherent internal potential and to rea-

lize one’s self (Deci, 2008; Deci & Ryan, 2012, 2008). Similar

to the approach of psychological achievement, self-determina-

tion theory emphasizes the effect of social conditions on in-

creases or decreases in individual motivation. Theories of self-

efficacy and goal achievement approaches suggest that higher

motivation produces more achievements (Ames, 1992; Roberts

& Dyer, 2005; Schunk, 1991, 2000).

The literature identifies two types of motivation, external and

internal (Nakanishi, 2002). Internal motivation lies within a

person and involves the urge to be desirably and pleasantly

engaged. External motivation is affected by external factors and

pushes an individual to engage in activities as a means to achi-

eve goals and ends (Klonis, Plant, & Devine, 2005). The litera-

ture indicates that actions driven by external motivation are

characterized by lower investment and efforts toward simple

tasks, whereas activities driven by internal motivation are cha-

racterized by greater effort toward complex and challenging

tasks (Ames, 1992; Ames & Ames, 1990; Nakanishi, 2002).

The theory of self-direction suggests that self-direction is a

naturally occurring process (Chee et al., 2011; Gibbons, 2002).

Self-directed people show a wide range of curiosity, self-discip-

line, independence, persistence, goal orientation, responsibility,

and enjoyment in learning (Nor & Saeednia, 2009). Self-direc-

ted people are motivated to learn, to develop a sense of owner-

ship over their learning and to identify their own learning ob-

jectives (Chee et al., 2011).

Motivation for learning is influenced by various factors (Pac-

ker, 2004). These factors include personal motives, such as the

psychological need for achievement and success or individual

self-esteem (Katz, 2004). Scholars believe that learning motiva-

tion and self-esteem vary by individual (Sowislo & Orth, 2012),

and there is a positive correlation between motivation for learn-

ing and self-esteem (Harlen & Crick, 2003).

Saada (2007) believes that motivation for learning can be at-

tributed to various factors, such as job readiness, interest in lear -

ning tasks, freedom of choice, level of involvement, and per-

sonality factors. The ba sic assumpti on is that a student is driven

1398

KH. ZOABI

to learn through self-guidance and is able to provide feedback,

which is based on three dimensions: 1) the perception of self-

efficacy (Self-Efficacy), which involves one’s beliefs about suc-

cess, challenges, strategies, processing and organization; 2) ex-

pression of achievement orientation (Achievement Orientation),

through which a student identifies the importance of task, in-

cludes the setting of goals, planning, supervision and self-guid-

ance; and 3) intrinsic motivation (Intrinsic Motivation), which

arises out of curiosity and the desire to understand the task it-

self.

Intrinsic motivation involves the creation of a learning atmo-

sphere, effort, perseverance and self-reinforcement. A study

conducted among students in an early childhood course found

that the dominant motives for learning are self-fulfillment and

achievement (Awad, Zoabi, & Khalil, 2009).

Self Esteem

Self-esteem appears under various names, such as “self-

concept”, “self-image”, “self-presentation”, or “self-evaluation”.

It reflects the totality of a person’s subjective perceptions, atti-

tudes, feelings, physical characteristics and behaviors with res-

pect to himself/herself (Levine & Smolak, 2002; Neziroglu, Khe-

mlani-Patel, & Veale, 2008). Eldred, Ward, Dutton and Snow-

don (2004: p. 7) define self-esteem as “...more than feeling

good about your self. It is also about being aware of your abili-

ties. It is about who you are, being able to acknowledge posi-

tive and negative aspects and still feel good about yourself. It’s

about having a positive sense of identity.”

Every one has some leve l of sel f-este em, an d devel opin g self-

esteem is a fundamental human need (Branden, 1994). Eldred,

Ward, Dutton and Snowdon (2004: p. 7) suggest that there are

many definitions of self-esteem, but the general theme in the

literature is that self-esteem is related to the twin aspects of

worth and competence (Mruk, 1999). For Branden (1994), self-

esteem “is the conviction that one is competent to live and is

worthy of living” (see also James, 2002, 2003).

According to Fitts (1972), self-esteem is composed of inter-

nal and external dimensions. He suggests three interior sub-di-

mensions of self-esteem: the Self as Object, which refers to the

self-identity; the Self as Doer, which refers to the acting self

and the criticizing self; and the Self as Observer and Judge,

which reflects the values and expectations that affect an indivi-

dual’s evaluations. The third dimension judges, compares, eva-

luates and sometimes mediates the first two, identity and beha-

vior. In addition to the internal dimensions, Fitts identified the

external dimensions of the se lf as family self-esteem, sel f-im-

age morality, social self-esteem, physical self-esteem and per-

sonal self-esteem.

Other scholars suggest that self-image is composed of many

aspects, such as social equity, the academic self, the emotional

self, the moral self, the family self and the physical self (Mai-

ano, Begarie, Morin, & Ninot, 2009).

Some consider personal self-image an innate virtue that is in-

ternally developed. An individual brings this virtue to his/her

environment after it has been formulated, and self-image is not

affected by environmental experiences (Dweck, 2002). Some

researchers refer to self-esteem as a dynamic virtue that is so-

cially constructed, learned by the individual during his/her life

and constantly evolving as a result of the experiences of the

individual, his/her interaction with “significant others” and con-

tact with the environment (Franken, 1994; Harter, 2003; Trzes-

niewski, Robins, Roberts, & Caspi, 2004).

The literature points to a connection between self-esteem and

motivation for learning (Harlen & Crick, 2003; Maxted, 1999;

Orth, Robins, & Widaman, 2012) and shows a positive correla-

tion between positive self-image and motivation (Dweck, 2002;

Harlen & Crick, 2003). Thus, positive self-esteem helps a per-

son to cope with tasks, whereas negative self-esteem encour-

ages a person to avoid tasks that require effort (Jacoby, 2008;

Orth, Robins, & Widaman, 2012). Research findings indicate a

positive relationship between self-esteem and performance;

more positive self-esteem is accompanied by more effective

personal performance, and vice versa (James, 2002, 2003; Orth,

Robins, & Widaman, 2012). A person with a positive self-im-

age is clear, consistent and realistic and behaves in ways that

are positive, healthy and effective (Alexander, 2001; Harlen &

Crick, 2003; James, 2002, 2003; LeMone, 2008). Moreover, the

literature reports on the relationship among success, control

over one’s fate, self-efficacy and self-esteem (Baumeister, 2005;

Chen, Gully, & Eden, 2004; Qazi, 2009).

Some studies suggest that demographic characteristics and

personal and environmental factors affect the development of

self-esteem (O’Dea & Caputi, 2001; Rhodes, Roffman, Reddy,

& Fredriksen, 2004) in the following ways: 1) age-young peo-

ple have a less established self-concept, and their self-confi-

dence develops with age and becomes clearer and more defined

(Mullis, Dossey, Foertsch, Jones, & Gentile, 1992; Erol & Orth,

2011); 2) gender is a significant f actor in self-esteem ( McMu llin

& Cairney, 2004; Moksnes, Moljord, Espnes, & Byrne, 2010);

3) income and socio-economic status (Leary & Baumeister,

2000; McMullin & Cairney, 2004; O’Dea & Caputi, 2001; Gil-

ligan, 1995); 4) health status (Benyamini, Leventhal, & Leven-

thal, 2004); 5) ethnicity (Bachman, O’Malley, Freedman-Doan,

Trzesniewski, & Donnellan, 2010; Birndorf, Ryan, Auinger, &

Aten, 2005); 6) body image (Fitts & Adams, 1971; O’Dea &

Caputi, 2001; Polce-Ly nch, Myers, Kilmartin, For ss ma nn- Fa lc k,

& Kliewe, 1998); and 7) culture (Arnett, 2008; Baumeister,

2005; Fitts & Adams, 1971).

In addition, self-image or self-concept is a significant factor

in increasing or decreasing an individual’s motivation (Alpay,

2000; Harlen & Crick, 2003; Black & Wiliam, 1998). People

who have a positive self-concept generally have more motiva-

tion and self-awareness of their capabilities and limitations

(Franken, 1994). Graduate students are significantly more mo-

tivated by internal motivation than are first-year students ( Rovai

et al., 2007). In contrast, low self-esteem reflects low motiva-

tion and low confidence (Azar & Vasudeva, 2006). Studies have

associated low self-esteem and low motivation with social sta-

tus, income and support (Azar & Vasudeva, 2006), and low-

paying jobs (Mary & Good, 2005).

This paper examines the relationship between self-esteem

and motivation among two student populations. The first in-

cludes regular students in the first year of their academic stud-

ies, and the second includes pre-academic preparatory students

who struggle to be accepted as regular students.

Hypotheses

This paper proposes two hypotheses:

1) There is a significant and positive relationship between

self-esteem and motivation for learning among pre-academic

program students.

2) There are differences in self-esteem and motivation for

KH. ZOABI

1400

learning in both groups (regular students and students in the

pre-academic program).

Methods

The present study is a quantitative study based on question-

naires.

Sample and Study Population

The study population consists of two groups: all students in

the pre-academic preparatory program (76 students) and regular

students in their first year of academic study (99 students). The

students in the second group were identified through a system-

atic random sample in the College. The sample ultimately in-

cluded 175 students, 76 (43%) of whom studied in the pre-

academic program. Of these students, 91% were female, and

9% were male. Furthermore, 92% of the participants were be-

tween the ages of 20 and 30 years, 87% of the sample were

Muslim, 9% were Christians, and the rest were Druze. In terms

of marital status, 84% of the participants were single, and 12%

were married. All of the married students (100%) had children .

The sample of regular first-year students included 99 stu-

dents, which was 57% of the entire first-year student population.

In this sample, 96% were women, 98% were in the age range of

20 - 30 years, 88% were Muslims, and the rest were Christians.

In this sample, 73% of the participants were single, and 18%

were married. Of the married students, 50% had children.

Tools

Data collection was based on a questionnaire that included

three categories of questions:

1) Demographic s: Gender, age, religion, marital status, num-

ber of children up to age 18.

2) Self-esteem: The self-image items were adapted from the

Tennessee Self-Concept Scale—Second Edition (Fitts & War-

ren, 1996). The questionnaire was translated from English to

Arabic by an educator with knowledge of both languages. To

verify the reliability of the translation, two professional judges

compared the Hebrew version and the translated version. In the

case of substantive comments, changes were made that were

acceptable to both parties. In the case of disputes, a third party

contributed. An expert provided notes on the grammar and style

of the Arabic version. The questionnaire included 87 items

addressing self-image. The overall reliability was calculated by

Cronbach’s alpha and was .90.

3) Motivation for learning: A factor analysis was conducted

that yielded three variables:

a) Achievement Aspects: This variable includes the following

items: “I value my academic improvement”; “I can identify

consistency in my studies”; “I can identify efforts in my studies

and my practical work”; “My current studies are my top prior-

ity”; “I am satisfied with my academic performance”; and “I

express willingness to continue my studies in the future”. The

Cronbach’s alpha reliability of this category was .84.

b) Self -re al ization Aspects: This variable includes the fol-

lowing items: “I believe in my ability to succeed in learning

and to be a good teacher”; “I complete all of my required as-

signments”; “I am interested in being a student”; “I believe in

my ability to achieve good grades in my practical work”; and “I

am strict with my academic success and practical work”. The

Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient was .85.

c) Proficiency of Content Aspects: This variable includes the

following items: “When I study, I organize the learning mate-

rial by category and topic”; “Even when my study materials are

not enjoyable, I am careful to take them seriously”; “I can deal

with required tasks and assignme nts”; “While learning, I notice

and perform essential operations, and I try to avoid stress and

other negative feelings towards my studies”. The Cronbach’s

alpha reliability coefficient was .79.

A learning motivation index was constructed that contained

all of the items. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient

was .93.

Procedure

The questionnaires were distributed in the classroom at the

end of the 2010-2011 academic year. The author distributed the

questionnaires among the students in the classrooms after re-

ceiving permission fro the college. The participants received a

brief explanation of the study and the confidentiality of the

process. The participants were asked to complete the question-

naires at their leisure and to return them to the researcher.

Findings

This section will present the means and standard deviations

of all of the study measures in relation to the two groups. Then,

the findings regarding the research hypotheses will be presented.

Table 1 shows the average index scores of the two populations,

the pre-preparatory academic students and the regular first-year

students.

Table 1.

Average index scores (standard deviations) in t he two groups.

Variable Pre-preparatory academic students Regular first-year students

General self-esteem 3.62

(.34) 3.69

(.29)

Motivation for learning 4.75

(.54) 4.78

(.68)

General learning motivation 4.84

(.66) 4.82

(.79)

Motivation—achievement 5.17

(.73) 5.24

(.84)

Motivation—self-realization 4.76

(.70) 4.75

(.78)

Motivation—proficiency of content 3.62

(.34) 3.69

(.29)

KH. ZOABI

Hypothesis Testing

This study examines two hypotheses related to the relation-

ship between self-esteem and motivation for learning among

Pre-academic track and regular students. The findings of the

two research hypotheses are as follows.

First hypothesis: A significant and positive relationship ex-

ists between self-esteem and motivation for learning among

pre-academic program students. To test the hypothesis, we cal-

culated Pearson’s correlation coefficients between the self-ima-

ge dimension and the dimension of motivation for learning for

all of the dimensions. The findings are presented in Table 2.

The table shows that the correlations between self-esteem

and aspects of motivation are positive and intermediate; that is,

self-image improves all aspects of motivation among the study

participants.

Second hypothesis: There are differences in self-esteem and

motivation for learning in the two groups (regular students and

pre-academic track students). To test the hypothesis, we con-

ducted t-test. The findings are presented in Table 3, which

shows no significant differences between the two populations.

Discussion

In the present study, we examine the relationship between

self-esteem and motivation for learning. To understand the fin-

dings in the context of learning motivation, a comparison was

made between students in the pre-academic program and regu-

lar first-year students. The findings reveal a significant positive

correlation between self-esteem and motivation for learning.

This may explain students’ decision to integrate into a frame-

work that allows them a “second chance” to improve their achie -

vements to meet the criteria for academic study.

These students are able to join the labor market and make

money after completing school, although this program is not

considered only preparatory. This choice is based on the stu-

dents’ own expectations rather than the expectations of their fa-

milies and society. It conflicts with the expected order of events

in which students enroll in academic study after completing

high school; students who do not do so may be considered “fai-

lures”.

The lack of a promising future after graduating from high

school decreases students’ motivation for learning (Abu Asba,

2007), especially because the preparatory course is not suffi-

cient to ensure success and to improve students’ progress. The

present study shows that despite the implications of integration

into pre-academic preparatory studies, this integration may ne-

vertheless contribute toward students’ ultimate goals. Students

who lack a good self-image may face personal and social “dis-

appointment”.

The literature indicates a causal relationship between self-

esteem and motivation for learning and suggests that low self-

esteem is a significant barrier to education (Crowder & Pupynin,

1995; Maxted, 1999; Mruk, 1999). Orth, Robins, and Widaman

(2012) believe that positive self-esteem has a significant impact

on an individual’s success and life experience (Orth, Robins, &

Widaman, 2012). Moreover, high self-esteem helps an individ-

ual to feel valuable and proud and to believe that he or she is

“good enough” and capable in terms of intellectual and social

skills (Sowislo & Orth, 2012). Positive self-image may be a

factor is success in various fields (Baumeister, 2005). Therefore,

students’ decision to enter a preparatory program and their per-

sistence in attempting to enter the academy is related to their

positive self-image, which helps them to address the challenges

before them and m o ti vate s them to succeed.

The findings reveal no significant difference between the two

groups regarding self-esteem. The findings indicate that the

self-esteem of preparatory program is sufficient to enable stu-

dents to learn the regular preparatory course framework neces-

sary for future opportunities. The differences in the behavior of

the two groups can be attributed to their national and ethnic sta-

tus. Abu Asba (2007) argues that minority groups face many

obstacles to obtain achievement similar to the hegemonic ma-

jority. He believes that education is important for minority

groups in society, particularly in multi-cultural societies. Edu-

cation is an important tool in promoting minorities and disad-

vantaged groups.

Table 2.

Pearson’s correlation between self-esteem and motivation for learning

among students in the pre-academic preparatory program.

Motivation for lea rning General self-e steem

Motivation for learning 3.62

(.34)

General learning motivation 4.75

(.54)

Motivation—achievement 4.84

(.66)

Motivation—self-realization 5.17

(.73)

***p < . 001.

Table 3.

Difference between the tw o g roups regarding self-esteem dimensions.

Variable Pre-preparatory academic students Regular first-year students T

General self-esteem 3.62

(.34) 3.69

(.29) NS

4.75 4.78

(.68) NS

Motivation for le a rning (.54)

4.84 4.82

(.79) NS

General le arning motivation (.66)

5.17 5.24

(.84) NS

Motivation—achievement (.73)

4.76 4.75

(.78) NS

Motivation—self-realization (.70)

3.62 3.69

(.29) NS

Motivation—proficiency of content (.34)

NS = Not Significant.

KH. ZOABI

There is increasing awareness among the Arab minority in

Israel about the need for and importance of providing education

to the younger generation because education ensures social mo-

bility at both the individual and the collective level (Abu Asba,

2007: p. 51). In other words, mobility among students arises

from the fact that education is a means to reduce the gaps in

various fields and means of obtaining equality.

This study contributes to our understanding of the nature of

the relationship between self-image and motivation for learning.

The findings show that students in preparatory studies are mo-

tivated to learn and maintain a self-image similar to that of re-

gular students.

In sum, this study suggests that this population is not “lost”

and has the self-image and motivation to learn in the same ways.

It can be concluded that the barriers that are faced by prepara-

tory school students and that reduce their opportunities to enter

regular school courses are not related to their self-esteem or

motivation. This study does not address the reasons for the

factors that hinder the achievement of these students in high

school.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the MOFET Institute and the

Department of Teacher Education at the Ministry of Education

in Israel.

REFERENCES

Abu-Asba, Kh. (2007). Arab education in Israel: Dilemmas of a na-

tional minority. Jerusalem: Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies.

Alexander, T. (2001). Defining self-esteem. What is self-esteem and

why does itmatter? Self-esteem as an aid to understanding and re-

covery. Mental healthcare, 4, 332-335.

Alpay, E. (2000). Self-concept and self-esteem. London: The Depart-

ment of Chemical Engineering and Chemical Technology, Imperial

College of Science, Technology, and Med icine.

Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational

climate. In D. H. Schunk, & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions

in the classroom (pp. 25-57). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ames, R., & Ames, C. (1990). Motivation and effective teaching. In B.

F. Jones, & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive in-

struction. Hillsdale, N.J: ErIbaum.

Arieli, M. (1997). Evaluation of the contribution of academic Pre

higher education system . Jerusalem: National Center for Testing and

Evaluation.

Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology

needs to become less American. American Psychologist, 63, 602-614.

doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602

Awad, Y. (2009). Pre-academic establishment Sakhnin college: Ra-

tionale, objectives and content. Sakhnin: College of Sakhnin for Tea-

cher Education.

Awad, Y., Zoabi, Kh., & Khalil, M. (2009). Introducing prior training.

Bmekhlala, 22, 238-211.

Azar, A. S., & Vasudeva, P. (2006). Self-efficacy and self-esteem: A

comparative study of employed and unemployed married women in

Iran. The German Journal of Psychiatry, 9, 111-117.

Bachman, J. G., O’Malley, P . M ., Fr eedman-Doan, P., Trzesniewski, K .

H., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). Adolescent self-esteem: Differences

by race/ethnicity, gender, and age. Self and Identity, Advance Online

Publication.

Baumeister, R. F. (2005). Self-concept, self-esteem, and identity. In V.

Derlega, B. Winstead, & W. Jones (Eds.), Personality: Contempo-

rary theory and research (3rd ed.) (pp. 246-280). San Francisco, CA:

Wadsworth.

Benyamini, Y., Leventhal, H., & Leventhal, E. A. (2004). Self-rated

oral health as an independent predictor of self-rated general health,

self esteem and life satisfaction. Social Science & Medicine, 59,

1109-1116. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.12.021

Birndorf, S., Ryan, S., Auinger, P., & Aten, M. (2005). High self-es-

teem among adolescents: Longitudinal trends, sex differences, and

protective factors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37, 194-201.

doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.08.012

Black, P., & Wilima, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning.

Assessment in Education, 5, 7-74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102

Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students to learn. New Jersey: Lawrence.

Broussard, S. C., & Garrison, M. E. B. (2004). The relationship be-

tween classroom motivation and academic achievement in elemen-

tary school-aged children. Family and Consumer Sciences Research

Journal, 33, 106-120. doi:10.1177/1077727X04269573

CBS—Central Bureau of Statistics (2008). Statistical Abstract of Israel.

Jerusalem: Central Bureau of Statistics.

Chee, T. S., Divaharan, S., Tan, L., & Mun, C. H. (2011). Self-directed

learning with ICT: Theory, practice and assessment. Singapore: Mi-

nistry of Education.

Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2004). General self-efficacy and

self-esteem: Toward theoretical and empirical distinction between

correlated self-evaluations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25,

375-395. doi:10.1002/job.251

Crowder, M., & Pupynin, K. (1995). Understanding Learner Motiva-

tion. Nottingham : Department for Education and Employment.

Deci, E. L. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human

motivation, development and health. Canadian Psychology, 49, 182-

185. doi:10.1037/a0012801

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and

psychological well-being across life’s domains. Canadian Psychol-

ogy, 49, 14-23. doi:10.1037/0708-5591.49.1.14

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. In P. A.

M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook

of theories of social psychology (pp. 416-437). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Dweck, C. S. (2002). Messages that motivate: How praise molds stu-

dents’ beliefs, motivation, and performance (In surprising ways). In J.

Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement. New York: Aca-

demic Press.

Eldred, J., Ward, J., Dutton, Y., & Snowdon, K. (2004). Catching con-

fidence. URL (last checke d 1 October 2012).

http://archive.niace.org.uk/funds/ACLF/Catching-Confidence-Final-

Report.pdf

Elliot, A. J. (2006). The Hierarchical model of approach avoidance

motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 111-116.

doi:10.1007/s11031-006-9028-7

Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2001). Achievement goals and the hier-

archical model of achievement motivation. Educational Psychology

Review, 12, 139-156.

Endler, A., Rey, G. D., & Butz, M. V. (2012). Towards motivation-

based adaptation of difficulty in e-learning programs. Australasian

Journal of Educational Technology, 28, 1119-1135.

Erol, R. Y., & Orth, U. (2011). Self-esteem development from age 14 to

30 years: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 101, 607-619. doi:10.1037/a0024299

Fitts, H. W. (1972). The self-concept and behavior: Overview and sup-

plement. Nashville: The Dede Wallace Center.

Fitts, H. W., & Adams, L. (1971). The self-concept and self-actualiza-

tion. Dede Wallace Center: Monograph III.

Fitts, W. H., & Warren, W. N., (1996). Tennessee Self Concept Scale,

second edition Manual. Torrance, CA: Western Psychological Ser-

vices.

Franken, R. (1994). Human motivation (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA:

Brooks/Cole Publishi n g C o .

Furtner, M. R., & Rauthmann, J. F. (2011). The role of need for achie-

vement in self-leadership: Differential associations with hope for

success and fear of failure. African Journal of Business Management,

5, 8368-8375.

Gibbons, M. (2002). The self-directed learning handbook: Challenging

adolescent students to excel. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gilligan, C. (1995). In a difference voice: Psychological theory and

women’s development . Cambridge: University Press.

Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C. F., Marsh, H. W., Larose, S., & Boivin,

1402

KH. ZOABI

M. (2010). Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation

for school subjects in young elementary school children. British

Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 711-735.

doi:10.1348/000709910X499084

Harter, S. (2003). The development of self-repre sentations during child-

hood and adolescence. In M. R. Leary, & J. P. Tangney, (Eds.),

Handbook of self and identity (pp. 610-642). New York, NY: Guil-

ford Press.

Hyosh, T. (2000). Achievements of graduates Pre-academic at a teach-

ers college. Master’s Thesis, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Jabareen, Y. (2006). Sustainable urban forms: Their typologies, models,

and concepts. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 26, 38-

52. doi:10.1177/0739456X05285119

Jabareen, Y. (2008). An urban leisure site as an ethno-place of trust for

an ethnic minority: The case of the German colony in Haifa. Journal

of Architectural and Planning Research, 25, 240-253.

Jabareen, Y. (2009). Ethnic groups and the meaning of urban place:

The German colony and Palestinians and Jews in Haifa. Cities, 26,

93-102. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2008.12.002

James, K. (2002). Report and literature review into the role of self-es-

teem as a barrier to learning and as an outcome. Leicester: DfES,

NIAC.

James, K. (2003). How self-esteem affects adult learners—Widening

participation and raising self-esteem are intimately linked. Adults

Learning, 24-26.

Katz, S. (2004). Enhancing elementary school children performance

through reflecting on their self-efficacy. Shaanan College Annual, 9,

E27-E36.

Klonis, C., Plant A., & Devine, G. (2005). Internal and external moti-

vation to respond without sexism. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 31, 1237-1249. doi:10.1177/0146167205275304

Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and function of

self-esteem: Sociometer theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology (pp. 1-62). San Diego, CA: Acade-

mic Press.

LeMone, P. (2008). Analysis of a human phenomenon: Self-concept.

International Journal of Nursing Terminologies and Classifications,

2, 126-130. doi:10.1111/j.1744-618X.1991.tb00347.x

Levine, M. P., & Smolak, L. (2002). Body image development in ado-

lescence. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzins ky (Eds.), Body image: A hand-

book of theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 74-82). New

York: Guilford Press.

Maïano, C., Bégarie, J., Morin, A., & Ninot, G. (2009). Assessment of

physical self-concept in adolescents with intellectual disability: Con-

tent and factor validity of the very short form of the physical self-

inventory. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39, 775-

787. doi:10.1007/s10803-008-0686-z

Mary. D., & Good, G. (2005). Women and mental of cache. URL (last

checked 1 October 2012).

www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/mental

McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton, NJ: Van

Nostrand.

McClelland, D. C. (1965). Toward a theory of motive acquisition. Ame-

rican Psychologist , 20, 321-333. doi:10.1037/h0022225

McClelland, D. C., Koestner, R., & Weinberger, J. (1989). How do

self-attributed and implicit motives differ? Psychological Review, 96,

690-702. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.690

McMullin, J. A., & Cairney, J. (2004). Self-esteem and the intersection

of age, class, and g ender. Journal of Aging Studies, 18, 75-90.

doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2003.09.006

Md Nor, M., & Saeednia, Y. (2009). Exploring SDL amongst children.

International Journal of Behavioral, Cognitive, Educational and

Psychological Sciences, 1, 33-38.

Moksnes, U. K., Moljord, I. E. O., Espnes, G. A., & Byrne, D. G. (2010).

The association between stress and emotional states in adolescents:

The role of gender and self-esteem. Personality and Individual Dif-

ferences, 49, 430-435. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.04.012

Mruk, C. (1999). Self-esteem research, theory and practice. London:

Free Association Books.

Mullis, I. V. S., Dossey, J. A., Foertsch, M. A. , Jones, L. R., & Gentile,

C. A. (1991). Trends in academicprogress: Achievement of US stu-

dents in science, 1969-1970 to 1990; mathematics, 1973 to 1990;

reading, 1971 to 1990; writing, 1984 to 1990. Princeton, NJ: Educa-

tional Testing Service.

Nakanishi, T. (2002). Critical literature review on motivation. Journal

of Language and Linguistics, 1, 278-287.

Neziroglu, F., Khemlani-Patel, S., & Veale, D. (2008). Social learning

theory and cognitive behavioral models of body dysmorphic disorder.

Body Image, 5, 28-38. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.01.002

O’Dea, J. A., & Caputi, P. (2001) Association between socioeconomic

status, weight, age and gender, and the body image and weight con-

trol practices of 6- to 19-year-old children and adolescents. Health

Education Research, 16, 521-532. doi:10.1093/her/16.5.521

Orth, U., Robins, R. W., & Widaman, K. F. (2011). Life-span develop-

ment of self-esteem and its effects on important life outcomes. Jour-

nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1271-1288.

Packer, J. (2004) motivational factors and the experience of learning in

educational leisure settings. Ph.D. dissertation, Brisbane: Faculty of

Education, Queens- l and University of Technology.

Polce-Lynch, M., Myers, B., Kilmartin, C., Forssmann-Falck. R., &

Kliewer, W. (1998). Gender and age patterns in emotional expres-

sion, body image, and self-esteem: A qualitative analysis. Sex Roles,

38, 1025-1048. doi:10.1023/A:1018830727244

Qazi, T. (2009). Parenting style, locus of control and self-efficacy: A

correlational study. Revista Costarricense de Psicología, 28, 75-84.

Rhodes, J., Roffman, J., Reddy, R., & Fredriksen, K. (2004). Changes

in self-esteem during the middle school years: A latent growth curve

study of individual and contextual influences. Journal of School Psy-

chology, 42, 243-261 doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2004.04.001

Robbins, S. & Seymour, J. (1999). Practicing identities: Power and

resistance. In S. Roseneil, & J. Seymour (Eds.), Practicing identities:

Power and resistance (pp. 1-10). London: Macm il lan Press.

Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom,

A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college

outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261- 288.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.2.261

Rovai, A. P., Ponton, M. K., Wighting, M. J., & Baker, J. D. (2007). A

comparative analysis of student motivation in traditional classroom

and e-learning courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 6, 413-

432.

Saada, N. (2007). Relationship between self-guidance and self-efficacy

for learning teaching in colleges teaching Arab students in Israel.

Baka Algarve: Al-Qasemi College of Education.

Salili, F., & Hoosain, R. (Eds.). (2007). Culture, motivation and learn-

ing: A multicultural, perspective. Charlotte: Information Age Publi-

shing.

Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educa-

tional Psychologist, 26, 207-231.

Schunk, D. H. (2000). Learning theories: An educational perspective

(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Sowislo, J. F., & Orth, U. (2012). Does low self-esteem predict depres-

sion and anxiety? A metaanalysis of longitudinal studies. Psycho-

logical Bulletin, Advance online p ublication. doi:10.1037/a0028931

Trzesniewski, K. H., Robins, R. W., Roberts, B. W., & Caspi, A.

(2004). Personality and self-esteem development across the life span.

In P. T. Costa, & I. C. Siegler (Eds.), Recent advances in psychology

and aging (pp. 163-185). Amst erdam: Elsevier Science.

Valle, A., Cabanach, R. G., Nunez, J. C., Gonzalez-Pienda, J., Rodri-

guez, S., & Pineiro, I. (2003). Multiple goals, motivation and aca-

demic learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 71-

87. doi:10.1348/000709903762869923

Visblay, A. (2007). Routes designated for the Arab population at the

pre-academic. Je rusalem: Research and Information Center.

Williams, K. C., & Williams, C. C. (2011). Five key ingredients for

improving student motivation. Research in Higher Education Jour-

nal, 121-123.

Zoabi, Kh., & Awad, Y. (2012). Exploring teaching training using

metaphors among Arab students in Israel. Creative Education, 3, 1-7.

doi:10.4236/ce.2012.32034

Zoabi, Kh., & Savaya, R. (2012). Cultural intervention strategies em-

ployed by Arab social workers in Israel: Identification and conceptu-

alization. The British Journal of Social Work, 42, 245-264.

doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcr071