Psychology
Vol.06 No.08(2015), Article ID:57265,6 pages
10.4236/psych.2015.68089

The Influence of Teachers on Increasing Student’s Motivation to the Ismail Qemaili High School in the City of Kamenica, Kosovo

Islam Borinca, Amir Maliqi

Department of Psychology, University of Prishtina “Hasan Prishtina”, Prishtine, Kosovo

Email: Islamborinca@gmail.com, amirshmaliqi@gmail.com

Copyright © 2015 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Received 3 May 2015; accepted 15 June 2015; published 18 June 2015

ABSTRACT

Motivation could be characterized as internal state, that it enlivens, directs and sustains behavior. With regard to schooling, the concept of student motivation is used to explain the extent to which students pay attention to the activities or different exercises, regardless of teaching, or not. Therefore, in the recent years there have been several researches, which among other things are also intended to review and analyze the impact of cognitive and affective aspects of the teachers in raising motivation to the students. The hypotheses are: Effectiveness of teachers only on the cog- nitive aspect is not enough on increasing student’s motivation. While another hypothesis is: A good teacher in affective aspect increase positively the student’s motivation. Regarding to the methodology, this study uses quantitative method, specifically descriptive-correlational method and this study belongs to cross-sectional design, as a measuring instrument is used in question- naire and data processing was done through PSPP. This study included 26 students, conveniently selected from XI/3 grade. The results lead to: The cognitive factor of teachers has an impact on increasing student’s motivation. However it does not act alone. It interacts with affective factor in this direction, and affective factor of teachers also has an impact on increasing student’s motivation but even here we have its interaction with cognitive factor. So a good teacher should have these two aspects developed to be effective in raising student’s motivation, while, with regard to gender and residence it has not yet significant differences, although to gender there exists an upward tendency towards them.

Keywords:

Teachers, Students, Cognitive & Affective Domains, Motivation, Learning, Academic Performance

1. Introduction

There are three things to remember about educating students: 1) the first is motivation, 2) the second is motivation and 3) the third is motivation ( Martin & Briggs, 1986 ).

Motivation could be characterized as internal state, that it enlivens, directs and sustains behavior. Motives encourage and guide individual behavior towards a certain goal ( Wilson & Cameron, 1996 ). So motivation is the driving force that lies within us and on its base we act or behave in a certain manner and it has a base on physiological, behavioral, cognitive and social areas (McCroskey, 2006). Various theories define motivation in different manners: Cognitive perspective emphasizes active human quest for meaning, sense of ability and power of attribution and its interpretation. The affective perspectives emphasize readiness to address social/emotional needs of people. Behaviorists tend to emphasize external motivation caused by promoters such as rewards and punishment. Humanistic perspective highlights internal motivation created by the need for personal development and personal fulfillment, and self-determination. Socio-cognitive theories consider interest of behaviorist about consequences as well as the interest of cognitivist for the effect of individual beliefs and expectations. Socio- cultural views highlight legitimate participation engaged and identity within a community ( Woolfolk, 2011 ). Related to the school environment, concept of student motivation is used to explain the extent to which students pay attention to the activities or different exercises, whether teaching or not teaching ( Hickey, 2001 ).

Lumsden (1994) describes three types of student motivation: intrinsic motivation―has to do with the participation of students in activities that brings to them internal satisfaction, external motivation―has to do with external rewards such as avoidance of a penalty or getting any good grades, and motivation to learn―include interest of students in academic tasks regardless of whether they were essential or not.

While learning is satisfaction and emotion, when the teacher realizes his/her curriculum in accordance with the interests and abilities of students, but the school converted into something boring and frustrating when students feel not being understood by teacher and treated as a mechanic machine ( Brophy, 2004 ).

Most teachers join the opinion that the motivation of students is one of the most critical tasks of teaching. To teach students should be cognitively, emotionally and in behavioral manner engaged in productive learning activities in the classroom ( Woolfolk, 2011 ).

Teachers are key agents in the raising of motivation among students in school, and they must evaluate their success with student’s success ( Russell, 2004 ). A teacher will be considered a “good teacher” when he/she learns you in a good way, as a surgeon who operates skillfully ( Anderson, 1995 ; Thomas, 1975 ). Teachers have a lot to do about motivation. A student can start school or complete a certain class with a certain degree of motivation but the behavior of teachers, teaching styles, the structure of the course, the nature of tasks, formal and physical proximity interactions with students have a major effect on their motivation and this can be achieved by being concise and practical in their explanations, showing support and intelligibility to the students, assessing their personal and material values, creating an open atmosphere in the classroom, and persuading them that “education really is important for their future and they are an important part of the community”, so that they can do if in their teaching style are included two domains as the cognitive and the affective as well ( Kerssen-Griep, 2001 ).

Recent studies point out, that the teacher only effective in cognitive domain does not affect the raising of motivation among students ( Martin, Meyers, & Moffett, 2002 ). Cognitive aspect includes things such as how the teacher assess students, knowledge capacity of teachers, teaching and methodological strategies supplemented by teachers, clarity of expression during the teaching lesson and homework exercises ( Banfield et al., 2006 ), but this is “one-dimensional” way which should be associated with affective domain and in its absence, namely the lack of physical proximity and intelligibility, weakened levels of motivation and also create space for negative interactions between students and teachers as loss of desire to learn and negative feedback by students among teachers ( Brophy, 2004 ).

Cayanus (2004) emphasizes that the teacher who express affective skills with students, positively affect increasing of motivation. In other words, teachers who possess emotional traits are those who have the ability and skills to address emotional/social needs of students. Emotional traits are not referring to academic or pedagogical skills (the ability to have good lecture) but it refers to the ability to keep as much continuity this significant relationship ( Williams, 2003 ). When a teacher fill these emotional needs of students, creates a safe environment for teaching and sociable within the class (Meyers, 2002).

Brown (1971) emphasizes that the teacher who wants to be effective regarding students motivation, (he or she must possess skills that make students to encompasses two aspects―the cognitive and emotional aspects), so this type of teacher gives instructions which point towards integration or combined of cognitive and emotional elements on individual and group learning, and this form of education is completed and motivated.

Object of study of the paper: Impact of teachers in raising motivation among students, ages 16 - 18 years in Ismail Qemaili high school in the city of Kamenica.

The purpose of this study: Is to disintegrate the connectivity between cognitive and affective factors of teachers and their influence on student’s motivation.

Specifically:

1) Is a cognitive aspect of teachers enough to increase motivation among students?

2) The relationship between cognitive and affective domain of teachers.

3) Impact of teacher’s affectivity on student’s motivation.

Hypotheses.

There are two hypotheses in this research, one of them is primary and the other one is known as secondary. The main or the primary hypothesis of this study is: Effectiveness of teachers only on the cognitive aspect is not enough on increasing student’s motivation. While other hypothesis is: The good teacher in affective aspect increase positively student’s motivation.

2. Methodology

2.1. Participants

The total number of participants in this research is 26 students.

This number was selected from XI/3 grade in Ismail Qemaili high school in Kamenica City.

The selection was conveniently made and the classroom that has had current disposal was assigned after relevant director approval for implementation. And was supported by the relevant caretakers of the respective class, the participants were 16 female and 10 male.

2.2. Instrument of Measuring

The instrument that is used in this research is a questionnaire. The questionnaire is devised by researchers themselves.

The questionnaire contains 36 questions that will give us information related with cognitive and affective factors of teachers in raising student’s motivation.

The answers given by the subjects are ranked from 1 to 5 points. The answers look like this:

1) Strongly agree;

2) Agree;

3) Neutral;

4) Disagree;

5) Strongly disagree.

2.3. Design of the Study

This research belongs to the type of cross-sectional studies that measure the phenomenon in a certain period of time. The descriptive-correlational method is used. This is a method designed to determine if two or more variables are related to each other and to describe the current behavior or any special features ( Cohen & Manion, 1994 ).

Data processing was done by the PSPP. According to calculations by the PSPP program we found correlational connectivity between cognitive and affective aspect, also between cognitive aspect with motivation, as well as affective and motivational aspects, and based on this analysis, supported our hypothesis or expectations.

2.4. Procedures

After the participants were selected, the purpose of the research was explained to them: Specifically: The teacher’s influence in raising motivation.

Subjects, at the beginning, were informed that the questionnaire would be anonymous and the most sincere answer was required. They had approximately 15 - 20 minutes to complete the questionnaire. The questionnaire was clear and therefore, subjects did not have any questions, regarding the submitted questions.

3. Results

In this research, there were 26 participants, of which 10 of them were males and 16 females. They ranged from 16 - 18 years. Specifically those of age16 were 11 subjects; from them 6 were females and 5 males. There were 14 subjects who were of 17 years old, consisting of 9 females and 5 males. There was only one subject of 18 years of age. She was female (Tables 1-6).

Reliability Statistics

Table 1. Confidentiality analysis-alpha coefficient.

Alpha result is .83 and based on established criteria by Professor Lee Joseph Conbrach, alpha with result of .83 is considered high reliability ( Cronbach, 1951 ).

Table 2. Correlation between cognitive domain and motivation.

Table 3. Correlation between cognitive and affective domain.

Table 4. Correlation between affective domain and motivation.

Table 5. T-TEST, Gender differences.

Table 6. T-TEST, Residence differences.

H1: Effectiveness of teachers only on the cognitive aspect is not enough on increasing student’s motivation.

In connection with this, it was made correlation between scores of cognitive aspect and motivation where we had this statistical output (r = .45 and p = .02) this correlation is significant and shows the relationship between two aspects of above,

However, when we look at the scores between cognitive and affective aspect, is this statistical output (r = .48 and p = .01), this correlation is significant and shows that with increasing of cognitive aspect, affective aspect grows as well, and therefore we realized that cognitive factor doesn’t interact only and this result support our hypothesis.

H2: The good teacher in affective aspect increase positively student’s motivation.

In connection with this, it was made correlation between scores of affective aspect and motivation where we have this statistical output (r = .34 and p = .09), so here we have a positive correlation, that supports our hypothesis, which means affective aspect is affecting the raise of motivation, however, even here it is shown this domain does not act alone so has the presence of cognitive factor.

As additional results, are differences related to gender and residence to the participants, where specifically to gender we have the following results: males reported X = 96.30 and DS = 14.97, while females reported X = 86.69 and DS = 11.63 and T-test (15.73) 1.73 and p = .08 therefore have no significant differences, however there is a high tendency towards them.

While the terms of the settlement, participants from city reported X = 89.78 and DS = 11.32, while participants from e village reported X = 90.71 and DS = 14.97 and T-test (20.76) −.18 and p = .86 therefore have no significant differences, even minimal tendency towards them.

4. Discussion

In this research we see that cognitive aspect or factor has a high correlation with motivation, so it increases motivation, that does not show support for our hypothesis, but the cognitive aspect has higher correlation with affective aspect as well, which means that, its growth increase the affective aspect so we have interaction of factors and not division and this results, with positive increase of students motivation and strengthens our hypothesis in this regard.

Then we see that the affective aspect is positively correlated with motivation. This means that the best teacher in this regard, affects or tends to influence positively on raising of motivation, but even here is the interaction with cognitive factor or its presence. As a result, the good teacher must have these two aspects developed to be effective in raising student’s motivation.

Results from this research are similar to many international researches regarding affective and cognitive factors and motivation: Miron & Segal (1978) in their study about effectiveness of teachers and students motivation emphasized that the two main categories in this regard were: cognitive and affective domains. In the cognitive domain, the teacher stimulates interest for researching of new knowledge and their absorption, develops thinking and working skills and provides encouragement and motivation for academic achievement through communication and clarification of the topics/subjects. On the other hand, the affective teacher provides emotional support to the students, in exchange for learning and shows a willingness to help students. These teachers are expected to be enthusiastic, with social and flexible personality inside and outside the class.

Research at Stanford University (USA) concluded in 2007, related with teacher effectiveness on students motivation, emphasizes that: a good teacher must have developed both aspects (such as the cognitive and affective) to be effective and play a crucial role in raising motivation, and also one aspect perfects the other and facilitates the learning and motivates students towards learning ( Seidel & Shavelson, 2007 ).

Also, another study made in 2004 at the University of Michigan in the US, in connection with, affective and cognitive factors and the development of learning interactions among students, about the motivation highlights that: students need to feel accepted and loved by teachers and at the same time it facilitates their cognitive process and their desire to explore and to develop positive thoughts about school and learning ( Russell, 2004 ).

Another study conducted in 2008 at the University of Ohio in the US, regarding to the role of teachers and interaction with students stated that: The teacher can encourage motivation, by providing sufficient practical and illustrative information, but the motivation of students will be raised more if the teacher shows emotional skills by creating an interactive environment and understanding problems that they may face in different time ( Anderman, 2008 ).

5. Limitations and Recommendations

As for limitations we can say that the sample was selected from only one class in high school in the city of Kamenica, not by other classes around, although we can do generalization of the results probably with a great sample and urban and rural inclusion in the other study.

Recommendations:

1) More studies should be made by expert on this issue; mainly studies which would have institutional support and which will be published with their recommendations.

2) To conduct studies in national or international level.

3) Update teachers about the importance of the cognitive aspect, especially for affective aspect and its role in motivation.

4) Awareness lectures and training on how to be effective in positive rising of motivation among students.

References

  1. Anderman , L. H., & Kaplan, A. (2008). The Role of Interpersonal Relationships in Student Motivation: Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 115-119. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.2.115-120
  2. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive Tutors: Lessons Learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0402_2
  3. Banfield, S. R., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (2006). The Effect of Teacher Misbehaviors on Teacher Credibility and Affect for Teacher. Communication Education, 55, 63-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520500343400
  4. Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating Students to Learn (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Eerlbaum Associates, Ins.
  5. Brown, G.I. (1971). Human Teaching for Human Learning. New York: The Viking Press.
  6. Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994) Research Methodsin Education (4th ed.). London: Routledge
  7. Cronbach, L. J.(1951). Coefficient Aplha and Internal Strukture of Test. Psychometrica, 16, 297-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
  8. Hickey, D., Moore, A., & Pellegrino, J. (2001). The Motivational and Academic Consequences of Two Innovative Mathe- matics Environments: Do Curricular Innovations and Reforms Make a Difference? American Educational Research Journal, 38, 611-652. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312038003611
  9. Kerssen -Griep, J. (2001). Teacher Communication Activities Relevant to Student Motivation: Classroom Framework and Instructional Communication Competence. Communication Education, 50, 256-273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520109379252
  10. Lumsden, L. S. (1994). Student Motivation to Learn. ERIC Digest, No. 92, 3 p.
  11. Martin, B. L., & Briggs, L. J. (1986). The Cognitive and Affective Domains: Integration for Instruction and Research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, 35, 123-130.
  12. Martin, M., Meyers, S., & Moffet, T. (2002). Students’ Motives for Communicating with Their Instructors.
  13. Miron, M., & Segal, E. (1978). “The Good University Teacher” as Perceived by the Students. Higher Education, 7, 27-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00129788
  14. Russell, M. (2004). The Importance of the Affective Domain in Further Education Classroom Culture. Research in Post- Compulsory Education, 9, 249-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13596740400200178
  15. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching Effectiveness Research in the Last Decade: Role of Theory and Research Design in Disentangling Meta-Analysis Results. Revieë of Educational Research, 77, 454-499. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654307310317
  16. Thomas, D. (1975). Education’s Seven Deadly Myths. NASSP Bulletin, 59, 60-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019263657505939511
  17. Wilson, S., & Cameron, R. (1996). Student Teacher Perceptions of Effective Teaching: A Developmental Perspective. Journal of Education for Teaching, 22, 181-195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02607479620340
  18. Williams, L. (2003). Including the Affective Domain. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 14, 3-4.
  19. Woolfolk, A. (2011). Educational Psychology. Active Learning Edition (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.