TASK PERFORMANCE AND MOTIVATIONAL LEARNING AMONG THE

GRADE 11 ICT STUDENTS OF NORTHLINK TECHNOLOGICAL COLLEGE

A Research Proposal Presented to:

Ms. Mayraflor Durango

NORTHLINK TECHNOLOGICAL COLLEGE,

NATIONAL HIGHWAY
NEW PANDAN, PANABO CITY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Subject

PRACTICAL RESEARCH 2
Research by:
Raoul Philippe Caedo
Catherine Sayod
Michelle Daroy
Jerome Sarol
Condrado Opiz
Queen Babor
Alanisah Modior
Fildward Cuantioso
September 2019
 CHAPTER I

The Problem and Setting

Background of the Study

Motivational learning is the element that leads students’ attitude towards

learning process. Number of studies has been conducted to probe the role of student

motivation toward task performance and different definitions of students’ motivation

have been used by various researches. For instance, Lumsden, (2014) analyzed

students’ involvement towards education and sources of their motivation. Marshal

(2011) viewed students’ motivation as a force beneficial to the learner. Ames (2012)

stated that motivation to learning is dependent on long-term, quality attachment in

learning and pledge to the process of learning. Most motivation theorist believes that

motivation is involved in the performance of all learned responses and leaned

behavior will not occur unless it is energized. Bomia et al. (2013) has suggested

student motivation as student willingness, need, desire and obligation to participate

and be booming in the learning process.

According to the Swedish Curriculum (Skolverket, 2011), teaching should

encourage students into developing an interest in their task performance. ICT is

something that is a part of students’ life since “young children are surrounded by

technology at home, in their community, and increasingly, in early childhood

education programs” (Blagojevic, Chevalier, MacIsaac, Hitchcock & Frechette 2011).

Coyle, Hood & Marsh (2010) also discuss that educational practices should adapt to

the cultural demands of those involved; the learners, teachers and communities. This

could be done by incorporating information and communication technologies such as

computers and tablets to increase students’ motivation. Since these past researches

show that learners’ interests should be a part of the classroom, incorporating ICT

should therefore have an impact on learners’ motivation.

In the Philippine context, Pascasio (2014) considers motivation a necessary

factor for successfully learning and acquiring a second language (L2). Motivation is

said to be particularly related to L2 learning achievement similar to how birthplace

and linguistic background influence the students’ degree of motivation to learn a

language. One phenomenal study in the Philippines was that of Santos in 1969

which suggested that Filipino students demonstrate attitudinal patterns,

instrumentally or integratively motivated or both in choosing English. She noted

significantly that the Filipinos’ desire to learn English does not mean identification

with Americans or their way of life but rather with the educated Filipinos.

Saefurrohman (2016) found that “Filipino junior high school English teachers

made and prepared their own assessments” as compared to Indonesian junior high

school English teachers who only “used items from published textbooks.”

Nonetheless, the nature, effectiveness, alignment with the standards, and

authenticity of these self-made tasks, which might have been contextualized in public

schools, shall be investigated.

Generally, the above statements persuaded the researchers to determine the

relationship of task performance and motivational learning of grade 11 ICT students.

This may be a great help for them to determine if they believe they have the

capability to accomplish specific tasks.

 Review of Related Literature

This section contains the Review of Related Literature and Review of Related

Studies that are being mentioned to help further understand the interest of the study.

TASK PERFORMANCE

Performances can be separated in organisational and task performance. task

performance is also known as job performance. However, it seems that job

performance is mostly subjectively measured in organisations and it will appear that

there are few alternative options. In this chapter, at first the distinction between

organisational and job performance is made. After that the concept job performance

is highlighted, together with measuring it and its implications (Creswell, 2012).

According to Otley, the performance of organisations is dependent upon the

performance of students (task performance) and other factors such as the

environment of the organisation. The distinction between organisational and task

performance is evident; an organisation that is performing well is one that is

successfully attaining its objectives, in other words: one that is effectively

implementing an appropriate strategy (Otley, 2016).

A good performance is necessary for the organisation, since an organisation’s

success is dependent upon the students creativity, innovation and commitment

(Ramlall, 2008). Good task performances and productivity growth are also important

in stabilizing our economy; by means of improved living standards, higher wages, an

increase in goods available for consumption, etc. (Griffin et al., 2009).

 In the U.S. performance is in some cases measured as the number and value

of goods produced. However, in general productivity tends to be associated with

production-oriented terms (e.g. profit and turnover) and performance is linked to

efficiency or perception-oriented terms (e.g. supervisory ratings and goal

accomplishments) (Pincus, 2011).

According to Hunter and Hunter (2014) crucial in a high task performance is

the ability of the student himself. The student must be able to deliver good results

and have a high productivity. Hunter and Hunter (2014) also argue that this is

something the organisation can know at forehand.

However, job performance is more than the ability of the employee alone.

Herzberg (2010) and Lindner (2008) refer to the managerial side of performance.

According to Herzberg (2010) performance is: let an employee do what I want him to

do. This implies that the organisation’s hierarchy and task distribution are also critical

for a good employee performance.

According to Vroom (2013) an employee’s performance is based on individual

factors, namely: personality, skills, knowledge, experience and abilities. Many

researchers agree that job performance is divided in those five factors (e.g. Hunter &

Hunter, 2014). Some researchers even argue that a person’s personality has a more

specific role in job performance (Barrick & Mount, 2011). However, according to

various researchers, it is not what performance exactly means, but how it is

composed and how it is measured (Furnham, Forde & Ferrari, 2007; Barrick &

Mount, 2011).
 Vroom’s (2013), Hunter & Hunter’s (2014), etc. results are evident. Namely,

Job performance can be divided in personality, skills, knowledge, experience and

abilities. Some researchers even argue that personality has a more specific role in

job performance. However, according to Bishop (2011) and others, job performance

contains a problem; namely the measurement of performance.

The effect personal characteristics and education have on performance is

difficult to interpret, since those estimates are imprecise and the models who claimed

that can interpret them are rejected as invalid (Kostiuk & Follmann, 2009). However,

Kostiuk and Follmann do argue that personality differences seem to be important in

the relationship with performance.

It can be stated that job performance contains a problem; the measurement of

it. Job performances are commonly measured by supervisory ratings and those

ratings are not perceived as objective. However, it seems that there are alternative

options to measure job performance Corbetta (2016).

Performance Outcomes

According to Niebuhr, performance outcomes or past experiences, are the

most important source of self-efficacy. Positive and negative experiences can

influence the ability of an individual to perform a given task. If one has performed

well at a task previously, he or she is more likely to feel competent and perform well

at a similarly associated task (Aripin, 2011).

 Positive example: If an individual performed well in a previous job

assignment, the they are more likely to feel confident and have high

self-efficacy in performing the task when their manager assigns them a

similar task. The individual’s self-efficacy will be high in that particular

 area, and since he or she has a high self-efficacy, he or she is more

likely to try harder and complete the task with much better results.

 Negative example: If an individual experiences a failure, they will most

likely experience a reduction in self-efficacy. However, if these failures

are later overcome by conviction, it can serve to increase self-

motivated persistence when the situation is viewed as an achievable

challenge (Burke, 2011).

Mastery experiences are the most influential source of efficacy information

because they provide the most authentic evidence of whether one can muster

whatever it takes to succeed. Success builds a robust belief in one's personal

efficacy. Failures undermine it, especially if failures occur before a sense of efficacy

is firmly established" Marcon (2011).

Sutton, (2015) posits that mastery experiences, or personal performance

accomplishments, are the most effective way to create a strong sense of efficacy.

With mastery experiences and personal performance accomplishments being the

most efficacious source of self-efficacy, little qualitative research exists with

secondary students. Most recent research is focused on teachers, middle school

students, and college students. Research with mastery experiences as a source is

conducted quantitatively in various forms.

Arslan (2012) found that the factor “performance accomplishments” was the

strongest predictor of the students self-efficacy beliefs for learning and performance.

The data accounted for 36.7% of the change in the students self-efficacy beliefs for

learning and performance. Therefore, vicarious experiences and verbal persuasion

accounted for only 2.1% of the total variance.

 Jenson, Petri, Day, Truman, and Duffy (2011) found that STEM classes added

to students overall sense of accomplishment and self-confidence as they made their

way through college. Representative statements include, “Success has made me

more confident,” and, “I didn’t think I could, but I got through it.” The most frequent

response to clicker questions about academic confidence (i.e. earning good grades

in STEM courses, getting help with class work, and working with faculty on

accommodations) was, “I am certain I can do it.”

Gray (2012) reported that several factors contributed to mastery experiences

in college, ranging from the role of instructors, family, friends, and classmates to the

assistance of the college’s academic and disability support offices.

Klassen and Lynch (2013) reported that having opportunities to apply learning

was also valuable. As one student noted, “When I work with other people and

accomplish a goal, that teamwork makes me feel successful.”

Arnold (2010) also reported that personal attributes such as perseverance,

self-confidence, and an unwillingness to fail contributed to these mastery

experiences. One student discussed the connection between a course and

confidence: “I took speech class and worked on becoming more comfortable talking

in front of people and am now more confident.”

Lazarus (2015) stated that students recognized self- responsibility in content

mastery. Students generally did not consider struggle to be the fault of the instructor

and success was attributed to studying and going to class. The participants credited

instructors as having the most impact on their ability to experience success in their

classes. Several students told of instructors who went out of the way to provide extra
support: “We had class two days a week, but we convinced the teacher to host extra

study sessions once a week.”

Laham (2005) associated attention from a teacher with an increased ability to

be engaged in class: “When I was going through personal ... drama in 2007, I was in

a math class. The teacher stayed after class and talked to me. This helped me not to

hesitate to ask questions.” Instructors created a valuable culture for learning in a

class that students appreciated and that promoted mastery experiences.

Kreitner (2011) stated, not only did mastery experiences improve students

self-efficacy beliefs, but another self-efficacy source, social/persuasion, proved to be

beneficial for the students.

Jungert and Andersson (2013) practising is the most important source of self-

efficacy because it is based on a person’s own experience. Experiences of success,

the feeling of mastery enhance self-efficacy, while regular failure decreases self-

efficacy, especially when the failure takes place early in the learning process. Once a

person has developed a strong self-efficacy, one failure does not have much

influence.

Schunk (2012) the effects of failure depend on the moment in the learning

process and the total pattern of experiences. Once a person has a high self-efficacy,

he tends to generalize from one experience to another, with the obvious danger that

the skills from the former experience are not always relevant to the latter.

Ringle (2010) experience with behavior and the attributions of success and

failure are an important source for the development of expectations of efficacy.

 Zimmerman (2009) persons who are certain of their capacities tend to

attribute failure to situational factors like not enough effort or bad strategy. Persons

with a low self-efficacy will sooner attribute failure to their own incapacity.

Vicarious Experiences

Another factor influencing perception of self-efficacy is vicarious experience,

or the observation of the successes and failures of others (models) who are similar

to one’s self. Watching someone like yourself successfully accomplish something

you would like to attempt increases self-efficacy. Conversely, observing someone like

you fail detracts or threatens self-efficacy. The extent to which vicarious experience

affect self-efficacy is related to how much like yourself you think the model is

(Walker, 2018). The more one associates with the person being watched, the greater

the influence on the belief that one’s self can also accomplish the behavior being

observed.

Relich (2015) this construct can be used to explain how group weight loss

programs work. If an obese person sees someone just like himself or herself lose

weight and keep it off by following a sensible diet and exercise, then the belief in his

or her own ability to also do this is strengthened. Watching friends who have taken a

nutrition course choose healthy foods at a fast food establishment may increase your

belief in your ability to also choose healthy foods: “If they can do it, so can I.”

Debus (2016) not only do workshops and training sessions increase mastery,

they can also provide vicarious experiences, as well. Watching others in a training

session, a class, or during role playing can provide observational experiences that

enhance self-efficacy, especially if the person performing or learning the behavior is

similar to the observer.

 People can develop high or low self-efficacy vicariously through other people’s

performances. A person can watch someone in a similar position perform, and then

compare his own competence with the other individual’s competence (Mvungi, 2011).

If a person sees someone similar to them succeed, it can increase their self-efficacy.

However, the opposite is also true; seeing someone similar fail can lower self-

efficacy.

 Increase in self-efficacy example: Mentoring programs, where one

individual is paired with someone on a similar career path who will be

successful at raising the individual’s self-efficacy beliefs. This is even

further strengthened if both have a similar skill set, so a person can see

first-hand what they may achieve.

 Decrease in self-efficacy example: Smoking cessation program, where,

if individuals witness several people fail to quit, they may worry about

their own chances of success, leading to low self-efficacy for quitting,

or a weight-loss program where others do not achieve the results you

are hoping for.

According to Bandura’s self-efficacy theory, vicarious experiences are one of

the main sources that influence the efficacy of the individual teacher and “alter

efficacy beliefs through transmission of competencies and comparison with the

attainment of others;” (Matteru, 2011).

Multiple studies have provided evidence of the role that vicarious experiences

play in influencing self-efficacy (Mlama, 2011; Bandura & Jourden, 2009; Bandura &

Menlove, 2010). A vicarious experience, within the context of teacher efficacy, refers

to an individual observing another individual teach.

 Weibell (2011) vicarious experiences are a common component of preservice

teacher education programs and occur during the preservice teacher’s field

experiences. The impact that a vicarious experiences has on an individual’s teacher

efficacy varies for a preservice teacher versus an experienced in service teacher.

According to Hussein (2011) he beliefs “are constructed from four principle

sources of information: Enactive mastery experience; vicarious experience; verbal

persuasion; and physiological and affective states. Within the context of teaching, an

inactive mastery experience is the act of teaching by the individual. A vicarious

experience is an individual observing another individual teach. Verbal persuasion is

any teaching information conveyed to the individual by another individual

Hanson (2012) proposes that modeling from another individual is an effective

tool for enhancing the self-efficacy of an individual during a vicarious experience.

Within the context of field experiences this occurs when the preservice field

experience teacher observes, as a participating observer or as a passive observer,

an inservice teacher teach. In this example, the inservice teacher (the model) has

the potential, during the vicarious experience, to influence the science teaching

efficacy of the preservice teacher.

Cox (2008) even though field observations (i.e., vicarious experiences) are a

major component of preservice elementary teacher training programs, no research

has been done to evaluate the impact these vicarious experiences have on the

teaching efficacy of preservice elementary teachers.

Furthermore, the relationship between the field experience classroom

characteristics (e.g., student socioeconomic status), where the preservice

elementary teachers conducted their vicarious experiences, and science teaching

efficacy has also not been explored (Lirgg, 2013).

Feltz (2015) seeing others perform successfully also is an important source of

self-efficacy. Other persons can serve as an example (role model) and supply

information about the degree of difficulty of a specific kind of behavior.

However, the people serving as an example should show similarity to the

observer in those characteristics which are relevant for the issue. In some situations

persons are extra sensitive to observed information (Dowrick, 2016).

In case of uncertainty about one’s own capacities, or inexperience with a

specific kind of behavior, people use observed indicators to which they can measure

their own capacities and base their estimation of success on (Hosford, 1981).

Maddux (2013) observing others is a weaker source of self-efficacy than

direct experience, but can contribute to a person’s judgement of his own self-efficacy.

Verbal Persuasion

According to Redmond (2010), self-efficacy is also influenced by

encouragement and discouragement pertaining to an individual’s performance or

ability to perform.

 Positive example: A manager telling an employee: “You can do it. I

have confidence in you.” Using verbal persuasion in a positive light

generally leads individuals to put forth more effort; therefore, they have

a greater chance at succeeding.

  Negative example: A manager saying to an employee, “This is

unacceptable! I thought you could handle this project” can lead to

doubts about oneself resulting in lower chances of success.

Meier (2013) the level of credibility directly influences the effectiveness of

verbal persuasion; where there is more credibility, there will be a greater influence. In

the example above, a pep talks by a manager who has an established, respectable

position would have a stronger influence than that of a newly hired manager.

Although verbal persuasion is also likely to be a weaker source of self-efficacy

beliefs than performance outcomes, it is widely used because of its ease and ready

availability (Sumra, 2010).

Klassen and Lynch (2007) conducted interviews with 8th and 9th graders with

learning disabilities. Both individual and focus group interviews were conducted. Two

quotes particularly captured how students beliefs can affect motivation towards a

task. “Well, if you have no confidence, you’re not going to be able to do anything at

all” (Klassen & Lynch, 2007); and from a 14 year old boy, “Somebody with low

confidence levels might just think, ‘Oh, I can’t do it’ and then not do it at all or just

half-heartedly” (Klassen & Lynch, 2007).

The feedback that teachers give to students and the manner in which it is

presented is a very important source of self-efficacy, even if you do not think it is

significant at the time. Students commented that when a teacher gives praise or

encouragement, “You don’t really think it helps at the time, but when it comes down

to it, it does” (Klassen & Lynch, 2007).

Based on all the literature reviews conducted in the study, Bergen (2013)

attests that a major focus of instruction should move towards improving students
level of self-efficacy, providing a shift in delivery and instruction. “If we can improve

how a student tackles and prepares for things by providing them with a more realistic

view of their skills (calibrating), we consequently bolster their belief and actual ability

to tackle a problem. This is the best life skill to internalize and generalize” (Bergen,

2013).

As noted, in Bergen’s (2013) research, few qualitative studies have been

conducted and few studies focus on the teacher’s interactions with students and how

those early interactions can improve or impede the formation of sufficient self-

efficacy.

Jungert and Andersson (2013) examined the role that self- efficacy had in

mathematics, native language literacy, and foreign language in students with and

without learning disabilities. The data revealed that children in the non-learning-

disabled group had significantly higher self-efficacy in mathematics than children in

both the MD (mathematics disability) only and MD-RD (mathematics disability and

reading disability) groups with (Jungert & Andersson, 2013).

The MD-only children displayed lower self-efficacy in mathematics, completely

accounted for by lower mathematic achievement. The lower self-efficacy for children

with learning disabilities may primarily be explained by the history of low

achievement interpreted as failures and emphasis on negative appraisals (Jungert

and Andersson, 2013).

Improving a student’s ability to accurately depict abilities in a content area will

improve performance. According to Jungert and Andersson (2013), specific content

programs and meaningful teacher interactions with students may improve self-

efficacy beliefs.

Zajacova (2011) also explains that verbal persuasion through observance of

social models also influence one’s perception of self-efficacy.

Lynch (2008) verbal persuasion is the most often used source of self-efficacy,

because it is easy to use. By giving instructions, suggestions and advice health care

professionals try to convince persons that they can succeed in a difficult task.

Espenshade (2009) critical importance are the credibility, expertise,

trustworthiness, and prestige of the person doing the persuasion. Convincing people

that they have the ability to perform a behavior is weaker than the previous two

sources because it does not concern own experiences or examples of them.

Lane & Lane, (2014) It can be a good supplementation to other sources. If

people are convinced of their abilities, they will be more inclined to persevere and

will not give up easily.

However, this is only the case with persons who already think they are able to

carry out a task and is useless if it is not realistic (Poyrazli, 2013).

Physiological Feedback (emotional arousal)

People experience sensations from their body and how they perceive this

emotional arousal influences their beliefs of efficacy (Qorro, 2011). Some examples

of physiological feedback are: giving a speech in front of a large group of people,

making a presentation to an important client, taking an exam, etc. All of these tasks

can cause agitation, anxiety, sweaty palms, and/or a racing heart (Bashire, 2012).

Although this source is the least influential of the four, it is important to note that if
one is more at ease with the task at hand they will feel more capable and have

higher beliefs of self-efficacy.

Arbona (2014) states or Emotional/Physiological states are also sources of

efficacy information. Powerful emotional arousal, such as anxiety, can effectively

alter individuals’ beliefs about their capabilities. People may view a state of arousal

as an energizing factor that can contribute to a successful performance, or they may

view arousal as completely disabling. The strength of the contribution made by each

source varies depending on the domain in question and on the cognitive processing

strategies of the individual. The manner in which the multiple sources of information

are weighted and combined influences the resulting self-efficacy.

Maddux and Meier (2008) attest that a strong sense of self-efficacy also helps

individuals approach challenging situations without experiencing incapacitating

anxiety and confusion.

Perceived self-efficacy is the belief individuals have about what they can do in

different situations with whatever skills they have rather than a measure of skill

(Nora, 2012).

McPherson (2015) people who demonstrate a strong sense of efficacy

enhance their accomplishments and personal well-being (Bandura, 1994) because of

the high assurance in the capabilities and approach difficult tasks as challenges to

be conquered and not avoided.

Additionally, these individuals recover quickly from adversity and setbacks. On

the other hand, individuals who doubt capabilities shy away from difficult tasks,

which are viewed as personal threats. Instead of concentrating on performing

successfully, inefficacious people have low aspirations, a weak commitment to

pursuing goals, dwell on personal deficiencies and obstacles encountered, readily

give up when faced with a difficult situation and often experience potentially adverse

outcomes (Pisecco, 2011).

Individuals have a hard time recovering their sense of efficacy after failure or

setbacks. Pajares (2010) believes that self-efficacy beliefs are constructed from four

main sources of information.

Schlechty (2007) enactive mastery experiences that serve as indicators of

capability; vicarious experiences that alter efficacy beliefs through transmission of

competencies and comparison with attainment of others; verbal persuasion and

allied types of social influences that one possesses certain capabilities; and

physiological and affective states from which people partly judge their capabilities,

strengths, and vulnerability to dysfunction.

Academic self-efficacy refers to students confidence in the ability to carry out

academic tasks such as preparing for exams and writing term papers (Zajacova,

Lynch, & Espenshade, 2005). Furthermore, as partial mediation analyses reveal, due

to the fact that students with high self-efficacy are better able to control natural

impulses when studying challenging material or when they are distracted, it is likely

for those students to receive higher grades.

Being self-motivated, such students perform well academically and probably

manage more easily without seeking help neither from peers nor from instructors.

When under stress, students with self-efficacy seem to maintain self-discipline,

uphold motivation and adjust efforts under taxing circumstances (Schunk, 2014).

Information on the human body can also influence a person’s estimation of his

capability to show a specific behavior. In judging their own capacities persons use
information about their physiological and emotional situation. They experience

tension, anxiety, and depression as signs of personal deficiency. In activities that

require strength and perseverance, they interpret fatigue, pain, hypoglycemia as

indicators of low physical efficacy (Woolfolk, 2013).

Persons expect to be more successful if they are not stressed than when they

are. Stress can have a negative influence on self-efficacy. What persons believe

about their illness and how they interpret symptoms influences the self-efficacy to

deal with the illness (Margetts, 2009).

The self-efficacy from the different sources needs to be processed cognitively.

Many factors influence the cognitive estimation of experiences, for instance

personal, situational, social and time factors. In forming a judgement of efficacy

persons have to weigh and integrate information form the different sources

(Bandura, 2012).

A certain hierarchy exists in the four information sources of self-efficacy. The

first source, the repeated execution of the task is the most powerful source because

it is based on direct information: people immediately experience success or failure.

The other three sources are all based on indirect information. Modelling, seeing

other people demonstrate the desired behavior, can offer very important self-efficacy

information but is not based on one’s own experiences (Dost, 2014).

Persuasion is a weaker source, especially when used by itself. This source

usually is used to support the other sources. The last source, the physiological

information is the least concrete. People rely on their physical and emotional states

to judge their capabilities (Schunk & Carbonari, 2014).

Motivational Learning

It seems that motivation can be conceived in many different ways; e.g. many

researchers tried to formulate motivation but all proposed different approximations.

Many research has been conducted about this subject and many theories were

designed which greatly influenced and still influence organisational behaviour. For

example Herzberg’s theory of motivation (1959) is still used nowadays.

According to Staw (2012) Herzberg was one of the first persons who

distinguished between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. And that distinction could

clarify and therefore help motivating employees.

According to Smith (2015) it is because of the survival of the company.

Amabile (2009) adds to this statement by arguing that it is important that managers

and organisational leaders learn to understand and deal effectively with their

employee’s motivation; since motivated employees are necessary to let the

organisation being successful in the next century. She also argues that unmotivated

employees are likely to expend little effort in their jobs, avoid the workplace as much

as possible, exit the organisation and produce low quality of work.

In the case that employees are motivated; they help organisations survive in

rapidly changing workplaces (Lindner, 2007). Lindner also argues that the most

complex function of managers is to motivate employees; because what motivates

employees changes constantly (Bowen and Radhakrishna, 2013).

According to them motivation used to be considered as: an entity that

compelled one to action. Lately, various researchers proposed different definitions of

motivation. Motivation has been defined as: the psychological process that gives

behaviour purpose and direction (Kreitner, 2014);

 Mitchell (2011) stresses that although there is some disagreement about the

importance of different aspects in the definition of motivation, there is consensus

about some underlying properties. Namely, that motivation is an individual

phenomenon, it is described as being intentional, it is multifaceted and that the

purpose of motivational theories is to predict behaviour.

Cetin (2014) also argues that motivation is concerned with action and the

internal and external forces that influence one’s choice of action. And that motivation

is not the behaviour itself, and it certainly is not performance. In relation to this, Cetin

(2014) proposes his own definition of motivation: “motivation becomes the degree to

which an individual wants and chooses to engage in certain specified behaviours”.

Hackman and Oldham (2012) even argue that people have individual

differences in response to the same work; they differentiate between employees high

and low in growth need strength. People high in growth need strength are most likely

to be motivated by jobs with high skill variety, task identity, task significance,

autonomy and feedback.

Furnham et al. (2007); they argue that introverts are more extrinsically

motivated and extraverts more intrinsically motivated. However, it not only seems

that persons are differently motivated but intrinsic and extrinsic motivation also have

effect on each other.

Amabile (2013) reacts to this discussion by stating that although extrinsic

motivation can work in opposition to intrinsic motivation, it can also have a

reinforcing effect: “once the scaffolding of extrinsic motivation is taken care of,

intrinsic motivation can lead to high levels of satisfaction and performance”.

Theoretical Framework

Bandura (1986) defined self-efficacy as, “People’s judgments of their

capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated

types of performances” Bandura’s (1977) foundation of self-efficacy: belief in one’s

capabilities to influence an outcome supported the students personal perceived

beliefs.

The theoretical framework for this study, self-efficacy theory, postulates that

people acquire information to evaluate efficacy beliefs from four primary sources: (a)

enactive mastery experiences (actual performances); (b) observation of others

(vicarious experiences); (c) forms of persuasion, both verbal and otherwise; and (d)

physiological and affective states from which people partly judge their capableness,

strength, and vulnerability to dysfunction (Bandura, 1997). The findings support

Bandura’s self-efficacy source framework. All of the participants described personal

experiences with self-efficacy source development and academic motivation.

Students experiences and events with self-efficacy sources all varied due to

environment and experiences or lack of experiences. Students who exhibited higher

self-efficacies had more family support, particularly from their mothers or someone

who fulfilled that motherly role. Self-efficacy is defined as “people’s beliefs about their

capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over

events that affect their lives” (Bandura, 1994a, People who possess confident beliefs

about their own capabilities believe they can accomplish the following:

(1) Approach tasks as challenges to be mastered, (2) Set goals and make

commitments to accomplish the goals, (3) Maintain or increase efforts when facing

challenges or adversity, (4) Attribute failure to lack of effort, skills, and/or knowledge,
(5) Assure that threatening situations can be controlled (Bandura, 1994a). When

students were interviewed and asked to describe a difficult time in their lives, the

following students responded with positive self-efficacy behaviors. In contrast,

people who doubt their capabilities (Bandura, 1994a): (1) Will not attempt tasks they

view as personal threats, (2) Possess a weak commitment to goals, (3) Think

negatively about themselves, their capabilities, their situations, and challenges, (4)

Give up more quickly when faced with difficulty, (5) Slowly recover their positive self-

efficacy after failure, (6) Experience stress and depression more often.

Conceptual Framework

This study seeks to find out the level of self-efficacy of grade 11 students of

Northlink Technological College. The independent variable of this study includes the

task performance which has four major indicators, namely performance outcomes,

vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, physiological feedback.

The dependent variable is motivational learning. Motivational learning consists

of the factors that stimulate the desire to attain a goal. Self-efficacy is defined as the

belief in one's capabilities to carry out, organize and perform a task successfully

(Bandura, 1997). Both are the driving forces that make people pursue a goal and

overcome obstacles.

The independent variable is task performance. Albert Bandura’s (1977, 1986)

Social Cognitive Theory includes a self-efficacy belief component that is formed from

various sources. Bandura (1986) defined self-efficacy as people’s judgments of the

capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated

types of performances. Self-efficacy theory postulates that people acquire

information to evaluate efficacy beliefs from four primary sources: (a) enactive

mastery experiences (actual performances); (b) observation of others (vicarious

experiences); (c) forms of persuasion, both verbal and otherwise; and (d)

physiological and affective states from which people partly judge their capableness,

strength, and vulnerability to dysfunction (Bandura, 1997). Bandura’s theory will be

utilized as a central component of the framework of this research.

Performance accomplishments, personal assessment information that is

based on an individual’s personal accomplishments. Previous successes raise

mastery expectations, while repeated failures lower them.

Vicarious experience, gained by observing others perform activities

successfully. This is often referred to as modeling, and it can generate expectations

in observers that they can improve their own performance by learning from what they

have observed.

Verbal persuasion, activities where people are led, through suggestion, into

believing that they can cope successfully with specific tasks. Coaching and giving

evaluative feedback on performance are common types of social persuasion.

Physiological and emotional states, the individual’s physiological or emotional

states influence self-efficacy judgments with respect to specific tasks. Emotional

reactions to such tasks (e.g., anxiety) can lead to negative judgments of one’s ability

to complete the tasks.

 1.2 Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to answer the following questions:

1. What is the level of task performance among grade 11 students in terms of:

1.1 Performance Outcomes

1.2 Vicarious Experiences

1.3 Verbal Persuasion

1.4 Physiological Feedback

2. Is there a significant relationship between task performance and motivational

learning of grade 11 ICT students?

Null Hypothesis

The null hypotheses wastestedat 0.05 level of significance.

1. There is no significant relationship between task performance and

motivational learning?

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Task Performance Motivational Learning

 Performance Outcomes

 Vicarious Experiences

 Verbal Persuasion

 Physiological Feedback

Figure 1. Conceptual paradigm showing the variables of the study.

 Chapter 2

METHOD

Research Design

The researchers will use a descriptive-correlational. Descriptive is a research

design to provide a snapshot of the current state of affairs. Correlational research is

designed to discover relationship among variables and to allow the prediction of

future events from present knowledge. Descriptive Correlational designs are used to

collect and analyze data and include case studies, survey, and naturalistic

observation. The study will be descriptive since it aims to determine task

performance and motivational learning of Grade 11 student in Northlink

Technological College, Inc. It will also be correlational since it determines the

relationship between the task performance and motivational learning.

Respondents

The respondents of the study will be the Grade 11 set A, B and C of ICT

students in Northlink Technological College, Inc. There will be a total of 63

respondents who are in grade 11 set A, B and C of ICT student. The distribution of

the number of respondents obtained in each set are as follows: 39 respondents from

ICT set A; they consisted of nineteen (19) male students and twenty (20) female

students; 38 respondents from ICT set B; they consisted of nineteen (19) male’s

students and nineteen (19) female students. And 42 respondents from ICT set C;

they consisted of twenty (20) male students and twenty-two (22) female students.
There were one hundred nineteen (119) total enrolled students of grade 11 ICT set A,

B and C in Northlink Technological College, Inc., and only sixty-three (63)

respondents will be taken as samples.

Research Instruments

A researcher-made test was used to measure the level of task performance of

the respondents. There are ten (10) statements for each indicator namely:

performance outcomes, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and physiological

feedback, for a total of forty (40) statements. This test was validated. The

researchers conducted a pilot testing in random students who are not the

respondents of the study. The results were tallied and were reliable. Moreover, an

adopted questionnaire by Doyle (2012) was used to measure the motivational

learning of the respondents.

Responses of the performance task questionnaire

Range Descriptive Interpretation

of
Equivalent
Means
4.5-5.00 Very High This indicates that the respondent has a very high
performance based on his or her response from the
questionnaire.
3.5-4.49 High This indicates that the respondent has a high
performance based on his or her response from the
questionnaire.
2.5-3.49 Moderate This indicates that the respondent has a moderate
performance based on his or her response from the
questionnaire.
1.5-2.49 Low This indicates that the respondent has a low
performance based on his or her response from the
questionnaire.
1-1.49 Very Low This indicates that the respondent has a very low
performance based on his or her response from the
questionnaire.

Data Gathering Procedure

In gathering data for this study, the researchers followed the following

procedure:

Permission from the school officials of Northlink Technological College in

Panabo city was requested for the conduct of the study. Compliance to research

ethics was done through informed consent. A questionnaire was floated to the

participants. The data collected were tabulated and analyzed. They were further

correlated to identify the relationship of the variables.

Data Analysis

In the analysis of data, the following statistical tools were employed:

Mean. This was used to answer problem 1 which were to determine the level of task

performance and motivational learning among grade 11 ICT students.

Pearson r. This was utilized to answer problem 2 verified if there is a significant

relationship between task performance and motivational learning of grade 11 ICT

students.
 QUESTIONNAIRE
Name:___________________ Course/Level:__________ Age:____ Gender:____
To better understand how you prefer to learn and process information, place a
check in the appropriate space after each statement below, and then use the scoring
directions at the bottom of the page to evaluate your responses. Use what you learn
from your scores to better develop learning strategies that are best suited to your
particular learning style. This 40-item survey is not timed. Respond to each
statement as honestly as you can.
Legend: 1 – Very Low, 2 – Low, 3 – Moderate, 4 – High, 5 – Very High

Ite 1 2 3 4 5
m
No.
Performance Outcomes
1 I study hard as much as I can.
2 I think about what I want to attain in my studies.
3 I set for myself high scores which I believe I can achieve.
4 I make strong demand on myself to pass in my studies.
5 I set highest academic goals which I can achieve.
6 I check my work carefully so that I can get good marks.
7 I prepare myself to get high marks in my studies.
8 I make strong effort to achieve as high marks as I can.
9 I try to do most studies which I think I might succeed.
10 I struggle hard to get correct answers in homework given.
Vicarious Experiences
11 I like studies because we interact with friends while we study.
12 I try to work hard in studies because of the challenges it brings.
13 I like the intellectual challenge brought about by academic work.
14 I like to solve problems in studies.
15 I like the rewards that studies bring.
16 I try to work hard because doing well in studies brings high status.
17 I like to study in order to be the winner in my class.
18 I value achievement (passing) in studies.
19 I only choose the easy study work which I think I will succeed
20 When I have not enough time for studies, I think about the
importance of education.
Verbal Persuasion
21 I participate in classroom discussions.
22 I participate in small group work/discussions.
23 I ask questions on topics I do not understand from others.
24 I try to learn from others who are better in studies than me.
25 I seek help from experts (e.g., teachers) in my studies.
26 I pay attention to my teachers to understand what is being taught.
27 I read and research widely on different topics.
28 I get interested in solving problems that others have as well in a
topic.
29 I show interest about topics being taught.
30 I concentrate in my academic work.
Physiological Feedback
31 I like the social relationships involved in studies.
32 I have fun with peers as we study.
33 I get honour and praise from my family for passing in my
studies/exams.
34 I get honour and praise from teachers for passing in my
studies/exams.
35 I have confidence that I can pass in my studies.
36 I receive encouragement on my studies from my teachers.
37 I receive encouragement from at least one friend on my ability in
my studies.
38 I receive encourage from at least one of my parents on my ability
in studies.
39 I take my studies as a personal responsibility.
40 I struggle to gather information on topics so that I can master
them.

Chapter 3
Result and Discussion