Article

Gifted Education International

2018, Vol. 34(1) 3–18
The role of motivation ª The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permission:
and self-esteem in the sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0261429416646192
journals.sagepub.com/home/gei
academic achievement
of Turkish gifted students*

Sevgi Topçu
Kıralan Primary School, Turkey

Marilena Z Leana-Taşcılar
Gifted Teacher Training Program, Istanbul University, Turkey

Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between self-esteem and moti-
vational components and to determine which were the best predictors of academic
achievement among Turkish gifted students. Participants in this study were 184 students
(76 girls and 108 boys). Sixty-one students were from the fourth grade, 43 from the fifth
grade, 34 from the sixth, 32 from the seventh and 14 from the eighth grade. Eighty-four
of the students attended _Istanbul Art and Science Centre, which is an after-school
program for gifted students, and 100 of them attended a public special education
school for gifted students. The Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory was used to assess
self-esteem and the Scale of Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivational Orientation in the
Classroom was used to assess motivational components. Findings showed significant
correlations between self-esteem, motivation and achievement. Using a regression
analysis, in fourth graders general self-esteem, in fifth graders academic self-esteem, in
sixth and seventh graders intrinsic motivations and in eighth graders extrinsic motivation
were found to predict academic achievement.

Keywords
Gifted students, self-esteem, motivation, achievement

Corresponding author:
Marilena Z Leana-Taşcılar, Department of Special Education, Gifted Teacher Training Program, Istanbul
University, Besim Omer Pasa Cad, Istanbul 34452, Turkey.
Email: mleana@istanbul.edu.tr
4 Gifted Education International 34(1)

Introduction
A student’s academic success has several determinants. Mental ability, social environ-
ment background, quality of education and personal characteristics are only a few
(Zimmerman and Schunk, 1989). Despite the academic success, personal characteristics
such as self-esteem and motivation are also key concepts in some models of giftedness
(Renzulli’s Three Ring Model, Tannenbaum’s Star Model, Gagne’s Differentiated
Model of Giftedness, etc.) (Colangelo and Davis, 1997). In his definition of prodigies,
Feldman (1986) describes them as having intense motivation in their domain of gift-
edness. Motivation is the psychological force that reinforces an action towards a
desired goal (Schacter et al., 2010). Research has indicated that motivation is one of
the important predictors of academic achievement (Leana-Taşcılar, 2015; Pokay and
Blumenfeld, 1990). According to Harter (1983), self-esteem ‘is the value that people
attach to their self-descriptions’ and it is positively correlated among other variables to
the academic achievement. There are several studies that investigate both constructs’
relationship with achievement (Battle, 1982; Bridgeman and Shipman, 1978; Elliot
and Dweck, 1988; Pintrich, 2000). However, research is needed into the extent to
which specific components of these constructs can best predict achievement in Turkish
gifted students.

Motivation and gifted students

Research on motivation and the gifted has important implications for identification,
programming and counselling and education program evaluation (Clinkenbeard,
1996). As Clinkenbeard (2012) indicates, there are several motivational theories that
can be related with gifted students and their education such as expectancy-value frame-
work, goal orientations, intrinsic–extrinsic theories, and so on. According to Schunk
et al. (2008), motivation is divided into two contrasting types: intrinsic and extrinsic.
Students who are intrinsically motivated are curious and focused on the task; on the other
hand, students who are extrinsically motivated are interested in the prizes, grades, and so
on, more than the task.
Usually there is an expectancy that gifted students have higher intrinsic motivation
than their average peers. Studies that compare gifted students with their average peers
suggested that on average gifted have higher intrinsic motivation than their peers (Topçu,
2015; Vallerand et al., 1994).
Different studies have indicated that for different grade levels, that is, Davis and
Connell (1985) for fourth and sixth graders, Vallerand et al. (1994) for fourth through
sixth graders and Gottfried et al. (2005) from preschool through early adulthood. Long-
itudinal studies such as Gottfried and Gottfried (1996) suggested that intrinsic motiva-
tion might be included in selection of children for gifted programs and that gifted
children had significantly higher academic intrinsic motivation across all subject areas
(reading, math, social studies and science) and school in general.
The relationship between intrinsic motivation and achievement in gifted students is
also a well-searched topic. Intrinsic motivation has been shown to be positively corre-
lated to gifted students’ school achievement (Gottfried, 1985, 1990). Highly intrinsically
Topçu and Leana-Taşcılar 5

motivated gifted students tend to have higher achievement, less anxiety and need less
extrinsic motivation. Studies indicated that there are motivational differences between
high-achieving and low-achieving gifted students (McCoach and Siegle, 2003a). Wal-
berg (1984) found an average correlation of 0.34 between various indices of motivation
and school learning. Ziegler et al. (1996) also found motivational differences that explain
achievement differences among gifted girls and highly gifted in physics.

Self-esteem and gifted students

Self-esteem is another subject of interest to researchers in gifted education field.
Among the main factors that affect the development of self-esteem are the family,
school, socio-economical status, and so on. The person who feels as a valued
member of the family or the school will develop positive self-esteem (Pope et al.,
1988). According to Gagne (2000), self-esteem is one of the catalysts that contribute
to talent development. Hence, self-esteem is positively associated with academic
outcomes in the theory.
Various research studies about intelligence and self-esteem are contradictory. Whilst
Kelly and Colangelo (1984) stated that intelligence positively affects self-esteem; Loeb
and Jay (1987) reported that there were no significant results. Generally, study results
indicate that gifted students have significantly higher levels of self-esteem in comparison
with average students (Karnes and Wherry, 1981; Leana-Taşcılar and Kanlı, 2014;
Topçu, 2015). Results of Pyryt and Mendaglio (1994)’s study indicated that gifted
students differ in self-concept from average-ability students, particularly in terms of
academic self-concept. Hoge and Renzulli (1993) supported these results. The results
of the studies of Karnes and Wherry (1981) and Marsh et al. (1995) indicated that
especially if the gifted students attending special education programs have higher aca-
demic self-concept than the gifted that they are going to regular school. Zeidner and
Schleyer’s (1999) study showed totally opposite results, but gifted students had still
higher self-esteem than their non-gifted peers.
In analysing the literature on gifted students’ self-esteem, it is clear that the emphasis
is on social and emotional outcomes rather than academic outcomes. There are very few
studies that investigated the relationship between self-esteem and academic achievement
in gifted students. In their longitudinal study of 65 gifted students, Vialle et al. (2005)
found that there was no correlation. These results contrast with the results of Helmke and
Van Aken (1995) and Heinrich and Walter (1995) who found a correlation among the
two variables.

Purpose of the study

The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between motivation and self-
esteem, and whether the components of motivation and self-esteem were or were not,
predictors of academic achievement. The main hypotheses of the study were: (a) There is
a correlation between motivation, self-esteem and achievement; and (b) Motivation and
self-esteem can predict achievement.
6 Gifted Education International 34(1)

Method
Participants
The 184 gifted students in this study compromised 61 students from the fourth grade (36
boys and 25 girls), 43 students from the fifth grade (26 boys and 17 girls), 34 students from
the sixth grade (23 boys and 11 girls), 32 students from seventh grade (12 boys and 20
girls) and 14 students from eighth grade (11 boys and 3 girls). Eighty-four of the students
attended Istanbul Art and Science Centres. Turkey’s Art and Science Centers (MEB, 1993)
offer gifted students various educational opportunities after school. One-hundred of the
students attended a state school that provided gifted students special education. Since both
institutions have their own strict acceptance procedures for gifted students, in the recent
study we didn’t collect any intelligence quotient scores, but we assumed that the students
are gifted because they had been accepted into these special programs.

Measurements
Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory. Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (CSEI) deter-
mines the self-esteem levels of students. It compromises of five different subscales,
which are as follows: general, social, academic, parental self-esteem and lie (Cooper-
smith, 1967). The highest scores indicate the higher self-esteem level in each subscale.
Pişkin (1997) in the Turkish form of the CFEI found that the Kuder–Richardson
(KR20) was 0.81 for the total, 0.78 for general, 0.45 for social, 0.66 for parental and
0.47 for academic. In the current study, the same analysis was 0.95, 0.93, 0.71, 0.68 and
0.57, respectively.

Scale of Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivational Orientation in the Classroom. Harter’s (1981)
scale asks students to indicate whether they see their everyday classroom actions as more
like those of a group of students who are extrinsically motivated or like those of an
intrinsically motivated group.
In particular, Harter (1981) sought to assess three major dimensions in students’
reported intrinsic versus extrinsic motivational orientations: preference for challenge
(i.e. a desire for challenging vs. easy tasks), curiosity (i.e. a focus on personal curios-
ity/interest vs. a focus on pleasing the teacher) and independent mastery (i.e. a desire for
independent mastery vs. a dependence on the teacher for guidance and direction). This
scale has been widely used to assess student motivation in elementary and middle school
children.
In the current study, the Turkish version – by Gökçe et al. (2011) (for third to eighth
graders) – was used. The confirmatory factor analysis constructed by Gökçe et al. (2011)
confirmed the unidimensional structure of the intrinsic component and the three-
dimensional structure of the extrinsic component. The internal consistency of the intrin-
sic motivation component in the current study was found to be 0.83, whereas the internal
consistencies of the subscales (desire for easy work, desire to please the teacher, depen-
dence on the teacher) of the extrinsic motivation components were 0.76, 0.54 and 0.80,
respectively. Two items (2 and 19) were removed from the final Turkish version owing
to the lack of DIF (Gökçe et al., 2011).
Topçu and Leana-Taşcılar 7

Achievement. The Board of Education Committee is responsible for the curriculum in the
Turkish education system; however, it does not decide the type or content of assessment
(MEB, 2014). Every school prepares its own exams in each subject, but there are no
standard achievement tests. Consequently, the achievement score is the final degree that
each student had in the last semester.

Procedure
The opportunity sampling method was used to select students from the state school and
state after-school programs in Istanbul. Permission for the administration was obtained
from the Turkish Ministry of Education (TME). The questionnaires were administered in
classrooms by teachers and the researchers. Students completed the questionnaires dur-
ing one lesson (45 minutes). All participants worked on the same materials, which
consisted of three components. In the first, they were requested to provide personal data
such as gender, age and grade. In the second, they received the school version of CSEI. In
the third, the Turkish version of the Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivational Orientation
in the Classroom (IVEMOCS) (Gökçe et al., 2011) was administered. The students were
volunteers and received nothing for their participation in the study. Since their names
were not known (as is required by ethical considerations), they could not receive any
personal feedback; instead, the results were shared with the programs’ psychological
counsellors. The TME was then informed of the results in a report.
The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences was used to compute descriptive
statistics, reliability, correlation and regression analysis.

Results
Reliability
Reliability was assessed using KR20 for the self-esteem and Cronbach’s a for the
motivation scales. The reliabilities of self-esteem subscales for all students came within
the range of 0.57  0.87. The overall KR20 for self-esteem was 0.87. The Cronbach’s a
for the IVEMOCS scales for all students was within the range of 0.68  0.84. The overall
Cronbach’s a for the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations was 0.83 and 0.82 (Table 1).

Gender and grade differences

t Tests were performed in order to analyse gender differences in self-esteem and IVE-
MOCS. In general, there was no gender difference except in social self-esteem (t ¼ 1.45,
p < 0.05). Girls reported significantly higher levels.
With respect to grade differences, fourth graders and fifth graders reported signifi-
cantly higher scores than eighth graders in academic self-esteem (p < 0.05). The fourth,
fifth and sixth graders obtained higher scores in parental self-esteem (p < 0.05) than
eighth graders. In intrinsic motivation, only fifth graders had significantly higher scores
than eighth graders. In extrinsic motivation, fourth, fifth and sixth graders reported
significantly lower scores than eighth graders (p < 0.01, p < 0.01 and p < 0.05, respec-
tively). Finally, all grade levels had significantly lower scores than eighth graders in
8 Gifted Education International 34(1)

Table 1. Reliabilities of self-esteem and IVEMOCS.a

Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth

grade grade grade grade grade Total
Scales (n ¼ 61) (n ¼ 43) (n ¼ 34) (n ¼ 32) (n ¼ 14) (n ¼ 184)

Self-esteem .84 .74 .68 .75 .69 .79

Social .67 .75 .65 .73 .80 .71
Academic .58 .63 .58 .67 .70 .64
Parental .60 .67 .48 .50 .63 .57
Lie .56 .75 .78 .70 .65 .60
Total Self-esteem (SE) .91 .86 .76 .83 .83 .87
Intrinsic motivation .82 .84 .84 .80 .85 .83
Extrinsic motivation .81 .83 .80 .74 .87 .82
Desire of easy work .86 .83 .82 .83 .77 .84
Desire to please teacher .60 .59 .72 .69 .77 .68
Dependence on the .75 .81 .79 .76 .87 .79
teacher
IVEMOCS: Scale of Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivational Orientation in the Classroom; KR20: Kuder–
Richardson.
a
According to grade levels (KR20 and Cronbach’s a).

desire to please the teacher, extrinsic motivation component (p < 0.001, p < 0.01, p <
0.01 and p < 0.05) (Table 2).

Correlations between self-esteem, motivation and achievement

Table 3 shows zero-order correlations for the self-esteem, motivation components
and achievement throughout the entire sample. The correlations ranged from
0.505 to 0.702. Whilst general, academic, parental, total self-esteem, intrinsic
motivation and achievement exhibited positive correlations with each other, the
extrinsic motivation and the desire to please the teacher correlated negatively
with achievement.

Regression analysis
Further analysis to determine which self-esteem subscales and motivation components
predict achievement in different grades is shown in Table 4. It appears that general self-
esteem explained 5% of achievement in fourth grade and academic self-esteem 9%.
However, the higher the grade was the higher the intrinsic motivation predicts achieve-
ment (20% in sixth grade and 42% in seventh grade). In contrast, in the eighth grade
extrinsic motivation was the best predictor with 40%.

Discussion
Both motivation and self-esteem have been seen as important characteristics in identi-
fication of gifted students and differentiation of their education. Therefore, both
 Table 2. Means, standard deviations, results of the ANOVAs and results of post hoc tests (Bonferonni) for grade.

Fourth grade Fifth grade Sixth grade Seventh grade Eighth grade F P 4/8 5/8 6/8 7/8

Self-esteem 39.11 (8.47) 39.58 (6.88) 40.85 (5.46) 40.87 (6.17) 35.71 (6.93) 1.63
Social 39.58 (6.88) 6.48 (1.84) 6.82 (1.46) 6.84 (1.66) 6.42 (2.06) .489
a a a
Academic 6.29 (1.59) 6.32 (1.74) 6.11 (1.55) 6.18 (1.33) 4.78 (1.88) 2.78
a a a a
Parental 6.31 (1.69) 6.39 (1.63) 6.58 (1.55) 6.03 (2.02) 4.71 (2.16) 3.17
Total SE 20.04 (4.73) 20.37 (3.70) 21.32 (3.42) 21.81 (3.47) 19.78 (3.44) 1.49
b a
Intrinsic M 66.47 (8.99) 67.13 (9.45) 62.70 (9.73) 61.50 (10.38) 58.64 (9.98) 3.86
b b b a
Extrinsic motivation 30.04 (8.84) 31.06 (9.49) 32.58 (8.65) 35.06 (9.09) 41.07 (9.09) 5.19
Desire of easy work 9.75 (4.70) 9.97 (4.37) 9.97 (3.90) 11.75 (4.77) 12.92 (3.42) 2.39
c c b b a
Desire to please teacher 7.52 (3.15) 8.18 (3.58) 8.91 (3.67) 9.00 (4.22) 12.35 (3.31) 5.56
Dependence on the teacher 12.77 (4.09) 12.90 (4.42) 13.70 (4.50) 14.31 (4.74) 15.78 (4.13) 1.87
Achievement 89.34 (14.57) 93.23 (8.15) 91.76 (8.55) 90.19 (10.44) 87.21 (11.17) 1.17
a
p < 0.05.
b
p < 0.01.
c
p < 0.001.

9
10
Table 3. Zero-order correlations for the self-esteem with motivation components and achievement for all sample.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 General self-esteem .702a .693a .626a .928a .262a .146b .222b .153b .043 .235a
2 Social SE .427a .249a .547a .020 .020 .117 .063 .108 .143
3 Academic SE .246a .541a .254a .155b .159b .179b .019 .272a
4 Parental SE .466a .320a .243a .284a .221a .044 .163b
5 Total SE .213a .098 .155b .130 .059 .176b
6 Intrinsic motivation .519a .437a .505a .237a .332a
7 Extrinsic motivation .778a .741a .718a .159b
8 Desire of easy work .432a .279a .096
9 Desire to please teacher .296a .166b
10 Dependence on the teacher .101
11 Achievement
a
p < 0.01.
b
p < 0.05.
Topçu and Leana-Taşcılar 11

Table 4. Results of the stepwise regression analysis of self-esteem and motivation components on
achievement according to grade levels.

Fourth grade

First step

Model b t p
a
General self-esteem .0.74 4.71
DR .058

Fifth grade

First step

Model b t p
a
Academic self-esteem .117 5.41
DR .095

Sixth grade

First step

Model b t p
b
Intrinsic motivation .231 9.62
DR .207

Seventh grade

First step

Model b t p
c
Intrinsic motivation .442 23.73
DR .423

Eighth grade

First step

Model b t p
b
Extrinsic motivation .445 9.63
DR .400
a
p < 0.05.
b
p < 0.01.
c
p < 0.001.

motivation and self-esteem are important structures that can help teachers who are
involved in gifted students to understand them and provide them superior education
facilities. Researchers found that there is a positive correlation between motivation and
self-esteem (Harlen and Deakin-Crick, 2003; Zolabi, 2012), between self-esteem and
academic achievement (Harter, 1983; Johnson and Kanoy, 1980) and between motiva-
tion and academic achievement. However, the main aim of the current study was to
12 Gifted Education International 34(1)

investigate if there was a correlation between motivation, self-esteem and academic

achievement and if these two can predict academic achievement in gifted students.
The primary findings of the current study were that grade differences were observed
only in academic and parental self-esteem as in intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, espe-
cially in the desire to please the teacher subtest. In their study, Vialle et al. (2005) also did
not find grade differences in general self-esteem of gifted students. In the current study,
younger gifted students had higher academic (fourth and fifth graders) and parental (fourth,
fifth and sixth graders) self-esteem than the older ones (eighth graders). Age characteristics
may account for this. The students that they are attending to the fourth and fifth grades in
Turkey are almost 10–11 years old. Since older students were teenagers that can affect
especially parental self-esteem because they can have a pessimistic opinion about how
their parents view them. Academic self-esteem is the perception of students about their
ability to succeed academically (Battle, 1982). In earlier study, Eshel and Klein (1981)
reported that younger students had higher academic self-concepts than the older ones.
Gifted students also begin their school career with high academic self-esteem but although
their general self-esteem remains stable, their academic self-esteem decreases over years.
Studies with gifted and non-gifted samples show that gifted students have higher academic
self-esteem than their average peers (Leana-Taşcılar and Kanlı, 2014; McCoach and
Siegle, 2003b). But in the current study, all of the students were gifted and attended special
programs about gifted students. Perhaps when they are comparing themselves with other
gifted students they don’t believe that they are good enough academically.
In the current study, whilst younger students (fifth graders significantly higher and
fourth, sixth and seventh higher in means) had higher intrinsic motivation older students
(eighth graders) had significantly higher extrinsic motivation and the desire to please the
teacher. These results are in line with the study results of regular students that show that
there is a systematic decrease in intrinsic motivation as age increases (Corpus et al.,
2009; Gillet et al., 2012). Studies with gifted sample reported the same results (Gottfried
and Gottfried, 1996; Lepper et al., 2005). As Gordon (2003) mentioned, when an activity
becomes competitive, it is no longer for personal enjoyment and the main purpose is to
win. Perhaps this is also the reason for the gifted students in Turkey. Since the education
system requires from them to pass an exam named TEOG (BESE - Basic Education to
Secondary Education) (MEB, 2015) to have access in the best high schools, they are no
longer intrinsically motivated but they are trying to win the competition and please the
teachers and of course their parents.
The correlation analysis revealed that self-esteem subtests (except social) correlated
positively with intrinsic motivation and negatively (except social and total self-esteem)
with extrinsic motivation. These results are in line with the aforementioned studies by
Zolabi (2012) and Harlen and Deakin-Crick (2003). As Hay (1993) stated:

development of goal setting, deriving positive expectations for success and personal control,
managing stress and anxiety and learning to effectively communicate feelings and needs are
consequences of motivated students and having a positive affect state and these affect
outcomes are mediated through the self-systems particularly self-perceptions/esteems.
Hereby students who hold positive self-esteem usually try harder and persist longer when
confronted by difficult tasks. (p. 18)
Topçu and Leana-Taşcılar 13

It is important to know that high self-esteem means high intrinsic motivation, and vice
versa, especially for the educators. As mentioned earlier, the findings of the current study
showed that gifted students lose both academic self-esteem and intrinsic motivation as
they are getting older. It can be suggested that differentiating their education not only
according to their academic needs but also their social-emotional needs can motivate
them more. Raising self-esteem and influencing motivation must be high on the list for
training programmes (Peer, 2012). Underachievers and twice exceptional students will
also benefit from that.
General, academic, parental, total self-esteem components and intrinsic motivation
were found to correlate positively, whilst extrinsic motivation and dependence on the
teacher correlated negatively with academic achievement. The results about motivation
(intrinsic and extrinsic) and achievement were in line with earlier research (Leana-
Taşcılar, 2015; Lemos and Verissimo, 2014). There is lots of evidence that supports the
correlation of self-esteem and achievement (Rubin et al., 1977; Schunk, 1990). Accord-
ing to Emerick (1992), self-esteem is also one of the factors that differentiate gifted
students from gifted underachievers.
Findings revealed that in every grade level there are different predictors for academic
achievement. In fourth graders the general self-esteem, in fifth graders the academic self-
esteem, in sixth and seventh graders the intrinsic motivation and in eighth graders the
extrinsic motivation are the best predictors for achievement. In the 4 þ 4 þ 4 (4 years
primary, 4 years secondary and 4 years high school) education system in Turkey, stu-
dents are introduced with important academic exams after the fourth grade. Generally
students at the beginning of the fifth grade till the end of the eighth grade are starting to
prepare for the TEOG exams, which will determine their future about high school.
Hence, for students in fourth grade, general self-esteem is the one that predicts best their
academic achievement. In their study with fourth graders, Midgett et al. (2002) also
found a positive correlation among self-esteem and achievement, and they concluded
that self-esteem is not the only predictor for academic achievement.
Muijs (1997) in his longitudinal study with fourth and fifth graders reported that
there is correlation between academic self-esteem and academic achievement.
Results showed that the correlations were higher in the fifth graders and that aca-
demic self-esteem and academic achievement predict each other. Results by Göktaş
(2008) also supported that in fifth graders academic self-esteem was highly corre-
lated with academic achievement. These results are in line with the current study.
Academic self-esteem is the best predictor in fifth grade. In addition, these results
are also showing that ‘the big fish little pond’ hypothesis that Zeidner and Schleyer
(1999) stated is not true for this gifted sample. The main reason for that can be that
the gifted students, who participated in the current study, were attending special
classes with both gifted and average peers. Therefore, we can conclude that taking
into account the self-esteem attending in different educational programs with mixed
Therefore, we can conclude that in these particular grades (fourth and fifth) it is
better to attend in mixed classes (gifted and not), thus self-esteem influence more
positively the academic achievement.
In their recent study, Kaya and Oğurlu (2015) didn’t find any correlation between
self-esteem and academic achievement in sixth and seventh grade gifted students from
14 Gifted Education International 34(1)

Turkey. In their longitudinal study, Hoge et al. (1990) reported similar results for the
same-grade students. Gottfried and Gottfried (1996) in their longitudinal study found
that gifted students at age 9 through 13 have high intrinsic motivation. These results were
in line with the results of the current study. Since self-esteem doesn’t have any influence
on academic achievement in sixth and seventh graders, intrinsic motivation predicts it
best. Especially for the seventh graders, the percentage of intrinsic motivation that
explains the variance was really high (42%). It is recommended to the educators of
gifted children to find programs to engage the intrinsic motivation of gifted students.
Martin (2005) supports that enrichment programs for motivation can increase academic
motivation. In addition, Baum (1984) advocated that enrichment programs also help the
twice exceptional students.
Extrinsic motivation was the best predictor for academic achievement in eighth grade.
In their study, Stake and Mares (2001) reported that family encouragement and good
teacher role model in science predicted science career motivation in gifted high-school
students. They concluded that students in that age who had supportive families and
teachers were able to benefit more from science programs. On the other hand, it is also
recommended that scholars and researchers investigate (maybe with qualitative meth-
ods) why extrinsic motivation increases with age. Do the gifted students leave intrinsic
motives to please their environment? And if this is the case, why?
In conclusion, the hypotheses of the study were met. The correlations between self-
esteem, motivation and achievement were found. General and academic self-esteem as
well as intrinsic and extrinsic motivation found to predict academic achievement of
gifted students but in different grade levels. Finally, further studies on gifted samples
that they didn’t attend to special education programs are recommended to investigate
these predictions. Last but not least, the authors hope that knowing that every grade level
has different predictors for achievement will help educators and parents to produce better
conditions for gifted students.

Implications and limitations

First limitation concerns school achievement: since there are no standard academic
achievement tests in the Turkish language, achievement scores had to be calculated as
regression scores. A second limitation is about the measurement invariance across gen-
der. As Guay et al. (1999) suggest, the author assumes that there is measurement invar-
iance across gender in achievement scores.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Topçu and Leana-Taşcılar 15

References
Battle J (1982) Enhancing Self-esteem & Achievement: A Handbook for Professionals. Seattle:
Special Child Publications.
Baum S (1984) Meeting the needs of learning disabled gifted students. Roeper Review 7(1): 16–19.
Bridgeman B and Shipman VC (1978) Preschool measures of self-esteem and achievement moti-
vation as predictors of third-grade achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology 70(1): 17.
Clinkenbeard PR (1996) Research on motivation and the gifted: implications for identification,
programming, and evaluation. Gifted Child Quarterly 40(4): 220–221.
Clinkenbeard PR (2012) Motivation and gifted students: implications of theory and research.
Psychology in the schools 49(7): 622–630.
Colangelo N and Davis G (1997) Handbook of Gifted Education, 2nd ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Coopersmith S (1967) The Antecedents of Self-esteem. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Corpus JH, McClintic-Gilbert MS and Hayenga AO (2009) Within-year changes in children’s
intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations: contextual predictors and academic outcomes.
Contemporary Educational Psychology 34: 154–166.
Davis HG and Connell JP (1985) The effect of aptitude and achievement on self-system. Gifted
Child Quarterly 29: 131–136.
Elliot ES and Dweck CS (1988) Goals: an approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 54(1): 5.
Emerick L (1992) Academic underachievement among the gifted: students’ perceptions of factors
that reverse the pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly 36(3): 140–146.
Eshel Y and Klein Z (1981) Development of academic self-concept of lower-class and middle
class primary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology 73(2): 287–293.
Feldman DH (1986) Nature’s Gambit: Child Prodigies and the Development of Human Potential.
New York: Basic Books.
Gagne F (2000) Understanding the comlpex choreography of talent development trhough
DMGT-based analysis. In: Heller KA, Monks RJ, Sternberg RJ and Subotnik RF (eds) Inter-
national Handbook of Giftedness and Talent, 2nd ed. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd, pp. 67–79.
Gillet N, Vallerand RJ and Lafreniere MK (2012) Intrinsic and extrinsic school motivation as a function
of age: the mediating role of autonomy support. Social Psychology of Education 15(1): 77–95.
Gökçe E, Öztuna D and Elhan HA (2011) Adaptation of Harter’s scale of instrinsic versus extrinsic
motivational orientation in the classroom to primary schools in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of
Educational Research 42: 79–94.
Göktaş M (2008) The relationship between the fifth graders academic self esteem level and their
_
acheivement [Ilköğretim beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin akademik benlik saygısı düzeyleri ile ders
başarıları arasındaki ilişki], Unpublished Master Thesis, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir. _
Gordon T (2003) Teacher Effectiveness Training. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Gottfried AE (1985) Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior high school students.
Journal of Educational Psychology 77: 631–645.
Gottfried AE (1990) Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children. Journal
of Educational Psychology 82: 525–538.
Gottfried AE and Gottfried AW (1996) A longitudinal study of academic intrinsic motivation in
intellectually gifted children: childhood through early adolescence. Gifted Child Quarterly
40(4): 179–183.
16 Gifted Education International 34(1)

Gottfried AW, Gottfried AE, Cook RC, et al. (2005) Educational characteristics of adolescents
with gifted academic intrinsic motivation: a longitudinal invastigation from school entry
through early adulthood. Gifted Child Quarterly 49(2): 172–186.
Guay F, Boivin M and Hodges EVE (1999) Predicting change in academic achievement: a model
of peer experiences and self-system processes. Journal of Educational Psychology 91:
105–115.
Harlen W and Deakin-Crick R (2003) Testing and motivation for learning. Assessment in Educa-
tion: Principles, Policy & Practice 10(2): 169–207.
Harter S (1981) A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom:
motivational and informational components. Developmental Psychology 17(3): 300–312.
Harter S (1983) Developmental perspectives on the self-system. In: Mussen P (ed) Handbook of
Child Psychology. New York: Wiley, pp. 275–386.
Hay I (1993). Motivation, self-perception and gifted students. Gifted Education International 9:
16–21.
Heinrich K and Walter C (1995) [Ignatius of Loyola – gifted or mentally ill?]. Fortschritte der
Neurologie-Psychiatrie 63(6): 213–219. DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-996618.
Helmke A and Van Aken MAG (1995) The causal ordering of academic achievement and
self-concept of ability during elementary school: a longitudinal study. Journal of Educational
Psychology 87: 624–637.
Hoge RD and Renzulli JS (1993) Exploring the link between giftedness and self-concept. Review
of Educational Research 63(4): 449–465.
Hoge RD, Smit EK and Hanson SL (1990) School experiences predicting changes in
self-esteem of sixth-and seventh-grade students. Journal of Educational Psychology
82(1): 117.
Johnson BW and Kanoy KW (1980) Locus of control and self-concept in achieving and under-
achieving bright elementary students. Psychology in the Schools 17: 395–399.
Karnes FA and Wherry JN (1981) Self-concepts of gifted students as measured by the Piers-Harris
children’s self-concept scale. Psychological Reports 49: 903–906.
Kaya F and Oğurlu Ü (2015) The relationship among self-esteem, intelligence, and academic
achievement [Benlik saygısı, zekâ ve akademik başarı ilişkisi]. Internationa Journal of Human
Sciences 12(1): 951–965.
Kelly KR and Colangelo N (1984) Academic and social self-consepts of gifted, general and special
students. Except Child 50: 551–554.
Leana-Taşcılar MZ (2015) The actiotope model of giftedness: its relationship with motivation, and
the prediction of academic achievement among Turkish students. The Australian Educational
and Developmental Psychologist 32(1): 41–55. DOI: 10.1017/edp.2015.6.
Leana-Taşcılar MZ and Kanlı E (2014) Investigation of perfectionism and self-esteem scores of
gifted and average students. Ankara University, Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences
47(2): 1–20.
Lemos MS and Verissimo L (2014) The relationships between intrinsic motivation, extrinsic
motivation, and achievement, along elementary school. Procedia Social and Behavioral
Sciences 112: 930–938.
Lepper MR, Corpus JH and Iyengar SS (2005) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in
the classroom: age differences and academic correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology
97(2): 184–192.
Topçu and Leana-Taşcılar 17

Loeb RC and Jay G (1987) Self-consept in gifted children: differantial impact in boys and girls.
Gifted Child Quarterly 1: 9–14.
Marsh HW, Chessor D, Craven R, et al. (1995) The effects of gifted and talented programs on
academic self-concept: the big fish strikes again. American Educational Research Journal
32(2): 285–319.
Martin AJ (2005) Exploring the effects of a youth enrichment program on academic motivation
and engagement. Social Psychology of Education 8(2): 179–206.
McCoach DB and Siegle D (2003a) Factors that differentiate underachieving gifted students from
high-achieving gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly 47(2): 144–154.
McCoach DB and Siegle D (2003b) The structure and function of academic self-concept in gifted
and general education students. Roeper Review 25(2): 61–65.
_
MEB (1993) Istanbul _
bilim sanat merkezi [Istanbul Art and Science Center]. Available at: http://
www.istanbulbilsem.meb.k12.tr (accessed 20 February 2014).
MEB (2014) Milli Eğitim Bakanlıg˘ı-Talim Terbiye Kurulu [Turkish Ministry of Education - The
Board of Education Committee]. Available at: http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr (accessed 9 September
2014).
MEB (2015) TEOG exam. Available at: http://www.meb.gov.tr/teog-sinavina-iliskin-basin-acikla
masi/haber/8916/en (accessed 23 July 2015).
Midgett J, Ryan BA, Adams GR, et al. (2002) Complication achievement and self-esteem: con-
sidering the joint effects of child characteristics and parent-child interactions. Contemporary
Educational Psychology 27: 132–143.
Muijs RD (1997) Predictors of academic achievement and academic self-concept: a longitudinal
perspective. British Journal of Educational Psychology 67(3): 263–277.
Peer L (2012) Gifted and talented children with dyslexia. In: Stopper MJ (ed.) Meeting the Social
and Emotional Needs of Gifted and Talented Children. New York: Routledge, pp. 65–80.
Pintrich PR (2000) An achievement goal theory perspective on issues in motivation terminology,
theory, and research. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25(1): 92–104.
_
Pişkin M (1997) Türk ve Ingiliz lise öğrencilerinin benlik saygısı yönünden karşılaştırılması.
[Comparison of Turkish and English high school students self esteem]. Paper presented at the
3. Ulusal Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Kongresi Kitabı, Adana.
Pokay P and Blumenfeld PC (1990) Predicting achievement early and late in the semester: the
role of motivation and use of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology 82(1): 41.
Pope AW, Mchale SM and Craighead WE (1988) Self-esteem Psychology. Canada: Pergoman Press.
Pyryt MC and Mendaglio S (1994) The multidimensional self-concept: a comparison of gifted and
average ability adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 17(3): 299–305.
Rubin RA, Dorle J and Sandidge S (1977) Self-esteem and school performance. Psychology in the
Schools 14(4): 503–507.
Schacter D, Gilbert DT and Wegner DM (2010) Psychology. NY: Catherine Woods.
Schunk DH (1990) Self-concept and school achievement. In: Rogers CG and Kutnick P (eds) The
Social Psychology of the Primary School. London: Routledge, pp. 70–79.
Schunk DH, Pintrich PR and Meece ML (2008) Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and
Applications, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
Stake JE and Mares KR (2001) Science enrichment programs for gifted high school girls and boys:
predictors of program impact on science confidence and motivation. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching 38(10): 1065–1088.
18 Gifted Education International 34(1)

Topçu S (2015) Üstün ve Normal zeka Düzeyine Sahip O¨g˘rencilerde Içsel-dışsal Motivasyon ve
Benlik Saygısı Arasındaki Ilişki [Relationship between Intrinsic-extrinsic Motivation and
Self-esteem among Gifted and Average Students], Unpibleshed Master Thesis, Istanbul Uni-
versity, Istanbul.
Vallerand RJ, Gagne F, Senecal C, et al. (1994) A comparison of school intrinsic motivation and
perceived competence of gifted and regular students. Gifted Child Quarterly 38: 172–175.
Vialle W, Heaven PC and Ciarrochi J (2005) The relationship between self-esteem and academic
achievement in high ability students: evidence from the Wollongong Youth Study. Australa-
sian Journal of Gifted Education 14(2): 39–45.
Walberg HJ (1984) Improving the productivity of America’s schools. Educational Leadership 41:
19–27.
Zeidner M and Schleyer E (1999) The effects of educational context on individual difference
variables, self-perceptions of giftedness, and school attitudes in gifted adolescents. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence 28(6): 687–703.
Zeidner M and Schleyer EJ (1999) The big-fish-little-pond effect for academic self-concept, test
anxiety, and school grades in gifted children. Contemporary Educational Psychology 24(4):
305–329.
Ziegler A, Heller KA and Broome P (1996) Motivational preconditions for gitls gifted and highly
gifted in physics. High Ability Studies 7(2): 129–143.
Zimmerman BJ and Schunk DH (1989) Self-regulated Learning and Academic Achievement:
Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: Springer.
Zolabi K (2012) Self-esteem and motivation for learning among minority students: a comparison
between students of pre-academic and regular programs. Creative Education 3(8): 1397–1403.

Author biographies
Sevgi Topçu recently graduated from the Gifted Teacher Training Master’s Program of
Istanbul University, and she is working as a teacher in a public primary school.

Marilena Z. Leana-Taşcılar has been working in the field of gifted education since
2002 in Istanbul University with an MA in psychology and PhD degree about gifted
children. Her general research topics are gifted student’s psychology and education. She
earned a 1-year fellowship to study in Friedrich Alexander Erlangen/Nurnberg Univer-
sity, Germany and worked with Prof. Dr Albert Ziegler in several projects related to
giftedness.