Achievement goals: what they are and how they help to understand learning

Motivation is a very important and decisive variable when carrying out any type of activity. This is especially important in the field of education, since how motivated the individual is will facilitate or hinder their learning and performance.

There are many motivational models that try to clarify the influence of this variable on aspects such as academic performance, being achievement goal theory the explanatory proposal in which we are going to deepen below.

• Related article: "Types of motivation: the 8 motivational sources"

What is achievement goal theory?

The achievement goal theory is a motivational model that refers to how people behave when it comes to meeting goals, especially applied in the academic field.

This model is based on the belief that an individual's goals consist of striving to demonstrate her competence and ability in achievement contexts, contexts which can be understand as those in which the person participates, especially the educational environment, sports, family, social... and from which they can receive influences for the orientation of their goals.

achievement goals

According to James W. Fryer, and Andrew J. Elliot achievement goals reflect the desire to develop, achieve, and demonstrate the assessed competency according to criteria that may well be absolute, such as the performance of the task itself same; intrapersonal, such as the maximum individual potential for that task, that is, "putting oneself to the test"; or normative, such as the performance and approval of others.

Originally, within the model there were two types of goals: The learning goal, also called mastery or task-directed, and the performance goal, also called relative ability or self-directed goal. The objective of the learning goal, as its own name suggests, is to develop a better competence according to criteria intrapersonal, while the objective of the performance goal is to demonstrate that competence based on normative criteria and interpersonal.

Over time, the model expanded, incorporating the concept of approach goals and avoidance goals. In an achievement context we understand the idea of ​​approximation as moving, in a figurative sense, towards or staying close to or on the positively valued object. On the other hand, avoidance means moving away from the object, which is valued negatively and you want to stay away from it.

Combining the ideas of learning and performance goals with those of approach and avoidance we have a 2x2 type model, in which we can distinguish 4 different types of goals learning:

1. Learning goal-approach

Its main objective is understand and learn as much as possibleapproaching the object of study.

2. Learning goal-avoidance

Their goal is to avoid incompetence, not to learn as much as possible.

3. Performance goal-approach

Focuses on the relative ability of the subject comparing himself with the rest of the classmates and trying to surpass them. He intends to show that he is the best in a certain skill or task.

4. Performance goal-avoidance

The subject tries to escape failure and avoid negative judgments from others. He does not want to show how incompetent he is in a certain task that is socially valued and judged.

Although the original 2x2 model has been widely valued, it has been considered that categorizing behaviors into apparently mutually exclusive categories does not correspond to reality. Research on how students perform academically, both learning and showing their performance, has found that You can really combine these goals and, in addition, social factors have an important weight in all of them. Multiple goals can be adopted simultaneously.

• You may be interested in: "Educational Psychology: Definition, Concepts, and Theories"

oriented behaviors

Maehr and Nicholls believe that people differ in their definitions of success or failure when they find themselves in achievement environments in which they have to demonstrate their competence and those in which they must achieve some goal, regardless of the competition that has allowed them to achieve that aim. They grouped into four categories the different behaviors that can be observed in achievement environments, based on the goals that originate such behaviors.

1. Behaviors oriented to the demonstration of capacity

People we feel capable if we perceive ourselves as more competent and gifted than other individuals and we feel less capable if we perceive ourselves as less competent than others.

2. Behaviors oriented to social approval

The objective of this type of behavior is to maximize the probability of showing superiority and thereby obtaining social recognition. In this case, success is achieved if said social approval is achieved by significant othersregardless of how good the final results are.

3. Behaviors oriented to the learning process of the task

These behaviors are intended to improve the ability or performance of the task being performed, that is, in themselves they are focused as a learning process. The achievement of the final objective or reaching the goal does not matter, but improving the competition. Success comes when the task is mastered.

4. Goal-oriented behaviors

The main reason for doing the behavior is to have a good result, regardless of how much has been learned during the performance of the task. Success or failure depends on whether the goal is achieved or not.

self determination theory

Although it is a different theory from achievement goals, self-determination theory is closely related to the former in so much so that it is still a model closely related to the motivational aspects involved in learning and academic performance. This theory assumes that the person is active by nature, in the sense that they have an innate tendency to become involved in the environmentassimilating new knowledge and developing autonomous self-regulation.

Within the model, self-regulation is understood as those causes or reasons that each person considers that underlie her conduct, that is, that explain it and that attributes a greater or lesser degree of self control. These various reasons can give rise to various regulatory styles and can be grouped into two categories.

1. autonomous

This regulatory style is deduced when the motives for acting of the person correspond to their interests, values ​​or needs. Really only the autonomous reasons can be considered as properly self-regulated, since the person recognizes that the way he acts depends on him. It could be related to an internalizing locus of control.

2. controlled

Here the regulatory style could be related to an externalizing locus of control. The person thinks that the reasons that direct their plans and behaviors have to do with some form of social pressure or external control. She behaves because others have told her to.

Taking all this into account, we understand that autonomous self-regulation is a fundamental aspect behind a student's motivation to study, do homework and carry out behaviors focused on the acquisition of new learning and an improvement in their performance academic. If you have an autonomous style, you will understand that it is through your effort and interest that you will get good grades., while if he has a controlled style, he will think that his poor academic performance, for example, it's because your teacher has a thing for you rather than attributing it to a lack of motivation for the study.

Demotivation or amotivation, that is, a state of absolute absence of motivation, makes it very difficult to carry out a certain task and obtain the goal that is at the end of the road. The unmotivated student lacks intentionality, so her behavior is non-self-determined and her regulatory style is that of non-regulation, that is, it is not mobilized in the achievement of the achievement, regardless of whether it is to learn or to improve its performance.

Extrinsic motivation is defined as any situation in which the reason for which the person acts is some consequence external to it., that is, it is dispensed by other people. This initially extrinsic motivation can become integrated, that is, intrinsic to the individual. With this comes to say that the individual can feel so much interest in the task that without anyone forced to do it or, regardless of how important it is for his future, he does it willingly win.

In relation to regulation and the type of motivation, we can talk about four types of regulation styles that can really be located in different sections of a spectrum made up at its extremes by the style of controlled regulation and the style of autonomous regulation.

• External regulation: the motivation comes from outside, to satisfy an external demand or obtain a prize.
• Introjected regulation: actions are carried out to avoid feelings of guilt or anxiety and protect self-esteem, rather than out of obligation or pleasure.
• Identified regulation: the person recognizes and accepts the implicit value of the behavior, freely executes it even if it is not pleasant.
• Integrated regulation: performs the behavior in good taste, has assimilated it as something that is part of their identity, values, needs or individual goals.

Relationships between achievement goals and self-determination

Given the theory of achievement goals and that of self-determination, we will see what relationships these two models of motivation have. The learning goal, typical of achievement goals, enhances intrinsic motivation, while performance is considered an indication of extrinsic motivation.

If our goal is to learn, we do it for ourselves, having a more integrated or introjected type of regulation. On the other hand, if our goal is performance, motivation usually comes from outside, with external regulation. We do it because we want a reward such as recognition.

Bibliographic references:

• Elliott, A. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct. in a. Elliott, and C. Dweck (Eds), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 52-72). New York: Guilford.
• Elliott, A. and Fryer, J. (2008). The goal construct in Psychology. In J. Shah and W. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 235-250). New York: Guilford.
• Elliott, A. and McGregor, H. (2001). A 2 x 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501-519.
• Elliott, A. and Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 613-628.
• Fryer, J. and Elliott, A. (2008). Self-regulation of achievement goal pursuit. in d. Schunk, and B. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 53-75). New York: Erlbaum.
• Harackiewicz, J. Barron, K., Elliot, A., Tauer, J. and Carter, S. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 316-330.
• Kaplan, A. and Maehr, M. (2007). The contributions and prospects of goal orientation theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 141-184.
• González, A., Donolo, D., Rinaudo, M., Paoloni, P. Goes. (2010). Achievement goals and self-determination in university students: individual differences and motivational profiles. REME, ISSN 1138-493X, Vol. 13, no. 34.