Year: 2018
Author: Meens, Evelyne, Bakx, Anouke, Klimstra, Theo, Denissen, Jaap
Type of paper: Abstract refereed
Abstract:
Two of the main reasons for high drop-out rates in higher education are making an erroneous educational choice (i.e., identity commitment) and lack of motivation. This study aimed at investigating whether identity formation combined with motivation could predict students’ achievement in the first year in higher education. For this purpose we addressed four research questions:
RQ1. How is identity associated with students’ achievement using both a variable-centered approach and a person-centered approach?
RQ2. How is motivation associated with students’ achievement using both a variable-centered approach and a person-centered approach?
RQ3. Can meaningful combined motivation-identity profiles be identified by combining the dimensions of identity and motivation?
RQ4. How are these combined motivation-identity profiles associated with student’s achievement?
Participants (N = 8,723, 47.1% female, Mage = 19.64, SD = 1.95) were divided into four students’ achievement groups (the dependent variable). The independent variables, five identity dimensions and five types of motivation were assessed by questionnaires. For the variable-centered approach we conducted multinomial logistic regression analyses. For the person-centered approach we conducted Latent Profile Analyses followed by chi-squared tests.
Regarding Research Question 1, only two identity dimensions were associated with students’ achievement. Students were more likely to be a successful stayer than an unsuccessful dropout when they engaged in more exploration in depth. Furthermore, students were more likely to be a successful dropout than a successful stayer when they ruminated. Identity profiles were not associated with students’ achievement.
Regarding the second research question, motivation dimensions as well as motivation-only profiles predicted students’ achievement. Students were more likely to be a successful stayer than an (un)successful dropout when they were autonomously motivated. Students were more likely to be an (un)successful dropout than a successful stayer when they had controlled motivation or amotivation.
Regarding Research Question 3, co-occurrence of identity formation dimensions and motivation existed which resulted in five meaningful combined motivation-identity profiles: an amotivated profile, a moderately negative profile, an autonomously achieved profile, and a controlled & troubled diffusion profile. These combined motivation-identity profiles predicted students’ achievement significantly, but not better than the motivation-only profiles (Research Question 4).
An avenue for future research would be to gain more insight into the cause-and-effect association between identity and motivation. Future research could also examine whether motivation is a mediator of effects of identity, since the dimensions of identity and quality of motivation were quite substantially related in this study.
RQ1. How is identity associated with students’ achievement using both a variable-centered approach and a person-centered approach?
RQ2. How is motivation associated with students’ achievement using both a variable-centered approach and a person-centered approach?
RQ3. Can meaningful combined motivation-identity profiles be identified by combining the dimensions of identity and motivation?
RQ4. How are these combined motivation-identity profiles associated with student’s achievement?
Participants (N = 8,723, 47.1% female, Mage = 19.64, SD = 1.95) were divided into four students’ achievement groups (the dependent variable). The independent variables, five identity dimensions and five types of motivation were assessed by questionnaires. For the variable-centered approach we conducted multinomial logistic regression analyses. For the person-centered approach we conducted Latent Profile Analyses followed by chi-squared tests.
Regarding Research Question 1, only two identity dimensions were associated with students’ achievement. Students were more likely to be a successful stayer than an unsuccessful dropout when they engaged in more exploration in depth. Furthermore, students were more likely to be a successful dropout than a successful stayer when they ruminated. Identity profiles were not associated with students’ achievement.
Regarding the second research question, motivation dimensions as well as motivation-only profiles predicted students’ achievement. Students were more likely to be a successful stayer than an (un)successful dropout when they were autonomously motivated. Students were more likely to be an (un)successful dropout than a successful stayer when they had controlled motivation or amotivation.
Regarding Research Question 3, co-occurrence of identity formation dimensions and motivation existed which resulted in five meaningful combined motivation-identity profiles: an amotivated profile, a moderately negative profile, an autonomously achieved profile, and a controlled & troubled diffusion profile. These combined motivation-identity profiles predicted students’ achievement significantly, but not better than the motivation-only profiles (Research Question 4).
An avenue for future research would be to gain more insight into the cause-and-effect association between identity and motivation. Future research could also examine whether motivation is a mediator of effects of identity, since the dimensions of identity and quality of motivation were quite substantially related in this study.