Achievement Goal Theory: The Relationship of Accounting Students’ Goal Orientations with Self-efficacy, Anxiety, and Achievement

Abstract

Students’ goal orientations are examined using two major frameworks for learning: achievement goal theory (AGT) and students’ approaches to learning (SAL). Previous student success research is extended, by examining goal constructs from the AGT framework to determine if they help explain the learning process in accounting. Data were gathered using an established instrument and used to examine how mastery and performance goals are related to students’ academic expectations, achievement, self-efficacy, and test anxiety. Cluster analysis was used to identify four motivation groupings (multiple-goal, mastery, performance, and low motivation). Pairwise comparisons of groups, for expected grades, self-efficacy, anxiety, final exam grade, and course grade, identified differences among some of the clusters. Results suggest that a combination of mastery and performance goal motivations, rather than a singular perspective, may provide better outcomes related to course grades, while reducing dysfunctional outcomes. Based on the results, suggestions are provided to help instructors influence student success.

Key Words:

• Motivation
• achievement goals
• self-efficacy
• test anxiety
• approaches to learning

Notes

1 For an extensive discussion of the terminology related to the motivation research literature, see Murphy and Alexander (2000).

2 Some past research has distinguished between approach and avoidance goals only for performance (Diseth & Kobbeltvedt, 2010; Elliot, 1999; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996), employing a trichotomous framework that is made up of mastery goals, performance-approach goals, and performance-avoidance goals (Elliot & Church, 1997; Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich et al., 2002).

3 For more discussion of adaptive, or optimal, outcomes (such as greater motivation, more use of learning strategies, and better performance) and maladaptive, or less than optimal or even undesirable, outcomes, such as less motivation, more use of superficial strategies, and poorer performance, see Pintrich (2000) and Wolters (2004).

4 For discussions of the history, development, and conceptual framework for SAL, see Beattie et al. (1997), Biggs (1978, 1987), Biggs et al. (2001), Marton and Säljö (1976a, 1976b), Entwistle and Ramsden (1983), Entwistle and Tait (1990), Entwistle and Smith (2002), Entwistle, Skinner, Entwistle, and Orr (2000). See Duff and McKinstry (2007) for a review of prior studies on SAL in an accounting context.

5 The introductory accounting course is the first in the accounting sequence at the university and is a prerequisite for all other accounting courses. Students in the introductory course have not typically had prior experience in the study of accounting, since accounting courses are not a usual component of a secondary school curriculum. The data set does not include a measure of accounting study at the secondary school level.

6 The MSLQ is an 81-item survey instrument that includes items used to measure study strategies and motivation. The scope of the current study was to examine the concept of motivation (and its impact on affect, achievement, and self-efficacy) and therefore included just the four motivation subscales discussed.

7 The GPA is an average of the following numerical representations of letter grades received for courses taken during prior semesters: 4 = A, 3 = B, 2 = C, 1 = D.