PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
2009 | 22 | 77-82
Article title

Reliabity and Validity of the Trichotomous and 2×2 Achievement Goal Models in Turkish University Physical Activity Settings

Authors
Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
The present research is designed to continue exploration of the reliability and validity of the 2 × 2 and trichotomous achievement goal frameworks in Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) Turkish undergraduate physical activity courses. One hundred and fifty eight Turkish undergraduate students (116 males; 42 females) served as participants. They completed both the trichotomous and 2 × 2 achievement goal scales. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed to examine and construct the validity of both the 2 × 2 and trichotomous achievement goal models. The results showed that the 2 × 2 achievement goal model represents an adequate fit to the data (X 2/df = 1.66, CFI = 0.91, GFI = 0.93, NNFI = 0.89, and RMSEA = 0.06). Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the mastery-approach, performance-approach, mastery-avoidance, and performance-avoidance goals were 0.65, 0.68, 0.72, and 0.60, respectively, indicating acceptable internal consistency. However, CFA analysis pointed out that the trichotomous achievement goal model provided a poor fit to the data (X 2/df = 1.59, CFI = 0.85, GFI = 0.88, NNFI = 0.69, and RMSEA = 0.06), although Cronbach's alpha coefficients in the trichotomous achievement goal model indicated acceptable reliability (mastery goals = 0.70, performance-approach goals = 0.73, and performance-avoidance goals = 0.64). Results from the present study indicate that only the 2 × 2 achievement goal model provides a reliable and valid measure of achievement goals for Turkish undergraduate students.
Publisher

Year
Volume
22
Pages
77-82
Physical description
Dates
published
1 - 1 - 2009
online
13 - 1 - 2010
Contributors
author
  • School of Sport Sciences and Technology, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Turkey
References
  • Agbuga, B., Xiang, P. Achievement goals and their relations to self-reported persistence/effort among Turkish students in secondary physical education. J Teach Phys Educ, 2008. 27:179-191.
  • Ames, C. Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. J Educ Psychol, 1992. 84:261-272.[Crossref]
  • Browne, M.W., Gudeck, R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Testing structure equation models. K.A. Bollen and J.S. Long, eds. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1993. pp.136-162.
  • Chen, A. A theoretical conceptualization for motivation research in physical education: An integrated perspective. Quest, 2001. 53:35-58.[Crossref]
  • Cury, F. New directions for achievement goals theory in sport: Development and predictive validity of the AAASQ. J Sport Exercise Psy, 1999. 20: S15.
  • Cury, F. Predictive validity of the approach and avoidance achievement in sport model. J Sport Exercise Psy, 2000. 22: S32.
  • Cury, F., Da Fonseca, D., Rufo, M., Peres, C., Sarrazin, P. The trichotomous model and investment in learning to prepare for a sport test: A mediational analysis. Brit J Educ Psychol, 2003. 73: 529-543.[Crossref]
  • Cury, F., Elliot, A., Sarrazin, P., Da Fonseca, D., & Rufo, M. The trichotomous achievement goal model and intrinsic motivation: A sequential mediational analysis. J Exp Soc Psychol, 2002. 38:473-481.[Crossref]
  • Dweck, C.S. Motivational processes affecting learning. Am Psychol, 1986. 41:1040-1048.[Crossref]
  • Elliot, A.J. Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educ Psychol, 1999. 34, 169-189.
  • Elliot, A.J. Integrating the "classic" and "contemporary" approaches to achievement motivation: A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. In: Advances in motivation and achievement. M.L. Maehs and P.R. Pintrich, eds. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press., 1997. pp. 243-279.
  • Elliot, A.J., Church, M.A. A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. J Pers Soc Psychol, 1997. 72:218-232.[Crossref]
  • Elliot, A.J., Thrash, T.M. Achievements goals and the hierarchical model of achievement motivation. Edul Psychol Rev, 2001. 13:139-156.[Crossref]
  • Elliot, A.J., Harackiewicz, J.M. Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol, 1996. 70:461-475.[Crossref]
  • Elliot, A.J., McGregor, H.A. A 2*2 achievement goal model. J Pers Soc Psychol, 2001. 80:501-519.[Crossref]
  • Guan, J., McBride, R., Xiang, P. Reliability and validity evidence for achievement goal models in high school physical education settings. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci, 2007. 11:109-129.[Crossref]
  • Harackiewicz, J.M., Barron, K.E., Carter, S.M., Lehto, A.T., Elliot, A.J. Determinants and consequences of achievement goals in the college classrooms: Maintaining interest and making the grade. J Pers Soc Psychol, 1997. 73:1284-1295.[Crossref]
  • Hatcher, L. A step by step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc, 1994.
  • Hu, L., Bentler, P.M. Evaluating model fit. In: Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications., R.H. Hoyle, ed. London: Sage. 1995. pp.76-99.
  • Jöreskog, K., Sörbom, D. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1993.
  • Kaplan, A., Middleton, M.J., Urdan, T., Midgley, C. Achievement goals and goal structures. In: Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning. C. Midgley, ed. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. 2002. pp.21-53.
  • Levy, I., Kaplan, A., Patrick, H. Early adolescent's achievement goals, social status, and attitudes towards cooperation with peers. Soc Psychol Educ, 2004. 7:127-159.[Crossref]
  • Maehr, M.L. On doing well in science: Why Johnny no longer excels: why Sarah never did. In: Learning and motivation in the classroom. S.G. Paris, G.M. Olson, and H.W. Stevenson, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 1983. pp.179-210.
  • McIver, J.P., Carmines, E.G. Unidimensional scaling. Quant Appl Soc Sci, 1981. 24:96-107.
  • Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., Middleton, M., Maehr, M.L., Urdan, T., Anderman, L.H., et al. The development and validation of scales assessing students' achievement goal orientations. Contemp Educ Psychol, 1998. 23:113-131.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • Nicholls, J.G. The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989.
  • Smith, M., Duda, J., Allen, J., Hall, H. Contemporary measures of approach and avoidance goal orientations: Similarities and differences. Brit J Educ Psychol, 2002. 72:155-190.[Crossref]
  • Solmon, M.A., Boone, J. The impact of student goal orientation in physical education classes. Res Q Exerc Sport, 1993. 64:418-424.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • Spray, C.M., Biddle, S.J.H. Achievement goal orientations and participation in physical education among male and female sixth-form students. Eur Phys Educ Rev, 1997. 3:83-90.[Crossref]
  • Walling, M.D., Duda, J.L. Goals and their associations with beliefs about success in and perceptions of the purposes of physical education. J Teach Phys Educ, 1995. 14:140-156.
  • Wang, C.K., Biddle, S.J.H., Elliot, A.J. The 2×2 achievement goal framework in a physical education context, Psychol Sport Exerc, 2007. 8:147-168.[Crossref]
  • Xiang, P., Lee, A. Achievement goals, perceived motivational climate, and students' self-reported mastery behaviors. Res Q Exerc Sport, 2002. 73:58-65.[Crossref][PubMed]
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.-psjd-doi-10_2478_v10078-009-0026-1
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.