School-Based Intervention for Academic Achievement: Targeting Cognitive, Motivational and Affective Factors

Outcome in any learning process should target three goals – propelling the underachiever’s engagement in the learning process, enhancing the drive to achieve, and modifying attitudes and beliefs in his/her capabilities. An intervention study with a three-pronged approach incorporating self-regulatory training targeting three categories of strategies – cognitive, metacognitive and motivational – was designed adopting the before and after control-experimental group design. The evaluation of the training process was based on pre- and post-intervention measures obtained through three indices of measurement – academic scores based on grades on school examinations and comprehension tests, affective variables scores and level of strategy use obtained through responses on scales and questionnaires, and content analysis of subjective responses to open-ended probes. The evaluation relied on three sources – student, teacher and parent. The t-test results for the experimental and control groups on the pre- and post-intervention measurements indicate a significant increase on comprehension tasks for the experimental group. Though statistically significant difference was not found on the school examination scores for the experimental group, there was considerable decline in performance for the control group. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was applied on the scores obtained on affective variables, namely, self-esteem, personal achievement goals, personal ego goals, personal task goals, and locus of control. The experimental group showed increase in personal achievement goals and personal ego goals as compared to the control group. Responses given by the experimental group to the open-ended probes on causal attributions indicated a considerable shift from external to internal causes when moving from the pre- to post-intervention stage. ANCOVA results revealed significantly higher use of learning strategies inclusive of mental learning strategies, behavioral learning strategies, self-regulatory strategies, and an improvement in study orientation encompassing study habits and study attitudes among the experimental group students. Parents and teachers reported significant progressive transformation towards constructive engagement with study material and self-imposed regulation. The implications of this study are three-fold: firstly, strategies training (cognitive, metacognitive and motivational) should be embedded into daily classroom routine; secondly, scaffolding by teachers through activities based on curriculum will eventually enable students to rely more on their own judgements of effective strategy use; thirdly, enhanced confidence will radiate to the affective aspects with enduring effects on other domains of life as well. The cyclic nature of the interaction between utilizing one’s resources, managing effort and regulating emotions forms the foundation for academic achievement.

• Joan Antony

• Academic achievement
• cognitive strategies
• metacognitive strategies
• motivational strategies.

[1] S. G. Paris, and A. E. Cunningham, “Children becoming adults,” In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee, Eds., Handbook of Educational Psychology. New York: Macmillan, pp. 117-146, 1996.
[2] L. Corno, “Student volition and education: Outcomes, influences, and practices,” in D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 229-251, 1994.
[3] P. K. Gupta, and R. Mili, “Impact of academic motivation on academic achievement: A study on high school students,” European Journal of Educational Studies, vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 43-51, 2016.
[4] C. E. Weinstein, and R. E. Mayer, “The teaching of learning strategies,” in M.C. Wittock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, 3rd ed., New York: Macmillan, pp. 315-327, 1986.
[5] B. L. Mc Combs, and R. J. Marzano, “Putting the self in self-regulated learning: The self as agent in integrating will and skill,” Educational Psychologist, vol. 25, pp. 51-69, 1990.
[6] C. E. Weinstein, J. Husman, and D. Dierking, “Self-regulation interventions with a focus on learning strategies,” in M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 417-449, 2000.
[7] L. W.H. Tan, and R. Subramaniam, Handbook of research on literacy in technology at the K-12 level, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference, 2006.
[8] A. L. Brown, “Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms, in F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 65-116, 1987.
[9] R. Kanfer, and B. L. McCombs, “Motivation: Applying current theory to critical issues in training,” in S.Tobias & D.T. Fletcher (Eds.), Handbook of Training, New York: Macmillan, pp. 85-108, 2000.
[10] R. Kanfer, P. L. Ackerman, and E. D. Heggestad, “Motivational skills and self-regulation on learning: A trait perspective,” Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 8, pp. 185-210, 1996.
[11] R. W. White, “Competence and the stages of psychosexual stages of development,” in M. R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, Vol. 8, pp. 97-141, 1960.
[12] B. S. Bloom, Human Characteristics and School Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976.
[13] J. Han, and Q. Lu, “A correlation study among achievement motivation, goalsetting, and L2 learning strategy in EFL Context,” English Language Teaching, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 5-14, 2018.
[14] P. A. W. Putro, Y. R. Pramadi, H. Setiawan, N. K. Gunawan, R. B. Hadiprakoso, and H. Kabetta, “Correlation Between Motivation and Achievement of Competencies in the Hands-On Learning Method,” in 2019 5th International Conference on Education and Technology (ICET), pp. 29-32, 2019.
[15] T. Vu, L. Magis-Weinberg, B. R. J. Jansen, N. Atteveeldt, T. W. P. Janssen, N. C. Lee, H. L. J. Maas, M. E. J. Raijmakers, M. S. M. Sachisthal, and M. Meeter, “Motivation achievement cycles in learning: A literature review and research agenda,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 34, pp. 39-71, 2022.
[16] J. C. Raven. Standard Progressive Matrices. Oxford: Oxford Psychologists Press, 1976.
[17] M. Rosenberg, Society and Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965.
[18] A. Kaplan, and M. L. Maehr, “Achievement goals and student well-being,” Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 24, pp. 330-358, 1999.
[19] S. Norwicki, and B. R. Strickland, A locus of control scale for children,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 148-154, 1973.
[20] P. Tuss, J. Zimmer, and H. Ho, “Causal attributions of underachieving fourth-grade students in China, Japan, and the United States,” Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 408-425, 1995.
[21] P. Warr, and J. Downing, “Learning strategies, learning anxiety and knowledge acquisition,” British Journal of Psychology, vol. 91, pp. 311-333, 2000.
[22] W. F. Brown, and W. H. Holtzman, Survey of study habits and attitudes. New York: psychological Cooperation, 1953.
[23] G. Sharma, and C. Vyas, “A Review on study habits of school going children in relation to their academic achievement,” International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 166-171, 2016.
[24] P. R. Pintrich, and E. V. DeGroot, “Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 82, pp. 33-40, 1990.