University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Factors influencing nursing students' motivation to succeed

(USC Thesis Other)

Factors influencing nursing students' motivation to succeed

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content FACTORS INFLUENCING NURSING STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION TO

SUCCEED

by

Patricia Theresa Tutor

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2006

Copyright 2006 Patricia Theresa Tutor

ii
DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to my mother, Kathryn Kelley Blake, in loving
memory of my father, Joseph Quilty Blake, and to my children, Matthew and
Elizabeth.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my chair, Dr. Myron Dembo, and committee members,
Dr. Robert Rueda and Dr. Debbie DiThomas, for their support and guidance. Thank
you to my friend and colleague, Dr. Lisa Howard-York, for going through this
incredible journey with me.
Additionally, I would like to extend a special thank you to the nursing
students who participated in this research.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

DEDICATION .............................................................................................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..........................................................................................iii
LIST OF TABLES .....................................................................................................vii
ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................viii
CHAPTER
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1
Overview..........................................................................................................1
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................5
Importance of the Study...................................................................................6
Research Question............................................................................................7
Definitions........................................................................................................7
Academic Self-Efficacy .......................................................................7
Achievement Goal Orientation ............................................................8
Nursing Student....................................................................................8
Self-Regulation of Learning.................................................................8
LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................................................10
The Nursing Literature...................................................................................10
The Education and Psychology of Education Literature................................13
Academic Self-Efficacy and Achievement ........................................13
Self-Regulation of Learning and Academic Achievement ................16
Cognitive Learning Strategies...................................................18
Metacognitive Learning Strategies ...........................................19
Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement ..................................22
The Dichotomous Model ..........................................................22
The Trichotomous Model .........................................................24
The Multiple Goal Model .........................................................26
The 2 X 2 Framework ...............................................................28
Summary ........................................................................................................30
METHOD...................................................................................................................33
Subjects and Setting .......................................................................................33
Instruments.....................................................................................................36
Goal Orientations ...............................................................................37
v
The Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey...............................37
Personal mastery goal orientation ..............................38
Personal performance-approach goal orientation.......38
Personal performance-avoidance goal orientation.....38
Academic Self-Efficacy .....................................................................39

Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire.....................39
Self-Regulation Strategies..................................................................39
The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory...........................39
Concentration scale ....................................................40
Information processing scale......................................40
Motivation scale.........................................................40
Selecting main ideas scale..........................................41
Test strategies scale....................................................41
Time management scale.............................................41
Mathematics and English Placement Scores......................................42
Procedures......................................................................................................43
RESULTS ..................................................................................................................47
Intercorrelations .............................................................................................47
Research Questions ........................................................................................52
Primary Research Question: What percent of the variance in
achievement for ADN nursing students is accounted by academic self-
efficacy, achievement goal orientation, and self-regulation of
learning?.............................................................................................52
Secondary Research Question: Does self-regulation of learning
further contribute to academic achievement above and beyond the
effects of achievement goal orientation and self-efficacy?................57
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................60
Mathematics and English Placement Scores and Academic Achievement ...60
Academic Self-Efficacy and Achievement ....................................................61
Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement ..............................................63
Self-Regulation of Learning and Academic Achievement ............................66
Strategies for Promoting Academic Self-Efficacy.........................................70
Mastery Experiences ..........................................................................71
Vicarious Experiences........................................................................72
Social/Verbal Persuasion ...................................................................74
Mood ..................................................................................................75
Strategies for Promoting Achievement Goal Orientation ..............................77
Strategies for Promoting Self-Regulation of Learning ..................................82
Limitations to the Study.................................................................................92
Conclusion .....................................................................................................93
Suggestions for Future Research....................................................................96
vi
REFERENCES...........................................................................................................97
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Nursing Student Motivation for Learning Survey: Part I.......105
Appendix B: Nursing Student Motivation for Learning Survey: Part II......107
Appendix C: USC IRB Approval.................................................................109
Appendix D: Approval from Riverside Community College District IRB .111
Appendix E: Approval from the Dean of the School of Nursing (RCC).....112
Appendix F: Informed Consent....................................................................113

vii
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Demographic Information of Participants…………………………………36
Table 2: Summary of Math and English Placement Scores and Group
Assignments…………………………………………………………….….43
Table 3: Means, Standard Deviations, and Zero-Order Pearson Product
Correlations for Measured Variables………………………...…………….48
Table 4: Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis……………………………54

viii
ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to identify the motivational factors that help
explain the variations in achievement for nursing students enrolled in an Associate of
Science Degree in Nursing (ADN) program at a Southern California community
college. Academic self-efficacy, achievement goal orientation, and self-regulation of
learning were the three predominant motivational factors found to be highly
predictive of academic achievement. Survey items from the PALS instrument for
goal orientation, the MSLQ for academic self-efficacy, and the LASSI inventory for
self-regulation of learning comprised the student survey. This study attempted to
determine the degree to which academic self-efficacy, achievement goal orientation,
and self-regulation of learning accounted for the variance in achievement for ADN
students. A sample of 232 nursing students participated in the study. Results of the
regression analysis revealed that, after first removing the effect of mathematics and
English placement, academic self-efficacy was a significant predictor of academic
achievement, contributing a significant 8.9% of the variance in achievement for these
students. Data also suggested that achievement goal orientation was not a significant
predictor in explaining variance in achievement, above and beyond the effects of
mathematics and English placement level and academic self-efficacy. Lastly, self-
regulation of learning and strategy use accounted for a significant 6% of the variance
in nursing student achievement. Together, academic self-efficacy and self-regulation
of learning contributed a significant approximately 15% of the variance in
achievement for the ADN students in this study.
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Overview
To address the nationwide shortage of registered nurses (RN), schools of
nursing have implemented many creative strategies including increasing enrollment
with each class of incoming students, offering evening and weekend programs, and
video streaming lectures on-line to qualified Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVN) in
an effort to promote career ladder advancement from LVN to RN. Additionally,
other schools of nursing have applied for, and received, State and Federal grant
funding to develop off-campus satellite programs to accommodate more students to
help resolve the nursing shortage issue.
In one fall term, for example, in a two-year Associate of Science Degree in
Nursing Program (ADN) at a community college, in excess of 300 applications were
received for 60 first semester nursing program positions. Those who completed all
general education requirements with an overall GPA of no less than 2.0 and who had
completed all required core science courses with an average GPA of 2.65 were
admitted based on a randomized selection process; the others who qualified were
guaranteed admission for subsequent semesters, and a waiting list was created for the
remainder.
As of this writing, California community colleges may not implement any
means of priority selection admission practices as criterion to rank applicants for
nursing program admissions unless such practices have been grounded in research by
2
the individual institutions. Arbitrary program admission policies may breach the
equal access versus quality debate (Phillips, Spurling, & Armstrong, 2002), and
could be seen as being discriminatory against protected populations (Gill, 2004). To
remain within all guidelines set forth by the California Community Colleges
Chancellor’s Office, (CCCCO), nursing programs must first validate all selective
admission criteria before admission policies can be enforced. Many nursing
programs have had to abandon such practices as first-come-first-served, lottery
selection, or ranking students by GPA. Consequently, nursing enrollment committees
may be faced with the potential problem that students now applying for positions,
who meet minimal general education requirements with a GPA of at least 2.0, may
be at high-risk for academic difficulties, may be lacking in strategies necessary for
academic achievement in a rigorous nursing program, and may need additional
remediation in order to be successful in the nursing program.
ADN program completion rates need to be maintained and attrition rates must
be kept to a minimum in order to graduate more eligible candidates to sit for the
National Certification Licensure Examination for Registered Nurses (NCLEX-RN)
to help fill this nursing shortage. In one ADN program, for example, the attrition
rate, defined as students needing to repeat a semester, in the fourth semester alone
rose from 2% in the Spring of 2002, to 7% in Spring 2003, and continued to rise for
the following Spring semesters to 9% in 2004, 20% in 2005, then to 10% for the
Spring 2006 semester. Although some students withdrew for personal reasons, most
students needing to repeat a semester did so because of cumulative semester grades
3
that were less than 75%. Regardless of the students’ circumstances, attrition rates
that have increased over the past few years are costly and problematic for the
student, the nursing program, and the college, and leave the greatly needed RN
positions in the workplace vacant.
In February 2004, State Assembly Bill AB 2177 was introduced to the
Legislature as a means of resolving California’s nursing shortage. This bill
essentially requires that each California community college with a nursing program
develop and implement, by the 2006-07 academic year, “selective admissions”
criteria for ADN program applicants. The language of the bill, further, acknowledges
California’s nursing shortage, understands that nursing education is costly for the
student and the school, and, realizes that California community college nursing
programs are now highly impacted. The bill will require that nursing program
applicants be prioritized by the likelihood of their successfully completing the
program. The intent of this bill is to enforce a change in nursing program admission
policies so that the students who are most likely to succeed in their course of nursing
study and pass the NCLEX-RN examination will receive priority admission over
those students with less academic ability. Hence, more graduates will be available to
fill the voids in nursing positions.
In response to this Assembly Bill, Gill (2004), representing the Chancellor’s
Office, issued a position statement of opposition on this measure. It is the position of
the CCCCO that community colleges support the tradition of equal opportunity and
equal access, for all residents of the school district, to the occupational programs
4
offered on these campuses. Often, students entering community college occupational
programs are considered nontraditional students (Board of Registered Nursing, 2000;
Gill, 2004; Jeffreys, 1998; Sandiford & Jackson, 2003; and, Shelton, 2003) by
definition; they are adults older than 24 years of age, employed, with dependant
children, and tend to have more familial responsibilities than do their younger
counterparts. It is the mission of the CCCCO (2004) that the nontraditional students
not lose opportunities for community college nursing program access that could
result from selective measures by ability.
As was previously noted, ADN program enrollment committees must follow
the guidelines set forth by the Chancellor’s Office, specifically, that no priority
admission practices may be in place that could be considered discriminatory, such as
the practice of issuing points to students with higher GPA’s. These guidelines did
indicate, however, that schools with available resources were to be encouraged to
conduct validation research, and only then may they individually set admission
criteria based on the evidence for success gleaned from the validation studies.
With respect to core science GPA, the school, whose nursing students were
the focus of this study, did in fact, conduct a validation study for core science entry
requirements and found that students’ whose cumulative core science (Anatomy and
Physiology and Microbiology) GPA was 2.65, or higher, were more likely to attain
successful program completion (75% or higher in each nursing course).
Authors of the Model Prerequisite Validation Study of Associate Degree
Nursing Programs (Phillips, Spurling, & Armstrong, 2002) found that the variables
5
with the highest relationship to predicted program completion were overall college
GPA, English GPA, core biology (science) GPA, and, core biology repetitions.
Further, their study found that two variables, core biology GPA and repetitions, were
most predictive of successful program completion. For example, a student with a
core science GPA of 2.0 and no science course repetitions had a 61% probability of
completing the nursing program. The predicted probability of success for a student
with a science GPA of 2.0 and one science course repetition dropped to 36%. A final
result, worthy of note from the ADN Validation Study, is that, assuming all GPA
components are equal and at least a 70% probability of program completion is
desired, a student with a GPA of 2.41 and no science repetitions would achieve a
70% likelihood of successful program completion.
In keeping with the philosophy of community college education, students of
the nursing program subject to this study have gained admission based on policies
that have been supported by validation studies, and have been deemed fair with
assurance of equitable access and opportunity.
Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify the possible factors that would help
explain the variations in nursing student achievement in an ADN program.
Community college nursing programs may not implement any selective admission
policy, such as ranking students by GPA, until such practice has been validated by
research. Consequently, students being admitted to nursing programs who have met
minimum GPA requirements may be at risk for academic difficulties and may lack
6
necessary behaviors and cognitions required for timely program completion. To this
end, it is important to explore the non-cognitive factors of academically successful
nursing students.
Importance of the Study

California is currently experiencing a serious nursing shortage. Schools of
nursing have addressed this shortage, in part, by increasing enrollment with each
incoming class. California community college nursing programs are now highly
impacted, receiving many more applications than space can accommodate. In
keeping with the philosophy of community college education, specifically, equal
opportunity and equal access for students entering the occupational programs offered
on these campuses, how can nursing program attrition rates be kept to a minimum
and completion rates be maintained in order to graduate more eligible candidates to
fill the nursing positions?
There is a potential for applicants, who meet minimum admission
requirements, to be lacking in strategies necessary for successful completion of
nursing programs. It is, therefore, very important to understand motivational factors
contributing to academic success for the nursing students so that the academic
programs can provide effective educational interventions and remediation plans to
support successful nursing program completion. Controlling for ability, what
motivational factors can be identified that will explain the variance in academic
achievement in the ADN nursing student?
7
Research Question

Nursing, education, and psychology of education literature were searched for
the identification of important motivational constructs that help explain academic
achievement. Academic self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994; Chemers & Garcia, 2001; and,
Zimmerman, 2000), self-regulation of learning (Dembo & Eaton, 2000; Schunk &
Ertmer, 1999), and achievement goal orientation (Barron & Harackiewicz, 2001)
were the three most predominant motivational indices identified in the literature as
being most predictive of academic achievement. Each of these constructs will be
defined in the following section, and support from this scholarly literature will be
used to answer the following research questions:
What percent of the variance in achievement for ADN nursing students is
accounted by academic self-efficacy, self-regulation of learning, and achievement
goal orientation? More specifically, does self-regulation of learning further
contribute to academic achievement above and beyond the effects of achievement
goal orientation and academic self-efficacy?
Definitions

For the purpose of this paper, the following definition of terms is offered.
More in depth definitions are provided in the literature review.
Academic Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy is described as an individuals’ perception or judgment of their
capabilities within a particular domain, and as the ability to organize, initiate, and
persist at a course of action to attain one’s goals (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002;
8
Zimmerman, 2000). Self-efficacy can be described as the students’ confidence in
their ability to be successful in their coursework. Since self-efficacy is a domain
specific construct (Schunk, 2004), all references to this term will infer academic self-
efficacy.
Achievement Goal Orientation
A students’ achievement goal orientation is defined as a situationally specific
orientation adopted by a student that represents the desire to develop, attain, and
demonstrate competence in a particular educational context (Harackiewicz, Barron,
Carter, Lehto, & Elliot, 1997) and explains the manner in which a student
approaches learning.
Nursing Student
For the purpose of this paper, a nursing student is defined as one who is
enrolled in an ADN program at a community college.
Self-Regulation of Learning
Academic self-regulation is a process whereby students demonstrate the
ability to activate and sustain cognitions, behaviors, and emotions that are
systematically oriented to academic goal attainment (McCann & Garcia, 1999;
Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Key processes implemented by self-regulated learners
include effective use of time management skills, setting goals, knowledge and
utilization of a variety of learning strategies, and, self-monitoring and self-evaluation
of their progress (Dembo, 2004; Zimmerman, 2002). Descriptions of the specific
processes and learning strategies will be provided in the literature review.
9
The previous section has described the nationwide nursing shortage,
identified some methods community colleges have implemented to address this
shortage, and has briefly outlined the legal parameters within which ADN enrollment
committees place applicants for nursing program positions. In the following section,
the literature review for the relevant motivational constructs that influence academic
achievement in the nursing student population will be presented, followed by
important research questions based on the information gleaned in the literature.

10

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

Scholarly educational literature was searched to identify motivational factors
and student behaviors that will help explain, not only academic achievement and
successful completion of desired courses of study, but those factors that will help
explain the variances of achievement within a student population. Relevant nursing
literature was searched for the motivational constructs characteristic of academically
successful nursing students enrolled in ADN programs offered at community
colleges. The focus on community college nursing programs is important for this
study since private institutions and state universities and colleges have more liberties
in their admission practices, thus, are able to screen and select students for
enrollment based on college entrance examination scores, Scholastic Aptitude Test
(SAT) or American College Test (ACT) scores, or overall high school GPA ranking.
The literature was queried using the following descriptors: academic
achievement, nursing program completion, academic indicators, indicators of student
success, and nursing student motivation.
The Nursing Literature

Since success on the NCLEX-RN examination is a measurable outcome
imperative for continued nursing program accreditation, it seemed likely that the
majority of nursing research found in this search identified studies that predict
graduates’ success on the NCLEX-RN examination (Briscoe & Anema, 1999;
Griffiths, Papastrat, Czekanski, & Hagan, 2004; Haas, Nugent, & Rule, 2004;
11

Morrison, Free, & Newman, 2002; Siktberg & Dillard, 2001; and, Yin & Burger,
2003), rather than the behaviors that predict or explain success during the program or
the motivational factors that account for the variations in nursing course
achievement.
Additionally, much of the nursing research found identified factors associated
with student success that were primarily cognitive in nature, for example, with
respect to NCLEX-RN passage, that cognitive ability is the most prominent factor in
predicting success (Griffiths, et al., 2004; Lewis & Lewis, 2000). Sandiford and
Jackson (2003) found that first semester ADN students assessed at college-level
language ability were significantly more likely to succeed in the nursing program
than those students with below college-level language ability. Briscoe and Anema
(1999) reported a significant relationship between pre-admission GPA, test scores on
two National League for Nursing (NLN) examinations administered in the first and
second years of an ADN program, and, failure of one clinical nursing course as being
predictive of passing the NCLEX-RN examination.
Further evidence of students’ cognitive ability as a major predictor of
program completion and success on the NCLEX-RN examination was found in
studies of nursing schools that have implemented progression policies (Morrison,
Walsh, & Newman, 2002; Spurlock & Hanks, 2004; and, Yin & Burger, 2003),
remediation/retention policies for students who have been identified as at-risk for
failure (Lockie & Burke, 1999; Symes, Tart, Travis & Toombs, 2002), or nursing
12

program admission examinations (Gallagher, Bomba, & Crane, 2001) to identify
candidates most likely to complete nursing curriculum successfully.
The nursing literature search was then expanded to include the non-cognitive
motivational descriptor for nursing student success, and few studies were found. Of
these, the non-cognitive predictors of academic success seemed more
environmentally focused than motivationally focused. The environmental factors
influencing student success included financial difficulties while attending college
(Sandiford & Jackson, 2003), hours of employment (Jeffreys, 1998), and, dependant
children or other familial responsibilities (Jeffreys, 1998; Sandiford & Jackson,
2003).
The nursing literature that examined purely motivational constructs was
scarce. These studies, however, did examine the relationship between self-efficacy,
learning strategies, environmental factors, and, academic success for the
nontraditional nursing student (Jeffreys, 1998; Kuiper, 2002) and nursing students’
self-efficacy, self-regulated learning, and academic performance in science (Andrew
& Vialle, 1998; Babenko-Mould, Andrusyszyn, & Goldenberg, 2004; and, Potolsky,
Cohen, & Saylor, 2003).
Since identifying this gap in the nursing literature, the education and
psychology of education literature will serve as the guiding influence upon which to
build nursing research that will be designed to examine the non-cognitive
motivational variables that explain nursing student success or lack thereof.
13

The Education and Psychology of Education Literature

Within the education and psychology of education literature, the motivational
factors highly correlated with academic success include academic self-efficacy
(Bandura & Locke, 2003; Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002; Lodewyk & Winne, 2005;
Margolis & McCabe, 2004; and, Zimmerman, 2000), the use of self-regulatory
strategies for learning (Azevedo & Cromley, 2004; Dembo & Eaton, 2000; Hadwin,
Winne, Stockley, Nesbit, & Woszczyna, 2001; Tuckman, 2002; Wolters, 2003; and,
Zimmerman, 1998) and, achievement goal orientation (Barron & Harackiewicz,
2001; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Elliot & McGregor, 2001; Elliott & Dweck, 1988;
Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich, Elliot, & Thrash, 2002; McGregor & Elliot, 2002;
Midgley, Kaplan, & Middleton, 2001; Pintrich, 2000; Urdan & Midgley, 2001; and,
Wolters, 2004).
The following section organizes the educational literature by studies
supporting academic self-efficacy, self-regulation of learning, and achievement goal
orientation as the predominant motivational constructs that influence academic
achievement.
Academic Self-Efficacy and Achievement
Self-efficacy is described as an individuals’ perception or judgment of their
capabilities within a particular domain, and as the ability to organize, initiate, and
persist at a course of action to attain one’s goals (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002;
Zimmerman, 2000). Academic self-efficacy is a highly effective predictor of
students’ motivation and learning, and influences the motivational indices of active
14

choice, mental effort, and persistence for the academic task (Margolis & McCabe,
2004; Zimmerman, 2000).
Self-efficacious students more readily undertake challenging tasks (Chemers,
Hu, & Garcia, 2001; Margolis & McCabe, 2004; and, Zimmerman, 2000), work
harder and expend more mental effort (Kruck & Lending, 2003; Pintrich & Schunk,
2002; and, Zimmerman, 2000), and, persist longer when faced with difficult
academic content (Margolis & McCabe, 2004; Zimmerman, 2000) than do the less-
efficacious students.
Self-efficacy influences how students’ respond to academic tasks by
predicting choices students’ make about how to engage in the task (Lodewyk &
Winne, 2005). With respect to the design of academic tasks, for example, (well-
structured versus ill-structured), these authors suggest teachers strive for a balance,
and posited that a well-structured task might fail to challenge students, limit their
opportunities to explore alternate learning tactics, and, minimize choices, while more
ill-structured academic tasks may increased anxiety, be excessively challenging, and
result in withdrawal in the face of difficulty rather than foster task engagement.
Bandura (1994) posits that one most influential source of self-efficacy is the
students’ task engagement during learning, and a potentially strong indicator of
academic self-efficacy is the degree to which students’ have the freedom to utilize a
variety of learning strategies.
Students with a well-grounded sense of academic self-efficacy experience
less anxiety in the classroom (Lodewyk & Winne, 2005), employ more effective
15

study tactics (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003), and, process information more
effectively (Bong, 2001).
Bandura (1994) has identified four methods by which a persons’ self-efficacy
can be developed. According to Bandura (1994), the most effective way educators
can foster a students’ sense of efficacy is by providing mastery experiences.
Academic successes can enhance self-efficacy for learning, however, the student
must feel challenged in performing the task, and experience a sense of
accomplishment for exerting effort and persevering in the face of adversity.
A second method for building academic self-efficacy is through vicarious
learning (Bandura, 1994; Schunk, 2004), or experiencing a social model with whom
a student may identify. Schunk (2004) further posits that the more closely people
identify themselves as being similar to the model, self-efficacy beliefs are increased
since they will see themselves as being capable of like accomplishments.
Bandura’s (1994) third method for fostering self-efficacy is through social or
verbal persuasion. This concept is similar to feedback students’ receive from their
instructors. Positive feedback that is meaningful and truthful will persuade students
to mobilize and sustain greater effort for academic tasks; positive feedback that is
undeserved will only serve to undermine motivation (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003).
Emotions have also been determined to influence a persons’ sense of self-
efficacy (Bandura, 1994; DeAngelis, 2003; and, Schunk, 2004). These authors posit
that positive mood will enhance self-efficacy, whereas negative mood will diminish
self-efficacy and promote, instead, self-doubt.
16

Evidence in the literature also suggests that students with high self-efficacy
beliefs employ more adaptive self-regulatory study strategies (Linnenbrink &
Pintrich, 2002), tend to adopt a mastery achievement goal orientation for learning
(Schunk & Pajares, 2002), and have been found to achieve more highly academically
than less efficacious students (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002, 2003).
In summation, this section of the literature review has identified academic
self-efficacy as being highly influential in promoting academic achievement.
Academic self-efficacy is an important motivational construct related to academic
choice, effort, and persistence. It is proposed in this study that the highly self-
efficacious nursing student will be engaged in academic tasks, invest sufficient
mental effort in learning, and demonstrate positive emotions to enhance academic
self-efficacy and nursing program achievement. The next section of this review
examines the construct of self-regulation for learning and strategy use, and the
importance this process plays in the enhancement of achievement in the educational
domain.
Self-Regulation of Learning and Academic Achievement
Academic self-regulation is a process whereby students demonstrate the
ability to activate and sustain cognitions, behaviors, and emotions that are
systematically oriented to academic goal attainment (McCann & Garcia, 1999;
Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). The self-regulated student demonstrates the ability to
assess priorities, finish academic projects, monitor their progress (Winne &
Jamieson-Noel, 2002), and manage personal and environmental distractions (Dembo
17

& Eaton, 2000). Self-regulation refers to the exercise of having influence over ones’
behavior with the purpose of helping oneself achieve desirable consequences
(Tuckman, 2002).
Zimmerman (2002) describes self-regulation as a process whereby students
proactively transform their cognitive abilities into academic skills by initiating self-
directed thoughts, behaviors, and emotions that are aimed at goal attainment. Further,
Zimmerman (2002) posits that self-regulation is a way that students can compensate
for individual learning differences by developing a system of regulatory strategies to
assist the student to learn on his or her own.
Self-regulated learners have the ability to assess the academic task, set short-
and long-term goals for studying, possess a variety of cognitive strategies to apply to
the learning activity, and are able to make sound judgments about which study
tactics will be most useful for achieving the academic goal (Hadwin, et al., 2001).
Pintrich (2004) describes a conceptual framework, based on a self-regulated
learning perspective, and views the self-regulated learner as one who actively
participates in the learning process and exerts control by monitoring and regulating
cognitions and behaviors. The self-regulated individual monitors progress and is able
to assess if the learning process is adequate for goal attainment, or if adjustment need
to be implemented (Pintrich, 2004; Wolters, 1998; and, Zimmerman, 2002). A final
assumption in the Pintrich (2004) conceptual model is that self-regulatory activities
are mediators between the students’ personal and contextual characteristics and the
actual goal achievement.
18

With reference to the conceptualization of self-regulated learning, some
researchers have identified categories of strategies that students use to help
themselves learn, remember, and understand course material (Dembo, 2004; Pintrich
& De Groot, 1990; and, Purdie, Hattie, & Douglas, 1996). Two broad categories of
learning strategies that foster student engagement in learning and result in higher
levels of achievement include cognitive and metacognitve strategies (Dembo, 2004;
Pokay & Blumenfeld, 1990; and, Weinstein & Palmer, 2002).
Cognitive Learning Strategies
Examples of cognitive learning strategies include rehearsal, elaboration, and
organizational strategies (Dembo, 2004; Schunk, 2004). These authors identify
rehearsal strategies as including such activities as memorization, the use of note
cards, underlining texts, and note-taking. In an effort to make learning more
meaningful and to integrate new knowledge with prior knowledge, Dembo (2004)
and Schunk (2004) endorse the use of elaboration and organizational strategies as
being effective tools for enhancing comprehension and recall of learned material.
According to these authors, elaboration and organizational learning strategies
include underlining and summarizing textbook readings, note-making, answering
questions, the ability to select main ideas, the development of concept maps, and the
use of mnemonics or acronyms to assist with retention, comprehension, and recall of
learned material. Weinstein and Palmer (2002) further identified subcategories
within the strategy of selecting main ideas to include the students’ ability to know
19

what to underline in text readings, and to be able to differentiate key points in
readings from supplemental information.
Metacognitive Learning Strategies
Metacognitive strategies refer to the students’ use of planning, monitoring,
and self-evaluation of progress in their understanding of course material (Pokay &
Blumenfeld, 1990). Weinstein and Palmer (2002) posit that the self-regulated learner
plans organized study time, sets proximal goals, and controls environmental
distractions in an effort to improve concentration. Monitoring and self-evaluation of
progress involves such activities as formulating and answering questions, keeping
records, paraphrasing, checking for consistencies, and self-testing (Dembo, 2004;
Purdie, et al., 1996; Schunk, 2004; and, Weinstein & Palmer, 2002).
Zimmerman (1989) found evidence that high school students’ use of cognitive
and metacognitive learning strategies accounted for approximately 93% of the
variance in achievement placement in school, and that the use of thirteen of fourteen
elaboration and organization learning strategies discriminated significantly between
higher and lower achieving students. Garavalia and Gredler (2002) examined the
relationship between prior course achievement, aptitude, and the use of learning
strategies as predictors of college student achievement. Although GPA was
significantly correlated to course achievement, the self-regulatory strategies of
general academic organization and planning for studying and homework both
correlated with academic achievement as well.
20

Additional empirical research by Wolters and Pintrich (1998) revealed that a
high level of academic self-efficacy was positively correlated to students’ use of
cognitive and regulatory strategies in mathematics, social studies, and English
classes. Students in this study who felt capable of learning course material (efficacy)
reported an increased likelihood of using a variety of cognitive and metacognitive
self-regulatory strategies. Similar findings, reported in a study by Pintrich and De
Groot (1990), revealed that cognitive strategy use and self-regulation of learning
were highly correlated to each other, with self-regulation as being a better predictor
of academic performance. The authors suggested that teaching students about self-
regulatory learning strategies may be more important for improving academic
performance, and that improving students’ self-efficacy beliefs may lead to greater
use of cognitive learning strategies.
As part of a research grant to increase student success and retention,
MacNamara and Pener (2005) examined the study skills and learning strategies of
300 first year mathematics students to determine which skills were predictive of
academic success. The participants were first year college mathematics students and
were administered the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) (Weinstein,
Palmer, & Shulte, 2002), an instrument consisting of ten subscales that measure
students’ study skills and motivation. Five of the ten LASSI scales were found to be
significant with respect to predicting final math course grade. The significant
subscales included, anxiety, which measured the degree to which students worried
about their academic performance, the concentration scale that measured the ability
21

to focus and maintain attention to the academic task, and the motivation scale that
measured the amount of effort students directed toward the task. Also significant
were the study aids scale that assessed the students use of resources that help them
retain and recall information, and, the time management scale that measured the
ability to effectively manage study time sufficient to complete coursework. Results
of this study are supported in the literature, specifically, that interventions aimed at
promoting motivation and study strategy use are useful in increasing students’
academic achievement.
VanderStoep, Pintrich, and Fagerlin (1996) conducted a study of college
students’ use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies for learning at the beginning
and end of a semester of humanities, social, and natural science courses. Results of
this research revealed that high achieving students scored significantly higher, both
at the beginning and ending of the semester, on each of the following four self-
regulatory strategies measurement scales; rehearsal, elaboration, organization, and
metacognition, than did lower achieving students. This study lends further support of
the merit of knowledge and implementation of a variety of cognitive and
metacognitive learning strategies as predictors of student academic achievement.
The previous section described common themes found throughout the self-
regulation of learning literature identifying this motivational construct as being
effective in predicting students’ academic achievement. Cognitive and metacognitive
strategies and behaviors of self-regulated students, such as rehearsal, elaboration,
organization, time management, and control of the social and physical environment,
22

have been found to be highly predictive of academic achievement. The following
section of the literature review addresses achievement goal orientation as the
predominant motivational theory that explains academic achievement.
Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement
The most central conceptualization of achievement goal orientation gleaned
from the literature is that of academic competence, specifically, the development of
competence versus the demonstration of competence in academic settings (Elliot et
al., 1999; Middleton & Midgley, 1997). The scholarly literature of achievement goal
orientation theory will be cited as early as 1988 to the present date in order to more
effectively illustrate the evolution, debate, and, discussion that has ensued regarding
the refinement and delineation of the major constructs within this achievement-
oriented motivational theory.
The Dichotomous Model
With respect to goal orientation, the focus for motivation is on the students’
perceived purpose for engaging in an academic activity (Middleton & Midgley,
1997). Historically, goal orientation theory described two broad goal perspectives
proposed to be central determinants of behavioral patterns of achievement: mastery
goal orientation and performance goal orientation (Elliott & Dweck, 1988; Wentzel,
1999).
Students with a mastery goal orientation learn for the sake of learning, and
experience a sense of satisfaction and competence in doing so (Eccles & Wigfield,
2002). Mastery goal-oriented students focus on the development of acquiring skill
23

and competence relative to the academic task (Harackiewicz, Barron, & Elliot, 1998)
and exhibit solution-oriented behaviors when faced with academic obstacles (Elliott
& Dweck, 1988). Elliott and Dweck (1988) further posit that mastery-oriented
students seek to increase their ability through the adoption of challenge-seeking
behaviors that tend to sustain effort and improve performance.
In contrast, students who are performance goal oriented often are more
interested in external rewards related to academic achievement (such as grades),
strive to outperform others, and, want to appear competent (or avoid seeming
incompetent) when compared to their peers (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Elliott &
Dweck, 1988; and, Middleton & Midgley, 1997) by promoting the demonstration of
ability relative to others in their class (Harackiewicz, Barron, & Elliot, 1998).
Performance goal oriented students focus on the relative adequacy of their ability,
are concerned with avoiding negative judgments of ability, and tend to demonstrate
challenge-avoidance behaviors when faced with academic obstacles (Elliott &
Dweck, 1988).
Elliott and Dweck (1988) found that mastery-oriented students were
interested in increasing their academic ability over time, did not internalize failure,
but, rather saw it as an opportunity to challenge existing learning strategies, did not
express negative affect in the face of obstacles, and were persistent in their attempts
to find solutions to difficult academic tasks. In contrast, Elliott and Dweck (1988)
also found that students who endorsed a performance orientation to achievement
were interested in out-performing their peers, and tended to deteriorate when faced
24

with obstacles or negative feedback. These students internalized failure as being
attributed to their ability, demonstrated negative affect through increased anxiety and
shame, and, seemed diverted from the academic task since continued effort might
further prove lower ability when compared to their peers. In this dichotomous model,
approach (to appear competent relative to peers) and avoidance (to avoid seeming
incompetent relative to peers) performance goals were examined as one unified set
of behaviors, and were seen as being contrary to the more positive behaviors
exhibited by mastery-oriented students.
However, as researchers continued to investigate this predominant
motivational theory of academic achievement, two distinct and independent patterns
of behavior in students who adopted a performance-relevant approach to academic
competence began to emerge (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996). With respect to
competence-relevant activity, these authors posited that performance-oriented
students focused their cognitions, behaviors, and emotions toward either the
attainment of favorable judgment, or the avoidance of unfavorable judgments of
competence, and that these two sets of motivated behavior warranted independent
investigation. Hence, with the partitioning of the performance goal into approach and
avoidance orientations, a trichotomous model was proposed by these authors, and
has received continued support by McGregor and Elliot (2002).
The Trichotomous Model
The three goal types now proposed by Elliot and Harackiewicz (1996), and
supported by Elliot and Church (1997), Middleton and Midgley (1997), and,
25

McGregor and Elliot (2002) are referred to as mastery, performance-approach, and
performance-avoidance goals. The performance-approach goal type is explained by
behaviors that are directed toward the demonstration of competence; the
performance-avoidance goal directs activities aimed at avoiding the demonstration of
incompetence. Both mastery and performance-approach are considered approach
orientations (Harackiewicz et al., 2000), with mastery being the most desirable
approach; performance-avoidance is considered an avoidance orientation that results
in negative achievement outcomes (Harackiewicz et al., 2000).
The trichotomous model prevailed as the predominant achievement goal
theory for much of this past decade (Barron & Harackiewicz, 2001; Elliot & Thrash,
2001), evidenced by the extensive research found in this literature search, and, the
complimentary and congruent themes agreed upon by the contemporary motivational
theorists exploring this approach to academic achievement.
With respect to achievement goal orientation and intrinsic motivation, Elliot
and Harackiewicz (1996) documented the first study that illustrated the independent
behaviors in the approach and avoidance goals endorsed by students. They found that
performance-avoidance orientations undermined intrinsic motivation, but
performance-approach orientations did not. Students endorsing performance-avoid
goals lacked persistence in the face of failure, and spent less time in task
involvement, whereas those with mastery and performance-approach goal
orientations increased activities in the areas of persistence and task engagement by
26

either attempting to master the task or by striving to improve performance to best
their fellow students.
There exists consensus among motivational theorists that mastery-oriented
behaviors, cognitions, and emotions are stable and consistent in the manner in which
students approach and perform their coursework (Harackiewicz, et al., 1997).
Mastery-oriented students tend to employ deeper-level processing of information,
(Elliot et al., 1999), choose more challenging academic tasks, (McGregor & Elliot,
2002), use effective study strategies (Elliot & Thrash, 2001), persist in the face of
difficulties, (Elliot et al., 1999) and, exert increased mental effort in their attempt to
develop competence (Elliot et al., 1999).
Students endorsing performance-approach goals use more surface-level
processing of information (Elliot et al., 1999), but have been found to implement
effective learning strategies in order to demonstrate competence when faced with
difficulties (Barron & Harackiewicz, 2001; Elliot & Church, 1997).
Performance-avoidance goals have been found to be positive predictors of
surface-level processing (Elliot et al., 1999), to result in numerous negative
processes including test anxiety, threat appraisals, deficient examination
performance, and, disorganized studying (McGregor & Elliot, 2002).
The Multiple Goal Model
There exists increasing evidence in the literature of the merit of a dual
achievement goal orientation; the adoption of mastery as well as performance-
approach orientations as a frame work for achievement-relevant behaviors that will
27

yield positive educational outcomes in some academic contexts (Barron &
Harackiewicz, 2001; Elliot et al., 1999; Harackiewicz et al., 1997, 1998, 2000, 2002;
McGregor & Elliot, 2002; and, Pintrich, 2000).
The endorsement of a multiple goal orientation arose when some researchers
proposed that the effects of performance goals as being strongly suggestive of
negative consequences might have been premature (Harackiewicz et al., 2000), and
that a multiple-goal perspective may have beneficial consequences for college
students (Harackiewicz et al., 2000; Pintrich, 2000). Students who strive for
acceptance to colleges and universities do need to employ some form of a
competitive motivational orientation in order to out-perform others (on the SAT, for
example), in order to gain college entrance, thus, the competitive nature, in this
context, will have positive outcomes.
Harackiewicz and colleagues (2000) found that mastery and performance-
approach goals had positive and complimentary effects on college students’ interest
that develops over time and performance in certain academic courses. These authors
found that mastery-oriented students reported higher levels of interest in their
introductory course, tended to enroll in future courses within the same discipline, and
used elaboration (deep processing) strategies for learning. Although performance-
approach oriented students adopted rehearsal rather than elaboration strategies for
learning, these students’ received higher grades in the course than did mastery-
oriented students.
28

Barron and Harackiewicz (2001) posited that because mastery goals were the
only goals positively linked to interest outcomes for learning new math techniques,
and performance-approach goals were the only goals positively linked to
performance outcomes, students who endorse both goals were more likely to become
interested and perform well in their coursework.
With respect to multiple goal orientation, Midgley, Kaplan, and Middleton
(2001) indicated, in the research, that performance-approach goals may be adaptive
for some students in some contexts, but, concomitantly, mastery-goal orientations
must also be high. Further, these authors felt that revisions of goal theory are
unnecessary since the emphasis on performance orientations might diminish the
emphasis on mastery orientation.
In contrast to Midgley and colleagues (2001) conclusion that no revision of
goal theory is necessary, Harackiewicz et al. (2002) believe that theoretical
developments, particularly the separation of performance goal orientation, do
warrant revision of goal theory that will prove to be necessary for a deeper
understanding of the issues of motivation, learning, and academic achievement.
The 2 X 2 Framework
The final delineation found in the extant literature on achievement goal
orientation has been proposed by Elliot and McGregor (2001) in their research
supporting four independent motivational constructs: mastery-approach, mastery-
avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance. These authors
29

concur with previously cited researchers that competence is conceptually central to
achievement goal theory.
Elliot and McGregor (2001) explain competence in terms of two fundamental
dimensions: how it is defined and how it is valenced, or measured. Competence is
defined according to three referent standards used in performance evaluations. The
absolute standard refers to the actual task requirements and can be described as
whether a student has mastered the task, or, at least, acquired an understanding of it.
Intrapersonal standards are evaluated by a students’ past or potential attainment, for
example, whether the task performance has improved or become more fully
developed. Lastly, a normative standard is defined as being an evaluation relative to
the performance of others. The second dimension of competence identified by these
authors is valence, specifically, whether competence is measured as a positive
(success) or a negative (failure) possibility.
The focus of a mastery-avoidance goal, as offered by Elliot and McGregor
(2001) is on avoiding a negative possibility, for example, striving to avoid
misunderstanding course content, failing to learn course material, or attempting not
to forget what one has learned. Examples of mastery-avoidance questionnaire items
developed for their research included statements referring to such emotions as worry
(that a student may not learn all that could possibly be learned in class), and,
fearfulness that content may not be as thoroughly understood as the student would
like. The authors found that mastery-avoidance goals were positive predictors of
30

worry, fear of failure, disorganized study, and were marginally correlated to
anticipatory test anxiety.
Although the 2 X 2 model has not received as much attention in the literature
as the trichotomous goal orientation model, Elliot and McGregor (2001) concluded
that the newly developed mastery-avoidance construct is empirically and
conceptually useful.
In summation, the previous section of the literature review has identified
achievement goal orientation as one of three motivational constructs that help
explain variations in academic achievement. For the purpose of this study, the
trichotomous model (mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance)
will be examined for the effect on nursing student academic achievement.
Summary

There exists substantial empirical evidence that the three motivational
constructs that explain and influence academic achievement are academic self-
efficacy, self-regulation of learning, and achievement goal orientation. Two
significant gaps in the nursing literature related to nursing student achievement were
identified, and have consequently become paramount as a rationale for the need for
this investigation.
First, the majority of nursing research found in this search identified studies
that predicted nursing graduates’ success on the NCLEX-RN examination rather than
the behaviors that explained success during the nursing program or the motivational
factors that accounted for variations in nursing student achievement. Secondly, much
31

of the nursing literature identified cognitive ability (aptitude) as a major predictor of
nursing program completion and success on the NCLEX-RN examination. Although
ability is a factor that must be considered, since highly efficacious, self-regulated
learners often earn higher grades, aptitude alone seems contrary to the sound
empirical evidence supporting the significance of the non-cognitive motivational
constructs, namely, academic self-efficacy, self-regulation of learning, and
achievement goal orientation as being highly influential in academic achievement.
Subsequently, aptitude will be controlled in this investigation. Few studies were
found in the nursing literature that examined these three purely motivational
constructs, and of these studies, environmental influences seemed predominant in
explaining nursing student achievement. Since identifying this gap in the nursing
literature, the education and psychology of education literature have served as a
guiding influence upon which to build nursing research that will investigate the non-
cognitive motivational variables that explain variations in nursing student
achievement.
In summation, the scholarly nursing, education, and psychology of education
literature have been searched for the motivational constructs that explain academic
achievement. Academic self-efficacy, self-regulation of learning, and achievement
goal orientation have each emerged as the predominant motivational constructs that
influence academic success. To this end, the following research questions are posed:
What percent of the variance in achievement for ADN nursing students is
accounted by academic self-efficacy, self-regulation of learning, and achievement
32

goal orientation? More specifically, does self-regulation of learning further
contribute to explaining academic achievement above and beyond the effects of
achievement goal orientation and academic self-efficacy?

33

CHAPTER 3
METHOD

The purpose of this study was to identify the motivational factors that would
help explain the variations in nursing student achievement in an ADN program.
Students presently seeking nursing program admission may be at high-risk for
academic difficulties, or lack the strategies, behaviors, and emotions necessary for
successful completion of a nursing program. The literature supports academic self-
efficacy, self-regulation of learning, and achievement goal orientation as three
predominant factors that influence academic achievement. To this end, these three
motivational constructs, characteristic of academically successful students, will be
examined.
Subjects and Setting

The participants included in this study were nursing students enrolled in an
ADN program offered at a community college in Southern California. The final
sample included 232 participants. Each student had completed all general education
requirements for the Associate of Science Degree and three additional core
prerequisite science courses (two semesters of Anatomy and Physiology and one
semester of Microbiology). All students in this program must achieve a minimum
cumulative grade of 75% in each nursing course in order to proceed to the next
semester.
The approximately 60 first semester nursing students are enrolled in two
courses; an eight-unit Introduction to Nursing Concepts theory and clinical course,
34

and a two-unit course designed to present an overview of registered nursing and to
introduce the student to the various roles within nursing practice. The second
semester nursing students, approximately 60, are enrolled in one eight-unit course,
Beginning Nursing Health and Illness that also includes a theory and clinical
component in the care of childbearing families, newborns, children, and young
adults.
The third and fourth semesters have approximately seventy students enrolled
in each. An additional ten to twelve students in each of the second year semesters are
currently advanced placement LVN students who are enrolled in the ADN program
through a special grant-funded video streamed program, and will be included in this
study. These students have access to classroom lectures via their home computers
and are held accountable for all program requirements.
Nursing 3 content includes both Intermediate Medical/Surgical nursing and
an additional section of Mental Health content incorporated into the nine units for
this class. Fourth semester nursing students are enrolled in two nursing courses,
Advanced Medical/Surgical nursing (nine units) and a one and one-half unit course
(Nursing 16) that includes content necessary for the transition from student to
registered nurse employee.
Each semester is taught by a team of three to four nursing faculty who are
experts in the specialty areas identified in the course content. Additionally, all
nursing students are enrolled in Nursing 7, a two-unit nursing course that provides a
35

laboratory for practicing skills as well as a computer classroom equipped with
instructional programs designed for nursing students.
Nursing students participate in lecture/discussions in the classroom biweekly.
They also spend two days each week for clinical experience in the healthcare
facilities within the surrounding area. Evaluation of students includes a cumulative
raw score on at least four examinations and one final examination, in addition to an
ongoing evaluation of the students’ clinical performance in the healthcare facilities.
Although a raw score or letter grade is not earned in the clinical setting, a minimum
of satisfactory performance based on the clinical evaluation tool is required for a
student to progress from one semester to the next. For example, a student who earns
a raw score equivalent to 89% in theory but demonstrates unsatisfactory performance
in the clinical setting receives a failing grade and will need to repeat the semester.
Among the 232 participants, 38 were male (16.4%) and 194 were female
(83.6%). The majority of the participants were Caucasian (n = 100, 43.1%), followed
by Hispanic (n = 47, 20.3%), Asian American (n = 37, 15.9%), Other (n = 34,
14.7%), and, African American (n = 13, 5.6%). Approximately 22% of the
participants were Nursing 1 students (n = 51), 25.9% (n = 60) were Nursing 2
students, 30.2% (n = 70) Nursing 3, and 22% (n = 51) were Nursing 4 students. Ages
ranged from 19 to 58 years, with the mean reported as 30 years of age. Demographic
information of the participants is illustrated in Table 1.
36

Table 1
Demographic Information of Participants
n %
Gender
Male 38 16.4
Female 194 83.6
Race/Ethnicity
White (non-Hispanic) 100 43.1
Hispanic/ Latino 47 20.3
Asian American/ Pacific Islander 37 15.9
Other 34 14.7
African American 13 5.6
Nursing Level
Nursing 1 51 22.0
Nursing 2 60 25.9
Nursing 3 70 30.2
Nursing 4 51 22.0
Most students placed in Mathematics Group 2 (31%, n = 72), which is
elementary algebra. English placement was Group 4 (48%, n = 113) for the majority
of students, which is Intermediate Writing and Grammar. College level algebra and
English Composition (English 1A) are required for the Associate Degree, so students
placing in Mathematics Groups 1 through 3, inclusively, were required to take
additional mathematics courses; those placing in English Groups 1 through 6 needed
to enroll in additional English courses in order to meet the college degree
requirements. The mean final course grade was 79%, with a range from 61% to 91%.
Students in this program must earn a minimum cumulative grade of 75% in order to
progress from one semester to the next.
Instruments

Appropriate scales from the following three instruments, the Patterns of
Adaptive Learning Survey (PALS) (Midgley et al., 1997), the Motivated Strategies
37

for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1993),
and the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) (Weinstein & Palmer,
2002), comprised the questionnaire used in this study (Appendix A, B) to measure
the variables of this study, including goal orientation, academic self-efficacy, and
self-regulation. Each scale was selected because of the statistical strength of the
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and the support of the reliability and validity of these
instruments in the literature. The following section will describe the three
instruments as well as each scale to be used in the student questionnaire.
Goal Orientations
The Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey
The Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey (PALS) initially developed by
Midgley et al. (1997) for use with middle school children has been found to be
reliable by Ross, Shannon, Salsbury-Glennon, and, Guarino (2002) for use with the
college level student population as well. This comparison study has provided
statistical evidence of reliability and validity based on scores from the assessment
tool obtained from middle school and college level students.
Items from the PALS survey included in this questionnaire were those that
measured mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goal
orientations. The format of these items within the PALS instrument is based on a five
point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (very true) for response
options. The survey items reflecting the three goal orientation perspectives (mastery,
performance-approach, and performance-avoidance) have, respectively, a
38

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .85, .89, and, .74. Survey items for the three
achievement goal orientation perspectives can be found in Appendix A.
Personal mastery goal orientation. The personal mastery goal orientation
scale is comprised of five items with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .85 and a
mean of 4.15. Sample survey items include, “It’s important to me that I thoroughly
understand my class work”, and, “One of my goals in class is to learn as much as I
can”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this study was .81, and the mean response
was 4.77.
Personal performance-approach goal orientation. The personal performance-
approach goal orientation scale includes five items, with a Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of .89 and a mean of 2.46. Examples of performance-approach items are,
“One of my goals is to look smart in comparison to the other students in my class”,
and, “It’s important to me that other students in my class think I am good at my class
work”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this study was .86, and the mean was
2.13.
Personal performance-avoidance goal orientation. Four items represent the
performance-avoidance goal orientation scale. Sample items consist of, “It’s
important to me that I don’t look stupid in this class”, and, “It’s important to me that
my teacher doesn’t think that I know less than others in class”. This scale has a
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .74, a mean of 2.40. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of this study was .74, with a mean response of 2.59.
39

Academic Self-Efficacy
Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire
Academic self-efficacy will be measured using appropriate survey items from
the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) developed and revised
by Pintrich et al. (1993). The questionnaire is divided into several sections, and is of
a seven point Likert-type scale design, with responses ranging from 1 (not at all true
of me) to 7 (very true of me).
The academic self-efficacy scale is comprised of eight items with a Cronbach’s
alpha coefficient of .93. Sample items include, “I expect to do well in this class”,
and, “I’m confident I can understand the most complex material presented by the
instructor in this course”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this study was .93,
and the mean was 5.27. The academic self-efficacy scale items from the MSLQ can
be found in Appendix B.
Self-Regulation Strategies
The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory
The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) (Weinstein, Palmer, &
Shulte, 2002) is a ten-scale, eighty-item inventory that assesses students’ cognizance
and use of study strategies related to self-regulation of learning. The LASSI has been
described as an inventory that is both diagnostic and prescriptive, assessing students’
thoughts and behaviors related to successful learning (Weinstein, et. al., 2002).
While only six of the ten scales from this inventory were examined in this study, the
instrument was administered on-line in its’ entirety since the scale items are
40

randomly situated throughout the inventory. Six LASSI scales were selected for
analysis based on the support found in the literature for the use of these self-
regulated behaviors and the strength of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients computed
for this study.
Concentration scale. The Concentration scale consists of eight items that
assess the students’ ability to attend to academic tasks in the face of distractions. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for this scale is .86. Sample inventory items measuring
concentration include, “If I get distracted during class, I am able to refocus my
attention”, and, “My mind wanders a lot when I study”. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient of this study was .83, with a mean response of 58.32, reported in
percentile.
Information processing scale. Information processing, described by Schunk
(2004), is the ability of the self-regulated learner to connect prior knowledge to new
knowledge through the use of such strategies as organization and elaboration in an
effort to make new learning meaningful. The information processing scale has a
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .84. Items included in this scale are, “To help me
remember new principles we are learning in class, I practice applying them”, and, “I
try to find relationships between what I am learning and what I already know”. Eight
items comprise the information processing scale. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient in
this study was .76, and the mean was 63.31.
Motivation scale. The motivational indices of active choice, mental effort, and
persistence are assessed in this eight-item scale. The internal reliability for this scale
41

is .84. Sample inventory items include, “When work is difficult I either give up or
study only the easy parts”, and, “I set goals for the grades I want in my classes”. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient in this study was .74, and the mean was 58.08.
Selecting main ideas scale. This eight-item scale assesses the ability of the
student to be able to distinguish relevant information that needs to be recalled from
supporting information found in textbook readings, lecture handouts, and journal
articles that may be assigned. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the selecting
main ideas scale is .89. Examples of the items include, “I have difficulty identifying
the important points in my reading”, and, “When studying, I seem to get lost in the
details and miss the important information”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this
study was .74, with a mean response of 54.19.
Test strategies scale. The eight-item test strategies scale assesses the students’
knowledge and use of methods that aid in the preparation for studying for
examinations as well as students’ appropriate strategy use, depending on the type of
examination, for example, multiple choice versus short answer or essay style. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for this scale is .80. Sample items are, “I have difficulty
adapting my studying to different types of courses”, and, “I review my answers on
essay tests to make sure I have made and supported my main points”. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient in this study was .75, and the mean was reported at
54.20.
Time management scale. An essential behavior of an academically successful
student is the effective use of time management skills (Dembo & Eaton, 2000). The
42

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this scale is .85. Examples of time management
survey items are, “I find it hard to stick to a study schedule”, and, “I set aside more
time to study the subjects that are difficult for me”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient
in this study was .80, with a mean response of 56.37.
Mathematics and English Placement Scores
In this study, the effect of aptitude, defined as the scores earned on
mathematics and English placement assessments, was removed in the statistical
analysis in order to determine the percent of variance in achievement that can be
accounted by self-efficacy, goal orientation, and self-regulated learning strategy use,
without the influence of aptitude. The actual placement scores for mathematics and
English assessments were not available to the investigator for students who either
held undergraduate degrees from other institutions, or who transferred from other
colleges or universities. However, the entry level of mathematics and English
placement for all students was accessible, if not by actual score, by transcript
evaluation. A numerical value, from 1 to 7, was assigned for each level of placement
for mathematics and English, for example, a student whose entry mathematics course
was at the lowest level (basic Arithmetic) was assigned a value of “1” and placed in
Mathematics Group 1. A student who placed at the highest level, Calculus, was
assigned a value of “7”. The same numerical ranking was assigned for the level at
which students’ placed for English courses. A breakdown of placement scores,
mathematics and English courses, and group assignments can be found in Table 2
below.
43

Table 2
Summary of Math and English Placement Scores and Group Assignment
Math
Group
Assignment
Math
Score
Math Class n %
1 0 – 19 50 or 51 Pre-algebra
27 11.6
2 20 – 29 52 Elementary Algebra
72 31.0
3 30 – 39 35, 53 Intermediate or Geometry
54 23.3
4 40 – 49 4, 5, 11, 12 College algebra or statistics
44 19.0
5 50 – 59 35 or 36 Trigonometry
16 6.9
6 60 – 69 10 Pre-Calculus
8 3.4
7 70 – 79 1 Calculus
11 4.7
English
Group
Assignment
English
Score
English Class n %
1 0 – 5 60A ESL Referral
3 1.3
2 6 – 9 60B Remedial English
3 1.3
3 10 – 14 61 Basic Writing and Grammar
15 6.5
4 15 – 19 62 Intermediate Writing and Grammar
113 48.7
5 20 – 24 50 Basic English Composition
68 29.3
6 25 – 29
0 0.0
7 >30 1A English Composition
30 12.
Procedures

Permission to conduct research was first granted by the Internal Review
Board from the degree-granting institution (Appendix C), the Institutional Research
Board from the site of the investigation (Appendix D), and finally, by the Dean of
the School of Nursing (Appendix E). Permission to address each class of nursing
student was also granted by the appropriate semester-level nursing faculty.
All nursing students currently enrolled in the program were offered an
opportunity to participate in this study. The purpose of the study was explained to the
students, all variables being measured were described, and any questions were
answered at that time.
44

Signed informed consent (Appendix F) was obtained from the participants
prior to them taking the survey. The participants also consented to have their college-
issued student identification number, Mathematics and English placement scores,
and final course grade accessible to the investigator.
On the prearranged date, the subjects completed the entire survey in the
computer room designated for nursing students. Parts I and II, twenty-two items
measuring academic self-efficacy and personal goal orientation, were completed
using a paper and pencil format. The third part of the survey was the on-line LASSI
instrument. Students received immediate feedback from the LASSI inventory in the
form of a computerized profile sheet that summarized each of the ten scales
measured in this instrument. The profile summary for each student was printed and
given to the student. The investigator provided an interpretation of the results to each
student in an effort to identify their particular areas of strengths and/or weaknesses.
The survey, in its’ entirety, took students between 15 to 25 minutes to complete.
The time frame for administration of this survey was around mid-term, thus,
allowing the necessary time for the student to become adjusted to their semester
requirements and expectations. Students were surveyed one time only over the Fall
and Spring semesters of the 2005-06 academic year.
To ensure that participation in this research was voluntary, had no impact on
the students’ grade, and to avoid any sense of coercion that could have been
experienced by the student, each was asked to enclose their completed survey in an
envelope that would remain sealed and locked in the investigators office until after
45

final course grades were issued. At semester end, and after final course grades were
issued, the investigator entered all survey data from Parts I and II into an SPSS
program, LASSI raw data was electronically mailed from the company in an Excel
format and applied to the SPSS program, and appropriate statistical analyses were
then computed.
In summation, this chapter has outlined the methodology used in this study.
The student population (n = 232) was described with respect to age, gender,
ethnicity, and semester level. Each of the scales, drawn from three different
instruments, has been discussed, and reliability coefficients, both internal and from
the data analysis for this study, have been listed.
The trichotomous model of the achievement goal orientation, drawn from the
PALS survey, measured mastery, performance approach, and performance avoidance
goal orientations. The survey items reflecting these three perspectives have a
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .85, .89, and, .74, respectively. In this study, the
Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were .81, .86, and, .74, respectively.
Academic self-efficacy was measured using appropriate survey items from
the MSLQ. The authors of this instrument report an internal alpha coefficient of .93
on the self-efficacy scale. In this study, the alpha coefficient was also .93.
The third variable measured in this study was self-regulation of learning, and
appropriate scales from the on-line LASSI instrument that included cognitive and
metacognitive learning strategies were described. The internal reliability for
concentration, information processing, and motivation is reported at .86, .84, and .84,
46

respectively. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients in this study were .84, .76, and .74,
respectively. For selecting main ideas, test strategy, and time management, the
Cronbach’s alpha coefficients are .89, .80, and .85, respectively, and in this study
reliability for these three scales were .74, .75, and .80.
In the next chapter, results of the correlation and hierarchical regression
analyses will be presented. The effects of mathematics and English placement will be
removed, then each of the three independent variables, self-efficacy, achievement
goal orientation, and self-regulation of learning and strategy use, will be regressed
and analyzed for the unique contribution each variable has in explaining the variance
in achievement for ADN nursing students.

47

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

In this chapter, results of the descriptive data of each variable in this study,
including demographic data, means, and standard deviations are presented. Results
of the correlation matrix are presented to identify positive or negative relationships
between and among the variables, followed by the results of the Zero-Order Pearson
Product Correlation. Finally, the hierarchical regression analysis was presented to
illustrate significant and unique contributions each variable had on explaining the
percent of variance in achievement for nursing students.
Intercorrelations

The correlation matrix of all measured variables revealed a positive
relationship between self-efficacy, mastery goal orientation, the self-regulated
learning strategies (concentration, information processing, motivation, selecting
main ideas, test strategies, and time management), and final course grades.
Specifically, students who placed high on the self-efficacy scale also scored high on
mastery goal orientation, as well as on all of the self-regulated learning strategy
scales measured in this study. Students who scored high in self-efficacy, who also
demonstrated a mastery approach to learning and implemented the strategies of a
self-regulated learner, also earned higher final course grades. A summary of the
Zero-Order Pearson Product Correlations for all measured variables is presented in
Table 3.
Table 3
Means, Standard Deviations, and Zero-Order Pearson Product Correlations for Measured Variables
Variables M SD 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Grade 79.41 5.34 .16* .11 .08 -.12 -.08 .31*** .19** .27*** .35*** .19** .24*** .01
2. Math -- .01 .04 .10 .06 .03 .04 .15* .14* -.03 .05 -.20**
3. Eng -- -.06 .01 .00 .08 .10 .13* .14* -.01 .08 -.06
4. Mastery 4.78 .39 -- -.02 .01 .23** .15* .07 .12 .24*** .08 .12
5. Per-App 2.13 .81 -- .58*** .01 .01 -.07 -.07 -.09 -.21** -.12
6. Per-Avo 2.60 .87 -- -.08 .05 -.03 -.11 -.04 -.12 -.14*
7. Self-Eff 5.27 1.06 -- .26*** .42*** .04*** .39*** .25*** .01
8. INP 63.31 24.77 -- .28*** .29*** .41*** .25*** .21***
9. SMI 54.19 26.72 -- .72*** .30*** .45*** .09
10. TST 54.20 27.77 -- .37*** .55*** .14*
11. MOT 58.08 27.87 -- .52*** .51***
12. CON 58.32 26.43 -- .50***
13. TMT 56.37 30.95 --
Note. All scores are scaled scores. 1.Grade = final grade; 2. Math = Math Placement Group Assignment (lower number indicates lower
entry scores or level); 3. Eng = English Placement Group Assignment (lower number indicates lower entry scores or level); 4. Mastery =
Mastery Goal Orientation; 5. Per-App = Performance Approach Goal Orientation; 6. Per-Avo = Performance Avoidance Goal Orientation;
7. Self-Eff = Academic Self-Efficacy; 8-13 are LASSI Scores (in percentile) 8. INP = Information Processing Self-Regulation Strategy; 9.
SMI = Selecting Main Idea Self-Regulation Strategy; 10. TST = Test Taking Self-Regulation Strategy; 11. MOT = Motivation Self-
Regulation Strategy; 12. CON = Concentration Self-Regulation Strategy; 13. TMT = Time Management Self-Regulation Strategy
* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001
48
49

Performance approach and performance avoidance goal orientations were
found to have a negative relationship to final course grades as well as negative
relationships to all of the self-regulated strategies measured in the LASSI tool, with
the exception of the Information Processing Scale. A negative relationship was found
between self-efficacy and performance avoidance goal orientations. Students scoring
high in self-efficacy scored low on the performance avoidance scale, meaning that
these efficacious students did not demonstrate avoidance behaviors for learning.
A positive and significant relationship was found between concentration,
information processing, motivation, selecting main ideas, and test taking strategy use
and final course grade. Students who implemented these important strategies of the
self-regulated learner also earned higher grades in their nursing courses.
With respect to mathematics and English placement scores, although both of
these variables had a positive relationship to final course grades, only mathematics
placement revealed a significant positive correlation to final grades. A positive
significant relationship was found between English placement group and two of the
LASSI scales, namely, selecting main ideas and test taking strategies.
A significant positive correlation was found between self-efficacy and final
course grade (r = .31, p < .001). A positive correlation was similarly found between
self-efficacy and mastery goal orientation at the (r = .23, p < .01) level of
significance. Additionally, self-efficacy was significantly and positively related to
five of six self-regulated learning strategies: information processing (r = .26, p <
.001), selecting main ideas (r = .42, p < .001), test strategies (r = .04, p < .001),
50

motivation (r = .39, p < .001), and concentration (r = .25, p < .001). This means that
students who held high self-efficacy beliefs also adopted a mastery goal orientation
to learning. Further, highly efficacious students implemented five of six self-
regulatory learning strategies and also earned higher final course grades. Time
management was positively correlated to self-efficacy, mastery goal orientation, and
final course grades, but not at a desired level of significance.
In addition to being positively correlated to self-efficacy, mastery goal
orientation was also found to be significantly positively correlated to motivation (r =
.24, p < .001) and information processing (r = .15, p < .05). This means that mastery
oriented students not only had high self-efficacy beliefs, but they were also highly
motivated and able to bridge prior knowledge to new knowledge to help make
learning more meaningful.
A negative correlation was found between performance approach goal
orientation, five of six self-regulation strategies, specifically, selecting main ideas,
test strategies, motivation, concentration, and time management, and final grades. Of
these, only a significant negative correlation existed between performance approach
and concentration (r = -.21, p < .05). This implies that students who were more
performance approach oriented were less able to concentrate on their studies.
Additionally, negative correlations were found between performance
avoidance goal orientation and self-efficacy, selecting main ideas, test strategies,
motivation, concentration, time management, and course grades. Among these
variables, of significance was the negative correlation between performance
51

avoidance and time management (r = -.14, p < .05). This means that students who
demonstrated performance avoidance behaviors also had difficulties applying time
management principles to studying.
A point of interest in this study was that a significant positive correlation was
found between performance approach and performance avoidance goal orientations
(r = .58, p < .001). In other words, students who demonstrated a performance
approach goal orientation also held performance avoidance perspectives to learning
as well. Recall that achievement goal orientation was once described in terms of a
dichotomous model, with mastery and performance goal orientations. A possible
explanation for this correlation could be that the performance behaviors in this group
of students may not have warranted a partitioning of the two performance
orientations.
The LASSI self-regulation of learning variables were significantly correlated
to each other. For example, a significant positive correlation was found between
concentration and information processing (r = .25, p < .001), selecting main ideas
(r = .45, p < .001), test strategies (r = .55, p < .001), motivation (r = .52, p < .001),
and, time management (r = .50, p < .001). Information processing was significantly
correlated to selecting main ideas (r = .28, p < .001), test strategies (r = .29, p <
.001), motivation (r = .41, p < .001), and, time management (r = .21, p < .001). A
significant correlation was also found between motivation and selecting main ideas
(r = .30, p < .001), test strategies (r = .37, p < .001), and time management (r = .51, p
< .001). Selecting main ideas was significantly correlated to test strategies with the
52

highest r-value (r = .72, p < .001) in this study. Finally, a significant positive
relationship was also found between test strategy use and time management (r = .14,
p < .05). Since these variables were so highly correlated to each to the other, the
hierarchical regression analysis will be useful in determining which strategies had
unique contributions in explaining variations in achievement.
With respect to final course grade, in addition to correlations with self-
efficacy, significant positive correlations were found with information processing (r
= .19, p < .01), selecting main ideas (r = .27, p < .001), test strategies (r = .35, p <
.001), motivation (r = .19, p < .01), and, concentration (r = .24, p < .001). This
implies that students who implemented these important strategies of the self-
regulated learner also earned higher final course grades.
This section reported the results of the correlation matrix and the Zero-Order
Pearson Product Correlations of all measured variables. The following section
reports the results of the hierarchical regression analysis that was computed to
address the primary research question.
Research Questions

Primary Research Question: What percent of the variance in achievement for ADN

nursing students is accounted by academic self-efficacy, achievement goal

orientation, and self-regulation of learning?

To answer the primary research question, four hierarchical regression
analyses were computed. Mathematics and English placement group was first
entered, to control for the effects of the entry math and English level. Next, academic
53

self-efficacy was entered, followed by the three achievement goal orientations, then
six self-regulation of learning strategies. The variables were entered into the
regression analysis in this order to determine the amount of variance in achievement
that may be explained by each variable, above and beyond the influence of the
preceding independent variable. Table 4 summarizes the computed hierarchical
regression analyses.
First, mathematics and English placement scores were entered to remove the
effects of ability at college entry level. Although the effect of this variable was
removed throughout the regression analysis, it is important to note that the results
indicated that mathematics ability, and not English, was significant in predicting
final course grades (3 = .156, p = .018, < .05, F
change
= 4.114). Combined,
mathematics and English placement level contributed a significant 3.5% of the
variance in final course grades. This finding has important implications as a possible
variable to be included in validations studies for the development of future admission
policies for nursing programs.
54

Table 4
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis
Variables R
2
R
2
Change F Change 3 p
Placement Scores .035 .035* 4.11 .018
Math* .156 .018
English .101 .123

Self Efficacy*** .124 .089*** 22.77 .299 .000

Goal Orientation .145 .021 1.81 .145
Mastery .013 .842
Performance Approach* -.154 .046
Performance Avoidance .017 .828
Self-Regulation Strategies .205 .060* 2.72 .014
Information Processing .075 .274
Selecting Main Ideas -.073 .425
Test Taking Strategies* .240 .014
Motivation .002 .982
Concentration .103 .249
Time Management -.075 .362
Note: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001

After removing the effects of mathematics and English ability, results
indicated that self-efficacy contributed to a significant 8.9% of the variance in
achievement for this population of nursing student (F
change
= 22.773, p = .000, <
.001, 3 = .299). This means that students who placed high on the self-efficacy scale
also earned higher final course grades. This finding is fully supported in the
literature.
When mastery, performance approach, and performance avoidance
achievement goal orientations were entered next to determine whether or not they
contributed to further variance in course achievement above and beyond the effects
of self-efficacy and mathematics and English placement scores, results indicated that
while performance approach goal orientation was a significant predictor (3 = -.154, p
= .046, < .05), the variance it explained was not significant (F
change
= 1.814, p =
55

.145, > .05). The negative coefficient indicated that those students who demonstrated
less of a performance approach goal orientation earned higher grades. Neither
mastery nor performance avoidance goal orientations were statistically significant in
the regression analysis. The literature supports mastery and/or a combined mastery
and performance approach goal orientation perspective on learning as being
predictive of academic achievement.
Finally, six self-regulation of learning strategy scales from the LASSI
instrument (concentration, motivation, information processing, selecting main ideas,
test strategy, and time management) were entered into the regression to examine the
effects on the final course grade above and beyond the effects of mathematics and
English placement, academic self-efficacy, and achievement goal orientations. The
data revealed that the six LASSI scales together were significant in predicting final
course grades (p = .014, < .05), accounting for an additional 6% of the variance in
achievement, a contribution that was also statistically significant (F
change
= 2.722).
Of these scales, however, only the Test Strategy Scale offered a unique contribution
that was also significant in explaining the variance in achievement in this group
(3 = .240, p = .014, < .05). The literature indicates that self-regulated learners have
knowledge of and implement a variety of cognitive and metacognitive behaviors and
strategies that help them achieve academically, but the findings in this study do not
support this.
In summation, the results of the hierarchical regression analysis revealed that,
once removing the effects of mathematics and English placement scores, students
56

with higher self-efficacy were found to achieve higher final course grades, and that
self-efficacy contributed a significant 8.9% of the variance in achievement for these
students.
Secondly, again removing the effects of mathematics and English placement,
none of the three achievement goal orientations contributed significantly in
explaining the variance in achievement for this population of nursing student, above
and beyond the effect of academic self-efficacy. There did exist, however, a
significant negative coefficient between performance approach goal orientation and
final course grade, meaning that students with higher course grades reported using
less of a performance approach goal orientation perspective. However, the percent of
variance in achievement for this variable was not significant.
Lastly, once the effects of mathematics and English placement level, self-
efficacy, and achievement goal orientations were removed, the self-regulated
learning strategies were significant in contributing an additional 6% of the variance
in achievement. Of these strategies, the Test Strategy Scale was the only significant
predictor of final course grades. This means that students who are able to implement
this important strategy of the self-regulated learner also earned higher final course
grades.
Together, academic self-efficacy and the use of effective self-regulated
learning strategies accounted for approximately 15% of the variance in achievement
for ADN students, once the effect of mathematics and English placement level was
removed.
57

Secondary Research Question: Does self-regulation of learning further contribute to
academic achievement above and beyond the effects of achievement goal orientation
and self-efficacy?
To answer the secondary research question, the data computed in the
regression analysis revealed that the six LASSI scales contributed a significant 6% of
the variance in achievement for the ADN students in this study. However, only the
Test Strategy Scale yielded a unique significant contribution (p = .014, < .05) in
explaining final course grades. The literature reports that the self-regulated learner
implements a variety of cognitive and metacognitive strategies to facilitate
achievement of the desired academic goal and to be successful students. To
understand why more of the LASSI scales were not significant predictors of
academic achievement, it is important to examine the mean responses on these scales
reported by the students in this study.
Responses on each of the LASSI scales are reported as percentiles, ranging
from 1 – 99. A student scoring above the 75
th
percentile on any particular scale
demonstrates an area of relative strength in the use of that strategy for learning. A
score ranging from the 50
th
to 75
th
percentiles requires attention on the part of the
student to improve their use of the strategy, lest they experience difficulties in
successful completion of their academic courses. A score below the 50
th
percentile
indicates an area of relative weakness and requires an intervention for improvement
in order for the student to be successful in college level courses.
58

The mean scores, reported in percentiles, for concentration, information
processing, and motivation were reported at 58, 63, and 58, respectively. For
selecting main ideas, test strategy, and time management, the reported mean scores
were 54, 54, and 56, respectively.
In comparison to the national norms for the LASSI, provided in the LASSI
User’s Manual (2002), nationwide mean percentiles for concentration, information
processing and motivation were reported at 15, 50, and 50, respectively, for
equivalent total item mean per scale. For selecting main ideas, test strategy, and time
management, national norm mean percentiles were 55, 55, and, 55, respectively.
Overall, students in this study ranked higher than the national norm for the LASSI on
four of six measured scales, specifically, the concentration, information processing,
motivation, and time management scales.
Although participants in this study ranked higher in most scales when
compared to the national norm ranking, still, the data suggest that these nursing
students may be lacking in either the knowledge of or the use of these strategies
necessary for academic achievement in nursing courses. The mean scores indicate
that the students in this study need to make a priority of improving their use of these
important self-regulatory strategies that are supported in the literature as being
behaviors of academically successful students. Since the data revealed that the mean
scores were close to the 50
th
percentile, and this indicates a need for improvement in
these areas of self-regulation, this could possibly be an explanation as to why self-
regulation of learning did not offer a more robust significance in achievement,
59

beyond the effects of mathematics and English placement, self-efficacy, and goal
orientation.
In summary, the secondary research question asked if self-regulation of
learning further contributed to academic achievement above and beyond the effects
of self-efficacy and achievement goal orientation. The data revealed that self-
regulation did contribute a significant 6% of the variance in achievement, but that
only the Test Strategy Scale had a unique contribution of its’ own at the significant
level. Further, although the study participants’ percentile ranking was higher than the
national norm on four of six scales, the data also revealed that the mean scores
reported by this population of nursing student on each of the measured LASSI scales
require a priority of attention to improving the use of these strategies for success in
the nursing program.
The following chapter discusses the results of this study to offer support of
the findings in the literature, followed by implications for faculty and students.

60

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to identify the possible motivational factors
that would help explain the variations in nursing student achievement in an ADN
program. The three predominant motivational constructs identified in the literature as
being most predictive of academic achievement were academic self-efficacy,
achievement goal orientation, and self-regulation of learning. The primary research
question attempted to identify the percent of variance in achievement for ADN
students that could be explained by academic self-efficacy, achievement goal
orientation, and self-regulation of learning. The secondary research question
addressed whether self-regulation of learning further significantly contributed to
academic achievement, above and beyond the effects of goal orientation and self-
efficacy.
The significance of the findings in this study is addressed in the following
section with respect to each of the independent variables and the relationship to
academic achievement. Implications for nursing faculty and students are then
discussed, followed by limitations, the conclusion of this descriptive study, and
implications for future research.
Mathematics and English Placement Scores and Academic Achievement

Mathematics and English placement scores were identified as the variable
that measured cognitive ability at college entry level. The effect of this variable was
removed in order to identify the percent of variance in achievement that could be
61

explained by non-cognitive motivational indices. It is important to note that
mathematics placement was significant in predicting student achievement in this
nursing program. Mathematics placement scores accounted for a unique significant
variance in achievement for the students in this study. There exists extant literature
in the education and psychology of education domains supporting the importance of
mathematics ability and math self-efficacy beliefs as being sound predictors of
student course achievement. For some nursing programs, mathematics and English
placement scores, along with core science prerequisite GPA, may be a variable to
consider when conducting validation studies for the determination of program
admission policies.
Academic Self-Efficacy and Achievement

Students who were highly efficacious were found to be more academically
successful than those with lesser self-efficacy beliefs. A positive significant
relationship was found between academic self-efficacy and final course grades for
these ADN students. Many studies have shown that students with high self-efficacy
beliefs are more cognitively engaged in their coursework and tend to achieve at a
higher level academically than do those who feel less confident in their abilities.
Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2002) reported that students with high self-efficacy
beliefs have been found to achieve more highly than less efficacious students.
Further, students with strong senses of self-efficacy have been shown to invest
greater effort and persistence and demonstrate superior academic achievement than
those students who lack such confidence in their ability to be successful
62

academically (Bong, 2001). The findings in this study, with respect to academic self-
efficacy, are consistent with empirical findings and are supported in the current
scholarly literature.
A significant positive relationship was also found between self-efficacy and
the use of self-regulated learning strategies, specifically, motivation, concentration,
information processing, selecting main ideas, and test strategy use. Further, a
significant positive relationship was found between self-efficacy, the use of the six
self-regulated learning strategies, and final course grades. Students who reported
high self-efficacy beliefs and the use of these self-regulated strategies for learning
also earned higher course grades.
The link between self-efficacy and learning strategy use has been supported
in the research, for example, Lodewyk and Whinne (2005) and Zimmerman and
Martinez-Pons (1990), reported that students with a strong sense of self-efficacy
have the ability to utilize more effective tactics and strategies, and that a strong cue
for self-efficacy while working on a task is the degree to which the student is able to
implement a variety of strategies.
With respect to self-efficacy, students enrolled in this nursing program have
previously experienced many academic successes, since all general education
requirements for the Associate of Science Degree had to have been completed prior
to admission into the nursing program, in addition to the completion of three core
prerequisite science courses with a cumulative GPA of 2.65. In other words, nursing
students have developed confidence in their academic capability over time, and
63

continued success in coursework facilitates the strength of the students’ efficacy
beliefs.
The relationship between academic self-efficacy and increased student
achievement is consistent with current scholarly education and psychology of
education literature. The results of this study will add to the body of nursing research
that is currently sparse in this field, and hopefully will stimulate further research in
the area of academic self-efficacy and nursing student achievement.
Goal Orientation and Academic Achievement

The most central conceptualization of achievement goal orientation is that of
academic competence, specifically, the development of confidence as opposed to the
demonstration of competence in academic settings (Elliot et al., 1999; Middleton &
Midgley, 1997). Empirical evidence suggests that mastery oriented students learn for
the sake of learning and experience a great deal of satisfaction and competence in
doing so (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). The students who is more performance
approach goal oriented is often more interested in the external rewards associated
with academic achievement such as higher grades, or the appearance of competence
when compared to their peers (Elliott & Dweck, 1988; Harackiewicz et al., 2000).
Performance avoidance goal oriented students tend to focus their cognitions,
behaviors, and emotions toward the avoidance of seeming incompetent relative to
their peers, and tend to deteriorate academically when faced with difficult tasks since
continued effort might further prove lower ability to perform the academic task
(Barron & Harackiewicz, 2001).
64

In this study, the correlation matrix revealed a positive relationship between
mastery goal orientation and final course grades, and a negative relationship with
both performance approach and performance avoidance goal orientations and final
course grades. However, the significance of each correlation was not robust enough
for statistical significance. Additionally, both performance goal orientations were
highly correlated to each other. A possible explanation for this finding may be that
the students in this study did not sufficiently differentiate between approach and
avoidance goal perspectives, so consequently, the trichotomous model may not have
been the best fit for this population.
Ideally, a mastery approach to learning is desired since mastery oriented
students tend to be highly efficacious, employ deeper level processing of
information, choose more challenging tasks, use effective study strategies for
learning, exert more effort, and persist in the face of academic difficulties than do
students of performance approach and/or performance avoidance orientations.
However, some studies support that students employing performance approach goal
orientations have also been found to implement effective self-regulated learning
strategies and have been very successful in their academic endeavors (Harackiewicz
et al., 2000; Pintrich, 2000).
There exists growing support, in the empirical research, of a dual
achievement goal orientation perspective, specifically, the merit of the adoption of
mastery as well as performance approach orientations as a framework for
achievement-relevant behaviors that will yield positive educational outcomes in
65

some educational contexts (Baron & Harackiewicz, 2001; Elliot et al., 1999;
McGregor & Elliot, 2002; and, Pintrich, 2000). The multiple-goal model may be
more realistic in the context of an ADN nursing program, given the time constraints
of a rigorous four-semester nursing program. As a reminder, fourth semester nursing
students, for example, have, not only five hours of theory each week, but also work
two eight-hour clinical days in the hospital setting with an additional one and one-
half hours dedicated to clinical post-conferences and case studies each week. The
weekly schedule, as such, may not lend itself to a purely mastery learning
perspective, but rather more of a dual mastery/performance approach orientation to
learning that may facilitate keeping students focused on the weekly content at hand,
(performance approach) and allow for application of theory to practice throughout
the clinical experience (mastery).
The data relevant to achievement goal orientation in this study revealed that
this variable did not contribute significantly in explaining the variance in
achievement for nursing students, and that no one goal perspective was emphasized
by this group. This finding is not supported in the literature, consequently, further
investigation to develop this important central concept for academic competence is
warranted, and methods for fostering mastery, if not, mastery and performance
approach goal orientation need to be implemented. No empirical nursing research
was found relevant to achievement goal orientation, so the results of this study
further emphasize the need for scientific nursing investigation in this area.
66

Self-Regulation of Learning and Academic Achievement

Self-regulation of learning refers to the ability of having influence over ones’
behavior with a purpose of helping oneself achieve desirable academic outcomes
(Tuckman, 2002). The self-regulated learner demonstrates the ability to assess
academic priorities, finish academic projects, monitor their progress, and manage
personal and environmental distractions (Dembo & Eaton, 2000; McCann & Garcia,
1999; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002; and, Winne & Jamieson-Noel, 2002). Further, self-
regulated students have the ability to set long- and short-term goals for studying and
possess a variety of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies that will help
themselves learn, remember, and understand course material (Dembo, 2004; Pintrich
& De Groot, 1990; and, Purdie et al., 1996). There exists extensive empirical
research supporting the self-regulation of learning and strategy use as being a
significant predictor of academic achievement.
In this study, self-regulation of learning was significantly correlated to
academic achievement. The variable was measured through the use of the on-line
LASSI instrument, one that has been described as being both diagnostic and
prescriptive in the identification of students’ strengths and/or weaknesses in the
knowledge and use of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies. Of these six
scales, concentration, information processing, motivation, selecting main ideas, test
strategy, and time management, only the Test Strategy Scale revealed a unique
contribution in explaining academic achievement. This finding is not consistent with
results from the literature.
67

Education and psychology of education literature indicate in many studies
that self-regulation of learning and the use of cognitive as well as metacognitive
strategies are highly predictive of academic achievement. In this study, the data
revealed that the students scored just above the 50
th
percentile (means ranging from
54 to 63), indicating that either these self-regulatory strategies are not being utilized,
the students do not have knowledge of the learning strategies, or they may not feel
confident in their abilities to implement these strategies in their nursing courses.
Recall that nursing program admission policies, in order to be in compliance
with the guidelines set forth by the Chancellor’s Office, were amended so that
practices that could be considered potentially discriminatory, such as giving points
for a higher GPA, were no longer to be in place. At that time, a concern was voiced
regarding the potential for students who are now applying to nursing programs, and
who have met at least minimum GPA requirements, to be at high risk for academic
difficulties or to be lacking in the study strategies necessary for academic success in
a rigorous nursing program. This could be a possible explanation for the statistical
results that revealed a mean score on the self-regulatory strategies falling in the near
50
th
percentile category, and the fact that only the Test Strategy Scale offered a
unique and significant contribution to the variance in final course grades. A point of
importance, with respect to students’ test taking strategies, is that most multiple-
choice questions that comprise the examinations in this program are written at the
level of synthesis and application. The examinations are patterned after the NCLEX-
RN certification questions that assess the students’ ability to apply concepts learned
68

in theory to a clinical situation. Consequently, on behalf of the students who test well
in this program, it is safe to assume that they have learned the material sufficiently
enough to be able to synthesize the knowledge gain in theory and apply it to the
clinical scenarios on which they are tested.
In looking at the self-regulation of learning factor as a whole, however,
although the students placed higher on four of six scales when compared to the
national norms for the LASSI, the findings in this study indicated that students must
make a priority of improving their knowledge and use of a variety of learning tools
that will assist them to engage in coursework more effectively; to learn, remember,
and understand course material in an effort to make learning more meaningful in
order to achieve their academic goals. To this end, these findings have important
implications for the development and implementation of methods that will help
students become more self-regulated.
In summary, the previous section provided a discussion of the results of both
the correlational and hierarchical regression analyses computed for this study. A
positive relationship was found between self-efficacy and final course grades.
Students who reported high self-efficacy beliefs also earned higher course grades. A
positive relationship was also found between self-efficacy and mastery and
performance approach goal orientations, although the relationship with performance
approach goal orientation was not robust enough to be statistically significant. An
inverse relationship was found between self-efficacy and performance avoidance
goal orientation. This means that students who expressed high self-efficacy also
69

adopted mastery and performance approach goal orientation, but did not endorse
performance avoidance goal perspectives. Self-efficacy was also found to be
positively correlated to the use of all six self-regulated strategies measured in this
study, and significantly positively correlated to five of the six strategies. The data
revealed, additionally, that a positive relationship was found between self-efficacy,
mastery and performance approach goal orientations, self-regulation of learning, and
higher final course grades.
The hierarchical regression analysis revealed, once the effect of mathematics
and English placement level was removed, that academic self-efficacy contributed to
a significant 8.9% of the variance in achievement for nursing students. Secondly,
when achievement goal orientation was entered into the regression, although
performance approach goal orientation was significant in predicting final course
grades, the amount of variance it explained was not significant. In this study,
achievement goal orientation did not contribute significantly in explaining the
variations in student achievement, beyond the effects of mathematics and English
placement and academic self-efficacy. Finally, when the six self-regulation of
learning strategies were entered into the regression analysis, results indicated that
self-regulation of learning contributed to a significant 6% of the variance in
achievement, above and beyond the effects of mathematics and English placement,
academic self-efficacy, and achievement goal orientation. Within this variable,
however, only the Test Strategy Scale offered a unique and significant contribution
to predicting final course grades. Together, academic self-efficacy and self-
70

regulation of learning accounted for a significant approximately 15% of the variance
in achievement for ADN students.
The following section addresses implications for nursing faculty and students
that, based on the results found in this study, will support and promote academic
self-efficacy, achievement goal orientation, and self-regulation of learning, as each
relates to academic achievement in an ADN program.
Strategies for Promoting Academic Self-Efficacy

It is imperative for nursing faculty and students to become proactive with
respect to developing self-efficacy beliefs. The results of this study indicated that
academic self-efficacy was a significant predictor of academic achievement. Prior to
entering their nursing program, these students have experienced many academic
successes through the completion of all general education requirements in addition to
three core science prerequisites. Continued academic success enhances the students’
sense of accomplishment, promotes deeper engagement in continuing coursework,
and strengthens their individual efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1994; Van Lanen, Lockie,
& McGannon, 2000).
Recall that students’ sense of academic self-efficacy can be developed
through the influences of mastery and vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and
positive mood. Banduras’ (1994) model for sources of fostering positive self-efficacy
will be used as a framework to describe interventions that will be useful for faculty
and students in the promotion of academic self-efficacy.
71

Mastery Experiences
Mastery experience implies, not only that a student has been successful in their
academic endeavors, but also that the student has had to invest sufficient time and
effort into mastering the activity, has had opportunities to practice the activity, and
has persevered when faced with challenging tasks. Nursing program curriculum is
designed in a manner that evolves from simple to complex theoretical concepts. So,
students who cognitively engage in their coursework early and build on their
foundation of nursing theory will be more efficacious throughout the program as
course content becomes more complex; they will be sufficiently challenged rather
than overwhelmed.
For example, the study of diabetes and the basic physiology involved with
this disease process begins in the first semester. In the second semester, students
apply basic concepts to the care of newly diagnosed pediatric patients with diabetes,
building on their foundation of understanding the disease process by teaching the
child and family about diabetes and carrying out the nursing interventions required
for the care of this patient. Third semester nursing students focus on the care of the
adult surgical patient, many of whom present, not only with a condition requiring
surgical intervention, but also with a history of diabetes. The implications for the
diabetic surgical patient requires the student not only have a basic understanding of
the disease process, but also be able to apply knowledge of the complications for the
diabetic surgical patient that may include, for example, impaired blood glucose
control after having nothing to eat or drink for several hours, prolonged healing of
72

the surgical incision, or an increased risk for infection. By the fourth semester, after a
broader foundation of nursing theory has been mastered, the more experienced
nursing students are then able to apply the simple concepts of diabetes to the more
complex pathophysioloigal condition that may be experienced, for example, in the
high-risk patient with gestational diabetes, and the subsequent implications for the
now high-risk neonate.
This example has attempted to explain the progression of nursing curriculum
so that theoretical concepts evolve from simple to complex, and how the students’
opportunity to experience challenging academic tasks, to practice and exert effort
and perseverance in the face of difficulties and be successful, influences their
confidence in their ability to master the task, and enhances strong academic self-
efficacy beliefs. The implication for faculty is to provide appropriate clinical
experiences necessary for learning so the student will be able to practice and be
successful in the academic task through these mastery experiences.
Vicarious Experiences
According to Bandura, (1994), vicarious experiences that promote self-
efficacious beliefs are provided by social models. Nursing faculty and nurses
practicing in the clinical facilities serve as models for nursing students. For example,
faculty may first demonstrate a head-to-toe physical assessment for the students in
the nursing learning laboratory on a simulated mannequin. Next, faculty may
demonstrate the same physical assessment on a volunteer student. In the hospital
setting, faculty and nurses continue to demonstrate assessments to students with the
73

patients, and as the students observe and learn from these vicarious experiences, they
begin to develop confidence in their ability to be successful in these learning
activities, which leads to increased self-efficacy beliefs for this task.
A very important concept about modeling is that students identify more with
a model who is very similar to them. If the student sees the model as being very
similar, their self-efficacy beliefs will be more greatly influenced by the behaviors
they observe with which they can identify. Methods to provide vicarious experiences
between students and similar models may involve the faculty assigning first and
fourth semester nursing students in the same clinical area, placing these same novice
and experienced students together with the same patient, or by assigning students in
clinical areas where new nurse graduates are working.
Placing novice and experienced nursing students in the same clinical area and
assigning the two students with the same patient strengthens self-efficacy in a
reciprocal manner. For example, first semester nursing students have the opportunity
to observe and model the behaviors and competencies of the fourth semester
students, the very students whose successes and clinical competencies to which they
aspire. Reciprocally, the experienced students can realize their own successes and the
progress they have made throughout the program, and are able to model and
demonstrate effective clinical competence in the management of patient care for the
more inexperienced students, and receive a great deal of satisfaction in doing so.
Efficacy beliefs are strengthened when a student experiences continued academic
74

success that has been acquired through persistence and effort, given the opportunities
to practice learning.
In most ADN programs, senior nursing students are assigned clinical
rotations in adult, pediatric, and neonatal critical care units of the area hospitals.
Here, in addition to being assigned to one critical patient, students also have the
opportunity to observe new nurse graduates working closely with their assigned
nurse preceptors caring for acutely ill patients. Throughout a seven-week critical care
rotation, for example, students observe the new graduate becoming increasingly
independent of the preceptor, demonstrating the ability to implement effective
competencies and strategies necessary for safe nursing care of the high acuity
patient. In this manner, efficacy beliefs are enhanced because the fourth semester
student identifies closely with the new nurse graduate, and can visualize themselves
in the near future as possessing similar capabilities to effectively master the
requirements of critical patient care.
Social/Verbal Persuasion
Students’ self-efficacy beliefs can also be enhanced through the verbal
persuasion of others. Although verbal persuasion has been described as a weaker
source of promoting efficacy (Bandura, 1994; Pajares, 1996) compared to mastery
and vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion in the form of feedback from faculty to
student can be beneficial in fostering efficacy as long as it is constructive and
supportive.
75

Nursing faculty need to evaluate student performance in the clinical setting,
for example, on an ongoing basis. It is important to evaluate clinical performance
frequently in order for the student either to be supported and encouraged with their
progress or to be redirected to expend more time, effort, and persistence to
accomplish the academic task more successfully. Nursing faculty also offer feedback
in the form of a summative evaluation at the end of each clinical rotation,
approximately two to three times each semester. In this format, it is important for the
faculty to carefully and accurately evaluate the students’ performance.
Positive feedback that is meaningful and truthful tends to stimulate more
engagement in the academic activities leading to deeper commitment and increased
self-efficacy for the coursework. Feedback that is undeserved or untruthful will only
serve to undermine motivation, weaken self-efficacy, and foster a negative attitude in
the student. In this case, the faculty needs to help redirect the students’ motivational
energies, instill belief in their capabilities, assure the student knows that the
academic requirements are attainable, and then, create the experiences so that the
student can be successful.
Mood
It has been stated in the literature that positive mood and other physiological
states, such as anxiety and stress, influence a persons’ judgment of efficacy beliefs
(Bandura, 1994; Pajares, 1996; and, Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). While positive mood
enhances students’ self-efficacy, negative mood can lessen self-efficacy for the
academic task. Bandura (1994) suggests that diminishing negative mood and the
76

associated stress reactions that accompany it can increase efficacy beliefs. Students’
negative emotions further diminish their perceptions of ability and lead to more
stress and anxiety, consequently, interfering with task engagement and resulting in
decreased self-efficacy. Negative mood has also been reported in the literature as
interfering with the students’ academic performance and deep processing of
information (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002) that further perpetuates lessened efficacy
beliefs in the academic setting.
Some anxiety is to be expected by nursing students, especially during their
first clinical experiences with patients. The student, in uniform, is clearly identifiable
as a “student nurse”, and there are certain expectations of the student by the patient,
expectations that can be seriously intimidating and challenging to the students’ sense
of capability in their new role in this setting. The implication for faculty is to provide
the least threatening experiences first, so students can gain confidence in their ability
to perform these types of tasks. Examples might be first, simply changing bed linen,
then progress to obtaining vital signs from a cooperative patient, then progress to
assisting with a bath, then performing a physical assessment with the assistance of
the nursing clinical instructor. This method of providing learning experiences that
will not immobilize a nursing student, but rather support and encourage success will
promote positive mood and emotion and result in increased self-efficacy beliefs.
In summary, this section has illustrated some important implications for
faculty and nursing students to realize the importance of the relationship between
high self-efficacy beliefs and academic achievement. Methods for fostering
77

increased self-efficacy include the provision of mastery learning experiences in
which students will invest time, effort, and persistence even in the face of
difficulties, to succeed in their academic tasks, and be provided with the appropriate
learning experiences to allow this to happen. Students’ efficacy beliefs will be
promoted through the vicarious experiences they gain by having competent nurses
whose clinical behaviors they can model and with whom they can identify as being
capable of demonstrating similar competencies. Students and faculty will also
facilitate increased efficacy through positive feedback that is meaningful and
truthful, because feedback that is undeserved only weakens efficacy beliefs. Finally,
the promotion of positive mood will be supported by creative learning experiences
that will enhance students’ confidence in their abilities to be successful in their
nursing program.
Strategies for Promoting Achievement Goal Orientation

The most central conceptualization of achievement goal orientation is that of
academic competence, specifically, the development of competence versus the
demonstration of competence in the academic setting (Elliot et al., 1999; Middleton
& Midgley, 1997). With respect to achievement goal orientation, the focus for
motivation is the students’ perceived purpose for engaging in the academic task, and
it describes the manner in which students’ approach learning.
There exists extant literature supporting a trichotomous model of goal
orientation that describes the achievement of competence as either mastery,
performance approach, or performance avoidance goal orientations, each with very
78

specific characteristics for explaining the manner in which students’ learn. The
trichotomous model was used in this study as one motivational factor that could help
explain the variations in nursing student achievement.
Mastery goal orientation describes a student whose focus is on the
development of skill and competence relative to the academic task. Mastery students
learn for the sake of learning, adopt challenge-seeking behaviors that sustain effort
and improve performance, and experience a great sense of satisfaction and
competence in doing so (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002).
Performance approach goal orientation describes a student who is focused on
the external rewards that come with academic achievement, such as grades and
favorable judgments, and strive for the appearance of competence relative to their
peers, often by gauging their success in academic tasks by outperforming their
classmates.
Students who endorse a performance avoidance goal orientation to learning
engage in activities aimed at avoiding the demonstration of incompetence relative to
their peers and often lack persistence and effort when faced with academic
difficulties resulting in disorganized study, increased anxiety, and deficient academic
performance on examinations (McGregor & Elliot, 2002). These students tend to
adopt more surface-level processing of information and lack the engagement in
coursework necessary for successful achievement in their academic endeavors.
Mastery and performance approach goal perspectives are both considered
approach orientations, and there does exist in the literature growing support of the
79

merit of adopting a dual achievement goal orientation. Mastery and performance
approach goal orientations as a framework for achievement-relevant behaviors have
been found to yield positive educational outcomes in some academic contexts
(Barron & Harackiewicz, 2001; McGregor & Elliot, 2002; and, Pintrich, 2000).
A positive correlation was found to exist between mastery goal orientation
and final course grades, and a negative relationship was found between performance
approach and performance avoidance goal orientations and final course grades.
Additionally, performance approach goal orientation was significantly correlated to
performance avoidance goal perspectives.
This finding has implications for faculty to promote and support a learning
environment that is conducive to fostering mastery orientation perspectives for
learning. Additionally, the merit of a dual mastery/performance approach orientation
must be considered since many studies in the literature have found that students who
endorse performance approach goals are highly motivated to perform well and have
invested significant effort to do whatever it takes to earn a good grade (Harackiewicz
et al., 1997). This implies that the performance-oriented student has sustained
sufficient commitment to deeply process course material and stay focused in order to
achieve successful outcomes.
One method to deter competition among students and to provide an
atmosphere that emphasizes individual progress rather than competence based on
peer comparisons is to refrain from posting results of students’ examinations. At
present, students do sign consent giving instructors permission to post raw scores,
80

identifiable only by the last four digits of the college issued student identification
number. In doing so, though, students are not only able to view their own individual
test results, but are also able to determine where they stand relative to the
performance of the rest of the class. This practice could be perceived as being
supportive of characteristics of the performance approach and avoidance goal
perspectives that focus on academic achievement that is measured by a normative
standard, rather than by individual progress, and allows the student to judge progress
by whether or not they have out-performed their classmates.
To remedy this potential problem source, most nursing examinations are
being administered using the web-based computer program that is provided by the
college for faculty use. Semesters 2 and 3 in this nursing program have already
implemented the web-based testing format and receive very favorable evaluations,
both from faculty and students. For example, Nursing 3 students will take their
examination in the ninety-station computer room that is designated for nursing
students. Once the examination is finished, the students are excused while the faculty
review the item analysis for the biserial of each question and the exam for sufficient
reliability; at least .70 reliability being desired using the Kuder-Richardson 20
statistical program. Any necessary adjustments can be made at this time, for
example, a miss-keyed response, and then the students return and are able to view
only their individual exam results. In doing so, students’ attention is focused solely
on their own achievement and not that of their classmates.
81

An additional feature of this type of testing is that exam review is conducted
immediately upon students’ return to their computer stations, usually within forty-
five minutes of completing the exam. An advantage to immediate feedback and
discussion of incorrect responses is that student’s are able understand the rationale
behind the correct response while the information is fresh in their minds, and make
necessary adjustments in their understanding of course material. The mastery-
oriented student will see this as an opportunity to further investigate the content to
ensure deeper understanding of the concepts. Performance approach students may be
motivated to study harder to improve the grade they received. Lastly, the student
who has a performance avoidance approach to learning who performed poorly on the
examination often may internalize failure as being attributed to ability rather than
effort, and may deteriorate when faced with this type of achievement difficulty.
Students who required additional assistance after the examination are
encouraged to first review their notes, formulate questions, and then see the
instructor whose content was most challenging for them. Mastery and performance
approach students often take advantage of seeking assistance in an effort to clarify
and understand the missed material, however, as is characteristic of avoidance
behaviors, the student needing most help will probably not seek it in an effort to
avoid looking less capable compared to their peers. In this case, many supportive
venues are available and highly recommended by faculty, including a designated
student instructional assistant, the nursing library, the computer lab equipped with
82

nursing computer assisted instructional aides (CAI’s), a simulated mannequin lab, or
individual private or small group instruction with the appropriate faculty.
To this end, an atmosphere supportive of individual student progress is
favored, as opposed to social comparisons, and will hopefully promote a mastery
and/or dual mastery and performance approach achievement goal orientation
perspective from students and faculty in this nursing program.
Strategies for Promoting Self-Regulation of Learning

Students who are self-regulated take responsibility for their learning. They
are able to set goals, assess priorities, monitor their progress, and implement a
number of learning strategies that will assist in the achievement of their academic
endeavors (Winne & Jamieson-Noel, 2002). Self-regulation of learning was
positively correlated to academic achievement. The fact that more LASSI scales
were not significant was disappointing, but the implications, based on the mean
scores of each of these scales (54th – 63
rd
percentiles) is valuable information that
warrants immediate action on the part of faculty and nursing students.
Over the past five years, a faculty position has been designated as the
Nursing Education Remediation Specialist (NERS). Historically, students who were
placed on academic probation for cumulative grades less than 75% midterm were
required to meet with the NERS to identify the learning difficulty, develop a new
study plan that included strategies to correct any deficiencies that were discovered,
and then report back to the NERS after subsequent examinations, with the goal of
improved course achievement. Although most students reported that this intervention
83

was helpful, the timing at midterm may not have been ideal to fully realize the
impact of the action taken.
Within the past academic year, faculty have become more proactive with
respect to identifying and intervening with students’ who demonstrate academic
difficulties. For example, rather than waiting until midterm when two of four
examinations have been taken, the fourth semester faculty placed all students who
earned less than 75% on the first exam on a contract for student success.
Responsibility for improvement was place on the student, specifically, student’s
were required to meet with one of four designated Nursing 4 faculty each week
prepared with a calendar illustrating time spent on studying or any other type of
preparative activities for the typical school week, lecture notes, chapter outlines from
required textbook reading, any other study aides the student uses, and specific
questions about lecture content that was particularly challenging for them.
Information gleaned in these meetings from the materials students brought
forth was very enlightening, and ranged from PowerPoint handouts that were
virtually void of any additional notes after the lecture/discussion, evidence that the
required textbook had not been read, to chapter outlines that were so lengthy it
appeared the student had basically rewritten the chapter word for word. Based on the
observations of the students’ use of self-regulating strategies for learning, or lack
thereof, both faculty and student were able to develop an individualized plan for
improvement that focused on the particular needs of each student. The student,
however, was held accountable for implementing the new study plan, which is
84

consistent with the literature that supports the self-regulated learner as one who is
actively involved in the learning process and has control over their actions, thoughts,
behaviors, and cognitions.
Most students in this group continued to meet with their designated faculty
member each week, as was required in the contract for student success, until their
grades improved. Of the 28 students (of a class of 77) who earned less than 75% on
the first examination, 24 progressed successfully to complete the semester and
graduate with their class. The remaining four students will be repeating the semester.
This action on the part of faculty and students lends support to the evidence found in
scholarly literature that links the ability to organize and plan for studying, to have
knowledge of and implement a number of study strategies, and to monitor ones’
progress, to improved academic achievement (Dembo, 2004; Schunk, 2004; and,
Weinstein & Palmer, 2002).
Further evidence of nursing faculty proactively intervening for the support of
the development of a more self-regulated student is twofold. First, recall the title of
Nursing Education Remediation Specialist, one who was designated to meet with
students on probation midterm. In an effort to be supportive of student success,
rather than seeming punitive, the faculty position title has been changed to Student
Outcomes Specialist (SOS). Given this more positive perspective for encouraging
and redirecting student behaviors and cognitions for more effective study habits, the
goal is to have students become more actively engaged, committed, and accountable
85

for their success in nursing courses, without the negative undertones that “probation”
and “remediation” may suggest.
Secondly, the SOS faculty member has scheduled Study Skills Workshops
for nursing students prior to the commencement of each semester, during the summer
and winter intersessions, in addition to several workshops that previously had been
offered throughout the semester. Offering study skills workshops before the semester
begins gives the student opportunity to gain knowledge of numerous cognitive and
metacognitive strategies, the use of which is fully supported in the literature as being
highly predictive of increased academic achievement, and characteristic of the self-
regulated learner. Furthermore, knowledge of a variety of study strategies prior to the
beginning of the term allows the student to practice implementing the activities to
decide which are more beneficial, depending on the context within which each will
be used. Additionally, having time to practice different strategies helps to develop
the students’ efficacy for using self-regulatory study strategies, a concept that has
been supported in the literature as being predictive of increased cognitive
engagement and improved academic outcomes (Silver, Smith, Jr., & Greene, 2001).
At the end of the semester, students receive a copy of the first few weeks of
the course syllabus for the semester into which they will be enrolling. For example,
at the end of the third semester, Nursing 4 faculty meet with Nursing 3 students to
introduce themselves, give a brief overview of the expectations for the coming
semester, and issue the first few weeks worth of reading and required CAI’s in the
syllabus, with a goal of encouraging the students to stay engaged in their coursework
86

over the break. Having the beginning assignments in hand as advanced organizers,
coupled with workshops before the semester begins, facilitates the early
implementation of a variety of strategies for learning, and helps the student make
judgments about which study tactics will be most useful for course material and for
achieving their academic goals (Hadwin, et al., 2001).
The Study Skills Workshop, offered before the semester begins, will outline
the major components of self-regulation of learning (Dembo, 2004), and emphasize
the importance of the students’ active involvement in taking responsibility and
accountability for their own learning. Since the self-regulated learner is able to
manage personal and environmental distractions, methods for structuring a quiet
study environment, free of distractions and interruptions, is necessary. Control of the
social environment will be addressed to determine the ability of the student to decide
whether studying alone or with a small group of students would be more beneficial.
Effective time management, another major component of self-regulation,
requires that the student be able to apply time management principles to academic
settings (Dembo, 2004; Weinstein & Palmer, 2002). Effective use of time
management strategies requires that students schedule coursework on a regular basis,
every day, and adhere to the schedule just as faithfully and rigorously as if they were
expected to be in clinical or in the classroom. The use of effective time management
minimizes the chance of procrastination, and provides an opportunity for the student
to monitor the timeframe that has been allotted for the completion of academic tasks.
87

Knowledge of specific cognitive and metacognitive strategies needs to be
provided to the student with the overall goal of improving self-regulatory skills
necessary for academic achievement. Examples of cognitive learning strategies
implemented by the self-regulated learner include such activities as rehearsal, the use
of note-cards, underlining texts, and note-taking. Elaboration requires the student be
able to connect and integrate previously learned material to new material. Recall that
nursing curriculum evolves from simple to complex theoretical concepts, and
students are expected to build on their foundation of nursing knowledge as they
progress throughout the program both in theory and the application of theory in the
clinical setting. Techniques to facilitate elaboration of course material include the
ability to select the main ideas from textbook chapters, underline and summarize
textbook readings, and the ability to answer questions about the new material, such
as those that are often at the end of textbook chapters.
Metacognitive learning strategies to be included in the Study Skills
Workshop are strategies that will help the student plan and monitor their progress.
Activities such as formulating and answering questions, keeping records of progress,
paraphrasing, checking for consistencies, and self-testing are all metacognitive
strategies of the self-regulated learner that are supported in the literature as being key
to student academic success. By self-testing and checking for consistencies, the
student is able to discern what is known from what is not known (Dembo, 2004), and
make the necessary adjustments to studying until the concepts are fully understood.
88

Finally, test-taking strategies will be offered to the students in the workshop
to help them be successful in correctly selecting responses to test items that are
aimed at measuring synthesis and application of theoretical concepts. Students who
are successful on examinations written at this level have been able to invest
sufficient time, effort, and persistence in learning course material that requires deep
processing of information with the ability to bridge what is known with what is being
learned (Dembo, 2004). The results of this study indicated that the Test Strategy
Scale offered a significant unique contribution in explaining the variations in nursing
student achievement. Most examination questions, patterned after those found on the
NCLEX-RN, are written at the application level, so students who test well in this
program have had to implement deep processing strategies in order to learn and
apply the information, and use the effective test taking strategies characteristic of the
self-regulated learner.
Faculty in this program have further contributed to the importance of the
promotion and development of a self-regulated learner by attending professional
staff development workshops aimed at educating the faculty about the characteristics
of the academically self-regulated learner, and how to provide support and direction
to the students who can benefit from such interventions.
Finally, the nursing department has been supported, by college and nursing
administration, to write and apply for State and Federal grants to receive addition
funding to increase student enrollment to help reduce the nursing shortage, more
faculty positions, and to purchase innovative learning resources for the facilitation of
89

student learning. One ninety-station computer lab, designated for nursing students, is
equipped with state-of-the-art computers with approximately 300 CAI’s and
interactive computer programs downloaded. An additional 25-station computer lab is
also designated for nursing students in a separate upstairs location and can be used
for small study group meetings. Both labs are staffed by nursing faculty and are open
Monday through Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM, and until 9:00 PM on two
evenings each week.
With grant funding, the department also purchased five simulated
computerized mannequins that are capable of creating actual physiologic states.
Clinical scenarios are preprogrammed, and with the use of a helium tank and a
creative audio system, the mannequin breathes (chest rises and falls), has audible and
palpable pulses, has a blood pressure, can receive fluids after the student inserts an
IV, and, consequently, produces simulated urine output once the student has
successfully inserted a catheter. The scenarios can be altered by the faculty if
students implement the wrong nursing intervention, for example, if the student opts
to administer an IV medication to support a falling blood pressure rather than the
appropriate administration of IV fluid and blood products, the patient will continue
to deteriorate to the point of cardiopulmonary arrest. The use of the simulated
mannequins has stimulated increased student engagement in learning by providing
another method for students to practice the application of concepts learned in theory
to the simulated clinical setting.
90

In summation, the previous section has addressed the implications for faculty
and students for the promotion of academic self-efficacy, achievement goal
orientation, and academic self-regulation of learning as each pertains to academic
achievement for nursing students.
Methods for promoting academic self-efficacy have been presented that
include implications for faculty to provide appropriate learning experiences,
particularly in the clinical setting, that will allow students the opportunity to practice
and master academic skills so that they may be successful. The literature supports the
idea that continued academic successes enhance students’ efficacy beliefs. Students
may also strengthen self-efficacy through the vicarious experiences gained by social
models; models with whom students can identify and whose skill and competencies
they can aspire. Positive, constructive feedback that is truthful and meaningful, in the
form of ongoing and summative evaluations, persuades the student to mobilize
greater efforts to master academic tasks, thus increasing efficacy beliefs. Finally, a
positive mood can promote academic self-efficacy by diminishing the negative
physiologic states associated with stress and anxiety that tend to undermine
motivation and achievement.
In this study, achievement goal orientation was not a significant factor in
predicting final course grades. Many studies support the adoption of mastery, if not
mastery and performance approach goal orientations as being predictive of academic
achievement and those students who implement both perspectives in some contexts
can be very successful. Methods to promote the mastery goal perspective can be
91

supported by faculty emphasizing the measure of competence as one that is focused
on individual student progress, rather than on comparisons between students.
Through the use of web-based testing programs, students will only be able to view
their own examination results, and have the opportunity for immediate feedback in
the form of exam review, so misinformation can be relearned after the understanding
of the correct rationales has been gained.
The promotion of the self-regulated learner has become a priority for the
faculty in this program. Through the implementation of Study Skills Workshops that
are offered before the semester begins, students are given the opportunity to learn
and practice a variety of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies, then decide
which study tactics are most beneficial in helping them learn and remember course
material. Early recognition and intervention, from both faculty and student, for those
students who demonstrate academic difficulties after the first examination, are aimed
at helping the student recognize deficiencies early, make necessary changes in their
way of learning, take responsibility for the implementation of the new study plan,
and be a more self-regulated successful student. Lastly, innovative learning
resources, including CAI’s, interactive computer programs, and simulated
mannequins, have been provided to allow the student the opportunity to practice the
application of theoretical concepts, in a non-threatening atmosphere.
The cumulative implications that academic self-efficacy, achievement goal
orientation, and self-regulation of learning are highly predictive of increased student
achievement have been extensively supported in the scholarly literature. The faculty
92

and students in this program have taken a proactive stance in the support of these
motivational factors, with the goal of graduating safe, competent nursing students to
help fill the vacancies in RN positions in the workplace.
The following section addresses limitations to the study, followed by the
conclusion, and recommendations for future research.
Limitations to the Study

As often is the case in self-report student surveys, students often answer the
items as they imagine the investigator would expect. In so doing, the responses may
not accurately illustrate the students’ true evaluation of how the survey items pertain
to them.
The first limitation to the study is the fact that only one of the six self-
regulation of learning scales contributed a unique significance in explaining the
variance in nursing student achievement. Additionally, since the LASSI survey was
completed after the paper and pencil sections, an order effects phenomenon may
have influenced the results of the LASSI survey, suggesting that students may have
tired of answering so many survey items. However, the unique significance of only
one LASSI scale, the Test Strategy Scale, was disappointing and problematic.
A second limitation to the study was that no one perceived goal emphasis
was significant. Since no nursing literature was found that investigated achievement
goal orientation in the nursing student population, there exists no similar research
that could support or counter the results found in this study. This area requires
further investigation.
93

Conclusion

Never before has this nation faced such a critical shortage of registered
nurses. Investment of State and Federal grant funding into evening and weekend or
off-campus satellite programs to accommodate increased student enrollment are a
few of the strategies implemented by nursing schools that will help resolve the
nursing shortage. However, simply increasing enrollment with each incoming class
is not the answer. Nursing faculty and Schools of Nursing are accountable, not only
to the profession of nursing, but more so, to the communities whose members are
consumers of healthcare services; people who are entitled to quality, expert, and
professional nursing care.
With this thought in mind, nursing faculty have been challenged to increase
the number of incoming nursing students without compromising the quality of their
programs’ graduates. A potential problem was noted that addressed the possibility
that students now being admitted to ADN programs who meet minimum admission
requirements may be at risk for academic difficulties, may be lacking in the study
strategies necessary for the successful completion of a rigorous nursing program, and
be in need of additional interventional remediation in order to increase academic
achievement. Consequently, this study was conducted to examine the degree to
which academic self-efficacy, achievement goal orientation, and academic self-
regulation could explain nursing student achievement. These three motivational
factors have been supported in the literature as being highly predictive of academic
achievement.
94

Academic self-efficacy and self-regulation of learning emerged as reliable
predictors of nursing student achievement. Therefore it is very important for all
nursing faculty to provide creative learning experiences that will support and
enhance student’s sense of self-efficacy. Developing nursing curriculum that evolves
from simple to complex theoretical concepts concomitant with the opportunity to
practice and master clinical skills and competencies fosters students’ self-efficacy
beliefs as they become more engaged in the academic tasks and can realize their
progress.
Providing students with the knowledge about many study strategies assists
the student in knowing how to study in nursing courses that are geared for the
application of theory to the clinical setting. Through the acquisition of a variety of
instructional media, such as CAI’s, interactive learning programs, and the simulated
mannequins, in addition to the traditional resources, students can realize that the
faculty make a priority of addressing students’ learning needs. Also, the expectation
that student success is a collaborative effort helps to facilitate the development of a
self-regulated learner who takes responsibility for his or her own learning.
Since all nursing programs are currently impacted with growing numbers of
students in the classrooms, the methods used in this study should be applied to other
nursing programs as well to help identify areas of student needs for each individual
program. Every population of nursing student has particular unique characteristics,
and being able to identify those that promote as well as inhibit academic
95

achievement will help faculty in the development of interventional strategies with a
goal of maximizing student success.
One of the more significant findings that emerged in this study was that of
the gap in nursing literature that was discovered with respect to nursing student
achievement throughout their nursing programs. Most nursing research,
understandably, is clinically oriented since nursing is a practice profession. However,
all nurses have been students, and so few studies were found that examined purely
motivational constructs that could help explain achievement in nursing programs. It
is hoped, therefore, that this study will stimulate further interest in understanding the
motivation and psychology of nursing student education, and that nurse educators
will find it equally important to identify the factors that lead to their students’
academic achievement.
In summation, this study has identified motivational factors that are highly
characteristic of successful nursing students. In this time of a serious nursing
shortage, simply increasing enrollment to fill the nursing positions is not the
solution. Nursing faculty are held accountable to the consumers of healthcare
services to maintain the quality of nursing programs, and to prepare graduates
capable of providing expert and professional nursing care. Faculty and nursing
students in this program support maintaining quality nursing education through the
promotion of increasing students’ self-efficacy beliefs, a perspective on competence
that is based on individual student achievement, and the education of faculty and
96

students on strategies for learning that will develop each student as a self-regulated
learner.
Suggestions for Future Research

It is recommended that future nursing research be conducted in three areas.
First, since no significant goal orientation perspective was emphasized in this study,
and no studies were found in the nursing literature with respect to achievement goal
orientation, this is an important area that needs investigation. A study assessing
students’ perceptions of their classroom and possibly of the nursing program as a
whole for goal orientation would be very beneficial in developing this area of
research.
Secondly, further investigation is necessary to assure that faculty and students
are sufficiently educated in the behaviors and cognitions of self-regulated learners.
Research with faculty as the participants on the knowledge and use of self-regulated
learning strategies could prove very interesting.
Finally, possible research that would include a different theoretical
perspective, such as that offered by expectancy-value theory, as one of the variables,
instead of achievement goal orientation, may prove to be more significant a predictor
of nursing student achievement.

97

REFERENCES

Andrew, S., & Vialle, W. (1998). Nursing students' self-efficacy, self-regulated
learning and academic performance in science. Retrieved March 7, 2005,
from http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/and98319.htm
Azevedo, R. & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning
facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational
Psychology, 96(3), 523-535.
Babenko-Mould, Y., Andrusyszyn, M., & Goldenberg, D. (2004). Effects of
computer-based clinical conferencing on nursing students' self-efficacy.
Journal of Nursing Education, 43(4), 149-155.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-Efficacy. Retrieved May 28, 2004, from
http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/BanEncy.html
Bandura, A. & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 87-99.
Barron, K. E. & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2001). Achievement goals and optimal
motivation: Testing multiple goal models. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 80,(5), 706-722.
Board of Registered Nursing (December 2000). NCLEX-RN task force report: The
problem and the plan. Sacramento, CA.
Bong, M. (2001). Role of self-efficacy and task value in predicting college students’
course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 26, 553-570.
Briscoe, V. J, & Anema, M. G. (1999). The relationship of academic variables as
predictors of success on the National Council Licensure Examination for
Registered Nurses (NCLEX-RN) in a selected Associate Degree program.
ABNF Journal, 10(4), 80-83.
Chemers, M. M., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and the first-year
college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 93(1), 55-64.
DeAngelis, S. (2003). Noncognitive predictors of academic performance. Journal of
Allied Health, 32(1), 52-57.
98

Dembo, M. H. (2004). Motivation and Learning Strategies for College Success: A
Self-Management Approach. (2
nd
ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Dembo, M. H., & Eaton, M. J. (2000). Self-regulation of academic learning in
middle-level schools. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 473-488.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual
Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Elliot, A. J. & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and
avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 72(1), 218-232.
Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement
goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 70(1), 461-475.
Elliot, A. J. & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 X 2 achievement goal framework.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501-519.
Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study
strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549-563.
Elliot, A. J. & Thrash, T. M. (2001). Achievement goals and the hierarchical model
of achievement motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 139-156.
Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and
achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 5-12.
Gallagher, P. A., Bomba, C., & Crane, L. R. (2001). Using an admissions exam to
predict student success in an ADN program. Nurse Educator, 26(3), 132-135.
Garavalia, L. S., & Gredler, M. E. (2002). Prior achievement. Aptitude, and use of
learning strategies as predictors of college student achievement. College
Student Journal, 36 (4), 616-626.
Gill, M. (2004). Retrieved December 28, 2004 from California Community Colleges
Chancellor's Office RE: AB 2177 (Jackson) http://www.cccco.edu
Griffiths, M. J., Papastrat, K., Czekanski, K., & Hagan, K. (2004). The lived
experience of NCLEX failure. Journal of Nursing Education, 43(7), 322-325.
99

Haas, R. E., Nugent, K. E., & Rule, R. A. (2004). The use of discriminanat function
analysis to predict student success on the NCLEX-RN. Journal of Nursing
Education, 43(10), 440-446.
Hadwin, A. F., Winne, P. H., Stockley, D. B., Nesbit, J. C. & Woszczyna, C. (2001).
Context moderates students’ self-reports about how they study. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 93(3), 477-487.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Carter, S. M., Lehto, A. T., & Elliot, A. J.
(1997). Predictors and consequences of achievement goals in the college
classroom: Maintaining interest and making the grade. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1284-1295.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Rethinking achievement
goals: When are they adaptive for college students and why? Educational
Psychologist, 33(1), 1-21.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Pintrich, P. R., Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. (2002).
Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 3(24), 638-645.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Carter, S. M, & Elliot, A. J. (2000).
Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting
interest over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 316-330.
Higgins, B. (2004). Relationship between retention and peer tutoring for at-risk
students. Journal of Nursing Education, 43(7), 319-321.
Jeffreys, M. R. (1998). Predicting nontraditional student retention and academic
achievement. Nurse Educator, 23(1), 42-48.
Kruck, S. E., & Lending, D. (2003). Predicting academic performance in an
introductory college-level IS course. Information Technology, Learning, and
Performance Journal, 21(2), 9-15.
Kuiper, R. (2002). Enhancing metacognition through reflective use of self-regulated
learning strategies. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 33(2),
78-87.
Lewis, C., & Lewis, J. H. (2000). Predicting academic success of transfer nursing
students. Journal of Nursing Education, 39(5), 234-238.
Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic
success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327.
100

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in
student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and Writing
Quarterly, 19, 119-137.
Lockie, N. M., & Burke, L. J. (1999). Partnership in learning for utmost success
(PLUS): Evaluation of a retention program for at-risk nursing students.
Journal of Nursing Education, 38(4), 188-192.
Lodewyk, K. R., & Winne, P. H. (2005). Relations among the structure of learning
tasks, achievement, and changes in self-efficacy in secondary students.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 3-12.
MacNamara, D., & Pener, K. (2005). First-year math students: Using study skills and
motivation to predict academic success. Office of Research and Scholarship
at Kwantlen University College. Retrieved June 7, 2006, from
www.kwantlen.bc.ca/firstyearexperience/researchfirstyear/MATH
Margolis, H., & McCabe, P. P. (2004). Self-efficacy: A key to improving the
motivation of struggling learners. The Clearing House, 77(6), 241-249.
McCann, E. J., & Garcia, T. (1999). Maintaining motivation and regulating emotion:
Measuring individual differences in academic volitional strategies. Learning
and Individual Differences, 11(3), 259-279.
McGregor, H. A. & Elliot, A. J. (2002). Achievement goals as predictors of
achievement-relevant processes prior to task engagement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 94, (2), 381-395.
Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of
ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 89(4), 710-718.
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., & Middleton, M. (2001). Performance-approach goals:
Good for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 93,(1), 77-86.
Morrison, S., Free, K. W., & Newman, M. (2002). Do progression and remediation
policies improve NCLEX-RN pass rates? Nurse Educator, 27(2), 94-96.
Pajares, F. (1996). Current directions in self-efficacy research. Review of
Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.
101

Phillips, B. C., Spurling, M. A., & Armstrong, W. A. (2002). Associate degree
nursing: Model prerequisites validation study California Community College
associate degree nursing programs.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). An achievement goal theory perspective on issues in
motivation terminology, theory, and research. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 25, 92-104.
Pintrich, P.R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-
regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review,
16(4), 385-407.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning
components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82, (1), 33-40.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research,
and applications (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). A Manual
for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).
National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and
Learning, Ann Arbor, MI.
Pokay, P., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1990). Predicting achievement early and late in the
semester: The role of motivation and use of learning strategies. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82(1), 41-50.
Potolsky, A., Cohen, J., & Saylor, C. (2003). Academic performance of nursing
students: Do prerequisite grades and tutoring make a difference? Nursing
Education Perspectives, 24(5), 246-250.
Purdie, N., Hattie, J., & Douglas, G. (1996). Student conceptions of learning and
their use of self-regulated learning strategies: A cross-cultural comparison.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, (1), 87-100.
Ross, M.E., Shannon, D.M., Salisbury-Glennon, J.D., & Guarino, A. (2002). The
patterns of adaptive learning survey: A comparison across grade levels.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(3), 483-497.
Sandiford, J. R., & Jackson, D. K. (April 5, 2003). Predictors of first semester
attrition and their relation to retention of generic Associate Degree nursing
students. Paper presented at the meeting of the Annual Meeting of the
Council for the Study of Community Colleges. Dallas, TX.
102

Schunk, D. H. (2004). Learning theories: An educational perspective (4th ed.).
Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Self-regulatory processes during computer
skill acquisition: Goal and self-evaluative influences. Journal of Educational
Psychology. 91(2), 251-260.
Schunk, D.H., & Pajares, F. (2002). The development of academic self-efficacy. In
A. Wigfield & J. Eccles (Eds.), Development of Achievement Motivation.
San Diego: Academic Press.
Shelton, E. N. (2003). Faculty support and student retention. Journal of Nursing
Education, 42(2), 68-76.
Siktberg, L. L., & Dillard, N. L. (2001). Assisting at-risk students in preparing for
NCLEX-RN. Nurse Educator, 26(3), 150-152.
Silver, B. B., Smith, Jr., E. V., & Greene, B. A. (2001). A study strategies self-
efficacy instrument for use with community college students. Educational
and Psychological Measurement, 61(5), 849-865.
Spurlock, D. R., & Hanks, C. (2004). Establishing progression policies with the
HESI exit examination: A review of the evidence. Journal of Nursing
Education, 43(12), 539-545.
Symes, L., Tart, K., Travis, L., & Toombs, M. S. (2002). Developing and retaining
expert learners: The student success program. Nurse Educator, 27(5), 227-
231.
Tuckman, B. W. (2002). A performance comparison of motivational self-believers
and self-doubters in competitive and individualistic goal situations.
Personality and Individual Differences. Paper presented at biennial meeting
of International Society for the Study of Individual Differences, Edinburgh,
Scotland, UK.
Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2001). Academic self-handicapping: What we know, what
more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 115-138.
VanderStoep, S. W., Pintrich, P. R., & Fagerlin, A. (1996). Disciplinary differences
in self-regulated learning in college students. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 21, 345-362.
103

Van Lanen, R. J., Lockie, N. M., & McGannon, T. (2000). Predictors of nursing
students' performance in a one-semester organic and biochemistry course.
Journal of Chemical Education, 77(6), 767-770.
Weinstein, C. E., & Palmer, D. R. (2002). LASSI User’s Manual for those
administering the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory. (2
nd
ed.).
Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing Company, Inc.
Weinstein, C. E., Palmer, D. R., & Shulte, A. C. (2002). LASSI: Learning and Study
Strategies Inventory. (2
nd
ed.). Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing Company,
Inc.
Wentzel, K. R. (1999). Social-motivational processes and interpersonal relationships:
Implications for understanding motivation at school. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 91(1), 76-97.
Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2002). Exploring students' calibration of self
reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 27, 551-572.
Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students’ regulation of
motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 224-235.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized
aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 189-205.
Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures
and goal orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and
achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236-250.
Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student
motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social
studies classrooms. Instructional Science, 26, 27-47.
Yin, T., & Burger, C. (2003). Predictors of NCLEX-RN success of associate degree
nursing graduates. Nurse Educator, 28(5), 232-236.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic
learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Academic studying and the development of personal skill:
A self-regulatory perspective. Educational Psychologist, 33, (2/3), 73-86.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.
104

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory
into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-
regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and
strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59.
105
APPENDIX A
Nursing Student Motivation for Learning Survey: Part I
Dear Student,
The following statements refer to your motivation and study habits for this class. Please understand that there are no right or wrong
answers. Use the scale below to respond to each statement as accurately as possible. If you think the statement is very true of you,
choose 5; if you think the statement is not at all true of you, choose 1. If the statement is more or less true of you, choose the
number between 1 and 5 that best describes you in this course.
Write your student ID # in the space provided __ __ __ __ __ __ __
O Please indicate if you are under 18 years of age by filling in the circle to the left.
For each answer, fill in the circle completely.
Use pencil or dark ink.
Not at all
true
1 2
Somewhat
True
3 4
Very True
5
1
It's important to me that I learn a lot of new concepts this
semester.
O O O O O
2 One of my goals in class is to learn as much as I can. O O O O O
3
One of my goals is to master a lot of new skills this
semester.
O O O O O
4
It's important to me that I thoroughly understand my class
work.
O O O O O
106
5 It's important to me that I improve my skills this semester. O O O O O
6
It's important to me that other students in my class think I
am good at my class work.
O O O O O
7
One of my goals is to show others that I'm good at my
class work.
O O O O O
8
One of my goals is to show others that class work is easy
for me.
O O O O O
9
One of my goals is to look smart in comparison to the
other students in my class.
O O O O O
10
It's important to me that I look smart compared to others in
my class.
O O O O O
11 It's important to me that I don't look stupid in class. O O O O O
12
One of my goals is to keep others from thinking I'm not
smart in class.
O O O O O
13
It's important to me that my instructor doesn't think that I
know less than others in class.
O O O O O
14
One of my goals in class is to avoid looking like I have
trouble doing the work.
O O O O O
107
APPENDIX B
Nursing Student Motivation for Learning Survey: Part II
Dear Student,
The following statements have to do with your feelings of confidence for this course. Use the scale below to respond to each
statement as accurately as possible. If you think the statement is very true of you, choose 7; if you think the statement is not at all
true of you, choose 1. If the statement is more or less true of you, choose the number between 1 and 7 that best describes you in
this course.
For each answer, fill in the circle completely.
Use pencil or dark ink.
Not at
all true
of Me
1 2 3
Somewhat
True of
Me
4 5 6
Very
True of
Me
7
1
I believe I will receive an excellent grade in this
course.
O O O O O O O
2
I'm certain I can understand the most difficult
material presented in the readings for this
course.
O O O O O O O
3
I'm confident I can understand the basic
concepts taught in this course.
O O O O O O O
4
I'm confident I can understand the most complex
material presented by the instructors in this
course.
O O O O O O O
108
5
I'm confident I can do an excellent job on the
assignments and tests in this course.
O O O O O O O
6 I expect to do well in this course. O O O O O O O
7
I'm certain I can master the skills being taught in
this course.
O O O O O O O
8
Considering the difficulty of this course, the
instructors, and my skills, I think I will do well in
this class.
O O O O O O O
Please provide the following information:
1 Ethnicity:
African
American
Asian
American
Caucasian Hispanic Other
O O O O O
2 Gender Male Female
O O
3 Semester Nursing1 Nursing2 Nursing3 Nursing4
O O O O
4 Age _____
109

APPENDIX C
USC IRB Approval
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
UNIVERSITY PARK INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD
FWA 00007099

Review of Research Involving Human Subjects
APPROVAL NOTICE
Date: Thu Aug 25 15:51:12 2005
Principal Investigator: Patricia Tutor
Faculty Advisor: Myron Dembo
Co-Investigators:
Project Title: Factors Influencing Nursing Students' Motivation to
Succeed (Factors Influencing Motivation)
USC UPIRB #UP-05-00089
The University Park Institutional Review Board has reviewed the information you
submitted pertaining to the above proposal at its meeting of N/A and has:
___ Approved Study Educ Psych SocWk Socio Bus Annen
___ Approved the Designated Review ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
___ Approved the Claim of Exemption
___ Approved continuation
___ Approved amendment
X Approved under expedited review by Chair / Designated IRB Reviewer -45
CFR 46.110 Category #___
(Approved with conditions on 8/25/2005)
Conditions of Approval:
The Investigators must provide the following requested information prior to
proceeding research (which includes contacting, recruiting, and enrolling potential
subjects) or adhere to the following conditions:
IRB APPROVAL EXPIRES: 8/24/2006. If this research study continues beyond
the approved period, you must request re-approval of this study prior to the
expiration date by submitting an Application for Continuing Review via iStar.
NOTE: The IRB must review all advertisements and/or recruiting materials. Serious
adverse events, amendments and/or changes in the protocol must be submitted to the
110

UPIRB for approval. Changes may not be implemented until you have received the
Board’s approval. Exception: changes involving subjects’ safety may be
implemented prior to notification to the UPIRB.
Please be advised that, per federal regulations, the IRB will be monitoring adherence
to approved research protocols. The oversight process does not end with approval of
a proposal. We appreciate your understanding of our collaborative efforts to maintain
the integrity of our human subjects’ research approval processes and procedures to
ensure continuous quality improvement and academic excellence at USC.
Principles To Be Followed By Principal Investigators:
As the Principal Investigator, you have ultimate responsibility for the conduct of the
study, the ethical performance of the project, the protection of the rights and welfare
of human subjects, and strict adherence to any stipulations imposed by the USC
UPIRB. You must abide by the following principles when conducting your research:
1. Perform the project by qualified personnel according to the approved
protocol.
2. Do not implement changes in the approved protocol or consent form without
prior USC UPIRB approval (except in a life-threatening emergency, if
necessary to safeguard the well-being of human subjects.
3. If written consent is required, obtain the legally effective written informed
consent from human subjects or their legally responsible representative using
only the currently approved USC-UPIRB stamped consent form.
4. Promptly report all undesirable and unintended, although not necessarily
unexpected adverse reactions or events, that are the result of therapy or other
intervention, within five working days of occurrence. All fatal or life-
threatening events or events requiring hospitalization must be reported to the
USC UPIRB in writing within 48 hours after discovery.
5. No subjects may be identified, contacted, recruited, or enrolled until the
University finalizes the contract with the sponsor.
Wynne R. Waugaman, Ph.D., Chair
111

APPENDIX D
Approval from Riverside Community College District IRB
From: Torres, David
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:31 PM
To: Tutor, Patricia
Cc: Aycock, Greg; Christiansen, Jill; Flyr, Mary; Gibbs, Travis; Hamerslough,
Rhonda; Howard, Lisa; Knipe, Theodore; Lange, Mary; Ruiz, Ronald
Subject: Approval for your project
Hi Patricia,
Thank you for meeting with our committee today. The Human Subjects Review Committee
of Riverside Community College District grants approval for your project to proceed in the
manner discussed at our meeting today. A paper copy of this authorization will be forwarded
to you during the coming week. For our records, could you please send copies of your
proposal and the approval from your institution, so that I will be able to keep them on file for
our committee?
Good luck on your research endeavors,
On behalf of the Human Subjects Review Committee,
David Torres
Director, Institutional Research
Chair, Human Subjects Review Committee
Riverside Community College District
(951) 222-8075
112

APPENDIX E
Approval from the Dean of the School of Nursing (RCC)
July 22, 2005
Dr. Wynne R. Waugaman
Chair
University Park Institutional Review Board
3601 Watt Way – GFS 306
Los Angeles, CA 90089-1695

RE: Patricia Tutor
Factors Influencing Nursing Students’ Motivation to Succeed

Dear Dr. Waugaman:

This letter is to convey that I have reviewed the proposed research study
being conducted by Patricia Tutor intended to conduct research at Riverside
Community College, Riverside, CA, and find “Factors Influencing Nursing Students’
Motivation to Succeed” acceptable. I give permission for the above investigator to
conduct research at this site. I will review, abide by, and comply with the procedures
approved by the University of Southern California’s University Park IRB. If you
have any questions regarding this permission letter, please contact the undersigned at
(951) 222-8408.

Sincerely,

Sandra Baker RN MSN
Dean, Department of Nursing

113

APPENDIX F
Informed Consent
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education

INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

Factors Influencing Nursing Students’ Motivation to Succeed

You are asked to participate in a research study conducted by Patricia T. Tutor, MSN
RN (principal investigator) and Myron H. Dembo, Ph.D. (faculty sponsor) from the
Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California. The results of
this study will be contributed to a dissertation. You were selected as a possible
participant in this study because you are a nursing student currently enrolled in the
Associate of Science Degree in Nursing Program at Riverside Community College.
Your participation is voluntary. You should read the information below, and ask
questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding whether or not to
participate.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

We are asking you to take part in a research study because we are trying to learn
more about the behaviors and activities used by students that help explain the
differences in achievement in a community college nursing program. While some
students seem to understand course material and get good grades, other students may
struggle throughout the nursing program, and, even though they try very hard to
understand the information, earn grades that are not as good as they would like.
Successful nursing students are not those that simply just seem know more than their
classmates. They use efficient learning strategies, make good use of their study time,
monitor their progress, and feel confident in their ability to learn course material. All
of these activities and behaviors are important factors that influence and motivate
students to be successful in school.

This study will examine three motivational factors. The first is known as academic
self-efficacy. This concept refers to how confident you are in your ability to learn the
course material. The second concept is called achievement goal orientation, and has
to do with the manner in which you approach learning. For example, do you try to
learn all you can just for the sake of learning? Do you try to earn the highest grade in
the class? Or, do you work hard so that your classmates and teachers will not think
that you know less than the other students? The third concept is known as self-
114

regulation of learning, and refers to the specific strategies and behaviors used by
students that influence their level of academic success.

PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, we would ask you to do the following
things:

You will be asked to complete a survey questionnaire in the computer lab that will
take approximately 25 minutes. The questionnaire has a total of 102 statements that
are divided into three sections. The first two sections are in paper/pencil format, the
third section is to be taken on-line. The first section is 14 statements about your
achievement goal orientation, or, how you approach learning in this class. You will
be asked to rate your opinion on these items using a scale from 1 (not at all true) to 5
(very true). Examples of the statements in this part are, “One of my goals in class is
to learn as much as I can”, “It’s important to me that other students in my class think
I am good at my class work”, and, “It’s important to me that I don’t look stupid in
this class”. In section two, you will be asked to rate your opinion on eight items that
have to do with your level of confidence for learning the course material. A scale of
1 (not at all true of me) to 7 (very true of me) is used in this section. An example of a
survey item in this part is, “I’m confident I can understand the most complex
material presented by the instructor in this course”. The third section is an instrument
that measures your awareness and use of study strategies related to self-regulation of
learning. In this part of the survey, you will be asked to rate your opinion on 80 items
using a scale from “a” (not at all typical of me) to “e” (very much typical of me).
Examples of statements from this section include, “My mind wanders a lot when I
study”, “I try to find relationships between what I am learning and what I already
know”, and, “I find it hard to stick to a study schedule”.

An additional part of this survey will ask you for some demographic information
(ethnicity, gender) and also in which semester level you are currently enrolled.

We will need to access your final course grade and Math and English placement
scores through the use of your college issued student ID number. This will require
your permission. For the purpose of this study, only the principal investigator will
view your data, grades, survey responses, and student ID number. Responses will be
held in strictest professional confidence.

Once your survey questionnaire is completed, you will be asked to place it in a
manila envelope and seal it with a tamper-proof sticker. The surveys will then be
kept in a file cabinet in the principal investigators office. Since the principal
investigator is also one of your instructors, the envelopes will not be opened until
after your final course grade has been issued. Only then will the data be analyzed.
115

You may, if you wish, during the semester, ask to inspect the envelopes to be sure
they are intact. Participation is voluntary, and will not influence the grade you
receive in this course. You may still participate in this study even if you do not grant
permission to access your placement scores and course grades.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS

This study does not pose any foreseeable risks or discomforts. However, you may
feel concerned about the confidentiality of your survey answers, or the principal
investigator having access to your student ID number, course grades, and placement
scores. If you feel unduly concerned about these issues, you may withdraw from the
study. If the time allotment inconveniences you too much or keeps you from
personal responsibilities, you may stop and withdraw from the study, or choose not
to participate. If there is a survey item that makes you uncomfortable, you may skip
it and leave it unanswered. Confidentiality will be protected at all times during data
collection, analysis, and presentation of the research report.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY

You will not benefit from this research study. Information from this study on the
motivational factors that are characteristic of academically successful students will
be used to provide educational interventions to students, and will help the nursing
faculty provide information on and implementation of learning strategies necessary
for successful completion of the nursing program.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION

You will not be paid for participating in this research study.

CONFIDENTIALITY

Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be
identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your
permission or as required by law.

The data and surveys collected in this study will be stored for three years after
completion of the study and at that time they will be shredded. The individual
surveys and computerized statistical analysis printout will be stored in the principal
investigators office in a locked file cabinet.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no
information will be included that would reveal your identity.
116

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL

You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this
study, you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may
also refuse to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the
study. The investigator may withdraw you from the research if circumstances arise
which warrant doing so.

IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS

If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact:

Patricia T. Tutor, MSN RN (principal investigator)
(951) 222-8311 (office)
Riverside Community College
School of Nursing
4800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506
patricia.tutor@rcc.edu.
Dr. Myron H. Dembo (faculty sponsor)
(213) 760-2364 (office)
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall Room 600C
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4036
dembo@usc.edu
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS

You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without
penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your
participation in this research study. If you have any question regarding your rights as
a research subject, contact:

University Park IRB
Office of the Vice Provost for Research
Grace Ford Salvatori Hall, Room 306
Los Angeles, CA 90089-1695
(213) 821-5272
upirb@usc.edu
117

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT

I understand the procedures described above, and I fully understand the rights of a
potential subject in a research study involving people as subjects. My questions have
been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have been
given a copy of this form.

__ I agree to have my demographic information accessed.
__ I do not agree to have my demographic information accessed.
__ I agree to have my final grade in this course accessed.
__ I do not agree to have my final grade in this course accessed.
__ I agree to have my Math and English placement exams accessed.
__ I do not agree to have my Math and English placement exams accessed.

Student ID number: _ _ _ _ _ _ _

___________________________
Print Name of Subject

___________________________ _______________
Signature of Subject Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
I have explained the research to the subject, and have answered all of his/her
questions. I believe that he/she understands the information described in this
document and freely consents to participate.

____________________________
Print Name of Investigator

____________________________ _______________
Signature of Investigator Date

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to identify the motivational factors that help explain the variations in achievement for nursing students enrolled in an Associate of Science Degree in Nursing (ADN) program at a Southern California community college. Academic self-efficacy, achievement goal orientation, and self-regulation of learning were the three predominant motivational factors found to be highly predictive of academic achievement. Survey items from the PALS instrument for goal orientation, the MSLQ for academic self-efficacy, and the LASSI inventory for self-regulation of learning, comprised the student survey. This study attempted to determine the degree to which academic self-efficacy, achievement goal orientation, and self-regulation of learning accounted for the variance in achievement for ADN students. A sample of 232 nursing students participated in the study. Results of the regression analysis revealed that, after first removing the effect of Mathematics and English placement, academic self-efficacy was a significant predictor of academic achievement, contributing a significant 8.9% of the variance in achievement for these students. Data also suggested that achievement goal orientation was not a significant predictor in explaining variance in achievement, above and beyond the effects of Mathematics and English placement level and academic self-efficacy. Lastly, self-regulation of learning and strategy use accounted for a significant 6% of the variance in nursing student achievement. Together, academic self-efficacy and self-regulation of learning contributed a significant approximately 15% of the variance in achievement for the ADN students in this study.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

What motivational factors influence community college students' tendency to seek help through math tutoring?

PDF

What motivational factors influence community college students' tendency to seek help from the writing center?

PDF

The effect of reading self-efficacy, expectancy-value, and metacognitive self-regulation on the achievement and persistence of community college students enrolled in basic skills reading courses

PDF

The relationship of gratitude and subjective well-being to self-efficacy and control of learning beliefs among college students

PDF

Motivational, parental, and cultural influences on achievement and persistence in basic skills mathematics at the community college

PDF

What factors influence student persistence in the community college setting?

PDF

The relationship between motivational factors and engagement in an urban high school setting

PDF

Motivation, language learning beliefs, self-efficacy, and acculturation patterns among two groups of English learners

PDF

The relationship of model minority stereotype, Asian cultural values, and acculturation to goal orientation, academic self-efficacy, and academic achievement in Asian American college students

PDF

The relationship of students' self-regulation and self-efficacy in an online learning environment

PDF

The relationship between student perceptions of parental expectations, utility value, aptitude and English achievement among Asian American high school students

PDF

Factors influencing student achievement in advanced placement and honors

PDF

Student academic self‐efficacy, help seeking and goal orientation beliefs and behaviors in distance education and on-campus community college sociology courses

PDF

The impact of the mindful method Youth Empowerment Seminar (YES!) on students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, and academic performance for becoming college- and career-ready

PDF

Motivational differences of high-ability high-performing (HAHP) and high-ability low-performing (HALP) high school students

PDF

The relationship of teachers' parenting styles and Asian American students' reading motivation

PDF

The tracking effect: tracking and the impact on self-efficacy in middle school students

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: Factors that support English learner and Hispanic student academic achievement in an urban intermediate school

PDF

Factors related to college graduation among private and public secondary school students

PDF

The relationship between students’ computer self-efficacy, self-regulation, and engagement in distance learning

Asset Metadata

Creator Tutor, Patricia Theresa (author)

Core Title Factors influencing nursing students' motivation to succeed

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Psychology)

Publication Date 11/02/2006

Defense Date 09/05/2006

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag learning strategies,nursing student motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,self-regulation

Language English

Advisor Dembo, Myron H. (committee chair), DiThomas, Debbie (committee member), Rueda, Robert S. (committee member)

Creator Email tutor@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m121

Unique identifier UC1326807

Identifier etd-Tutor-20061102 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-27726 (legacy record id),usctheses-m121 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Tutor-20061102.pdf

Dmrecord 27726

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Tutor, Patricia Theresa

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu