Analyzing the Motivation on International Students' Academic Performance in Universities in Taiwan

全文

(1)Analyzing the Motivation on International Students' Academic Performance in Universities in Taiwan. By Janell Roshea Dawson. A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Major: International Human Resource Development. Advisor: Cheng-Ping Shih, Ph.D. National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan June, 2015.

(2) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First and foremost I would like to thank God, for granting me the health, strength, chance and mental ability to complete this research. I also sincerely and dedicate this thesis to mother, Janet K. Hendy and maternal grandmother, Yvonne Hendy, who have always told me I could do anything I put my mind to and thankfully I believed them. I also thank my father, Leroy Smith and little sister, Leisha Smith, who have supported me on this journey in everyway possible. These two years would have never gone as smoothly as they have without your love and support. I express special, sincere gratitude and appreciate to my advisor Dr. Tony Shih for his time, patience, guidance, encouragement and lectures, and always pushing me to do my best. Thank you for helping me to mature into more levelheaded woman. Thank you father Tony! Also, thanks to every professor of International Human Resource Development (IHRD), especially Dr. Wei Wang Chang, Dr. Pai-Po Lee, and Dr. Steven Lai, all of whom contributed in some way to my success as a graduate student. Without their support, the accomplishment of my master degree program would not be possible. I also would like to thank each committee member, Dr. Pai-Po Lee and Dr. steven Lai for contributing to the process of writing this thesis. I wish to thank my two best friends that I gained while in Taiwan, Lahela Cleveland and Sofana Rojas for supporting and keeping me sane through these two years, you guys put up with so much from me; sisters for life.. Also thanks to my friends Fryda Sales,. Warisa Cern Krongboonying, Rodrigo Car, Melton Morrison, and Tania Rojas who made my stay in Taiwan a home away from home. Thank you for not only being my friends but apart of my extended international family. I also would like to thank my two best friends who supported me since day one, Victor Randy Suazo and Bea Jay Armstrong. Without their constant support, encouragement and pep talk this degree would have never manifested to reality. You have helped me in so many ways possible, I’m truly blessed to call you guys my friends, this is for us! Good friends are better than pocket money. Finally, special thanks go the International Cooperation Development Fund (ICDF) for this scholarship opportunity and for the new beginnings I am about to embark on from achieving this degree..

(3) Abstract Motivation is one of the most commonly used instruments in predicting performance. The majority of the studies based on motivation tackle the issue of predicting job performance, while some of the studies are involved on more specific situations, such as academic performance or training performance. This study examined the relationship between motivation and academic performance of international students enrolled in universities throughout Taiwan who have take the Test of Chinese as a Second Language to determine whether motivation played a significant role in student achievement in this examination. Secondly to add information, insight, and close research gaps where Taiwan is concern and to offer both academic and practitioners additional insight in educational issues such as admissions to college or graduate programs. Motivation was assessed using the Academic Motivation Scale Questionnaire (AMS) comprised of the following seven motivation subscales: intrinsic motivation- to know, intrinsic motivation-towards accomplishment, intrinsic motivation- to experience stimulus, extrinsic motivation- identified regulation, extrinsic motivation-introjected regulation, extrinsic motivation-external regulation and Amotivation. Shih and Dawson developed two models. The MAP model, developed by Shih and Dawson tested motivation and academic performance with a sample of 200. Results show that there is a moderate correlation among the independent variable of Motivation and the dependent variable of academic performance as seen from the SEM pathway.. Keywords: Academic Performance, Motivation, Academic Motivation Scale, Test of Chinese as a Foreign Language. I.

(4) TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKOWLEGENDEMENT ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................I TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................II LIST OF FIGURES .....................................................................................IV LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................V CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ..........................................................1 Background of Study .........................................................................................1 Purpose of Study ................................................................................................2 Question of Study ..............................................................................................2 Significance of Study .........................................................................................2 Delimitation and Limitations .............................................................................4 Definition of Terms............................................................................................4. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ...............................................6 Introduction to Motivation ...............................................................................6 The Motivational Continuum ............................................................................6 Intrinsic Motivation .........................................................................................8 Extrinsic Motivation.........................................................................................9 Motivation and the Learner ..............................................................................10 Enhancing Intrinsic Motivation........................................................................11 Academic Motivation Scale..............................................................................11 Introduction to Personality Theory and the Big Five Trait Theory...................12 Leading Towards Current Five-Factor Models of Trait Taxonomy..................13 The Lexical Approach.......................................................................................13 The Questionnaire Approach.............................................................................14 Details of the Big Five Theory.........................................................................15 Extraversion.....................................................................................................16 Agreeableness……………………………......................................................16 Conscientiousness............................................................................................17 Openness..........................................................................................................18 II.

(5) Neuroticism......................................................................................................19 Critique and Defense of the Model..................................................................21 Existing Research on the Big Five and Academic Success.............................23 Big Five Aspect of Personality........................................................................27. CHAPTER III METHODOLGY............................................................30 Research Framework ........................................................................................30 Research Hypotheses Identified ........................................................................30 Research Procedures .........................................................................................31 Data Collection Method....................................................................................32. CHAPTER IV DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AND PILOT STUDY FINDINGS ............................................................................................38 Sample Characteristics .......................................................................................38 Pilot Study..........................................................................................................46 Validity Test........................................................................................................46 Partial Least Square (PLS) .................................................................................53 Correlational Analysis........................................................................................53 Validity and Reliability Analysis .......................................................................55 Partial Least Square (PLS) Analysis ..................................................................56. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............60 Research Conclusions ........................................................................................60 Recommendations for Future Research .............................................................60. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................62 APPENDIX A: RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE: MOTIVATION ...... 73 APPENDIX B: RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE: BIG FIVE ASPECT OF PERSONALITY............................................................................79 APPENDIX C: PLS RESULTS: MOTIVATION............................................88 APPENDIX D: PLS RESULTS: BIG FIVE..............................................90. III.

(6) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 The Motivational Continuum of Self-Determination Theory .................. 7 Figure 3.1 Research Framework................................................................................ 30 Figure 3.2 Research Process ...................................................................................... 31 Figure 4.1 PLS Structural Model Pilot Test (N=40).................................................. 52 Figure 4.2 MAP Model .............................................................................................. 59. IV.

(7) LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Reliability of Instrument…………………………………………………....................33 Table 3.2 Validity of Instrument………………………………………………………………....33 Table 4.1 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of Gender (N=40)………..39 Table 4.2 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of Race (N=40)………......39 Table 4.3 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of Language (N=40)…......39 Table 4.4 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of University Type. (N=45)..........................................................................................................................39 Table 4.5 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of Education (N=40).........40 Table 4.6 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of Scholarship Recipients (N=40).........................................................................................................................40 Table 4.7 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of University (N=40).........40 Table 4.8 Sample Characteristics Based on Demographic Variables of Scholarship (N=40).......41 Table 4.9 Extrinsic Motivation- External Regulations Mean and Standard……………………..42 Table 4.10 Extrinsic Motivation- Introjected Regulation’s Mean and Standard……………..….42 Table 4.11 Extrinsic Motivation-Identified Regulation Means and Standard Deviation………..43 Table 4.12 Intrinsic Motivation- To know Means and Standard Deviation……………………..44 Table 4.13 Intrinsic Motivation- Towards Accomplishments Means and Standard Deviation…44 Table 4. 14 Intrinsic Motivation- Experience to Stimulation Means and Standard Deviation….45 Table 4.15 Amotivation Means and Standard Deviation……………………………………......46 Table 4.16 KMO and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Values (Pilot Test)........................................46 Table 4.17 EFA: Factor Loadings (Pilot Test=40)........................................................................47 Table 4.18 Reliability Test (Pilot Test, N=40)..............................................................................49 Table 4.19 Factor loadings and internal consistency reliability analysis via PLS (Pilot Study, N=40)……………………………………………....………………….....50 Table 4.20 PLS Cronbach’s Alpha, internal consistency and R2 …………………………….....51 Table 4.21 Empirical result of PLS Path Analysis (Hypothesis, Standardized Beta Coefficients and Adjusted T-values)…………………………………………………………........51 Table 4.22 Correlational Table......................................................................................................54 V.

(8) Table 4.23 KMO and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Values (Main Study N=200).........................55 Table 4.24 Reliability Test (Main Study N=200)..........................................................................56 Table 4.25 Measurement Model Results (Main Study N=200).....................................................57 Table 4.26 PLS Loadings (Main Study N=200.............................................................................57 Table 4.27 PLS Path Analysis Results (Main Study N=200)........................................................58 Table 4.28 Research Hypotheses Results......................................................................................58. VI.

(9) CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The first chapter of the thesis proposal delivers an introduction into the study. The audience will gain discernment pertaining to the background of the study, the problem statement, the purposes of the research, the research questions, the hypotheses, the significance of the study and also the delimitations and limitations. Lastly, this chapter provides the explanation for the terms that are imperative to this study. This introductory chapter will help the audience to gain a thorough and comprehensive focus by the researcher.. Background of Study The motivation of students is an essential issue in higher education, mainly owing to importance of academic performance in their professional life. This study is focused on identifying the factors that will those in the educational field to know students’ attitudes concerning learning, what enables learning and what hinders in the process of learning. This will assist the education community to forecast student academic performance and identifying the students before their grades begin to fall (Kamauru, 2000). Lumsden (1994) has investigated that passion to learn seems to minimize as children age. Learning sometimes becomes obligation than pleasure, due to this, a large number of students quit school before graduation. Due to having an unpleasant attitude of students towards education very few are actually mentally present in the classroom. Student motivation is the component that leads students’ outlook towards the learning process. A number of studies have showed to investigate the role of student motivation toward academic performance and different descriptions of students’ motivation have been used by various researches. For instance, Lumsden, (1994) analyzed students’ involvement towards education and sources of their motivation while Marshal (1987) viewed students’ motivation as a force that is beneficial to the learner. Ames (1990) stated that motivation to learning is dependent on long-term, quality attachment in learning and commitment to the process of learning. Most motivation theorist believes that motivation is involved in the performance of all learned responses and learned behavior will not occur unless it is empowered. Bomia et al. (1997) has proposed student motivation to be a student’s willingness, need, desire and obligation to partake and be successful in the learning process.. 1.

(10) Purposes of the Study Nevertheless, there is a lack of accessible research addressing the role of Motivation as a predictor of achievement in universities in Taiwan among international students. The purpose of this study is, therefore, to examine the impact of motivation and its traits on the academic performance of international students currently enrolled at the undergraduate and graduate level using the dimensions of motivation. Hence the importance of this study, which will examine: Whether Motivation can predict academic performance in international university. (i). students studying in Taiwan. Determine whether specific Motivation traits significantly correlates and predicts. (ii). academic performance (iii). To offer both academic and practitioners additional insight in educational issues such as techniques or ways of motivating students in college or graduate programs.. (iv). Identifying the factors that will assist educational leaders and contributors to know students’ attitudes towards learning, what expedites learning and what hampers in the process of learning.. Questions of the Study Based on the intentions to evaluate the impact of personality traits on academic performance in Taiwan’s university among international students, this research purposes to answer the following questions: 1. Do the dimensions of motivation influence international students’ academic performance in universities in Taiwan? 2. What aspect of motivational traits has the most positive effect on students’ academic performance?. 3. What are types of Motivations that has the most Positive effect on Students’ academic performance?. Significance of Study Psychology and Human Resource Management are as natural a pairing as is possible amidst the fields of potential research, because at its most basic level, Human Resource Management must seek to understand the employee thoroughly in order to maximize productivity and ultimately success. Each step in psychological research that leads towards a 2.

(11) deeper understanding of human work potential can be endlessly beneficial in actual real world outcomes. This, it can be argued, is the main significance of any research – that it could be a positive increment to answering the question of how the information found can be of use to the further betterment of the field. This research seeks to investigate the relationship between motivation and academic performance, and intends to investigate the relevant phenomena in the population of international students on their scores achieved in the Test of Chinese as a Second Language (TOCFL) exam in Taiwan. The use of the TOCFL was selected for this study due to many university programs implementing the test score to determine admission in certain programs for international students and also as apart of the requirements for some scholarship in Taiwan, for example, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) in Taiwan has a mandatory rule that all international students under the MOFA scholarship must pass the official TOCFL Chinese exam in order to gain admission into the university of their choice after one year of completing Chinese classes. As of 2013, the International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF)’s scholarship also implemented the rule of passing the TOCFL while international students simultaneously complete their university degree. Carrying a study such as this one would not only contribute to psychological world in regard of literature but the findings can be used to help improve the foundations for both universities, government and organizations that are presently issuing scholarships to international students. The results would help in determining as to whether or not there may be a need for modifications among the scholarship requirements Within these parameters of observation, the possible applications to the real world human resource environment are fairly quickly evident. If there can be found positive associations between motivation and good performance in the exams, then we can imagine the substantive implications this may have for those in the business of using the motivation test scores for recruitment or hiring purposes, for example. Instead of merely taking a person’s high or low score on an exam and deciding on that person’s ability based on some arbitrary cutoff grade, a recruiter may be able to consider the findings in a research like this one as well. The combination of information could help to create a more vivid portrait of the individual by indicating motivation related talents that have already been extensively researched and proven, leading to smarter hiring and not just cherry picking based on superficial excellence. Extending this premise even further, findings that connect personality to academic performance could prospectively create grounds for more efficient 3.

(12) grooming and development of the future work force at an optimally early point in people’s academic career. The application of the findings from this type of research to university and even high school programs could reasonably serve to help students in motivation, study skills, and test confidence, simply because it would help to define areas of improvement to focus on. The motivation theories have been extensively researched from many angles, and there is certainly no shortage of research on the way the theory and its traits relate to or predict success, in many countries and cultures all over the world at that. There does seem to be, however, a prevalence of Western and European samples among the examples of research related to this topic. The consequent dearth of research into Asian countries, and Taiwanese subjects explicitly, is yet another reason why this particular investigation can be of significant contribution to the current conversation. There is undoubtedly room for what is to be found.. Delimitations and Limitations Delimitations The study is delimited to only international students enrolled in public and private universities in the country of Taiwan in year 2015. Secondly, the study is also delimited to international students that are either perusing an undergraduate and/or graduate degree. Thirdly, students must have taken the Test of Chinese as a Foreign Language Exam.. Limitations Since the sample of students is from Taiwan the results of this study may differ among international students living in another country because each country has its own urbanity, the learning styles may also contrast with those used in Taiwan. The target population for this study is undergraduate and graduate university student, male and females.. Definition of Key Terms The following is the definitions of variables in this study:. 1. Students Academic Performance The course grades and standardized tesores; the average of the grades students 4.

(13) receives on their report cards (Wentzel et al 1998, p. 9;).. 2. The Test Of Chinese as a Foreign Language (TOCFL) The Test of Chinese as A Foreign Language is a national standardized test designed and developed by the National Taiwan Normal University to evaluate and certify the Chinese language proficiency of non-native speakers, such as foreigners and overseas Chinese. (Test of Chinese as a Foreign Language, n.d.). 3. Motivation Motivation is defined as the process that initiates, guides, and maintains goal-oriented behaviors. Motivation is what causes us to act, whether it is getting a glass of water to reduce thirst or reading a book to gain knowledge. (Cherry, n.d.). 5.

(14) CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW Chapter Overview In this chapter, a review of the existing literature on the topic is given. The chapter explores the history of motivation theory as it is linked to personality that has led to current ideas in the field, most specifically the research of the theorists most influential in developing what is known in psychology as the theories of Motivation: Extrinsic, Intrinsic and Amotivation. It then explains the Motivation theory in detail and presents information on how it is used in psychology. Also, this chapter brings forward the research relevant to the idea that personality and motivation theory is related to human behavior and is therefore useful in predicting behavioral outcomes, such as a person’s potential performance in the academic arena. a person’s potential performance in the academic arena.. Literature on Motivation Introduction To Motivation Self-determination theory insinuates that humans have an instinctive craving for stimulation and learning since the time of birth, which is either maintained or discouraged within their environment (Deci and Ryan, 1985 & Deci and Ryan, 2000). The extent to which this natural drive, or intrinsic motivation, is completed is dependent on the fulfillment of one’s psychological needs. That is, the fulfillment of these needs is an essential predecessor to intrinsic motivation. Self-determination theory presents three psychological needs that impact intrinsic motivation: the need for competence, the need for autonomy, and the need for relatedness ( Deci & Ryan, 1985). Throughout development, social contexts can either suppress or promote intrinsic motivation based upon fulfillment of these needs.. The Motivational Continuum Theorists have since been able to differential several specific categories of motivation based on the interaction of these needs and the environment: (1) intrinsic motivation—the energy to follow an activity simply for the liking or satisfaction resulting from it, (2) extrinsic motivation—pursuing an activity due to a sense of compulsion, or as a means to an end, and (3) amotivation—the absence of intent or drive to follow an activity due to one’s not valuing the activity, feeling incapable, or feeling unable to obtain a desired outcome (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Vallerand et al., 1992). These deferential conditions have been argued to fall along a. 6.

(15) motivational continuum that reflects the degree of self-determined behavior, ranging from amotivation to extrinsic motivation to intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Notably, researchers have tested and supported this representation of self-determination theory as a continuum in a number of different domains (Blais, Sabourin, Boucher, & Vallerand, 1990; Goudas, Biddle, & Fox, 1994; Villacorta, Koestner, & Lekes, 2003). With amotivation and intrinsic motivation securing the ends of the motivational continuum, Deci and Ryan (1985) further distinguished between numerous forms of extrinsic motivation. Specifically, they outlined four types of extrinsic motivation: external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, and integrated regulation. These four types of extrinsic motivation vary in the degree of self-determination that the individual links with the conduct, where more internalized or more integrated behaviors produce a greater sense of self-. Figure. 2.1. The Motivational Continuum of Self-Determination Theory. The extrinsic continuum (from external regulation to integrated regulation), motivation starts to take on more of the characteristics connected with intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). At the lowest end of the continuum, bordering to amotivation, externally regulated motivation is the least self- determined behavior and is described as resulting from external influences or reward possibilities. Moving upward along the continuum, introjected regulated behaviors are still controlled in part by the environment, but also by internal reward/punishment possibilities, such as ego enhancement, guiltiness, or compulsion. Further along the continuum is identified regulation, while it is still under extrinsically motivated; it involves the person ascribing personal value to the behavior. The last subtype of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation, and differs from intrinsic motivation only slightly. Considering that is still 7.

(16) extrinsically motivated the self comes to fully support the activity. Therefore, this type of extrinsic motivation is necessarily different from intrinsic motivation in that, “even though fully volitional, it is instrumental” rather than followed for pleasure or satisfaction (Deci & Ryan, 2000). More particularly, “intrinsic motivation is characterized by interest in the activity itself, whereas integrated regulation is characterized by the activity’s being personally important for a valued outcome” (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991). Additional researchers have taken Deci and Ryan’s original theory and added further divisions along the motivational continuum. Specifically, Vallerand et al. (1992) managed to categorized Deci and Ryan’s construct of intrinsic motivation to include separate types of intrinsic motivation. They based this partitioning of intrinsic motivation on Deci’s (1976) proposition that it may be propelled by specific, differentiated factors. Vallerand et al.’s examination of this research inspired them to classify between three types of intrinsic motivation: (1) intrinsic motivation to know, (2) intrinsic motivation to accomplish, and (3) intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation. Intrinsic motivation to know signifies the desire to perform an activity for the amusement one receives while learning new things. Intrinsic motivation to accomplish refers to the yearning to do an activity for the fulfillment that one collects from accomplishing or creating new things. Lastly, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation refers to the aspiration to perform an activity to experience intellectual or physical stimulation.. Intrinsic Motivation Intrinsic motivation has been expressed as a participation in an activity purely out of inquisitiveness, that is, from a necessity to understand more about something (Deci, 1975; Woolfolk, 1990), the wish to involve in an activity merely for the sake of participating in and accomplishing a task (Bates, 1979; Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991); and the desire to contribute (Mills, 1991). Academic intrinsic motivation has been measured by the capability of the learner to persevere with the task given (Brophy, 1983) the amount of time spent by the student on undertaking the task (Brophy, 1983); the instinctive curiosity to understand (Gottfried, 1983); the feeling of efficacy associated to an activity (Gottfried, 1983; Schunk, 1991; Smith, 1994); the desire to select an activity (Brophy, 1983); and a amalgamation of all these variables (Deci, 1975; Deci & Ryan, 1985). A student who is intrinsically motivated will persevere with the assigned task, even though it may be challenging (Gottfried, 1983; Schunk, 1991), and will not require. 8.

(17) any type of prize or incentive to start or finish a task (Beck, 1978; Deci, 1975; Woolfolk, 1990). This type of student is more likely to complete the chosen task and be enthusiastic by the perplexing nature of an activity. The intrinsically motivated pupil is also more prone to remember the ideas learned and possess confidence about undertaking new learning situations, such as new formulas and math problems. However, the amount of interest produced by the assignment also plays a vital role in the motivational orientation of the learner. An assigned task that has no interest value is less likely to motivate the student than is a task that stimulates awareness and inquisitiveness. Intrinsic motivation is based in the instinctive, organismic needs for proficiency and self-determination (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Woolfolk, 1990), as well as the craving to pursue and overcome challenges (Adelman & Taylor, 1990). People are likely to be motivated to finish a task on the basis of their level of interest and the nature of the challenge. Research has suggested that children with higher academic intrinsic motivation function more effectively in school (Adelman & Taylor, 1990; Boggiano & Barrett, 1992; Gottfried, 1990; Soto, 1988). Besides innate factors, there are several other variables that can affect intrinsic motivation.. Extrinsic Motivation In order to encourage learners to participate in or to complete an activity, learners are often given an incentive. The incentive might be in the shape of a physical reward, such as money. It might be the chance of receiving a reward in the future, such as a good grade. It might be an intangible reward, for example, verbal commendation or a congratulatory pat on the back. The incentive might also be immunity from a less enjoyed activity or avoidance of penalty. These incentives are extrinsic motivators. A person is considered to be extrinsically motivated when she or he commences a task solely for the sake of getting a reward or for eluding some punishment (Adelman & Taylor, 1990; Ball, 1984; Beck, 1978; Deci, 1975; Wiersma, 1992; Woolfolk, 1990). Extrinsic motivation can, especially in learning and other forms of creative work, impede with intrinsic motivation (Benninga et al., 1991; Butler, 1989; Deci, 1975; McCullers, Fabes, & Moran, 1987). In such cases, it might be better not to offer rewards for partaking in or for finishing an activity, be it paradigmatic learning or an organized play activity. This does not only apply teachers but also parents have been found to negatively influence the motivational orientation of the child by providing extrinsic consequences depending upon their school. 9.

(18) performance (Gottfried, Fleming, & Gottfried, 1994). The relationship between rewards (and other extrinsic factors) and the intrinsic motivation of the learner is outlined in the following sections.. Motivation and the Learner In a classroom, the student is anticipated to tackle certain types of tasks, usually with and these usually come with very limited choices. Most of the research done on motivation has been done in settings where the learner had a wide choice of activities, or in a free-play setting. In reality, the student has to complete tasks that are obligatory as well as evaluated (Brophy, 1983). Students are expected to complete a certain number of assignments that meet indicated criteria. For example, a student may be asked to complete five algebra problems and is expected to get correct answers to at least three. Teachers need to consider how instructional practices are designed from the motivational perspective (Schunk, 1990). Development of skills required for academic achievement can be influenced by instructional design. If the design destabilizes student ability and skill level, it can decrease motivation (Brophy, 1983; Schunk, 1990). This is especially applicable to students with disabilities. Students with Learning disabilities have shown a significant increase in academic learning after engaging in interesting tasks like computer games designed to enhance learning (Adelman, Lauber, Nelson, & Smith, 1989). A common objective of educators is to aid all students in enhancing their learning, regardless of the student's ability level. To achieve this outcome, the teacher has to develop a curriculum geared to the individual needs and ability levels of the students, especially the students with special needs. If the assigned task is within the child's ability level as well as naturally interesting, the child is very likely to be intrinsically motivated to tackle the task. The task should also be challenging enough to encourage the student’s yearning to attain mastery. The likelihood of achievement or failure is often credited to factors such as aptitude, determination, difficulty level of the task, and luck (Schunk, 1990). One or more of these qualities might, in turn, affect the motivational orientation of a student. The student who is possess a sure level of success is more likely to be motivated to tackle the task than one who is unsure of the outcome (Adelman & Taylor, 1990). A student who is motivated to learn will find academic-related tasks to be meaningful (Brophy, 1983, 1987). Teachers can help students to. 10.

(19) boost their achievement by modifying the instructional design to their individual characteristics and motivational orientation.. Enhancing Intrinsic Motivation A student's lack of achievement in school maybe a result of his or her expecting to perform inadequately on an assigned task or recognizing school personnel and activities as threats to her or his self-determination, skill, or sense of relatedness (Adelman & Taylor, 1990). With this in mind, intervention should focus on strategies to replace threatening or intimidating situations and tasks. This could be achieved by (a) eradicating, or at least reducing, external pressures (e.g., rewards); and (b) by developing an intrinsically motivating activity. Classroom climate and teacher interaction with students have been found to play a crucial role in influencing student achievement and motivation (Brophy, 1987; Cunniff, 1989; Grolnick & Ryan, 1990). Options alone are not sufficient to enhance intrinsic motivation (Woolfolk, 1990). Also necessary is a structure that encourages and supports student involvement in the decision-making process. Feedback on student progress must include effectiveness of the decisions made by the student, in addition to evaluation of the task performance (Adelman & Taylor, 1990; Deci & Ryan, 1985). In some settings, intervention strategies might need to focus on alternatives capable of stimulating greater feelings of self- determination, of competence, and of being related to. Academic Motivation Scale A standout amongst the most examined subjects in instructive brain science is scholarly inspiration. Its immediate and roundabout impact on learning procedures has been demonstrated in various examinations. On one hand, it has been connected to the effort and persistence investigated into the profundity of data handling and to the utilization of self-directed subjective and metacognitive techniques. However, its nearby relationship with self-adequacy discernment, objective foundation, and era of accomplishment desires has been brought up more than once. Past examinations have commented on how inspiration regulates valorization of doled out undertakings and imprints the congruity of utilizing outer prizes. And in addition that, it has been recommended that low accomplishment, abandonment, and challenges in the move between instructive levels are frequently confirmation of issues that, to outline palliative intercessions, may be focused from a motivational point of view.. 11.

(20) As a result of its intricacy and its focal part in the instructive milieu, the requirement for the advancement of instruments fit for giving scientists and experts legitimate and dependable measures of this develop has been stressed. Most of the scales have been in view of diverse calculated proposition. The corpus that was utilized to offer shape to a decent measure of the examination in this field is the self- determination hypothesis, which has its birthplace in the work of Deci and Ryan. This is a macrotheory identified with human improvement and the capacity of identity in distinctive social connections. It considers that inspiration can be communicated through a continuum of expanding self-determination with three central positions mirroring the level of independence on which practices are based: amotivation and extraneous and characteristic inspiration.. An Introduction to Personality Theory and the Big Five Trait Theory To state the obvious, the field of personality research is a broad sea of information and ideas. From psychodynamic theorists as famous as Freud to the present-day obsession with personality testing made possible by the internet, there seems to be an innate desire to explore the components of what comprises our human nature. Trait theory, a recognized branch of research and thinking within the personality psychology field, defines personality traits as scientific, measureable constructs existing in unique “patterns of perceiving, relating to and thinking about the environment and oneself” (American Psychiatric Association, DSM V). While differing from person to person, identifiable traits are relatively constant within the individual over time and undeniably influence and affect behavior. It is the goal of trait theory to utilize these constructs of human personality as a means to organizing our way of thinking about people as a whole. The task of developing and organizing a standard to measure observable traits across the spectrum of human personalities is daunting to say the least, but the benefit of a unified instrument is that personality theory can then be used as a tool applied to studying other fields (i.e. human resource management). Over the last half a century there have been significant obstacles to finding consensus on how and what to measure. The first and main obstacle is that the number of traits to measure can be endless. Secondly, psychology in the heyday of the 1960s to the 1980s was more interested in producing more new measurements than codifying the research that had already been produced, and “competing systems of trait measurement paralyzed the field”(McCrae & John, 1992). In this milieu of overwhelming lack of definition,. 12.

(21) the answer seems clearly to be that “a taxonomy would permit researchers to study specified domains of personality characteristics, rather than... the thousands of particular attributes that make each human… unique” and “a generally accepted taxonomy would facilitate the communication of empirical findings by offering a standard vocabulary“ (John & Srivastava, 1999). With this understanding in mind, the early research within the field has led to a much more unified theory of investigating personality traits, which is what ultimately has led to the effective use of trait theory to research behavioral outcomes.. Leading Towards Current Five-Factor Models of Trait Taxonomy Historically, there were two distinct research approaches that, perhaps through happy accident, led to the model of trait taxonomy that became the “Big Five”/Five-Factor model, which is in the opinion of many, the most satisfying means to construct use personality traits in psychological research. These historical approaches are the lexical approach and the questionnaire approach. A simplified view is that from the lexical approach came the term "Big Five", originally associated with studies of personality traits used in natural language and the term "Five-Factor Model" comes from studies of traits using personality questionnaires. These two research traditions produced cohesion and in current practice the terms are often used interchangeably.. The Lexical Approach The lexical approach is based on the premise that it is easiest to discover the dimensions of personality by decoding personality trait terms already existing in a natural language. Simply put, what terms are used to describe the aspects of personality in the dictionary of a given language? American psychologists Gordon Allport and Henry S. Odbert (1936) were pioneers in the lexical study of personality relevant terms. Their research originally created 4 distinct categories to organize the overwhelming list of trait terms that can be found in the English language. Later, Warren Norman (1967) and Lewis Goldberg (1988) contributed to further classifications within the lexical approach while Raymond Cattell (1943) focused on the subset of trait terms specifically related to personality (as opposed to emotional state terms and social evaluation terms). Cattell is first credited with narrowing the 4500-trait term subset to 35 variables and then to 12 personality factors that became a part of his 16-personality factor (16PF) questionnaire. Norman developed a taxonomy derived from Cattell’s trait terms that is 13.

(22) considered the formal beginning of a five-factor model, as it was he who chose the Roman numeral factor numbers and names that ultimately made the model agreeable with the other directions of thought that were developing simultaneously in the field. It is important to note here that the terms Norman used along with his numerals were I: Extraversion/Surgency, II: Agreeableness, III: Conscientiousness, -IV: Emotional Stability and V: Culture. While these terms are often still used in the five factor personality theory, the eventual emergence of the more commonly used and understood terms in the field related to Norman’s IV and V positions are ‘Neuroticism’ and ‘Openness to Experience’; these terms are related to the convergence of research done within the lexical approach and the questionnaire approach.. The Questionnaire Approach Personality research and theory has and largely still relies mostly on the self-report instrument of the questionnaire for the information that guides it. It is theorized by supporters of the FFM that the five-trait factors that arose in the lexical approach to discovering relevant personality traits can be found in the majority of reported outcomes using personality questionnaire instruments. German psychologist H.J. Eysenck identified Extraversion and Neuroticism as major components of psychological tests around the same time that Norman was identifying synonymous concepts as part of the framework derived using the lexical approach, and subsequently, the pervasiveness of these two categorizations of human traits within questionnaire results led them to become known as “the Big Two” –no far stretch of the imagination for Goldberg to derive the “Big Five” terminology after that. Two of the most recognized names in the arena of five-factor personality theory are Paul Costa and Robert McCrae, because of their substantive contributions to the researching and defining of measureable broad scale personality factors, as well as sub-facet traits related to each of the main five factors. They published their NEO Personality Inventory (1985) measuring Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E) and Openness to Experience (O) after analyzing Cattell’s 16PF, and eventually more and more similarities amongst researchers became known. The recurrence of the N and E dimensions of personality in a wide variety of instruments over years of psychiatric research was the beginning of solidifying a unified theory of personality measurement. The lexical and questionnaire traditions eventually merged into what is the contemporary FFM because of consistent overlap in the findings of independent researchers –for example, Auke Tellegen and John William Atkinson proposed the factor of “Absorption” in their model (1974), which was. 14.

(23) similar to Costa & McCrae’s “Openness”, and again, “Self-Control” suggested by Costa & McCrae was similar to the dimension of “Constraint” suggested by Tellegen (1982) which developed into the currently recognized trait of “Conscientiousness”. In testament to the overlap in findings, in the table below, Oliver John and McCrae show a list of personality scales empirically related to each of the five factors: The consonant findings from the lexical and the questionnaire personality schools are ultimately the strength of the Big Five/Five-Factor Model as a common taxonomy of personality traits. This is due to the underlying need in all psychological research for appealing, accessible simplification that can lead to useful generalization. As factor analysts continued along the lexical convention they were able to find correlation across languages; the 4500 trait terms found in English matched highly with German, Japanese and Chinese lexicons, attesting to the universal importance of defining personality and speaking to our human instinct to classify personality traits (John & Srivastava, 1999). Today, researchers are still examining the extent to which the Big Five structure generalizes across cultures.. Details of the Big Five Theory As has already been introduced, the Five-Factor Model of personality trait theory presents 5 major personality constructs, within each of which are grouped several secondary/minor/subfacet traits. The five major traits hereafter referred to in this research follow the OCEAN acronym derived from five-factor theory which uses Openness (O), Conscientiousness (C), Extraversion (E), Agreeableness (A), and Neuroticism (N); there has always been terminology ambiguity concerning the naming of the traits, but as previously mentioned, there is certainly general consensus in terms of what is being measured/observed in each trait. The FFM includes a number of propositions about the nature and developmental course of each of the major personality traits, as well as about the relation of these traits to their respective sub-facets and to the behavioral outcomes associated with each. The work of Costa & McCrae is considered invaluable to this particular point in fivefactor theory, because their original naming of the major and sub traits is most popularly used as a basis for further investigation. For example, the table below is based on the use of Costa & McCrae’s NEO Personality Inventory test as a measure of the big five traits. The table is a summarization of the big five traits, the names and definitions of their respective sub-facet traits, and profile adjectives describing what high and low scoring means within each trait. Following. 15.

(24) this summary table, a detailed examination of the Big Five is given.. Extroversion As one of the first traits to be highlighted as significant across the research, extroversion has perhaps always appeared in factor-analytic models, and is one of the traits to appear even in non five-factor models, such as Eysenck's PEN model. The term is incredibly recognizable - and possibly overused to the point of misnomer – even outside the realm of trait psychology. At its simplest, the term implies an “energetic approach to the social and material world” (Popkins, 2010) and high scorers in extroversion are described as having personality traits such as sociability, high activity, assertiveness, and positive emotionality. It has been referred to as social adaptability, though the popularity of this term seems to be waning (Zuckerman, 1991). One of the most important aspects of the definition of extroversion is that it is "a trait characterized by a keen interest in other people and external events, and a venturing forth with confidence into the unknown" (Ewen, 1998). This emphasis on comfort in social interaction and the external is what is possibly most distinctive about persons who can be considered extroverts. It is important to discuss traits associated with both extremes of each major trait spectrum. Again, because of the wide understanding of the term extrovert, most laymen will have an idea of what it means to be considered an introvert; scientifically, that is, those who score low on the extroversion scale. Low scorers tend to lack the exuberance, energy, and activity levels of extroverts. To avoid the trap of merely pathologizing the low-end score traits of a major factor, the lack of social involvement of an introvert should not be interpreted as merely the extrovert’s sad opposite. Introversion is not the same as shyness or depression. Introverts simply need less interpersonal stimulation and often display a preference for being alone. Common personality components are a tendency to be quiet, deliberate, and independent. The 6 sub-facet traits on the Extroversion (E) scale in the NEO Personality Inventory are Warmth, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity, Excitement-Seeking, and Positive Emotions. Observing these as examples of the five-factor sub-facet structure, it is relatively easy to see and understand how the structure works to present a comprehensive picture of personality. Each of these sub-facets has its unique definition (see above table), but they exist under the umbrella of Extroversion, each adding more detail to the overall concept.. Agreeableness 16.

(25) The Agreeableness (A) scale trait is primarily meant to measure interpersonal tendencies; that is, how compatible a person is with others, or, more importantly, how interested a person is in getting along with others. The highly agreeable individual is fundamentally concerned with cooperation, altruism, and social harmony – a ‘people person’. Goldberg used the lexical approach to define Agreeableness as a major trait domain from the occurrence of personality words similar to the construct in language and in other previous work (Goldberg, 1981). The personality words used as sub-facet terms under Agreeableness illustrate the good-natured friendliness of the high scoring end of this trait easily and perfectly: . Trust (in others) – Agreeable people are optimistic about people and their intentions. They believe people are basically decent and so they trust easily.. . Compliance – Because they are interested in social harmony, Agreeable people are more likely to compromise and/or avoid confrontations in order to get along.. . Modesty – Working well with the facet of Compliance, Modesty is one of the components of Agreeableness that contributes to the likeability of a high scorer in this trait. Humility is generally more likeable than arrogance in personalities.. . Sympathy – Also referred to as Tender Mindedness, it refers to an ability to be compassionate and empathetic.. . Sincerity – High scoring in this facet may be related to being considered genuine; somewhat controversially, this same sub-facet is often described as candid or frank, which are not necessarily positively connoted in common vernacular.. . Altruism – Again, in the spirit of likeability and social harmony, Agreeable people tend to put others’ needs before their own.. On the low scoring end of the scale – the unavoidably negative sounding Disagreeable end – the individual is much more cynical, competitive, self-interested, and self-promoting, with reported difficulty feeling empathic and higher tendencies towards manipulation. Each end of the polarity in the major trait scales as well as their respective sub-facets has components that can be construed as positive and useful, however; the skepticism of a low scorer in the Trust subfacet can be more optimal in a situation in which high scoring Compliance prevents a necessary confrontation, for example. The particular real world applications of each major domain are to be discussed later in the chapter.. Conscientiousness 17.

(26) Conscientiousness relates to a person’s level of attention. In the English language the basic dictionary term has its meaning derived from the conscience and this is reflected in the definitions measured within the sub-facets of the domain. Some of the sub-facets seem more aligned with the moral connotation of the term ‘conscientious’ and some align with the ideas of meticulousness and carefulness that relate to the conscience. Either way, Conscientiousness is associated with self-control – this is reflected in the fact that the term used for low-scorers on the scale is Impulsive. The opposite of a Conscientious individual in personality theory is an Impulsive individual. The NEO PI-R sub-facets of Conscientiousness are Competence, Order, Dutifulness, Achievement-Striving, Self-Discipline, and Deliberation. Conscientiousness gets a lot of attention in terms of how it can benefit individuals in society. Obviously, high scoring in these constructs can be perceived as desirable character traits, especially in a work environment. High scoring in Competence, Self-Discipline and Deliberation is a reflection of abilities to think things through, plan for the future, and be careful in terms of one’s actions. High Order accounts for the neatness and thoroughness associated with Conscientious persons. Dutifulness is also referred to as Sense of Responsibility, and it is what contributes to the image of Conscientious people as reliable. Achievement-striving as a facet is somewhat self-explanatory, as it measures exactly that – the degree to which the individual values success and is willing to work towards it. The extreme high end of these traits can combine into a workaholic, perfectionist type nature, or perhaps be considered boring or even be associated with types of compulsive disorders. According to the NEO Personality Inventory Professional Manual, “individuals low on Conscientiousness are unable to motivate themselves to perform a task that they would like to accomplish” (Costa & McCrae, 1992). If the highly Conscientious individual is consistently viewed as reliable and hard-working, then the unfortunate perception of Impulsive (low Conscientious) persons is that may be unreliable, lack ambition or work ethic, and disorderly. Low Conscientiousness is an indication of an easy-going nature, and these persons are generally more spontaneous, but also less driven by a need for achievement.. Openness Openness, also known as openness to experience or intellect, is held as a broad dimension of individual experiences, that includes both structural and motivational aspects: “Openness is seen as breadth, depth and permeability of consciousness, and in the recurrent need to enlarge. 18.

(27) and examine experience (McCrae & Costa). The structural aspect of openness recalls Rokeach’s (1960) classic conception of dogmatism in terms of labeled beliefs, and also Hartmann’s (1991) description of thick and thin boundaries in the mind. The motivational side of openness suggests links to Murray’s (1938) needs for understanding, change, and sentience as well as Zuckerman’s (1979) Experience Seeking. The sub facets that individuals possess with high openness traits tend to be liberal, creative, curious and aesthetically minded and fantastical. In terms of career, they are more likely to be artists or scientists (Fagan, 2014) They are also characterized as being more willing to have interest novel ideas and interests and experience positive and negative emotions more deeply. In contrast, low scorers tend to behave more conservatively, hold more conformist values, and experience a thinner range of affect than high scorers (Jonassaint et al., 2010) Unlike Neuroticism and Extraversion, Openness appears to be abstractly directly related to intelligence, rather than merely affect test performance (psychometric intelligence). Conversely, other researchers have favored to refer to Openness as Intellect or Culture, deciphering this personality trait in terms of introspective reflection and intellectual knowledge (Goldberg, 1994; Johnson, 1994; Saucier, 1994). Openness is consequently linked with intellectual curiosity, vivid imagination, and behavioral flexibility (McCrae & Costa, 1997), but also with understanding ability, knowledge in science, change and autonomy (see Ashton, Lee, Vernon, & Jang, 2000).. Neuroticism Of all the traits within the Big Five Personality Trait, neuroticism is the trait that is considered to be “negative” or “bad.” Personality researchers habitually reverse it and refer to it as “emotional stability.” Stable people are calm under pressure while neurotic people tend to be anxious, pessimistic, stressed, upset, fearful, and emotionally unstable (Hough et al., 1990). Neuroticism has a very strong biological basis; the two most fundamental traits are neuroticism and extraversion. They date all the way back to Ancient Greece, where Hippocrates (460-370 BC), a Greek physician labeled people as belonging to one of four personality types depending on how calm/excitable and morose/sanguine they were. Subsequently, Eysenck (1967) proposed just two personality traits, extraversion and neuroticism, before further research expanded to three and eventually five. Though conscientiousness and agreeableness may be associated to higher cognitive. 19.

(28) functions of inhibition and executive control extraversion and neuroticism are more associated with the older, “system 1” regions. Many studies have found that neuroticism is related to the “Amygdala,” which is considered to be an old, primal area of the brain that is accountable for sensing emotions, specifically fear. Gray (1970) proposed that there are two independent regions in the brain: the Behavioral Activation System (BAS) and the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS). The BAS, theorized as extraversion, which concerns a person’s sensitivity to reward and their probability of approaching desirable stimuli, whereas the BIS (neuroticism) looks at sensitivity to punishment and evading aversive stimuli. A person can be high in both: a neurotic extravert would be delicate to both positive and negative emotions. It is for this reason that researchers have used measurements of BAS/BIS to determine when a bipolar patient is due to undergo a manic or depressive episode. The con of neuroticism is epitomized by amplified sensitivity to negative emotions. Thus, neurotics are more likely than others to “negative” in a situation, which leads to them becoming stressed and offended by things which most people would consider trivial. This is why research has found that that neurotics are much more sensitive to stressful or anxiety-provoking conditions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). In line with the biopsychological processes previously outlined, both low neuroticism and high extraversion are related to happiness. Shockingly though, neuroticism has strong correlations to depression. In fact, out of the Big Five Personality Traits, neuroticism is the strongest correlate of several psychological conditions, including depression, schizophrenia, obsessiveness, antisocial personality disorder, addiction, negative treatment and family problems (Millon & Davis 1996). The trait of Neuroticism is also related to poor physical health as well, through two processes. Firstly, neuroticism increases the likelihood of indulging in risky behaviors such as conflict (emotionally and physically) and substance abuse. Secondly, neuroticism can have an effect on the body; it can, for example, increase blood pressure and induce a heart attack. Personal achievement further falls under the wheels of neuroticism. For example, the trait is consistently related to poor job performance due to its associations with low self-confidence and high anxiety, hostility and vulnerability. Some studies even suggest that emotional stability is as important for job success as conscientiousness (Kendler, Kuhn & Prescott, 2004).. 20.

(29) Additionally, it is an important intercessor of exam success, because neurotics tend to feel a lot more stress and anxiety under exam conditions, which disturbs their performance. This is said to occur because neurotic people are very sensitive to internal and external negative stimuli, which escalates “mental noise” and makes it hard to pay attention to the task at hand (Halamandaris & Power, 1999).. Critique and Defense of the Model This chapter has hinted at some of the problems associated with developing a cohesive theory of personality traits. Mainly, the researchers responsible for the five-factor approach to trait theory had to face the overarching obstacle of whether or not it is at all even possible to develop a set of constructs for the scientific description of personality. As one FFM dissenter, psychologist Jack Block (1995) stresses, there are scientific criteria that need to be fulfilled if a theory in personality is to be regarded as the “universal descriptive framework… for the comprehensive assessment of individuals” that McCrae (1989) and other FFM advocates claim it to be. There are certainly warranted critiques that can be made when the Five-Factor model is brought under the scrutiny of these scientific criteria then, and it would behoove any researcher to examine these critiques before attempting to utilize the model. One very significant critique of the FFM is that it calls itself a model at all, when there are discrepancies between what the FFM does and the understood definitions of what makes a psychological model. Block (1995) again posits that the term ‘model’ in psychology must refer to a working representation that must be based on some already established theory, and that it must operate with the intention to generate some new psychological phenomena. From this point of view, admittedly the Big Five and Five-Factor school of thought did not have any roots in established hypotheses or theories, and its designation as a ‘model’ is not based on its use to explore the structure of personality the way other personality trait analysis is connected to the broader work of a particular theoretical approach (like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator test developing from Jungian trait theory as a tool to further examine the premises of this particular approach to human personality, for example). If it is agreed that the scientific understanding of the word ‘model’ can be either a descriptive framework of what exists to be observed, or, a theoretical explanation of what causes the observable to exist, then it must be noted that the FiveFactor Model/Big Five is a model in the descriptive sense only. On its own, the Big Five are not an actual theory of how personality is developed or works; the five-factor structure is in fact an. 21.

(30) empirically based phenomenon of personality categorization, however, as proven by the robust measurability of the trait constructs. Another point of contention about the five-factor approach is the difficulty in reaching consensus on the number of factors that should logically exist – even among the researchers that advocate the approach. This is probably connected to an increasingly popular trend in Big Five personality trait tests becoming much shorter than other personality assessment instruments and many argue that with smaller instruments there is no way the individual differences in personality can adequately be assessed. The basic problem is that there is the question of whether there are other overarching factors to personality that the FFM misses out on. Some proposed 6th factors include Masculinity/Femininity (Kamp & Gough, 1986), and perhaps most notably Honesty/Humility from the 6-factor HEXACO model (Ashton & Lee, 2008) for example. Even within the five-factor school, there is subtle disagreement between the lexical and questionnaire approaches as to the naming and underlying details of one of the five factors called Openness to Experience in the questionnaire tradition and Intellect by many lexical researchers. Additionally, concerning the naming and definition of traits at the facet level directly below the Big Five there seems to be even more discord, because the truth about factor based personality theory is that “no consensus exists regarding the number and identity of the facets” (DeYoung, 2014). This may initially sound negative as a characteristic of the FFM, but it is in fact possible to view the lack of a universally accepted list of sub-facet traits as an opportunity for open research on which sub-facets can be observed and measured most vigorously; in fact it is because of this opportunity for exploration in trait theory at the sub-facet level that new models expounding on the Big Five, such as the Big Five Aspect Scale that will be discussed further, have come about. Since the outcomes in research already highlighted, the FFM is obviously not flawless, but represents a cross section of dimensions of personality that have been explored and pointed out by enough personality theorists to conclude its broad usefulness. In the end, the goal of the FFM is to represent the highest hierarchical level of trait description, providing a useful tool to summarize the complex web of personality traits that affect human experience. The main merit and reason to opt to use the Big Five theory as the point of view in this research is the crosscultural generalizability that Jolijn-Hendriks, et al. (2003) investigated in their study of the structural invariance of the Five Factor Personality Inventory across 13 countries and a variety of. 22.

(31) language families and cultures. Jolijn-Hendriks et al., found that 5 clear factor structures were found in all but the smallest sample. The language families and their corresponding nations represented were:  Indo-European o Germanic . Belgium. . England. . Germany. . The Netherlands. . United States. o Romance . Italy. . Spain. o Slavic . Croatia. . Czech Republic. . Slovakia.  Semito-Hamitic o Israel  Altaic o Hungary o Japan Certainly, the idea of a trend in the five-factor construct being presented across such a wide representation of people is exciting and captivating within the realm of personality research. The compelling results from this study even inspired the proposed international Five-Factor Personality Inventory reference structure. As a result, it can be assumed that the generalizability of the five-factor structure will also translate into generalizability of the related effects of personality traits on academic outcomes that this research hopes to explore.. Existing Research on the Big Five and Academic Success When categorizing the existing research on the Big Five and academic success, there are obvious patterns that can be seen in the findings. Of course, the most obvious statement that can. 23.

(32) be made from even a superficial glancing at what literature is available is that there are in fact clear, undeniable relationships to be drawn – between the five personality traits and behavior in general, and more narrowly, between the traits and academic outcomes. Most helpful to the purpose of this research is the pattern found to reveal strong relationships between specific Big Five traits and positive academic performance and the patterns associating the sub-facet level more strongly with the academic outcomes than the more broad meta-traits. In reviewing the existing literature perhaps most interesting and, in the end, most compelling towards the need for execution of similar work in Taiwan, was the patterns found in the geographical replication of the findings. It is this repetition of findings in different nations that are compelling to the idea that similar findings can be expected from this research among international students in Taiwan. The literature presented reveals as its foundation the rationality of using Big Five personality traits – to review, these are Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism - to predict academic outcomes. One of many research examples supporting this point is the study by Conard, (2006), which investigated validity of the Big 5 for predicting college GPA and course performance. Their results concluded that personality measures are promising predictors of academic outcomes and showed that Conscientiousness predicted both their investigated criterion. Similarly, Noftle, and Robins, (2007), examined the relationship between Big 5 traits and SAT scores and high school and college GPA. This study is of particular interest, since the authors claimed that there had been virtually no research on personality and SAT scores at the time, and the SAT is an internationally recognized test of academic achievement. Also of repute was the fact that Noftle and Robins replicated their findings across 4 different personality inventories and found that participants’ scoring in Openness was the strongest predictor of SAT verbal scores, that Conscientiousness predicted high school and college GPA and of course, proved that personality traits have independent effects on academic outcomes, even when controlling for traditional predictors of these outcomes, such as controlling for SAT scores when examining college GPA. As mentioned, according to the existing literature, the deeper level of trait facets seem to be even more strongly related to academic outcomes than just the Big Five. Paunonen, and Ashton, (2001) studied two of the Big 5 factors - Conscientiousness and Openness - along with 2 of their constituent narrow personality traits - Need for Achievement and Need for Understanding - to predict final grades in an undergraduate psychology course and found exactly. 24.

(33) that the lower level traits were stronger predictors of grade outcomes. In this case, the researchers even concluded that broad factor measures may be counterproductive in behavior prediction and explanation, but there does not seem to be many others in the field who would concur with this degree of statement. Lounsbury, Welsh, Gibson, and Sundstrom, (2005), for example, examined the relationships between all of the broad Big 5 traits and the narrow personality traits of Optimism and Work Drive in relation to cognitive ability in 375 high school students in Tennessee, USA (their research sampled middle school students as well) and found that Optimism – the narrow personality trait - and Openness were the significant predictors in their high school sample. A pattern emerges here highlighting Conscientiousness and Openness as the Big 5 traits most closely linked with academic outcomes. That is, the existing literature repeatedly indicates high scoring in these personality factors predicts high academic achievement, whether it is measured using test scores, or GPA, or other markers of academic performance. The studies mentioned here already were exclusively American in origin, but the thread seems to persist in other countries as well. O’Connor, and Paunonen, (2007) reviewed Canadian empirical literature on relationship between big 5 traits and post-secondary academic achievement and found Conscientiousness to be most strongly and consistently associated with academic success and Openness also to be sometimes positively associated. Thus, the personality factor that seems to be more steadily connected with academic performance is Conscientiousness (Blickle, 1996; Busato et al., 2000; Costa & McCrae, 1992; De Raad & Schouwenburg, 1996). Studies have duplicated this relationship in school (Wolfe & Johnson, 1995) as well as undergraduate (Goff & Ackerman, 1992) and postgraduate (Hirschberg & Itkin, 1978) education. Some authors have argued that Conscientiousness may affect academic Openness to Experience also known as intellect, has been connected with academic success in school (Shuerger & Kuma, 1987) and university, both at an undergraduate (De Fruyt & Mervielde, 1996) and postgraduate (Hirschberg & Itkin, 1978) level. Some have debated that this link can be expounded in terms of the correlation between crystallized intelligence also referred to as general intelligence, and the Openness to Experience trait (Brand, 1994). Others researchers have explained this association in terms of typical rather than maximal performance (Goff & Ackerman, 1992; Hofstee, 2001), since Openness has also been revealed to be vastly correlated with Typical Intellectual Engagement (Goff & Ackerman, 1992), a trait that refers to. 25.