Dominant achievement goals and academic outcomes across tracks in high school

Abstract

The self-reported grades Dutch, English and Math of 13,970 students in the third grade of Dutch secondary education (US grade 9) were investigated with regard to educational track-level and dominant achievement goal (DAG). The performance approach goal group scored significantly higher on all three subjects than the performance avoidance group, the mastery approach group, the mastery avoidance group and the group without a DAG. In addition, the differences between the performance approach group and the other groups with regard to the three school subjects were of the same size, suggesting that the DAG is associated with the same processes across various school subjects. The magnitude of the differences between the other DAG groups, however, decreased with decreasing track level, suggesting that the DAGs' adaptive value varies systematically with ability level.

The dominant achievement goal in Dutch secondary education

“…The above suggests that the dominant achievement goal (DAG) is eminently suited for longitudinal studies. In the last decade a couple of studies showed that most people have a DAG (de Lange et al, 2010;Fernandez-Rio et al, 2014;Scheltinga et al, 2016;Scheltinga, Timmermans, & van der Werf, 2017;Van Yperen, 2006;Van Yperen et al, 2011;Van Yperen & Orehek, 2013;Van Yperen & Renkema, 2008). In domains such as education, the workplace or sports, people tend to prefer one specific achievement goal over the other goals from the 2x2 achievement goal framework (Elliot & McGregor, 2001).…”

“…Results regarding the association of the DAG with performance outcome measures, however, are reported only by Scheltinga et al (2017) and Van Yperen (2006). In the latter study, Van Yperen ( 2006) used the average score on final course grades of 109 sophomore and 170 junior students enrolled as majors in the science department at a university in the Netherlands to examine the various DAG groups.…”

“…The means of the performance approach and the performance avoidance group proved to be the highest, respectively lowest, of the five DAG groups, but only the difference between these two groups reached statistical significance. Scheltinga et al (2017) studied the self-reported school grades in Dutch, Math, and English of 13,970 students in the third grade of Dutch secondary education (comparable to US grade 9) with regard to DAG group and concluded that the performance-approach group scored highest on all three subjects. In addition, the differences between the other DAG groups were in general negligible.…”

“…Furthermore, the results of Scheltinga et al (2017) rely on self-reported school grades, which especially the performance-approach group may have presented in a too favorable light (Van Yperen et al, 2011). Moreover, because the results of Van Yperen ( 2006) are based on grades that were partly produced several semesters before the DAG was measured, we do not know the specific goal that the students endorsed at the time they produced those grades.…”

“…Probably, track itself is a factor by which the results vary. For instance, the prevalence of the various DAG groups was found to differ systematically across tracks; in higher tracks there are less students without a DAG, more students with a mastery-avoidance goal and less students with an approach goal (Scheltinga et al, 2016(Scheltinga et al, , 2017. In addition, the (positive) association of the performanceapproach group with self-reported grades English, Dutch, and Math existed primarily in higher tracks, while the other goal groups generally did not show significant associations with these school subjects in any track (Scheltinga et al, 2017).…”