Amir Maliqi¹, Islam-Isaac Borincaj-Cruss²

Show more
¹ Department of Psychology, University of Prishtina “Hasan Prishtina”, Prishtine, Kosovo.
² Faculty of Arts and Social Science, International University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Show less

Abstract: Motivation could be characterized as internal state, that it enlivens, directs and sustains behavior. With regard to schooling, the concept of student motivation is used to explain the extent to which students pay attention to the activities or different exercises, regardless of teaching, or not. Therefore, in the recent years there have been several researches, which among other things are also intended to review and analyze the impact of cognitive and affective aspects of the teachers in raising motivation to the students. The hypotheses are: Effectiveness of teachers only on the cognitive aspect is not enough on increasing student’s motivation. While another hypothesis is: A good teacher in affective aspect increase positively the student’s motivation. Regarding to the methodology, this study uses quantitative method, specifically descriptive-correlational method and this study belongs to cross-sectional design, as a measuring instrument is used in questionnaire and data processing was done through PSPP. This study included 26 students, conveniently selected from XI/3 grade. The results lead to: The cognitive factor of teachers has an impact on in-creasing student’s motivation. However it does not act alone. It interacts with affective factor in this direction, and affective factor of teachers also has an impact on increasing student’s motivation but even here we have its interaction with cognitive factor. So a good teacher should have these two aspects developed to be effective in raising student’s motivation, while, with regard to gender and residence it has not yet significant differences, although to gender there exists an upward tendency towards them.

Keywords: Teachers, Students, Cognitive & Affective Domains, Motivation, Learning, Academic Performance

Cite this paper: Maliqi, A. and Borincaj-Cruss, I. (2015) The Influence of Teachers on Increasing Student’s Motivation. Psychology, 6, 915-921. doi: 10.4236/psych.2015.68089.

References

[1]   Anderman, L. H., & Kaplan, A. (2008). The Role of Interpersonal Relationships in Student Motivation: Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 115-119.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.2.115-120

[2]   Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive Tutors: Lessons Learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0402_2

[3]   Banfield, S. R., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (2006). The Effect of Teacher Misbehaviors on Teacher Credibility and Affect for Teacher. Communication Education, 55, 63-72.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520500343400

[4]   Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating Students to Learn (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Eerlbaum Associates, Ins.

[5]   Brown, G.I. (1971). Human Teaching for Human Learning. New York: The Viking Press.

[6]   Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994) Research Methodsin Education (4th ed.). London: Routledge

[7]   Cronbach, L. J.(1951). Coefficient Aplha and Internal Strukture of Test. Psychometrica, 16, 297-334.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555

[8]   Hickey, D., Moore, A., & Pellegrino, J. (2001). The Motivational and Academic Consequences of Two Innovative Mathematics Environments: Do Curricular Innovations and Reforms Make a Difference? American Educational Research Journal, 38, 611-652. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312038003611

[9]   Kerssen-Griep, J. (2001). Teacher Communication Activities Relevant to Student Motivation: Classroom Framework and Instructional Communication Competence. Communication Education, 50, 256-273.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520109379252

[10]   Lumsden, L. S. (1994). Student Motivation to Learn. ERIC Digest, No. 92, 3 p.

[11]   Martin, B. L., & Briggs, L. J. (1986). The Cognitive and Affective Domains: Integration for Instruction and Research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, 35, 123-130.

[12]   Martin, M., Meyers, S., & Moffet, T. (2002). Students’ Motives for Communicating with Their Instructors.

[13]   Miron, M., & Segal, E. (1978). “The Good University Teacher” as Perceived by the Students. Higher Education, 7, 27-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00129788

[14]   Russell, M. (2004). The Importance of the Affective Domain in Further Education Classroom Culture. Research in Post- Compulsory Education, 9, 249-270.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13596740400200178

[15]   Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching Effectiveness Research in the Last Decade: Role of Theory and Research Design in Disentangling Meta-Analysis Results. Revieë of Educational Research, 77, 454-499. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654307310317

[16]   Thomas, D. (1975). Education’s Seven Deadly Myths. NASSP Bulletin, 59, 60-66.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019263657505939511

[17]   Wilson, S., & Cameron, R. (1996). Student Teacher Perceptions of Effective Teaching: A Developmental Perspective. Journal of Education for Teaching, 22, 181-195.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02607479620340

[18]   Williams, L. (2003). Including the Affective Domain. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 14, 3-4.

[19]   Woolfolk, A. (2011). Educational Psychology. Active Learning Edition (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.