St.

Paul University
Manila
(St. Paul University System)
680 Pedro Gil St. Malate, Manila

ENDORSEMENT LETTER

October 7, 2015
Pricila B. Marzan, Ph. D.
Program Chair, Psychology
St. Paul University Manila
Dear Dr. Marzan:
I am endorsing herewith the thesis of DRAPER, SHAIRA R., RIVA, PATRISYA
KIM S.,and VILLAFUERTE, ARIANNE JOIE S., with the title, The Psychological Needs
as Predictors of Science Motivation among Grade 10 Students from Public Schools.
I have read and examined the final paper and recommend that it be accepted for thesis
oral validation, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of
Science in Psychology.

Mr. Rene Nob

Thesis Adviser

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS

AS PREDICTORS OF SCIENCE MOTIVATION
AMONG GRADE 10 STUDENTS FROM PUBLIC SCHOOLS

A Thesis Proposal presented to

the faculty of the College of Arts, Sciences, and Education
St. Paul University Manila

In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Science in Psychology

Submitted by:
Draper, Shaira R.
Riva, Patrisya Kim S.
Villafuerte, Arianne Joie S.

October 2015

6
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page ..i
Table of Contents.................................................................ii
List of Figures..iii
Chapter 1: Introduction...........................................................................1
Background of the Study1
Review of Related Literature.5
Synthesis ..14
Theoretical Framework.15
Conceptual Framework.16
Statement of the Problem..20
Hypothesis.20
Scope and Limitation.21
Significance of the Study...22
Definition of Terms23
Chapter 2: Methodology..25
Research Design.... 25
Participants ....26
Research Instruments ....26
Data Gathering Procedures.28
Data Analysis..29
Appendices..30
Appendix- A.30
Appendix- B..31
References39

7
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Three psychological needs as predictors of science motivation

Chapter 1
Introduction

18

2
Background of the study
Motivation is any condition that initiates, activates, or maintains the individuals goaldirected behavior. In other words, motivation is the psychological process that arouses, directs
and maintains the behavior of an individual.
Motivation is widely important in various settings, especially in academics. But
motivation is not directly observable, nonetheless what are directly observable are its
multidimensional stream of behavior and the products of those behaviors. In order to be
motivated, it means to be moved to do something, as defined by Deci & Ryan (2000).
The pertinence of motivation in the academic settings has been highlighted from a
variety of researches. A great extent of the research has been explained from a large number
of theoretical perspectives, which will be mentioned in the latter part of the paper.
In several recent studies, students motivation has been found as playing an important
role in their conceptual change processes, critical thinking, learning strategies and science
learning achievement (Lee 1989, Lee & Brophy 1996). In addition, self-determined
motivation has been linked to various educational outcomes across the age span, from early
elementary school to college students. Some of these studies Vallerand, & Blais, 1988
Vallerand, have shown that students who had more self-determined forms of motivation for
doing schoolwork were more likely to stay in school than students who had less selfdetermined motivation.
Psychologists and educators have uncovered the role of motivation in the context of
student achievement and learning. In accordance with Pintrich & Schunk (2002) it is evident
that in order for students to pick up their performance in school, one must have a cognitive

3
skill and motivational will which was the focus of researchers during 1980s. The separation of
the cognitive and motivational factors of learning and student achievement has been done a
research on during the early times. As for this study, different assumptions with regard to
motivation in academic setting will be further discussed in the paper.
One theory may explain motivation in an academic setting, since it is found to be
important. In accordance with Deci & Ryan (1985), the Self- Determination Theory have
pointed out that the quality of motivation seems to be more important than the quantity and it
also describes a continuum of the quality of motivation. In reference to Vallerand et. al.,
(2008), the basic principle of Self- Determination Theory is that the environment does not
matter per se, but rather that function of the environment that supports the basic psychological
needs of a person. The further elaboration for the said theory will be more discussed on the
review of literature of the present study.
In mentioning the basic psychological needs of a person, self- determination also
postulates that the basic psychological needs are innate and universal. Moreover, SDT
upholds an understanding of human motivation that requires a consideration of the innate
psychological needs of an individual. Deci and Ryan (2000) proposed that the three basic
psychological needs of humans are--- the needs to feel competent, autonomous and related to
others.
For further understanding of the concept of the totality of motivation, it is important to
highlight that it does not only explain the behavior of a person but also the facilitation of
motivation (types of motivation) from Deci and Ryans Self- Determination Theory (1985).
Motivation may refer to as intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is known to
be the highest form of motivation. A person is intrinsically motivated if that person does

4
something out of personal interest in which the person finds inherent enjoyment. A person
who is intrinsically motivated manifests volition since the behavior itself is already
internalized and is more self- controlled. Extrinsic motivation in contrast, refers to a person
only doing an activity for external contingencies.
The second to the highest form of motivation is the autonomous motivation which
includes both intrinsic and types of extrinsic motivation. People who are autonomously
motivated experience volition or a will to do the action enthusiastically. The other one is
controlled motivation, in contrast, only include external regulation in which a person does
something to receive reward and to avoid punishment.
Furthermore, SDT elaborated that it is not only the quantity of motivation that explains
the behavior of a person but rather the continuum described as a quality of motivation
(facilitation of motivation). As it progresses, the behavior of a person becomes more selfdetermined and self-regulated. A brief summary of the continuum will be discussed from
lower to higher level of motivation accordingly. Amotivation is having no motivation at all.
The motivation is neither intrinsic nor extrinsic. Thus, it will not be included in the present
study because it does not have significant effect in the science motivation of the students.
Followed by external regulation where a person does an activity for external rewards. Next is
introjected regulation which refers to doing an activity in which a person behaves in order to
avoid guilt and shame or to attain ego-enhancements such as pride. After that, a more
autonomous behavior where one already consciously values a goal, thus, a person engages an
activity because one already accepted the action is important this is known to be the
identification regulation. Following the identification regulation is the integrated regulation
which is known to be the most autonomous form of behaviour when identified regulations are

5
fully integrated to the self and it becomes congruent to ones other values and needs. And
lastly, intrinsic motivation which is the highest form of motivation as defined above.
Science and technology has become important in our industrialized society today. More
and more students are enrolling to science course to pursue a degree and eventually attain a
career in a scientific field. Accomplishing a career in science is mainly influenced by the early
choice made by students (according to Lavigne, Vallerand, Miquelon, 2007) It is important for
instructors to keep their students motivated in science subjects. A motivational approach can
be used to understand the motivation of students in educational context by using the Self
Determination Theory of Deci and Ryan (1985).
The public education in the Philippines has a fairly recent history, dating back to the
early part of the 20th century, according to Jimenez (2001). Before then, students attended
religious as well as nonsectarian private schools. This tradition of a large private role in
provision continued even after the establishment of the public school system and still persists
today, particularly at higher levels. There are large differences between quantity and quality of
education between private and public institutions. Though a large difference between these
institutions have been established since then, that private schools has more focus on their
students because of the controlled amount of children per classroom, many parents still enroll
their children in public schools because of having low budget.
The researchers conducted the study to find out if the psychological needs from the
Self- Determination Theory by Deci and Ryan (1985) predict the motivation of students in an
academic domain specifically in Science.
Based on the empirical evidences, according to Deci & Ryan (2000) Although
autonomy and competence have been found to be the most powerful influences on intrinsic

6
motivation, theory and research suggest that relatedness also plays a role, albeit a more distal
one, in the maintenance of intrinsic motivation. Since relatedness is not as powerful
influence as competence and autonomy, it still plays a role in an individual. A sense of
relatedness may function as a motivational resource when students are faced with challenge or
difficulties. In times of stress, students who experience trusted others as backing them up
respond with more vigor, flexibility, and constructive actions. Therefore, this research
addresses the relatedness of the students to their teachers, parents and classroom peers.

Review of Literature
Motivation. Motivation examines the question of why people think and behave as they
do. According to Deci and Ryan (2000), they defined motivation as to be motivated means to
be moved to do something. A person who feels no impetus or inspiration to act is thus
characterized as unmotivated, whereas someone who is energized or activated toward an end
is considered motivated. (p.54) However, we should take note that motivation is not just a
unitary concept. According to Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2002), Social cognitive models
considered one of the most important assumptions about the motivation is that motivation is a
dynamic phenomenon that contradicts the traditionalistic quantitative view models of
motivation. Simply put, newer social cognitive models do not have a dichotomous view
whether the students are either motivated or not motivated. Another assumption is
applied in motivation models is that motivation is not a stable trait of a person, but rather
motivation is varies depending on the situation or the context in the academic setting. Finally,
the third assumption is that the individuals cultural, demographic background and personality
characteristics does not influence academic motivation directly or the contextual

7
characteristics of the environment in the classroom but rather the active regulation of the
person to his or her motivation, behavior, cognition that mediates to the relationship between
the person, context and achievement.
The importance of motivation has been highlighted from the past research in specific domains
(physical activity, smoking cessation, academics) Much of the research has been explained
from multitude of theoretical perspectives. While it holds true that there is no one-single
theory existing that explains motivation in a variety of field; motivation can be defined and
elaborated in different ways
Contemporary Theories of Motivation like Expectancy-Value Theory (Atkinson, 1957), SelfEfficacy (Bandura, 1977), Goal Setting Theory (Locke and Latham, 1990), Goal-Orientation
Theory (Ames, 1992) attempt to explain human motivation in different areas. Intuitively, in
order to perform a task, one must be motivated in order to achieve it. If a person is motivated,
one is more determined and energized to perform and persist even when faced the most
difficult task. Motivation is critical for long term goals such as losing weight and eating a
proper balanced diet for a healthier lifestyle, smoking cessation, sobriety, achieving a college
degree and financial goals. It is also essential as it facilitates commitment to a person.
Self Determination as a form of motivation. As we have mentioned above,
traditionalistic views of motivation consider motivation as a unitary concept that primarily
varies to the totality of it. Theories like Banduras (1996) and Baumeister & Vohs (2007)
assumed that more motivation will lead to better functioning and greater achievement. In
contrast, the perspective of Self Determination Theory of Motivation, however, does not see it
as that. It is important to emphasize by the researchers to make the readers understand the
concept of the totality of motivation does not only explain the behavior of a person but also

8
the facilitation of motivation (types of motivation) according to the theory of Ryan and Deci
Self Determination Theory (1985). From the Self Determination Theory of motivation, Ryan
and Deci (2000) have pointed out that the quality of motivation is seems to be more important
than the quantity and describes a continuum of the quality of motivation
According to Ryan and Deci (2000), the premise of Self Determination Theory suggests
that it is not only the whole amount of motivation that is substantial in itself, but the kind of
motivation that is regulated through a behavior of a person investing towards in doing a task.
As mentioned by Vallerand et. al., (2008), the basic principle of Self Determination Theory is
that the environment does not matter per se, but rather that function of the environment that
supports the basic psychological needs of a person.
To elaborate further, according to theory of Ryan and Deci (2008), the main distinction
of Self Determination Theory was applied: autonomous motivation and controlled motivation.
Another type of motivation called amotivation or lack of motivation was also included.
Before the researchers explain the continuum of the Self-Determination Theory, we would
like to classify it from the higher to lower level of motivation.
First, the highest form of motivation is called intrinsic motivation, when a person is
intrinsically motivated; a person does something out of personal interest in which one finds it
inherently enjoyable. A person who is intrinsically motivated also experiences satisfaction and
pleasure and according to Ryan and Deci (2000) it has been shown that intrinsic motivation
leads in high-quality learning and creativity.
Second, autonomous motivation includes both intrinsic and types of extrinsic
motivation that people identified within the value of activity and ideally will initially integrate

9
it to the sense of self. People who are autonomously motivated experience volition or a will to
do the action voluntarily. The two components of autonomous motivation are identified
regulation and integrated regulation. With identified regulation, a person already values an
activity and there is an endorsement of goals. A good example that will provide is a person
ceasing smoking habits because he/she recognizes that it is an important goal to accomplish.
While integrated regulation, the highest level among the autonomous motivation, is when a
person already possesses a behavior because the behavior is already consistent with other
values and goals. An example given is a person might say I want to lose weight so I will
have a better lifestyle and will also decrease the risk of other diseases, such as hypertension,
diabetes and obesity.
The second one which is controlled motivation, in contrast, only includes external
regulation in which the persons rationale into performing a behavior is for rewards and
avoiding of punishment. External regulation, as part of extrinsic motivation, seeks only for
compliance, external rewards and punishment. A classic example from Deci and Ryan (1985)
as cited by Vallerand & Bisonette (1992) was given, a student may work hard at school in
order to receive a prize promised by their parents. In this case, the motivation is still extrinsic
and nonself-determined, but the instigating factor is the desired reward rather than a
constraint. Regardless of whether the goal of behavior is to obtain rewards or to avoid
sanctions, the individual experiences an obligation to behave in a specific way, and feels
controlled by the reward or the constraint. (p. 601) Introjected regulation is where the
extrinsic motivation has been partially internalized and seeks for self-control, egoinvolvement, internal rewards and avoidance of shame. With introjected regulation, a person
begins to internalize the reasons of their actions and the control is already within the person.
Internalization is defined by Deci and Ryan (2000) as a natural and active process which an

10
individual change his behavior according to socially sanctioned mores to a more personally
valued endorsed self-regulated behaviours. The form of internalization is still however
nonself-determined, as rewards and contingencies is still imposed by the person (Ryan, 1982,
as cited by Vallerand & Bisonnette, 1992) For example, a person would want to start losing
weight because that person might say I need to start losing weight so people will not make
fun of me.
According to Ryan and Deci (2008), another type of motivation has been identified:
amotivation or lack of motivation. Amotivation is neither a form of intrinsic motivation and
extrinsic motivation. Amotivation is also a non-regulated behavior and it manifests behaviors
such as lack of interest, lack of control and decreased of effort in attaining a certain goal. An
amotivated person lacks perceived of contingency between a behavior and outcome. There are
no rewards and thus it will manipulate a person to cease participation in a task or activity. An
amotivated person either do not act at all or act but without intent, it results from not valuing
any activities (Ryan, 1995, as cited by Ryan & Deci, 2000), lack of competency (Bandura,
1986, as cited by Ryan & Deci, 2000) or not wanting to yield a desirable outcome (Seligman,
1975, as cited by Ryan & Deci, 2000) According to Ryan and Deci (2000), as the individuals
progress along this continuum, their motivation becomes less controlled and more selfdetermined.
Innate Psychological Needs in Intrinsic Motivation. Unlike other motivation
theories, according to Deci, Pelletier, Ryan and Vallerand (1991), self-determination also
addresses the energization and direction issues, thus, they postulated that the basic
psychological needs are innate and universal. Based on empirical methods and inductive

11
reasoning, Deci and Ryan (2000) suggested that the three basic psychological needs of
humans are --- the need to feel competent, autonomous and related to others.
According to Deci and Ryan (2000), SDT proposes fundamental needs: (1) A person
should experience optimal challenges in order to achieve mastery and effectance in both
physical and social worlds; (2) that a person should seek attachments, feels belonged, secured
and intimate to others; and (3) to self-regulated ones own behavior. These basic needs also
serve as a guide for people to become more competent, vital and have socially integrated
forms of behavior.
In accordance to Deci and Ryan, the three psychological needs are defined simply by
the following: The need for competency refers to a desire to be effective and master the
environment. The need for relatedness refers to desire to be connected to other people and
having a sense of belongingness, and the need for autonomy, refers to have a control in the
environment. When a person engages in a task, the need of autonomy pertains to having a
sense of free will or acting out of own values and interests.
According to Ryan and Deci (1985), research also revealed that not only rewards but
also deadlines, threats, pressured evaluation and imposed goals can reduce intrinsic
motivation because like tangible rewards, they can perceived it as an external locus of
causality. On the contrary, acknowledgement of feelings, providing more choices and giving
more opportunities will conduce towards greater feelings of autonomy.
Based from the research of Sheinman, Deci, Nezlek (1981), teacher who showed
autonomy support to their students would improve their students intrinsic motivation and
perceived competence over the course of the year. Similar findings of Grolnick, Ryan and

12
Deci (1997) have also been linked to parents who showed autonomy-supportive towards to
their children rather than to controlling parents, are more intrinsically motivated.
The third factor, which is relatedness was also explained and suggested by attachment
theories of Bowlby (1979). During infancy, the intrinsic motivation of a child is more
observable and is considered as exploratory behavior. It is more evident if the child has an
attachment to its parents. Studies from Frodi, Bridges & Grolnick (1985) have found out that
mothers who have shown both security and autonomy support predict exploratory behaviour
of an infant. SDT claims that over the life span of a person, intrinsic motivation will more
likely be developed if the sense of security and relatedness has been acquired. To cite an
example from Manoogian et. al. (1976), it has been found out that when a child performed on
a interesting task with a present of a stranger who failed to respond to their approach, an
extremely low level of intrinsic motivation has been the outcome. Ryan and Grolnick (1986)
also observed that students who perceived their teachers as uncaring or cold also
experience lower level of intrinsic motivation.
Motivation in Academic Setting in Philippines. Psychologists and educators have
find out the role of motivation in the context of student achievement and learning. Early
research on learning and student achievement have been separated the cognitive and
motivational factors affecting to it. However, during 1980s, researchers focus on how both
cognitive and motivational factors influence student learning and achievement. Simply put,
there is an evident that in order for students to do well in school, one must have a cognitive
skill and motivational will. (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002, as cited by Linnenbrink & Pintrich,
2002)

13
There are two types of sectors of education in Philippines; public and private schools
are differentiated mainly by the ownership of the schools, which can be privately-owned or
government-owned. Private schools in Philippines are typically founded by religious bodies
or independent boards of trustees. The funding from these schools came from tuition fees and
other nonpublic sources such as foundations, alumni or private donors. Public schools are
funded by the government, though additional funding can also be acquired from grant
scholarships from foundations or from parent- or student-initiated fundraising activities. Apart
from ownership, other distinctive differences can be found from the public and private sectors
of education.
Among observable differences, funding, infrastructure, class size and achievement gap
is typically attributed to these operational differences. The achievement gap both in public and
private schools seems to be related in terms of social- and school-related factors. To cite an
example, students from private schools in the Philippines tend to have higher income
households and have more access to reading and educational materials, more exposed to
various media and have more educated parents; according to Lockheed and Zhao (1993),
these factors predicted strongly the achievement of students in the Philippines across different
types of schools.
According to Chua (2000), achievement gap is also associated with the differences in
level of expenditures in the two types of school, but some studies (Jimenez et. al. 1988)
indicated that the expenses of public schools are higher than private schools and that private
schools operate more efficiently. Yamauchi (2005) also suggested that selectivity of the
students can be a factor that explains the achievement gap, however, there is a lack of
empirical studies that will provide evidence. It is true that some private schools may have an
open admission policies to meet revenue targets coming from the tuition fees being paid, but

14
it seems that achievement gap can be related more to learning processes of the students.
Citing an example from a study of Lockheed and Zhao (1993), a comparison study of science
achievement in private and public schools in Philippines has indicated that the higher the
science achievement of students in private schools, that more it is associated with stronger
teacher education (i.e., the level of science education at post-secondary of a teacher), efficient
instructional planning and the use of science laboratories needed for the class.
There is also some indication that students motivation can be related to achievement
gaps between private and public schools in the Philippines. Study from Lockheed and Zhao
also found out that students from private schools have more positive attitudes in science
subjects and therefore exerted more effort in doing homework and assignments.
Research from Bernardo and Ismail (2010) has also demonstrated that the support from
parents, teachers and peers may facilitate students engagement in learning.
Motivation in Science domain. Science and technology has become important in our
industrialized society today. More and more students are enrolling to science course to pursue
a degree and eventually attain a career in a scientific field. Accomplishing a career in science
is mainly influenced by the early choice made by students (according to Lavigne, Vallerand,
Miquelon, 2007) It is important for instructors to keep their students motivated in science
subjects.
Although less research has been conducted within the science education field, Ratelle
et. al. (2005) found out that parents autonomy support positively influenced the
psychological needs satisfaction of the children within the science subject. In addition, from
the study of Black and Deci (2000) also showed that teachers autonomy support is also

15
related to the students perception of competence, heightened interest and enjoyment,
improved performance within the organic chemistry subject.
According to Zusho et. al, (2003) as cited by Vallerand et. al. (2007), the role of
teachers behavior and students motivation towards science has been identified as an element
to their persistence within the science subject. A motivational approach can be used to
understand the motivation of students in educational context by using the Self Determination
Theory of Deci and Ryan (1985).
Synthesis
It is evident that motivation is important in specific domains. In the context of
educational setting, higher level of motivation will lead generally into a greater psychological
well-being. The structure of self-determination is a continuum; as it progresses along, the
behavior is more self-regulated, and thus, it becomes more internalized by the person.
To summarize, the outcomes of motivation is positively affected in academic setting.
From the study of Vansteenkiste et. al. (2005), it has been indicated that motivation of the
students had a more desirable outcome to academic performance, study strategy and wellbeing.
Interpersonal context also influences the concept of enhancing versus plummeting the
level of intrinsic motivation of a person (Deci & Ryan, 1985, as cited by Black and Deci,
2000) the satisfaction of psychological needs such as feelings of competency, relatedness and
autonomy will lead to a self-determined behavior. Findings also seem to point out that more
autonomy-supportive social agents such as teachers (from the study of Deci et. al., 1981),

16
parents (from the study of Frodi et. al., 1981) will greatly affect the levels of motivation on a
person in a given context.
The same result has also been provided in the field of science education. Previous
studies of Ryan and Deci (2000) showed that teachers autonomy support also positively
influenced to the perception of competence of the students.
Although it is safe to say that feelings of competency and autonomy of a student will
lead to intrinsic motivation, less research has been focused on the feelings of relatedness of
students in the context of education most especially in public schools in the Philippines.
Among the three psychological needs, autonomy and competence have been found to have the
most influence on intrinsic motivation. Theory and research also suggest otherwise that
relatedness also plays a role though a distal one in prolonging intrinsic motivation.
Empirical study of Anderson, Manoogian & Grolnick (1976) has become an evident.
Findings suggested that when children did an interesting activity in the presence of an adult
experimenter who ignored them, the children displayed a very low level of intrinsic
motivation. Although much of the evidence on the effects of relationship representations only
involves childrens internal working models of parents, the connection between the childs
sense of relatedness to the parents and his or her engagement in school is not particularly
explored. The relatedness of the child to his or her parents may only just be an indicator for a
quality parents-child relationship and has no independent causal impact on the childs
motivation in school.
Another possibility might be is that, the sense of relatedness of the child to the parents
impacts on the childs classroom behavior because it forms the kind of relationship the

17
construct with their teachers. Children who feels secure and has a loving relationship with
their parents may able to form good classroom relationship with their teachers, whereas
children with problematic relationship with their parents may find it more difficult in form
good relationship to their teacher in the classroom. If so, then a sense of relatedness to parents
will not predict childrens engagement to childrens sense of relatedness to teachers.
However, evidence has been given on the importance of parent involvement to a childrens
school success, it may be a possibility that relatedness to parents plays a unique role in
childrens motivation in academics.
Theoretical Framework
Theory of Self Determination. According to Ryan and Deci (2008), Self
Determination Theory is an empirically based theory of human motivation that address issues
such as personality development, self-regulation, innate psychological needs, life goals and
aspirations and the impact of social environments on motivation, affect, behavior and wellbeing.
There are two types of motivation in general; first, intrinsic motivation refers to a person
doing a task or an activity because one finds it inherently interesting and enjoyable. A person
who is intrinsically motivated manifests volition because the behaviour itself is already
internalised and is more self-controlled. Meanwhile, extrinsic motivation, in contrast, refers to
a person only doing an activity for external contingencies.
SDT further elaborated that it is not only the quantity of motivation that explains the
behaviour of a person but rather the continuum described as a quality of motivation

18
(facilitation of motivation). As it progresses, the behavior of a person becomes more selfdetermined and self-regulated.
To demonstrate the continuum, we would like to discuss these terms from lower to higher
level of motivation accordingly:
1. External Regulation - is a type of extrinsic motivation where a person do an activity for
external rewards. Individuals experience externally regulated behaviour as controlled and their
actions have an external perceived locus of causality (deCharms, 1968, as cited by Deci &
Ryan, 2000)
2. Introjected Regulation- refers to doing an activity in which a person behaves in order to avoid
guilt and shame or to attain ego-enhancements such as pride. Introjection represents regulation
by contingent self-esteem (Deci & Ryan, 1995, as cited also by Deci & Ryan, 2000) A person
does are motivated in doing a certain task in order to maintain feelings of worth. Although
internally driven, introjected behaviour still have an external perceived locus of causality and
is still not imposed within the sense of self.
3. Identification Regulation- a more autonomous behaviour where one already consciously values
a goal, thus, a person engages an activity because one already accepted the action is important.
4. Intrinsic motivation- the highest form of motivation where a person engages an activity out of
interest and pleasure. When a task is performed, an inherent satisfaction is acquired.
The SDT perspective can also be applied in the educational context. The researchers
will be using the continuum approach (intrinsic, identified, introjected and external
regulation) in measuring the motivation of the students in the context of Science subject.

19
The theory of self-determination also tackled the three basic psychological needs that
will also be part of our conceptual framework. By definition in the context of Self
Determination Theory, the three psychological needs are energizing state that, if fulfilled will
conduce towards to a well-being, but if not fulfilled, will contribute to pathology and illbeing. The three basic psychological needs are the following:
1. The need for competency-refers to a desire to be effective and master the environment.
2. The need for relatedness- refers to desire to be connected to other people and having a
sense of belongingness
3. The need for autonomy - refers to have a control in the environment. When a person
engages in a task, the need of autonomy pertains to having a sense of free will or acting
out of own values and interest.
Conceptual Framework
Drawing from the theoretical perspective of SDT, the researchers have formulated an
operationalization for our study.
(Figure 1):The satisfaction of three
psychological needs (autonomy,
relatedness) will

positively predict to science

SCIENCE MOTIVATION
External Regulation
Introjected Regulation
Identified Regulation
Intrinsic Motivation

competence and

motivation
(intrinsic motivation,
RELATEDNESS
introjected regulation, identified regulation and external regulation motivation) of the
student.

COMPETENCE

20

AUTONOMY

Relatedness. The satisfaction of relatedness of the students from classroom peers will
positively predict science motivation (intrinsic, integrated, introjected and external regulation
motivation). According to Wentzel (2009), classroom peers provide contextual affordances
that can support academic competence. To cite example, when students are interacting with
their classmates, students practice communication, give and receive feedback, model
academic competencies, resolve conflicts, provide help and advice, and create shared
academic goals and behavioural standards. Also study of relatedness from (Furrer, 2003)
suggests that students feelings of connection to their parents may play a role in the between
parenting and childrens academic motivation and performance.
Autonomy. The satisfaction of autonomy of the students from teachers will positively
predict science motivation (intrinsic, integrated, introjected and external regulation
motivation). According to Ryan (1982), studies of intrinsic motivation have demonstrated that
despite a positive outcome-success--on a task, participants lose interest if their autonomy is
compromised by controlling feedback from the experimenter. When any of the three needs are
thwarted, the individual is hypothesized to experience negative affect and to disengage from
the enterprise despite the positive outcome. That is, outcome alone is insufficient to ensure
continued progress or reengagement.
Competence. The satisfaction of competency of the students from teachers will
positively predict science motivation (intrinsic, integrated, introjected and external regulation

21
motivation). According to Deci and Cascio (1972), positive feedback enhanced intrinsic
motivation, and negative feedbacks undermine intrinsic motivation. A study of Vallerand and
Reid (1984) confirmed that felt competence mediated the effect of positive versus negative
feedback on intrinsic motivation. Drawing from these, we hypothesized that greater
satisfaction needs of competency will predict motivation in the field of science education.

Statement of the Problem

This study intends to find out whether the three psychological basic needs are positively
predicts to the motivation of the students in science. Specifically, the researchers aim to seeks
answers the following:
1. Will the satisfaction of the three psychological needs predict intrinsic motivation of
the students?
2. Will the satisfaction of the three psychological needs predict identified regulation
motivation of the students?
3. Will the satisfaction of the three psychological needs predict introjected regulation
motivation of the students?
4. Will the satisfaction of the three psychological needs predict extrinsic motivation of
the students?
Hypotheses

22
The following hypotheses will be tested at an alpha level of 0.05, two tail.
H1: Satisfaction of relatedness of the student positively predicts intrinsic motivation in
science class
H2: Satisfaction of relatedness of the student positively predicts identified motivation in
science class
H3: satisfaction of relatedness of the student positively predicts introjected motivation in
science class
H4: satisfaction of relatedness of the student positively predicts external regulated motivation
in science class
H5: Satisfaction of autonomy of the student positively predicts intrinsic motivation in science
class
H6: Satisfaction of autonomy of the student positively predicts identified motivation in
science class
H7: satisfaction of autonomy of the student positively predicts introjected motivation in
science class
H8: satisfaction of autonomy of the student positively predicts external regulated motivation
in science class
H9: Satisfaction of competence of the student positively predicts intrinsic motivation in
science class
H10: Satisfaction of competence of the student positively predicts identified motivation in
science class
H11: satisfaction of competence of the student positively predicts introjected motivation in
science class

23
H12: satisfaction of competence of the student positively predicts external regulated
motivation in science class

Scope and Limitation

The socioeconomic status or classification of the students in public schools in the
Philippines is believed to be below middle class or in the middle class. In the modernization of
our lifestyle, nowadays, many from this classification already have access on their computers at
home but not all have computers in their home. The researchers spot this as one of the
limitation in the study because some students may not be part of the study if the researchers
gather data via web- based survey questionnaire. Therefore, the data will be gathered via pen
and paper survey questionnaire for the convenience of both the participants and the researchers
as well.
The study will focus on the application of the concept of SDT to determine the
satisfaction of the three psychological needs which are relatedness, competence, and autonomy
as predictors in the science motivation of the Grade 10 students. Therefore, the participants for
the present study will be limited to Grade 10 students from the public sectors of education
system in the Philippines only. As explained before, the SDT is a continuum thus we intend to
measure its variables but it will only be limited to measuring external regulation, introjected
regulation, identified regulation, and intrinsic motivation. Amotivation will not be included in
the study because previous studies discussed that it has no significant effect on the motivation
of an individual. Lastly, the academic achievement of students in science class will not be
further investigated as well as their intention in pursuing into a higher degree of science major
course in the future.

24
Significance of the Study
The findings of the study will contribute to better understanding the needs of the
students and its benefits that will lead to better quality education considering science subjects
plays an important role in the academic as students may have intent into pursuing higher
education and further enhance their competency in the field of Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics. This will also help the school administrators to encourage the
professors to employ facilitative and productive teaching to motivate their students even
more. Another significance of this study is to determine the science motivation of students
particularly in the public school setting. Findings to this study will also help in providing new
research from the lack of available literature especially in the Philippine Educational System
in public school setting.

Definition of Terms
Psychological Needs is defined as universal and innate needs of an individual that if
thwarted, will undermine intrinsic motivation of an individual.
Autonomy is defined as the extent with which someone makes their own choices
satisfying their own internal desires (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Competence is defined as an individuals perceived capacity to function effectively in
an environment (White, 1959).
Relatedness is defined as the extent with which someone feels connected to others
(Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Intrinsic motivation is defined as to doing something because it is inherently
interesting or enjoyable (Deci & Ryan, 2000). This means they are experienced as emanating

25
from the self rather than from external sources, and are accompanied by feelings of curiosity
and interest (Deci and Ryan, 1985).
Identified regulation is defined as the individuals behavior reflects conscious values
and is internalized as personally important (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier & Ryan 1991)
Introjected regulation is defined as a partial internalization without completely
accepting it as one's own (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier & Ryan 1991)
External regulation is defined as a behavior is performed for external rewards or
constraints (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier & Ryan 1991)
Amotivation is defined as a motivational contsruct that is characterized by a relative
lack of motivation (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier & Ryan 1991)
Internalization is defined as s an active, natural process in which individuals at- tempt
to transform socially sanctioned mores or requests into personally endorsed values and selfregulations (Ryan et al., 1985).
Science Motivation (adapted from Self Determination Theory) is a continuum scale of
motivation that comprises of two main distinctions: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The
most self-determined style of motivation is intrinsic motivation defined above. In addition,
several types of extrinsic motivation have been proposed (Deci & Ryan, 1985) each with a
different degree of self- determination. From a high to a low degree of self-determination,
there is identified regulation where the individuals behavior reflects conscious values and is
internalized as personally important; introjected regulation which represents a partial
internalization without completely accepting it as ones own and external regulation which
takes place when a behavior is performed for external rewards or constraints. The self-

26
determination approach is widely used in the educational setting thus, the researchers will be
using it to understand the students motivation in the field of science.

Chapter 2
Methodology

The purpose of the study is to address whether the three innate psychological needs from
Self Determination Theory (Autonomy, Competence and Relatedness) predicts the students
science motivation. In this chapter the methodology that was used in the research study is
being discussed.

Research Design
The research will be conducted in a predictive non- experimental & cross- sectional
research design. According to Johnson (2001), a predictive non- experimental research
determines whether the primary objective was predictive, one needs to answer the following

27
question: Did the researchers conduct a research so that they could predict or forecast some
event or phenomenon in the future (without regard for cause and effect). On the other hand,
cross- sectional design is explained by Johnson (2001) as data collected from research
participants at a single point in time during a single, relatively brief time period (called
contemporaneous measurement), the data directly apply to each case at that singles time
period, and comparisons are made across the variables of interest.
In which, the researchers wanted to examine whether the three psychological needs from
SDT could be used to predict science motivation among students in Grade 10. The
psychological needs were autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The data were collected at
a single time point from 200 students (ages 15-16) by means of using a scale.

Participants
The start of the twenty- first centurys second decade saw a major improvement in the
Philippine education system. In 2011, the Department of Education started to implement the
new K-12 educational system, which also included a new curriculum for all schools
nationwide.
Since the education system in the country has changed recently and the K -12 education
system has been effective, the fourth year high school students from the previous basic
education system were changed to Grade 10. Hence, the target participants for the study were
200 public school students from different institutions in the Philippines.
The participants for this research were selected purposively. The criteria for selecting the
participants must be a Grade 10 public student enrolled in the current academic year that has
science or science related subject in their curriculum.

28
Research Instrument
The researchers will make use of two test questionnaires accordingly, Academic Self
Regulation Questionnaire based from Ryan and Connell (1989) in the context of Science
Motivation and Basic Need Satisfaction Scale in General based from Deci and Ryan (2000) to
gather data from the participants.
Motivation towards science. The Academic Self Regulation Questionnaire based from
Ryan and Connell (1989) will be used to adapt to Science Motivation Scale. The scale contains
32 items and has 4 subscales. The scale was developed for students in late elementary and
middle school. (The comparable SRQ for adults is referred to as the Learning Self-Regulation
Questionnaire.) Consequently, its format is slightly different from the format of the SelfRegulation Questionnaires intended for adults.
The responses to each item are on a 4-point scale rather than a 7-point scale because we
have found that more than 4 possible responses is not optimal for the children who complete
the questionnaire who are as young as about 8 years of age. The participants will respond right
on the questionnaire by circling their correct response rather than using an answer sheet since
it will be easier most especially when conducting a group administration to a class of students
in Science subject. To score the scale: Very True is scored 4; Sort of True is scored 3; Not Very
True is scored 2; and Not at All True is scored 1. This way, a higher score will indicate a
higher level of endorsement of that regulatory style.
The SRQ-A uses four subscales: external regulation, introjected regulation, identified
regulation, and intrinsic motivation. The scale developed was intended to use in many studies
of school children. It mainly asks four questions about why students to various schools related
behaviours. Each question is followed by several responses that represent the 4 regulatory

29
styles used in this scale. A Relative Autonomy Index (RAI) has been formed using weighted
variables of sum in the formula. RAI describes the level of autonomous behavior: the higher
positive RAI, the more autonomous, the higher negative RAI, the more non-autonomous. The
figure 3 describes the hierarchy of SRQ-A variables. In this study this following formula will
be used to combine subscale scores: 2 * (intrinsic motivation score) +1 * (identified regulation
score) -1 * (introjected regulation score) -2 * (external regulation score)
Validation of this scale is presented in Ryan and Connell (1989). The validity of scales
measuring a continuum of autonomy is supported when a simplex pattern (Guttman 1954) is
obtained whereby there are positive correlations between adjacent types on the continuum and
the correlations become less positive and more negative with more distant types on the
continuum (Vallerand 1997). The reliabilities of the variables of sum were good showing
sufficient internal consistency (= .78-.84).
Basic Need Satisfaction in General a scale from Deci and Ryan (2000) will be
employed in our study. The BNSG includes 21 items, with three 7-item subscales: autonomy,
relatedness, and competence. Participants are asked to rate their agreement with each
statement using a 7-point response scale (1= Not true at all and 7 = Very true). Examples of
items include: I feel like I can decide for myself how to live my life (autonomy), I really
like the people I interact with (relatedness), and I often do not feel very capable
(competence, reversed). Internal consistency for the subscales ranged from acceptable to good
(autonomy = .65; competence = .72; relatedness = .82). As have others (e.g., Gagn,
2003; Vansteenkiste et al., 2007), we averaged the three correlated subscales to form a single
index of general need satisfaction ( = .87).

30
The Basic Psychological Needs Scale is a family of scales: one that addresses need
satisfaction in general in ones life, and others that address need satisfaction in specific
domains. Here we include the work domain and the interpersonal relations domain. The
original scale had 21 items concerning the three needs for competence, autonomy, and
relatedness. Some studies have worked with only 9 items, namely, 3 items per subscale. Here,
the general and the work versions of the scale have 21 items, whereas the interpersonal
relations version has 9 items.
Data Gathering Procedures
The researchers coordinated with the institution that they will conduct a study and
would like to ask the availability of the students to be a participant in the current study.
Moreover, the researchers informed the faculty teacher about the data gathering and the same
information was cascaded to the class as well. Upon informing everyone about the study, the
assurance of not disclosing the gathered data is emphasized that only the researchers can see
their answers to the survey questionnaire administered to them. Ergo, the researchers will
provide a pen and paper survey questionnaire to measure the variables intended to measure.
The survey questionnaire will be administered to Grade 10 students enrolled in the present
school year. Afterwards, everyone were thanked for their participation is the study.

Data Analysis
The researchers will make use of the multiple regression analysis in analyzing the
gathered data. This design allowed the researchers to learn more about the relationship of the
independent or predictor variables and a dependent or criterion variable. Therefore, by means

31
of the multiple regression the researchers will gain knowledge of the relationship of the three
innate psychological needs from SDT and the students science motivation.

APPENDIX-A
Informed Consent
We, students from St. Paul University Manila, Psychology Program, are conducting a study
titled as The Psychological Needs as Predictors of Science Motivation Among Grade 10
Students from Public Schools. The researchers would like to gather data via survey
questionnaires: (1) The Self-Regulation Questionnaires Academic Self-Regulation
Questionnaire (Adapted in Science Subject), and (2) Basic Needs Satisfaction in General. The
purpose of this study is
Your participation in this research study is voluntary. You may choose not to participate. If you
decide to participate in this research survey, you may withdraw at any time. If you decide not

32
to participate in this study or if you withdraw from participating at any time, you will not be
penalized.
Each response you will provide on each of the items will be given with utmost confidentiality
by the authors of the study. The authors hope for your active and complete participation in
answering these scale questionnaires.
If you are interested in knowing the result of the test, the researchers are willing to inform you
thru electronic mail or mobile. You may contact them at ShairaR.Draper@gmail.com and
09162409247, respectively.
The test will only take for not more than 15 minutes your time. You can maximize the
following contact information mentioned above for further questions and clarifications
concerning the study. Thank you for your participation.

Respectfully yours,

Draper, Shaira R.

Riva, Patrisya Kim S.

Villafuerte, Arianne Joie S.

_____________________________________

______________________

Signature over Printed Name of the Participant

Date

Appendix B
For Science Motivation Sample
The Self-Regulation Questionnaires Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A)
Name: _________________________________
Age: ___________________
Grade: ________
Sex:__________
Teacher: ________________
Direction: Please read each of the following items carefully, indicate your answer by
encircling that would fit best on why you do things in your Science class.

33
WHY I DO THINGS IN SCIENCE CLASS
A. Why do I do my homework in Science subject?
1. Because I want the teacher to think Im a good student in Science subject.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

2. Because Ill get trouble in my Science class if I dont.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

Not very true

Not at all true

3. Because Science is fun.

Very true

Sort of true

4. Because I will feel bad about myself if I dont do it.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

5. Because I want to understand our subject in Science.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

6. Because thats what Im supposed to do.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

7. Because I enjoy doing my homework in Science.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

8. Because its important to me to do my homework in Science.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

B. Why do I work on my classwork in Science?

9. So that the teacher wont yell at me.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

10. Because I want the teacher to think Im a good student in Science class.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

34
11. Because I want to learn new things in Science.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

12. Because Ill be ashamed of myself if I didnt get done in my Science subject.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

Not very true

Not at all true

13. Because Science is fun.

Very true

Sort of true

14. Because thats the rule in Science class.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

15. Because I enjoy doing my classwork in Science.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

16. Because it is important to me to work on my classwork in Science subject.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

C. Why do I try to answer hard questions in Science class?

17. Because I want the the other students to think Im smart in Science class.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

18. Because I feel ashamed of myself when I dont try.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

19. Because I enjoy answering hard questions in Science subject.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

20. Because thats what Im supposed to do in Science class.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

21. To find out if Im right or wrong in Science subject.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

35
22. Because its fun to answer hard questions in Science subject.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

23. Because it is important to me to try to answer hard questions in Science class.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

24. Because I want the teacher to say nice things about me in Science class.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

D. Why do I try to do well in Science class?

25. Because thats what Im supposed to do.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

26. So my teachers will think Im a good student

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

27. Because I enjoy doing my school work in Science subject well.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

28. Because I will get in trouble if I dont do well in Science class.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

29. Because Ill feel really bad about myself if I dont do well.
Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

30. Because its important to me to try to do well in Science class.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

31. Because I will feel really proud of myself if I do well.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

32. Because I might get a reward if I do well.

Very true

Sort of true

Not very true

Not at all true

36
Basic Need Satisfaction in General
Direction: Please read each of the following items carefully, thinking about how it relates to
your life, and then indicate how true it is for you. Use the following scale to respond:

1.

very

true

true

true

I feel like I am free to decide for myself how to live my life.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I really like the people I interact with.

2

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

Often, I do not feel very competent.

1

4.

7
somewhat

3.

not at all

2.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I feel pressured in my life.

1
not at all

somewhat

7
very

37
true
5.

7
very

true

true

true

I get along with people I come into contact with.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I pretty much keep to myself and don't have a lot of social contacts.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I generally feel free to express my ideas and opinions.

1

9.

somewhat

8.

not at all

7.

true

People I know tell me I am good at what I do.

1

6.

true

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I consider the people I regularly interact with to be my friends.

1

38

10.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I have been able to learn interesting new skills recently.

1

11.

7
very

true

true

true

In my daily life, I frequently have to do what I am told.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

People in my life care about me.

2

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

Most days I feel a sense of accomplishment from what I do.

14.

somewhat

13.

not at all

12.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

People I interact with on a daily basis tend to take my feelings into

39
consideration.

15.

true

true

true

In my life I do not get much of a chance to show how capable I am.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

There are not many people that I am close to.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I feel like I can pretty much be myself in my daily situations.

2

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

The people I interact with regularly do not seem to like me much.

1

19.

very

18.

somewhat

17.

not at all

16.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

I often do not feel very capable.

40
1

20.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

There is not much opportunity for me to decide for myself how to do things in
my daily life.
1

21.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

People are generally pretty friendly towards me.

not at all

somewhat

very

true

true

true

References

41

Bernardo, Allan B.I., Ganotice, F., & Ronnel, K. (2014). Motivation Gap and Achievement
Gap Between Public and Private High Schools in the Philippines. Asia-Pacific
Edu Res. DOI: 10.1007/s40299-014-0213-2

Deci, E.L., Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G., & Ryan, R.M. (1991). Motivation and
education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26,
325-346.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The What and Why of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs
and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry. Retrieved
from: https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/
2000_DeciRyan_PIWhatWhy.pdf
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human
motivation,development, and health. Canadian Psychology. Vol. 49, 182-185.
doi:10.1037/a0012801
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: Classic Definitions
and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 54- DOI:
10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1987) The Support of Autonomy and the Control of Behavior.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Vol.53, No. 6,1024-1037.
American Psychological Association, Inc. DOI: 0022-3514/87/100.75

42
Filak, V. F., & Sheldon, K. M. (2003). Student psychological need satisfaction and college
teacher-course evaluations. Educational Psychology, 23, 235247.

Finney, Sara J., & Johnston, Mary M. (2010). Measuring basic needs satisfaction:
Evaluating previous research and conducting new psychometric evaluations of
the Basic Needs Satisfaction in General Scale. Contemporary Educational
Psychology. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.04.003

Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of Relatedness as a Factor in Childrens Academic
Engagement and Performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, DOI:
10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
Graham, S., and Weiner, B. (1996). Theories and Principles of Motivation. Handbook of
educational psychology (pp. 63-84).
Grolnick, W., and Ryan, R.M. (1989). Parent Styles Associated With Childrens
Self Regulation and Competence in School. Journal of Educational Psychology.
Vol. 81, No. 2, 143-154. American

Psychological Association, Inc.

Jimenez, E., & Sawada, Y. (2001). Public for private: The relationship between public and
private school enrolment in the Philippines. Economics of Education
Review, (2001), 389-399. DOI:10.1016/S0272-7757(00)00061-3

Johnson, B. (2001). Toward a New Classification of Nonexperimental Quantitative

Research. Educational Researcher, Volume 30, 3-13.

43
Koestner, R., Pelletier, L.G., & Vallerand, R.J. (2008). Reflections of Self-Determination.
Canadian

Psychology. Vol. 49, No. 3, 257262. DOI: 10.1037/a0012804

Kusurkar, R. A., Ten Cate, T. J., Vos, C. M. P., Westers, P., & Croiset, G. (2013). How
motivation affects academic performance: a structural equation modelling
analysis. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 18(1), 5769. http://doi.org/
10.1007/s10459-012-9354-3
Lavigne, G., Vallerand, R., & Miquelon, P. (2007). A motivational model of persistence in
science education: A self-determination theory approach. European Journal of
Psychology of Education. Vol. XXII, 351-369.

La Guardia, J. G., & Patrick, H. (2008). Self-determination theory as a fundamental theory

of close relationships. Canadian Psychology, 49, 201209.

Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the
classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory
and Research in Education, 7, 133144.

Pintrich, P.R. (2003). A Motivation Science Perspective on the Role of Student Motivation
in Learning and Teaching Contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 95,
No. 4, 667-686. American Psychological Association, Inc. DOI:
10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Reeve, J., Bolt, E., & Cai, Y. (1999). Autonomy-supportive teachers: How they teach and
motivate students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 537548.

44
Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students autonomy
during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 209218.

Reeve, J., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Jang, H. (2007). Understanding and promoting
autonomous self-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. In D.
Schunk & B. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning.
Theory, research, and application (pp. 223244).

Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Kaplan, H. (2007). Autonomous motivation for
teaching: How self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 761774.

Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes.

Journal of Personality, 63, 397427.

Ryan, R. M., & Powelson, C. L. (1991). Autonomy and relatedness as fundamental to

motivation and education. Journal of Experimental Education, 60, 4966.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, Vol. 55,
68-78. doi:10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68
Ryan, R.M., & Connell, J.P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization:
Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57, 749-761.

45
Vallerand, R.J., & Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational styles as
predictors of behavior: A prospective study. Journal of Personality, 60, 599-620.
Vallerand, R., Pelletier, L., & Koestner, R. (2008). Reflections on self-determination
theory. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, Vol. 49, 257-262. doi:
10.1037/a0012804
Vallerand, R. J., Fortier, M. S., & Guay, F. (1997). Self-determination and persistence in a
real-life setting: Toward a motivational model of high-school drop out. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 11611176.

Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivating
learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal
contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 87, 246 260.