Business undergraduates' perceptions of motivation to learn: Empirical evidence from Pakistan

The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

The International Journal of Management Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijme

Business undergraduates’ perceptions of motivation to learn: Empirical evidence from Pakistan Muhammad Kashif*, Mubashir Ayyaz, Adnan Raza, Warda Shahid Hamid GIFT University, Pakistan

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 30 September 2012 Received in revised form 21 October 2012 Accepted 14 February 2013

Motivation to learn is considered imperative to students’ academic achievement in higher education. Current research explains the role and impact of personality, peers, faculty, family, and learning aids on business students’ motivation to learn. Qualitative data through interviews from faculty is collected which forms the basis of a questionnaire, alongside rigorous literature review. Further, a random sample of 531 undergraduate business students enrolled in a Pakistani university is selected. The role and impact of identified variables on motivation to learn has been presented and explained through qualitative and quantitative measures. Results of the study indicate that all the variables used in this research are validated and considered important to stimulate undergraduate business students’ motivation to learn. Research answering the business students’ motivation to learn from developing country’s perspective is absent where current study intends to fill this knowledge gap. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Learning motivation Academic problems Undergraduate students Business education Pakistan

1. Introduction One of the major achievements during university years is successful completion of a degree program where the student has enrolled and it is considered possible through student motivation in learning (Leach & Zepke, 2009). However, the dropout rates are alarming as in UK it has been estimated that almost 100,000 full-time and part-time students enrolled in university do not complete their degree program and dropout (National Audit Office, 2007). This is true in case of developing world as on average, 25 percent of degree students do not complete their degrees in Pakistan and drop-out during first year at the university. The major reason behind this dropout is their inability to meet the ‘attendance requirement’ which indicates lower levels of student motivation to learn in higher education (Seema & Maryam, 2011). Learning and motivation of higher degree students has been studied extensively and it is believed that ‘true learners’ are individuals having a sense of ‘belongingness’ and engagement with class room activities and they are mostly involved in performing some ‘purposeful’ activities (Krause & Coates, 2008, p. 493). These ‘true learners’ remain highly motivated throughout the degree program as their motivation to learn is major predictor of their intent to complete degrees with enhanced learning (Vansteenkiste, Sierens, Soenens, Luyckx, & Lens, 2009). Another hallmark of ‘true learners is their goal orientation; they are motivated to set and achieve their goals in academic settings (Frymier, 2007). Frisby and Myers (2008) also highlighted some traits of ‘True learners’ as having a great habit of cooperation with their peers, accept assignments happily, and keep a great attitude toward class participation. Academic research in recent years has well highlighted the importance of business education and it is considered as an important factor in socio-economic development of nations (LeBlanc & Nguyen, 1999). It has been observed that undergraduates lack the engagement and motivation to learn during the course of study (Rynes, Trank, Lawson, & Ilies, 2003).

* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (M. Kashif). 1472-8117/$ – see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2013.02.002

76

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

Lack of motivation and engagement in business students has been due to factors like large class sizes, less individual attention paid to the students, and lesser focus on student motivation and learning in higher education (McIntyre & Munson, 2008). This lack of motivation damages the ‘spirit’ of being the true learners and knowledge producers which are the desirable characteristics of business students in higher education settings. Students’ motivation to learn has been studied by many researchers over the years but most of studies expressed the views of students from developed nations (Hiller & Hietapelto, 2001; Levy, 2007; Vaill, 2007). The students’ focus on surface learning rather than deep learning and an overwhelming focus on achieving merely the grades instead of stressing on academic learning has been due to lack of motivation to learn (Hiller & Hietapelto, 2001). It is strongly believed that our knowledge concerning the development of various factors that instill motivation to learn amongst business students has been limited and must be probed further (Debnath, Tandon, & Pointer, 2007). Despite the significant number of research articles to published on student motivation to learn, studies in the western world are on the way probing this phenomenon (Adcroft, 2010). This entails that some research must be conducted to understand better the reasons that trigger student motivation to learn, especially in business education. Thorough literature review, faculty interviews, and focus group sessions with students supported the idea that this construct needs to be investigated. There are studies found which explain the construct of ‘student motivation to learn’ from developed country perspective but still need further detail-oriented studies to better understand the factors contributing toward business student’s motivation to learn. It is also evident that research focusing on the Asian region is limited and hard to find as per the authors’ access and understanding of literature in higher education. However, there have been same learning challenges to both the students; from western as well as Asian world (Rogers & Lopez, 2002). Given the observation of phenomenon that undergraduate students lack motivation to learn, an increasing trend toward business education, and absence of literature motivated the research team to conduct this study. Thorough literature review, focus group sessions with students, and faculty interviews directed the research team to focus on meeting the following research objectives; a. To recognize and quantify the impact of five identified variables on students’ motivation to learn among undergraduate business students. b. To recommend strategies that increase learning motivation among undergraduate business students from developing countries. The remainder of this article will be presented in four major sections. Literature review will discuss the traditional and modern literature in students’ motivation to learn and debates this critical issue from multiple perspectives. Methodology section discusses the qualitative and quantitative methods employed for the purpose of this research. Findings section presents the results of this research and leads to Conclusion section where a debate has been developed based on the findings of this study. Finally, some recommendations and then areas of future research have been discussed.

2. Literature review There has been significant research studies conducted to offer a valid definition of adult learning with a reasonable generalization and acceptability. However, the work of Mezirow (1998, p. 190) is notable as he defines learning as “the process of using a prior interpretation to construe a new or revised interpretation of the meaning of one’s experience in order to guide future action”. With this definition in mind, it can be inferred that learning process is focused, and outlined by a special frame of reference that includes a broad set of individual predispositions having a definite link with psych cultural assumptions. There has also been various models and theories used to present the adult learning processes. Mezirow (1981) through his pioneering work in motivation and learning, presented a theory; transformative learning theory. This theory discusses the adult learning process in both formal as well as informal context. Society and individual both are important and an individual cannot be separated from the society while he/she is exposed to some learning situations. Mezirow (1991) presented four stages of the learning process: (a) disruptive happenings in life changes the learner’s way of thinking about the world, (b) learner’s then focuses on the beliefs and values that change the situating perspectives, (c) the learner then develops new solutions to overcome the discrepancies, (d) and learner then incorporates the discovered solution to his/her life. Spear and Mocker (1984) described learning process based on three interactive dimensions: the environment is closely observed by the learner and he/she finds some opportunities to excel from the surrounding environment, learner then incorporates existing or new knowledge to better avail those identified opportunities, and further an action is taken to gain some valuable insights. These three stages combine and shape a total learning experience to life. Globalization has impacted every aspect of our lives and motivation and learning are no exceptions. There have been huge demographic changes in many developing countries which have forced the service providers to behave in more culturally responsive way. For instance, in U.S, students having an Asian background are treated stereotypically as a very high-achieving group of individuals who need little or no help from peers or instructors (Gewertz, 2004). The way students retrieve information, process it, and interpret as part of their learning process varies across cultures (Ramburuth & McCormick, 2001). Biggs (1987) classifies three types of learners with different motivation levels: (a) Surface learners repeat what they have learned without considering the fact as what they have learned already because they want to use ‘rote memory’ as a learning strategy, (b) Deep learners are individuals who tend to engage in their studies and have the skill to relate paradigms to develop a better understanding of material, (c) Achievers strive hard for grades that is their core motivation and they tend to organize their study

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

77

time and efforts in achieving good grades. The cultural differences in student learning have been compared in western and nonwestern settings. Some studies compared that people from non-western societies tend to memorize the material, rely more on the power of memory, and use a surface approach to learning as compared with their western peers who try to develop deep understanding of the subject material (Ballard & Clanchy, 1984; Samuelowicz, 1987; Volet, Renshaw, & Tietzel, 1994). Studies have found some cultural differences in learning, motivation to learn, goals and purposes of learning, and learning strategies adopted (Marsella, DeVos, & Hsu, 1985; Weisz, Rothbaum, & Blackburn, 1984). Cross-cultural knowledge in learning is extremely important to understand for educationists and psychologists in order to minimize students’ academic difficulties, provide better instruction by enhancing student motivation and learning in education settings (Rogers & Lopez, 2002). There is evidence that students, whom are motivated and have greater interest, learn course contents and necessary skills beyond their expectations (Bergin, 1999). Student motivation and interest was originated and popularized through the work of Dewey (1913) amongst educational psychologists. Dewey (1913) agreed to the notion that extrinsic factors lead toward students motivation to learn whereas having interest with some material leads to creation of intrinsic motivation. Various researchers have highlighted the need and importance of student motivation which leads to excellent learning outcomes amongst business students (Love, Love, & Northcraft, 2010). Motivation to learn is important by considering the fact that it enhances the freedom in class room discussions and creates increased interest in the subject matter (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). This freedom of dialog is very important in higher education settings where class rooms provide a platform to produce knowledge. There is also evidence that motivation to learn instills dedication, and ‘genuine’ engagement with the material which is always a great source of learning (Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon, & Deci, 2004). Another strong element justifying the need for student motivation to learn is that students’ psychological health and wellbeing can be achieved (Deci et al., 1999). Cognitive engagement is instilled through students’ motivation to learn in higher education which leads to success and high academic achievements (Blumenfeld, Kempler, & Krajcik, 2006). In recent years, the importance of motivation to learn has been heightened due to an increase in number of college enrollments and many advantages that students can have while being motivated. Given the benefits and challenges discussed above to higher education, there is a need to identify those factors which instill motivation to learn amongst students. Research in higher education has identified some factors which instill motivation in undergraduate business students they include; personality of the learner, family, college, and social conditions (Masaali, 2007). The students’ personality having an intrinsic desire to excel has been found to contribute positively toward higher learning and academic achievement (Abouserie, 2009). The work of Abouserie (2009) also revealed that students who do not take a lot of stress and think creatively tend to perform better in academic assignments. Some researchers explained that learner personality could be examined through behaviors like; gaining logical skills and learning style for academic achievement in higher education (Schulze & Tomal, 2006). However, it is widely acceptable that students who are externally motivated, they just try to memorize the content and students who are intrinsic desire for learning, spend more time and efforts in developing critical thinking and knowledge of the subject (Schiefele, 1991). The motivation of student toward learning can be developed and increased by the person who is facilitating the learning process, inside and outside the class room. Research indicates that students are motivated to learn when they believe that teacher is also motivated, friendly with the students during the times of academic stress and anxiety, and uses teaching aids effectively in the class rooms (Masaali, 2007). Schulze and Tomal (2006) through their work established a positive relationship between students’ motivation to learn and teachers’ perceived preparation of course contents. Another study conducted by LeBlanc and Nguyen (1999) highlighted the importance of teachers’ communication skills, positive attitude, and academic research credentials in satisfying and motivating students in higher education. This furthers the notion that better prepared teachers, with good communication skills and a research-oriented teaching style motivates students to learn. Another paradigm defining the role of teachers in motivating students is use of modern instructional methodologies like usage of multimedia in to deliver lectures in class room, industry-led projects involving faculty and students to develop industry-academic linkage, group-based creative assignments, and case-based teaching instead of lecture-based approach to deliver material (Baker, Dreher, & Guthrie, 2000; Bogner, Raphael, & Pressley, 2002; Jackson, 2003). These approaches help in attaining the students’ attention in the class and encourage the students in participating class-room activities directed toward student learning. These all are important elements in the role of teacher to motivate students to learn however, the importance of friendliness, approachability, and accessibility of instructors cannot be neglected (Granitz, Koernig, & Harich, 2009). Teachers assign tough assignments and projects to students but if they are approachable, willing to help, and knowledgeable, the students’ interest and motivation never declines, rather increases. The higher education literature highlighting the role of peers on student motivation to learn is scarce but given the changes in teaching methods, the role of peers contributing toward learning cannot be neglected (Jackson, 2003). The modern concepts in class room delivery methods validate the need to interact between students and their peers, and are considered crucial to enhance academic learning and success (Gardner, 2001). The work of Gardner (2001) also stressed the need that the class room discussions must go beyond merely the interactions and every one must challenge each other to stimulate learning which will lead to motivating the participants. Student engagement in intellectual discussions with other students in class leads to learners’ understanding of concept, and motivation (Miller & Miller, 2000). Problem-based learning methods demand students to think individually and challenge the others’ perspectives, with solid arguments (Savin-Baden, 2000). In these situations, those individuals, having greaterself-control and positive/respect-paying attitudes toward others have a greater chance to be successful. There is recognition of fact that support from the family is one of the major contributor toward students’ academic motivation and achievement (Herndon, 2001; Herndon & Hirt, 2001). Whether it is high school education or higher

78

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

education, family involvement boosts the students’ morale and ignites their spirit to learn (Moore, 2000). The parents are expected to involve in the student learning at three levels; positive involvement, no involvement, and negative involvement (Middleton & Loughead, 1993). Each way has its own positives and negative relationships with student learning and it is highly suggested that parents must get themselves involved positively. There is also evidence of a positive relationship between high family involvement and learners’ motivation as well as excellent academic achievements (Smith & Hausfaus, 1998). Student motivation and satisfaction in higher education is positively affected by the facilities offered and available (LeBlanc & Nguyen, 1999). Price, Matzdorf, Smith, and Agahi (2003) conducted a study to discover the factors which students consider important in any university and enhance their satisfaction and motivation to learn. Those factors were; right courses, availability of computers, quality library facilities, teaching reputation, quiet areas available, ‘self-study’ zones are available, public transport is available and attitude toward students is positive and friendly. It is clear that students’ enrollment and further initiatives are influenced by the facilities offered to them in a university. Coles (2002) stressed the need to provide inclass facilities to the students and also promotes small class sizes for student learning and motivation. Attractive lecture halls and modern libraries enhance student motivation to attend classes and sharing with each other and lead to higher learning (Kraithman & Bennett, 2005). The students are better users of technology today and tend to use laptops, iPods, and other related devices which call for using new approaches in lecture delivery (BBC, 2010). However, this can only be possible through the usage of these modern facilities to students in higher educational institutions. Students’ motivation to learn has been addressed by many researchers over the years but most of studies presented a holistic view of student motivation to learn in higher education settings (Hiller & Hietapelto, 2001; Levy, 2007; Vaill, 2007). Despite this significant work, students really lack the ‘motivation to learn’ and academia must find some ways to instill the ‘spirit to learn’ in undergraduate business students to impart relevant skills and knowledge in undergraduates (Glenn et al., 2011). The factors which are considered important to contribute in students’ motivation to learn are presented through a relationship between curriculums, and learners’ interest on the extent of academic learning (Abrantes, Seabra, & Lages, 2007). This is where current study will contribute, aiming specifically business students and offering valuable strategies in order to enhance student learning and motivation. Extending these elements further, current study aims to identify the role of learner, faculty, peers, family, and learning aids on business undergraduates’ motivation to learn. The research team is curiously finding to answer the following research question; - How personality of learner, faculty, peers, family, and learning aids contribute toward business students’ motivation to learn in developing countries?

3. Methodology 3.1. Qualitative research 3.1.1. Faculty interviews The academic literature pertaining student motivation to learn in business education is scarce and requires novel methods to be used in order to explain the factors contributing toward student motivation. Qualitative research orientation especially the Interpretivist philosophy in management research is strongly recommended in cases where the construct lacks contextual insight. Interpretivists usually use qualitative tools for data collection like; focus group and interviews (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). In the light of Interpretivist approach, research team decided to conduct business faculty interviews and focus group sessions with undergraduate students to help operationalizing the construct of student motivation to learn. This research study was administered in Pakistan and for the purpose of data collection a private sector University was selected. The University has one of the largest business schools in the province of Punjab, Pakistan and faculty members are active in research activities. Faculty members were asked the following open ended questions; ‘Why motivation to learn is important in business education?’ What factors are important in increasing undergraduate student motivation to learn? The criteria to select business school faculty was based on their academic rank and experience while teaching at undergraduate levels. There were five interviews collected from the faculty and all the respondents from faculty were having more than five years of teaching experience at undergraduate levels. The interviews were conducted as per the guidelines provided by Saunders et al. (2009) where he opined that experienced respondents must be used in order to get grounding for the construct and its operationalization. The members were ‘Assistant Professors’, selected purposefully, with a condition as all those who are whether have teaching or research interests in student motivation to learn. The purposive sampling technique has been recommended by Donald (2005) to be used in psychology and business management qualitative research studies. Most of the faculty members believed that role of the teachers in the class, family involvement, and peers’ role is crucial in enhancing the students’ motivation to learn. The relevant detail from faculty interviews has been provided underwith: Faculty interviews “Student motivation to learn has been an area of my interest for the last many years and despite the fact that academia is pursuing it seriously, there exists still a need to probe it further as many facets of learning have not yet been explored. I believe that not only students, but faculty and family of a student play a significant role in student motivation to learn”.

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

79

“Student motivation to learn has been an important but challenging topic to pursue as learning has many facets in business education. However, I would strongly support this idea of investigating student motivation to learn in higher education. I consider peers, self-concept & motivation of student, and positive involvement and encouragement from family as strong contestants to instill motivation to learn amongst business students”. “Business students’ engagement and motivation with class room activities has been limited and must be investigated. As per my thinking, student’s personal motivation and the faculty play a significant role in instilling motivation to learn”. “I consider this field of inquiry as fascinating, stimulating, and quite a learned safari. Considering the fact that we are a collectivistic society, there seem to have a significant role of friends, family, and teachers on student motivation to learn in business education”. “Motivated students are an asset for the family, institution, and society. Hence, I would strongly favor the idea to conduct this study especially in the context of Pakistan where such studies are not pursued. I think that campus facilities and faculty members influence the students’ motivation to learn in higher education”. 3.1.2. Focus groups Interpretivist approaches call for some qualitative measures in the form of data collection through interviews and focus group sessions (Saunders et al., 2009). These tools help researchers to operationalize the construct under investigation. The major advantage is that researchers, by incorporating focus group sessions, get detailed and open responses (Patton, 2002). For this purpose, two focus group sessions were conducted with undergraduate business students, studying in the last year of their undergraduate business degrees. Only those students were invited to focus group sessions whom have special interest in investigation of ‘class room motivation’ approaches. Most of them were assisting their professors in teaching different courses in business school at undergraduate levels. Student perceptions regarding the importance of motivation to learn were noted through focus group sessions. All the research team members were available during the focus group sessions, playing various roles; moderator, observer, and expert. The responses were noted, and discussed by the research team to infer the results. Important factors contributing toward students’ motivation to learn were asked and majority of the students favored role of teachers, peers, and learning methodologies on motivation to learn.

3.2. Quantitative research 3.2.1. Instrument development Rigorous review of academic literature, focus group sessions with students, and faculty interviews led the researchers to identify five variables that contribute positively toward undergraduate business students’ learning motivation. The questionnaire consisted of two sections; first section included five variables highlighted in theoretical framework and second section comprised of respondent demographics. In first section, five variables were; personality of learner, teacher’s role, peers’ influence, family, and learning facilities. These variables were measured by asking different questions through related items on a Likert scale of 1 ¼ strongly disagree, 2 ¼ disagree, 3 ¼ neutral, 4 ¼ agree, and 5 ¼ strongly agree. The items used in the questionnaire were tagged by naming all five variables for the purpose of attaining some ease in data coding and analysis that was assisted through SPSS (statistical package for social sciences) 14.0. After designing the questionnaire, it was pretested with a pilot sample of three business students. Pilot testing has been used extensively in order to improve the quality of instrument (Wallenburg, Knemeyer, Goldsby, & Cahill, 2010). The method used for this pilot testing was participation-based-pretesting where the respondents generally suggest some improvements in questionnaire design to improve quality. The respondents, however, did not suggest any improvements in the questionnaire content and structure. Finally, in order to improve the methodology of current research study, the participants engaged during pilot testing of questionnaire were not included in the final sample selected. 3.2.2. The sample For the purpose of achieving research objectives, sampling frame was a private sector university offering degree programs in five disciplines alongside business and management. The business school, amongst the largest in the province of Punjab, comprised of 1300 students at undergraduate and graduate levels. The survey was conducted during the months of November 2011–February 2012. The sample unit was undergraduate business students and respondents were contacted randomly, while attending the classes by the research team. This random selection provided the appropriate rigor and ease in data collection which any other probability technique may not provide under the given circumstances. This technique is also widely recognized and most of the times are free from ordering or grouping errors (Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2006). In total, 531 valid responses were collected. The respondents were volunteers and all the questionnaires have been distributed and collected back by research team. The sample size, sampling technique, and addressing some ethical issues has been justified through the work of Yi-Guang, McKeachie, and Yung (2003) where the researchers investigated similar construct; learning motivation. Within the sample, there were 307 (57.82 percent) male students and 224 (42.18 percent) female students. The students were 179 (33.71 percent) in 1st year, 166 (31.26 percent) in 2nd year, 122 (22.98 percent) in 3rd year and 64 (12.05 percent) in 4th year.

80

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

4. Results 4.1. Descriptive statistics For the purpose of explaining the data in detail, descriptive analysis was performed which calculated mean and standard deviation scores for all the items included in Questionnaire. These results have been presented through Table 1 and Table 2. Results depict that the respondents agree at most that the identified variables contribute significantly toward undergraduate business students’ motivation to learn. Under the dimension of learners’ personality, the highest mean score was achieved for the item; ‘I will be more motivated when I am able to control my emotions and feelings’ with a mean score of 4.32. Faculty plays an important role in contributing toward students’ motivation to learn in business education. This was evident by the fact that all the items were scored on the higher end and well supported this notion. The highest score (M ¼ 4.35) under ‘Faculty’ as a dimension was for the item; ‘I am more motivated to learn if my lecturers are easy to be traced, friendly, and approachable’. Peers play significant role in students’ motivation to learn and the academic literature discussed above supports this paradigm. The item, ‘I like to make friends with those who have a great passion for learning’ got the highest mean score of 4.19. There is moral and financial involvement required motivating students by the ‘Family’, which was fourth variable used for this study. All the items’ mean score was 3.50 and above but the item; ‘I am more motivated when living together with my family’ got the highest score amongst all other (M ¼ 4.21). ‘Learning aids’ was fifth variable used for the purpose of this study and item, ‘Facilities for conducive learning infrastructure that can increase learning motivation’ achieved highest mean score of 4.28 (Table 1 and Table 2). A rule of thumb in describing the alpha values to measure the internal consistency is conditioned as; a  .9 ¼ Excellent, .9 > a  .8 ¼ Good .8 > a  .7 ¼ Acceptable .7 > a  .6 ¼ Questionable .6 > a  .5 ¼ Poor .5 > a (George & Mallery, 2003). The five factors used for this study present different alpha scores such as; Personality (0.846), Faculty (0.756), Peers’ influence (0.701), Family (0.809), and Learning aids (0.734). Relying on the literary evidence in social sciences research, it can be concluded that the alpha scores for all items included in questionnaire are considered ‘good’ and ‘excellent’.

4.2. Internal consistency The purpose of this research was to ascertain the positive impact of identified variables on undergraduate business students’ motivation to learn. It is imperative to explain that the respondent considered significant differences amongst independent items, while filling in the questionnaire. Table 3 describes the internal consistency and descriptive results for all Table 1 Descriptive analysis. Factors of motivation to Learn 1. Personality I will be more motivated when I am able to control my mind I will be more motivated when I am able to control my emotions and feelings I will be more motivated when I am out of stress I will be more motivated when I think critically about the issue 2. Lecturers/teaching staff I am motivated to learn if my lecturers have made good teaching preparations I am motivated to learn if my lecturers use a lot of verbal communication when delivering their lectures I am motivated to learn if my lecturers use teaching aid in their teaching I am motivated to learn if my lecturers include humor during teaching sessions I am motivated to learn if my lecturers have a great passion for teaching I follow my lecturers’ example while undergoing the learning process I am more motivated to learn if my lecturers are easy to be traced, friendly and approachable 3. Peers’ influence I am more motivated when my friends are also Studying I like to make friends with those who have a great passion for learning I like to make friends with those who are able to be Independent 4. Family I am more motivated when receiving support and encouragement from my family I am more motivated when living together with my family My family always gives me support and encouragement to achieve excellent success I am motivated to learn because my family needs my financial support after I get a good job I am motivated to learn when my family provides me study-related guidance 5. Learning facilities Facilities for conducive learning infrastructure that can increase learning motivation Facilities for libraries that provide quality service causing me to be more motivated to learn Conducive lecture halls causing me to be more motivated to learn Spacious and comfortable tutorial rooms causing me to be more motivated to learn Efficient maintenance of labs causing me to be more motivated to learn Systematic service of the faculty’s resource room causing me to be more motivated to learn Providing of projectors and laptops in lecture halls motivates me to learn

N

Mean

Std. deviation

531 531 531 531

4.31 4.32 4.18 4.26

.63426 .76874 .81106 .84729

531 531 531 531 531 531 531

4.27 3.99 4.30 3.97 3.91 4.05 4.35

.87556 .89124 .70334 .94638 1.07210 .88934 .70769

531 531 531

4.10 4.19 4.16

.90999 .78790 1.05217

531 531 531 531 531

3.86 4.21 3.91 3.76 4.08

1.07191 .90917 .99165 .95520 .74777

531 531 531 531 531 531 531

4.28 3.57 3.59 3.85 4.00 3.98 4.07

1.23348 .89844 1.00219 .90056 .80326 .84769 . 94637

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

81

Table 2 Items’ consistency. Items

Cronbach’s alpha

Personality Faculty Peers Family Learning aids

0.846 0.756 0.701 0.809 0.734

the five items used in this study. It can be inferred that all five dimensions are considered significantly different and have positive effect on students’ motivation to learn.

5. Discussion This study was delineated to assess the role and impact of various factors on student motivation to learn by offering some strategies to instructors in order to increase student motivation to learn. The results are interesting and unique in nature as the relationship of faculty, peers, family, technology, and personality of learner has never been probed. The results are important because these have been presented through the lens of cultural changes and similarities between western and Asian business students’ motivation to learn. Faculty plays an important role in motivating business students and the results of this study verify this relationship. The findings exhibit as those faculty members whom are self-motivated, friendly & approachable, and prepare their lectures well; tend to enhance the student motivation to learn in business class rooms. This work is in line with previous studies (Baker et al., 2000; Bogner et al., 2002). This can be due to the fact that many students join business degrees with a non-business backgrounds and that limits their interaction with faculty in the class rooms. Large class sizes also add to lack of motivation to learn, making faculty’s role more difficult and challenging where they have to address the needs of larger student population. The element of approachability and friendliness was considered significant mainly because students need a lot of help after class hours. Once they approach faculty for help and guidance, the instructor must be friendly and knowledgeable that will minimize the stress levels of students. The findings also triggered the idea that there is great need to train the faculty in such a way that they are able to assign creative work to students in the form of group assignments, projects, accompanied by case studies. This all can lead to a huge stress for the students but when instructors are approachable, knowledgeable, friendly, helping, and well trained, the stress can be managed effectively through enhancing academic learning (Granitz et al., 2009). The class room performance also depends, to a large extent, on the motivation and performance of peers as per the findings of this study. The results exhibit that student motivation is increased with a positive role being played by friends who are willing to work, have positive attitude to learning, and are critical, independent thinkers. This has been proposed by Gardner (2001) and Savin-Baden (2000), where they expressed the role of peers within the class rooms as well as working in group projects and assignments. These results do not support the findings of the study conducted by Gewertz (2004) where the ‘role of peers’ found to have minimal or no impact on students’ motivation to learn. This may be because the usage of more ‘student-centered’ teaching approaches being introduced that require a lot of team work and critical thinking by the students (Granitz et al., 2009). Especially the advent of case-based teaching, that is much more rigorous, demanding and useful on part of faculty and students, require students to work in close collaboration with each other (Jackson, 2003). It is also evident through the results of this study that family play significant role in motivating students to learn especially when family members provide financial support and moral encouragement. The results support the work of Moore (2000) where the researcher acknowledged the role of family in motivating college students. There is an interesting fact that students who live with their family during the study are more motivated to learn. This relates to the culture of Asia where most have ‘collectivist’ societies and people tend to live with each other, supporting every matter of routine life. These results verify the work of Rogers and Lopez (2002) who studied psychology of students from Asian and Western cultures. Extending this notion further, students belonging to developing countries are not only getting support from family but also look to support back their families once they graduate. Supporting the family is not merely an obligation rather it is considered a ‘ritual’ rather in countries like Pakistan. This has been well highlighted through the work of (Herndon & Hirt, 2001) where studies were conducted to elaborate the positive relationship of student success with family support. Students value the role of facilities offered like lecture halls, library, and other related academic facilities offered by respective business schools. These facilities Table 3 Mean (M), standard deviation (SD), and correlation matrix. Construct

M

SD

1

2

3

4

5

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

4.38 4.14 4.24 3.94 3.82

.767 .713 .594 .667 .601

1.00 .591 .445 .489 .391

1.00 .640 .421 .325

1.00 .312 .298

1.00 .512

1.00

Personality Faculty Peers’ influence Family Learning aids

82

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

motivate students to attend the classes and get them engaged in the learning process in higher education settings. These results are in line with the findings of a study conducted by Kraithman and Bennett (2005) where researchers stressed the role of engaging students with class room activities and providing them support through library and other academic facilities. It should be noted that students really value the importance of offering modern facilities and these facilities also enhance the image of business school as well as the satisfaction and motivation of students (Price et al., 2003). 6. Conclusion The current scientific inquiry specifically contributes toward academic literature in business & management education with regard to enhancing student motivation to learn. The results reveal positive influences of learners’ personality on motivation to learn in business education. The results have been in line with the studies conducted by Abouserie (2009) where the intrinsic motivation was a strong driver of learner’s personality; contributing positively toward learning and academic achievement. This study found that students’ motivation to learn increases when they are out of stress, think creatively, and have better control over mind that verifies the findings of study conducted by Abouserie (2009). However, some methodological fancy of previous academic work highly neglected the notion of recommending some thoughtful insights which can improve student learning in business education. Given the challenges like little student engagement, lack of learner’s motivation in class room settings and lesser focus on deeper learning by business students, this study is very useful to increase business undergraduates’ motivation. Based on the results, some recommendations have been proposed to enhance student motivation to learn. Peers have a positive role to play in motivating students and it is highly recommended that problem-based work needs to be promoted through group projects and assignments. This problem based learning has been well documented through the work of Savin-Baden (2000). Well trained, and self-motivated faculty and staff, need to devote counseling time which will minimize the confusions and ultimately, motivating students to learn. Faculty must be willing to help, knowledgeable about the subject matter and friendly enough to discuss the academic problems of students which will keep students interested and motivated (Granitz et al., 2009). It is generally considered that parents’ role in higher education settings is minimal and they just have to provide financial support. But results of this study indicate that role of family is more enriched and a closer observation of semester-based assessments and guidance in other academic matters will encourage students to learn (Moore, 2000). Results of this study also indicate that students are motivated when they perceive that instructor is fair while grading the courses. Hence, proper grading schema must be introduced and justified by the faculty which will definitely enhance the intrinsic motivation and interest of undergraduate students (Levy, 2007). The results of study suggest that students are motivated when they feel that course is of practical relevance and is innovative. Hence, course design must be in a way which demands greater interactions amongst participants and encourage them to actively involved with each other (Vansteenkiste et al., 2004). The results regarding personality of learner suggest that intrinsic motivation amongst students is key to success but only for those who are better able to manage stress and have control over mind. To make this happen, faculty must play a significant role in grooming the students’ personalities and once the instructors are approachable and willing to help; this will minimize stress and ultimately will lead to enhanced motivation to learn (Mandernach, 2009). Results reveal that learning facilities like; availability of discussion rooms, library, and spacious lecture halls are considered pivotal in igniting the spirit to learn amongst business school students. The academic work assigned to students must be backed up by all the academic facilities that can aid in performing in a better way (Kraithman & Bennett, 2005). One of the major limitations of this research is that data collected from a single business school and has limited generalizability. This was neither the objective of current research and this limitation is justified through the work of Douglas, Douglas, and Barnes (2006) where a single business school was selected to conduct a study pertaining to higher education. Although, this research added important insights regarding motivating students to learn but future studies are highly recommended to extend this piece of work to other disciplines. The results concerning ‘role of faculty’ showed some multidimensional links in this study. The faculty members are found to minimize the level of stress among business students, shape their personalities, and influence the roles played by peers and family in business school settings. This can be probed further in future studies as what impact does faculty members can have on business students’ motivation to learn? Another future area of concern can be a comparison of student motivation in public and private sector institutions of higher learning where the results are expected to be interesting. Acknowledgment The research team is highly thankful specifically to Mr. Asim Ilyas, Mr. Suleman Anwar, Mr. Suleman Kamwani, Mr. Shoaib ul Haq, Mr. Usman Naeem and generally to all other Business School faculty members for their support toward completion of this study. References Abouserie, R. (2009). Self-esteem and achievement motivation as determinants of students approaches to studying. Unpublished work. Abrantes, J. L., Seabra, C., & Lages, L. L. (2007). Pedagogical affect, student interest, and learning performance. Journal of Business Research, 60, 960–964. Adcroft, A. (2010). The motivations to study of undergraduate students in management: the impact of degree programme and level of study. International Journal of Management Education, 9(1), 11–20. Baker, L., Dreher, M. J., & Guthrie, J. T. (2000). Engaging young readers. New York: The Guilford Press.

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

83

Ballard, B., & Clanchy, J. (1984). Study abroad: A manual for Asian students. Kuala Lumpur: Longmans. BBC. (2010). Students only have 10-minute attention span. BBCAvailable at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8449307.stm. Accessed 08.02.11. Bergin, D. A. (1999). Influences on classroom interest. Educational Psychologist, 34, 87–98. Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Chapter 28: motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environment. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bogner, K., Raphael, L., & Pressley, M. (2002). How grade 1 teachers motivate literate activity by their students. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 135–165. Coles, C. (2002). Variability of student ratings of accounting teaching: evidence from a Scottish business school. International Journal of Management Education, 2(2), 30–39. Debnath, S. C., Tandon, S., & Pointer, L. V. (2007). Designing business school courses to promote student motivation: an application of the job characteristics model. Journal of Management Education, 31, 812–831. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 627–668. Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education. Boston, MA: Riverside. Donald, E. P. (2005). Language and meaning in data collection. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 137–145. Douglas, J., Douglas, A., & Barnes, B. (2006). Measuring student satisfaction at a UK university. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(3), 251–267. Frisby, B. N., & Myers, S. A. (2008). The relationships among perceived instructor rapport. student participation. and student learning outcomes. Texas Speech Communication Journal, 33. Frymier, A. B. (2007, November). Teachers and students goals in the teaching-learning process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago, IL. Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. Dörnyei, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 1–19). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Gewertz, C. (2004). Asian students needs overlooked in NYC, Advocacy Group says. Education Week, 23(42), 15. Glenn, D. C., Patel, F., Kutelieh, S., Robbins, J., Smigiel, H., & Wilson, A. (2011). Perceptions of optimal conditions for teaching and learning: a case study from Flinders University. Higher Education Research and Development, (iFirst), 1–15. Granitz, N. A., Koernig, S. K., & Harich, K. R. (2009). Now its personal: antecedents and outcomes of rapport between business faculty and their students. Journal of Marketing Education, 31(1), 52–65. Herndon, M. K., & Hirt, J. B. (2001). Black students and their families: What leads to success in college. Unpublished manuscript. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg. Herndon, M. K. (2001). The role of family in the success of African American college students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg. Hiller, T. B., & Hietapelto, A. B. (2001). Contract grading: encouraging commitment to the learning process through voice in the evaluation process. Journal of Management Education, 25, 660–684. http://beta.hec.gov.pk/InsideHEC/Divisions/QALI/Others/Pages/StatisticalInformationUnit.aspx. Assessed 24.07.12. Jackson, J. (2003). Case-based learning and reticence in a bilingual context: perceptions of business students in Hong Kong. System, 31, 457–469. Kraithman, D., & Bennett, S. (2005). Blending chalk. talk and accessibility in an introductory economics module. Higher Education Academy Economics NetworkAvailable at www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/showcase/kraithman_smirk.htm. Accessed 08.02.10. Krause, K.-L., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493–505. Leach, L., & Zepke, N. (2009, July). Engaging first year students: A conceptual organiser for student engagement. Paper presented at the 2009 first year in higher education conference. Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.fyhe.qut.edu.au/past_papers/papers09/content/pdf/6A.pdf. LeBlanc, G., & Nguyen, N. (1999). Listening to the customers voice: examining perceived service value among business college students. International Journal of Educational Management, 13(4), 187–198. Levy, S. (2007). An inquiry into motivation using the case of Phaedrus demonstrator. Journal of Management Education, 31, 797–811. Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Love, E. G., Love, D. W., & Northcraft, G. B. (2010). Is the end in sight? Student regulation of in-class and extra-credit effort in response to performance feedback. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 81–97. McIntyre, S. H., & Munson, J. M. (2008). Exploring cramming: student behaviors, beliefs, and learning retention in the principles of marketing course. Journal of Marketing Education, 30, 226–243. Mandernach, B. J. (2009, March). Three ways to improve student engagement in the online classroom. Online Classroom, 1–2. Marsella, A., DeVos, G., & Hsu, L. K. (1985). Culture and self: Asian and Western perspectives. London: Tavistock Publications. Masaali, S. (2007). Relationship between reading study and academic achievement among students in IU. Doctoral Dissertation Isfahan: Khorasgan Islamic Azad University (in Persian). Mezirow, J. (1981). A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education Quarterly, 32, 3–24. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48, 185–198. Middleton, E. B., & Loughead, T. A. (1993). Parental influence on career development: an integrative framework for adolescent career counseling. Journal of Career Development, 19, 161–173. Miller, S. M., & Miller, K. L. (2000). Theoretical and practical considerations in the design of web-based instruction. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education (pp. 156–177). Hershey, USA: Idea Group Publishing. Moore, J. L. (2000). The persistence of African-American males in the College of Engineering at Virginia Tech. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg. National Audit Office (NAO). (2007). Staying the course: The retention of students in higher education. London: The Stationary Office. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). London: SAGE. Price, I., Matzdorf, F., Smith, L., & Agahi, H. (2003). The impact of facilities on student choice of university. Facilities, 21(10), 212–222. Ramburuth, P., & McCormick, J. (2001). Learning diversity in higher education: a comparative study of Asian International and Australian Students. Higher Education, 42, 333–350. Rogers, M. R., & Lopez, E. C. (2002). Identifying critical cross-cultural school psychology competencies. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 115–141. Rynes, S. L., Trank, C. Q., Lawson, A. M., & Ilies, R. (2003). Behavioral coursework in business education: growing evidence of a legitimacy crisis. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2, 269–283. Samuelowicz, K. (1987). Learning problems of overseas students: two sides of a story. Higher Education Research and Development, 6, 121–134. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. London: Pearson Education. Savin-Baden, M. (2000). Problem-based learning in higher education: Untold stories. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299–323. Schulze, E., & Tomal, A. (2006). The chilly classroom. Beyond Gender College Teaching, 54(3), 263–269. Seema, A., & Maryam, I. (2011). Leadership, empowerment and customer satisfaction in teaching institutions: case study of a Pakistani University. The TQM Journal, 23(4), 388–402. Smith, F. M., & Hausfaus, C. O. (1998). Relationship of family support and ethnic minority students achievement in science and mathematics. Science Education, 82, 111–125.

84

M. Kashif et al. / The International Journal of Management Education 11 (2013) 75–84

Spear, G. E., & Mocker, D. W. (1984). The organizing circumstance: environmental determinants in self-directed learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 35(1), 1–10. Vaill, P. B. (2007). F. J. Roethlisberger and the elusive phenomena of organizational behavior. Journal of Management Education, 31, 321–338. Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Soenens, B., Luyckx, K., & Lens, W. (2009). Motivational profiles from a self-determination perspective: the quality of motivation matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 671–688. 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. Volet, S. E., Renshaw, P. D., & Tietzel, K. (1994). A short-term longitudinal investigation of cross-cultural differences in study approaches using Biggs SPQ questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 301–318. Wallenburg, C. M., Knemeyer, A. M., Goldsby, T. J., & Cahill, D. L. (2010). Developing a scale for proactive improvement within logistics outsourcing relationships. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 21(1), 5–21. Weisz, J. R., Rothbaum, F. M., & Blackburn, T. C. (1984). Standing out and standing in: the psychology of control in America and Japan. USA Psychologist, 39, 955–969. www.hec.gov.pk. Accessed December 2011. Yi-Guang, L., McKeachie, W. J., & Yung, C. K. (2003). College student intrinsic and/or extrinsic motivation and learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 13, 251–258.