@2024 Afarand., IRAN

---

ISSN: 2228-5468    Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2014;7(5):173-278

Background
… [1] Achievement motivation is defined as the desire to reach the targets based on a set of standards [2]. … [3] Achievement motivation is also defined as desire to or interest in overall achievement or achievement in a specific field [4]. Students with high academic achievement motivation usually show signs such as high enthusiasm to the course, ability to presence continually in the courses, participating in the classroom activities, finding the lesson activities meaningful, feeling capable of learning the course materials, and academic achievement [5]. Procrastination is the lack of self-regulation performance and behavioral tendency in delaying what is necessary to achieve the goals [6]. … [7-12] Self-regulation is defined as mental efforts in controlling internal situation, processes, and function to achieve the upper goals [13]. … [14, 15] Metacognition is a cognitive process, participating in evaluating, revising, and controlling the cognition. Some specific aspects of metacognition are relevant with academic achievement [16].
Previous Studies
The higher the procrastination, the higher academic burnout is [10]. In comparison to their peers, the students, who procrastinate, have lower self-regulation and less metacognition strategies in their tasks [11]. The higher the students’ self-regulation, the higher academic achievement is; and the students have higher enthusiasm to continue education. In addition, students with lower self-regulation probably have lower metacognition [15]. … [17] Metacognition ability enhancement goes with academic efficacy and progression [18]. There is a positive correlation between metacognition and self-regulation and self-efficacy; and to be aware of cognition and metacognition strategies leads to better learning and academic performance [19].
Aim(s)
The aim of this study was to investigate the roles of procrastination, self-regulation, and metacognition beliefs in predicting students' academic achievement motivation.
Research type
This is a correlative descriptive-cross sectional study.
Research society, place and time
Students of Arak University of Medical Sciences, including 1400 persons, were studied in 2012-13 academic year.
Sampling method and number
302 students were selected, using systematic random sampling method according to Morgan and Krejcie table.
Used devices&materials
Data were collected, using academic achivement motivation, self-regulating, metacognition beliefs, and academic procrastination scales. Items of 7 sub-scales and 7-point Likert are the constituent parts of the academic achievement motivation scale. The sub-scales are “intrinsic motivation to know”, “intrinsic motivation toward accomplishment”, “intrinsic motivation to stimulation”, “identified regulation”, “introjected regulation”, “external regulation”, and “amotivation”. Using Cronbach’s Alpha, the reliabilities of the sub-scales are 0.84, 0.85, 0.86, 0.62, 0.84, 0.85, and 0.85, respectively [20]. Reliability of the whole questionnaire is 0.71 [21]. Self-regulation scale includes 32 questions and 4 components. The components are “external regulation”, “introjected regulation”, “identified regulation”, and “intrinsic motivation”. Based on the 4-point (1 to 4) Likert scale, each question receives a score between 32 and 128. Credibility of the questionnaire has been computed by internal consistency coefficient method with Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients between 0.69 and 0.75 for the sub-scales [22]. Internal consistency coefficient for the sub-scales has been estimated from 0.62 to 0.82 [9]. Reliability of the questionnaire has been computed by internal consistency coefficient method with Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients between 0.73 and 0.79 for the sub-scales and reliability for the whole scale has been estimated 0.89 [22]. Metacognition beliefs were assessed by Metacognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30). The 20-item self-report questionnaire assesses persons’ beliefs about their thoughts. The scale has 4-choice items. The sub-scales of the questionnaire are “positive beliefs about worry”, “negative beliefs about uncontrollability and danger”, “beliefs about lacking of cognitive confidence”, “cognitive self-consciousness”, and “negative beliefs about superstitious thinking, punishment, and responsibility”. The reliability and validity of the questionnaire has been confirmed [23]. Using Cronbach’s Alpha method, reliability of the questionnaire has been reported 0.82 for whole test and between 0.58 and 0.83 for the components [24]. The academic procrastination scale includes 10 items. Each item is evaluated between 1 and 4 (completely false to completely true), with the exception of 5 items (1, 4, 6, 9, and 10) scored inversely. Validity of the scale was 0.78. Reliabilities of the scale have been reported 0.84 and 0.75 using Cronbach’s Alpha and Split-half methods, respectively [23]. Data were analyzed, using SPSS 18 software and Pearson Correlation Coefficient and Stepwise Regression tests. In the regression equation, procrastination, self-regulating, and metacognition beliefs variables were analyzed as predictor variables. Achievement motivation was analyzed as criterion variable.
Findings by Text
105 students (34.8%) had a background of failure in some courses. 41 persons (13.6%) had a background of whole failure. From the participants’ fathers, 30 persons (9.9%) were unemployed, 162 persons (53.6%) were self-employed, 90 persons (29.8%) were employees, and 20 persons (6.6%) were dead. The mean total scores of procrastination, metacognition beliefs, self-regulation, and achievement motivation were 22.15±3.69, 53.25±5.81, 40.25±7.45, 23.47±3.77, respectively. There were positive and significant correlations between metacognitive beliefs, self-regulation, and achievement motivation. There was a negative correlation between procrastination and achievement motivation. About 18% of the variance of achievement motivation was explained by procrastination, self-regulation, and metacognition beliefs. The students’ achievement motivation changes were predicted by procrastination, self-regulation, and metacognition beliefs with 99% confidence. About 24% of the variance of achievement motivation was explained by procrastination. However, only about 11% of achievement motivation was explained by two other variables.
Main comparison to the similar studies
There was a negative significant correlation between procrastination and the students’ academic achievements. This is consistent with other studies [7, 9, 10]. There was a positive and significant correlation between self-regulation and academic achievement. This is consistent with other studies [12-14], showing that students with less self-regulation have more academic failure. There was a positive and significant correlation between metacognition and academic achievement motivation. This is consistent with other studies [16, 17, 19], showing that metacognition awareness covers our feelings and emotions and metacognition experience conducts our thoughts in problem-solving situations and leads to better function of the memory. … [25-28]
Suggestions
More studies on other disciplines and education levels, as well as non-academic fields, ought to be done to determine the dependency of procrastination to both each field and personal characteristics. The same research ought to be repeated as an experimental study.
Limitations
Restriction to academic fields and to a specified education level were of the limitation for the study. Correlational research method was another limitation.
Conclusions
Procrastination is the most powerful predictor for academic achievement motivation. Different behaviors of the students, such as academic performance, academic failure, and academic burnout, can be understood by procrastination, self-regulation, and metacognition beliefs, which might affect the student-university relationship and the student’s enthusiasm to continue education.
Acknowledgments
The researchers feel grateful to Arak University of Medical Sciences and all the students who participated in the study.
Conflict of interest
Non-declared
Ethical Permissions
All procedures were approved by Arak University of Medical Sciences.
Funding Sources
Non-declared