Is motivation inextricably tied to self-efficacy? Can you be motivated to learn, to accomplish
a particular task, to change your way of thinking, to embark on an adventure,
to cross the bridge from the third to the fourth order, or from the fourth to
the fifth, if you lack a positive sense of self-efficacy? In his overview of self-efficacy Pajares explains
that self-efficacy is a person’s belief about their ability to organize and
carry out the necessary tasks or steps needed to accomplish a goal. The overview of self-efficacy goes on to say
that “unless people believe that their actions can produce the outcomes they desire;
they have little incentive to act or to persevere in the face of difficulties”
(http://des.emory.edu/mfp/eff.html,
retrieved 7/23/2012). This is probably
true in most instances, but not always.
Maybe the question is one of exactly what “belief” is; is it supposing
you can’t do it, or thinking you might not be able to do it, or suspecting that
you probably can’t do it? Or is it
really having a fundamental feeling of absolute certainty that “this isn’t
going to happen”. Even as I write this I
am reminded of a line in the Pajares article.
He is discussing the point of view that reality and potential should be
well-matched and he asks not only who is capable of assessing the full
potential of another, but “who has the key to understanding the precise nature
of reality?” (Pajares, 2005, p. 355).
Or maybe the question is one of defining
motivation. If you are motivated to do
something because you have to do it, is it still motivation? Albert Bandura notes that “Motivational
processes regulate whether people act on what they have learned
observationally.” So, if you observe
that waitresses at O’Charlie’s make about $75.00 in tips a night, and you know
that your family needs money, even if you feel that you probably won’t get the
job, or aren’t young enough or pretty enough to get the job, or maybe believe
you can’t do the job, but you decide to apply for the job anyway…are you
motivated? Perhaps a condition of need necessitates
an effort that is tied to your sense of efficacy, but overrides your
self-doubts or uncertainties, and you truly are motivated; maybe not
to be a waitress, but to care for your family. It may simply boil down to two questions; 1. What
are your incentives? and 2. Will they cause you to persevere in the face of
difficulties whether you believe you can do it or not? Maybe the distinction is one between
incentives and imperatives?
I have no doubt that observational learning
occurs. The idea that everything that is
ever learned observationally happens as a result of unseen physiological forces
and that human choices that result in “deliberative, reflective,
self-referential, and other high-level cognitive events are dismissed as
epiphenomenal events” (Bandura, 2011, p. 4) seems unreasonable and
short-sighted. I do believe that humans
are intentional (sometime to the amazement of those around them) and that this
precludes a purely physiological explanation for behavior. True that much behavior learned
observationally is mimicked, but what about the decision to place oneself in
the learning environment in the first place?
People do make decisions that change their lives, and consequently what
they learn; they join the military, they quit school, they go to school, they get
married, they swim in the ocean, they decide to take French. Could these all be examples of “epiphenomenal
events that create an illusion of control but actually have no effect on how
one behaves?” (Bandura, 2011, p. 4).
No comments:
Post a Comment