CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 78Education, Achievement, and GiftednessPsychological and Temporal Perspectives ResearchCareer Development and Diversity

Future goal setting, task motivation and learning of minority and non‐minority students in Dutch schools

Open access
Andriessen, Iris, Phalet, Karen, Lens, Willy·2006·British Journal of Educational Psychology
DOI 10.1348/000709906x148150
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background. Cross‐cultural research on minority school achievement yields mixed findings on the motivational impact of future goal setting for students from disadvantaged minority groups. Relevant and recent motivational research, integrating Future Time Perspective Theory with Self‐Determination Theory, has not yet been validated among minority students. Aims. To replicate across cultures the known motivational benefits of perceived instrumentality and internal regulation by distant future goals; to clarify when and how the future motivates minority students' educational performance. Sample. Participants in this study were 279 minority students (100 of Turkish and 179 of Moroccan origin) and 229 native Dutch students in Dutch secondary schools. Methods. Participants rated the importance of future goals, their perceptions of instrumentality, their task motivation and learning strategies. Dependent measures and their functional relations with future goal setting were simultaneously validated across minority and non‐minority students, using structural equation modelling in multiple groups. Results. As expected, Positive Perceived Instrumentality for the future increases task motivation and (indirectly) adaptive learning of both minority and non‐minority students. But especially internally regulating future goals are strongly related to more task motivation and indirectly to more adaptive learning strategies. Conclusion. Our findings throw new light on the role of future goal setting in minority school careers: distant future goals enhance minority and non‐minority students' motivation and learning, if students perceive positive instrumentality and if their schoolwork is internally regulated by future goals.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/000709906x148150

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 11-year-old students who reported knowing people who had benefited from education were rated by their teachers as more motivated and performing better.

    “Research has shown that 11-year-old students who reported that they knew people who had benefitted from education-who were likely to be in-group members and perhaps members of their local community-were rated by their teachers as being more motivated and performing better (Andriessen, Phalet, & Lens, 2006).”

    From Tackling Educational Inequalities with Social Psychology: Identities, Contexts, and Interventions (2021) · cites this paper as Andriessen, Phalet, & Lens, 2006

    The indexed Abstract describes students’ ratings of future goals, task motivation and learning strategies, but does not report whether they knew people who benefited from education or whether teachers rated their motivation and performance. Searches for beneficiaries of education, role models and teacher ratings found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 65 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Andriessen, I., Phalet, K., & Lens, W.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Andriessen, Iris
ORCID
Venue
British Journal of Educational Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-12
Volume
76
Issue
4
Pages
827-850
ISSN
  • 0007-0998 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8279
DOI
10.1348/000709906x148150
OpenAlex
W2138971949
Cited by
78
References
65
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • British Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychological and Temporal Perspectives Research
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
task motivation, minority students, Turkish students, Moroccan students, perceived instrumentality, internal regulations, learning strategies, cross-cultural replication, self-determination theory, academic performance, Dutch secondary schools
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Attitude, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Female, Goals, Humans, Learning, Male, Minority Groups, Morocco, Motivation, Netherlands, Surveys and Questionnaires, Schools, Students, Turkey

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review