The present research examines the ambivalence of achievement goal promotion at university, and more specifically in the psychology curriculum. On the one hand, psychology teachers explicitly encourage mastery but not performance (neither approach nor avoidance) goals. On the other hand, the selection process encourages the endorsement of not only mastery but also performance-approach goals. In fact, it would seem that both performance-approach and mastery goals are valued in a university context. Two pilot studies verified the above assumptions. Subsequently, Experiments 1, 2, and 3 showed that each of these goals corresponds to different aspects of social value. Indeed, high endorsement of mastery goals was associated with being judged as both likable (social desirability) and likely to succeed (social utility). High endorsement of performance-approach goals enhanced social utility judgments but reduced perceived likability. Performance-avoidance goals only enhanced perceived likability. The discussion focuses on the 2 functions of university, namely education (apparent in the official discourse of teachers) and selection (apparent in the university structure), and on the perceived value of achievement goals.

Evaluation is an inescapable feature of academic life with regular grading and performance appraisals at school and at university. Although previous research has indicated that evaluation and grading in particular are likely to have a substantial impact on motivational processes, little attention has been paid to the relationship between grading and approach versus avoidance achievement goals, 2 fundamental concerns whenever evaluation is at stake. Three experiments, carded out in professional schools, revealed that expectation of a grade for a task, compared with no grade, consistently induced greater adoption of performance-avoidance, but not performance-approach, goals. Experiments 2 and 3 revealed that expectation of a grade, compared with no grade, consistently induced greater adoption of performanceavoidance goals even when grading was accompanied by a formative comment. Furthermore, Experiment 3 showed that reduced autonomous motivation measured after having completed a task for a grade versus no grade mediated the relationship between grading and adoption of performance-avoidance goals in a subsequent task. Results are discussed in the light of achievement goal and self-determination theory.

No abstract

The significant number of financial and academic frauds hitting the headlines is paralleled by high rates of cheating in schools. Does adherence to the neoliberal values that underpin our economic and academic systems predict acceptance of cheating? Four studies revealed that adherence to neoliberal values of self-enhancement-power and achievement-predicts the motivation to gain social approval; this motivation, in turn, favors the adoption of context-specific competitive performance-approach goals, which predict the condoning of cheating. An experimental study showed that when participants were exposed to a source promoting the values of universalism and benevolence (self-transcendence values, the normative opposite of self-enhancement values), self-enhancement adherence ceased to predict the condoning of cheating. Most important, a classroom-based study addressed the core question of cheating behavior, revealing that adherence to self-enhancement values indeed predicted actual cheating behavior. These results point to the relevance of diagnosing societal values as social causes of cheating.

The use of grades to motivate constitutes an unresolved theoretical controversy. In 2 experiments carried out with different age groups and academic tracks, a standard-grade condition was compared with a condition in which differential scoring engendered higher grades and with a no-grade condition. The relative power of task performance and task autonomy to explain differences in subsequent intrinsic motivation (self-report task interest and continuing motivation for the task) was assessed. Results show that, compared with the standard-grade condition, both high-grade and no-grade conditions enhanced the 2 forms of subsequent intrinsic motivation. However, although task performance explained higher levels of task interest in the high-grade condition, it failed to explain higher levels of continuing motivation for the task. Task autonomy, conversely, explained the higher levels of both task interest and continuing motivation for the task experienced in the nongraded condition. Results are discussed in the light of an integrative model that differentiates the mediational role of task performance and autonomy, 2 traditional major explanations of the link between grades and intrinsic motivation.