The purpose of this study was to determine the cross-cultural validity of a collective achievement goal model using a sample of non-music-major college band students from the US and Singapore. The study was situated within a theoretical framework that posited individual and collective achievement goal orientations of mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance. These constructs were also examined in relation to three adaptive learning outcomes: flow, grit, and commitment to band. Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that whether considering the US, the Singapore, or the entire sample, the collective 2 × 2 achievement goal framework yielded a superior fit to the data when compared with four competing dichotomous and trichotomous models. Model invariance testing found that although the collective 2 × 2 achievement goal model appears to fit fairly well to the data from both groups of participants, cross-cultural model invariance can only be claimed conditionally. Hierarchical regression indicated that independent of any variation already explained by achievement goal sub-scales from the individual perspective, scales from the collective perspective explained a small but significant increase in variance for flow.
AmesC.ArcherJ. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivational processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260–267.
2.
AsmusE. P.HarrisonC. S. (1990). Characteristics of motivation for music and musical aptitude of undergraduate nonmusic majors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 38, 258–268. doi:10.2307/3345223
3.
BerndtT. J.KeefeK. (1992). Friends’ influence on adolescents’ perceptions of themselves at school. In SchunkD.MeeceJ. (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 51–74). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4.
BundersonJ. S.SutcliffeK. M. (2003). Management team learning orientation and business unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 552–560. doi:10.1037/0021–9010.88.3.552
5.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
6.
DeShonR. P.KozlowskiS. W. J.SchmidtA. M.MilnerK. R.WiechmannD. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1035–1056. doi:10.1037/0021–9010.89.6.1035
7.
DragoniL.KuenziM. (2012). Better understanding work unit goal orientation: Its emergence and impact under different types of work unit structure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 1032–1048. doi:10.1037/a0028405
8.
DuckworthA. L.PetersonC.MatthewsM. D.KellyD. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1087–1101. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.92.6.1087
9.
DuckworthA. L.QuinnP. D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(2), 166–174. doi:10.1080/00223890802634290
10.
DweckC. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
11.
ElliotA. J. (1997). Integrating the “classic” and “contemporary” approaches to achievement motivation: A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. In MaehrM. L.PintrichP. R. (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 143–179). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
12.
ElliotA. J.McGregorH. A. (2001). A 2 x 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.80.3.501
13.
ElliotA. J.MurayamaK. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 613–628: doi:10.1037/0022–0663.100.3.613
14.
GoldM. (Ed.). (1999). The complete social scientist: A Kurt Lewin reader. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
15.
GongY.KimT. Y.LeeD. R.ZhuJ. (2013). A multilevel model of team goal orientation, information exchange, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 827–851. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0177
16.
JacksonS. A.MartinA. J.EklundR. C. (2010). Short Dispositional Flow Scale [Measurement instrument]. Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden.
17.
KimJ.KimM.SvinickiM. D. (2012). Situating college students’ achievement goal orientation in a cooperative learning context: Proposing different levels of goal orientations. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80, 352–385. doi:10.1080/00220973.2011.625996
18.
KimJ. I.ChungH.KimM.SvinickiM. D. (2015). Context-specific achievement goal orientations in cooperative group work. Learning and Individual Differences, 42, 117–125. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.004
19.
KlassenR. M.KrawchukL. L. (2009). Collective motivation beliefs of early adolescents working in small groups. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 101–120. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2008.11.002
20.
KlineR. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
21.
LacailleN.KoestnerR.GaudreauP. (2007). On the value of intrinsic rather than traditional achievement goals for performing artists: A short-term prospective study. International Journal of Music Education, 25, 245–257. doi:10.1177/025576140707083578
22.
LacailleN.WhippleN.KoestnerR. (2005). Reevaluating the benefits of performance goals: The relation of goal type McGregor to optimal performance for musicians and athletes. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 20, 11–16.
23.
LemkeC. (2011). Learning through technology. In BellancaJ. A.BrandtR. (Eds.), 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn (pp. 243–272). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
24.
MatthewsW. K.KitsantasA. (2007). Group cohesion, collective efficacy, and motivational climate as predictors of conductor support in music ensembles. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55, 6–17. doi:10.1177/002242940705500102
25.
MatthewsW. K.KitsantasA. (2013). The role of the conductor’s goal orientation and use of shared performance cues on collegiate instrumentalists’ motivational beliefs and performance in large musical ensembles. Psychology of Music, 41, 630–646. doi:10.1177/0305735612441738
26.
McDougallW. (1920). The group mind: A sketch of the principles of collective psychology with some attempt to apply them to the interpretation of national life and character. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
McGregorH. A.ElliotA. J. (2002). Achievement goals as predictors of achievement-relevant processes prior to task engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 381–395. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.94.2.381
28.
MehtaA.FeildH.ArmenakisA.MehtaN. (2009). Team goal orientation and team performance: The mediating role of team planning. Journal of Management, 35, 1026–1046. doi:10.1177/0149206308326773
29.
MikszaP. (2009a). An investigation of the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework in the context of instrumental music. In ThompsonL. K.CampbellM. R. (Eds.), Research perspectives: Thought and practice in music education (pp. 81–100). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
30.
MikszaP. (2009b). Relationships among impulsivity, achievement goal motivation, and the music practice of high school wind players. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 180, 9–27.
31.
MikszaP. (2011). Relationships among achievement goal motivation, impulsivity, and the music practice of collegiate brass and woodwind players. Psychology of Music, 39, 50–67. doi:10.1177/0305735610361996
32.
MikszaP.TanL. (2015). Predicting collegiate wind players’ practice efficiency, flow, and self-efficacy for self-regulation: An exploratory study of relationships between teachers’ instruction and students’ practicing. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63, 162–179. doi:10.1177/0022429415583474
33.
MikszaP.TanL.DyeC. (2016). Achievement motivation for band: A cross-cultural examination of the 2× 2 achievement goal motivation framework. Psychology of Music, 44, 1372–1388. doi:10.1177/0305735616628659
34.
MoellerA. C.ElliotA. J. (2006). The 2 × 2 achievement goal framework: An overview of empirical research. In MitelA. V. (Ed.), Focus on educational psychology (pp. 307–326). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
35.
NichollsJ. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328–346. doi:10.1037/0033–295X.91.3.328
36.
NielsenS. G. (2008). Achievement goals, learning strategies, and instrumental performance. Music Education Research, 10, 235–247. doi:10.1080/14613800802079106
37.
OrmrodJ. E. (2011). Human learning (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Higher Education.
38.
ParkG.DeShonR. P. (2010). A multilevel model of minority opinion expression and team decision-making effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 824.
39.
PittsS. (2009). Roots and routes in adult musical participation: Investigating the impact of home and school on lifelong musical interest and involvement. British Journal of Music Education, 26, 241–256. doi:10.1017/S0265051709990088
40.
PorterC. O. L. H.WebbJ. W.GogusC. I. (2010). When goal orientations collide: Effects of learning and performance orientation on team adaptability in response to workload imbalance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 935–943. doi:10.1037/a0019637
41.
SalanovaM.Rodríguez-SánchezA. M.SchaufeliW. B.CifreE. (2014). Flowing together: A longitudinal study of collective efficacy and collective flow among workgroups. The Journal of Psychology, 148, 435–455. doi:10.1080/00223980.2013.806290
42.
SawyerR. K. (2008). Group flow. In Group genius: The creative power of collaboration (pp. 39–57). New York, NY: Basic Books.
43.
SchmidtC. P. (2005). Relations among motivation, performance achievement, and music experience variables in secondary instrumental music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53, 134–147. doi:10.2307/3345514
44.
SolandJ.HamiltonL. S.StecherB. M. (2013). Measuring 21st century competencies. Global Cities Education Network Report, 2013, 1–68.
45.
StajkovicA. D.LeeD.NybergA. J. (2009). Collective efficacy, group potency, and group performance: Meta-analyses of their relationships, and test of a mediation model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 814–828. doi:10.1037/a0015659
46.
TanL. (2016). Confucius: Philosopher of twenty-first century skills. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 48(12), 1233–1243. doi:10.1080/00131857.2016.1182416
47.
TrillingB.FadelC. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
48.
Van MierloH.Van HooftE. A. (2015). A group-level conceptualization of the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework: Antecedents and motivational outcomes. Group & Organization Management, 40(6), 776–808. doi:10.1177/1059601115592990
49.
Van YperenN. W.BlagaM.PostmesT. (2014). A meta-analysis of self-reported achievement goals and nonself-report performance across three achievement domains (work, sports, and education). PloS one, 9(4), e93594. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093594
50.
VandeWalleD. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(6), 995–1015. doi:10.1177/0013164497057006009
51.
WebbN. M.MastergeorgeA. M. (2003). The development of students’ helping behavior and learning in peer-directed small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 361–428. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2104_2.
