Content uploaded by Nancy J. Karlin
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Nancy J. Karlin on Aug 02, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company
New Horizons in Adult Education
& Human Resource Development
25 (3), 91-102
The role of intrinsic
motivation in the
academic pursuits of
nontraditional students
Shani Shillingford1
Nancy J. Karlin1
1University of Northern Colorado
Corresponding Author:
Shani Shillingford, University of Northern Colorado, 501 20th Street, Greeley, CO, 80639, USA
E-mail: shanishillingford@yahoo.com
The face of universities is changing. Typically, undergraduates are comprised of adults who recently left high school
and are attending college to get degrees to enter the job market. However, recent trends have indicated the increas-
ing presence of older adults, those aged 25 and above who are either attending college for the first time or are return-
ing students. These adults are described as nontraditional students. College students between the ages of 18 and 24
are referred to as traditional students. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (2005) report indicated
“by 2015, undergraduates of age 25 and older will be the growing population for higher education, with a related
numeric decline in 18-21 year old undergraduate enrollment” (p. 9).
Abstract
This article examines the role of intrinsic motivation in the academic pursuits of nontraditional students. The Aca-
demic Motivational Scale (AMS) was administered to 35 undergraduate students, 6 males and 29 females, aged 25 to
49 to explore their motivational orientations in choosing to attend college. The results of the study show that re-
spondents endorsed more items of intrinsic motivation than extrinsic motivation or amotivation. Hence, the desire to
demonstrate competence, a need for a sense of self determination, and the pleasure and satisfaction derived from the
college experience played a greater role in nontraditional students’ academic pursuits than the external rewards such
as career advancement. This information is important for college administrators in developing programs that cater to
the needs of nontraditional students and facilitate degree attainment.
Keywords
Intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, nontraditional students, achievement motivation, amotivation
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
92
The NCES (2002) report provided the most recent definitions of the traditional and nontraditional student: “the
‘traditional’ undergraduate is one who earns a high school diploma, enrolls full time immediately after finishing
high school, depends on parents for financial support, and either does not work during the school year or works
part time” (p. 1). A nontraditional student is defined as one who has either delayed enrollment into college, attends
school part time, works full time while enrolled, is financially independent, has dependents other than spouse, is a
single parent, or may not have a high school diploma (NCES, 2002).
According to the NCES (2005) report, the reasons for delaying enrollment in college varies, including a lack of
academic skills for college, lack of resources, enrollment in the military, employment, or raising a family. These
students decide to return to college to obtain skills to enter the job market, for career advancement, or to change
careers. The report indicated that “as delayed entrants age, they tend to look to postsecondary education for voca-
tional training, while those who delay shorter periods of time continue to report aspirations for bachelor’s or even
advanced degrees” (p. xii).
There are many factors influencing nontraditional students’ decision to attend college and to continue to degree
completion. Many of these students are balancing families and may be working full time. Lane (2004) recognized
that factors such as, dependents, part-time enrollment, and full-time employment placed nontraditional students at
risk for not completing their degrees. However, nontraditional students continue to persevere and to attain under-
graduate degrees. The NCES (2002) data indicate that 73% of the nontraditional students surveyed reported that
personal enrichment or interest in the subject, gaining skills to advance in their job or obtain a new career, or simp-
ly completing a degree or certificate program were important factors in their perseverance.
Achievement Motivation
Individuals are driven to participate in activities for various reasons such as, to gain reward or to avoid punishment.
A person may also engage in an activity for the pleasure they receive from participation. Two factors that guide
individuals’ decision making for engaging in activities are intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Deci and Ryan
(1985) indicated that intrinsic motivation is doing an activity for itself and for the pleasure and satisfaction derived
from participating in the activity. Intrinsic motivation is defined as “the doing of an activity for its inherent satis-
faction rather than for some separate consequence. When intrinsically motivated a person is moved to act for the
fun or challenge entailed rather than because of external products, pressures, or rewards” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.
56). On the other hand, extrinsic motivation involves engaging in a behavior as a means to an end, and not for its
own sake.
The terms intrinsic and extrinsic motivation have been expanded to include three separate subtypes. The three
types of intrinsic motivation include:
1. Intrinsic motivation to know- fact of performing an activity for the pleasure and the satisfac-
tion that one experiences while learning, exploring, or trying to understand something new
2. Intrinsic motivation to accomplish things- the fact of engaging in an activity for the pleasure
and experience when one attempts to accomplish or create something
3. Intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation- engaging in activity in order to experience
stimulating sensations (sensory pleasure, fun and excitement) (Ryan & Deci, 2000)
The three types of extrinsic motivation proposed consist of:
1. External regulation-behavior regulated through external means such as rewards or
constraints
2. Introjection-individuals begin to internalize the reasons for his or her actions
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
93
3. Identification-action becomes so internalized that it is judged as important to the person
(Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Additionally, a third motivating factor was also identified, amotivation. An amotivated person is neither intrinsi-
cally or extrinsically motivated. The individual does not perceive contingencies between the outcomes and their
own actions. The behavior is caused by forces outside of an individual’s own control (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Intrinsic Motivation
For the current research, the main focus will be on the role of intrinsic motivation. Persons are intrinsically moti-
vated for some activities and not others. Deci (1975) proposed that intrinsically motivated behaviors are those be-
haviors a person engages in to feel competent and self-determining. The challenge for an intrinsically motivated
individual is to seek out an activity that provides the opportunity to feel competent and self-determined. Intrinsi-
cally motivated behaviors involve conquering challenges or reducing incongruity.
Deci and Ryan (1985) developed Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which postulates that an individual engages in
a behavior that helps meet their need for competence, relatedness, and autonomy. Based on the Cognitive Evalua-
tion Theory (CET), Deci and Ryan (1985) suggest that for an individual to be intrinsically motivated, they must
experience satisfaction of the needs for both autonomy and competence. Interpersonal events and structures
(rewards, communication, and feedback) that contribute toward feelings of competence during action can enhance
intrinsic motivation for that action because they allow satisfaction for the basic psychological need of competence.
However, it should be noted that feelings of competence might not enhance intrinsic motivation unless accompa-
nied by a sense of autonomy.
Based on this theory, an individual is intrinsically motivated to partake in an activity because it allows the individ-
ual the opportunity to exercise and experience one’s capacities. The individual feels connected with others and
seem to feel in control of their actions. Thus, the individual engages in the activity based on interest or integrated
value. Furthermore, optimal challenges, positive feedback, and freedom from demeaning evaluations are all pre-
dicted to facilitate intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Research on Intrinsic Motivation
Researchers have carried out studies to explore the role of intrinsic motivation on behavior. These experiments
have often included investigating the effects of external rewards on intrinsic behaviors. Researchers have disputed
whether external rewards influence intrinsically motivated behaviors. Rawsthorne and Elliot (1999) conducted a
meta-analysis of intrinsic motivation experiments. They concluded that the results from those studies indicate “that
the undermining effect of performance goals relative to mastery goals was contingent on whether participants re-
ceived confirming or non confirming competence feedback and on whether the experimental procedures induced a
performance-approach or performance-avoidance orientation” (p. 333). In these experiments, mastery goals are
linked to intrinsic motivation as they challenge appraisals and support self-determination and feelings of autonomy.
While performance goals increase anxiety, they are expected to produce lower intrinsic motivation. The results
from the meta-analysis show that “overall the pursuit of performance goals produced significantly less free choice
persistence and self reported interest and enjoyment than did the pursuit of mastery goals” (Rawsthorne & Elliot,
1999, p. 337). Thus, this suggests that positive rewards can impact intrinsic motivation.
Pierce, Cameron, Banko, & So, 2003 investigated the positive effects of rewards and performance standards on
intrinsic motivation. Two levels of reward (reward vs. no reward) and two levels of performance (constant or pro-
gressive) were used as the determining factors of intrinsic motivation. The study concluded that rewarding individ-
uals for meeting a graded level of performance increased their intrinsic motivation. Since these rewards were not
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
94
perceived as controlling, they led to an increase in intrinsic motivation. The study supports the hypothesis that re-
wards can be used to enhance intrinsic motivation.
However, other researchers have proposed that people can enjoy activities for the pleasure received and not for any
perceived reward. Waterman (2005) hypothesized that since interest, flow experience, and feeling of expressive-
ness have been suggested as subjective experiences associated with intrinsic motivation, then an activity which
leads to the aforementioned will increase an individual’s intrinsic motivation. Waterman’s premise is that level of
effort would play a differential role in the motivation for activities that were enjoyed. The study demonstrated that
when activities were compared with respect to enjoyment, those associated with higher levels of effort were report-
ed to be more strongly associated with all forms of the subjective experiences of intrinsic motivation. Thus, con-
cluding that both self realization values and effort play a significant role in intrinsic motivation along with self de-
termination and perceived competence.
Waterman (2005) further confirmed earlier results found in the research, where a series of studies were conducted
to investigate the contribution of self determination, perceived competence, and self realization values in the sub-
jective experience of intrinsic motivation (Waterman et al., 2003). The results of the Waterman et al. (2003) study
showed that the three forms of subjective experience of intrinsic motivation (interest, flow experience, and feelings
of expressiveness) were all substantially related. Hence, the strength of intrinsically motivated experiences appear
to vary as a function of the extent to which the behavior engaged in is self determined, taps the perceived compe-
tence of the person, and reflects the person’s perceived potentials and purposes.
These experiments have all demonstrated the notion proposed by Deci and Ryan (1985) that intrinsically motivated
persons engage in behaviors that promote a sense of competence and self-determination. Interestingly, other fac-
tors such as self-efficacy and perseverance have also been shown to have an effect on intrinsic motivation. Prabhu,
Sutton, and Sauser (2008) studied the relationship between intrinsic motivation and creativity. Intrinsic motivation
was shown to partially mediate the relationship between creativity and openness to experience and to completely
mediate the relationship between creativity and self-efficacy. Thus, confirming that self-efficacy may have a posi-
tive impact on intrinsic motivation. The study demonstrated that “intrinsically motivated persons are motivated
because of the challenge and pleasure of the work itself, but when faced with obstacles and constant failures, it will
be their perseverance that sail them through the difficult path” (p. 62).
Intrinsic Motivation in College Students
Research on intrinsic motivation has also been extended to the classroom. Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (2001) exam-
ined the effects of external rewards and intrinsic motivation in education. According to CET, the effects on intrin-
sic motivation of external events such as those received in educational settings, the offering of rewards, the deliv-
ery of evaluation, the setting of deadlines, and other motivational inputs, are a function of how these events influ-
ence a person’s perception of competence and self-determination. Deci, Koestner, and Ryan confirmed that
“verbal rewards (positive feedback) tend to have an enhancing effect on intrinsic motivation. Verbal rewards can
also have a negative effect on intrinsic motivation if the interpersonal context within which they are administered is
controlling rather than informational” (p. 4). This suggests that if rewards are provided sufficiently to students,
rewards can enhance intrinsic motivation.
To explore the role of motivation in the lives of college students, Baker (2004) investigated the relationship be-
tween motivational orientation and adjustment to university, stress, and well being in a sample of university stu-
dents, and also to assess the predictive value of motivation in determining academic performance. The study found
that amotivation led to worse psychosocial adjustment to the university, higher levels of perceived stress, and
greater psychological distress while studying. Intrinsic motivation was linked to lower perceived stress scores
while studying, but was not predictive of better psychosocial adjustment to university life or greater levels of per-
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
95
ceived well-being. Additionally, in relation to academic performance, neither extrinsic or intrinsic motivation nor
amotivation were related to academic achievement.
Faye and Sharpe (2008) also explored the role of motivation in university students. They examined the relation-
ship between psychological need fulfillment, psychosocial development and academic motivation in university stu-
dents. In this study, competence and identity were found to be the two constructs most strongly associated with
academic motivation. There was no significant relationship between autonomy and motivation, but a relationship
was found between feelings of competence and a strong sense of identity. The findings suggest that a strong sense
of self affects intrinsic academic motivation because a strong sense of self affects feelings of competence and to a
lesser extent autonomy. Faye and Sharpe (2008) proposed that a relationship between autonomy and motivation
was not found because university settings are not set up to promote autonomy, as one is expected to attend classes
and take multiple choice tests. Also, these findings support the view that identity formation plays a critical role in
facilitating academic motivation in universities.
Intrinsic Motivation and Nontraditional students
Further investigation of motivation type was completed with traditional and nontraditional students. Harju and Ep-
pler’s (1997) examination of college students’ academic motivation found that “the majority of nontraditional stu-
dents (74%) endorsed the learning orientation which was related to a higher level of classroom and study flow.
Flow in these learning contexts can be characterized as intense concentration and involvement, strong intrinsic mo-
tivation, and enjoyment” (p. 156). Moreover, nontraditional students were shown to have a higher learning goal
orientation and thus a strong, highly involved intrinsic motivation.
In addition, Bye, Pushkar, and Conway (2007) compared the motivations and interests of traditional and nontradi-
tional students. Results indicated that nontraditional students reported higher levels of intrinsic motivation for
learning than traditional students. Overall, nontraditional students reported higher levels of motivation than tradi-
tional students. Also, both traditional and nontraditional students reported equal amounts of extrinsic motivation,
indicating the fact that the defining conditions of success within the classroom itself, and degree requirements are
the same for all. The results of the study further suggest that nontraditional students maintain a higher threshold of
intrinsic motivation to learn with an accompanying increase in positive affect.
Similarly, Taylor and House (2010) found that more mature students, those over age 21, endorsed both extrinsic
and intrinsic motivations for attending college, while those under 21 endorsed extrinsic motivations. Also, males
were more likely to identify extrinsic motivation, and females both extrinsic and intrinsic motivations for attending
college. These results further indicate the motivational differences between traditional and nontraditional students.
Rationale for Study
The extensive research on intrinsic motivation has indicated that it plays a significant role in a person’s decision
making. Deci and Ryan (1985) proposed that optimal challenges and freedom from demeaning evaluations are all
predicted to facilitate intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, external rewards such as positive feedback can enhance
intrinsic motivation (Pierce et al., 2003; Rawthorne & Elliot, 1999). An individual may choose to engage in an
activity for the feelings of competence and self-determination that it ensues. In college classrooms, though struc-
tured to provide external rewards, individuals may be intrinsically motivated based on the feedback they receive.
The growing trend of nontraditional students’ presence in university classrooms indicates that these students are
finding it necessary to attend college and to attain degrees. Based on the NCES 2002 and 2005 reports, nontradi-
tional students primarily enrolled to attain skills for a new career or to improve on job skills. These can be consid-
ered extrinsic motivations; however, intrinsic motivation also plays a role.
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
96
The few studies (Bye, Pushkar, & Conway, 2007; Harju, & Eppler, 1997; Taylor, & House, 2010) comparing tradi-
tional and nontraditional students show different motivating factors, with nontraditional students exhibiting higher
intrinsic motivation than traditional students. Thus, it is necessary to conduct further studies on the role of intrinsic
motivation in the academic pursuits of nontraditional students. Since, the NCES (2002) report indicated that when
compared with their traditional counterparts, nontraditional students seeking bachelor’s and associate’s degrees are
less likely to attain their degree goal within five years and are more likely to leave postsecondary education. Fur-
thermore, nontraditional students are most at risk for leaving during their first year, regardless of their degree ob-
jective.
Unfortunately, there is a dearth in the research on the role of intrinsic motivation in nontraditional students’ aca-
demic endeavors. Researchers have focused on comparing the academic motivations of nontraditional and tradi-
tional students; however, there is a need to narrow the focus on nontraditional students. These students have en-
rolled in universities not only for career advancement but also to tap their perceived competence and potential, and
to improve their self-efficacy. Hence, the aim of this study was to examine the role of intrinsic motivation in non-
traditional students’ decision to attend college and to explore the motivational factors of nontraditional students.
This information will prove useful in the development of successful programs in universities that cater to the needs
of nontraditional students and subsequently, decrease attrition rates.
Method
Participants
Participants included 35 undergraduates (29 females, 6 males) enrolled in fall classes in a Midwestern university.
The academic institution is a mid-sized university located in a mid-sized city. Ages ranged from 25 to 49 years.
Participants were contacted by their professors and received either partial course credit or extra credit points. Ta-
ble 1 contains the demographic data of the sample.
Procedures
The questionnaires were administered during a particular class period designated by the professor, and others met
the researcher in a research room in the Psychology department. Participants were first asked to complete demo-
graphic information: Gender (male or female), Age, Marital status (single or never married, married, divorced or
separated, and widowed), Race (white, black or African American, Asian, American Indian, Alaska native, Native
Hawaiian, or other), number of children currently in household, and program of study. Then participants answered
the Academic Motivation Scale (AMS), which required participants to rate 28 statements and the impact of each on
their decisions to attend college. Participation in the current study took approximately 20 minutes. Upon comple-
tion of the survey, participants were asked to place completed surveys in a sealed envelope.
Instruments
The participants were administered the Academic Motivation Scale (AMS), a measure of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation, and amotivation in education. Based on the tenets of self-determination theory, the AMS was devel-
oped by Vallerand et al. (1989). It is composed of 28 items subdivided into seven subscales assessing three types
of intrinsic motivation (intrinsic motivation to know, to accomplish things, and to experience stimulation), three
types of extrinsic motivation (indentified regulation, external, introjection), and amotivation. The scale was first
formulated in French and has been translated to English through appropriate methodological procedures. The
AMS has been shown to include elements of concurrent and construct validity. The internal consistencies of all the
scales were typically .80. The scales were correlated with motivational antecedents and consequences based on
Cognitive Evaluation Theory (Vallerand et al, 1992).
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
97
Table 1. Demographic data.
Characteristics Frequency Percentage
Gender
Male 6 17.1
Female 29 82.9
Total 35 100
Age
25-29 22 62.9
30-34 7 20
35-39 3 8.6
40-44 2 5.7
45-49 1 2.9
Total 35 100
Race
White 32 91.4
Black or African Ameri-
can 2 5.7
Hispanic 1 2.1
Total 35 100
Marital Status
Single or Never married 19 54.3
Married 15 42.9
Widowed 1 2.9
Total 35 100
No. of Children
0 21 60
1 6 17.1
2 7 20
3 1 2.9
Total 35 100
Program of Study
Psychology 9 25.8
Nursing 18 51.5
Education 4 11.5
Other 4 11.2
Total 35 100
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
98
On the AMS, the students were required to rate, based on a Likert scale, the extent items correspond to why they
are attending college. Questions are related to extrinsic motivation such as (“Because with only a high-school de-
gree I would not find a high-paying job later on”), intrinsic motivation (“For the intense feelings I experience when
I am communicating my own ideas to others”) or to amotivation (“Honestly, I don't know; I really feel that I am
wasting my time in school”). There are four questions that relate to each subscale.
Results
Data Analysis
Data collected was coded and the questionnaire was scored and analyzed based on seven subscales. Directions for
scoring the AMS as provided by Vallerand et al. (1989) were used. The values for each question were entered into
a scoring matrix with seven possible motivational orientations. The subscale with the highest score indicated the
motivational orientation strongest for each participant.
A reliability analysis of the subscales showed that all seven scales had high reliability except for the extrinsic moti-
vation-identified subscale, Cronbach’s α = .34. The scree plot obtained was slightly ambiguous and showed inflex-
ions that would justify extracting 4 items. Based on the reliability analysis, given the low reliability of items and
the resultant increase in Alpha if these items were deleted, items 1, 3, 10, 17, 24, and 30 were extracted from the
final analysis. See Table 2 for listing of Cronbach’s α for the seven subscales.
Table 2. Cronbach’s alpha for the seven subscales.
The seven subscales were compiled into three scales representing the three motivational orientations under investi-
gation- intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation. Participants in the study endorsed more items
related to intrinsic motivation (M = 52.94, SD= 11.48) than extrinsic motivation (M = 36.48, SD= 9.05) or amotiva-
tion (M = 4.57, SD= 1.84). The histograms below depict participants’ response patterns on the three motivation
scales.
In order to compare any group differences in scores on the three motivational scales, a series of ANOVA’s were
conducted. Prior to interpreting the results of the ANOVA’s, a test of homogeneity of variance was conducted us-
ing Levene’s Test. For these data, Levene’s test was non-significant with all p values greater than .05. This indi-
cated that the assumption of variance was met.
Motivation Scale Cronbach’s alpha
Intrinsic motivation- to know .78
Intrinsic motivation- toward accom-
plishment .81
Intrinsic motivation- to experience
stimulation .88
Extrinsic motivation- identified .34
Extrinsic motivation -introjection .89
Extrinsic motivation-external regu-
lation .62
Amotivation .66
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
99
The results of the analysis show there was a significant effect of program of study on the type of motivational
scales endorsed F (3,31) = 3.406, (p <.05). Post hoc analysis revealed a significant difference between those stu-
dents studying psychology and those studying nursing on their extrinsic motivation subscale.
There was no significant effect of gender, race, age, marital status, and number of children on the motivational
scales endorsed, all p values greater than .05.
Figure 1. Intrinsic Motivation Scale.
Figure 2. Extrinsic Motivation Scale.
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
100
Figure 3. Amotivation Scale.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to explore the role of intrinsic motivation in the academic pursuits of nontraditional stu-
dents. Based on the NCES 2002, and 2005 reports, nontraditional students were primarily extrinsically motivated
to attain a college education. These motivational factors included gaining new skills for improvement in job per-
formance, or to make a career change. However, other factors such as personal enrichment or interest in a subject,
also served as determining factors in nontraditional students’ decisions to enroll in college. Thus, it was proposed
that intrinsic motivation played a significant role in the decision making process. As stated by Deci (1975) intrinsi-
cally motivated behaviors are those behaviors a person engages in to feel competent and self-determining.
This study examined the motivational orientations of males and females, of different age groups, enrolled in differ-
ent programs of study. As a whole, the sample endorsed more items of intrinsic motivation than extrinsic motiva-
tion or amotivation. This supports past research (Bye, Pushkar, & Conway, 2007; Harju & Eppler, 1997; Taylor, &
House, 2010) that has demonstrated that nontraditional students had higher intrinsic motivation for learning than
traditional students.
The results of the study show a significant difference in extrinsic motivation between those students majoring in
nursing and those majoring in psychology. This difference supports NCES 2002 and 2005 reports of nontraditional
students pursing degrees for career advancement. This difference demonstrates the complementary role of extrinsic
motivation in nontraditional students’ choice of degree programs.
This research was limited in the sample size and lack of diversity among the students. Further research should aim
to explore the motivational orientations of nontraditional students in various departments or colleges, such as com-
munity colleges, to further explore whether the type of program enrolled in may have a difference in the motiva-
tional orientations. NCES (2005) survey reported that with age, nontraditional students tend to look to postsecond-
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
101
ary education for vocational training. This also implies that there might be age differences in motivational orienta-
tions, with older nontraditional students seeking external rewards such as skills in a specialized field.
This study was also limited because of the convenience sample utilized. Participants are students from a mid-sized
university in a Midwestern city, and thus this limits the ability to generalize to other populations. Additionally,
nontraditional students in other settings such as urban areas may have different motivations for attending college
and it would be useful to explore any potential differences based on geographic location. Furthermore, the use of a
quantitative study limited the information that could be obtained from the students about their experiences and mo-
tivations for attending college. The use of interviews could provide additional information about the students’ mo-
tivation.
Although there may be limitations in this study, the findings indicate that intrinsic motivation plays a vital role in
nontraditional students’ academic pursuits. Thus, this need for self-determination and competence should be taken
into consideration during program development in universities, and programs should cater curriculum to meet stu-
dents’ motivational needs. Accordingly, Kenner and Weinerman (2011) suggested that university officials should
recognize the difference between traditional and nontraditional students and provide specific tools that would help
nontraditional students adjust to the university environment. Furthermore, techniques such as those proposed by
Pierce et al. (2003) including rewarding individuals for meeting a graded level of performance can increase nontra-
ditional students’ intrinsic motivation. Hence, rewarding the intrinsic motivation of nontraditional students could
help to decrease attrition rates and make the college experience more worthwhile for nontraditional students.
References
Baker, S. R. (2004). Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivational Orientations: Their Role in University Adjustment,
Stress, Well-Being, and Subsequent Academic Performance. Current Psychology, 23, 189-202.
Bye, D., Pushkar, D., & Conway, M. (2007). Motivation, Interest, and Positive Affect in Traditional and Nontradi-
tional Undergraduate Students. Adult Education Quarterly, 57, 141-158. doi: 10.1177/0741713606294235
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum, New
York.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. Plenum, New York.
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation in Education: Recon-
sidered Once Again. Review of Educational Research, 71, 1-27.
doi: 10.3102/00346543071001001
Faye, C. & Sharpe, D. (2008). Academic motivation in university: The role of basic psychological needs and iden-
tity formation. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement,
40, 189-199.
Harju, B. L., & Eppler, M. A. (1997). Achievement motivation, flow and irrational beliefs in traditional and nontra-
ditional students. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 24, 147.
Kenner, C., & Weinerman, J. (2011). Adult Learning Theory: Applications to Non-Traditional College Students.
Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41(2), 87-96.
Lane, K. (2004). Sen. Clinton Unveils Plan to Help Nontraditional Students. Black Issues in Higher Education, 21
(2), 6.
New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3)
102
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Waiting to Attend College, 2005. Retrieved from http://
nces.ed.gov/das/epubs/2005152/index.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. Nontraditional Undergraduates, 2002. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/
programs/coe/2002/analyses/nontraditional/sa06.asp
Pierce, W. D, Cameron, J., Banko, K. M., & So, S. (2003). Positive effects of rewards and performance standards
on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Record, 53, 561-578.
Prabhu, V., Sutton, C., & Sauser, W. (2008). Creativity and Certain Personality Traits: Understanding the Mediat-
ing Effect of Intrinsic Motivation. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 53-66.
Rawsthorne, L. J., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Achievement Goals and Intrinsic Motivation: A Meta-Analytic Review.
Personality & Social Psychology Review, 3, 326.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic definitions and New Directions.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
Taylor, J., & House, B. (2010). An exploration of identity, motivations and concerns of non-traditional students at
different stages of higher education. Psychology Teaching Review, 16, (1), 46-57.
Vallerand, R.J., Blais, M.R., Brière, N.M., & Pelletier, L.G. (1989). Construction et validation de l’Échelle de Mo-
tivation en Éducation (EME). [Construction and validation of the Echelle Motivation in Education (EME)].
Revue canadienne des sciences du comportment, 21, 323-349.
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L.G., Blais, M.R., Brière, N.M., Senecal, C.B., & Vallieres, E. F. (1992). The Academic
Motivation Scale: A Measure of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education. Educational and Psy-
chological Measurement, 52, 1003-1017. doi: 10.1177/0013164492052004025
Waterman, A. S. (2005). When Effort Is Enjoyed: Two Studies of Intrinsic Motivation for Personally Salient Ac-
tivities. Motivation & Emotion, 29, 165-188.
Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., Goldbacher, E., Green, H., Miller, C., & Philip, S. (2003). Predicting the Subjec-
tive Experience of Intrinsic Motivation: The Roles of Self-Determination, the Balance of Challenges and
Skills, and Self-Realization Values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1447-1458. doi:
10.1177/0146167203256907
