Intrinsic motivation and culture are linked

Culture and intrinsic motivation are linked. From an intrinsic motivation perspective Responsibility Theory? points out – irrespective of culture or social environment – every person is responsible for and has power over what they think, do, say, choose and learn.

Viktor Frankl writing in his book: Man’s search for meaning, who lived under impossible circumstances, offered the following powerful considerations:

• When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
• Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.
• Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.

Intrinsic control and ownership

Control and ownership, pertaining to self, is what Glasser (1986) aligns with intrinsic motivation. According to Glasser it is a person’s attitude and their intrinsic motivation which has the most influence over what the individual will think, do, say, choose, and learn. By examining and reporting on student behaviour and student attitudes in relation to their learning outcomes, Glasser (1986) found that unless a student was personally motivated to behave and learn, there really was very little anyone else could do except support, encourage and offer advice; ultimately (the alpha and omega) of behaviour is that inevitably, the student is the one who is responsible for their thoughts, behaviour and learning.

No one can actually learn for someone else

 As Woolfolk (1998, p. 231) points out: No one can actually “learn for someone else.” Therefore, from a Responsibility Theory? perspective, when the following question is asked of the student in the RT classroom: “Who’s responsible for what you think, do, say, choose and learn?” There is only one axiomatic response from the student(s): “I am!” This self-talk realisation and the application of this self-talk realisation brings with it valuable self-talk insights and a sense of personal power. As noted by Glasser (1986, p. 27) “if students do not feel that they have any power in their … classes, they will not work in school. The same could also be said for teachers.” And RT is all about informing students about self-empowerment.

Axiomatic truth

From a cultural perspective, research into culture points out that culture is complex, and with this complexity there are a myriad number of definitions for culture. However, even for all of these different definitions, and associated complexities, there is one universal truth in all of these definitions and complexities, and that is culture is not biologically or genetically predetermined. Culture is not inherited.

Culture is not inherited

What that means is that culture is not and can never be thought of as being innately or biologically inherited; culture is and has always been learnt. Therefore, as a result of this axiomatic truth, that culture is not genetically determined, what that means is that culture is socially learnt and is socially organic; which indicates the behaviours of the individuals living in the cultural collective, is influenced by the collective. There is also the view the behaviour of the individual has an influence on the culture. What that means is culture is never static, culture is organic.

Culture is organic

Culture and its social mores is a forever changing organic entity. In terms of definition, according to Geert Hofstede, culture can be defined as being an ongoing learning process – for all members of the collective – where “the collective programming of the mind … distinguishes the members of one group from another.” This cultural learning is then constantly being shared, explored, experienced and being passed on from person to person, within the collective, not only on a daily basis, but also from generation to generation.

Learnings are continually being added to culture

Culture is socially organic and never static. Learnings are continually being added to the culture, through the actions of the individuals in the culture. Associated with this, previous learnings, if not passed on, can also be lost. However even with this social and cultural (add-loss, ebb and flow of information that is taking place within the cultural collective), each culture is still able to maintain a cohesive and stable understanding of itself.

Which, as noted, leads to deep and specific intrinsically unseen social knowledge and understandings, which is only intrinsically understood by each person within each cultural collective. These internal understandings and associated externally presented behaviours is what provides all of the members of one group to be able to distinguish themselves from another different group, collective and culture.

When children enter the classroom, they are bringing with them their cultural mores. The presenting behaviours of the students can be seen, however the internal motivations for their presenting behaviours are unseen. 

Intrinsic motivation is the driving force

In terms of research dealing with engagement and behaviour, if, as the research indicates, intrinsic motivation is the driving force for action, and at the same time, if culture is the social determinant that shapes behaviour, the question that needs to be asked again, is: what is it that needs to happen for students to engage in what may be referred to here as mainstream academic school-based scholarship pursuits? There was and is only one answer. Change can – and only will take place – when the spark for change is ignited by the thinking and the action from within the culture.

Ignition

Coyle (2009), points out that ignition is all about self-motivation, drive and commitment on the part of the individual. It is not the responsibility of the cultural outsider to try to light the fire of change potential. The outsider can of course, offer advice and support, however as evidenced by the words of Glasser (1986): when it comes to learning, from any advice presented, the action for what may follow this advice, must be activated by the receiver of this information.

The only thing a teacher, adviser, mentor, a coach can do is offer, support, advice or information. If an individual, or a collective who is listening to this information decides to follow this advice, it is because the individual and/or the collective, has decided that the information presented brings and adds value to the individual, the collective and culture in question.

Change will only take place when the individual wants to change

If this information has meaning to the culture, it is then, and only then, that the spark will ignite and start the fire of cultural change and possibilities. This process links in with the concept of self-system and self-motivation, as described by John Kendall, and others. The self-system is all about self-motivation. “The self-motivating self-system [is] the deciding factor as to whether or not” an individual will decide to engage with the information that has been presented. This indicates that culture, the self-system and self-motivation are all linked. Change will only take place if the individuals in the culture want to change, and the change, whatever it may be needs to be valued by the collective in question.

About the Author

Dr Ragnar Purje holds the position of Adjunct Lecturer School of Education and the Arts, Central Queensland University. Under the supervision of Professor Ken Purnell Ragnar’s thesis focussed on the success of his pioneering form of acquired brain injury rehabilitation therapy.

The therapy is now referred to as CBBMMT (Complex Brain-Based Multi-Movement Therapy). Ragnar’s thesis has also added two new descriptors into the lexicon of human biology; these are neurofluidity and hólos.

Neurofluidity are the neurological processes that lead to the condition of brain plasticity. Hólos is a descriptor which, for the first time in history (to the best of Ragnar’s research and understanding), provides a category which unifies the brain and the body, with one word. 

Prior to this holistic biological unification, the brain and the body had always been referred to as two separate entities. Hólos derives from the Greek: ?λο? ? ? ólos. The English word holistic is derived from hólos. Holistic and hólos offer the same classification. Holistic and hólos incorporate the concept of holism.

Ragnar is the author of Responsibility Theory? (A new consideration in neuroeducation). A brain-based immersive systematic self-talk sequence learning program. The purpose of which is to empower teachers and inspire and transform students. Haibo He (2011, p. 190) emphasises that “sequence learning is presumably among one of the most important components of human intelligence.” 

Responsibility Theory? presents ten powerful precepts which provides teachers, educators, and parents with additional linguistic focussed pedagogical and social tools, that fits in with any teaching style, any classroom behavior management program, and all school rules. The Responsibility Theory? program also fits in with all parental home rules.

Once teachers are informed about what Responsibility Theory? is and how it should be applied, the next stage is for the teachers, in accordance with their own personality and teaching styles, to begin introducing the program to their students. 

As part of this process the students are informed by their teacher that each student can immediately use this knowledge and power to take control of their thinking and behavior, which will help them to constructively advance their well-being, their social skills and academic potential; not only for today, but forever.

Associated with this is Ragnar’s Responsibility Theory? NeuroEducation Self-Empowerment Project. The Project is based on neuroscience and brain plasticity research. It is suitable for schools, colleges, corporations, or any organisation interested advancing personal and social wellbeing by constructively and systematically especially dealing with negative influences such as bullying, cyberbullying, or negative life-style choices and/or negative peer influence. The motto of the program is: If I can change my thinking, I can change my behaviour and my life.

Ragnar is the initiator of NeuroNumeracy?, an intensive self-motivating and transformative neuroscience brain-based numeracy learning program for children, the purpose of which is to enhance their skills, knowledge and understanding of the four operations in mathematics.

In addition to his cognitive neuroscience PhD, Ragnar has completed three Master of Education degrees (one in Education; one in Guidance and Counselling; and one in Leadership and Management). He has two Bachelor degrees (Physical Education and Psychology). He has also completed five Post-Graduate awards (Education; Sports Science; Exercise and the Sports Sciences; Health Counselling; and Communication Studies).

Ragnar is a traditional Goju Karate martial arts practitioner and a former sports karate Australian champion. “Every day one kata”.