Application Of Reality Therapy To Develop Effective Achievement Goals
 
Sunawan Junmei Xiong
School of Psychology, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, People Republic of China
 

Abstract: Achievement goals affected student’s performance, emotion, motivation, and learning strategy. Unfortunately, some students did not have effective achievement goals. The purpose of this article was to provide a comprehensive review about application of reality therapy to develop effective achievement goals in individual counseling setting. During the counseling process, student’s achievement goals was interpreted from basic needs, quality world, choice theory and total behavior perspective. The goals of reality therapy were human connection, using choice theory, understanding total behavior and developing effective plans. Those goals were basis to develop effective achievement goals. This article also discussed implementation of the WDEP system.

Keywords: Achievement goal, quality world, choice theory, total behavior and WDEP system

Achievement goals were important components of self-regulated learning. It provided basis, rationale and direction for self-regulation process (Anderman, Austin & Johnson, 2002; Trust & Hursh, 2008). Achievement goals predict the use of learning strategies, efforts, emotions and academic achievement or performances (Schunk, 2012). Results of experimental studies regarding the effects of trichotomy goal orientation on performance showed that in the non-contingent condition subject with performance-avoidance goals had poorer performance than subjects with mastery goals and performance-approach goal, whereas subjects with mastery goals and performance-approach goal had an equal performance (Elliot, et. Al., 2005). However in the contingent condition, subjects with performance-approach goals had the best performance then subjects with mastery goals and performance-avoidance goals. Anderman, Austin and Johnson (2002) based on his analysis of laboratory and field studies concluded that the impact of goals orientation to performance were consistent. As implication, students need to develop effective achievement goals (such as mastery goals or performance-approach goals) for basis of self-regulation process and develop self motivation.

Unfortunately, not all students have effective achievement goals. The survey results indicated that in Semarang (Indonesia) about 63.1% of high school students adopted ineffective achievement goals, especially performance-avoidance goals (Sugiharto & Sunawan, 2011). Results of interviews to lower group students indicated that they tend to evaluate their learning outcomes with external criteria (especially peers) and did not have a clear short-term goals (Sunawan, Sugiharto & Trianni, 2012). Their short-term goals, for example, had a better grade in exam, and completed all homework to get good grade (without being able to mention the level of expected grade).

School counselors have an important role to help students to develop effective achievement goals. American School Counselor Association (2004) set a standard of competence of students in academics i.e. "Students will acquire the attitudes, knowledge and skills that contribute to effective learning in school and lifelong learning." Achievement goals, an important component in self-regulated learning (Zimmerman & Moylan, 2009), can be used as of positive attitudes and skills that contribute to effective learning capability. School counselors can helped students to develop effective achievement goals through guidance curriculum, individual planning, responsive service and system support (Cobia & Henderson, 2007). Focus of this article was to apply reality therapy to develop effective achievement goals in school counseling program components, particularly individual counseling.

There are three considerations of applying reality therapy to develop effective achievement goals. First, reality therapy argued that behavior is purposeful (Corey, 2009; Malone, 2002). Reality therapy focus on self evaluation, make a plan and commitment. It was relevant to achievement goals theory that behavior was directed to achieve the future object (Locke & Latham, 2002). Second, reality therapy focused on behavior (Hansen, Stevic, & Warner, 1982). This focus encouraged students to develop effective achievement goals that be able to be implemented in concrete actions. Third, reality therapy emphasized short term relationship with a focus on 'here and now behavior'. Short term relationship possible reality therapy helps developing effective achievement goals effectively.

The application framework of reality therapy can be seen in Figure 1. This framework describe the counseling process that begins with understanding student’s ineffective achievement goals problem from reality therapy perspective and will be ended with the establishment of effective achievement goals based on reality therapy goals (connected, choice theory, total understanding behavior and planning). The following discussions were about reality therapy application framework to develop effective achievement goals.

Effective Achievement Goals
Goals relate to purposeful behavior to achieve future object. According to Elliot and Fryer (2008), goal referred to a cognitive representation of future object that organism was committed to approach or avoid. This definition can be interpreted that the goal is a cognitive imagination about what a person wants to achieve in the future and its impact on the behavior is affected by commitments. In the achievement context, cognitive imagination can be a GPA, level of competency, class ranking, and so on. Level of commitment affected effort, strategy use, persistence, and choice (Locke & Latham, 2002).
 

 

Effective achievement goals can been seen from orientation, specificity and commitment (Locke & Latham, 2002). Achievement goal orientation was a general focus or purpose in achievement (Pintrich, Conley & Kempler, 2003). Goal orientation relate to beliefs about the nature of intelligence or ability. There were two kinds of theories of intelligence, i.e. incremental theory and entity theory (Thrash & Hurst, 2009). People with incremental theory believes that intelligence can increase of as a result of learning. They believe that intelligence and abilities can be developed through effort, experience and learning. However, people with entity theory believe that intelligence is a fixed entity. They believe that effort has taken him to reach the highest limit of capacity so their ability are impossible to be developed (for a brief review see Schunk, 2012).

There are some concepts of goals orientation. According to the normative goal orientation perspective, there were two goal orientations, namely mastery or learning goal orientation and performance goal orientation (Dweck, 1986). Mastery goal orientation aimed to master a task or develop competence, whereas performance goal orientation aimed to demonstrate the ability of a person compared with others (Schunk, 2012; Schunk, Pintrich & Meece, 2008). Related to intelligence theory, incremental theory adopted mastery goal orientation, and entity theory adopted performance goal orientation. Previous studies relatively consistent have shown that people with mastery goal orientation had a better motivation, performance and achievement than people with performance goal orientation (Ames & Archer, 1988; Barron & Harackiewics, 2001; Brett & Vandewalle, 1999; Erez & Judge, 2001; Harackiewics, et al., 2000; Klein, et al., 1999; VandeWalle, Cron, & Slocum, 2001, and Wood, Atkins, & Bright, 1999). However, Thrash and Hurst (2009) noted that there were inconsistencies in the results of the performance goal orientation.

In the 2 x 2 achievement goals framework, Elliot classified goals into two dimensions, namely definition (mastery and performance) and valence (approach and avoidance) (Elliot, 2008; Elliot & McGregor, 2001). Mastery-approach goal orientation focus on developing competence and mastering tasks, while the mastery-avoidance goal orientation focus on mastering of competencies but also avoiding errors. Most previous studies on mastery goals emphasized on mastery-approach goal orientation, whereas mastery-avoidance was rarely done; mastery-avoidance goal orientation tended to occur in people with impaired perfectionism (Thrash & Hurst, 2009). Performance-approach focus on demonstrating competence in comparison to others, while the performance-voidance focus on avoiding the appearance of incompetence. Previous studies have shown that performance-avoidance goals were negative predictors of performance or achievement, whereas performance-approach goals  predicted performance and achievement better than mastery goals (Elliot & McGregor, 2001; Elliot, Shell, Henry, & Maier, 2005). However, mastery-approach and performance-approach goals were equally adaptive for students (Anderman, Austin & Johnson, 2002).

Brophy (2010) explained the reasons of performance-approach goals as a better predictor of achievements than mastery goals. First, performance-approach goals develop a strong commitment to reach higher achievement than their peers, while mastery goals commit to improve their competence; achievements is seen from personal progress. Second, performance-approach goals follow the 'teacher's agenda' while mastery goals follow the 'self-generated agenda' so that performance-approach goals using strategies that really support attainment the highest normative achievement. As implication, goal orientation should be flexible to change between mastery goals and performance-approach goals in accordance with the context. The experimental results in dart-drawing game have shown that participants who used mastery goals in exercise period, then applied performance goals in match period (shifting goals) had the best performance  than participants with single goal (both only mastery goal orientation or performance goal orientation) (Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 1997).

Elliot, Murayama and Pekrun (2011) developed a 2 x 3 model of achievement goals. This model is revised from 2 x 2 achievement goals framework. The revision was in dimension of definition, namely task, self and others. Aspects of task and self were elaborated from aspects of mastery of 2 x 2 achievement goals framework, while other represents aspects of performance of 2 x 2 achievement goals framework. This models were composed of the following goals: a task-approach goal focused on the attainment of task-based competence; a task-avoidance goal focused on the avoidance of task-based incompetence; a self-approach goal focused on the attainment of self-based competence; a self-avoidance goal focused on the avoidance of self-based incompetence; an other-approach goal focused on the attainment of other competence-based; and an other-avoidance goal focused on the avoidance of other-based incompetence. Regression analysis results indicated that others-approach positively predict achievements, while the task-approach positively predicted intrinsic motivation. Others goal orientation was less adaptive impacts on behavior.

Cropanzano (in Brett and VandeWalle, 1999) explained that the goal orientation arranged hierarchically from abstract orientation (analogous to attitude) that was in upper level, then more concrete orientation in lower level, behavioral goals. Abstract goal orientation usually is a long-term goal orientation (distal goal orientation), whereas a concrete goal orientation is a short-term goal orientation (proximal goal orientation). Concrete goal orientation was most powerful effect to students’ motivation (Bandura in Zimmerman, 1989; Schunk & Ertmer, 1999). In short, to develop effective achievement goals students need to have comprehensive goals from distal goal orientation to proximal goal orientation.

Goal commitment is a moderator variable between goal achievement and performance (Klein et al 1999; Locke & Latham, 2002). It indicated that in absence of goal commitment, goal achievement will not be a source of motivation. When a student experiences difficulty in achieving his goals, goal-commitment provide energy to keep his effort. Klein, et.al. (1999) in meta-analysis study showed that although goal-commitment is a strong predictor of the performance, rigid and high goal-commitment potentially cause the problem, such as stress and anxiety. In other words, in order to develop effective achievement goals, students need to develop a high and flexible goal-commitment at the same time. It encourages people to develop motivation as well as self-acceptance.
 
The Impact of Achievement Goals to Motivation and Emotion
Some studies have shown the effect of achievement goals to motivation. In cross-cultural studies that was involving participants from USA and Japan indicated that avoidance goals predicted self-esteem (for U.S. of participants) and collective self-esteem (for Japan of participants) negatively (Elliot, et al. 2012). This study also explained that avoidance goals negatively predicted self actualization for both U.S. and Japan of participants.

Previous study showed that achievement goals affect learning strategies and interest (Costello, 2011). In that study, participants were divided into four clusters achievement goals according their Achievement Goals Questionnaire (AGQ) scores, i.e. high mastery-high performance approach (HM/HP), high mastery-low performance-approach (HM/LP), low mastery-high performance-approach (LM/HP) and low mastery-low performance-approach (LM/LP). Participants in HM/HP clusters used more deep learning strategies significantly than participants in LM/LP cluster. However, there were no significant differences in learning strategies using of surface between all clusters. Participants in HM/HP cluster had higher personal interest significantly than participants in LM/HP and LM/LP clusters. However, there were no significant differences situational interest between all clusters.

In nina puzzle experiment, Elliot and Harackiewicz (1996) found that approach-avoidance goals affected enjoy both directly and indirectly; and time spent indirectly that was mediated by task involvement. Participants in performance-approach condition engaged more puzzle solving in free-choice period, enjoyment, and task involvement than performance-avoidance condition.

The effect of achievement goals to emotions have been proved in several studies. In correlational study, Pekrun, Elliot and Maier (2009) shown that achievement goals predicted academic emotions significantly. Mastery goal predicted enjoyment, hope and pride positively and predicted shame, hopeless, boredom and anger negatively. Performance-approach goal predicted hope and pride positively. Performance-avoidance goal predicted anger, anxiety, hopeless and shame positively and predicted pride and hope negatively.

In 2 x 2 framework achievement goals study, Putwain, Sander and Larkin (2013) showed that achievement goals predicted academic emotions significantly. Mastery-approach goal predicted enjoyment, hope and pride positively and boredom negatively. Mastery-avoidance goal predicted anger, anxiety, shame and hopelessness positively and hope and pride negatively. Performance-approach did not predict any academic emotions. Finally, performance-avoidance goal predicted anxiety and shame positively and hope negatively.
 
Achievement Goals: A Reality Therapy Perspective
Human beings act to meet their basic needs that have been brought since birth. Glesser (1998) identified that humans had five basic needs, i.e. needs of survival, love and belonging, freedom or independence, power, and fun. Survival needs are need to survive both physiologically and psychologically in order to carry out a life, such as eating, drinking, sleeping, sex. Love and belonging needs are expressed to many ways, such as building intimate relationship with the opposite sex for foster families, foster friendship, working together in a team and a variety of other activities that link individual to individual. Love and belonging needs are main needs and most difficult to be met (Corey, 2009). Many conflicts in interpersonal relationships due to the effort to meet this need. Freedom or independence needs are reflected in the desire of people to be autonomous. Freedom needs are reflected in willingness to make decisions and choices in absence of rigid rules. Power needs related to achievement, accomplishment, and internal control. Finally, needs for fun are needs to get excitement from various games and fun activities.

Achievement goals can be interpreted as a direction or a way to meet basic needs. As well as goal theory, reality therapy believed that standard of basic needs fulfillment are represented cognitively as a quality world (Wubbolding, 2007). Quality world is idea about final results that want to be obtained if the behavior is directed to attain goals achievement. For instance, if a student has an achievement goal to attain 8.5 in math, he can meet his basic needs through attain that goal, such as meet requirements to get extra pocket money from parent (survive), perceived as a brilliant student (power), and getting attention and affection from parents and peers (love and belonging). In that case indicate that quality world related to peoples, beliefs, and experience (Flanagan & Flanagan, 2004, Sharf, 2004). In short, reality therapy considers that behavior has a goal to achieve quality world (Wubbolding, 2007) which in this context is achievement goals.

People have capacity to make choices about what should or not to do. They are determined by internal control, not external control (such as environment and social interaction) (Glesser, 1998). Consequently, people are required to take responsibility for their choices. People also can choose any strategies to accomplish their goals, but they do not have access to determine the consequences of his choice (Sharf, 2004). For example, a student has been trying hard to get score 8.5, but he only get 7.5. People make choices in all aspects of their life, such as choosing what is their goals, the difficulty level, strategies to achieve it, react to the goal attainment and make meaning.

Human was classified into two group based on their identity, namely succes identity and failure identity (Hansen, Stevic, & Warner, 1982). The criterium to judge human’s identity is 3R (responsibility, reality and right). Responsibility refers to one’s ability to meet his basic need without disturb the others rights. Reality refers to one’s willingness to accept logical and natural consequences of behavior. Right refers to value or norm standard as a comparison to determine whether a behavior is right or wrong. People with success identity be able to meet their basic needs in accordance with 3R principles and vice verse. During attaining achievement goals, students can choose those type of identity. In order to achieve a grade of 8.5, for example, student A cheated and asked someone else to finished his job so that he did not need to work hard to accomplish his goal. As a result, he attain his achievement goal by getting a 8.5 grade. However, these achievements indicated that he had failure identity; depriving other student work (breaking responsibility principle), lying (breaking right principle) and want to achieve the goal without effort (breaking reality principle). His way to achieve the achievement goal is the result of choice and he must be responsible for the choices. Failure or succes identity adoption is a result of choice.

Every choice affect behavior. Reality therapy describe behavior comprehensively so-called as total behavior, which includes thinking, acting, feeling and physiology (Glesser, 1998; Wubbolding, 2007). Behavior can not be seen in isolation. Thinking, acting, feelings and physiology are not a separate part of the behavior. Otherwise, all components of total behavior are integrated components that shape behavior. When a student establishes an achievement goal, such as achieve 8.5 at the end of the semester in math, then every component of total behavior (thinking, acting, feeling and physiology) will work in an integrated way to achieve that goal. Humans can control thinking and acting directly, but control feeling and physiology indirectly. When having difficulty in achieving a achievement goal, for example, a person can control his thinking to keep these challenges by doing self-persuasion to convince that he can attain the goal, and his actions are directed to solve the difficulties one by one; nevertheless his feelings may still remain insecure, anxious and physiological conditions are still sweating, palpitations and so on which indicated the presence of anxiety. However, if he control thought and action consistently, the physiological and feeling will change indirectly later.

In the cycle of self-regulated learning, students will experience a self-reflection phase (Zimmerman & Moylan, 2008). During process of self-reflection, students will evaluate goal accomplishment and react to the evaluation results. Those reaction could be adaptive or not. If the achievement is equal or beyond achievement goal, student will be satisfied and vice versa. Some maladaptive responses are self-handicapping, defensive pessimism, and learned helplessness (Zimmerman, 2011). If associated with choice theory, reaction to goal accomplishment both adaptive or maladaptive is a result of choice. Maladaptive reactions are not due to the results or performances which are below of achievement goals. Otherwise, maladaptive response is a student’s choice after seeing the results of goals evaluation. This condition like a depressed person, where it is not a 'depression' rather 'depressing' (Corey, 2009; Seligman, 2006). Therefore, responses to the evaluation of goal accomplishment are a choice and people take responsible to the consequences of their choice. Choice theory awareness is important for students to be more responsible and adaptive, especially in the context of learning (Malone, 2002).

Wubbolding (2007) distinguished mental health status into two groups, namely regressive stage and positive stage. Regressive stage is indicated by ineffectiveness in fulfilling basic needs, while positive stages is indicated by effectiveness in fulfilling basic needs. Regressive stage occurs in three steps. First, "I give up". People in this step believe that there is no alternative except surrendered or avoid responsibility to solve the problem. They tend to become apathetic and withdrawal. Second, negative symptoms that appear in total behavior. Third, negative addiction. People repeat negative symptoms to meet basic needs. Positive stage also occurs in three steps. First, "I will do it," or "I want to change." It indicate that person have willingness to make an effective choice. Second, positive symptoms that appear in total behavior. Third, positive addiction. Person with positive addiction feel on self-worth, constructive, and satisfy with his personal achievement. Positive and negative addiction is not a separate or categorical dimension of mental health. In daily life, a positive attitude can be a manifestation of negative or positive addiction. It depends on how to person develop effective choice and take responsible.

Various forms of maladaptive behavior in learning, such as self-handicapping, procrastination, low self-motivation, and learned helplessness, indicate that student is in the regressive stage. First, he does not realize that he could make a better choice to fulfill their basic needs. Maladaptive responses are not the only choice that can be taken when fail to attain the achievement goals. By utilizing the power of the self-control, people can determine the best choice to meet their needs. Unfortunately, most people perceive that they do not have opportunity to choose a better choice and maladaptive response is caused by the external situation or stimulus (Glesser, 1998). Second, people belief that he do not have any hope. Otherwise, choice theory teaches that under no circumstances humans always have choice (Corey, 2009).

Student with positive behaviors in academic setting, such as high motivation and achievement, does not always reflect that he is in a positive stage. Positive behavior is a positive addiction if it is done base on the principles of reality, right and responsibility (3R). Students who earn grades 8.5, for example, does not have positive achievement addiction if it is based on the desire to get a gift from parents or humiliate someone else. In contrast, the achievement indicates a positive addiction when he realized that his efforts is a best choice in for himself and others; his awareness about responsibility, reality and right encourage him to achieve his goals in positive way, sportive and fair.
 
Counseling Process to Develop Effective Achievement Goals
Counseling Goal
There are four goals of reality therapy, i.e. human connection, using choice theory, understanding total behavior and developing effective plans (Flanagan & Flanagan, 2004; Wubbolding, 2007). All of these goals are directed to help counselee meet their basic needs effectively. Human connection goal is directed to help counselee make a good and health relationship with other people who are involved in counselee’s quality world. Using choice theory goal is directed to encourage counselee increase self-control and responsibility. Understanding total behavior goal is directed to help counselee to understand behavior and improve control of minds and actions. Developing effective plans goal is directed to help the counselee develop and implement an effective plan to meet his basic needs.

Developing effective achievement goals can be placed as a concrete goal of reality therapy. The goal of reality therapy is a basis for developing effective achievement goals. After attending counseling process, counselee is expected to have a flexible achievement goals (between mastery-approach goals and performance-approach goal) with a clear goal specification both long-term goals and short-term goals based on the adaptive goal commitment. Effective achievement goals are developed and implemented with a good quality of human connection, applying choice theory, in line with the total behavior principle and implemented based on SAMIC3 planning principles.

Counseling Steps
Procedures of reality therapy were implemented in the WDEP system (see Corey, 2009; Seligman, 2006; Wubbolding, 2007). WDEP is an acronym of the counseling stages that includes Wants, Direction and doing, self Evaluation and Planning. The following sections will discuss the possible applications of WDEP system to help counselee developing effective achievement goals.

Exploring wants and perceptions
Counselor explore counselee’s wants and needs in the context of learning and achievement from the human basic needs perspective. Some questions that can be used in the exploration of wants, "What do you want from your studying in school?", "What do you expect from ... (parents, teachers, peers) related to your studies?", "What do you want from learning that you can not fulfill? "

Exploration of perceptions is conducted to get a deeper understanding of counselee’s judgment about his learning experience and people that involved in his quality world. Some relevant questions are "What is your judgment about ... (teachers, peers)?", "Do you think more of having the success or failure experiences?"

Direction and doing
The purpose of conversation about doing is to understand counselee’s learning behavior, such as motivation, effort, learning strategies, which are relevant to his achievement goals. Focuses of this conversation are current behavior and past events only insofar as it influences counselee’s current behavior. Some relevance questions, "What are you doing for your study now?", "What will you do to learn tomorrow?", "What did you do this past week?"

In addition, at this stage counselor discuss direction of counselee’s future life. A relevance question is, "What do you see for yourself now and in the future ... (in study, career, social, etc.)?" Conversation of direction and doing is associated with total behavior. Counselor interpret counselee’s life experience from counselee’s total behavior perspective.

Self Evaluation
Self evaluation is the core stage in reality therapy. The basis for developing effective achievement goals is induced through self evaluation process. During  self-evaluation, counselee is encouraged to restructuring his thought; linking actions and lifestyle to needs fulfillment process. Most of self-evaluation focus is to get understanding about counselee relationships with others. There are six type of self-evaluation, namely, behavior direction, specific action, wants, perception, new direction and plans. Some examples of questions that can be asked in self evaluation are, "Do your achievement goals help you meet your needs?", "Are your goals realistic achievement?", "Are your goals achievement really what you want?" Self-evaluation is always associated with all component of total behavior in order to know the quality of the action and can help the counselee make a choice about effective achievement goals.

Planning
Counselee is invited into the planning stage when he has had a clarity about adaptive achievement goals which he wants. Core processes of this stage is to help the counselee explore the various possibilities behavior and formulate action plans to reach achievement goals. Planning allows the counselee gain effective control over his life. Plan can be modified as needed if it is less effective. Plan is formulated in accordance with the principles which was proposed by Wubbolding (2007), namely SAMIC3 (simple, attainable, measurable, involved, controlled by planner, committed and continuously done). In short, counselee really get effective achievement goals that can be applied in his life because reality therapy results operational and concrete plan for counselee to meet their basic needs.

Counselor and Counselee Role
There are several important counselor’s roles in the counseling process (Corey, 2009), especially to encourage counselee develop effective achievement goals. First, create a counseling relationship. Counselee can not be guided to develop effective achievement goals through application of choice theory if counseling relationship is not created. Second, teaching counselee evaluates their learning activities in regard to achievement goals. Third, counselor convince counselee that there is a hope from difficulty or choice. A student who believes entity intelligence theory needs to be instilled a belief that there is always hope to develop competence in accordance with the principle of choice theory.

On the other hand, counselee has several important roles during the counseling process. First, open to involved in counseling relationship. Second, take responsibility to make effective choices. Lastly, accepting the exploration focus of current behavior. Most counselee, in counseling sessions, wants to discuss past behavior which is not very relevant to the current behavior. When counselor limits a discussion of past behavior, it is expected that counselee understand that the focus of the discussion about the current behavior to makes counseling to be effective.
 
Limitations
Developing effective achievement goals was more effective if it is done learning process and involve teachers in class (Agran, et.al. 2008; Lapan, 2002; Sunawan, 2011). Collaboration between counselor and teachers are very helpful for students to apply their effective achievement goals. Helping students develop effective achievement goal through individual counseling takes a longer time and the target (students) is limited. Helping student to develop effective achievement goals counseling service should be done if the student is really having a difficult obstacle. However, this discussion suggests that the principles of reality therapy can be implemented to help students developing effective achievement goals.

In the theory of motivation, achievement goals related to other concepts such as self-efficacy, attribution and task value (Pintrich, Schunk, & Meece, 2008). During the counseling process to help students develop effective achievement goals, counselor need to consider the dynamics of counselee from these perspectives.
 
References
Agran, M., Wehmeyer, M.L., Cavin, M., & Palmer, S. 2008. Promoting Student Active Classroom Participation Skills Through Instruction to Promote Self Regulated Learning and Self Determination. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31(2), 106-114.
American School Counselor Association. 2004. ASCA National Standards for Students. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. 1988. Achievemen Goals in the Classroom: Students’ Learning Strategies and Motivation Process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80 (3), 256-267.
Anderman, E.M., Austin, C.C., & Johnson, D.M. 2002. The Development of Goal Orientation. In A. Wigfield & J.S. Eccles (eds.). Development of Achievement Motivation. New York: Academic Press.
Barron, K.E., & Harrackiewicz. 2001. Achievement Goals and Optimal Motivation: Testing Multiple Goals Models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80 (5), 706-722.
Brett, J.F., & VandeWalle, D. 1999. Goal Orientation and Goal Context as Predictors of Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84 (6), 863-873.
Brophy, J. 2010. Motivating Students to Learn. 3rd edition. New York: Routledge.
Cobia, D.C., & Handerson, D.A. 2007. Developing an Effective and Accountable School Counseling Program. Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Corey, G. 2009. Theory and Practice Counseling and Psychotherapy. Belmont: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning.
Costello, T.A. 2011. Achievement Goals, Interest, Study Strategies and Academic Achievement. Dissertation. New York: Graduate School of Education of Fordham University.
Elliot, A.J. 2008. Approach and Avoidance Motivation. In A.J. Elliot (ed.) Handbook of Approach and Avoidance Motivation. New York: Psychology Press.
Elliot, A.J., et.al. 2012. Cross-Cultural Generality and Specificity in Self-Regulation: Avoidance Personal Goals and Multiple Aspects of Well-Being in the United States and Japan. Emotion. 12 (5), 1031-1040.
Elliot, A.J., & Harackiewicz, J.M. 1996. Approach and Avoidance Achievement Goals and Intrinsic Motivation: A Mediational Analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 70 (3), 461.475.
Elliot, A.J., Murayama, K., & Pekrun, R. 2011. A 3 x 2 Achievement Goal Model. Journal of Educational Psychology. 103 (3), 632-648.
Elliot, A.J., & McGregor, H.A. 2001. A 2 x 2 Achievement Goal Framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80 (3), 501-519.
Elliot, E.J., Shell, M.M., Henry, K.B., & Maier, M.A. 2005. Achievement Goals, Performance Contingencies, and Performance Attainment: An Experimental Test. Journal of Educational Psychology. 97 (4), 630-640.
Ellsworth, L. 2007. Choosing to Heal: Using Reality Therapy in Treatment of Sexually Abused Children. New York: Routledge Toylor & Francis Group.
Erez, A. J., & Judge, T.A. 2001. Relationship of Core Self-Evaluations to Goal Setting, Motivation, and Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (3), 361-372.
Fall, K.A., Holden, J.M., & Marquis, A. 2004. Theoritical Models Counseling and Psychotherapy. New York: Taylor and Francis Books Inc.
Flanagan, J.S., & Flanagan, R.S. 2004. Counseling and Psychotherapy Theories in Context and Practice: Skills, Strategies and Techniques. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Glesser, W. 1998. Choice Theory: A New Psychology of Personal Freedom. New York: HarperCollins.
Hansen, J.C., Stevic R.R., & Warner, R.W., 1982. Counseling: Theory and Process. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Harackiewicz, J.M., Barron, K.E., Tauer, J.M., Carter, S.M., & Elliot, A.J. 2000. Short Term and Long Term Consequences of Acheievement Goals: Predicting Interest and Performance over Time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 (2), 316-330.
Klein, H.J., et.al. 1999. Goal Commitment and Goal Setting Process: Conceptual Clarification and Empirical Synthesis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84 (6), 885-869.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation: A 35-year Odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705.
Malone, Y. 2002. Social Cognitive Theory and Choice Theory: A Compatibility Analysis. International Journal of Reality Therapy. 22 (1) p. 10-13.
Mason, C.P., & Duba, J.D. 2009. Using Reality Therapy in School: Its Potential Impact on the Effectiveness of the ASCA National Model. International Journal of Reality Therapy. 29 (1) p. 5-12.
Pintrich, P.R., Conley, A.M.M., & Kempler, T.M. 2003. Current Issues in Achievement Goal Theory and Research. International Journal of Educational Research. 39. 319-337.
Pekrun, R., Elliot, A.J., & Maier, M.A. 2009. Achievement Goals and Achievement Emotions: Testing a Model of Their Joint Relations with Academic Performance. Journal of Educational Psychology. 101 (1), 115-135.
Putwain, D.W., Sander, P., & Larkin, D. 2013. Using the 2×2 Framework of Achievement Goals to Predict Achievement Emotions and Academic Performance. Learning and Individual Differences, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.006.
Schunk, D.H. 2012. Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective. 6th edition. Boston: Pearson.
Schunk, D.H., & Ertmer, P.A. 1999. Self Regulatory Process During Computers Skill Acquisition: Goal and Self Evaluative Influence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (2), 251-260.
Schunk, D.H., Pintrich, P.R., & Meece, J.L. 2008. Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and Application. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Merril Prentice Hall.
Seligman, L. 2006. Theories of Counseling and Psychotherapy: Systems, Strategies, and Skills. Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Sharf, R.S. 2004. Theories of Psychotherapy and Counseling: Concepts and Cases. Singapore: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning.
Sugiharto, D.Y.P., & Sunawan. 2011. Pengembangan Inventori Kesulitan Belajar Berbasis Self Regulated Learning bagi Siswa Sekolah Menengah Atas. Unpublished Research. Semarang: Semarang State University.
Sunawan. 2011. Kolaborasi Guru dan Konselor dalam Memfasilitasi Siswa menjadi Self Regulated Learner. Bimbingan dan Konseling: Jurnal Teori dan Praktik. 16 (1), 48-61.
Sunawan, Sugiharto, D.Y.P., & Trianni, C. 2012. Bimbingan Kesulitan Belajar Berbasis Self Regulated Learning untuk Meningkatkan Prestasi Belajar. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan. 19 (1) 105-115.
Thrash, T.M., & Hurst, A.L. 2008. Approach and Avoidance Motivation in the Achievement Domain: Integrating the Achievement Motive and Achievement Goal Tradition. In A.J. Elliot (ed.). Handbook of Approach and Avoidance Motivation. New York: Psychology Press.
VandeWalle, D., Cron, W.L., & Slocum, J.W. 2001. The Role Goal Orientation Following Performance Feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84 (4), 629-640.
Wood., R.E., Atkins, P.W.B., & Bright, J.E.H. 1999. Bonuses, Goals, and Instrumentally Effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84 (5), 703-720.
Wubbolding, R.E. 2007. Reality Therapy Theory. Dalam Capuzzi, D., & Gross, D.R. Counseling and Psychotherapy: Theories and Interventions. Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Zimmerman, B.J., & Kitsantas, A. 1997. Acquiring Writing Revision Skill, Shifting from Process Goals to Outcome Self Regulatory Goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (2), 241-250.
Zimmerman, B.J., & Moylan, A.R. 2009. Self Regulation: Where Metacognition and Motivation Intersect. In D.J. Hacker, J. Dunlonsky, & A.C. Graesser (eds.). Handbook of Metacognition in Education. New York: Routledge.