SELF-ESTEEM AND ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION AMONG PHYSICALLY CHALLENGED AND NORMAL STUDENTS

Dr.Chandrakant Jamadar**Manjula

Abstract

The term “self-esteem” is one of the oldest concepts in psychology. The term having been first coined by American psychologist and philosopher William James in 1890, it is one’s mental perception of his qualities, not physical features. Then achievement Achievement motivation people differ in the extent to which they pursue challenging goals. The achievement motive refers to the desire to do well relative to standards to excellence. Objectives of the study: To know the level of self-esteem and achievement motivation among physically challenged and normal students. And also know the differences between Self-Esteem and achievement motivation among physically challenged and normal students. Samples: The subjects consisted of 100 students (50 physically challenged and 50 Normal students) from four public and four private conveniently selected schools of the Mysore district at the secondary level. Intact groups of all eight schools enrolled in 9th grade were involved in the study. Results: In conclusion, the higher the self-esteem of the student, the higher their academic achievement.

Key words:Self-esteem,achievement motivation,physically challenged students

*Asst.Professor, Post Graduate Studies in Psychology, Maharani Arts & Commerce College for women, Mysore.

**M.Sc,student , Post Graduate Studies in Psychology, Maharani Arts & Commerce College for women, Mysore.

Introduction

            The development of self-concept or self-image depends upon the need for an achievement and the fulfillment of this need. In other words, an individual who feels that his need for achievement is not fulfilled may not feel that his self-development has taken places. As such, both these factors are important for personality structure of an individual. The more an individual feels that his self is well developed which further depends upon his perceptions the more he would develop a stable personality structure. Further, this kind of situation may provide better achievement motivation. Self-esteem, fully realized, is the awareness that we are equal to the obstacles placed in front of us. Self-esteem is confidence in our ability to think, confidence in our ability to cope with the basic challenger of life and confidence in our right to be successful and happy. People with appropriate levels of self-esteem are assured in their right to feel worthy, enjoy the fruits of their efforts, and assert their needs and wants.

            Self-esteem refers to the amount of realistic respect that you have for yourself. It is important for a person to have a healthy self-esteem in order to lead a happy and successful life-both on a personal level and a business level. People with low self-esteems often have a harder time leading a happy and successful life. People with a healthy self-esteem realize that they deserve the good things in their lives, while those who suffer from low self-esteem feel that they deserve only the bad things in live. Each person is responsible for their own self-esteem and can take measures to improve their self-esteem, thereby improving their lives.

            Cofer and Apply (1960) have given the impression that motivation is a complex process which involves the arousal of an activity, its patterning and continuation in a particular direction for sufficiently a longer period. With this definition of the concept of motivation in the background, achievement motivation may be regarded as related to need fixation and reaching a state of need fulfillment with a process involved in the attainment of a goal. There are individual differences with regard to achievement motivation and this point has been elaborately discussed by a few eminent psychologists like David McClelland, Atkinson and others. McClelland (1955) defined a motive as “The reintegration by a cue of a change in an affective situation”. This definition of a motive is an improvement on the earlier definition of 1951. According to the definition of 1951, a motive is “a strong affective association, characterized by an anticipatory goal reaction and based on past association of certain cues with pleasure or pain”. In support of the affective state involved in achievement motivation, fantasy was used as a measure of motivation. However some of the recent experiments conducted by psychologists indicate that in addition to affective state of an individual other factors also contribute to achievement motivation. Especially, the environmental factors also play a part in creating a state of achievement motivation. The manipulation of the environmental conditions in the real life situation is an evidence for this state of affair.

                        According to Anastasi, and Urbina, (1997) self-esteem is in fact typically described as the evaluative component of the self-concept. On a long-term cumulative basis, such self-evaluations may influence the development of cognitive and affective traits. In particular, there is widespread agreement that self-esteem is a crucial determinant of such psychologically important variables as coping ability and sense of well-being. The construct of self-esteem at first glance is deceptively simple. It is often assumed to be a general evaluative attitude towards oneself, ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative that is stable and entirely subjective in nature.

Shultz (1993) conducted a comparative study on self-esteem among physically disabled and normal adolescents. Females with physical disabilities were lower in self-esteem. In addition, social self -efficacy was found to be a significant predictor of both independence and persistence in adolescents with disabilities who are significantly less dependent and persistent than were normative samples.

            Hasan, (2006) investigated career maturity of Indian adolescents as a function of self-concept, vocational aspiration and gender. The aim of the research work was to examine empirically that whether or not self-concept, occupational aspiration and gender work independently or in interaction with each other are capable of generating variance in career maturity in case of Hindi speaking Indian adolescents studying in class X. All the three independent variables were found to be potential enough in generating variance in career maturity. Barring a few exceptions, the first order interactions were not found significant whereas the second order interactions were found significant for almost all the components of career maturity.

Objectives of the study

1)                 To know the level of self-esteem among physically challenged and normal students.

2)                 To know the level of achievement motivation among physically challenged and normal students.

3)                 To know the difference between Self-Esteem and achievement motivation among physically challenged and normal students.

4)                 To know the gender differences between Self-Esteem and achievement motivation among physically challenged and normal students.

Hypothesis of the study

H1.There is a significant difference in the level of self-esteem among physically challenged and normal students.

H2.There is a significant difference in the level of achievement motivation among physically challenged and normal students.

H3.There is a significant difference between physically challenged and normal students.

H4.There is a significant difference between girls and boys physically challenged and normal students.

Variables:

Dependent Variables: Self-Esteem and Achievement Motivation

Independent variable       : Physical Challenged and Normal Students

Samples: The subjects consisted of 100 students (50 physically challenged and 50 Normal students) from four public and four private conveniently selected schools of the Mysore district at the secondary level. Intact groups of all eight schools enrolled in 9th grade were involved in the study.

Statistical analysis

Data collected from this study were obtained through questionnaire for the two concepts: Achievement motivation and self-esteem and the results of the students for academic achievement. The data collected in this study were analyzed using independent sample t-test and ANOVA statistic. Independent sample t-test was used to test the differences between male and female also Physically Challenged and normal students. ANOVA was used to test the differences between Gender and subgroups, used because more than two groups (males, females and physically challenged and normal students) were being examined to determine the differences in their mean scores.

Tools

V.P. Bhargava (1994). Revised manual for Achievement motive test (ACMT).

Anand Kumar (1988). Battle’s Self-Esteem Inventory for children (Indian adaptation) (SEIC).

Results and Discussion

Self-esteem is ones’ judgment of oneself. Social psychologists refer to self-evaluation whether favorable or not as individuals self -esteem. Self esteem has been known to affect behavior of individual. Self-esteem is important in psychology because one’s judgment of oneself affect the way he relates to others. Self-concept has been defined as the perception that an individual has of himself/herself, regarding the different aspects of him/her self (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003; Harter, 1999). Milton (1668) is argued to have first coined this term self-esteem after a career in the proto-psychological lore of phrenology in the 19th century. The term entered more mainstream psychological use in the work of the American psychologists and philosophers Lorne Park andWilliamJamesin1890.Nevertheless; some argued that the study of self-esteem began with Hindu scripture. With Cooley’s (1902) contribution to the theory of the looking-glass-self which stated that people see themselves through the eyes of others; self esteem became a target of empirical research.          

Table no 01: Mean, SD and‘t’-value of self-esteem of physically challenged (blind) girls and boys students (N=50)

Self – Esteem	Gender	Mean	SD	t-value
	Girls	36.00	4.12	*3.7505
	Boys	32.56	1.98

                         *significant at 0.05 level

Above table shows that the mean and SD of self-esteem of physically challenged (blind) girls and boys students is 36.00 and 4.12 and 32.56 and 1.98 is respectively. Girls have higher self-esteem than the boys. Its shows that girls have high achievement goals than the boys. The calculate‘t’- value is 3.7505 .It is statistically significant at 0.05 level.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is that “there are significant differences between physically challenged girls and boys students”. Hence, the formulated hypothesis is accepted. Blyth and Traeger (1988) found a correlation between high self-esteem and perceived intimacy with parents. High self-esteem has also been correlated with academic success in high school.

Academic achievement is the outcome of an education. It is the extent to which a student has achieved his or her learning objectives. The study of academic achievement and other variables has formed significant contribution to educational system in many Countries. Some researchers reported that academic achievement is associated with both cognitive and non-cognitive variables including environment, climate and culture. The research in academic achievement and other variables was initiated to discover avenues by which academic achievement could be managed and improved. Lavin (1965) in his book , ‘Prediction of Academic Achievement’ listed 29 types of variables which have been used as predictors of school achievement in over 3000 studies published during the period 1953-1961. Self-esteem is one of the variables that have been associated with academic achievement. Several inquire and research has traced the study of self-esteem to the Hindu Scripture. Self-esteem became an official area of study in 1890 with James William’s contribution to psychology. James (1890), saw self esteem as an evaluation process which could be measured as the ratio of individuals success to his affectations.    

Table no 02

Mean, SD and t-value of achievement motivation of physically challenged (blind) girls and boys students (N=50).

Achievement motivation	Gender	Mean	SD	t-value
	Girls	21.48	3.15	3.7496*
	Boys	18.44	2.55

*significant at 0.05 level

Above table shows that the mean and SD of achievement motivation of physically challenged (blind) girls and boys students is 21.48 and 3.15 and 18.44 and 2.55 respectively. Physically challenged girls are high at achievement motivation than the boy’s students. The calculated ‘t’-value is 3.7496 statistically significant at 0.05 levels.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is that “there is significant difference between physically challenged girls and boys students”. Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is accepted.

Academic achievement has been described as the conclusion of an education. It is the extent to which a she has achieved her educational objective. Academic achievement is also defined as the experiences in life which includes community, family, current and school experiences. So to understand the process, the family, community is required.

Table no 03

Mean, SD and t-value of self-esteem of physically challenged (blind) and normal students (N=50).

Groups	Self-Esteem
	Blind		Normal
Mean	Girls	boys	Girls	boys
	36.00	32.56	58.00	34.56
SD	4.12	1.98	78.77	2.12
‘t’ – value	3.7628*		1.48**

                      *0.05 level of significance** Not significant

Above table reflects that the mean, SD and ‘t’-value of self-esteem of physically challenged (blind) and normal girls and boys students is 36.00 and 4.12  and 32.56 and 1.98 and 58.00 and 78.77 and 34.56 and 2.12 is respectively. Physically challenged (blind) students are higher self-esteem than the normal students. The calculated‘t’-value is 3.7628 is statistically significant at 0.05 levels in blind students and the calculated‘t’-value is 1.48 is statistically not significant in normal students.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is that “there is significant difference between girls and boys physically challenged students”. Hence, the formulated hypothesis is accepted. Physically challenged (blind) students are higher self-esteem than the normal students because they are visually handicapped, so they take their blindness as a target and take life as a serious issue and make it as a challenge to achieve their goal. Hence, we can see more self esteem in blind when compared to the normal student.

Table no 04

Mean, SD and ‘F’-value of achievement motivation of physically challenged (blind and normal) girls and boys students (N=50)

Group	Achievement Motivation
	Normal		Blind
	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys
Mean	21.48	18.44	22.96	15.60
SD	3.15	2.55	1.71	3.37
‘F’-value	*3.7505		**9.73

*Significant at 0.05 level** Significant at 0.01 level

Above table reveals that the mean, SD and ‘t’-value of achievement motivation of physically challenged (blind) and normal girls and boys students is 21.48 and 3.15 and 18.44and 2.55 and 22.96 and 1.71 and 15.60 and 3.37 is respectively. Blind students are higher the achievement motivation than the Normal students. The calculated ‘F’-value 3.7505 is statistically significant at 0.05 levels in blind students. The calculated ‘F-’ value is 9.37 and it is statistically significant at 0.01 levels among normal students.

It shows that the physically challenged students are higher the achievement motivation than the normal students.  Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is that “there are significant difference between girls and boys physically challenged and normal students”. Therefore the formulated hypothesis is accepted.

Physically challenged students are higher achievement motivation than the physically challenged (blind) students because of they take their visual handicap as a challenge they make their self-confidence level to increase day by day. They get motivated by themselves and by others. So their achievement level automatically gets increased. Hence, their visual handicap is a way to get motivated and to achieve their goals.

Table no 05

Mean, SD and ‘F’- value of the self-esteem of physically challenged blind and Duff and Dum girls and boys students. (N=50).

Group	Self- Esteem
	Blind		Duff and Dum
	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys
Mean	36.00	32.56	28.72	33.71
SD	4.12	1.98	3.34	2.03
‘F’-value	*3.76		**6.2897

*Significant at 0.05 level ** Significant at 0.01 level

Above table explained that the mean, SD and F-value of self-esteem of physically challenged blind and Duff and Dum girls and boys students are 36.00 and 4.12 and 32.56 and 1.98 and 28.72 and 3.34 and 33.71 and 2.03 is respectively. Duff and Dum are higher self-esteem than the blind students. The calculated F-value is 3.76 is statistically significant at 0.05 levels in blind students and the calculated ‘F’- value is 6.2897 is statistically significant at 0.01 levels in Duff and Dum student.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is that “there is significant difference between blind and deaf and dumb physically challenged students”. Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is accepted.

Table no 06

Mean, SD and F-value of achievement motivation of physically challenged blind and deaf and dumb girls and boys students (N=50).

Group	Achievement motivation
	Blind		Duff and Dum
	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys
Mean	23.48	18.44	20.04	16.68
SD	3.15	2.55	3.46	2.10
‘F’-value	*3.74		**4.1136

                        *significant at 0.01 level**significant at 0.01 level

Above table shows that the mean, SD and F-value of achievement motivation of physically challenged blind and Duff and Dum girls and boys students is 21.48 and 3.15 and 18.44 and 2.55 and 20.04 and 3.46 and 16.68 and 2.10 is respectively. Duff and Dum students are higher achievement motivation than the blind students. The calculated F-value is 3.74 it is significant at 0.01 levels in blind students. The calculated F-value Duff and Dum is 4.1136 is significant at 0.01 level. Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is that there is significant difference between blind and Duff and Dum physically challenged students. Therefore the formulated hypothesis is accepted.

Duff and Dum students are higher achievement motivation than the blind physically challenged students because of the Duff and Dum people are much motivated them to attain their goals and they are capable to do many things many of them are not handicaps.

Table No 07

Mean, SD and F- value of self-esteem of physically challenged (Duff and dumb) and normal girls and boys students (N=50).

Group	Self- Esteem
	Duff and Dum		Normal
	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys
Mean	28.22	33.71	18.24	28.48
SD	3.34	2.04	2.73	38.24
‘F’-value	*6.28		**1.3354

*significant at 0.01 level** Not statistically significant

Above table reflects that the mean, SD and F-value of self-esteem of physically challenged duff and Dum and normal students is 28.22 and 3.34 and 33.71 and 2.04 and 18.24 and 2.73and 28.48 and 38.24 respectively. Duff and Dum students are having high self-esteem than the normal students. The calculated F-value is 6.28 is statistically significant at 0.01 level . The calculated F-value in normal students is 1.3354 it is statistically not significant.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is having significant difference between Duff and Dum girls and boys physically challenge students. Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is accepted. Duff and Dum students are higher self-esteem than the normal students because of their handicap. some people treat then very badly, but still some people show sympathy, and yet some other taunt them, all these make them to set their mind to achieve something like normal people.

Table No 08

Mean, SD and F-value of achievement motivation of physically challenged deaf and dumb and normal girls and boys students (N=50).

Group	Achievement motivation
	Normal		Duff and Dum
	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys
Mean	20.04	16.68	22.96	15.60
SD	3.46	2.10	1.71	3.37
‘F’-value	*4.1136		**9.73

*significant at 0.01 level**significant at 0.01 level

Above table shows that the mean, SD and F-value of Achievement motivation of physically challenged Duff and Dum and normal students is 20.04 and 3.46 and 16.68 and 2.10 and 22.96 and 1.71 and 15.60 and 3.37 respectively. Physically challenged students are higher achievers than the normal students. The calculated F-value is 4.1136 and 9.73 is statistically significant at 0.01 level.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis is that “there is significant difference between Duff and Dum and normal students. Therefore the formulated hypothesis is accepted.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the higher the self-esteem of the student, the higher their academic achievement.

Girls have higher self-esteem than the boys. Its shows that girls have high achievement goals than the boys.

Physically challenged girls are high at achievement motivation than the boy’s students.

Physically challenged (blind) students are higher self-esteem than the normal students.

Physically challenged students are higher the achievement motivation than the normal students. 

            Duff and Dum are higher self-esteem than the blind students.

Duff and Dum students are higher achievement motivation than the blind students

Duff and Dum students are having high self-esteem than the normal students.

Physically challenged students are higher achievers than the normal students.

Recommendations

The following suggestions are offered as a result of the outcome of the date analysis of the respondents.

1. Adequate measures should be made by both teachers and parents to develop and build the students’ self-esteem as this has direct relationship to their academic achievement. They should embrace the methods of building a positive self-esteem in students.

2. Schools should implement personality development programmers’ to help students change from the unproductive explanation for their failures to a positive one to enable them work harder in future. And they can’t feel we are physically challenged.

3. Parent should not only monitor their children academic achievement but more importantly the affective domain of their education since this if not properly handled could damage a child into adulthood.

4. Give the special education and develop the creative knowledge.

REFERENCE

Abouserie, Reda (1995). Self-esteem and achievement motivation as determinants of student’s approaches to studying, Routledge, part of the Taylor and Francis Group, vol 20, PP 19-26 (8).       

Adedeju J. Ogunleye (2012). self esteem and achievement motivation: behavioral traits for entrepeneruship, business and economic growth and development, research journal in organizational psychology and educational studies vol-1 (3). PP 145-148

Bandura, A., and Walters, R.H. (1963) social learning and personality development. Newyork: Halt Rinehart and Winston.

Bimla Kapoor; Psychiatric Nursing; (2008); Volume-2; Kumar Publishing House; 308 – 14 p.p.

Blankenship, V. (1987) A computer based measure of resultant achievement motivation. Journal of personality and social psychology, vol 53, PP 361-372.

Branden, N (1969) the psychology of self-esteem Los Angeles: Nosh publishing.

Eccles, J.S. (1984 a). Sex differences in achievement patterns. in T. Sonderegger (Ed), Nebraska symposium on motivation psychology and gender. vol 32, PP 97-132. University of Nebraska press.

Eccles, J.S. (1984 b). Sex differences in mathematics participation. in M. steinkamp and M.L. Maehr (Eds) advances in motivation and achievement vol 2, PP93-137. Lincoln, university of Nebraska Press.

Elizabeth Jasmine (2010) the impact of cognitive behavior therapy on irrational beliefs. self-esteem, self acceptance and depression in late adolescence, University of Mysore (Ph.D Thesis) TELT- 155.5, PP 31-36

Heckhausen, H. (1967). the anatomy of achievement motivation. New York: Academic press.

Hennessey B.A., Se Amabile, T.M. (1998) Reward, intrinsic motivation, and creativity. American psychologist, vol 53, PP 674-675.

Hewitt. J.P. (1970). Social strafification and deviant behavior. New York : Random House

Mcclelland. D.C., and winter, D.C (1969) Motivating economic achievement, Newyork: free press.

McDaniel. S. (1986). Political Priority #1:: Teaching Kids to like Themselves “New Options” N 27 (April 28)

Mecca, A.M., Smelser, N.J. & Vasconcellos, J. (1989). The social importance of self esteem. USA : University of California Press.

Winter B. M (1958). The relation of need for achievement to learning experience in independence and mastery. In J. Atkinson (Ed) motives in fantasy, action, and society. Princeton, NJ Van Nostrand, PP 453-478.