The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education © 2018 Elsevier Inc Accepted version (Final draft) Vasalampi, Kati; Kiuru, Noona; Salmela-Aro, Katariina Vasalampi, K., Kiuru, N., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2018). The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 55, 110-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.09.001 2018 Accepted Manuscript The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education Kati Vasalampi, Noona Kiuru, Katariina Salmela-Aro PII: S0361-476X(17)30406-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.09.001 Reference: YCEPS 1712 To appear in: Contemporary Educational Psychology Please cite this article as: Vasalampi, K., Kiuru, N., Salmela-Aro, K., The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education, Contemporary Educational Psychology (2018), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.09.001 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 1 The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education Kati Vasalampi1, Noona Kiuru1, and Katariina Salmela-Aro2 1University of Jyväskylä 2University of Helsinki Author note Kati Vasalampi and Noona Kiuru, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, 40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Katariina Salmela-Aro, University of Helsinki, P. O. Box 9, 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland. This study was supported by grants from the Academy of Finland (No. 299 506 and 308 351). Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kati Vasalampi, Department of Psychology, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, 40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Electronic mail may be sent to [email protected], telephone number: +(358) 40805-4126. INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 2 The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education Abstract This longitudinal study investigated the role of parents and peers as well as of educationrelated goal motivation during educational transitioning in late adolescence. The sample consisted of 1,520 upper secondary education students attending either academic or vocational upper secondary school in Finland. They were surveyed three times: (1) in the first year of their upper secondary education, 2) in the second year of their upper secondary education, and (3) two years later. The results show, first, that when students in upper secondary education pursued their educational goals out of autonomous motivation they also invested more effort in their goals, which was reflected in high levels of goal progress. High goal progress, in turn, was related to high levels of school satisfaction, whereas low goal progress was associated with the intention to drop out of school. By contrast, controlled motivation was associated neither with goal effort or goal progress in educational goals. Second, different interpersonal environments played unique and different roles in adolescents’ educational goals. While mothers’ affective warmth and involvement particularly enhanced adolescents’ autonomous motivation, fathers’ affective support directly predicted high levels of school satisfaction and low intentions to drop out of upper secondary school. The role of peer acceptance (measured using a sociometric procedure) was twofold: it was related to high autonomous motivation in adolescents’ educational goals, and it also directly predicted adolescents’ satisfaction with their chosen educational track. The intention to drop out of school is an important warning signal of later actually dropping out. Additional INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 3 analyses showed that the less adolescents had the intention to drop out of upper secondary school, the more likely they were to be successful in dealing with the educational transition from upper secondary school to further education or employment. Keywords: educational goal, educational transition, intention to drop out, school satisfaction, goal attainment INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 4 The Role of a Supportive Interpersonal Environment and Education-Related Goal Motivation During the Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education During their school years, adolescents face several school-related transitions, such as the transition from lower secondary to upper secondary education, or from upper secondary to further studies. Transitions are critical junctures in which both motivational and interpersonal factors are likely to play a crucial role. First, adolescents’ own education-related goal motivation has been shown to play an important role in their success in fully dealing with these transitions (e.g., Eccles, 2005; Haase, Heckhausen, & Silbereisen, 2011; SalmelaAro & Nurmi, 1997a; Vasalampi, Nurmi, Jokisaari, & Salmela-Aro, 2012; Vasalampi, Salmela-Aro, & Nurmi, 2009). Second, self-determination theory (SDT) suggests that one’s motivation is channelled by significant others (Deci & Ryan, 2000)). In the four-year longitudinal study we present here, we examined the role of supportive parent and peer relationships in: a) Finnish adolescents’ motivation concerning their education-related goals, and b) in their success in dealing with the transition to further studies or working life following their upper secondary education (see Figure 1). In Finland, this is one of the most demanding educational transitions and one that has a significant impact on individuals’ later life. Educational Goal Motivation According to SDT (Deci & Ryan, 1985), the motivation underlying personal goals varies depending on the reasons for pursuing these goals. Goals that are based on autonomous motivation reflect personal interests and values. By contrast, controlled motivation occurs when a goal is adopted because of social pressure (i.e., an individual is doing something because others want or expect him/her to) or internal pressure (i.e., an individual is doing something to avoid feelings of shame/guilt or to gain feelings of pride/self-esteem). Thus, a student who applies to become a medical doctor because he/she finds the medical profession INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 5 to be an interesting and important occupation chooses his/her educational goal for autonomous reasons. Comparatively, a student who does so only because it is a highly valued profession in his/her family, chooses his/her educational goal for controlled reasons. Autonomous motivation has been shown to be important for successful goal attainment because it promotes effort in pursuing the goal, which then leads to high goal progress (Sheldon, 2002; Sheldon & Elliot, 1998, 1999; Sheldon & Kasser, 1998). Progress in a personal goal contributes to goal attainment (Nurmi, Salmela-Aro, & Koivisto, 2002; Wiese & Freund, 2005) and has been found to have a direct effect on adjustment (Sheldon & Houser-Marko, 2001; Sheldon & Kasser, 1998; Skorikov, 2006). For example, Sheldon and Elliot (1999) found, in their semester-long study, that adolescents who began their semester with goals that matched their implicit values and interests (i.e., the goals were based on autonomous motivation) invested more effort in these goals during the semester and were less likely to give up their goals than those with goals motivated by control. As a result, autonomously motivated individuals attained their goals more readily and this led to their increased adjustment (see also Ketonen, Dietrich, Moeller, Salmela-Aro, & Lonka, 2018). Controlled motivation in personal goals is instead considered potentially problematic, because with this type of motivation people’s goals are not connected to their deeper values and interests and may therefore fail to activate their inner source of energy (Sheldon & Elliot, 1998; Sheldon, 2002). Thus, although controlled motivation may also form a preliminary sense of commitment, individuals can have problems in translating these goals into action (Gollwitzer, 1996; Sheldon, 2002; Sheldon & Elliot, 1998). This was evidenced, for example, in three studies by Koestner and colleagues (2008), which examined the role of autonomous and controlled motivation in academic, leisure and weight-loss goals. All of these studies showed that controlled motivation is less likely to lead to progress in the goals, whereas autonomous motivation facilitated goal progress in all of these goals. INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 6 Autonomous motivation may be especially beneficial in attaining an education-related goal that can only be achieved by hard work (Locke & Latham, 2002). Empirical evidence for this was provided by Lazarides, Viljaranta, Ranta and Salmela-Aro (2017), who showed that adolescents studying during the educational transition from lower secondary to upper secondary education whose goal orientation was mastery (i.e., studying for learning and understanding) invested effort and valued school after the transition. Similarly, Vasalampi and colleagues (2009; see also Vasalampi et al., 2012) showed that when upper secondary school students pursued their education-related goal out of autonomous motivation, they invested more effort in their goal, and this was reflected in the high level of goal progress. Goal progress, in turn, predicted a high level of school engagement during upper secondary school and, subsequently, success in the educational transition beyond upper secondary school (i.e., these students were more likely to pursue further education right after upper secondary school). By contrast, Vallerand and Bissonnette (1992; see also Black & Deci, 2000) showed that college students who dropped out during the school year had significantly lower scores in autonomous motivation than did those who did not drop out. However, despite these transitions being critical junctures in which motivational factors may play an important role (Salmela-Aro, 2009), only a few attempts have been made to investigate these motivational processes systematically by using longitudinal data during educational transitioning. Vasalampi and colleagues (2009) studied the role of autonomous motivation, goal effort and goal progress during the educational transition beyond upper secondary school (i.e., academic track) and the transition to university (Vasalampi et al., 2012). The results showed the importance of autonomous motivation in goal effort and goal progress, but the authors did not separately examine the role of controlled goal motivation versus autonomous motivation. The present research expands these studies by separately examining both types of goal motivation. INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 7 This research explores, first, the role of autonomous and controlled motivation, goal effort and goal progress in students’ school satisfaction and intentions of dropping out during their upper secondary education. Second, we examined the role of these variables in regard to the degree of success in dealing with educational transition from upper secondary school to further education or employment. The success in transitioning was investigated with a fourpoint scale documenting each student’s current situation and satisfaction with their educational choice shortly after their upper secondary education. One end of the scale was “optimally successful,” that is, these students had completed their upper secondary education in the three normative years and subsequently pursued higher education or obtained a relevant job after graduating from upper secondary school (academic or vocational) and indicated no plans to change or quit their present studies/job. In contrast, the other end was defined as “unsuccessful” if students had not completed an upper secondary qualification in the three normative years. The scale was based on earlier studies about school-to-work transitions (e.g., Pinquart, Juang, & Silbereisen, 2003; for a review, see McKee-Ryan & Harvey, 2011) and educational transitions (e.g., Vasalampi et al., 2009). Interpersonal Environment and Educational Goals Adolescents typically do not face challenging educational transitions on their own, but they ask for advice from and discuss opportunities with their significant others. The life-span model of motivation (Nurmi, 2004; Salmela-Aro, 2009) suggests that, besides one’s own beliefs and motivation, an individual’s goals during critical transitions are also influenced by the perceptions, attitudes and expectations of his/her significant others. Thus, affective support from one’s interpersonal environment during challenging educational transitions can be a critical resource for adolescents (see also, e.g., Gniewosz, Eccles, & Noack, 2012). Particularly the importance of parents and peers as part of a student’s interpersonal environment influencing his/her choices have been emphasized (see, e.g., Nurmi, 2004). This INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 14 Harvey, 2011). Second, a moratorium or delay in upper secondary school studies can have a negative effect on other transitions in young people’s lives (see, e.g., Nurmi, 2004). Methods Participants This study is part of the ongoing XX longitudinal study (authors removed for review purposes, 2003–) that examines life planning, motivation and school transitions from middle adolescence to adulthood. At the beginning of the longitudinal study, the participants were lower secondary school students (15-year-olds) in Grade 9 facing the transition to postcompulsory education. After the transition, these students and all of their classmates answered questionnaires during their first and second year in upper secondary education (academic or vocational), as well as right after their upper secondary education (four years after lower secondary school). All students attended school in the same community in Central Finland. For the present study, we used the data collected when the participants were in upper secondary school. At the beginning of our study, the participants were 16 years old and attending either an academic or vocational upper secondary school. They were surveyed three times: (1) in the first year of upper secondary school, (2) in the second year of upper secondary school, and (3) two years after the second measurement point when the participants should have completed the transition from secondary school to either further studies or working life. At the first measurement point, 1,520 (712 girls and 808 boys) students participated in the study, and at the second measurement point, 1,017 (500 girls, 517 boys) joined. Six hundred eighty-five of the students (45.1%) represented five different academic upper secondary schools, and 835 (54.9%) represented four different vocational upper secondary schools. At the third measurement point, 494 (265 girls, 229 boys) students participated in the study. The small number of participants at the third measurement point INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 15 was due to the fact that only the participants who had already been followed since Grade 9 were also assessed after their upper secondary education. Analyses were conducted to compare those students who participated in all measurements with those who did not with respect to our key variables. The results of the ttest revealed that these groups did not differ in peer acceptance, parents’ support, autonomous and controlled motivation, school satisfaction or their intention to drop out of school during their upper secondary education. However, they did differ in goal effort, goal progress and the outcome of the educational transition after their upper secondary education; those students who participated at all measurement times invested more effort [t(420) = −2.72, p = .007, Cohen’s d = −0.29], progressed better in their educational goals [t(420) = −2.92, p = .004, Cohen’s d = −0.31], and were more successful in their educational transition after upper secondary school than were those who did not participate [t(492) = −2.15, p = .032, Cohen’s d = −0.20]. Measures Peer acceptance (T1). Peer acceptance was measured using a sociometric procedure at the first measurement time. The level of peer acceptance was represented by the number of positive nominations each adolescent received, standardized by school size. Each student was able to freely name a maximum of three classmates (from the entire cohort in their school) with whom they would most like to spend time in school. Sociometric nominations have been shown to yield valid, stable and reliable assessments of peer acceptance during childhood (Bukowski, Cillessen, & Velasquez, 2012). Perceived parental affective support (T1). Maternal and paternal support were measured at the first measurement time with a Finnish version (Aunola & Nurmi, 2004) of the Child Rearing Practices Report (Roberts, Block, & Block, 1984). The assessment refers to the extent to which parents show affective warmth, acceptance, and involvement. INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 16 Adolescents were asked to rate the maternal and paternal affective support they received with nine items (e.g., My mother/father often shows me how much he/she appreciates the fact that I try to do or achieve something; My mother/father respects my opinion; My mother/father often shows that she/he loves me). Items were rated on a scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (completely). Items were averaged to create the subscale score for maternal support (α = .91) and paternal support (α = .93). Autonomous and controlled motivation, goal effort, and goal progress (T2). First, at the second measurement time, adolescents were asked to name one personal goal related to their education, future career or occupation by answering an open-ended question (“Please state one personal goal related to your education, future career, or occupation”; Nurmi, Salmela-Aro, & Koivisto, 2002; Salmela-Aro & Nurmi, 1997a). Second, the participants were requested to rate this educational goal in relation to eight appraisal items by using a seven-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all for this reason) to 7 (completely for this reason). These items reflected the following: (1) autonomous motivation (three items, How important is this goal to you? Why are you trying to carry out this goal—because you enjoy carrying it out and you are interested in it? –because you really believe it is an important goal?; (2) controlled goal motivation (two items, Why are you trying to carry out this goal—because someone else wants you to or because the situation requires it? –because you would feel ashamed, guilty or anxious if you would not?); (3) goal effort (two items, How much time and effort have you spent on this goal? To what extent have you worked for your goal?); and (4) goal progress (one item, To what extent have you progressed toward achieving this goal?). The Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities of these scales were .63 for autonomous goal motivation, .63 for controlled goal motivation, and .89 for goal effort. School satisfaction (T2). In the second year of upper secondary school (second measurement time), academic or vocational, students’ school satisfaction was examined with INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 17 four items (e.g., Are you satisfied with your current form of education?). The items were rated on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much), and a mean sum score was calculated for all four items. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability of the scale was .87. Intention to drop out of school (T2). In the second year of upper secondary school (second measurement time), academic or vocational, adolescents’ intention to drop out of school was measured with two items (e.g., Have you considered changing your school or field of study and quitting the current one?). The items were rated on a four-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very often). The Cronbach’s alpha reliability of this scale was .78. Successful transition (T3). Success in educational transition was assessed at the third measurement time with a variable that indicated whether the participants were able to complete an upper secondary qualification (i.e., an upper secondary school or vocational school qualification in the three normative years) and whether they were satisfied with their educational choice. The following categories were created: (1) did not complete any upper secondary qualification in the three normative years (n = 29; 5.9%), (2) completed an upper secondary qualification but did not progress beyond (e.g., is unemployed and not studying at the moment; n = 120; 24.3%), (3) completed a vocational or academic upper secondary qualification but is not satisfied with his/her education (i.e., may be studying at the moment but is still going to apply somewhere else, or is working in a place related to his/her completed degree but is going to apply for further studies; n = 95; 19.2%), and (4) had a successful transition (e.g., is studying further and not going to apply anywhere else, or is in a job related to his/her completed degree and has no plans to change or quit the job at the moment; n = 250; 50.6%). Socioeconomic status (controlled for variable). The socioeconomic status of mothers and father was controlled for. Mothers and fathers were classified into different INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 18 socioeconomic status categories according to their occupations by using a standard classification system (Central Statistical Office of Finland, 1989). These classifications were coded as the following ordinal socioeconomic categories: (1) blue-collar professions, such as manual labor (12% of mothers and 34% of fathers); (2) lower-level white-collar professions, such as lower-level professional, managerial or administrative work (51% of mothers and 17% of fathers); and (3) higher-level white-collar professions, such as higher-level professional, managerial or administrative work (23% of mothers and 29% of fathers). All other occupations were coded as missing values (14% of mothers and 20% of fathers). Statistical Analyses Statistical analyses were performed using the Mplus statistical package (version 7; Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2017). The proportion of missing data in the variables at the first and second measurement time (T1 and T2) ranged from 16% to 34%. In turn, the proportion of missing data at the third measurement time (T3) was 68%, because only the participants who had already been followed since Grade 9 were also assessed after their upper secondary education. Missing at Random (MAR), which is a weaker condition of missing data than Missing Completely at Random (MCAR), was expected. In the MAR situation, missingness does not depend on the unmeasured variables, but it can depend on the values of the observed variables included in the analyses (Little, 1988; Rubin, 1974). When MAR was expected, the parameters of the models were estimated using full-information maximum likelihood estimation with non-normality robust standard errors (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2017). The chi-square test (χ²), comparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) were used to evaluate the goodness-of-fit of the estimated model. Indirect paths from interpersonal environmental variables to outcome variables via motivational variables were examined using the model indirect command in Mplus. INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 19 We ran four models to examine the relations between the students’ interpersonal environment, motivational constructs, and educational outcomes (Figure 1). In the first model (Hypotheses 1a and 1b), we tested the relations between the motivational constructs (i.e., between autonomous and controlled motivation, goal effort, and goal progress) with a simultaneous path model. In the second model, we tested the relations between the interpersonal environment and motivational variables with a recursive path model (Hypothesis 2). In this model, peer acceptance as well as maternal and paternal support during the first year of upper secondary school predicted autonomous and controlled motivation in the second year. In the third model (Hypotheses 3a and 3b), educational outcomes in upper secondary school (i.e., school satisfaction and the intention to drop out) were added to the model. The fourth model included additional analyses that tested whether peer acceptance, autonomous motivation, goal effort, goal progress, school satisfaction or intentions to drop out predicted success in the transition beyond upper secondary school (Hypothesis 4). Although models 1, 2 and 3 were also part of the final model (model 4), they were run first to ensure that the coefficients of the paths would not change when increasing the complexity of the model. We also reported the results of each model to provide a clear picture of the relations between all of the assessed constructs. Results Relations Between Motivational Constructs In the following section, the results are reported in the order that the models were run, as described in the analysis strategy. The descriptive statistics of the variables in the models are presented in Table 1. The first step in our analyses involved examining the theoretical model between all motivational constructs. In model 1, goal effort was predicted by autonomous and controlled motivation, and goal progress was predicted by goal effort INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 20 (Figure 1). The indirect effects of autonomous and controlled motivation on goal progress via goal effort were also tested. The result of the path model showed that the overall fit of the model was excellent: χ²(2) = 9.45, p = .009; CFI = 0.99; RMSEA = 0.06; SRMR = 0.02. The results (presented in Figure 2) showed that goal effort was significantly predicted by autonomous motivation, but not by controlled motivation. Furthermore, goal progress was significantly predicted by goal effort. These findings were also supported by the indirect model. The results of the indirect model showed a significant association (standardized indirect effect = .32, s.e. = 0.03, p < .001) between autonomous motivation and goal progress via goal effort. Contrastingly, the indirect path from controlled motivation to goal progress was non-significant (standardized indirect effect = −.03, s.e. = 0.02, p > .05). Predicting Motivation with the Supportiveness of the Interpersonal Environment In the second step, we added the factor of supportiveness of the interpersonal environment (i.e., mother’s support, father’s support, and peer acceptance) to the model as an antecedent to goal motivation. More specifically, autonomous and controlled motivation were predicted by peer acceptance and both mothers’ and fathers’ affective supportiveness. Goal effort, in turn, was predicted by autonomous motivation, and goal progress by goal effort (Figure 1). The results of the path model 2 showed that the overall fit was good, once again: χ²(14) = 32.13, p = .004; CFI = 0.98; RMSEA = 0.03; SRMR = 0.04. The results (Figure 2) indicated that mothers’ support played a role in adolescents’ motivation. Mothers’ high supportiveness was significantly related to adolescents’ high autonomous motivation for their educational goals, whereas mothers’ low support was associated with high controlled motivation. Furthermore, peer acceptance was statistically significantly related to high autonomous motivation in adolescents’ educational goal pursuit. These results were also INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 21 supported by the indirect model. Statistically significant unique indirect paths were observed from mothers’ support (standardized indirect effect = .04, s.e. = 0.01, p < .001), as well as from peer acceptance (standardized indirect effect = .02, s.e. = 0.01, p = .03), via autonomous motivation and goal effort to goal progress. Fathers’ support, in turn, was neither related to adolescents’ autonomous motivation nor to controlled motivation. In other words, after mothers’ support was controlled for, fathers, on their own, were found not to have a unique effect on adolescents’ motivation. School Satisfaction and the Intention to Drop Out of Upper Secondary School Next, as a third step, we added variables for school satisfaction and the intention to drop out of upper secondary school to the model as possible outcome variables (see Figure 1). The fit of the model 3 was acceptable: χ²(20) = 67.75, p < .001; CFI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.04; SRMR = 0.05. However, to fit the model to the data as presented above, a direct path from autonomous motivation to school satisfaction had to be added. The results (Figure 2) showed, first, that education-related goal motivation was strongly related to adolescents’ satisfaction with their educational choice (Figure 2). High autonomous motivation and high goal progress were related to high school satisfaction, whereas low goal progress was related to the intention to drop out of upper secondary school. Second, parents had different roles in this process. Fathers’ high supportiveness was significantly related to adolescents’ high levels of school satisfaction and to low intentions of dropping out. Contrastingly, mothers’ high support was not related to either of these outcome variables, but the indirect model indicated a weak indirect effect of mothers’ support on high levels of school satisfaction via motivational variables (standardized indirect effect = .01, s.e. = 0.01, p < .001) and low intentions of dropping out (standardized indirect effect = −.007, s.e. = 0.003, p = .002). Third, peer acceptance also played a role in adolescents’ satisfaction with their educational track. High peer acceptance was related to adolescents’ school satisfaction as well as to low INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 22 intentions of dropping out. The indirect effect model showed that the effect of peer acceptance was also partly mediated by motivation leading to greater school satisfaction (standardized indirect effect = .004, s.e. = 0.001, p = .04) and to lower intentions of dropping out (standardized indirect effect = −.003, s.e. = 0.001, p = .05). All together, these results indicate that both autonomous motivation and the supportiveness of the interpersonal environment are significant determinants of adolescents’ satisfaction with their educational choice. Adolescents’ progress in their educational goals was reflected in their high levels of school satisfaction and low intention to drop out of upper secondary school. Furthermore, peer acceptance and high levels of fathers’ support were particularly associated with school satisfaction and low intentions of dropping out of school, whereas mothers’ support had only a small influence via adolescents’ motivation. Successful Transition Beyond Upper Secondary Education In the last step, we used additional analyses to examine whether adolescents’ interpersonal environment, motivation and satisfaction with their educational choice would predict their success in their educational transition beyond upper secondary school. We examined whether the students completed their upper secondary education in the three normative years and subsequently searched for and pursued higher education or obtained a relevant job, that is, after graduating from upper secondary school (academic or vocational) with a sense of satisfaction. Thus, we added a successful educational transition variable as an outcome variable to the model (see Figure 1). The model fit was acceptable: χ²(23) = 81.40, p < .001; CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.92; RMSEA = 0.04; SRMR = 0.05. The results (Figure 2) showed that low intentions of dropping out of upper secondary school predicted successful educational transitioning beyond upper secondary school. Thus, the less adolescents had the intention to drop out of upper secondary school, the more likely they were to have a successful educational transition beyond their upper secondary education. INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 23 Other direct effects on successful educational transitioning were not found; that is, peer acceptance, maternal or paternal support, and students’ motivational characteristics or school satisfaction did not directly predict students’ success in the transition after controlling for the other predictors in the model. However, some significant indirect effects via drop-out intentions were detected. First, goal progress predicted successful transitioning via the intention to drop out (standardized indirect effect = .04, s.e. = 0.02, p = .01). Also, significant indirect effect of fathers’ support on successful transitioning via the intention to drop out (standardized indirect effect = .04, s.e. = 0.02, p = .02) was found. Furthermore, a weak but significant indirect effect was found also of mothers’ support on successful transitioning via motivational variables and via intentions of dropping out (standardized indirect effect = .002, s.e. = 0.001, p = .02). In addition, the indirect effect of peer acceptance via the intention to drop out was nearly significant (standardized indirect effect = .02, s.e. = 0.008, p = .053). Other indirect effects were not found. Discussion Inspired by SDT this study examined the extent to which affective support from mothers and fathers as well as peers’ acceptance serve as antecedents to autonomous and controlled motivation in adolescents’ educational goals, and, furthermore, whether these factors are associated with the students’ satisfaction with their educational track and their degree of success in educational transitioning beyond upper secondary school (e.g., whether or not the students completed an upper secondary education, academic or vocational, and continued studying thereafter, and/or started working, and whether they were satisfied with their choice). The results indicated that adolescents’ own individual motivational process plays an important role in whether they attain their educational goals. However, their interpersonal environment also significantly affects their goal attainment—it has an effect via INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 30 Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2004). Maternal affection moderates the impact of psychological control on a child's mathematical performance. Developmental Psychology, 40, 965-978. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.965 Berndt, T. J., Laychak, A. E., & Park, K. (1990). Friends’ influence on adolescents’ academic achievement motivation: An experimental study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 664–670. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.664 Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective. Science Education,84, 740-756. doi:10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6 Bukowski, W. M., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Velasquez, A. M. (2012). The use of peer ratings in developmental research. In B. Laursen, T. Little & N. Card (Eds.), Handbook of developmental research methods (pp. 211-228). New York: Guilford. Central Statistical Office of Finland. (1989). Sosioekonomisen aseman luokitus [Classification of socioeconomic status] (Käsikirjoja [Handbook] 17). Helsinki, Finland: Central Statistical Office of Finland. Central Statistical Office of Finland (2016). Education. Retrieved June 20th, 2016, from http://www.stat.fi/index_en.html. Collins, W. A., & Russell, G. (1991). Mother-child and father-child relationships in middle childhood and adolescence: a developmental analysis. Developmental Review, 11, 99136. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(91)90004-8 Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Larson, R. (1984). Being adolescent: Conflict and growth in the teenage years. Basic Books. d’Ailly, H. (2003). Children’s autonomy and perceived control in learning: A model of motivation and achievement in Taiwan. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 84–96. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.84 INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 31 Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. Dietrich, J., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2013). Parental involvement and adolescents' career goal pursuit during the post-school transition. Journal of Adolescence, 36, 121-128. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.10.009 Duineveld, J., Parker, P. Ryan, R., Ciarrochi, J., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2017). The link between perceived maternal and paternal autonomy support and adolescent well-being across three major educational transitions. Developmental Psychology, 53, 1978-1994. doi:10.1037/dev0000364 Gniewosz, B., Eccles, J. S., & Noack, P. (2012). Secondary school transition and the use of different sources of information for the construction of the academic self‐concept. Social Development, 21, 537-557. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00635.x Eccles, J. S. (2005). Studying the development of learning and task motivation. Learning and Instruction, 15, 161-171. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.04.012 Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2009). Schools, academic motivation, and stage‐environment fit. In R. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 404-434). New York: Wiley. Estell, D. B., & Perdue, N. H. (2013). Social support and behavioral and affective school engagement: the effects of peers, parents, and teachers. Psychology in the Schools, 50, 325-339. doi:10.1002/pits.21681 French, D. C., & Conrad, J. (2001). School dropout as predicted by peer rejection and antisocial behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11, 225–244. doi:10.1111/15327795.00011 Freund, A. M., & Baltes, P. B. (2000). The orchestration of selection, optimization, and compensation: An action-theoretical conceptualization of a theory of developmental INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 32 regulation. In W. J. Perrig & A. Grob (Eds.), Control of human behavior, mental processes, and consciousness (pp. 35-58). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gaudreau, P., Carraro, N., & Miranda, D. (2012). From goal motivation to goal progress: The mediating role of coping in the self-concordance model. Anxiety, Stress & Coping: An International Journal, 25, 507-528. doi:10.1080/10615806.2011.628015 Gollwitzer, P. M. (1996). The volitional benefits of planning. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action (pp. 287-312). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children's selfregulation and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 143-154. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.143 Grolnick, W. S., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Inner resources for school achievement: Motivational mediators of children’s perceptions of their parents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 508-517. Guay, F., & Chanal, J. (2008). Meet the parents: Mothers and fathers’ contextual and psychological resources associated to adolescents’ perceptions of parental autonomy support. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), Self-processes, learning, and enabling human potential: Dynamic new approaches. Vol. 3. Advances in self research (pp. 45–169). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Guay, F., Ratelle, C. F., Larose, S., Vallerand, R. J., & Vitaro, F. (2013). The number of autonomy-supportive relationships: Are more relationships better for motivation, perceived competence, and achievement? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38, 375-382. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.07.005 Haase, C. M., Heckhausen, J., & Silbereisen, R. K. (2011). The interplay of occupational motivation and well-being during the transition from university to work. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1739–1751. doi: 10.1037/a0026641 INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 33 Hallinan, M. T., & Williams, R. A. (1990). Students' characteristics and the peer-influence process. Sociology of Education, 63, 122–132. doi:10.2307/2112858 Heckhausen, J., Wrosch, C., & Schulz, R. (2010). A motivational theory of life-span development. Psychological Review, 117, 32-60. doi:10.1037/a0017668 Hymel, S., Comfort, C., Schonert-Reichl, K., & McDougall, P. (1996). Academic failure and school dropout: The influence of peers. In J. Juvonen & K. R. Wentzel (Eds.), Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment (pp. 313–345). New York: Cambridge University Press. Ketonen, E. E., Dietrich, J., Moeller, J., Salmela-Aro, K., & Lonka, K. (2018). The role of daily autonomous and controlled educational goals in students’ academic emotion states: An experience sampling method approach. Learning and Instruction, 53, 10-20. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.07.003 King, R. B. (2015). Sense of relatedness boosts engagement and well-being: A latent growth model study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 26-38. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.04.002 Kiuru, N., Aunola, K., Vuori, J., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2007). The role of peer groups in adolescents' educational expectations and adjustment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 995-1009. Kiuru, N., Nurmi, J.-E., Aunola, K., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2009). Peer group homogeneity in adolescents' school adjustment varies according to peer group type and gender. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33, 65-76. doi: 10.1177/0165025408098014 Kiuru, N., Pakarinen, E., Vasalampi, K., Silinskas, G., Aunola, K., Poikkeus, A.-M., Metsäpelto, R.-L., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Nurmi, J.-E. (2014). Task-focused behavior mediates the associations between supportive interpersonal environments and students’ INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 34 academic performance. Psychological Science, 24, 1018-1024. doi: 10.1177/0956797613519111 Kiuru, N., Salmela-Aro, K., Nurmi, J., Zettergren, P., Andersson, H., & Bergman, L. (2012). Best friends in adolescence show similar educational careers in early adulthood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33(2), 102-111. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2011.12.001 Koestner, R., Otis, N., Powers, T. A., Pelletier, L., & Gagnon, H. (2008). Autonomous motivation, controlled motivation, and goal progress. Journal of Personality, 76, 12011229. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00519.x Ladd, G. W. (1990). Having friends, keeping friends, making friends, and being liked by peers in the classroom: predictors of children's early school adjustment? Child Development, 61, 1081–1100. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02843.x Ladd, G. W., Kochenderfer, B. J., & Coleman, C. C. (1997). Classroom peer acceptance, friendship, and victimization: Distinct relational systems that contribute uniquely to children's school adjustment? Child Development, 68, 1181-1197. doi:10.2307/1132300 Larson R., & Richards, M. H. (1991). Daily companionship in late childhood and early adolescence: Changing developmental contexts. Child Development, 62, 284-300. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01531.x Lazarides, R., Viljaranta, J., Ranta, M., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2017). Adolescents' preparedness and motivation across the transition to post-comprehensive education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 151-159. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.01.008 Little, B. R. (1983). Personal projects: A rationale and method for investigation. Environment and Behavior, 15, 273-309. doi:10.1177/0013916583153002 Locke, E. A., & Latham. G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. American Psychologist, 57, 705-715. doi:10.1037/0003066X.57.9.705 INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 35 Massey, E. K., Gebhardt, W. A., & Garnefski, N. (2008). Adolescent goal content and pursuit: A review of the literature from the past 16 years. Developmental Review, 28, 421460. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2008.03.002 McKee-Ryan, F. M., & Harvey, J. (2011). “I have a job, but . . .”: A review of underemployment. Journal of Management, 37(4), 962–996. doi:10.1177/0149206311398134 Melby, J. N., Conger, R. D., Fang, S.-A., Wickrama, K. A. S., & Conger, K. J. (2008). Adolescent family experiences and educational attainment during early adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1519–1536. doi:10.1037/a0013352 Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus Version 7 user’s guide. Available from http://www.statmodel.com Nurmi, J.-E. (2004). Socialization and self-development. Channeling, selection, adjustment, and reflection. In R. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology, (pp. 85-124). New York: Wiley. Nurmi, J.-E., Salmela-Aro, K., & Koivisto, P. (2002). Goal importance and related achievement beliefs and emotions during the transition from vocational school to work: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 241-261. doi:10.1006/jvbe.2001.1866 Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. R. (1987). Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are lowaccepted children at risk? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357-389. doi:10.1037/00332909.102.3.357 Pinquart, M, Juang, L. P., & Silbereisen, R. K. (2003). Self-efficacy and successful school-towork transition: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 329-346. doi: 10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00031-3Ratelle, C. F., Guay, F., Larose, S., & Senécal, C. (2004). Family correlates of trajectories of academic motivation during a school transition: INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 36 A semiparametric group-based approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 743754. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.743 Ricard, N. C., & Pelletier, L. G. (2016). Dropping out of high school: The role of parent and teacher self-determination support, reciprocal friendships, and academic motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44-45, 32-40. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.12.003 Risi, S., Gerhardstein, R., & Kistner, J. (2003). Children's classroom peer relationships and subsequent educational outcomes. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 32, 351–361. doi:10.1207/S15374424JCCP3203_04 Roberts, G. C., Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1984). Continuity and change in parents' childrearing practices. Child Development, 55, 586-597. doi:10.2307/1129970 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 Salmela-Aro, K. (2009). Personal goals and well-being during critical life transitions: The four C’s—Channelling, choice, co-agency and compensation. Advances in Life Course Research, 14, 63–73. doi:10.1016/j.alcr.2009.03.003 Salmela-Aro, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (1997a). Goal contents, well-being and life context during transition to university: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 20, 471-491. doi:10.1080/016502597385234 Salmela-Aro, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (1997b). Personal project appraisals, academic achievement and related satisfaction: A prospective study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XII, 77-88. doi:10.1007/BF03172871 INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 37 Sheldon, K. M. (2002). The self-concordance model of healthy goal-striving: When personal goals correctly represent the person. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 65-86). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are personal: Comparing autonomous and controlled reasons for goals as predictors of effort and attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546-557. doi: 10.1177/0146167298245010 Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal wellbeing: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 482-497. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.3.482 Sheldon, K. M., & Houser-Marko, L. (2001). Self-concordance, goal-attainment, and the pursuit of happiness: Can there be an upward spiral? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 152-165. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.152 Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (1998). Pursuing personal goals: Skills enable progress, but not all progress is beneficial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1319-1331. doi:10.1177/01461672982412006 Skorikov, V. (2006). Continuity in adolescent career preparation and its effects on adjustment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 8-24. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2006.04.007 Steinberg L., & Silverberg, S. B. (1986). The vicissitudes of autonomy in early adolescence. Child Development, 57, 841-51. doi: 10.2307/1130361 Tynkkynen, L., Dietrich, J., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2014). Career goal-related success expectations across two educational transitions: A seven-year longitudinal study. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 11, 356-372. doi:10.1080/17405629.2013.840577 INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 38 Upadyaya, K., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2013). Development of school engagement in association with academic success and well-being in varying social contexts. A review of empirical research. European Psychologist, 18, 136-147. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000143 Vallerand, R. J., & Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational styles as predictors of behavior: A prospective study. Journal of Personality, 60, 599-620. Vandell, D. L., & Hembree, S. E. (1994). Peer social status and friendship: Independent contributors to children's social and academic adjustment. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 40, 461−477. Vasalampi, K., Nurmi, J-E., Jokisaari, M., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2012). The role of educational goal-related autonomous motivation, effort and progress to successful entrance into university. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27, 591-604. doi:10.1007/s10212-011-0098-x Vasalampi, K., Salmela-Aro, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2009). Adolescents’ self-concordance, school engagement and burnout predict their educational trajectories. European Psychologist, 14, 332-341. doi:10.1027/1016-9040.14.4.332 Véronneau, M.-H., & Vitaro, F. (2007). Social experiences with peers and high school graduation: A review of theoretical and empirical research. Educational Psychology, 27, 419-445. doi:10.1080/01443410601104320 Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Social support matters: Longitudinal effects of social support on three dimensions of school engagement from middle to high school. Child Development, 83, 877–895. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01745.x Wentzel. K. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 202-209. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.202 INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATIONAL GOALS 39 Wentzel, K. R., Battle, A., Russell, S. L., & Looney, L. B. (2010). Social supports from teachers and peers as predictors of academic and social motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 193-202. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.002 Wentzel, K. R., & Caldwell, K. (1997). Friendships, peer acceptance, and group membership: Relations to academic achievement in middle school. Child Development, 68, 1198–1209. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1997.tb01994.x Wentzel, K. R., Muenks, K., McNeish, D., & Russell, S. (2017). Peer and teacher supports in relation to motivation and effort: A multi-level study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 32-45. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.11.002 Wiese, B. S., & Freund, A. M. (2005). Goal progress makes one happy, or does it? Longitudinal findings from the work domain. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 287-304. doi:10.1348/096317905X26714