Motivation is widely acknowledged as a strong predictor of academic achievement (Cambria, Eccles & Wigfield, 2012). Educational motivation predicts attitudes toward school, class participation, homework completion, test performance, attendance, and grades. It is particularly salient in high school because educational decisions made during high school are consequential as students position themselves in further education and their specific interest in certain subjects (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Manganelli, et al., 2021). According to self-determination theory, motivation is able to play an important role in helping students from low-wealth situations break out of poverty by raising certain behaviours to overcome the inequality barrier (Ryan & Deci, 2017). However, previous studies have demonstrated that low-socioeconomic status (SES) students endorse lower levels of achievement motivation than high-SES students (Manganelli, et al., 2021). Nevertheless, some low SES students obtain high educational motivations in China, albeit it “against the odds”, and achieve high academic achievements afterwards (e.g. Xie, 2015). Underlining the cultural background of filial piety in China, Guo and his colleagues (2021) also emphasise the role of parenting factors, including parental control and support, on adolescents’ motivations. Thus, it may be that parenting factors, are especially key for young people from low SES backgrounds to be highly motivated. For example, Leung and Shek (2016) have identified that parent-child discrepancy in perceived parental sacrifice influences the motivation of poor Chinese adolescents based on their study of 275 adolescents and their families in Hong Kong. Therefore, it is worthwhile to explore how the parenting factors associate with the SES-academic motivation relationship in China. Moreover, empirical evidence of how disadvantaged adolescents can be more motivated academically could supplement studies of social justice.

Led by the theoretical framework of Coleman’s social capital theory in the family (Coleman, 1988), this study regards educational motivation as a non-cognitive ability outcome, which is considered to be closely related to future academic achievement (Ames, 1992). Coleman’s theory of social capital in the family suggests that financial capital, human capital and social capital all affect educational outcomes jointly and intercorrelate with each other (Coleman, 1988). Following this framework, this study aims to explore the association of parenting factors, SES and educational motivations among 12 to 15 years old adolescents in China using a nationally representative secondary dataset, the China Education Panel Survey (CEPS). This secondary data was collected from around 20,000 secondary school students from 112 schools in 28 counties in mainland China (National Survey Research Centre at Renmin University of China, 2015). Through conducting quantitative analysis, the article aims to answer the following research questions:

1. What is the educational motivation pattern of adolescents in China? What is the difference in educational motivation patterns between Grade 7 (Age 12 to 13) and Grade 9 (Age 14 to 15) students?

2. How do different kinds of parental capital, including occupation, education and home possessions, relate to students’ educational motivations?

3. How do parental capitals incorporate parenting factors as a form of social capital in the family, including parental involvement, parenting styles and parental aspiration, relate to students’ educational motivation? 

This study offers empirical evidence from China to further explain Coleman’s theory of social capital, joining the international theoretical conversation from a different country background. Moreover, it includes a broader range of SES and parenting factors and a wider age range than similar studies that have used large-scale data from China. Furthermore, it explores the patterns of educational motivation of adolescents in mainland China and its relationship with SES and parenting factors, which have not been jointly identified in previous large-scale quantitative educational research.

The data of this study is from the 2013-2014 wave (Wave 1) of the China Education Panel Survey (CEPS), including around 10,000 students from Grade 7 and 9,000 students from Grade 9. Regarding the ethical approval, the participants and their parents have provided a written informed consent to the National Survey Research Centre (National Survey Research Centre at Renmin University of China, 2015). The descriptive statistics and correlation matrix have been calculated to understand (1) the differences in forms of parenting factors between families of different SES in China and (2) how the SES and parenting factors correlate with educational motivations. Factor analysis will then be conducted on SES and parenting factors to create the scale for further analysis. To understand the relationship among SES, parenting factors and educational motivations, hierarchical regression models have been completed. All variables have been z-score standardised in the analyses. All the analytical procedure was completed using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 29) software. •Dependent Variables: Educational Motivation Following the measurement of educational motivations from Liu and Chiang (2019), the indicators for educational motivation are students’ self-reported motivations in three main subjects: Chinese, Math and English. The 4-point Likert scale of the three responses (“Chinese/Math/English is highly useful for my future”) ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). •Independent Variables: 1. SES: This research followed previous research (e.g Strand,2014) and create a single composite measure of SES derived from the three variables- parental occupational status, parental educational attainment and home possessions (including family self-reported income, family poverty and family assets). 2. Parenting Factors: Following the conceptualisation of the parenting factors, this research selected 21 parental response items. The parenting style items follow Zhang et al. (2020)’s selection of CEPS indicators of parenting style selection and evaluation. For parental involvement indicators, the research takes into consideration of Hill and Tyson’s (2009) conceptualisation of parental involvement, described previously, and the indicators of parental involvement that Li et al. (2020) adopted in their studies using the CEPS dataset. This research also includes parental educational aspiration as part of parenting factors, which has been widely acknowledged to be a correlated and significant predictor of academic achievement in both the Chinese and Western literature. •Control Variables: This study’s control variables include hukou, gender, ethnicity, whether the student is an only child and parental absence.

The analysis can identify the different motivation patterns for adolescents in different age groups and grades. Considering that those Grade 7 students are freshers for secondary school and Grade 9 students are facing Zhongkao (senior high school entrance exam), choosing whether they would continue to study academically, their educational motivations varied. The study also reveals how parental occupation, parental educational attainment and home possessions are correlated with educational motivations. Moreover, the study also identifies which parenting factor could play a substantial role in the formation of educational motivations. Following Zhang et al. (2020)’s approach using the demandingness and responsiveness scale created by the factor analysis, this research also aims to discover a pattern of the parenting styles’ association with educational motivations. As for the relationship among the SES, parenting factors and educational motivations, the research is expected to claim whether parenting factors can act as mediators or moderators for the SES-educational motivation relationship. In other words, the study is hoping to explore which kind of parenting factors could have positive consequences on motivations for specific SES groups of adolescents. This research can raise important implications for further policy, underlining the importance of certain kinds of parenting factors for educational motivation.

Ames, C. (1992) Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271. Cambria, Jenna, Eccles, Jacquelynne S, & Wigfield, Allan. (2012). Motivation in Education. In The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation (Oxford Library of Psychology, The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation, 2012). Oxford University Press. Coleman, James S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95 Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273. Guo, Mingchun, Wang, Long, Day, Jamin, & Chen, Yanhan. (2021). The Relations of Parental Autonomy Support, Parental Control, and Filial Piety to Chinese Adolescents' Academic Autonomous Motivation: A Mediation Model. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental Involvement in Middle School: A Meta-Analytic Assessment of the Strategies That Promote Achievement. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 740–763. Leung, Janet T. Y., & Shek, Daniel T. L. (2016). Parent–Child Discrepancies in Perceived Parental Sacrifice and Achievement Motivation of Chinese Adolescents Experiencing Economic Disadvantage. Child Indicators Research, 9(3), 683-700. Li, X., Yang, H., Wang, H., & Jia, J. (2020). Family socioeconomic status and home-based parental involvement: A mediation analysis of parental attitudes and expectations. Children and Youth Services Review, 116(February) Liu, Ran, & Chiang, Yi-Lin. (2019). Who is more motivated to learn? The roles of family background and teacher-student interaction in motivating student learning. The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 6(1), 1-17. Manganelli, Sara, Cavicchiolo, Elisa, Lucidi, Fabio, Galli, Federica, Cozzolino, Mauro, Chirico, Andrea, & Alivernini, Fabio. (2021). Differences and similarities in adolescents' academic motivation across socioeconomic and immigrant backgrounds. Personality and Individual Differences, 182. National Survey Research Center (NSRC) at Renmin University of China. (2015). China Education Panel Survey [Dataset]. http://ceps.ruc.edu.cn/English/Home.htm Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2017). Self-determination theory : Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York, New York ; London, [England.] Strand, S. (2014). Ethnicity, gender, social class and achievement gaps at age 16: Intersectionality and “getting it” for the white working class. Research Papers in Education, 29(2), 131–171. Xie, A. (2015). Inside the College Gate: Rural Students and Their Academic and Social Success. Zhang, Haochen, Qin, Xuezheng, & Zhou, Jiantao. (2020). Do tiger moms raise superior kids? The impact of parenting style on adolescent human capital formation in China. China Economic Review, 63.