In further elaboration of the motivation phenomenon, Atherton (2004) defines it as "either intrinsic/expressive (doing something for its own sake) or extrinsic/instrumental (doing something for some other reason)." Contrary to Petty’s (1993) presentation, Atherton (2004) emphasises that motivation is not an indivisible whole but is comprised of two distinct forms. While Pettys (1993) assertion is largely true, he oversimplifies the complex phenomenon of motivation, in which instance one need turn to Atherton (2004) for a more accurate understanding of the mentioned. In further elaboration of the stated, while Petty has correctly identified the centrality of motivation to effective learning, he incorrectly identifies teachers as the primary instigators of motivation.
In essence, Petty (1993:32) lays much, if not all, of the responsibility for the generation of motivation upon teachers whereby he defines this particular task as the "greatest challenge that many teachers face." This is an oversimplification of the phenomenon of motivation, implying that motivation is essentially extrinsic whereby, as noted by Atherton (2004) it is both intrinsic and extrinsic. A teacher, through the enthusiasm with which he/she approaches the information communication responsibility, can similarly enthuse learners and, through the creation of a positive learning environment, characterized by encouragement and trust, can enhance the confidence levels of individual learners, thereby injecting them with the motivation to learn. However, as may be observed, a teachers motivation-elevation capacities are limited to the extrinsic, while effective learning is predicated on the presence of requisite minimal levels of both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Petty does not admit to the explicated differentiation, rendering his observation only partially accurate.
As language, literacy and numeracy skills vary