Does teaching imply learning? According to Byman and Kansanen (2008, p605) '…teaching in itself does not imply learning'. The underachievement of young people in education has been a priority in British policy for over two decades (Ross, 2009). Estimates of academic underachievement at Key Stage 4 (KS4) are reportedly between one fifth and one third of the KS4 population in England (Steedman and Stoney, 2004). An Ofsted report (2013) identifies that pupils' ages 11 to 16 (start KS4) are below the national average. Underachievement in KS4 has become a recurring phenomenon (Wogboroma, 2014), with several academics and government bodies identifying a number of significant implications, not only for the individual but also for wider society (Beinart, et al. 2002 ; McIntosh and Houghton, 2005; This invisible group of academically underachieving students is representative of a questionable waste of potential, as well as incurring subsequent costs, from an individual perspective on a national scale (Ofsted, 2013). and promoting timely interventions to address low achievement in KS4 and subsequently achieve social justice for this group of students should be a key objective for schools. Motivation is recognized as an effective tool for overcoming low achievement (Mega, et al. 2014). Furthermore, the intrinsic locus of motivation has developed to become an important phenomenon for educators, producing effective and high-quality learning as well as creativity and achievement. which can be progressively nurtured by teachers' practices (Ryan & Stiller, 1991). Theories of motivation, self, and society are critically evaluated to determine effective strategies… half of paper… motivation. However, SCTs recognize the importance of social interactions and their influence on motivation. Furthermore, SCT is an expectancy x value sociocognitive approach to motivation, reflecting Eccles and Wigfield's (2001;2002) expectancy-value theory model. Similar to attribution theory, SCT determines that motivation is influenced by the environment and interactions with others and how these influence students' attributes and judgments. In contrast, SCT is unique in that it determines that motivation and behavior are influenced through observation and cognition, ignoring Blooms' (1956) affective and psychomotor domains. Self-regulation is a recent development in SCT. Like SDT, self-regulation includes two categories, with students either self-regulating or not. According to this theory, poor performance occurs when a student is (Woolfolk et al. 2013).