Factors Affecting Reading Ability White Paper

Factors Affecting Reading Ability

in School Age Children

Prepared by Strategic Marketing & Research, Inc.

February 2013

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

MARKETING & RESEARCH, INC.

Contents

Purpose 2
Background 2
Barriers to reading development 4
Required competencies 5
Importance of motivation 8
Theories on motivation 9
Factors for change 15
Importance of knowledge 17
Effects of individual temperaments 19
Average and gifted students 20
Average students 21
Gifted students 22
Motivating behaviors and interventions 23
Collecting instincts 25
Rewards as motivation 28
Triarchic instruction 29
Motivating factors reported by students 30
Technology’s motivational role 31
E-books 34
Gaming 35
Online collaboration 36
Email as a motivational tool 38
References 41

MARKETING 1 & RESEARCH, INC.

Purpose
This secondary research report is intended to serve as a benchmark against which existing
reading enhancement programs and software can be compared. It can also serve to inform the
development of new programs and software superior to those now in the marketplace.

Background
Reading failure is a serious national problem and cannot simply be attributed to poverty,
immigration, or the learning of English as a second language.
A Statement to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources revealed that 44% of the nation’s
fourth-grade children had little to no mastery of the knowledge and skills necessary to perform
reading activities at the fourth-grade level (Lyon, 1998). By 2009, the percentage reading below
grade level had gradually improved to 33% but has remained unchanged through 2012.
Two-thirds of eighth-graders do not read at grade level. Only one-third of all students entering
high school are proficient in reading. Within this group, only about 15 percent of African-
American students and 17 percent of Hispanic students are proficient.
Boys lag behind girls in reading proficiency in all 50 states – in some states by as many as 10
percentage points.
Between 1971 and 2004, the NAEP scores of 12th-graders showed no improvement. Further, the
2005 scores of 12th-graders were generally lower than their counterparts in 1992.
Fifty percent of reading difficulties are believed to be preventable if students are given effective
language development experiences in preschool and kindergarten and effective reading
instruction in the primary grades (Slavin et al., 1996).


A study by Yankelovich found most children are reading but they are not reading enough.
Despite the importance placed on reading for fun, only about 3 in 10 children can be classified as
high frequency readers who read books for fun every day.
– Age 8 is the critical drop-off age for reading engagement. Older children are less likely to
see benefits to reading and are less engaged in reading for fun.
– Data also indicate girls are more likely than boys to have positive attitudes about reading
and to regularly engage in reading for fun.
– The benefits of reading are evidenced by the attitudes of high frequency readers.
Compared to others, they are more likely to have positive self-perceptions and to
associate strong reading skills with future success.
– More than 40% of children ages 5 to 8 say they are high frequency readers; by ages 9 to
11 that proportion drops to 29%.
– Almost half of the 15- to 17-year olds (46%) are low frequency readers, compared with
14% of 5- to 8-year-olds.
Reader groups are defined as: High = Reads every day; Medium = Reads 4-6 times a week to
once a week, Low = 2-3 times a month or less (Yankelovich).
For students to develop into effective readers, they must possess both the skill and the will to
read. As noted by Guthrie and Wigfield (2000), “motivation is what activates behavior.”
Children’s motivation is increasingly multidimensional in the later elementary grades.



Barriers to reading development
Developmental factors and students’ perceptions about their own abilities also play into their
level of engagement with learning. The older students get, the less likely they are to take risks
and engage themselves fully in activities at which they are not sure they will succeed. According
to Lumsden (1994), young children tend to maintain high expectations for success even in the
face of repeated failure, while older students do not. To older students, failure following high
effort appears to carry more negative implications—especially for their self-concept of ability—
than failure that results from minimal or no effort (Lumsden, 1994).
Students’ attitudes about their capabilities and their interpretation of success and failure further
affect their willingness to engage themselves in learning (Anderman & Midgley, 1998). For
example, students who understand poor performance as a lack of attainable skills, rather than as
some innate personal deficiency, are more likely to re-engage themselves in a task and try again.
Students whose self-concept is bound up in their history of failure, on the other hand, are less
likely to be motivated to learn.
Motivated readers hold positive beliefs about themselves as readers (Guthrie & Wigfield, 1997).
Conversely, struggling readers assume they are responsible for their reading difficulties.
MacIver and Reuman (1994) add that middle school and high school-age students’ level of
engagement in school is also highly influenced by peers. As students grow older, their
motivation to engage in learning may be influenced by their social group just as much as, if not
more than, it is by teachers, parents, and other adults.
Recurring failures to succeed and self-concept issues often complicate a student’s ability to learn
any of a variety of reading skills. Schunk and Zimmerman (1997) found that students who doubt
their ability to learn give up quickly when faced with new challenges.


Berliner (1981) found that success rates had a substantial impact on student learning. His studies
produced strong, consistent evidence that tasks completed with high rates of success were clearly
linked to greater learning and improved student attitudes, while tasks where students were
moderately successful were less consistently related to learning, and hard tasks had a negative
impact on learning.

Required competencies
The ultimate goal in teaching reading is to have students comprehend the ideas in a piece of text
as they read. Reading helps children expand their thinking skills, learn to concentrate, and
enlarge their vocabulary and effectively master their environment.
Reading is a complex act that requires many years of experience and use in order to do well.
Many “models” of reading have been offered, each attempting to describe the essential
components of skilled reading. Reading can be described at many levels, from the neurological
to the psychological to the sociological. It is useful to think of skilled English readers as
individuals who:
• Understand and use the “alphabetic principle,” that is, how the sounds of spoken speech
can be represented by letters in the alphabet and how letters are used to identify printed
words;
• Have and use background knowledge, knowledge of words, and comprehension strategies
to obtain meaning from print;
• Read fluently and effortlessly, except when they come across unfamiliar text, when they
consciously use the alphabetic principle and comprehension strategies to make sense of
what they are reading; and;
• Are motivated to do all of the above on a regular and sustained basis.
Although reading is often thought of as a matter relating to the first component listed above, that
is, using letters in words to read or pronounce words, skilled reading involves much more.
Successful readers attend to all the relevant dimensions of reading, not simply word recognition,
as important as it is. Successful reading and writing also involves comprehension, fluency,
mastery of essential strategies, and motivation.


Learning to read English presents particular challenges that are not seen in other languages and
reading systems. English is based upon the alphabetic principle. Alphabetic systems, (as
opposed to syllabic systems such as Japanese), represent sounds that are meaningless in and of
themselves but which acquire meaning when the sound units are combined. Before they can
begin to read or spell, children must understand that written words are made up of sounds or
phonemes.
Research indicates that instruction in phonological awareness should begin in preschool and
kindergarten so that children can learn that written words represent spoken sounds. This process
is known as “decoding” and means breaking down a word into its separate sounds. To decode,
children need to be explicitly taught how to sound out words into phonemes. As children
become more adept at decoding and reading words, they are able to focus on building their
comprehension.
Fluency comes when a student recognizes more and more words on sight. The more words are
recognized by sight the fewer the reading errors made. If a student is struggling with decoding,
or if she does not have good phonological skills, fluency and comprehension will suffer.
The problems children experience learning to read are often not related to their ability to learn
but to their phonological awareness; their ability to “hear” the English language and their
exposure to the English alphabet. Rhyming words and repeating lines help children develop an
“ear” for language—by appreciating the sounds of words.
The more a child is exposed to reading, the more likely the child is to acquire the requisite skills
for reading. Children must learn that words on a page have meaning and that reading is done
from left to right and from top to bottom.
Children who have not been read to before they enter school may not have experience listening
to rhythms and sounds. They may also not have developed an interest in reading; that is, they


may not be motivated to learn to read. Children who have been read to in childhood are more
motivated to learn to read, and they appreciate that reading is a gateway to new ideas.
The enjoyment of reading comes from comprehension, however, and not decoding words.
Skilled readers “interact” with a text, thinking about what will happen next, creating questions
about the main characters and so on. Kids who love to read have good comprehension skills.

Elements of Reading Comprehension:
• identifying and summarizing the main idea
• comparing and contrasting
• identifying supporting facts and details
• making inferences and drawing conclusions
• predicting outcomes
• recognizing fact and opinion
• recognizing realism versus fantasy
• identifying cause and effect
• recognizing sequence of events
• identifying story elements such as main characters, settings, plot, conflict, and
resolution
• identifying the author’s purpose and point of view
• interpreting literary devices such as imagery, symbolism ,and metaphors
A study of third- and fifth-graders and eighth- and 10-graders by Guthrie, Wigfield, Metsala and
Cox (2009), found connections between the amount of time spent reading and comprehension
and between the motivation to read and the time spent reading. After statistically controlling for
reading achievement, prior topic knowledge, self-efficacy, and reading motivation, the study of
third- and fifth-graders showed reading motivation significantly predicted the amount of reading.
The study of older students (after similar statistical controls were imposed) found that, as with
the younger group, motivation predicted both the amount of time spent reading, and the amount
of time spent reading significantly predicted text comprehension (Guthrie, Wigfield, Metsala &
Cox, 2009).


Importance of motivation
Student motivation “refers to a student’s willingness, need, desire and compulsion to participate
in, and be successful in, the learning process” (Bomia et al., 1997).
Skinner and Belmont (1991) develop the definition further, noting that students who are
motivated to engage in school “select tasks at the border of their competencies, initiate action
when given the opportunity, and exert intense effort and concentration in the implementation of
learning tasks; they show generally positive emotions during ongoing action, including
enthusiasm, optimism, curiosity, and interest.”
Motivation is the key to developing successful readers. It also affects how students approach
school in general, how they relate to teachers, how much time and effort they devote to their
studies, how much support they seek when they are struggling, how they perform on tests, and
many other aspects of education. If students are not motivated, it is difficult, if not impossible,
to improve their academic achievement, no matter how good the teacher, curriculum or school is.
Means, Jonassen, and Dwyer (1997) cite studies that showing motivation accounts for 16% to
38% of the variations in overall student achievement.
Motivation often declines as students progress from elementary through high school. Upwards of
40% of high school students are disengaged from learning, are inattentive, exert little effort on
school work, and report being bored in school, according to a 2004 analysis by the National
Research Council.
Metsala, Wigfield, and McCann (1997) found that young children, who are positively motivated,
have a strong sense of their personal competency and efficacy. Less motivated or disengaged
students, on the other hand, “are passive, do not try hard, and give up easily in the face of
challenges” (Skinner & Belmont, 1991).


Higher motivation to learn is linked not only to better academic performance but also to greater
conceptual understanding, satisfaction with school, self-esteem, social adjustment, and school
completion rates.
The amount of motivation that a student has for reading determines whether the learning derived
will be meaningful, deep, and internalized, or if it will be trivial (Gambrell, Morrow & Pressley,
2007).

Theories on motivation
Theories abound on motivation. It has been defined on one extreme as the product of
environmental conditioning—of deprivation and reinforcement schedules. (Skinner, 1953) On
the other extreme, individuals like Carl Rogers (1951) and Abraham Maslow (1954) adopt a
humanistic approach where motivation is almost entirely a byproduct of free will and an internal
drive for self-actualization. Bandura’s (1969) social learning theory argued that learning and
motivation were a result not just of the environment or the individual’s free will but a
combination of the two. Gagné (1985) advised that both internal and external conditions existed
that influenced learning and motivation.
Wigfield (1994) developed the expectancy-value model of achievement choice as a framework

for understanding young children’s and adolescent’s choices and performance in mathematics.
Bembenutty (2008) discusses Jacquelynne Eccles expectancy-value theory and describes how
this model demonstrates that people are most likely to do things they perceive that they are good
at doing and when they consider what they are doing high in value. Eccles and Wigfield (2002)
believe that the expectations for an individual’s performance and the amount of value that a
person places on the task is highly socialized according to cultural settings in which one grows
up.
Motivation is difficult to define and measure, but scholars generally recognize two major types:
intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is the desire to do or achieve something because one
truly wants to and takes pleasure or sees value in doing so.


Extrinsic motivation is the desire to do or achieve something not so much for the enjoyment of
the activity itself, but because it will produce a certain result. The difference between the two is
more like a spectrum than a divide; any action can be motivated by a combination of intrinsic
and extrinsic factors, and the same person may be motivated differently in different contexts.
According to Dev (1997), “A student who is intrinsically motivated . . . will not need any type of
reward or incentive to initiate or complete a task. This type of student is more likely to complete
the chosen task and be excited by the challenging nature of an activity.” There is compelling
evidence that students who are more intrinsically than extrinsically motivated fare better (Brooks
et al., 1998; Lumsden, 1994).
Pachtman and Wilson (2006) found that motivation can develop from intrinsic or extrinsic
stimuli. Intrinsic motivation is developed through the choice of literacy activities based on
individual interest and the child’s beliefs that he/she can successfully complete the reading task.
Lapp and Douglas (2009) expand on this notion, finding that peer influence and intrinsic
motivation are primary factors associated with encouraging teens to want to read.
When students read for aesthetic reasons (Rosenblatt, 2005), they are motivated because the
reading provokes feelings, ideas, and attitudes that are linked through private, past experiences.
Therefore, when students’ readings evoke connections to individual responses, they will be more
likely to want to continue to read.
Metsala, Wigfield, and McCann (1997) suggest that if children are intrinsically motivated to read
and self-satisfied, they will increase the frequency with which they read.
Pachtman and Wilson (2006) discovered from their research findings that supplying ample books
in the class library, allowing students to choose their own books, participating in book counts
and celebrations, being able to visit the class library every day, and recording books in book logs
were the top results from student questionnaires and surveys on student motivation.

MARKETING10
& RESEARCH, INC.

Intrinsically motivated students:
• Earn higher grades and achievement test scores, on average, than extrinsically motivated
students (Dev, 1997; Skinner & Belmont, 1991)
• Are better personally adjusted to school (Skinner & Belmont, 1991)
• Employ “strategies that demand more effort and that enable them to process information
more deeply” (Lumsden, 1994, p. 2)
• Are more likely to feel confident about their ability to learn new material (Dev, 1997)
• Use “more logical information-gathering and decision-making strategies” than do
extrinsically motivated students (Lumsden, 1994, p. 2)
• Are more likely to engage in “tasks that are moderately challenging, whereas
extrinsically oriented students gravitate toward tasks that are low in degree of difficulty”
(Lumsden, 1994, p.2)
• Are more likely to persist with and complete assigned tasks (Dev, 1997)
• Retain information and concepts longer, and are less likely to need remedial courses and
review (Dev, 1997)
• Are more likely to be lifelong learners, continuing to educate themselves outside the
formal school setting long after external motivators such as grades and diplomas are
removed (Kohn, 1993)
Some research demonstrates that using extrinsic motivators to engage students in learning can
both lower achievement and negatively affect student motivation (Dev, 1997; Lumsden, 1994).
Students who are motivated to complete a task only to avoid consequences or to earn a certain
grade rarely exert more than the minimum effort necessary to meet their goal. And when students
are focused on comparing themselves with their classmates, rather than on mastering skills at
their own rate, they are more easily discouraged and their intrinsic motivation to learn may
actually decrease. Brooks et al. (1998) observe that while external rewards sustain productivity,
they “decrease interest in the task, thereby diminishing the likelihood that the task will be
continued in the future.”

MARKETING11
& RESEARCH, INC.

It should be noted here that there are also researchers who object to describing student
motivation as either intrinsic or extrinsic. Sternberg and Lubart (as cited in Strong, Silver, &
Robinson, 1995) for example, argue that this division is too simple to reflect the many complex
and interrelated factors that influence students’ motivation to succeed in school. They point out
that most successful people are motivated by both internal and external factors.
As Bandura explains, “perceived efficacy is a judgment of capability; self-esteem is a judgment

of self-worth” (Bandura, 2006; Mohajer & Earnest, 2009). High self-efficacy has been shown to
predict better performance in academics and sports; increased happiness, job satisfaction, and
persistence; improved safe sex practices; and successful smoking cessation and prevention (de
Vries et al., 1988; Judge & Bono, 2001; Kalichman & Nachimson, 1999; Martin & Gill, 1991;
Multon et al., 1991; Natvig et al., 2003). A meta-analysis conducted by Stajkovic and Luthans
(1998) found that self-efficacy accounted for a 28% improvement in work-related performance.
Evidence suggests that high self-esteem is related to high social support and resilience (Dumont
& Provost, 1999; Hoffman et al., 1988), whereas low self-esteem is related to depression,
anxiety, and suicidal ideation (Newbegin & Owens, 1996; Overholser et al., 1995; Rosenberg et
al., 1995). Boden and colleagues (2008) found self-esteem to be an important “risk marker
variable, with low self-esteem being associated with a range of negative outcomes.”
Gambrell, Palmer, Codling, and Mazzoni (1996) found that the amount of motivation a student
has to read depends on the amount of value students place on the particular reading task. These
researchers discuss the expectancy component of Eccles’s theory of motivation because it
extends the belief that students need to find personal value in reading. Students who believe they
are capable and knowledgeable readers will have more success than students who do not have
such positive thoughts.
Hidi (2001) found interest was a clear indicator of the quality of learning derived from reading.
When students’ interests were activated, readers were encouraged to go beyond the surface
elements of the text and focus on more elaborate, higher-order thinking skills, to help them

MARKETING12
& RESEARCH, INC.

uncover the underlying meaning of the main ideas. Flowerday, Schraw, and Stevens (2004)
emphasize that materials that students find interesting affect the application and transfer of
deeper text processing. What students find interesting they consider meaningful (Fink &
Samuels, 2008).
Components of reading motivation identified by Baker and Wigfield et al., (1999) include:
(a) self-efficacy, (b) interest, (c) preference for challenge, and (d) social interaction (Baker &
Wigfield, 1999; Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997).
Bandura et al., (1996) finds there are four dimensions that define reading motivation. These are
defined below. At least one of these must be present for a student to be motivated (Bandura,
1996; Dweck, 2010; Murray, 2011; Pintrich, 2003; Ryan & Deci, 2000; Seifert, 2004)
• Competence — the student believes he or she has the ability to complete the task.
• Control/autonomy — the student feels in control by seeing a direct link between his
or her actions and an outcome and retains autonomy by having some choice about
whether or how to undertake the task.
• Interest/value — the student has some interest in the task or sees the value of
completing it.
• Relatedness — completing the task brings the student social rewards, such as a sense
of belonging to a classroom or other desired social group or approval from a person
of social importance to the student.
Christensen, Horn, and Johnson (2010) believe efforts to motivate students often founder
because the incentives are defined from the educator's point of view and not the student's.
They hypothesize that there are two core goals most students try to achieve every day: To feel
successful and make progress, and to have fun with friends. They note that educators operate as
if the delivery of education – their product — is the objective. As a result, the activities in
schools generally are not integrated in ways to help students be successful every day. The key
events embedded within typical curricula that might help students feel successful—examinations

MARKETING13
& RESEARCH, INC.

and grades—are not sufficiently related in time to the performance they measure to reinforce the
desired behaviors (Christensen, Horn, & Johnson, 2010).
The researchers posit that all students are equally motivated to feel successful. For some, school
is a viable means for achieving this goal. This group likely includes those whose parents provide
a clear link between academic achievement and career success; those whose intellectual
capacities were honed through repeated, sophisticated verbal interaction with adults before the
age of three; and those whose way of learning or interests match that of their particular teachers.
Students who do not obtain feelings of success from school are not unmotivated to feel
successful. They simply do not or cannot feel successful at school, which often makes them feel
like failures. Correctly integrating activities in ways that would help students feel successful
every day might include a “project-based” learning strategy, in which students are organized into
teams and then undertake meaningful projects that require them to master the reading, writing,
math, science, and social science skills that the school wants them to learn. This method
integrates the delivery of curriculum with experiences that enable students to feel successful and
have fun with their friends every day (Christensen, Horn, & Johnson, 2010).
Computer-based learning can also be an important mechanism for achieving student-centric

learning and is discussed later in this report. By its very nature, software allows achievement to
be integrated with the delivery of content in ways that help students feel successful while they
learn. Achievement comes from completing reviews or examinations that are built into the
software. These require students to demonstrate mastery before they can move to the next body
of material. Feedback can be delivered frequently and in bite-sized pieces, as necessary, to help
each student feel successful.


MARKETING14
& RESEARCH, INC.

Factors for change
An ample body of research suggests that reading motivation and consequently performance can
be changed for the better (Brooks, Freiburger & Grotheer, 1998; Dev, 1997; Skinner & Belmont,
1991).
Focusing on student interests in selecting reading materials may be more beneficial in promoting
reading success than a focus on reading level. It turns out that interest is far more significant than
readability. When students have strong interest in what they read, they can frequently transcend
their reading level (Worthy, 1996). Many educators and researchers consider interest to be an
essential factor in all learning (Hidi, 1990; Schiefele, 1991).
Hidi (2001) found that all types of interests – topic and situational – serve as powerful
determinants that contributed to students’ increased recognition, comprehension, and recall.
Interest was a clear indicator of the quality of learning derived.
Under the right circumstances, a challenging task can be motivating. It often requires students to
use prior knowledge and construct an understanding of a topic. This practice increases the
personal meaning that students attach to an activity, therefore, increasing the likelihood of
becoming engaged in an activity (Miller, 2003).
Vygotsky (1978) argues that one internalizes the higher cognitive abilities applicable to reading
through social interaction. He perceived learning as a profoundly social process, suggesting that
individuals master their surroundings when immersed in dialogue and engaged in the social
construction of meaning.
Brooks et al., (1988) outline the following steps toward changing students’ motivation:
1. Ensure course materials relate to students’ lives and highlight ways learning can be
applied in real-life situations (Lumsden, 1994; Skinner & Belmont, 1991).
Schoolwork should be meaningful to students outside the school building, as well as
within. Students are more engaged in activities when they can build on prior
knowledge and draw clear connections between what they are learning and the world

MARKETING15
& RESEARCH, INC.

in which they live. They also need to feel that “school work is significant, valuable,
and worthy of their efforts” (Policy Studies Associates, 1995).
2. Allow students to have some degree of control over learning (Brooks, et al., 1998).
This can be done in any number of ways, from giving students choices between
different assignments, to minimizing adult supervision over group projects, to letting
students monitor and evaluate their own progress (Anderman & Midgley, 1998; Dev,
1997; Policy Studies Associates, 1995). “Even small opportunities for choice, such as
whether to work with a partner or independently” give students a greater sense of
autonomy (Anderman & Midgley, 1998).
3. Assign challenging but achievable tasks for all students. Tasks that seem impossible
easily discourage learners as do those tasks that are rote and repetitive (Dev, 1997;
Policy Studies Associates, 1995). Remedial programs that limit students to repetitive
basic skills activities actually “prompt students’ lack of engagement in their school-
work and frequently result in limited achievement.”
4. Arouse students’ curiosity about the topic being studied. Strong, Silver, and Robinson
(1995) suggest using the “mystery” approach, in which students are presented with
fragmentary or contradictory information about a subject and are then asked to
examine available evidence to develop their own hypotheses. Give students an
opportunity to direct inquiry and “discover for themselves.”
5. Design projects that allow students to share new knowledge with others. Strong,
Silver and Robinson (1995) observe that when students do assignments that only the
teacher will read, they are entering into a non-reciprocal relationship. Projects are
more engaging when students share what they are learning in reciprocal relationships
where each student’s knowledge is needed by others in the group to complete an
assignment.

MARKETING16
& RESEARCH, INC.

Importance of knowledge to reading and comprehension
Awareness about the world is needed to give context and meaning to words. More serious than
skill deficiencies are knowledge deficiencies that arise for children who have limited access to
the informal informational lessons that can be transmitted through day-to-day interactions with
the world around them.
Indications are that limited content knowledge might ultimately account for what appear to be
comprehension difficulties (Vellutino et al., 1996) or higher-order thinking difficulties in older
children.
Real leverage may be found in the continual, systematic, everyday ways children are engaged in
learning new knowledge and information, starting in the early years. Frede (1998) reported
children who had a broad base of experience in domain-specific knowledge were likely to move
more rapidly in acquiring complex skills. Basic skills must be used to develop coherent
understandings of knowledge and concepts, which are the very basic foundations for later
learning.
According to a recent literature review, there is a scarcity of informational text in primary-grade

classrooms (and, to some extent, throughout elementary school) (Palincsar & Duke, 2004). Low
income first-grade students were given extensive exposure to informational genres in an
experiment. By the end of the year, the experimental group of children was better writers of
informational text than children in the control groups, had progressed more quickly in reading
level, and had shown less decline in attitudes toward recreational reading (Palincsar & Duke,
2004).
Flowerday, Schraw, and Stevens (2004) identify differences and similarities between the
importance of topic interest and situational interest. They find that these variables correlate with
one another and result in positive outcomes. The researchers define topic interest as something
that students have prior knowledge about, personal experiences with, and that evokes some sort

MARKETING17
& RESEARCH, INC.

of emotion. Situational interest is defined as something that depends on the present context and
tends to be informational in content.
Situational interest often precedes and facilitates an individual’s development of personal

interest. When combined these are an excellent way to activate students’ attention, increase
effort, engagement, and maintain deeper mental processing levels.

The enjoyment of reading comes from comprehension, not decoding words. Skilled readers
‘interact’ with a text, thinking about what will happen next, creating questions about the main
characters and so on. Children who love to read have good comprehension skills.
Elements of Reading Comprehension

Identifying and summarizing the main idea Identifying cause & effect

Comparing & contrasting Recognizing sequence of events
Identifying supporting facts and details Identifying story elements such as main

characters, settings, plot, conflict, and solution
Making inferences & drawing conclusions Identifying the author’s purpose and point of

view
Predicting outcomes Interpreting literary devices such as imagery,

symbolism, and metaphors
Recognizing fact & opinion Recognizing realism versus fantasy
Hidi (2001) found that all types of interests (topic and situational) served as powerful
determinants that contributed to students’ increased recognition, comprehension and recall.
Interest was a clear indicator for the quality of learning derived. Students’ interests were
activated, which influenced readers to go beyond the surface elements of the text and focus on
more elaborate, higher-order thinking skills, to help them uncover the underlying meaning of the
main ideas.

MARKETING18
& RESEARCH, INC.

Flowerday, Schraw, and Stevens (2004) emphasize materials that interest students affect the
application and transfer of deeper text processing.

Effects of individual temperament on reading motivation
Temperament is a broad, multidimensional construct that can be defined as an individual’s style

of response to stimuli in the environment (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). Attributes such as intensity
and activity levels, persistence, affect, and behavioral inhibition are temperamentally based child
characteristics that may contribute to teacher-child relationship quality. Certain attributes ease
children’s adjustment into student roles (Entwisle & Alexander, 1998).
People can be categorized into behaviorally inhibited and uninhibited styles. These
characteristics are highly salient and fairly stable over time. People who are apprehensive toward
new people, events, and things are categorically different from others who approach novelty with
ease (Caspi & Silva, 1995; Kagan, Snidman, & Arcus, 1992). They have a biologically based
predisposition to be inhibited.
In the general population, approximately 15% to 20% of people are inhibited, about 30% to 35%
of people are uninhibited, and the remainder of the population falls somewhere in between
(Kagan, 1997; Kagan et al., 1992; Kagan, Snidman, & Arcus, 1998). These classifications
remain fairly stable for 60% of children through at least age 9 (Kagan et al., 1998).
Children’s school experiences vary in part because of their temperamentally based individual
differences. Children who are inhibited are highly reactive; that is, they show fear in new
situations (Kagan, 1994). Kagan and colleagues (1992) reported that children who are
uninhibited are low reactive and approach-oriented in new situations, and display fewer fears at 9
and 14 months than their high reactive counterparts. Therefore, high reactivity and fear together
predict social inhibition in school.

MARKETING19
& RESEARCH, INC.

Research shows that bold or uninhibited children are more socially competent and therefore have
more interactions with teachers than their less-bold counterparts (Lerner et al., 1985; Patrick,
Yoon, & Murphy, 1995; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2002; Rimm–Kaufman & Kagan, 2005;
Skarpness & Carson, 1986). In addition, they are viewed by their teachers as more verbal and
academically competent compared to their shy counterparts (Lerner et al.).
On the other hand, inhibited children appear to fit well into student roles because they are likely
to be more compliant and refrain from speaking out of turn (Keogh, 2003). However, because of
their quiet style, they may elicit less attention from their teachers than uninhibited children;
additionally, they may receive less conversation and verbal feedback from their teachers, both of
which contribute to children’s early learning in the preschool classroom.
Uninhibited children appear to be more affected than other children by the sensitivity of their
teachers, with teacher sensitivity predicting more self-reliance, more positive affect and fewer
negative and off-task behaviors among socially bold children, but not for their wary counterparts
(Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2002). These findings suggest that bold children receive more exposure
to the teacher than inhibited children.

Average and gifted students
There is notable variability among average students. Both inter-individual and intra-individual
differences are observed. Treating the class as a homogeneous group and providing the same
lesson at the same time to all the students favors only a small fraction of the students (Blancas et
al., 1985).
The goal is to enhance the fit between the students’ personal needs and ways of learning and the
pedagogical activities. If each student operates in his or her “zone of proximal development,” a
concept proposed by the Russian psychologist and educator Lev Vygotsky (Vygotsky, 1978;
Wozniak, 1980), then quality education will be achieved. The speed with which students

MARKETING20
& RESEARCH, INC.

progress can vary between students (inter-individual differences) but can also vary across
learning domains for a particular student (intra-individual variability).

Average students
University of South Carolina researchers found that average students believe that their effort,
more than their innate abilities, helps them to get ahead (Holland, 2000). In one experiment,
teachers told the students what their reading levels were and shared specific strategies for
improving their understanding of text. Included among these strategies were frequent quizzes so
students could break difficult material into smaller chunks. Early in the semester, teachers’ first
tests were designed to help every student score well. After two tests, teachers sent home notes to
boost students’ self confidence by congratulating them for having A averages. The difficulty of
subsequent tests was gradually increased. Threats of bad grades were ineffective with average
students but success motivated them (Holland, 2000).
Stevens (2001) described interest as a motivational device to encourage reading growth among
students. If a gifted student has an interest in a particular topic, he/she tends to apply a
significant amount of effort to reading about it using superior reading skills. This application of
effort in turn resulted in improved reading comprehension overall.
While personal interest in the subject matter is important to motivate reading for all ability
levels, the average or below average students are generally not sufficiently motivated by personal
interests alone to apply the significant effort required to tackle material above or beyond their
level or ability which hinders further progress. In part this may be due to lack of the topical or
general knowledge of the world around them that forms the framework for comprehending
information related to those interests. Flowerday, Schraw, and Stevens (2004)
However, as the USC researchers discovered average and below average readers are motivated to
exert effort to read what they believe they can succeed in comprehending. That is, when they are
given strategies for improving their understanding of text and when material is initially at or

MARKETING21
& RESEARCH, INC.

below their reading level to build confidence. The USC researchers found this method of
coupling technique with initial successes to be an effective way of increasing students’
motivation to read and their comprehension of progressively more difficult material.
Characteristics of Average Students

Generally hard workers Positive self-‐concept
Believe their academic success is due to effort,
Lack independent work habits
not talent
Blend into classrooms by fitting in
Cooperative, well-‐behaved
or staying in the background
Wide variation in academic performance;
Like to please
inconsistent
What Motivates Average Students

Material that is interesting and important more Discussions, cooperative learning, research
than difficult projects, opportunities to move beyond standard
“seat work”
Teachers who care about them and Success, not the threat of bad grades. They need
communicate their high expectations to know their hard work matters.
Realistic targets; teachers must tell them in The chance to earn effort grades as well as
advance of an assignment what standards they achievement grades
need to reach and how they can earn good
grades

Gifted students
Contrary to popularly held conceptions, research suggests that gifted children are not gifted
across all domains. They tend to have heterogeneous ability profiles, where abilities are
expressed especially strongly in one domain (such as mathematics) and average in others. Thus
an individualized educational program that allows gifted students to remain in their regular class
for certain subjects and to be in enriched or advanced classes for other subjects may be the best
overall solution given these pupils' cognitive and social needs.

MARKETING22
& RESEARCH, INC.

Motivating behaviors and interventions
Of the several theoretical perspectives most often used in motivation research, achievement goal
theory is, as the name indicates, most directly applicable to goal-setting. Achievement goal
theory posits that students’ academic motivation can be understood as attempts to achieve goals
(Seifert, 2004, p. 142). To feel competent, students need to see their goals as realistic and
achievable, which may require altering the goals or altering students’ perceptions of their own
abilities. To feel in control, students must be able to see a clear path to achieving the goal,
through means they can control rather than through luck or chance. Control is also maximized
when students set goals themselves, or at least agree with and internalize goals set for them by
someone else.
Goal theorists generally break education goals into two groups: “mastery” (or “learning”) goals
and “performance” goals. Mastery goals involve increased understanding, skills, and content
knowledge. Performance goals, on the other hand, involve reaching a pre-defined performance
level or outperforming others. Researchers have consistently found that students who have a
mastery goal in mind exhibit deeper cognitive processes, strategize more effectively, and are
more adaptable to challenges.
Performance-oriented students show more adverse reactions to failure, see less of a link between
effort and outcome, and focus more on their performance relative to the performance of others
(Pintrich, 2003; Seifert, 2004). The same student can have different mindsets and goals in
different contexts.
To implement motivational strategies, Hunter states it is often necessary to begin with extrinsic
motivation and outline a path that lets students see that they can generate intrinsic motivation
themselves—that they can set their own best effort and operate at the top of their potential.
Initially, when the focus is on extrinsic motivation, the students are doing the work to please
their teachers, or because they are told the result is going to be good. But as they continue to

MARKETING23
& RESEARCH, INC.

work, they can develop greater intrinsic motivation. Students can be motivated by showing them
methods for visualizing and making concrete their own progress. Charts or reading logs can help
students keep track of the number of books they have read, the new words they have learned, or
the amount of time they have spent (e.g., Braunger & Lewis, 1998). Students need to know
what to expect. If they know something about what is coming up, they can get excited about it.
Children like to know what their peers think. They also like knowing their opinion is valued.

Students’ learning can be optimized by developing a sense of autonomy through reading
instruction that cultivates their abilities to make their own choices and to take responsibility for
their own actions. This freedom leads to the development of intrinsic motivation (Fink &
Samuels, 2008). When this occurs, students develop an inherent satisfaction with learning
because they believe they are in control, rather than being controlled (Stroudt, 2010).
Wigfield and McCann (1997) find autonomy to be a crucial element in fostering children’s
confidence that they can read. Building upon students’ own interests and curiosity about different
topics and immersing them in a variety of books is a proven way to do so. Students who believe
that they have ownership over their leaning are motivated, self-determining, and self-regulated.
Research shows that letting students select their own books helps to increase interest value and
boosts motivation (e.g., Wigfield, 1994). A wide variety of texts should be provided that are
interesting and appropriate for students’ age range and personally relevant to individuals.
Students should be matched to “just right” texts on their reading level that are challenging
enough to maintain interest and foster a sense of achievement but not so difficult that they are
discouraged. The teacher pushes the student to grow, while still making sure that it is possible for
the student to succeed (e.g., Gambrell, Palmer, & Codling, 1993; Morrow, 1996).
Flowerday, Schraw, and Stevens (2004) examined the effects of choice, topic interest, and
situational interest on reading engagement, attitude, and learning and discovered that when
students are able to select their own reading materials they tend to report that they enjoyed the
task much more. Therefore, their attitude improves and they find the task to be more valuable.

MARKETING24
& RESEARCH, INC.

Rich (2009) finds that students will value reading if they are able to choose their own books.
Students who chose a novel for class became engaged with it because they were interacting with
it, not just reading to find answers.

The collecting instinct
G. Stanley Hall, one of America’s first students of the “child mind,” proposed instruction should
be a kind of collecting game where students are encouraged to gather scraps of information on
literature, geology, and so on Folsom, (1915); Bernstein, (2011). Others, including educator
Elizabeth Howe, thought the method would work best if it took as its starting point the collecting
interests of each individual child Howe, (1906).
There may be a relationship between motivation, book selection and personal library-building or
book logging activity and children’s behavioral proclivity to build collections.
Following a study of 90 first through fifth-grade students, Baker and Gentry suggest that children
are naturally motivated to collect because they (1) enjoy the process of collecting as it allows
them to escape boredom and sometimes reality, (2) learn or satisfy curiosity about their
collecting domain, (3) satiate a passion for the objects which are desired, (4) want to differentiate
themselves from others, and (5) desire to associate with others, especially family and friends.
Children often have multiple motives for collecting (Baker & Gentry, 1996).
The motives with which the collecting process is approached and the tasks associated with it aid
children in their developmental process and in their search for identity. In an exploration of
collecting in consumer research, Belk et al. (1991) suggest that two basic motivations can be
used to explain collecting: legitimization and self-extension. Legitimization motives are
characterized by collectors behaving within boundaries that the social world will accept.
Behavior which is done for “rational” purposes (e.g., creating, investing, building history) is not
considered to be self-indulgent if one labels it as “collecting.” Self-extension motives are
characterized by a desire to enhance or improve the self.

MARKETING25
& RESEARCH, INC.

What you really collect is always yourself. Whether your collection serves as a public display or
as a private preserve, it is a form of expression where you materialize that abstract thing called
the self, where you can thus see and handle yourself, even talk to yourself, taking comfort in the
way objects stabilize you as a subject.
Fifth-grade participants in the Baker and Gentry study appreciated collecting because it made
them unique. None of the first-graders talked about this value of collecting.
The role of family appears to be central to the collecting process, especially in a modeling sense.
There was modeling evident; for example, a few of the children mentioned that their collections
were started because of their parents’ or grandparents’ influence or interest. The involvement of
adults in the collections also results in longer term expectations for collecting. The major role
played by family in the collecting by the child is in its facilitation, by easing the child’s entry
into the process (Baker & Gentry, 1996).
Most mentions were of gifts that started the collection or of continuing additions on birthdays
and other holidays. Friends were also important motivators for children’s collecting behaviors.
For example, modeling of friends’ collecting behaviors was evident. Many children, especially
the first-graders, compared their material possessions to those of others. They suggested that
collecting was a way of getting “more” of something than others have. The facilitating role
played by parents diminishes as the child gains access to resources (Baker & Gentry, 1996).
Formanek (1991) found that collectors were motivated by investment, obsession, preservation,
and legitimization of the personal and social self. One thing all collectors have in common is
their passion for the items that they collect. Ease of entry is an important component of the type
of collection children pursue, as evidenced by the prominence of items that can be picked up
without cost or received as a small gift. Gender norms seem to affect what is collected. The
influence of movies, cartoons, and advertising on collections is also apparent. Children are able
to express the goals they have in their collecting and enjoy talking about it. However, they are
more likely to do things rather than to ponder why they do them.

MARKETING26
& RESEARCH, INC.

Collecting is a kind of play that results in something to play with. These intrinsic satisfactions
have much to do with the “playability” of free choice collectibles, with how readily they inspire
an absorbing make-believe. Single function items or objects overly tied to pre-existing
narratives, for instance, often do not allow for the free rein of imagination. Things amenable to
symbolic transformation by the child best inspire play.
Collecting, like all forms of playing, exercises critical imaginative and cognitive skills. The items
collected served as repositories of distributed intelligence - handling, arranging and classifying
concrete objects, animating and empathizing in make believe adventures. Children explore an
embodied feel for the logical, narrative and social relationships of abstract knowledge. For a
time, the objects that are collected store both the “what” and the “how” of inner life as the child
learns to think, to imagine and to reflect. Sometimes a collection is not just a collection, but a
spur to the imagination, to learning and creating (Bernstein, 2011).
First-graders displayed vivid imaginations about what collecting means. Older children had both
more traditional collections and more traditional perspectives of what collecting entails. Further,
they were able in many cases to take a more active role in the acquisition of their collections due
to their access to more resources.
Although children have different definitions for collecting, they seem to have some expectations
as to what collecting will provide to them. Collecting was seen by many respondents as
something to do. Many said they collected because collecting is “fun” and because they enjoy
doing it. Not only is collecting enjoyable for children, but it also helps them to relieve their
boredom or put order in their lives. Besides using collecting as an escape from boredom, children
also use collecting as something to do to escape from reality. Some children suggested they
collected just because they enjoyed looking at their things. First-graders were much more likely
to acquire collections that served a functional purpose. Many informants saw their collection as
a way of “doing” something for the future. Gender and age differences were noted in this

MARKETING27
& RESEARCH, INC.

“collecting as investment” perspective. Males mentioned expectations concerning their collection
growing in value.
Several of the children, boys in particular, talked about how they used their collections to learn
about features or phenomena related to them. The study found clear evidence of curiosity, at
least as conceptualized by Loewenstein’s (1994) information gap model. The children talked
about how they learn about their collections, which included talking to friends or reading books;
however, they also often mentioned catalogs, magazines, and stores as important sources of
information. One motive for most children in collecting was to find something that they like.
The intense passion for collecting evident in adult collectors (Baker & Mittelstaedt, 1995; Smith
& Lee, 1994) was not as clearly evident among pre-adolescents. Similar to adults, the interviews
with children show evidence of high enduring involvement both in the frequent maintenance
activities observed and the description of their “learning” activities related to their collections.

Rewards as motivation
On the whole, research shows that reward programs can have positive effects if they are
implemented thoughtfully, carefully, and within a set of guidelines, and if they address the four
dimensions of motivation: competence, autonomy, interest, relatedness. Rewarding students for
mastery of a discrete task, skill, or subject, such as reading a book or solving a problem, works
better than rewarding them for performance, such as reaching a certain benchmark on a test.
Rewards that are too large can be counterproductive because students may feel pressured into
taking part. At the same time, poorly designed reward programs can actually decrease motivation
if they are targeted at the wrong students, do not build on the four dimensions of motivation, or
are implemented ineffectively (Lepper, 1973).
Parents who are actively involved in their children’s education and provide a stimulating
learning environment at home help their children develop feelings of competence, control,
curiosity, and positive attitudes about academics, according to various studies. Reading to
children, talking with children about what they read, interacting with children about academics,

MARKETING28
& RESEARCH, INC.

and celebrating moments of intellectual discovery are among the activities that promote
achievement and motivation. Parents’ beliefs and expectations also appear to strongly influence
children’s motivation.
Triarchic instruction
A series of studies with elementary and middle-school students showed that triarchically based
instruction involving a combination of analytic, creative and practical activities led to better
quality learning than traditional memory-oriented lessons or lessons based on only analytic,
critical thinking. Multiple angles are offered on each topic, and these approaches reinforce
learning through the multiple exposures— analytic, creative and practical—to a topic.
The triarchic approach is implicitly child-centered because there is something for each child in
the program that all children receive. Individual differences are taken into account when the
program is constructed because the program responds to a diversity of pupils. This approach
does not advocate individualized academic standards nor individualized ways of reaching a
common goal.
Analytic instruction emphasizes comparisons, contrasts, evaluation, and judgment. Creative

instruction focuses on inventing, discovering. Traditional memory-based instruction focuses on
straightforward knowledge acquisition (when, where, who, how). Practical instruction concerns
real-world applications and implications. This last component directly concerns the development
of the knowledge needed to build society and more generally social intelligence and cultural
knowledge.
In general, students who received triarchic instruction both (a) outperformed students receiving
analytic-critical thinking or traditional, memory-based instruction, and (b) reported that they
liked their lessons more than the analytic and traditional instruction groups (Sternberg, Torff, &
Grigorenko, 1998). The group receiving triarchic instruction outperformed other groups

MARKETING29
& RESEARCH, INC.

on analytic, creative and practical, performance measures but also on traditional memory-based
measures of learning.

A study of 708 fifth-grade students showed that triarchic methods were more powerful than
traditional methods for reading instruction (Grigorenko, Jarvin, & Sternberg, 2002). The research
included a pre-test of reading skills (with no difference between the instructional groups),
instruction via triarchic or traditional methods. A post-test showed significantly better
performance for students in the triarchic instructional condition. Nearly eighty-one percent of
students (80.8%) reported that they liked the program; teachers also liked it, and found that it
addressed a wide range of students’ needs.

Motivating factors reported by students
Edmunds and Bauserman (2006) conducted a series of interviews with school children. Six
factors, or categories, were identified that appeared to get children excited about reading
expository and narrative text and about reading in general.
Category 1: Reading narrative text

The most popular factors leading to enthusiasm for reading were personal interests, book
characteristics, and choice.
Characteristics of the books included exciting book covers, action packed plots, and humor. The
importance of choice was revealed throughout the interviews as children shared the books they
were reading or had recently read: 84% of the children discussed books they had selected
themselves.
Category 2: Reading expository text

Children’s responses focused on the influence of the knowledge gained by reading the book, on
the relationship between the book and their personal interests, and on choice.

MARKETING30
& RESEARCH, INC.

Category 3: Reading in general
This category included characteristics of books and the opportunity to gain knowledge. Children
enjoyed books that were funny or scary or had great illustrations. The children also placed a
great deal of importance on the information they could learn from reading books.
Category 4: Sources of book referrals

Access to books is critical to the amount of reading children do and to their reading achievement
(Gambrell & Marinak, 1997). Children overwhelmingly reported that they found out about their
books from the school library. Other libraries such as the classroom library and the local or
county library were also mentioned but not as frequently. When discussing the narrative text they
were reading, the children often identified their teacher as the person who introduced books to
them. In terms of influence on their reading choices, children most frequently responded that
their mother had the greatest influence, followed by other family members and peers.
Category 5: Sources of motivation:

Children’s interest in and excitement about reading was sparked by various individuals including
family members (especially mothers), teachers, and themselves.
Category 6: Actions of family members, teachers, and peers

After discovering who motivated the children to read, the actions of these individuals were
examined. Three themes emerged: buying or giving children books, reading to them, and
sharing books with them. The two most (and equally) frequent responses were: buying or giving
books to the children and reading to them.

Technology’s motivational role
There is a need to offer students a variety of educational tools, such as interactive exercises and
games that may promote motivation to learn and thereby enhance learning (Gee, 2003; Mayer,
2011; Mintz & Nachmias, 1998).

MARKETING31
& RESEARCH, INC.

Students in online environments may choose their own learning path based on their preferences
and needs. Their choice is exercised, for example, by the type or amount of content they
consume, the time they dedicate to learning, and the effort they are willing to make (Sims &
Hedberg, 1995). Motivated students consume more content and use more tools, dedicate more
time to thinking, and make an effort to answer questions correctly (e.g., Cocea & Weibelzahl,
2007).
Online learning environments contain a variety of educational tools to enhance students’

knowledge and skills in a specific subject domain. These tools are often rich in media such as
simulations, games, and other interactive tools (Mayer, 2011). The most prevalent tool for
students are the drills in which they get immediate feedback regarding the accuracy of their
answers (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2005; Weiss & Muller, 2008). It helps students to assess their
knowledge and competence and to focus on their learning process (Chickering & Gamson, 1987;
Gibbs & Simpson, 2004).
In some studies, it was found that these tools have achieved only limited success in helping
students develop advanced knowledge and skills. The reasons mentioned in this regard are that
such tools have been poorly designed and are simplistic, boring, and repetitious, and they do not
allow users any possibilities for active exploration (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004; Schank,
2005).
Games are another common tool in online environments. A growing volume of research
indicates that games have promising potential as learning tools. Alongside their ability to
improve students’ knowledge and skills, they generate motivation for learning by means of
components such as competition, fun, and creativity (Gee, 2003; Gredler, 2004; Mintz &
Nachmias, 1998). Some studies even point out the link between playing games and learning
outcomes (Klopfer, Osterweil, & Salen, 2009; Mor, Winters, Cerulli, & Björk, 2006; Sandford,
Ulicsak, Facer, & Rudd, 2006).
There is a problem in integrating games into formal education (Jantke, 2006; Weiss & Muller,
2008). Research has found that there is a lack of acceptance of games as an educational tool
among the majority of teachers as well as among many students. The reason for this is that

MARKETING32
& RESEARCH, INC.

games tend to be perceived as a leisure time activity with no pedagogic value (de Freitas, 2006;
Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2005; Schrader, Zheng, & Young, 2006).
Assessment of learners’ motivation in online environments has been a challenge for researchers
as well as developers due to the fact that it is a difficult factor to evaluate without physically
observing the students in the learning process. Extracting students’ actions from well prepared
log files can help to achieve this goal for a large population of students (Castro, Vellido, Nebot,
& Mugica, 2007; Merceron & Yacef, 2005; Pahl, 2004; Srivastava, Cooley, Deshpande, & Tan,
2000).
Motivation usually impacts on the behavior of students in the learning environment and
determines the amount of content and tools they consume, the way they consume them, and the
effort they are willing to make on a specific assignment (Cocea & Weibelzahl, 2007; Dweck,
1986; Hershkovitz & Nachmias, 2008). In addition, in some cases, motivation influences the
learning outcomes (Martinez, 2003).
Current research places special emphasis on the features of games, such as the challenge, control,
and competition that can generate internal motivation (Gee, 2003; Gredler, 2004; Mayer, 2011).
Tracing the students’ actions in the learning environment makes is possible to assess students’
actions. Beck (2004), in his study, built a model to predict students’ engagement by measuring
the difficulty of the questions, the student’s response time, and the accuracy of his answer. Cocea
and Weibelzahl (2007) tested the students’ engagement by variables such as the number of pages
read, the number of tests taken, and the time spent on the assignment. Hershkovitz and Nachmias
(2009) developed a measuring tool for motivation which focuses on: the extent of engagement
and its energization and source based on variables such as time on task percentage, average
session duration, and average pace of activity within sessions.
Greater motivation to learn was found in the drills and the self-test than in the learning game. An
unexpected finding in both units was that students played the learning games the least and

MARKETING33
& RESEARCH, INC.

focused on drills and self-tests, although, chronologically, the games appeared before the self-
tests, and the self-tests were located on different web pages.
These findings reveal the need to explore in greater length under which conditions learning
activities, in general, and games, in particular, should be integrated into online learning
environments (Ben-Zadok, Leiba, & Nachmias, 2011)

E-‐books
E-books provide students with many options to improve their literacy development. De Jong,
(2004); De Jong and Bus, (2003); Doty, Popplewell, and Byers, (2001); Shamir and Korat,
(2007) discuss the various e-book components they determined to be of benefit. Features include
multimedia and interactive components and the promotion of reading independence and
enjoyment.
Multimedia additions such as dynamic, film-like visuals, story sound effects, printed, and
spoken text invite children to interact with textual displays on the computer. De Jong and Bus
believe these dynamic visuals help to evoke feelings, moods, and attitudes that help to improve
children’s ability to make inferences about story events.
Shamir and Korat (2007) report that highlighting written phrases as the text is read orally by an
actor has the potential to advance children’s literacy development through the exposure to the
connection between oral and written language. It improves word recognition skills and enriches
vocabulary. Closely following the written words allows students to focus on the entire word and
make connections between its features and its parts. Post assessment results by Shamir and
Korat (2007) show that the activation of hot spots within the text that offered certain types of
assistance affected children’s recall of the story better than when the complete story had just
been read aloud to them several times. These interactive features contribute to the advancement
of emergent phonological awareness and word recognition. Doty, Popplewell, and Byers (2001)
researched the differences between young readers’ reading comprehension when one group read

MARKETING34
& RESEARCH, INC.

an interactive CD-ROM storybook and the other group read from a conventionally printed book.
The mean scores for comprehension questions were much higher for the group reading the
interactive CD-ROM storybook suggesting the interactive exchange of information between the
reader and the text lessens the decoding burden allowing the focus to be placed on meaning. De
Jong and Bus (2004) and Robinson (2003) have found that e-books are not only good for
teaching and learning important literacy skills but they are also a tool for promoting reading
independence and enjoyment.
E-book features also provide distractions that can hinder literacy development. De Jong and Bus
(2004) report that the multimedia and interactive elements within e-books have drawbacks that
detract from literacy development. Oral narrations of the text frequently do not relate to the
interactive animations. Sound effects create interruptions that interfere with the oral narration
and the visual effects encourage children to think of the stories more as games. All of these tend
to diminish the reader's comprehension.

Gaming

In recent years, there has been rapidly increasing interest in educational games. Some of this
interest has been based on the hypothesis that games will lead to better affect than existing
learning environments.
There is evidence that educational games may not have entirely positive effects on learners’
affect and motivation. Bragg (2007) found that students exhibited negative attitudes toward the
use of games as the main instructional method for learning mathematics. Vogel (2006) argues
that games and simulations that fail to make seamless connections between the subject matter
and the game play will also inhibit learners’ engagement and motivation.
In the research reported here, we have found that a traditional intelligent tutoring system can
produce equally good—or better— effect as an award-winning educational game. The key
question, therefore, appears not to be which type of learning environment is better, but how we

MARKETING35
& RESEARCH, INC.

can leverage the best practices developed by each of these design communities in order to
develop a new generation of engaging and educationally effective learning environments.
While factors such as fantasy may make games more fun (Cordova & Lepper, 2006), the
interactivity and challenge common to both games and intelligent tutors may play a larger role in
making games affectively positive learning environments.
It has been found that intelligent tutoring systems lead to significantly improved Affect and
motivation as compared to traditional, non-computerized learning contexts (Schofield, 1995),
though not necessarily to expert human tutors. Intelligent tutors generally lack game-like features
like competition and fantasy, but share in common with games features such as instant
feedback and measures of continual progress
Online collaboration
In a learner-centered online collaborative environment, students work together to construct
knowledge and negotiate meanings through group-based collaborative learning activities.
Online collaborative learning is supported by socio-cultural theory positing that an individual’s

cultural development appears twice and on two levels; first on the social, and later on the
psychological level, that is, first between people as an inter-psychological experience, and later
as an intra-psychological experience (Vygotsky, 1998; Bonk & King, 1998; Ge, Yamashiro, &
Lee, 2000).
Based on this theory, assumptions can be drawn about collaborative learning and knowledge
building, which require communication, collaboration and negotiation on the common ground of
shared ideas, values and beliefs (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
Recent practices have contributed to the growing body of knowledge on collaborative learning;
for example, the use of online asynchronous environments for project and inquiry based learning
(Collis, 1998). Harasim (1990) also emphasizes that teamwork enhances connectivity and socio-
MARKETING36
& RESEARCH, INC.

emotional engagement in the learning process as well as creates an intellectual climate that
encourages participation. In other words, a well designed online environment is conducive to
both learners’ affective and cognitive development.
The literature also acknowledges that cognitive achievement and metacognitive strategies are not
sufficient to promote student achievement and that students must also be motivated to learn
intentionally and in a self-regulated manner (Pintrich, 1989).
Student motivation is underpinned by a number of theoretical models and theories. The most
commonly applied is the expectancy value model of motivation (Schunk, 1994). According to
Pintrich & De Groot (1990), there are three motivational components that may be linked to the
different models of self-regulated learning:
1. An expectancy component: Students’ beliefs about their ability to perform a task;
2. A value component: Students’ goals and belief about the importance of the task; and
3. An affective component: Students’ emotional reactions to the task.
A review of the literature on self and peer assessment indicates that in order to promote the
development of these skills, the environment should be designed to encourage participants to:
• Have a clear understanding of the objectives
(Orsmond, Merry, & Reiling, 1996; Stefani, 1994);
• Identify valid assessment criteria
(Falchikov, 1995; Ford, 1997; Klenowski, 1995; Sluijsmans, Dochy, & Moerkerke, 1999;
Sullivan & Hall, 1997; Topping, Smith, & Swanson, 2000);
• Accurately and objectively judge success or failure (Oldfield & MacAlpine, 1995;
Woolhouse, 1999); and
• Become self-regulated and self-motivated.
Self-assessment refers to people being involved in making judgments about their own learning
and progress, which contributes to the development of autonomous, responsible and reflective
individuals (Sambell, McDowell, & Brown, 1998; Schon, 1987). This is also supported by Boud

MARKETING37
& RESEARCH, INC.

(1992), who has expressed the defining characteristics of self-assessment as: the involvement of
students in identifying standards and/or criteria to apply to their work and making judgments
about the extent to which they have met these criteria.

E-‐mail as a motivational tool

It appears that simple, cost-effective, and easy-to-design mass e-mail messages show potential
for addressing some of the motivational needs and retention concerns associated with students
using electronic learning devices. With their simplicity and ease of use, motivational e-mails
represent another tool that distance educators can employ to complement other motivational
efforts.
Numerous scholars highlight the general lack of research concerning the motivational needs of
online learners (Astleitner & Keller, 1995; Gabrielle, 2003; Huett et al., 2007; Means, Jonassen,
& Dwyer 1997; Shellnut, Knowlton, & Savage 1999; J. Visser & Keller, 1990). According to
Song and Keller (2001), instructional designers often ignore motivational design concerns in
web- or site-based, computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and incorrectly assume that the novelty
effect of the technology is enough to stimulate learner motivation.
A need exists for simpler approaches to motivating and retaining online learners that are
appropriate for the audience, the delivery system, and the course. Such methods should be cost-
effective, fit within the time restraints of the class, and be easily integrated into the instruction.
One such approach that shows promise is the creation of simple, systematically designed mass
e-mail messages based on established ARCS (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and
Satisfaction) model principles (Gabrielle, 2003; Huett et al., 2008; Keller & Suzuki, 2004; L.
Visser et al., 2002; L. Visser, Plomp, & Kuiper, 1999).
Keller and Burkman (1993) acknowledge that motivation is often thought of as solely a product
of learner personality and perceptions—much of which is assumed beyond the control of the
instructional designer. However, they believe that providing for motivation is largely the

MARKETING38
& RESEARCH, INC.

responsibility of the designer. Additionally, they feel that motivation is a systematic process that
must be considered during all stages of design.
Many learners initially find web-based environments like distance education and other CAI
programs novel or fun. This often translates into a temporary increase in learner motivation.
Unfortunately, if the CAI is poorly designed or lacks continuing motivational appeal beyond that
of an initial novelty level, learners will eventually lose interest, and motivation and confidence
will wane (Keller & Suzuki, 1988).
To stimulate and manage student motivation to learn, Keller (1987a, 1987b, 1987c) created the
ARCS model of motivation. ARCS is short for (A)ttention, (R)elevance, (C)onfidence, and
(S)atisfaction and serves as the overall framework for the motivational mass e-mail messages.
The ARCS model is an attempt to synthesize behavioral, cognitive,
and affective learning theories and demonstrates that learner motivation can be influenced
through external conditions.
The attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction categories serve as a framework for
developing instructional strategies for capturing and maintaining learner attention, establishing
relevance of the material being taught, improving and sustaining learner confidence, and
providing a sense of learner satisfaction through intrinsic and extrinsic rewards.
Keller’s ARCS model more neatly parallels Bean and Eaton’s (2000) retention model, which
emphasizes the key concepts of locus of control, self-efficacy, and approach-avoidance theory as
integral to the student’s commitment to persist. Additionally, established research into general
retention theory often makes a connection between learner persistence and core ARCS principles
such as motivation, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction (Andreu, 2002; Dille & Mezack,
1991; Tinto, 1975, 1993, 2007).

MARKETING39
& RESEARCH, INC.

Keller’s ARCS model enjoys support in the literature, and researchers have applied its guidelines
to different learning and design environments. For example, ARCS research can be found
concerning the traditional classroom (Bickford, 1989; Klein & Freitag, 1992; Means,
Jonassen, & Dwyer, 1997; Moller, 1993; Naime-Diefenbach, 1991; Small & Gluck, 1994; J.
Visser & Keller, 1990); computer-assisted instruction (Astleitner & Keller, 1995; Bohlin &
Milheim, 1994; ChanLin, 1994; Lee & Boling, 1996; Shellnut, Knowlton, & Savage, 1999;
Song, 1998; Song & Keller, 1999; Suzuki & Keller, 1996); blended learning environments
(Gabrielle, 2003); and online, distant, and web-based classrooms (Chyung, 2001; Huett, 2006;
Song, 2000; L. Visser, 1998).
There is some limited research directly applicable to ARCS-based motivational messages. For
instance, Keller and Suzuki (2004) cited a 1998 report by L. Visser outlining a 70% to 80%
improvement in retention rates of distance learners when motivational messages based on the
ARCS model were used. Additionally, with their ARCS-based motivational communications,
L. Visser, Plomp, and Kuiper (1999) and L. Visser et al. (2002) found that motivational
messages “considerably increased the completion rates of students.”
Of the research available, J. Visser (1990) showed an increase in learner motivation through the
use of motivational messages in a conventional classroom. L. Visser, Plomp, and Kuiper (1999)
and L. Visser et al. (2002) used the ARCS model as a guide for developing motivational
communications with international distance education students. They found positive outcomes
for learner motivation. They also found no statistically significant difference between the use of
mass messages versus personalized messages and recommended using mass messages to
increase “the chance of successful implementation” (1999, 410). Additionally, L. Visser (1998)
conducted a pilot study and a main study using the Motivational Messages Support System
(MMSS), upon which the e-mails in this study were partly based. In both studies, she found that
the messages increased the confidence levels of students. Also, she found no statistically
significant difference in the use of mass messages versus personalized messages in terms of
effectiveness.

MARKETING40
& RESEARCH, INC.

References
Abraham, C; Graham, J. (2009). Reading: Breaking through the barriers, http://www.multilit.com/wp-‐
content/uploads/Reading-‐Breaking-‐Through-‐the-‐Barriers-‐Australia.pdf].
Anderman, L.H., & Midgley, C. (1998). Motivation and middle school students [ERIC digest]. Champaign, IL: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421
281.

Andreu, M. L. (2002). Developing and implementing local-‐level retention studies: A challenge for community
college institutional researchers. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 26 (4): 333–344.

Astleitner, H., and J. Keller (1995). A model for motivationally adaptive computer-‐assisted instruction. Journal of
Research on Computing in Education 27 (3): 270–280.

Baker and Gentry (1996). Kids as Collectors-‐ A Phenomenological Study. U. of Nebraska.

Baker, Stacey Menzel and Robert A. Mittelstaedt (1995), "The Meaning of the Search, Evaluation, and Selection of
'Yesterday's Cast-‐offs': A Phenomenological Study into the Acquisition of the Collection," in Enhancing Knowledge
Development in Marketing, Barbara B. Stern and George M. Zinkhan (Eds.), 152.

Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Bandura, A. (1996). Social cognitive theory of human development. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.),
International Encyclopedia of Education (2nd ed., pp.5513-‐5518). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for Constructing Self-‐Efficacy Scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and
Education: Self-‐Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents (Vol. V, pp. 307-‐337). Greenwhich: Information Age Publishing.

Baudrillard, J. (1968). Le système des objets in Brown 2001 University of Chicago.
Bean, J. P., and S. B. Eaton (2000). A psychological model of college student retention. In Reworking the student
departure puzzle, ed. J. M. Braxton, 48–61. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Beck, J. E. (2004). Using response times to model student disengagement. In Proceedings of the Workshop on
Social and Emotional Intelligence in Learning Environments, 7th International Conference on In-‐telligent Tutoring
Systems, Maceio, Brazil.

Belk, R. (1991), "Possessions and the Sense of the Past," in Highways and Buyways: Naturalistic Research from the
Consumer Behavior Odyssey, ed. Russell W. Belk, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 114-‐130.

Bembenutty, H. (2008) Self-‐Regulated Learning: New Directions for Teaching and Learning: Wiley.

Ben-‐Zadok, G. Leiba, M. Nachmias, R (2011) Interdisciplinary Journal of E-‐Learning and Learning Objects Volume 7.

Berliner, D. C. (1981). Academic learning time and reading achievement. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and
teaching: Research reviews (pp. 203–226). Newark, DE:International Reading Association. [cited in Student
Attitudes toward Reading, Seitz(2010) Journal of Inquiry & Action in Education, 3(2), 2010].

Bernstein, R and Bernstein, L. Childhood collecting a neglected connection between playing and learning.
Psychology Today, July 2011.

MARKETING41
& RESEARCH, INC.

Bickford, N. (1989). The systematic application of principles of motivation to the design of printed instructional
materials. Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, Tallahassee.

Blancas, A., Blancas, R., Dejaune, A., Mur, D., Ramplon, A.(1985). Pourquoi ? Comment ? Démarrer en pédagogie
Freinet. Cannes, France : CEL.

Boden, J. M., Fergusson, D. M., & Horwood, L. J. (2008). Does adolescent self-‐esteem predict later life outcomes? A
test of the causal role of self-‐esteem. Development and Psychopathology, 20(01), 319-‐339.

Bohlin, R., and W. Milheim (1994). Applications of an adult motivational instructional design model. Paper
presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, February, Nashville, TN.
ChanLin, L. 1994. A case for assessing motivation from learning a computer assisted instruction. ERIC, ED 376803.

Bomia, L., Beluzo, L., Demeester, D., Elander, K., Johnson, M., & Sheldon, B. (1997). The impact of teaching
strategies on intrinsic motivation. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood
Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 418 925).

Boud, D. (1992). The use of self assessment schedules in negotiated learning. Studies in Higher Education, 17(2),
185-‐200.

Bragg, L (2007).: Students’ conflicting attitudes towards games as a vehicle for learning mathematics: A
methodological dilemma. Mathematics Education Research Journal 19(1), 29–44.

Braunger, J., & Lewis, J.P. (1998). Building a knowledge base in reading. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional
Educational Laboratory’s Curriculum and Instruction Services.

Brewster,C . Fager, J (2000): Increasing student Engagement Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Brooks, S.R., Freiburger, S.M., & Grotheer, D.R. (1998). Improving elementary student engagement in the learning
process through integrated thematic instruction. Unpublished master's thesis, Saint Xavier University, Chicago, IL.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421 274).

Caspi, A., & Silva, P. A. (1995). Temperamental qualities at age three predict personality traits in young adulthood:
Longitudinal evidence from a birth cohort. Child Development, 66.,

Castro, F., Vellido, A., Nebot, A., & Mugica, F. (2007). Applying data mining techniques to e-‐learning problems. In L.
C. Jain, T. Raymond & D. Tedman (Eds.), Evolution of teaching and learning para-‐digms in intelligent environment,
62, 183-‐221. Berlin: Springer-‐Verlag.

Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles to good practice in undergraduate education. Racine,
WI: The Johnson Foundation.

Christensen, C. Horn, M. Johnson, C. (2010) Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the
nd
World Learns 2 edition McGraw-‐Hill.

Chyung, S. Y. (2001). Systematic and systemic approaches to reducing attrition rates in online higher education.
The American Journal of Distance Education 15 (3): 36–49.


MARKETING42
& RESEARCH, INC.

Cocea, M., & Weibelzahl, S. (2007). Cross-‐system validation of engagement prediction from log files. In E. Duval, R.
Klamma, & M. Wolpers (Eds.), Creating new learning experiences on a global scale: Pro-‐ceedings of the Second
European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, EC-‐TEL 2007, Crete, Greece, September 17-‐20, 2007.

Collis, B. (1998). WWW-‐based environments for collaborative group work. Education and Information
Technologies, 3, 231-‐245.

Cordova, D.I., Lepper, M.R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of
contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology 88, 715–730.

Craig and Sarlo (2012) Improving Adolescent Literacy. Addressing Student Engagement and Motivation Issues
2012 Eye On Education, Inc. Larchmont, NY.

Dev, P.C. (1997). Intrinsic motivation and academic achievement: What does their relationship imply for the
classroom teacher? Remedial and Special Education, 18(1), 12-‐19.

de Freitas S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds: A review of game based learning. JISC (Joint informa-‐tional
Systems Committee) report. Retrieved 6 September 2009 from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/eli_outcomes.html

De Jong, M. T., & Bus, A. G. (2003). How well suited are electronic books to supporting literacy? Journal of Early
Childhood Literacy, 3, 147-‐164.

De Jong, M. T., & Bus, A. G. (2004). The efficacy of electronic books in fostering kindergarten children’s emergent
story understanding. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 378-‐393.

de Vries, H., Dijkstra, M., & Kuhlman, P. (1988). Self-‐efficacy: the third factor besides attitude and subjective norm
as a predictor of behavioural intentions. Health Educ. Res., 3(3), 273-‐282.

Dille, B., and M. Mezack. (1991). Identifying predictors of high risk among community college telecourse students.
The American Journal of Distance Education 5 (1): 24–35.

Doty, D. E., Popplewell, S. R., & Byers, G. O. (2001). Interactive CD-‐ROM storybooks and young readers' reading
comprehension. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 374-‐384.

Duke, N.D., Pearson, P.D., Strachan, S.L., & Billman, A.K. (2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching
reading comprehension. In S.J. Samuels, & A.E. Farstrup, What research has to say about reading instruction, 4th
edition (pp. 51-‐93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Dumont, M., & Provost, M. A. (1999). Resilience in Adolescents: Protective Role of Social Support, Coping
Strategies, Self-‐Esteem, and Social Activities on Experience of Stress and Depression. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 28(3), 343-‐363.

Dweck, C. S. (2010). Mindsets and equitable education (2011). Montessori elementary philosophy
reflects current motivation theories. Montessori Life, 23(1), 22-‐33.

Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-‐1048.

Eccles, J. and Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational Beliefs, Values and Goals Annual Review of Psychology. 53:109–32
Edmunds and, Bauserman (2006). Reading motivation reported by students. The Reading Teacher Vol. 59, No. 5
February 2006


MARKETING43
& RESEARCH, INC.

Egenfeldt-‐Nielsen, S. (2005). Beyond edutainment: Exploring the educational potential of computer games. PhD
thesis, University of Copenhagen.

Entwisle, D. R., & Alexander, K. L. (1998). Facilitating the transition to first grade: The nature of transition and
research on factors affecting it. The Elementary School Journal, 98, 351–364.

Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and
Training International, 32, 175-‐187.

Fink, R., & Samuels, J. S. (2008). Inspiring reading success: Interest and motivation in an age of high-‐stages testing.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Flowerday, T., Schraw, G., & Stevens, J. (2004). The role of choice and interest in reader engagement. The Journal
of Experimental Education, 72(2), 93-‐114.

Folsom (1915) Pedagogical Seminary in Bernstein 2011 Psychology Today.
Ford, A. (1997). Peer group assessment: Its application to a vocational modular degree course. Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 21(3), 285-‐298.

Formanek, Ruth (1991)., "Why They Collect: Collectors Reveal Their Motivations," Journal of Social Behavior and
Personality, 6(6), 275-‐286.

Frede, E. (1998). Preschool program quality in programs for children in poverty. In W.S. Earnett and S.S. Boocock
(eds), Early care and education for children in poverty: Promises, programs, and long-‐term outcomes. 77-‐98. New
York:State University of New York Press.

Gabrielle, D. (2003). The effects of technology-‐mediated instructional strategies on motivation, performance, and
self-‐directed learning. Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, Tallahassee.

Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning, 4th ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, Inc.

Gambrell, L.B., Palmer, B., & Codling, R.M. (1993). Motivation to read. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Morrow, L.M. (1996). Motivating reading and writing
in diverse classrooms: Social and physical contexts in a literature-‐based program (NCTE Research Report No. 28).
Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Gambrell,L. & Marinak,B. (1997). Intrinsic Motivation and Rewards: What Sustains Young Children’s Engagement
with Text?. Literary Research and Instruction 47: 9-‐26, 2008. College Reading Association.

Gambrell, L. B., Palmer, B. M., Codling, R. M., & Mazzoni, S. A. (1996). Assessing motivation to read. The Reading
Teacher, 47, 518-‐533.

Ge, X., Yamashiro, K. A. & Lee, J. (2000). Pre-‐class planning to scaffold students for online collaborative learning.
Educational Technology and Society, 3(3), 159-‐167. http://www.ifets.info/journals/3_3/b02.html

Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave.

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004) Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning? Learning and
Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.


MARKETING44
& RESEARCH, INC.

Gredler, M. E. (2004). Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. Educational Technology Research
and Development, 21, 571-‐582.

Grigorenko, E., Jarvin, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (2002). School-‐based tests of the triarchic theory of intelligence: Three
settings, three samples, three syllabi. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 167-‐208.

Guthrie, Wigfield, Metsala & Cox (2009). Scientific Studies of Reading Vol. 3, Issue 3, 1999.

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in reading.
Journal of Educational Psychology. 92, 331-‐342. [cited in Student Attitudes toward Reading, Seitz(2010) Journal of
Inquiry & Action in Education, 3(2), 2010]

Harasim, L. (Ed.) (1990). Online Education: an environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification. New
York: Praeger

Hershkovitz, A., & Nachmias, R. (2008). Developing a log-‐based motivation measuring tool. The First International
Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM'08), Montreal, Canada. Retrieved from
http://www.educationaldatamining.org/EDM2008/uploads/proc/26_Hershkovitz_8.pdf

Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of
Educational Research, 60, 549-‐571.

Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology
Review, 13, 191-‐209.

Hoffman, M. A., Ushpiz, V., & Levy-‐Shiff, R. (1988). Social support and self-‐esteem in adolescence. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 17(4), 307-‐316.

Holland. H. (2000). You’ve got to know them to show them. Middle Ground,. Volume 3, Number 5, April 2000, 10-‐
13, National Middle School Association 2003.

Howe, (1906) The Collecting Instinct. Elementary School Teacher.

Huett, J. (2006). The effects of ARCS-‐based confidence strategies on learner confidence and performance in
distance education. Ph.D. diss., University of North Texas, Denton.

Huett,J. Kalinowski, K. Moller, L. (2008) Improving the Motivation and Retention of Online Students Through the
Use of ARCS-‐Based E-‐Mails. The Amer. Journal of Distance Education, 22: 159–176, 2008

Huett, J., L. Moller, J. Young, M. Bray, and K. Huett (2008). Supporting the distant student: The effect of ARCS-‐
based strategies on confidence and performance. Quarterly Review of Distance Education 9 (2): 113–126.

Hunter, P. (2005).Raising Students Who Want to Read. Scholastic Professional Papers.

Jantke, K. P. (2006). Games that do not exist: Communication design beyond the current limits. Proceed-‐ings of the
ACM Conference on Design of Communication.

Johnson, D. Johnson, R. (1996). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed),
Handbook of research for educational telecommunications and technology (pp. 1017-‐1044). New
York: Simon & Schuster.


MARKETING45
& RESEARCH, INC.

Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-‐evaluations traits-‐-‐self-‐esteem, generalized self-‐efficacy,
locus of control, and emotional stability-‐-‐with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-‐analysis. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80-‐92.

Kagan, J., Snidman, N., & Arcus, D. (1992). Initial reactions to unfamiliarity. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 171-‐174.

Kagan, J. (1992). Yesterday's premises, tomorrow's promise. Developmental Psychology, 28,
990-‐997.

Kagan, J. (1992). Behavior, biology, and the meanings of temperamental constructs. Pediatrics, Vol. 90, No.3, pp.
510-‐513.

Kagan, J. (1994). Galen’s prophecy: Temperament in human nature. New York: Basic Books.

Kagan, J. (1997). Temperament and the Reactions to Unfamiliarity. Child Development, Volume 68, Issue 1, 139–
143, February 1997

Kagan J, Snidman N, Arcus D (1998a): Childhood derivatives of high and low reactivity in infancy. Child
Development 69:1483–1493.

Kagan J, Reznick JS, Snidman N (1988b): Biological bases of childhood shyness. Science 240:167–171.

Kalichman, S. C., & Nachimson, D. (1999). Self-‐efficacy and disclosure of HIV-‐positive serostatus to sex partners.
Health Psychology, 18(3), 281-‐287.

Keller, C. (1983): Motivational Design of Instruction. In: Reige-‐luth,C.(ed.) Instructional Design Theories and
Models: An Overview of their current status. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.

Keller, J. M. (1987a). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and Instruction 26 (8): 1–7.

Keller, J. M. (1987b). The systematic process of motivational design. Performance and Instruction 26 (9): 1–8.

Keller, J. M. (1987c). Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational design. Journal of Instructional
Development 10 (3): 2–10.

Keller, J. M., and E. Burkman (1993). Motivation principles. In Instructional message design: Principles from the
nd
behavioral and cognitive sciences, 2 ed., eds. M. Fleming and W. H. Levie, 3–53. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational
Technology.

Keller, J. M., and K. Suzuki (1988). Use of the ARCS motivation model in courseware design. In Instructional designs
for microcomputer courseware,ed. D. H. Jonassen, 401–434. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Keller, J. M., and K. Suzuki (2004). Learner motivation and e-‐learning design: A multi-‐nationally validated process.
Journal of Educational Media 29 (3): 229–239.

Keogh, B. (2003). Temperament in the classroom: Understanding individual differences. Baltimore: Brookes.

Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning. Nesta Futurelab series, Report 8,
Bristol.


MARKETING46
& RESEARCH, INC.

Klamma, & M. Wolpers (Eds.), Creating new learning experiences on a global scale: Pro-‐ceedings of the Second
European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, EC-‐TEL 2007, Crete, Greece, September 17-‐20, 2007.

Klein, J. D., and E. T. Freitag (1992). Training students to utilize self-‐motivational strategies. Educational Technology
32 (3): 44–48.

Klenowski, V. (1995). Students’ self-‐evaluation processes in student-‐centered teaching and learning contexts in
Australia and England. Assessment in Education, 2(2), 145-‐163.

Klopfer E., Osterweil, S., & Salen K. (2009). Moving learning games forward. The education arcade, MIT. Available
at http://education.mit.edu/papers/MovingLearningGamesForward_EdArcade.pdf

Lapp, D., & Douglas F. (2009). It's all about the book: Motivating teens to read. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 57, 556-‐561.

Lee, S., and E. Boling (1996). Motivational screen design guidelines for effective computer-‐mediated instruction.
Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, November, Indianapolis, IN.

Lepper, M.R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R.E. (1973). Understanding children’s intrinsic interest with extrinsic
rewards. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129–137.

Lerner, J. V, Lerner, R. M., & Zabski, S. (1985). Temperament and elementary school children’s actual and rated
academic performance: A test of ‘goodnessof-‐fit’ model. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 26, 125–136.

Loewenstein, G. (1994). The Psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin,
116(1):75-‐98.

Lubart,T. Individual Student Differences and creativity for quality education 2004, Education for All Global
Monitoring Report, UNESCO 2005.

Lumsden, L.S. (1994). Student motivation to learn (ERIC Digest No. 92). Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 370 200).

MacIver, D.J., & Reuman, D.A. (1994). Giving their best: Grading and recognition practices that motivate students
to work hard. American Educator, 17(4), 24-‐31.

Martin, J. J., & Gill, D. L. (1991). The relationships among competitive orientation, sport-‐confidence, self-‐efficacy,
anxiety, and performance. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 23, 149-‐159.

Martinez, M. (2003, July). High attrition rates in e-‐learning: Challenges, predictors, and solutions. The e-‐Learning
Developers Journal. Retrieved on 25/02/2006 from http://www.elearningguild.com

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.

Mayer, R. E. (2011). Towards a science of motivated learning in technology-‐supported environments. Edu-‐cational
Technology Research and Development, 59(2), 301-‐308.

McLoughlin, C. Luca, J (2004) An Investingation of the motivational aspects of peer and self-‐assessment tasks to
enhance teamwork outcomes. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-‐Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort
zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 629-‐636. Perth, 5-‐8 December.
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/mcloughlin.html

MARKETING47
& RESEARCH, INC.

Means, T., D. Jonassen, and F. Dwyer (1997). Enhancing relevance: Embedded ARCS strategies vs. purpose.
Educational Technology Research and Development 45:5–17.

Mercedes, T. Rodrigo, Baker, R. D’Mello, S et al. (2007), Comparing Learners’ Affect While Using an Intelligent
Tutoring System. Human-‐Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.

Merceron, A., & Yacef, K. (2005). TADA-‐Ed for educational data mining. Interactive Multimedia Elec-‐tronic Journal
of Computer-‐Enhanced Learning, 7(1). Available at: http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/2005/1/03/index.asp

Metsala, J. L., Wigfield, A., & McCann, A. D. (1997). Children’s motivations for reading. The
Reading Teacher, 50, 360-‐362
Miller, S. D. (2003). How high-‐and low-‐challenge tasks affect motivation and learning: Implications for struggling
learners. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 39-‐57.

Mintz, R., & Nachmias, R. (1998). Teaching science and technology in the information age. Computers in education,
45-‐46, 25-‐31.

Mohajer, N., & Earnest, J. (2009). Youth empowerment for the most vulnerable: A model based on the pedagogy of
Freire and experiences in the field. Health Education, 109(5), 424-‐438.

Moller, L. (1993). The effects of confidence building strategies on learner motivation and achievement. Ph.D. diss.,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.

Mor, Y., Winters, N., Cerulli, M., & Björk, S. (2006). Literature review on the use of games in mathematical learning,
part I: Design. Report of the Learning Patterns for the Design and Deployment of Mathematical Games project.
Available at: http://lp.noe-‐kaleidoscope.org/outcomes/litrev/

Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-‐efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-‐
analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(1), 30-‐38.

Naime-‐Diefenbach, B. (1991). Validation of attention and confidence as independent components of the ARCS
motivational model. Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, Tallahassee.

Natvig, G. K., Albrektsen, G., & Qvarnstrom, U. (2003). Associations between psychosocial factors and happiness
among school adolescents. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 9(3), 166-‐175.

Neuman, S. (Spring 2006). How We Neglect Knowledge and Why. American Educator.

Newbegin, I., & Owens, A. (1996). Self-‐esteem and anxiety in secondary school achievement. Journal of Social
Behavior & Personality, 11(3), 521-‐530.

Oldfield, K. A., & MacAlpine, M. K. (1995). Peer and self assessment at tertiary level-‐an experiential report.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20(1), 125-‐132.

Orsmond, P., Merry, S. & Reiling, K. (1996). The importance of marking criteria in the use of peer assessment.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-‐250.

Overholser, J. C., Adams, D. M., Lehnert, K. L., & Brinkman, D. C. (1995). Self-‐Esteem Deficits and Suicidal
Tendencies among Adolescents. Journal of Amer Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(7), 919-‐928.


MARKETING48
& RESEARCH, INC.

Pachtman, A. B, & Wilson, K. A. (2006). What do the kids think?. The Reading Teacher, 59, 680-‐684.

Pahl, C. (2004). Data mining technology for the evaluation of learning content interaction. International Journal of
E-‐Learning, 3, 47-‐55.

Palincsar, A. S and Duke, N. K. (2004). “The role of text and text-‐reader interactions in young children’s reading
development and achievement,” The Elementary School Journal, 105(2), p. 183-‐197.

Patrick, H., Yoon, K. S., & Murphy, A. (1995, March). Personality characteristics, social competence, and early
school adjustment: A contextual and developmental perspective. Paper presented at the meeting for the Society
for Research in Child Development, Indianapolis, IN.

Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and
teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-‐686.

Pintrich, P. R. & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-‐regulated components of classroom
academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-‐40.

Policy Studies Associates (1995). Raising the educational achievement of secondary school students: An idea book.
Volume 1, summary of promising practices. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved October 4,
2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/Raising/vol1/

Pourchot (Eds), Adult learning and development: Perspectives from educational psychology (pp. 67-‐88). Mawah:
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Regalado, M. Goldenberg, C. and Appel, E. (2001) Building Community Systems for Young Children: Reading and
Early Literacy, in N Halfon, E Shulman and M Hochstein, eds., Building Community Systems for Young Children,
UCLA Center for Healthier Children, Families and Communities.

Rich, M. (2009). A New assignment: Pick books you like. New York Times September 10, 2009

Rimm–Kaufman, S. E., Early, D. M., Cox, M. J., Saluja, G., Pianta, R. C., Bradley, R. H., et al. (2002). Early behavioral
attributes and teachers’ sensitivity as predictors of competent behavior in the kindergarten classroom. Applied
Developmental Psychology, 23, 451–470.

Rimm–Kaufman, S. E., & Kagan, J. (2005). Infant predictors of kindergarten behavior: The contribution of inhibited
and uninhibited temperament types. Behavioral Disorders, 30, 329–346.

Robinson, L. (2003). Technology as a scaffold for emergent literacy: Interactive storybooks for toddlers. Young
Children, 58, 42-‐48.

Rogers, C. (1951). Client-‐centered therapy; its current practice, implications and theory. Oxford: Houghton Mifflin.

Rosenberg, M., Schooler, C., Schoenbach, C., & Rosenberg, F. (1995). Global Self-‐Esteem and Specific Self-‐Esteem:
Different Concepts, Different Outcomes. American Sociological Review, 60(1), 141-‐156.

Rosenblatt, L. (2005). Literature S.O.S.!. Making meaning with texts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (1998). Temperament. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook
of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional and personality development (5th ed., pp. 105–176). New York:
Wiley.

MARKETING49
& RESEARCH, INC.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-‐determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social
development, and well-‐being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-‐78.

Sambell, K., McDowell, L. & Brown, S. (1998). "But is it fair?": An exploratory study of student
perceptions of the consequential validity of assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 349-‐
371.

Sandford, R., Ulicsak, M., Facer, K., & Rudd, T. (2006).Teaching with games: Guidance for education. Futurelab:
Innovation in education. Available at: http://www.futurelab.org.uk/projects/teaching-‐ithgames/research/guidance

Schank, R (2005). Lessons in learning, e-‐learning, and training. New York: Wiley and Sons.

Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299–323.

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching and learning in the
professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-‐Bass.

Schrader, P. G., Zheng, D., & Young, M. F. (2006). Teacher’s perception of video games: MMOGs and the future of
preservice teacher education. Journal of Online Education, 2(3).

Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-‐efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-‐231.

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-‐regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist,
32, 195-‐208. [cited in Student Attitudes toward Reading, Seitz(2010) Journal of Inquiry & ction in Education, 3(2),
2010

Seifert, T. L. (2004). Understanding student motivation. Educational Research (46)2, 137-‐149.

Shamir, A., & Korat, O. (2007). Developing an educational e-‐book for fostering kindergarten children's emergent
literacy. Computers in the Schools, 24(1/2), 125-‐143.

Shellnut, B., A. Knowlton, and T. Savage (1999). Applying the ARCS model to the design and development of
computer-‐based modules for manufacturing engineering courses. Educational Technology, Research and
Development 47:100–110.

Sims, R., & Hedberg, J. (1995). Dimensions of learner control: A reappraisal for interactive multimedia instruction.
In J. L Pearce & A. Ellis (Eds.), First International Workshop on Intelligence and Multi-‐modality in Multimedia
Interfaces: Research and Applications, University of Edinburgh, Scotland.

Skarpness, L. R., & Carson, D. K. (1986). Temperament, communicative competence and the psychological
adjustment of kindergarten children. Psychological Reports, 59, 1299–1306.

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Free Press.
Skinner, E., & Belmont, M. (1991). A longitudinal study of motivation in school: Reciprocal effects of teacher
behavior and student engagement. Unpublished manuscript. University of Rochester, Rochester, NY. Cited in
Brewster,C & Fager, J: Increasing student Engagement Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 2000.

Slavin, R., Madden, N., Dolan, L., & Wasik, B. (1996). Every child, every school: Success for All. Corwin Press.


MARKETING50
& RESEARCH, INC.

Sluijsmans, D., Dochy, F. & Moerkerke, G. (1999). Creating a learning environment by using self-‐ peer and
co-‐ assessment. Learning Environments Research, 1, 293-‐319.

Small, R. V., and Gluck, M. (1994). The relationship of motivational conditions to effective instructional attributes:
A magnitude scaling approach. Educational Technology 34 (8): 33–40.

Song, S. H. (1998). The effects of motivationally adaptive computer-‐assisted instruction developed through the
ARCS model. Ph.D. dissertation., Florida State University, Tallahassee.

Song, S. H. (2000). Research issues of motivation in web-‐based instruction. Quarterly Review of Distance Education
1 (3): 225–229.

Song, S. H., and Keller, J. M. (1999). The ARCS model for developing motivationally-‐adaptive computer-‐assisted
instruction. Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, February,
Houston, TX.

Song, S. H., and Keller, J. M. (2001). Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-‐assisted instruction on the
dynamic aspects of motivation. Educational Technology, Research and Development 49:5–22.

Srivastava, J., Cooley, R., Deshpande, M., & Tan, P.T. (2000). Web usage mining: Discovery and applications of
usage patterns from web data. SIGKDD Explorations, 1.

Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-‐efficacy and work-‐related performance: A meta-‐analysis. Psychological
Bulletin, 124(2), 240-‐261.

Stefani, L. A. J. (1994). Peer, self, and tutor assessment: Relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-‐
75.

Sternberg, R. J., Torff, B., & Grigorenko, E. (1998). Teaching triarchically improves school achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 90(3), 374-‐384.

Stevens, K. (2001). The effect of topic interest on reading comprehension of higher ability
students. Journal of Educational Research, 73, 365-‐368.

Strong, R., Silver, H.F., & Robinson, A. (1995). What do students want? Educational Leadership, 53(1), 8-‐12.

Sullivan, K. & Hall, C. (1997). Introducing students to self-‐assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education, 22(3), 289-‐305.

Suzuki, K. & Keller, J. M. (1996). Applications of the ARCS model in computer-‐based instruction in Japan. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Japanese Educational Technology Association, August, Kanazawa,
Japan.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational
Research 45:89–125.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition, 2nd ed. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.


MARKETING51
& RESEARCH, INC.

Tinto, V. (2007). Research and practice of student retention: What next? Journal of College Student Retention:
Research, Theory, and Practice 8 (1): 1–20.

Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F. & Swanson, I. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing
between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-‐166.

U.S. Dept of Education (2005). National Center for Educational Statistics: National Assessment of Educational
Progress .

U.S. Dept of Education (2007). National Center for Educational Statistics: National Assessment of Educational
Progress.

U.S. Dept of Education (2009.) National Center for Educational Statistics: National Assessment of Educational
Progress.

Usher, A. Kober, N. Jennings, J.(2012). Student Motivation—An Overlooked Piece of School Reform. Center on
Education Policy, George Washington University.

VanLehn, K. (2006). The behavior of intelligent tutoring systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in
Education 16(3), 227–265.

Vellutino, F., Scanlon, D., Sipay, E., Small S., Pratt, A., Chen, R., et al. (1996). Journal of Educational Psychology, 88,
601-‐638.

Visser, J. (1990). Enhancing learner motivation in an instructor-‐facilitated learning context. Ph.D. diss., Florida State
University, Tallahassee.

Visser, J., and Keller, J.M. (1990). The clinical use of motivational messages: An inquiry into the validity of the ARCS
model of motivational design. Instructional Science 19:467–500.

Visser, L. (1998). The development of motivational communication in distance education support. Den Haag, The
Netherlands: CIP-‐gegevens Koninklijke Bibliotheek.

Visser, L., Plomp, T., and Kuiper, W. (1999). Development research applied to improve motivation in distance
education. Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, February,
Houston, TX.

Visser, L., Plomp, T., Arimault, R., and Kuiper, W. (2002). Motivating students at a distance: The case of an
international audience. Educational Technology Research and Development 50 (2): 94–110.

Vogel, J.J., Greenwood-‐Ericksen, A., Cannon-‐Bowers, J., Bowers, C.A. (2006): Using virtual reality with and without
gaming attributes for academic achievement. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 39(1), 105–118.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. (M. Cole, V. John-‐Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds). Cambridge, MA
: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1998). Mind in Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Bonk, C. J. & Kim, K. A. (1998).
Extending socio-‐cultural theory to adult learning. In M. C. Smith & T.

Weiss, S., & Muller, W. (2008). The potential of interactive digital storytelling for the creation of educational
computer games. Proceedings of Edutainment 2008, China, pp. 475–486. Springer.

MARKETING52
& RESEARCH, INC.

Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-‐value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective.
Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49-‐78.

Wigfield, A. (1994). The role of children's achievement values in the self-‐regulation of their learning outcomes. In
D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-‐regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational
applications (pp. 101-‐124). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wigfield, A. (1997). Children's motivations for reading and engagement. In J. T. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.),
Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp. 14-‐33). Newark, DE: International
Reading Association. Wigfield, A., & McCann, A. D. (in press). Children's motivations for reading. The Reading
Teacher.

Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children's motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of
their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology. 89, 420-‐433.

Woolhouse, M. (1999). Peer assessment: The participants' perception of two activities on a further education
teacher education course. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 23(2), 211-‐219.

Worthy, J. (1996). A matter of interest: Literature that hooks reluctant readers and keeps them reading. The
Reading Teacher, 50(3), 204-‐212.

Wozniak, R. H. (1980). Theory, practice, and the “zone of proximal development” in Soviet psychoeducational
research. ContemporaryEducational Psychology, 5, 175-‐183.

Yankelovich (2006) Cited in Kids & Family Reading Report (2006), Scholastic.


MARKETING53
& RESEARCH, INC.

Factors Affecting Reading Ability White Paper

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Factors Affecting Reading Ability White Paper

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

in School Age Children

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Wigfield (1994) developed the expectancy-value model of achievement choice as a framework

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

As Bandura explains, “perceived efficacy is a judgment of capability; self-esteem is a judgment

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Computer-based learning can also be an important mechanism for achieving student-centric

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

According to a recent literature review, there is a scarcity of informational text in primary-grade

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Situational interest often precedes and facilitates an individual’s development of personal

Elements of Reading Comprehension

Predicting outcomes Interpreting literary devices such as imagery,

Recognizing fact & opinion Recognizing realism versus fantasy

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Temperament is a broad, multidimensional construct that can be defined as an individual’s style

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Characteristics of Average Students

What Motivates Average Students

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Analytic instruction emphasizes comparisons, contrasts, evaluation, and judgment. Creative

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Category 1: Reading narrative text

Category 2: Reading expository text

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Category 4: Sources of book referrals

Category 5: Sources of motivation:

Category 6: Actions of family members, teachers, and peers

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Online learning environments contain a variety of educational tools to enhance students’

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

Online collaborative learning is supported by socio-cultural theory positing that an individual’s

3. An affective component: Students’ emotional reactions to the task.

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC

GUIDING CHANGE • INSPIRING CONFIDENCE • STRATEGIC