No abstract

No abstract

In a 3-year longitudinal, mixed-method study, 67 children in two schools were observed during literacy activities in Grades 1-3. Children and their teachers were interviewed each year about the children's motivation to read and write. Taking a grounded theory approach, content analysis of the child interview protocols identified the motivations that were salient to children at each grade level in each domain, looking for patterns by grade and school. Analysis of field notes, teacher interviews, and child interviews suggests that children's motivation for literacy is best understood in terms of development in specific contexts. Development in literacy skill and teachers' methods of instruction and raising motivation provided affordances and constraints for literate activity and its accompanying motivations. In particular, there was support for both the developmental hypotheses of Renninger and her colleagues (Hidi & Renninger, 2006) and of Pressick-Kilborne and Walker (2002). The positions of poor readers and the strategies they used were negotiated and developed in response to the social meanings of reading, writing, and relative literacy skill co-constructed by students and teachers in each classroom. The relationship of these findings to theories of motivation is discussed.

Three groups of high school science students (college‐bound and non‐college‐bound freshmen, college‐bound juniors and seniors) completed surveys measuring their beliefs in the utility of four kinds of study strategies, three types of motivational orientation to science (task orientation, ego orientation, and work avoidance), their reported ability, and attitude toward science. Results indicated that belief in the usefulness of strategies requiring deep processing of information was more strongly positively related to task orientation than to ego orientation in all groups. For the younger groups only, task orientation was positively related to belief in the utility of surface‐level strategies (e.g., rote memorization of facts). Task orientation proved to be the best predictor of student beliefs in deep‐processing strategies, above and beyond that explained by perceived ability and interest in science. The implications of these findings for the current and future goals of science educators are discussed.

No abstract