Analyzing and supporting reading and writing motivation: Outcomes of descriptive and intervention studies

Purpose. Many low achieving adolescents have difficulties with writing in school (Trapman, 2016). One important factor in students’ writing success is their writing motivation (Graham & Harris, 2012). For reading, a distinction has been made between positive (affirming) and negative (undermining) motivations: undermining reading motivations appear to constitute separate constructs that play an independent role in low-achieving students’ reading performance (Van Steensel, Oostdam, & Van Gelderen, 2019). In this study, we examine whether the same holds for low achieving adolescents’ writing.

Method. We administered a writing test (Trapman, 2016) and a writing motivation questionnaire based on an existing instrument for reading (Coddington, 2009; Van Steensel et al., 2019) to 326 low achieving students in Dutch prevocational education (Grade 7/9). The questionnaire aimed to measure affirming motivations (intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy) and undermining motivations (avoidance, perceived difficulty) for writing in school.

Results. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the questionnaire was adequate for measuring affirming motivations and undermining motivations for writing in school: all hypothesized types of motivation could be empirically distinguished. When analyzed separately, intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy were positively related to writing performance and avoidance was negatively related to writing performance. When combined, however, undermining motivations did not contribute to explaining differences in writing performance.

Conclusions. Undermining motivations for writing appear to work differently than undermining motivations for reading. In the presentation, we discuss possible explanations, and possible consequences for motivation theory and for writing education to low achievers.

Purpose. The number of students acquiring a basic level in reading comprehension is significantly lower for students enrolled in the vocational track in comparison with students in the academic and technical track (De Meyer et al., 2010). Additionally, these students are less intrinsically motivated to read (Mol & Jolles, 2014). Given the significance of proficient reading, the research literature calls for studies aiming at fostering vocational students’ reading expertise. More particularly, both stimulating reading motivation and comprehension is put central.

Method. A quasi-experimental intervention study in authentic classes with switching replication design (Abbuhl et al., 2013) is applied. The intervention theoretically departs from Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1991), aiming at fostering students’ psychological needs (i.e., autonomy, relatedness and competence). Approximately 400 9th-grade students from 29 classes participate. Multiple aspects of treatment fidelity (Fogarty et al., 2014) are investigated by means of teacher logbooks and regular classroom observations.

Results. The presentation will focus on (1) presenting the intervention design guidelines and the underlying theoretical and empirical rationale and (2) presenting the impact of the intervention. At present data collection is ongoing. Students’ evolution in autonomous and controlled reading motivation and reading comprehension performance will be analyzed using piecewise multilevel growth modelling, taking into account the nested data structure (i.e. students into classes) (Hox, 1994).

Conclusion. Implications (1) for theory on reading motivation and comprehension and (2) for educational literacy practice in vocational tracks will be discussed.