Running head: READING MOTIVATION

The Impact of Goals on Reading Motivation of Struggling Readers

Maureen Deming
EDU 699
Dr. Jessica York

READING MOTIVATION

2
Abstract

This research project explored the impact of goals on the reading motivation of struggling
readers. The ultimate aim was to create an effective, easy to use technique teachers can
implement in their classrooms. A protocol for a goal setting conference to be used with the
existing population of Tier II reading intervention students in grades 3-6 was created. Goals
were tracked using the Google Apps for Education platform. The Motivations for Reading
Questionnaire was used to measure reading motivation. The motivational impact of technology
use was measured by field observations.

READING MOTIVATION

3
Problem Statement

Reading is arguably the most crucial skill taught and learned in elementary school. For
years, common wisdom and reading research proposed that independent reading time was one of
the best ways to promote reading skill (Lawler & Wedwick, 2012). However, mandated
standardized testing and National Reading Panel research from the early 2000s has pushed
independent reading to the side in favor of component skill instruction (Lawler & Wedwick,
2012). This has led to an erosion of engagement in some readers (Marinak, 2013, p. 39),
resulting in lower reading performance among those students. According to the National Center
for Education Statistics, 65% of fourth graders were reading at or below the basic level in 2013
(Reading Is Fundamental, n.d.). Teachers need guidance on how to motivate their reluctant
readers.
Designing instruction for motivation leads to increased student motivation (Colakoglu &
Akdemir, 2010; Marinak, 2013). Motivated students spend more time reading (Lawler &
Wedwick, 2012), leading to better performance (Lawler & Wedwick, 2012; Padak & PotenzaRadis, 2010; Villavicencio & Bernardo, 2012). However, missing from the literature is research
on the aspects of motivation that matter most in fostering intrinsic motivation, specifically in
struggling readers, as well as the role of technology in developing motivation. Among the many
aspects of motivation in reading are choice of material, previous experience, self-confidence,
availability of enjoyable material, availability of independent-level material, and perceived value
of reading. An action research project applying constructs of motivation to instruction can yield
valuable insight into designing curriculum, classroom environments, and pedagogical techniques.
This, in turn, can help teachers and curriculum designers by creating guidelines for technologyinfused instruction that fosters intrinsic motivation.
The project will research the following questions:
1. Which aspects of reading motivation in struggling readers do goal setting and

READING MOTIVATION
tracking impact?
2. How can technology positively impact intrinsic motivation of struggling readers?

READING MOTIVATION

Review of Literature on Reading Motivation in Struggling Readers

Since the advent of No Child Left Behind in 2001, researchers have noted a decline in
student motivation as they progress through the grades, even in elementary school. This presents
a problem for educators, especially in this environment of high-stakes standardized testing, since
intrinsic motivation is a critical component for successful learning. This trend is especially
notable in reading motivation (Morgan & Fuchs, 2007). Since intrinsic motivation to read leads
to increased reading volume, and eventually better reading performance, (Lawler & Wedwick,
2012; Padak & Potenza-Radis, 2010; Villavicencio & Bernardo, 2012) determining concrete
ways to enhance motivation is crucial.
Reading motivation is multidimensional and therefore it is difficult to pinpoint which
facet, or facets, holds the key to increasing student motivation. Goal setting touches on many
aspects of reading motivation: autonomy, choice, challenge. The following is a review of the
literature on reading motivation as it pertains to struggling readers, goal-setting as it relates to
reading motivation, and the potential role of technology in aiding motivation, goal setting, and
goal tracking.
Reading Motivation Defined
At the most basic level, reading motivation is a desire to read. Many different models
attempt to further explain what those desires are and how reading motivation functions in the real
world. These models include antecedent and genuine motivation, autonomous vs. controlled
motivation, expectancy-value theory, and intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation.
Schiefele, Schaffner, Moller, and Wigfield (2012) consider antecedents to motivation vs.
genuine reading motivation. Antecedents consist of self-concept, self-efficacy, and task value,
all of which combine to create value of reading and an expectancy of successful reading.
Genuine reading motivation is attitude towards reading as well intrinsic and extrinsic

READING MOTIVATION

motivational factors.
A different model of motivation proposed by DeNaeghel, Van Keer, Vansteenkiste, and
Rosseel (2012, in De Naeghel & Van Keer, 2013) differentiates between autonomous and
controlled reading motivation. Autonomous motivation refers to reading for personal enjoyment
or because of personal significance. Controlled motivation, on the other hand, is reading to meet
an outside demand or internal pressure, such as guilt or fear. Both influence reading behavior in
school settings.
One long-standing model of motivation is Eccles (1983) expectancy-value theory. The
theory states that student investment and performance is related to self-efficacy and value given
to a particular activity (Marinak, 2013). Classroom practices that support self-efficacy and value
include: students choice of texts, collaboration, authentic purposes for reading and discussing,
opportunities for success, and control through self-monitoring (Marinak, 2013). Choice, social
aspects, and authentic reading have appeared in research throughout the past three decades as
positive motivational instructional features.
Each of the aforementioned models aligns closely with the dominant model of motivation
in education: intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation. Research reviews by Morgan & Fuchs (2007) and
Schiefele et al. (2012) confirm that intrinsic motivation, reading for personal enjoyment,
significance, or goals, is most beneficial for reading competence. It is worth noting that, while
extrinsic motivation is often shunned by educators as resulting in lowered motivation, there are
certain cases in which extrinsic motivation can bolster intrinsic motivation (Schiefele et al.,
2012).
While the literature agrees that motivation leads to higher performance, the variables that
mediate this relationship are still unclear. Some research indicates that the increased amount of
reading that comes with intrinsic motivation leads to improved reading competence (Lawler &
Wedwick, 2012; Padak & Potenza-Radis, 2010). However, Schiefele et al.s review (2012)

READING MOTIVATION

indicates that these results are inconclusive, and suggest that text difficulty may play a role in the
inconsistent results.
Goals may also mediate the relationship between motivation and performance. Smithson
(2012) found that personal goals facilitate increased participation in academic settings. This
study found that personal goal setting resulted in maintained or increased assessment scores, with
the largest gains for average and below average students. Mastery goals, also known as
knowledge or learning goals, are found to be more conducive to learning than are performance
goals. Performance goals center on obtaining positive outcomes and avoiding negative outcomes
(Worthy, Brez, Markman, & Maddox, 2011). Standardized testing is a common performance
goal setting. The next section discusses the impact of standardized testing on student motivation.
Over all, researchers agree that data points to a relationship between reading motivation
and learning outcomes (Morgan & Fuchs, 2007; Villavicencio & Bernardo, 2013). Research
agrees that reading motivation of all kinds, regardless of the model describing it, leads to more
reading and engagement in school. Another point of agreement is that reading motivation is
lower among students who struggle to read.
Struggling Readers and Lower Motivation
The correlation between low motivation and struggling readers gets stronger as students
age, a finding consistent with the decline in overall motivation (Morgan & Fuchs, 2007).
Wigfield, Guthrie, Tonks, and Perencevich (2004) posit that motivation is key to successful
reading, since reading requires effort and choice. Therefore, many struggling readers will choose
not to read, because the required effort to successfully read is overwhelming. This is one of
many possible causes of low reading motivation identified in the literature. Determining the root
of low motivation is crucial to providing students with the appropriate remedy (Serravallo,
2014).
One common cause of low reading motivation is a deficit or lag in reading skills. The

READING MOTIVATION

most common remedy for this is targeted instruction in the form of reading interventions (Lawler
& Wedwick, 2012). Skills intervention is necessary but not sufficient for increasing motivation
motivation intervention is also needed. Intrinsic motivation can grow with choice, autonomy,
collaboration, and meaningful questions and connections (Wigfield et al., 2004). Instructors
must be careful not to sacrifice reading instruction to focus on motivation, as students will not
grow as readers (Marinak, 2013).
Notably, research on students receiving reading intervention has found that the types of
instructional activities used impacts motivation. Lawler and Wedwick (2012) found that student
motivation decreased markedly in intervention groups that completed discreet skill exercise, but
no connected reading. Instead, authentic (real) reading, with meaningful discussions,
connections, and questions has proved to be most motivating (Lawler & Wedwick, 2012;
Marinak, 2013; Padak & Potenza-Radis, 2010; Serravallo, 2014). Activities that promote
coherence between content and skills taught in different subjects, and an appropriate level of
cognitive challenge are also motivating (Robertson, Dougherty, Ford-Conners, & Paratore,
2014).
Other instructional factors also impact motivation. Teachers beliefs about student
abilities shape the classroom environment, interactions between students and teachers, and
instructional practices. Negative beliefs about student abilities can result in lower motivation
and performance (Laguna-Riordan & Aguilar, 2009). It is critical to determine students specific,
individual needs through observation and data collection, and provide tailored small group or
one-on-one instruction that meets these needs. Since students respond to materials and resources
differently (Laguna-Riordan et al., 2009), teachers who learn their students interests and
strengths can provide material that holds their interest and attention (Robertson et al., 2014).
Lower motivation could also be driven by the individuals view of intelligence. Dweck
differentiates between an entity view of intelligence and instrumental-incremental view of

READING MOTIVATION

intelligence (in Vogler and Bakken, 2007). The entity view of intelligence means that
intelligence is fixed and uncontrollable. Students with this view tend to pursue performance
goals instead of learning goals. On the other hand, the instrumental-incremental view sees
intelligence as inconsistent and controllable by the individual. Students holding this view
believe they can control their effort to produce learning and to grow their intelligence (Vogler &
Bakken, 2007).
The literature offers several other possible explanations for low reading motivation
among struggling readers. Behavioral or learning difficulties can impact motivation (Serravallo,
2014). Students perception of their peers and parents involvement and engagement in reading
can impact their own motivation to read (Padak & Potenza-Radis, 2010). Even prior negative
experiences can lead to low motivation as a result of poor self-efficacy.
On a broader level, researchers have investigated the impact of federal legislation on
motivation, morale, and performance. The 2001 iteration of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA), popularly known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), required all schools
to set high standards for all students to achieve, to test student progress toward these standards,
and institute accountability mechanisms to ensure that all students attain the proficiency
standards (Laguna-Riordan, 2009, p. 136). Overall, NCLB has not met its stated goals of
narrowing the achievement gap and raising achievement for underperforming students (Husband
& Hunt, 2015; Laguna-Riordan et al., 2009). In fact, this legislation has resulted in a number of
unintended consequences, including lower teacher morale (Husband et al., 2015; LagunaRiordan et al., 2009). Laguna-Riordan et al. (2009) argue that NCLB does not address the root
social and emotional causes of poor performance: poverty, community and home life, and
socioeconomic status, all of which impact student motivation in school. In order to truly close
the achievement gap, these motivating factors must be addressed.

READING MOTIVATION

10

Goals and Motivation

A wide range of research suggests that setting personal goals for learning is beneficial for
student motivation (Robertson et al., 2014; Serravallo, 2014; Smithson, 2012; Vogler et al., 2007;
Wery & Thomson, 2013; Worthy et al., 2011). Goals motivate students by articulating
requirements for personal success and prompting self-monitoring and self-judgments of
performance (Smithson, 2012, p. 59). Goals set and tracked by students also instill a sense of
control, ownership, responsibility, and commitment (Smithson, 2012, p. 71), all aspects of selfefficacy. As part of a broader classroom environment, goal setting can support individual needs
and promote a love of reading (Padak & Potenza-Radis, 2010; Serravallo, 2014).
There are certain characteristics which make goals a good fit for any particular student.
Firstly, goals should be specific in order for students to have a clear idea of what they are
working towards (Serravallo, 2014; Smithson, 2012). Smithson (2012) cites a study by Schunk
(1991) in which groups of students working on math problems were given goals. One group was
given the goal of solving 20 problems in an hour; the other group was given the goal of working
productively (Smithson, 2012, p. 60). The first group, with the specific goal, had higher scores.
Goals should be measurable; students and teachers need to assess progress and adjust strategies
and instruction if needed. Thirdly, goals should be attainable. The goal be a better reader is
unwieldy. It involves many steps in many different areas (decoding, fluency, vocabulary, genre
knowledge, background knowledge, and comprehension of literal and deeper meanings) too
much for a student to tackle at once. However, if the process is broken into smaller manageable
chunks (smaller incremental goals), students have a much better chance of reaching those goals
and feeling the satisfaction that comes with accomplishment (Smithson, 2012). Finally, after the
goals are set, teachers must provide support, usually in the form of strategies, to help students in
their work (Serravallo, 2014). Goals give students a purpose for reading a destination to work

READING MOTIVATION

11

towards (Serravallo, 2014). Strategies and supports give students a way to navigate the road to
their destination. Interestingly, research by Vogler et al., (2007) suggests that instructional style,
such as setting incremental goals and providing supports in reaching goals, influences motivation
more than socioeconomic status or ethnicity.
Motivation can also be impacted by the type of goal a student harbors. Goals are
frequently classified as either mastery goals or performance goals (Worthy et al., 2011; Vogler et
al., 2007). Mastery goals promote learning and overall competence through effort, time and
practice, and are associated with higher motivation (Western Oregon University, 2012; Worthy et
al., 2011). On the other hand, performance goals stress external rewards and judgments. Often,
students with a performance goal orientation will display avoidance behaviors (learned
helplessness) for fear of negative judgments when being compared to their peers (Wery et al.,
2013; Worthy et al., 2011). Struggling readers will often display a performance goal orientation,
which may explain, in part, the Matthew Effect. Stanovich (1986, cited in Ciampa, 2012)
describes the Matthew Effect as the pattern where, over time, good readers get better and poor
readers remain weak (Ciampa, 2012, p. 83). The lower motivation indicated by performance
goals could be a factor in the continuing struggles of poor readers.
A third category, knowledge goals, sometimes called learning goals, is a very short-term
goal that applies to a particular instance of reading. Teachers will often call a knowledge goal
the purpose for reading. Knowledge goals are motivating for this very reason; they instill
purpose, a main aspect of motivation according to Pink (2009), into the act of reading.
Knowledge goals are also motivating in their ability to link the content areas, thus creating
coherence between educational settings (Robertson et al., 2014), which is helpful for struggling
learners.

READING MOTIVATION

12

Technology and Reading Motivation

Technology has become an integral part of todays classrooms, and many educators claim
an increase in student engagement and motivation when using technology. There a number of
ways in which technology aligns with theories of motivation and learning, thus resulting in
higher student interest and performance. Chief among these is the fact that technology connects
students lives in school with their lives outside of school (Conradi, 2014; Ertem, 2013; United
States Department of Education Office of Educational Technology, 2010). Students are often
adept at navigating the internet, computers, and mobile devices for personal enjoyment, and
teachers who leverage that skill in their instruction find higher motivation among their students.
It is not just the process of using technology that connects learning to students home lives, but
the ability to personalize content that makes technology motivating (Boyd, 2013; Chien, Chen,
Ko, Ku, & Chan, 2015; Ertem, 2013; Revere & Kovach, 2011). Ertem (2013) conducted an
experiment in which fifth grade students were placed in two conditions: reading personalized
online text or reading non-personalized online text. Personalized texts were selected based on a
personal interest survey students completed. The results showed higher reading motivation in
the personalized text group.
The social aspect of technology has also been found to motivate students (Boyd, 2013;
Conradi, 2014; Revere et al., 2011). Technology allows students to collaborate and
communicate, not only with local peers, but with other children and subject experts from around
the world, building a sense of community and belonging (Boyd, 2013). Also, the presence of
real audiences instills authentic purpose and ownership into student work (Revere at al., 2011).
It should be noted that the mere presence is not enough to guarantee motivation to learn,
read, and engage. Cheung and Slavin (2013) state, there is no magic in the machine (p. 297).
Rather, it is quality instructional design which uses technology thoughtfully to reach its

READING MOTIVATION

13

objectives that leads to increased and sustained motivation (Aydemir & Ozturk, 2012; Rosen &
Beck-Hill, 2012). Differentiation of content, process, and product is current best-practice for
meeting student needs, especially those of struggling students, and technology can aid teachers in
all three areas (Rosen et al., 2012). Yet even beyond differentiation, technology can help
educators overhaul how they structure their teaching to better align with the learning process
(Rosen et al., 2012). Flipped classrooms, blended learning designs, project- and problem-based
learning models all give students opportunity for Pinks (2009) three aspects of motivation:
control, autonomy, and purpose. Within these models, technology can be used for accessing
information, communication, collaboration, creation, and sharing, and teachers will still be able
to leverage the capacity for differentiation.
While the research on the overall motivational characteristics of technology is fairly
abundant and unanimous, research on technological reading tools is less numerous inconclusive
in terms of outcomes. Ciampa (2012) noted a significant increase in the motivation of first grade
students using online storybooks. On the other hand, Aydemir et al.s (2012) study on screen
reading found a decrease in reading motivation compared to reading from physical, printed text.
Cheung at al. (2013) noted in their research review the emergence of a general pattern of reading
applications being more motivating for younger students than for older students. The same
authors also noted that only 20 studies met their selection standards, meaning that significantly
more research is needed to study the effectiveness of educational technology on reading
performance and motivation.
Conclusion
Reading motivation is a multifaceted construct, and is influenced by a number of factors.
Struggling readers often display low motivation to read based on the effort necessary to
successfully read, lack of perceived relevance to their lives, and negative past experiences. To

READING MOTIVATION

14

mitigate the negative factors, teachers and researchers are attempting to design effective
motivation interventions. Motivation research has made it clear that instruction can be designed
to boost motivation, eventually yielding positive performance and achievement results. Personal
goals and technology integration can help educators in their quest to motivate all students to
learn.
The body of research on motivation lacks sufficient exploration into specific applications
of technology in reading, especially in terms of struggling readers. One difficulty in filling this
gap is the wide variety of educational settings in which students read. Students not only have
traditional reading time in their classrooms, but also read across the disciplines math, science,
social studies, writing, even special areas like music and foreign language. Many students
receive pull-out instruction for special education or Response to Intervention purposes. Setting
may impact the motivational impact of technology. As mentioned in the previous section, there
may be global shifts in motivation based on age (Cheung et al., 2013) that make certain
technologies less effective.
This variation also extends to goals and goal setting. Some goals are set by teachers,
some by students, and some are co-created. Future research should consider comparing goals set
by teachers, students, and teachers working with students. Longitudinal studies to track the
effectiveness of these motivational practices through high school, higher education, and into the
workforce and daily life of adults would give a more detailed picture of their impact. Likewise,
extending motivation research beyond the classroom to whole-school studies and to home
settings will give more information about the interaction of various motivational forces.
Design and Methodology
Sample
The sample for this study consisted of 21 students in Tier II reading intervention. These

READING MOTIVATION

15

students were mixed in terms of grade level. There are eight grade three students (one female,
seven male), five grade four students (one female, four male), four grade five students (one
female, three male), and four grade six students (three female, one male). Most of these students
were Caucasian. Two were Latino, from Spanish speaking homes; one of these students received
English as a Second Language instruction.
These are students who scored below grade level on standardized reading assessments at
least twice in one school year. They ranged from one half-year to one and a half years below
grade level according to the Developmental Reading Assessment, 2nd Edition (DRA 2). Scores
from Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) assessments indicate these students are below
grade level norms in reading.
Method
Since the students in this project are minors, parental permission must be obtained for
their participation. A letter was sent home stating that the teacher is conducting research in the
course of her normal instructional duties, that no student will be denied instruction, and that no
names or images of the student will be used in reporting the results. See the Instructor Guide in
Appendix B for the complete letter.
A one-group time-series design was chosen. Since the population does not allow for
randomized selection of a sample, and there is no control group, this design allows for the best
control of internal validity (Ary, Jcaobs, Sorenson, & Walker, 2014). The intervention instructor
administered the Motivations for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ) (Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997)
three times once a month for the first three months of the school year. By administering the
MRQ multiple times, the effects of maturation and testing on validity are reduced to the point
where they become negligible (Ary et al., 2014). Mean scores on all 11 dimensions, as well as
an overall mean score, were calculated for each student and the whole sample for each

READING MOTIVATION

16

administration.
After the third administration of the MRQ, the instructor instituted the goal setting
protocol. This procedure was based on the models from two sources. The conference model in
Readers Workshop calls for the discussion to be student-led. The model described by Serravallo
(2014) uses recent student work from intervention group, and suggestions offered by the teacher,
ultimately allowing the student to decide on the goal. Therefore, the goal-setting protocol for
this project is as follows: the instructor confers with an individual student, presenting several
examples of the students recent work in intervention, including any assessments. The instructor
prompts the student to discuss their perceived strengths and weaknesses and offers two
suggestions for the students goal (related to either oral reading fluency, comprehension, or
written response), based on professional judgment and the students input. The student will
select his or her goal from the two choices. Finally, the instructor introduces the online
document in which the student tracks his or her progress (Figure 1). These conferences were
meant to take less than five minutes per student.
Janes Goal Tracking

Date: November 7, 2016

Strengths
accuracy
good expression
retell/summary

Work On
written response
use text evidence

Goal: Use text evidence

Strategy: Use a highlighter to find one piece of evidence each time I share my thinking
or write about my reading.
Progress:
November 14 I am remembering to use a highlighter to find evidence for every

READING MOTIVATION

17

question. I need to remember to give evidence when I talk.

November 21 I gave evidence for every question on my running record. I like using
highlighters, because it helps me remember to find evidence.
Figure 1. Sample Goal Tracking document.
During the goal setting conferences, the instructor observed students reactions to using
the goal tracking document, including facial expressions, speech, and body language, and noted
this information on the technology use observation form. After the 12-week implementation
period, these observations were combined with data on student use of the tracking document to
assess the motivational impact of the technology. Both the goal tracking and technology use
form are included in Appendix B. To help the instructor stay organized during the
implementation phase, there is a space on the technology observation form for student initials;
however no identifying information will be used during data reporting.
To help students track progress towards their goals, the instructor used the progress
monitoring tools included with the intervention materials. For students in the Leveled Literacy
Intervention program (LLI), this is a biweekly running record with accompanying
comprehension questions. For students not in LLI, progress was monitored with the DRA 2
Progress Monitoring kit, which is also a biweekly running record with comprehension questions.
Each program includes graphs and tables which students fill out, giving them a visual
representation of their growth. After each instance of progress monitoring, another goal-setting
conference was held, at which point the student and instructor updated the online goal-tracking
document, and the student chose to keep the current goal or selected a new focus.
After three months of setting and tracking goals, the protocol ended, and the instructor
administered the MRQ three more times, once a month for the next three months. As before, an
overall mean and mean scores on all 11 dimensions were calculated for each student and the
whole sample for each administration. If scores on the dimensions related to intrinsic motivation
(self-efficacy, curiosity, involvement, importance) (Baker & Wigfield, 1999) rose, it can be

READING MOTIVATION

18

concluded that goal setting and tracking have a positive relationship with reading motivation.
However, since the one-group time-series design does not control for history, a causal
relationship cannot be inferred. Outside events such as school vacations, holidays, and testing
could account for a portion of the differences in motivation scores.
Evaluation and Assessment
Review by Panel of Experts
Due to time constraints this project could not be implemented, and was therefore
reviewed by a panel of external evaluators. This panel consisted of the school principal, primary
and intermediate reading consultants, the district technology integration specialist, and a
classroom teacher who was a member of the literacy curriculum committee. Evaluators gave
feedback on research design and methods, ethical considerations, and use of technology.
The principal raised two important points. First he noted that socioeconomic and
environmental factors impact motivation. Neither the literature review nor the one group timeseries design address these factors. A students home life and socioeconomic status can indeed
impact motivation, and this should be considered when analyzing results of the MRQ. Secondly,
the principal suggested integrating technology in content delivery and instruction in order to
achieve choice and personalization. In this case, the running records from the LLI program
could be used as a progress monitoring tool. I decided against this for two reasons. I was
concerned about ethics of giving some students one type of intervention instruction and a
different type of instruction to the other students. More importantly, the LLI curriculum was
purchased specifically for use by Tier II interventionists, and therefore must be used as the
instructional materials by the instructor. If LLI provided digital versions of the texts in the
programs, a control group time-series design would be feasible, with the control group reading
printed text and the treatment group reading digital texts.

READING MOTIVATION

19

Two evaluators suggested employing graphs or charts to help students visualize their
progress. One suggested using Google Forms to make tracking quick, and further integrate
technology. However, both LLI (Figure 2) and DRA 2 (Figure 3) progress monitoring programs
include tables and graphs that help students visualize their progress.

Figure 2. Graph included in the LLI program allows students to see their growth.

Figure 3. Students track their fluency and comprehension with a graph and table included in the

READING MOTIVATION

20

DRA 2 progress monitoring kit.

The classroom teacher raised a crucial question. How do teachers push motivation to last
after the trial has ended? Goal setting can be incorporated into all subjects: writing, math,
science, and social studies. This protocol is just one technique teachers can use to encourage
motivation. This protocol should be part of a larger, overarching classroom and curriculum
design that encourages autonomy, control, and purpose.
Self Evaluation
To self-assess this project, I created rubric that delineates each outcome of the Capstone
project according to the course syllabus and the Capstone project document. The completed
rubric can be found in Appendix D.
Overall, the project is strong. It meets program and concentration outcomes, is wellresearched, and contributes to the field via the creation of an easy-to-implement protocol.
However, the technological component of this project can still be improved. Much of the
experimental research on technology and reading focuses on reading from a screen, and the
resulting changes in achievement, motivation, and performance. Since I am required to use LLI
in Tier II intervention instruction, and there are no digital versions of the programs texts, screen
reading was not an option for the technology component of this project. This same curriculum
requirement also meant that I could not use technology to personalize content or delivery
method. This left me with a limited scope for using technology in the protocol. I wanted to
create a technique teachers could use without difficulty, and the Google platform fulfills the easeof-use requirement. If I had a larger sample, perhaps including students at and above grade level,
using technology for the content and delivery of instruction to a treatment group would be
feasible.

READING MOTIVATION

21
Discussion and Reflection

Throughout the Masters of Education program, I have learned the importance of

cognitive science in education. Designing schools, classrooms, and instruction to best align with
how children learn requires an understanding of cognition, memory, emotions, and, perhaps most
importantly, motivation. Motivation to explore, to interact with peers and content, and to read is
foundational in childrens success in school. The topic of motivation is broad; multiple factors
contribute to an individuals motivation. Therefore, it was necessary to narrow the focus of my
project. While the body of research on motivation is vast, teachers need concrete, explicit
techniques for encouraging motivation in their students. The ultimate aim of this project was to
create an effective classroom practice which teachers can easily implement to improve student
motivation.
For those interested in implementing this project, consider existing curriculum constraints
before adjusting the experimental design. I mentioned in the Assessment and Evaluation section
that I considered a control group time-series design, using the LLI program as a control group.
However, since I had explicit instructions to use LLI for intervention instruction, professional
judgment dictated that I keep the original experimental design. If others have more freedom in
curriculum selection, I would suggest using the control group time-series design. The control
group can use printed text. Instruction for the treatment group can use technology for reading
texts based on student interest and goals, leveraging the motivational properties of technology by
promoting choice.
Master of Education Program Outcomes
Students will be able to identify, analyze, evaluate, and implement research-based
education practices matched to an area of concentration (instructional design and
technology).

READING MOTIVATION

22

This outcome was met by a review of literature on motivation and goals. A common
topic in the motivation literature is personal control and choice. Therefore, goals set in this
experiment are selected by the students themselves.
Students will be able to apply the principles of cognitive science to teaching and
learning to positively affect learning and improve the practice of teaching.
This outcome was met by addressing motivation. Villavicencio and Bernardo (2013)
state that a learners judgment of task value, based on emotion and motivation, can become
ingrained in their schema, thus coloring their expectations of future learning. This project
attempted to align classroom practices with cognitive science by creating an instructional
practice to improve motivation.
Students will be able to define, understand, analyze, and use metrics to measure
student, programmatic, and institutional achievement.
This outcome was met by the use of quantitative data to assess student motivation. The
MRQ results in motivation scores that can be compared across time. The data can also be broken
down by demographics to assess differences in motivation, or into dimensions of motivation to
further describe changes in motivation.
Concentration in Instrucitonal Design & Technology Outcomes
Students will be able to design and develop learning environments using models of
instructional design, such as the ADDIE model.
This outcome was met by creating an instructional protocol that follows the process of
instructional design. The protocol begins with an assessment of strengths and weaknesses. The
instructor then designs and delivers a strategy for the student to implement. Growth is evaluated
with LLI or DRA 2 Progress Monitoring assessments, and then the student decides what goal to

READING MOTIVATION

23

pursue next.
Students will understand and be able to apply theories of design and instruction to
the development, design, and implementation of educational experiences and events.
This outcome was met by incorporating research on goals and motivation into the
creation of an instructional practice. The goal setting protocol met Pinks (2009) three aspects of
motivation (control, autonomy, and purpose), and was based on the work of Serravallo (2014).
Students will be able to integrate appropriate technology in a diversity of
educational settings, including schools, universities, corporations, non-profits and
government agencies.
Appropriate, quality integration of technology starts with instructional goals and
objectives the tool must fit the job. As mentioned previously, curriculum constraints do not
allow technology to be used to promote choice in content for this project, which would be a
closer integration of technology and instruction for motivation. However, technology can be
used to communicate and track progress. Based on the technology available in the school (iPads
and laptops), the Google Apps for Education platform was a natural selection.
Students will be able to assess, budget, and evaluate education technology.
This outcome was met by ongoing field observations. The _______ form allows the
instructor to assess student reactions to using technology during the protocol. There was no
monetary budget for this project; therefore choice of technology was limited to that readily
available to students in Tier II intervention.
Final Thoughts on Finishing the Master of Education Program
When I started the Capstone courses, one of the first discussions points was the
importance of using research and data to support instructional decisions. Instead of acting on

READING MOTIVATION

24

hunches or impressions, analyze the evidence of student growth homework, projects, and
assessments. This project attempts to help teachers quantify a construct that is multifaceted and
changeable, so they do not have to rely only on impressions. However, while designing this
protocol and experiment, I often ran into questions that needed to be answered by professional
judgment. I have been debating the apparent conflict between research and data on the one hand,
and professional judgment on the other. Consider, for instance, the question of changing the
experimental design to allow for a control group that reads printed text and a treatment group
that leverages technology for individualized texts. Including a control group would certainly
make the design stronger, but I had to weigh that against curricular constraints. I deferred to
professional judgment in this case, even though research shows that technologys ability to
individualize instruction is highly motivating. Was this the correct decision? I am not certain.
However, I do think there needs to be a balance between data and professional judgment.
Numbers can only describe the portions of a student that are quantifiable. Perhaps it is up to our
professional judgment, as educators, to fill in the gaps.

READING MOTIVATION

25
References

Aydemir, Z.I., & Ozturk, E. (2012). The effects of reading from the screen on the reading
motivation levels of elementary 5th graders. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology, 11(3), 357-365.
Baker, L., & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of childrens motivation for reading and their
relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34,
452-477.
Boyd, P. (2013). Blogging in the classroom: Using technologies to promote learner-centered
pedagogies. The Researcher, 26(3), 85-113.
Cheung, A.C.K., & Slavin, R.E. (2013). Effects of educaitonal technology applications on
reading outcomes for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research
Quarterly, 48(3), 277-299. doi: 10.1002/rrq.50
Chien, T., Chen, Z., Ko, H., Ku, Y., & Chan T. (2015). My-Bookstore: Using information
technology to support childrens classroom reading and book recommendation. Journal
of Educational Computing Research, 52(4), 455-474. doi: 10.1177/0735633115571920
Ciampa, K. (2012). Electronic storybooks: A constructivist approach to reading motivation in
primary-grade students. Journal of Literacy & Technology, 13(2), 81-148.
Colakogle, O. M., & Akdemir, O. (2010). Motivational measure of the instruciton compared:
Instruciton based on the ARCS motivation theory v.s. traditional instruction in blended
courses. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 11(2), 73-89.
Conradi, K. (2014). Tapping technologys potential to motivate readers. Phi Delta Kappan,
96(3), 54-57.
De Naeghel, J., & Van Keer, H. (2013). The relation of student and class-level characteristics to
primary school students autonomous reading motivation: A multi-level approach. Journal
of Research in Reading, 36(4), 351-370. Doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2013.12000.x
Ertem, I.S. (2013). The influence of personalization of online texts on elementary school
students reading comprehension and attitudes towards reading. International Journal of
Progressive Education, 9(3).

READING MOTIVATION

26

Husband, T., & Hunt, C. (2015). A review of the empirical literature on No Child Left Behind
from 2001 to 2010. Planning and Changing, 46(1), 212-254.
Laguna-Riordan, C, & Aguilar, J.P. (2009). Whats missing from No Child Left Behind? A policy
analysis from a social work perspective. Children & Schools, 31(3), 135-144.
Lawler, J., & Wedwick, L. (2012). The effect of time spent reading during intervention block.
Illinois Reading Council Journal, 40(4), 26-33.
Marinak, B. A. (2013). Courageous reading instruction: Effects of an elementary motivation
intervention. The Journal of Educational Research, 106, 39-48.
Morgan, P.L., & Fuchs, D. (2007). Is there a bidirectional relationship between childrens reading
skills and reading motivation? Exceptional Children, 73(2), 165-183.
Padak, N., & Potenza-Radis, C. (2010). Motivating struggling readers: Three keys to success.
New England Reading Association Journal, 45(2), 1-7.
Pink, D. (2009, August 25). Dan Pink: The puzzle of motivation [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y
Reading Is Fundamental. (n.d.). Literacy facts & stats. Retrieved from
http://www.rif.org/pdf/Literacy-Facts-Stats.pdf
Revere, L., & Kovach, J.V. (2011). Online technologies of engaged learning: A meaningful
synthesis. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(2), 113-124.
Robertson, D.A., Dougherty, S., Ford-Connors, E., & Paratore, J.R. (2014). Re-envisioning
instruction: Mediating complex text for older readers. The Reading Teacher, 67(7), 547559. doi: 10.1002/trtr.1247
Rosen, Y., & Beck-Hill, D. (2012). Intertwining digital content and a one-to-one laptop
environment in teaching and learning: Lessons from the Time to Know program. Journal
of Research and Technology, 44(3), 225-241.
Schiefele, U., Schaffner, E., Mller, J., Wigfield, A., Nolen, S., & Baker, L. (2012). Dimensions
of Reading Motivation and Their Relation to Reading Behavior and Competence.
Reading Research Quarterly, 47(4), 427-463. doi:10.1002/RRQ.030
Serravallo, J. (2014). Reading Time with goals in mind. Educational Leadership, 72(1), 54.
Smithson, M. (2012). The positive impact of personal goal setting on assessment. Canadian
Journal of Action Research, 13(3), 57-73.

READING MOTIVATION

27

United State Department of Education Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming

American education: Learning powered by technology. National education technology
plan 2010. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED512681.pdf
Villavicencio, F.T., & Bernardo, A.I. (2013). Positive academic emotions moderate the
relationship between self-regulation and academic achievement. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 83, 329-340.
Vogler, J.S., & Bakken, L. (2007). Motivation across domains: Do goals and attributions change
with subject matter for grades 4 and 5 students? Learning Environments Research, 10,
17-33. doi: 10.1007/s10984-007-9021-4
Wery, J., & Thomson, M.T. (2013). Motivational strategies to enhance effective learning in
teaching struggling students. British Journal of Learning Support, 28(3), 103-108. doi:
10.1111/1467-9604.12027
Western Oregon University. (2012). Characteristics of learners with mastery versus performance
goals. Retrieved from
http://www.wou.edu/~girodm/100/mastery_vs_performance_goals.pdf
Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. (1997). Motivations for reading questionnaire. Retrieved from
http://www.cori.umd.edu/measures/MRQ.pdf
Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J.T., Tonks, S., & Perencevich, K.C. (2004). Childrens motivation for
reading: Domain specificity and instrucitonal influences. Journal of Educational
Research, 97(6), 299-309.
Worthy, D.A., Brez, C.C., Markman, A.B., & Maddox, T. (2011). Motivational influences on
cognitive performance in children: Focus over fit. Journal of Cognitive Development,
12(1), 103-119. doi: 10.1080/15248372.2010.535229

READING MOTIVATION

28
Appendix A
Project Management Plan

Problem Statement
Struggling readers often exhibit decreased reading motivation, which can lead to
decreased reading amount and low academic performance. This project will explore the impact
of goal setting on the reading motivation of struggling readers.
Learners
The learners in this project are elementary age students in Tier II reading intervention.
This group of 21 children ranges in age from grade three to grade six, and is predominantly male
(15 male, six female). Two of these students are from Spanish speaking homes; one receives
English as a Second Language instruction. According to assessment data, these students range
from one-half year to one and a half years below grade level in reading.
Learning Objectives
1. By the end of this project, students will be able to analyze their own reading work to
identify areas of strength and weakness.
2. By the end of this project, students will be able to select an area of personal weakness
to make the focus of their reading.
3. By the end of this project, students will be able to write, with assistance from the
teacher, a personal goal statement that includes the area of focus and a benchmark for
meeting the goal.
4. By the end of this project, students will be able to use Google Apps for Education
platform to document their goals and progress toward their goals.
Timeline
Week/Date
s
1/Mar 7-13

Task
Select non-implementation
track

Subtasks

READING MOTIVATION
Deliverables

Self-Assessment of Project
Evaluation by Experts

2/Mar 1420

Deliverables

Self-Assessment of Project

Evaluation by Experts

3/Mar 2127

4/Mar 28Apr 3

Final Report
Evaluation by Experts

Final Report

Evaluation by Experts
5/Apr 4-10

Final Report
Evaluation by Experts

Deliverables

6/Apr 1117

Evaluation by Experts

29
Draft goal-setting conference protocol
Draft goal-tracking protocol
Draft instructor materials
Draft parent permission form
Draft rubric
Contact and inform experts about
evaluation
Draft rubric

Revise goal-setting protocol

Revise goal-tracking protocol
Revise instructor materials and
permission form
Submit deliverables for review
Finalize rubric
Submit Self-Assessment rubric for
review
Finalize rubric
Submit Expert Evaluation rubric for
review

Submit for review

Deliver project and rubric to experts
Revise report based on feedback from
Week 3
Update Project Management Plan
Draft Abstract, Discussion/Reflection
Start to compile feedback
Update PMP
Draft Reflection
Collect rubrics and feedback by 4/10
Compile all feedback
Continue to draft
Assessment/Evaluation
Revise based on feedback
Submit for review

Revise project based on feedback

Draft Evaluation/Assessment section
Add rubric as Appendix C

READING MOTIVATION

Final Report

Create Presentation for Share

Fair

7/Apr 1824

Deliverables

Create Presentation for Share

Fair
Final Report
PLE Page
Complete Self-Assessment of
Project

8/Apr 25May 1

Share Fair

PLE Page

Submissions

30
Revise report based on feedback from
Week 5
Update PMP
Add evidence of product to body of
report
Select medium for presentation
Gather information from Final Report
Gather appropriate visuals, evidence
Finalize goal setting and tracking
protocol
Finalize data collection and analysis
guidelines
Finalize instructor materials
Edit and revise presentation
Edit and revise
Add PMP document as Appendix A
Create page
Password protect page
Address project strengths and
weaknesses
Review project outcomes
Fill out rubric
Add rubric as Appendix D

Link presentation in discussion board

View presentations from classmates
Comment on peers' presentations
Respond to comments about
presentation
Embed Final Report
Embed presentation
Write explanation of Capstone project
Include appropriate graphics
Edit and revise Final Report
Submit Final Report and Deliverables
Include PLE link in comments box

READING MOTIVATION

31
Appendix B

Technology Use Observations

Note students behavior and reactions while using the Goal Tracking document.
Grade:

Student #

Initials:

Total Times Tracking Document

Accessed:

Student #

Initials:

Total Times Tracking Document

Accessed:

Date (Note if a goal

setting conference)

Grade:
Date (Note if a goal
setting conference)

Goal Tracking

READING MOTIVATION

32

Conference #1
Date:
Strengths

Work On

Strengths

Work On

Strengths

Work On

Goal:
Strategy:
Progress:

Conference #2
Date:

Goal:
Strategy:
Progress:

Conference #3
Date:

READING MOTIVATION

33

Goal:
Strategy:
Progress:

Conference #4
Date:
Strengths

Work On

Strengths

Work On

Goal:
Strategy:
Progress:

Conference #5
Date:

READING MOTIVATION

34

Goal:
Strategy:
Progress:

Conference #6
Date:
Strengths

Goal:
Strategy:
Progress:

Work On

READING MOTIVATION

35
Appendix C
External Evaluation

Needs Work
Minimal
connection
between
research
questions,
experimental
design, and
data
collection and
analyses.

Proficient
Data
collection and
analyses
address
research
questions.
Research
design does
not control
for
variability/
confounding
variables.

Ethical
Considerations

No
consideration
given to
ethical
demands of
working with
minors.
Researchers
bias evident.

No bias
evident.
Some ethical
consideration
s of working
with minors
not accounted
for.

Instructional
Design/
Technology
Integration

Inappropriate
use of
technology in
instruction.

Technology
used in
instruction
could be
altered to
better align
with goal
(increasing
motivation).

Instructional
Design
Goal setting/
tracking
protocols

Instructional
design does
not address
research
problem.

Instructional
design
superficially
addresses
research
problem.

Research
Design and
Methodology

Exemplary
Experimental
design, data
collection,
and analysis
align with
research
questions.
Design
controls for
variability/co
nfounding
variables as
much as
possible.
All pertinent
aspects of
working with
minors
accounted
for.
Researchers
bias not
present in
design or
writing.
Technology
thoroughly
integrated in
instruction.
Chosen
technology is
appropriate
for
instructional
goal.

Comments

Well
designed
instruction is
grounded in
best
practices, and
addresses
research
problem.

How well does the project, as a whole, address the stated problem (reduced motivation in
struggling readers)?

READING MOTIVATION

What are the projects strengths?

What parts of the project can be improved?

36

READING MOTIVATION

37
Appendix D
Self Assessment

Element

Unsatisfactory
0

Needs
Work 1

Proficient

Exemplary
3

Comments

Final Report
APA
formatting,
references,
writing
style, free of
errors
Final Report
all sections
included,
with
evidence of
deliverables
and
appendices
Final Report
reflects
thoughtful
selfassessment
and external
evaluation
Final Report
discussion
and
reflection
show
personal
growth,
value added
to field
Total Points 11/12
Presentation
covers
each aspect
of final
report
Presentation
Media
(images,
video, etc.)

Proofread and consulted Purdue

Online Writing Lab.

Evidence of deliverables in body of

report and appendices. PMP included
in appendices.

Major points of external evaluation

discussed; rubric included in
appendices. Self-assessment

Addresses program and concentration

outcomes. Value added to field easy
to use teaching technique

Includes each section of final report

Video helps explain motivation,

SMART graphic explains goals with
images and text; some slides textheavy

READING MOTIVATION
support
content,
slides follow
principles of
good design
Presentation
Accessible
to broad
audience,
publishable
Presentation
tone,
writing,
design
appropriate
for audience
(teachers
and peers)
Total Points
Deliverables
designed
according to
theories of
teaching and
learning
Deliverables
clear to
understand
and
implement
Total Points
Project
addresses
local
educational
need
Project has
immediate
implications
for practice.
Project
features well
designed
experiment,
grounded in
research

38

Published and can be shared

Language accessible to non-teachers

Protocol grounded in theories of

motivation

11 /12

Some expert evaluators requested

clarification of technology component
did not explain what precisely
needed clarification.

5/6

Motivation impacts learning and

performance

Protocol easy to implement with little

preparation
Experiment may be made stronger
with inclusion of control group
curriculum constraints eliminate this
option.

READING MOTIVATION
Total Points

8 /9

39