Motivational predictors of struggling readers’ reading comprehension: the effects of mindset, achievement goals, and engagement
- 314 Downloads
Reading for understanding is a challenging task for many upper elementary struggling readers, and their attitudes toward such challenges can make a difference in their subsequent engagement and reading achievement. Mindset and achievement goals provide a useful explanatory framework for understanding struggling readers’ engagement and reading comprehension. This study examined the extent to which mindset and achievement goals are associated with reading comprehension; as well as the mechanism through which engagement mediates this relation, controlling for the effects of vocabulary, word recognition, and limited English proficiency status. Structural equation modeling of four and fifth grade struggling readers (N = 107) demonstrated the importance of achievement goals in predicting reading comprehension. Effects of mindset on engagement and reading comprehension were completely mediated by mastery and performance-avoidance goals; further, these goals had indirect relations to reading comprehension through emotional engagement. Performance-approach goals had a direct, negative relation to reading comprehension. Findings highlight the importance of including motivational variables in understanding sources of individual differences in reading comprehension for struggling readers.
KeywordsReading comprehension Mindset Achievement goals Engagement Motivation
This research was supported in part by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305F100013 to The University of Texas at Austin as part of the Reading for Understanding Research Initiative. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.
- Baird, G. L., Scott, W. D., Dearing, E., & Hamill, S. K. (2009). Cognitive self-regulation in youth with and without learning disabilities: Academic self-efficacy, theories of intelligence, learning vs. performance goal preferences, and effort attributions. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28, 881–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- DiPerna, J. C., & Elliott, S. N. (2000). Promoting academic enablers to improve student achievement: An introduction to the mini-series. School Psychology Review, 31, 293–297.Google Scholar
- Dupeyrat, C., & Mariné, C. (2001). Implicit theories of intelligence, achievement goals, and learning strategy use: A test of Dweck’s model with returning to school adults. Psychologische Beiträge, 43, 34–52.Google Scholar
- Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Lillington, NC: Edwards Brothers.Google Scholar
- Gonida, E. N., Voulala, K., & Kiosseoglou, G. (2009). Students’ achievement goal orientations and their behavioral and emotional engagement: Co-examining the role of perceived school goal structures and parent goals during adolescence. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 53–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Grigg, W. S., Daane, M. C., Jin, Y., & Campbell, J. R. (2003). The nation’s report card: Reading, 2002. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics (ED).Google Scholar
- Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (2004). Scaffolding for motivation and engagement in reading. In J. T. Guthrie, A. Wigfield, & K. C. Perencevich (Eds.), Motivating reading comprehension: Concept oriented reading instruction (pp. 55–86). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- International Reading Association. (2000). Excellent reading teachers: A position statement of the International Reading Association. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44, 193–200.Google Scholar
- Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guildford Press.Google Scholar
- MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests. Forms S and T (4th ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- McGrew, K. S., Schrank, F. A., & Woodcock, R. W. (2007). Woodcock-Johnson III normative update technical manual. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
- Midgley, C., Maehr, M., Hicks, L., Roeser, R., Urdan, T., Anderman, E., et al. (2000). Manual for the patterns of adaptive learning scales (PALS). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
- Morgan, P. L., & Fuchs, D. (2007). Is there a bidirectional relationship between children’s reading skills and reading motivation? Exceptional Children, 73, 165–183.Google Scholar
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2015). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/.
- RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. www.rand.org/multi/achievementforall/.
- Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Selig, J. P., & Preacher, K. J. (2008). Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org/.
- Shrank, F. A., McGrew, K. S., & Woodcock, R. W. (2001). Technical abstract (Woodcock-Johnson III Assessment Service Bulletin No. 2). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
- Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (2009a). Engagement and disaffection as organizational constructs in the dynamics of motivational development. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 223–245). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009b). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 493–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2012). Test of word reading efficiency (TOWRE) (2nd ed.). Austin, TS: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar