Produced by

SERVE

Associated with the School of Education,

University of North Carolina at Greensboro

First Edition 1997

Second Printing 1997

Third Printing 2001

Acknowledgments

We appreciate reviews of this document provided by SERVE’s Teacher of the

Year Advisory Board members: David E. Williams, Florida; Steve Ricks,

Alabama; Susan Sailor, Florida; Bobbi Ford, Georgia.

Written for SERVE by

Judith Meece, Ph.D., School of Education,

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

and

Wendy McColskey, Ph.D., SERVE

Edited by

Charles Ahearn, Ed.D., Program Director of Communications

& Publications, SERVE

Donna Nalley, Ph.D., Publications Project Director, SERVE

Stephen Chapman, Assistant Program Specialist, SERVE

Designed by

Kelly Dryden, Graphic Designer, SERVE

Cover Designed by

Jeremy McClellan, Graphic Designer, SERVE

The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or

policies of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S.

Department of Education, nor does mention of trade names, commercial

products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

This document was produced with funding from the Office of Educational

Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract

number ED-01-CO-0015.

ii
Table of Contents

Introduction and Overview .......................................................... v

Chapter One

How Engaged Are Students in Learning?........ 1

What is a Highly Motivated Student?............................................ 4

Is the Lack of Student Motivation—Desire to Work and Learn

..... —a Problem in Schools? ......................................................... 5

Is the Lack of Motivation a Student Problem (They Just

Aren’t Motivated), a School Problem, a Cultural Problem,

or All of These? ....................................................................... 7

What Kind of Motivation Are We Ultimately Hoping to

..... Cultivate: Intrinsic or Extrinsic? .............................................. 9

What Advantages Are There to Providing a School

Environment That Emphasizes Intrinsic, Rather than

Extrinsic, Reasons for Learning? ............................................. 9

Why Do Students Differ in Their Approaches to Learning?...... 12

Is There Evidence That Motivational Patterns Can

Be Changed? .......................................................................... 16

Chapter Two

Using External Incentives to Motivate

Students ............................................................... 19

Why Use Extrinsic Incentives? .................................................... 20

Rewards and Punishments .......................................................... 22

Summarizing Potential Problems with Incentives and

..... Associated Recommendations .............................................. 24

Schoolwide Incentive Programs ................................................. 27

Discussion Guide for Use of Extrinsic Incentives

and Consequences ................................................................ 31

Chapter Three

What Can Teachers Do to Increase Motivation

in the Classroom?.............................................. 33

The Quality of Instructional Activities ........................................ 34

The Quality of Student Assessment Methods and Teacher

Feedback ............................................................................... 38

iii
Classroom Climate ....................................................................... 48

Assessing Teacher Needs ............................................................ 57

Chapter Four

Strategies for School Improvement............... 61

Managing for Results/School Improvement Planning ............... 63

Curriculum/Assessment............................................................... 64

School Organization and Structure that Supports

 Personalization ...................................................................... 65

Work-Based Learning/Career Exploration.................................. 66

Conclusions.................................................................................. 67

Discussion Questions for School Improvement Teams............. 67

Chapter Five

Assessing Student Motivation ......................... 69

Grades, Test Scores, and Other Indicators................................. 70

Understanding the Kinds and Levels of Motivation That

..... Students Have........................................................................ 71

Other Indicators of Motivation ................................................... 72

Open-Ended Questions/Interviews/Informal Discussions ........ 76

Action Research ........................................................................... 76

Conclusions.................................................................................. 78

Chapter Six

Conclusions: Using the Information in This

Document ........................................................... 79

For Further Reading .................................................................... 83

References.................................................................................... 85

About SERVE................................................................................ 93

Ordering Information .................................................................. 94

iv
Introduction and Overview

M

ore and more teachers are reporting that motivating their students to

learn is one of their most difficult challenges. While some students

seem self-motivated to learn, others show very little interest in learning, gaining new skills, or improving their abilities. Far too many students do not

develop their academic abilities or talents because they lack the desire to do

so. By the time a student has reached adolescence, poor motivation has

become one of the chief contributors to underachievement.

Improving students’ motivation is generally viewed as important because it is

related to high achievement. However, it is also an important educational

outcome itself. We want our students to achieve, but we want them to also

value the process of learning and to develop a long-term commitment to

learning. John Dewey (1963) said in the 1930s that “the most important attitude

that can be formed is that of the desire to go on learning” (p. 48). Teacher

education programs, however, still give only minimal attention to the subject of

student motivation. Many teachers, therefore, begin their teaching careers with

little working knowledge of how to motivate students (Ames, 1990). Concerns

about the quality of student motivation have received very little attention in

recent debates about school reform. The focus of policy at the state level is

often on district-level incentives for increased test scores and sanctions for low

test scores, with little consideration of the kinds of impact such policies might

have on teachers and, ultimately, student motivation.

v
This document presents a general overview of current research and thinking

on student motivation in classroom and school settings. It is designed as a

resource to help teachers and school teams analyze the sources of students’

motivational problems and consider changes that will improve motivation.

Specifically, this publication is intended to help the reader

● Understand the importance of considering student motivation as an educational outcome

● Consider causes of lack of student motivation

● Reflect on how teaching practices affect student motivation

● Explore effective ways of using incentive systems based on research

● Consider schoolwide policies that enhance intrinsic forms of motivation

● Consider ways to assess student motivation

Because it is intended as a resource, it does not have to be read in the order

presented. The summary below outlines the intent of each chapter. We invite

you to select those of most interest to you.

Chapter One defines motivation, considers the extent to which we have a

motivation problem in the American educational system, and introduces the

reader to some conclusions from research on motivation. Evidence is cited to

suggest that

● Lack of motivation is a major problem in education. Students often exert

the minimum rather than maximum effort.

● There are individual differences in motivation which arise from a number

of factors (child-rearing practices, cultural influences, etc.), but motivation

cannot be considered as primarily the student’s problem because researchers have documented that student motivation declines over the school

years.

● Motivation can be increased. One researcher (Ames, 1990b) assembled a

large notebook of strategies for teachers and parents to consider in increasing students’ motivation to learn. She reported a number of positive student outcomes from the work of these teachers.

Chapter Two combines a review of the research on the use of incentives with

the practical experience of educators experimenting with incentive systems in

an urban district (Birmingham, Alabama, the site of a SERVE Research and

vi
Development project) with a high percentage of disadvantaged youth. Although incentives and consequences are frequently used by schools to improve motivation, research suggests that such strategies have limitations that

need to be understood and considered in planning.

The relation of extrinsic rewards to individual differences is of critical

importance. In the classroom, extrinsic incentives are often intended to

motivate the least attentive students or those who typically perform poorly;

however, the rewards are typically applied to the entire classroom or even

the entire school population, as in many reading incentive programs. The

hidden costs become most apparent when they are applied to these larger

groups where individual differences in interest, performance, and ability

are ignored. (Ames, 1992)

Chapter Two stresses that rewards can be overused and reduce interest in

learning, and punishments can lead to increased alienation and frustration

among students. The context for the use of rewards and consequences are

critical to their impact. The more controlling the environment in which they

are administered, the more compliance and obedience may be served but the

less we will help students become responsible and caring people.

In Chapter Three, you will find a discussion of a variety of classroom factors

that have been shown to relate to student interest and effort and an overall

framework for a classroom environment that results in a high level of student

engagement and interest.

Factors related to instruction, assessment, and classroom climate are described.

This chapter is critical for promoting dialogue among teachers about what

constitutes good practice in light of the goal of improving student motivation.

A checklist is provided to help teachers assess their current practices.

Consideration of schoolwide policies and practices that affect student motivation is the focus of Chapter Four. It is not enough to provide teachers with

opportunities to reflect on how to improve motivation in their classroom

settings. Schoolwide practices in grouping, curriculum, grading, etc., must also

be considered in light of their impact on student motivation.

This chapter is important for school administrators and leadership teams to

read to better understand their role in supporting teachers’ efforts to improve

student motivation.

In Chapter Five, we suggest ways to assess motivation as a starting point for

identifying an action plan for improvement. Methods include analyzing

achievement and behavioral indicators, using existing motivation instruments,

adapting items, and using focus groups or other means to get student and

parent input.

vii
Students can articulate what they like and don’t like about courses and what

conditions are best for motivating them. McCombs et al (1995) note that when

we listen to students talk about conditions that motivate them, they talk about

teachers who know and care about them, who provide challenges in a nonthreatening environment, who give them choices and responsibility and solicit

their input, who make learning fun, and who make instruction relevant. Beginning to explore student attitudes and perceptions is critical for improving

motivation.

Chapter Six offers some concluding remarks about how a school might organize

itself to consider the information in Chapters Two through Five.

viii
Chapter One

How Engaged Are Students

in Learning?

Chapter Preview

The goal of this chapter is to bring the reader to a better understanding of

the meaning of motivation in a school setting. The information will assist

educators and school improvement teams in deciding if student motivation

should be considered as an important school-improvement goal.

After describing what is meant by “a highly motivated student,” evidence is

provided to suggest that schools often stop short of the level of motivation

and student engagement described and are satisfied if students follow

directions, complete their work, and behave. Many students exert the

minimum, rather than the maximum, effort. Underachievement is particularly problematic among the non-college-bound and non-white populations. Although it may be unrealistic for teachers or schools to think that

they can motivate 100 percent of their students to learn, educators generally agree that there is room for improvement.

Factors both inside and outside of school that affect motivation are described. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are contrasted. We conclude that

although there are individual differences in motivation, factors outside the

school’s control (e.g., parental and cultural influences) cannot alone explain low levels of student motivation in our middle and high schools.

Research reflects significant declines in intrinsic motivation over the school

years. Thus, the school environment clearly has a role in the kinds of

motivation students exhibit.

T

esting and accountability have been a common refrain throughout the

1980s and 1990s. The educational enterprise has been judged based on its

ability to produce higher and higher test scores. At the same time this topdown pressure has been exerted, some more innovative schools with site1
based management, new curriculum frameworks, and other influences have

begun a process of self-examination that typically begins or centers around

discussions of what kinds of students they are trying to develop. Most of these

schools, in addition to the development of basic skills, have dedicated themselves to the business of producing students who will be active learners; be

motivated to learn; take responsibility for their improvement; use information;

plan, think, and develop products; and care about learning.

These schools have taken the idea of site-based management seriously and are

holding themselves accountable for student outcomes that go beyond statemandated test scores. They are looking at a host of interrelated factors (curriculum, instruction, grading, scheduling, size, student involvement, grouping

practices, etc.) and improving them in light of the desire to create life-long,

active learners. It is not to say they don’t care about improving test scores, but

if they create a culture that fosters student responsibility for learning and a

commitment to continual improvement, they believe test scores will improve.

The success of many of these schools in helping students to perform at

high levels is in part due to their commitment to engaging student

motivation (Darling-Hammond, 1996). They care about getting the

conditions right that foster students’ commitment to the learning process. These schools demonstrate that fostering motivation to learn is a worthy

goal that pays rich dividends.

Darling-Hammond (1996) calls the schools which have successfully restructured, “high-involvement, high-performance” schools: “high involvement”

because they have relied to a greater extent on the knowledge, judgment, and

skill of front-line workers (teachers) and developed more collaborative forms

of planning and problem-solving that are more responsive to students’ needs;

“high performance” because they are approaching teaching and learning in

distinctive ways. These successful schools

are learner-centered, in that they are deliberately organized to attend to the

individual needs of learners, and learning-centered in that their work is

clearly focused on developing powerful learning and proficient performances. They organize their work around learners’ needs for active, inquiry-based learning opportunities that build on prior experience. Learning

is organized around complex and integrative tasks that lead to major

products and performances; students and teachers are grouped in ways

that are sufficiently personalized for teachers to come to know their students

well. (Darling-Hammond, 1996)

Many schools around the country are on the road to becoming such “highinvolvement, high-performance” schools, but they need resources and information. This publication is for those interested in learning more about the rich

research on student motivation, those schools or teachers who feel that their

2
students are not as motivated to learn as they could be, and those who want

to explore ways to improve that outcome. It may be that this lack of motivation is evidenced by missing class, avoiding homework, cheating, negative

attitudes in class, lack of interest in reading, choosing easy classes, or avoiding challenging work. The perception may be that many students are just

“getting by” or “marking time” until graduation.

Sometimes schools recognize that they have a motivation “problem,” but they

opt for simplistic solutions (e.g., implement an incentive program). In addition,

teachers, especially of middle and high school students, may feel that motivation is something that students either have or don’t have and feel helpless to

impact student motivation. These reactions to the motivation problem may be

based on a lack of awareness of the research base that exists. Research on, and

practical experience with, student motivation can provide a framework for

beginning to think about the kind of educational environment that creates a

commitment to learning. Involving teachers in assessing and trying to improve

student motivation through getting the conditions right may be a missing, but

vital, link to improving schools. A key point of this document is that

schools and teachers can encourage or discourage student responsibility for, and interest in, learning through the ways in which they structure the learning environment.

In this first chapter, we explore the problem of student motivation. Consider

how you would answer the following questions:

● What is a highly motivated student?

● Is the lack of student motivation—desire to work and learn—a problem in

schools?

● Is the lack of motivation a student problem (they just aren’t motivated), a

school problem, a cultural problem, or all of these?

● What kind of motivation are we ultimately hoping to cultivate: intrinsic or

extrinsic?

● If intrinsic motivation—desire to master tasks for personal satisfaction—has

positive life-long benefits, why are some students intrinsically motivated

and others not?

● Can schools and teachers increase student motivation to learn?

3
What is a Highly Motivated Student?

According to Brophy (1987a)

Student motivation to learn is an acquired competence developed through

general experience, but stimulated most directly through modeling, communication of expectations, and direct instruction or socialization by significant others (especially parents and teachers).

When making inferences about student motivation, teachers rely on observations of behavior and performance. Motivation to learn in school is clearly

linked to grades, test scores, and other measures of academic performance.

However, because prior learning and instruction can affect academic performance, achievement should not be the sole indicator of student motivation.

Behavioral Indicators of Highly Motivated Students:

1. Attendance and discipline. At the most basic level, students who are

motivated attend class, pay attention, and are not disruptive.

2. Participation and completion of work. Students who are motivated begin

assignments with little prompting, follow directions, participate in classroom discussions, and complete tasks on time.

3. Task persistence and acceptance of errors. How long a student stays with a

task, especially a difficult one, is an important indicator of motivation.

Highly motivated students persist and try different solutions before seeking

help when they have difficulty with a task.

4. Quality of task involvement. Students can either invest effort in learning or

find shortcuts to get the task done without expending a great deal of effort.

The amount and quality of effort students expend on learning tasks is an

important indicator of motivation. Highly motivated students are willing to

invest effort and to use the skills they have acquired.

5. Independent learning. Students who are willing to learn more than is

required are reluctant to stop working on a task, even when it is time to

move on to something new. They also may bring in materials from home,

complete work that is not required, or ask questions to learn more about a

topic.

6. Interest and liking. Highly motivated students enjoy learning, show enthu4
siasm, and take pride in their work.

Think about a classroom or school you are familiar with, and estimate the

percentage of students who

● Persist on difficult tasks or material

● Enjoy coming to school

● Sometimes engage in learning activities that go beyond course

requirements

● Select challenging tasks, even though they may not initially succeed

These attitudes and behaviors are commonplace in schools where students are

highly motivated.

Is the Lack of Student Motivation—Desire to

Work and Learn—a Problem in Schools?

Consider the following conclusions about the lack of motivation in the United

States from Motivating Students to Learn (Tomlinson, 1993).

● In a chapter on the anomalies between what adolescents are capable of

and their lack of “academic effort” (J. Thomas: Course Demands, Students’

Study Practices, and Academic Achievement)

Recent commissioned reports and essays about the state of learning and

instruction in the United States have presented a picture of the typical

adolescent learner as relatively disengaged from learning, unmotivated,

less than proficient at carrying out learning tasks on his or her own,

and disposed to invest only a minimum of effort on academic tasks

(e.g., Carnegie Forum on education and the Economy, 1986; College

Board, 1985; National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983).

Surveys taken at institutions of higher education confirm this latter

characterization; high school graduates are described as having desultory study practices, low-level, repetitive study strategies, and poor time

and effort management habits (e.g., Bossone, 1970). Further, virtually

every college and university has instituted some type of program for

entering students designed to provide remedial assistance in the area of

learning and study skills. (Tomlinson, 1993)

523
● From a chapter of international comparisons of motivation (L. Peak: Academic Effort in International Perspective)

Among the many values and beliefs that exist in every society, some

reinforce and others undermine student academic effort. Some of the

most important of these beliefs and values concern the relationship of

effort to success. Most cultures acknowledge that academic success is

influenced by a combination of effort and innate ability, but the relative emphasis placed on effort and ability differs. . . . In Japanese

schools, effort is so consistently portrayed to children as the key to

success, ability is rarely mentioned. Mottos and slogans adorn the walls

of Japanese classrooms: “Become a child who can persevere,” “If you try,

you can do it,” and the like. Many times a day, children are encouraged

“gambatte” (hang in there) and “gaman shite” (persevere). . . . In

Japan, all students are believed to be able to master the curriculum if

they try hard enough, and those who are ahead of their peers should

exert their effort toward helping their friends. This is in marked contrast

to the United States, where ability is believed to be so crucial to academic performance and potential that it is standard practice to separate

children during the first weeks of first grade into ability groups for

reading. . . .(Tomlinson, 1993)

● From a chapter on the impact of peer pressures on academic effort (B.

Brown: School Culture, Social Politics, and the Academic Motivation of U.S.

Students)

Several observers of American high schools have reported that high

school teachers routinely forge implicit treaties with their students in

which academic demands are lowered in exchange for students’ compliance with norms of conduct in the classroom. Teachers agree not to

challenge students’ intellect if students agree not to challenge teachers’

authority. We know, as well, that the number of high school students

who admit to cheating occasionally is quite high—55% in one recent

survey. Practices such as copying homework are so commonplace that

students often do not regard them as cheating. . . . The general point,

however, is that peer pressures direct high school students toward moderate levels of achievement but stop well short of encouraging true

devotion to scholarship. (Tomlinson, 1993)

● From a chapter on the special problems of minorities in metropolitan areas

(A. Garibaldi: Creating Prescriptions for Success in Urban Schools: Turning

the Corner on Pathological Explanations for Academic Failure)

The majority of schools in metropolitan areas today are populated by

non-white youth, many of whom are African-American or Hispanic.

Unfortunately, these two groups disproportionately account for high

rates of academic failure and also for disciplinary actions, such as

6
nonpromotions, special education placements, suspensions, and expulsions resulting from misbehavior in school. . . . While school reform

efforts are indeed laudable at this point in our history, answers and

solutions to the more fundamental questions and problems of underachievement and educational attainment of the masses of non-white

students are needed now. (Tomlinson, 1993)

Do we have a student motivation problem in education? Our conclusion is that

motivational problems occur in the contexts of the American culture, the

school and peer culture, and the urban, rural, or suburban culture. These are

contexts that must be taken into account, but the impact of these contexts can

be reduced and schools can make changes in the learning environment that

increase the number of students who stay engaged and motivated as they

grow older.

Is the Lack of Motivation a Student Problem

(They Just Aren’t Motivated), a School

Problem, a Cultural Problem, or All of These?

Psychological research over the years has described motivation in different

ways. Motivation was first studied as a personality trait, as something people

had in more or less degrees, perhaps depending in part on their genetic

makeup and their early childhood experiences. However, much of the recent

motivational research contradicts this view and demonstrates that motivation is

sensitive to contexts. For example, a student may be highly motivated in

geography but not in algebra. Disadvantaged students may be very unmotivated in some school environments but very motivated in others. Some teachers put a higher priority on setting up a motivating classroom environment

than others. Motivation also reflects cognitive factors such as the ways in

which individuals differ in how they interpret their success and failure and

their beliefs about how “fixed” their ability is.

All children are born with a desire to learn, to master new skills (walking,

talking) and to feel competent. The good feeling that comes from mastering a

new or challenging task is the basis for life-long learning. What happens to this

drive for mastery or success at new tasks as children grow and develop? As

children get older, mastery is increasingly defined by feedback from others.

Students depend on parents and teachers to tell them if they are “mastering”

reading, for example. In addition, mastery becomes more difficult to define,

and often teachers are not clear about how they define mastery on a particular

task. Schools, in particular, are often not designed to encourage individual

feelings of mastery. Rather, they sort students into ability groups (the “A”

student, the “C” or average student, the failing student) based on how they do

relative to grade-level expectations.

7
Consider the following:

Although children in the early grades have some difficulty following directions and completing tasks, nearly all are eager, self-confident learners. . . .

Young children typically have very high (sometimes unrealistic) levels of

confidence. In one of my own studies we asked kindergartners, first, second,

and third graders to rate their smartness on a 1-5 scale, with “5” representing the smartest child in their class. Nearly every kindergartner and most of

the first graders gave themselves a “5,” including some who were actually

performing very poorly compared to their classmates. By second or third

grade, some students begin to lose confidence, become anxious in learning

contexts, and consequently engage in activities that inhibit, rather than

facilitate, learning.

If motivational problems are not taken care of by high school, they can have

serious consequences for individuals’ behavior and learning. For the first

six-to-nine years of school, students have little choice in their educational

curriculum. Because they cannot avoid many tasks, motivational problems

are often expressed in terms of low-effort expenditure, poor attention, high

anxiety, or acting out. By high school, students have considerable choice in

the type and difficulty level of the course they take or whether they remain

in an educational context at all. Older students can, therefore, avoid

courses or even school. Thus, while the younger child who lacks self-confidence in math may “forget” to do her homework every day, the older student may simply not take any courses in math. Or, if the older child’s selfconfidence is very low, she may drop out of school altogether. As choices

increase, students’ methods to deal with motivational problems become

more drastic. (Stipek, 1993)

Conclusion

Many schools have not focused on improving student motivation as an important outcome. Rather they have focused mainly on improving test scores or

achievement—a subtle, but significantly different, approach. A focus on student achievement often leads schools to think in terms of students as the

problem or as needing something done to them. If, in addition to a focus on

academic outcomes, school-improvement teams focused on improving student

motivation, they would be more likely to consider improvements in the learning environment and more likely to invite regular feedback from students

about how they feel about school and learning.

8
What Kind of Motivation Are We Ultimately

Hoping to Cultivate: Intrinsic or Extrinsic?

Intrinsic Motivation

Research has shown that some students report that they have “task-oriented”

goals for doing their schoolwork. These students say they work to gain mastery or understanding and feel good about accomplishing challenging tasks.

They can be said to have a “mastery” orientation or be intrinsically motivated.

They judge their abilities according to a set of internal standards—how much

they learned, how much they improved, how hard they tried, etc. When they

experience difficulty, they increase their efforts because they believe effort is

necessary for success or improvement. When students are motivated to learn,

they willingly put forth the necessary effort to develop and to apply their skills.

Extrinsic Motivation

Other students say they feel successful when they please the teacher or do

better than other students, rather than when they understand something new.

In the research literature, these students are said to be primarily motivated by

extrinsic factors (grades, parent approval, etc.) and by an “ability” orientation

(a need to prove their ability). These students feel successful when they

receive the best grade or do well with little effort, because it implies high

ability. In addition, when these students experience difficulty, they are not

likely to increase their effort because it could imply low ability if they do

poorly or fail.

What Advantages Are There to Providing a

School Environment That Emphasizes Intrinsic,

Rather Than Extrinsic, Reasons for Learning?

Researchers have found that students who report a more intrinsic approach to,

or reasons for, learning tend to take on more challenging tasks, persist on tasks

longer, handle failure better, and use better learning strategies. For example

● Students focused on intrinsic goals prefer challenging activities over easy

tasks because they can learn from them (Elliot & Dweck, 1988; Ames &

Archer, 1988).

● With an intrinsic or learning-oriented focus, students are more likely to

seek instrumental forms of help that allow them to continue working on

their own (e.g., asking for hints, examples, or information rather than the

9
answer). When students are more focused on external reasons for doing

schoolwork (e.g., good grades, fear of failure), they prefer a more passive

form of help-seeking that involves less cognitive effort but gets the work

done (Arbreton & Roesner, 1993).

● Students who are focused on their ability to perform (e.g., extrinsic reasons) show poor recall of information when the learning tasks require

deeper levels of information processing (Benware & Deci, 1984; Graham &

Golan, 1991).

Thus, what may be of interest to educators who have relied on extrinsic means

(grades, rewards, threats of tests) to motivate students is that students who

report working for external, rather than internal, reasons use more superficial

learning strategies, such as simply memorizing or rehearsing information

(Ames & Archer, 1988; Graham & Golan, 1991; Meece, Blumenfeld, & Hoyle,

1988; Nolen, 1988). In short, students appear to benefit most from learning

situations when they are focused on doing school work for internal or intrinsic

reasons. They persist longer, try alternative problem-solving strategies, seek

appropriate assistance (not “just the answer”), and use learning strategies that

enhance understanding rather than rote memory.

Work Avoidance

In addition to understanding whether students seem more motivated by intrinsic

or extrinsic goals, it is also important to know what percentage of the population

is “work avoidant” (i.e., students who work with the minimum amount of effort).

The number of students with this kind of orientation may be growing, based on

the number of students entering college and community college still needing

remediation. In fact, some reforms, such as Tech Prep, are predicated on the

assumption that the middle majority of students who choose not to go to a fouryear college often choose watered-down courses and, in general, do their “seat

time” to get their degree with little commitment and involvement. Discussions

about the abundant use of social promotion focus on the tendency of these

kinds of policies to produce “work-avoidant” students. Students learn that there

are no standards for promotion and, therefore, do the bare minimum.

Even though it’s helpful to analyze students’ reasons for doing schoolwork in a

broad way as mostly intrinsic, extrinsic, or work-avoidant, students may have

different reasons for doing or not doing work in different contexts. Particular

students may be intrinsically motivated for one teacher but work-avoidant for

another. They may be intrinsically motivated on class projects but extrinsically

motivated on chapter tests.

10
On any particular task, students are motivated to behave the way they do by

some goal or reason. A student may want to avoid looking “dumb” and, thus,

cheat or copy others’ work. A class clown may be motivated by making others

laugh. Some students are more motivated by social than academic goals.

Rather than thinking about students as lacking motivation, it may be helpful to

think and analyze more broadly the reasons why they seem to exert different

levels of effort. They choose to react to an assignment in a certain way for a

reason, even if they have trouble articulating the reason.

What looks like lack of motivation may not be. For example, a student in a

math class may have the desire to do well but feel so uncomfortable asking

questions that might seem “dumb” that he or she doesn’t ask the questions and

then can’t do the work. Or, a teacher may infer that because a student doesn’t

write very much on daily writing tasks that he or she is lazy, when, in reality,

the student is having trouble coming up with interesting topics. A student may

stop participating in class or asking questions when confused, and a teacher

may infer it is lack of interest, when unknowingly, the teacher is reacting to

student questions in ways that put down the student.

Overuse of Extrinsic Approaches to Motivating Students

Intrinsic motivation is associated with a variety of positive-learning strategies.

Because it is easier and comes more naturally to many of us as parents and

teachers to use rewards and punishments as controllers of children’s behavior,

many students are more used to extrinsic rewards and to feeling controlled

and told what to do, rather than valuing learning for what it can do for them.

Research suggests that there is value in getting students to think more about

what they are doing (the task at hand) than how they are doing it (the grade

or reward or punishment they will get). When the extent and frequency of

evaluations (grades, rewards, punishments) are overdone and students

are overly focused on how well they are doing, how they compare to

others, or what they might get, they are less likely to perform well

(Kohn, 1993). Kohn states

This may seem paradoxical, but the fact is that students overly concerned

about their performance come to see learning as a means to an end, the

end being the good grade or other reward they will receive. They start to

think that their performance, especially when they fail, is due to innate

intelligence (or its absence): “I screwed up, therefore I’m stupid.” That in

turn leads them to assume there isn’t much point in trying harder next

time, which means they are unlikely to improve. It also leads them to try to

avoid difficult tasks so they can escape negative evaluation. After all, to

think about your performance is to think less about what you are doing

than about how you appear to others.

11
He concludes

The famous “Wad-ja-get” preoccupation of students—compulsively comparing their own grades to others—is not a function of human nature but of

the performance (ability) orientation that suffuses most American classrooms and stifles children’s interest in what they are learning.

Conclusion

The overuse of extrinsic motivators (excessive grading, rewarding, and punishing) undermines students’ interest in and ability to take responsibility for their

own learning and can create fear and anxiety (Will it be on the test? Can I

pass? Is this a dumb question? Will I get laughed at?).

Why Do Students Differ in Their Approaches

to Learning?

Why are some students more intrinsically motivated to learn (motivated to

master new skills and knowledge) than others? Some reasons discussed in the

literature are child-rearing practices, students’ perceptions of the role of ability,

the school environment, and disadvantagement and cultural considerations.

Child-Rearing Practices

Harter (1978) maintains that an intrinsic orientation results from successful

learning experiences early in development that lead children to feel they can

effectively and competently deal with their environment. As a result, these

children develop an internal set of mastery standards to judge their accomplishments and a strong sense of confidence in their abilities (i.e., self-efficacy). Students who are primarily extrinsically motivated to learn do not

develop early feelings of competency and efficacy because they have experienced a history of early failure or disapproval in response to their learning

efforts.

More recent studies have analyzed differences in parent-child relations. This

research suggests that parenting styles that are overly controlling or permissive

can have a detrimental effect on children’s motivation and achievement patterns (Dornbush, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987; Ginsburg &

Bronstein, 1993; Grolnick & Ryan, 1989). In contrast, parenting styles that

support and facilitate the development of children’s autonomy are generally

associated with higher levels of intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Examples of this parenting style might include giving children input into

decision making, stating expectations in a suggestive rather than directive

manner, acknowledging children’s needs and feelings, and providing choices

or alternatives.

12
Once children enter school, parents’ goals continue to be an important influence. Parents with different goals respond differently to their child’s performance. For example, some parents emphasize good grades by giving large

amounts of money for each “A.” Others might emphasize that their children do

their best. Some parents punish their children when they receive bad grades.

This contributes to a fear of school. Others are more concerned with behavior,

athletic performance, or popularity rather than school work and emphasize

doing enough to get by (Stipek, 1993).

Beliefs about Ability and Effort

Dweck and Elliot (1983) suggest that students have different beliefs about the

role of ability or intelligence in school success. Some students believe that their

ability is a fixed entity that cannot be improved through practice or effort.

Other students have an incremental view of ability. They believe they can

improve their ability by investing greater effort or by trying different strategies.

Dweck and Elliot maintain that these different beliefs about the role of ability

are unrelated to objective measures of ability (grades or achievement test

scores). For example, a low-ability student who experiences failure but believes greater effort could help him improve could maintain confidence in the

possibilities for school success. Or high-ability students who perceive their

ability as lower than it is, and who believe intelligence is “fixed,” could doubt

their ability to succeed as learning tasks become more difficult.

Although one would expect that those with the highest IQ and achievement

test scores might be most confident about future attainment and less likely to

attribute difficulties to a lack of ability, this is not always the case. There is, for

example, research that shows that girls have a higher tendency to avoid challenges, attribute failure to a lack of ability, and to show deteriorated performance after failure than boys.

One study showed strong differences between bright girls and boys. The “A”

girl students preferred tasks they were good at, and the “A” boy students

preferred ones that were challenges, that they would have to work hard at to

master (Licht et al, 1989). Thus, bright girls compared to bright boys (and

compared to less-bright girls) can exhibit less confidence, lower preference for

challenging tasks, and more frequent debilitation in the face of failure or

confusion. That is, they are not less motivated but, perhaps, less confident.

This finding can explain the discrepancy in boys’ and girls’ math achievement

scores in junior high and high school. For example, new units and courses in

math involve new skills, concepts, and frameworks that increase in difficulty

over the high school years. Thus, given the lesser confidence of bright girls, they

may be less likely to attempt the novelty and difficulty of new courses for fear of

failure. Teachers need to be sensitive to the fact that even bright children (such

as bright girls in math) need help in interpreting confusion as a normal part of

the learning process, not as a sign that they aren’t “good” in math.

13
School-Related Experiences

Most children begin elementary school with a desire to learn and to master

new skills. Preschool teachers rarely complain about their students’ motivation

to learn. However, this intrinsic interest in learning rapidly declines with age

and experience in school. Harter (1981) reported a systematic shift from a

predominantly intrinsic motivational orientation in third grade to a more

extrinsic orientation by the ninth grade. Gottfried (1985) has shown significant

declines in intrinsic motivation for reading, mathematics, science, and social

studies by the seventh grade. Developmental changes in students’ intrinsic

motivation are generally accompanied by declines in their competency and

self-efficacy beliefs and by increases in their worry and anxiety. The largest

change in students’ motivation occurs when they make the transition

from elementary to middle school in early adolescence.

What causes these changes? Some point to the school environment. For example, as students progress in school, there is an increased emphasis on

evaluation and competition. This can heighten students’ concerns about their

ability and lower intrinsic motivation (Eccles, Midgley, & Adler, 1984). A study

by Harter, Whitesall, and Kowalski (1992) indicates that, compared with elementary school, seventh-grade students reported a greater emphasis placed

on competition, knowing the right answer, getting good grades, and being

compared with others. Moreover, students who perceived these changes

reported lower academic competence, more anxiety about learning, and

greater extrinsic motivation compared with students who did not report these

changes between elementary and junior high school.

Socio-Economic Status (SES) and Cultural Considerations

The motivational problems of students from economically disadvantaged

families are often more complex and difficult to address (Braddock &

McPartland, 1993). Success breeds success; that is, success on challenging tasks

leads to greater confidence and interest in subsequent tasks. Disadvantaged

students who start school behind in development have fewer experiences of

success in school. The following factors may also be important:

● Compared with middle-class families, poor families have fewer resources to

support their children’s learning outside school. These students often need

extra help in mastering basic and advanced skills, but placement in special

programs increases the risk that these students will perceive themselves as

slow learners.

● The home and community socialization patterns of disadvantaged students

are sometimes mismatched to the middle-class orientation of schools. As a

result, disadvantaged students frequently experience adjustment and

discipline problems that can lead them to feel negatively about their

schooling experiences.

14
● Older disadvantaged students have difficulty seeing the relevance and

importance of schoolwork to their future goals, due to needs for instant

gratification, high rates of unemployment in their communities, and/or lack

of financial resources to further their education.

● Some minority peer cultures discourage achievement. As Brown (1993)

states

High achievers must weigh the risk that their academic efforts may be

resented by peers and that peers will associate them with a crowd that is

routinely omitted from social activities. Minority students who strive to

excel academically risk being ostracized by ethnic peers for appearing

to sell out their own cultural heritage for a spot in the majority culture.

● Some students are distracted from learning for reasons beyond their control. Webb, Covington, and Guthrie (1993) argue

School is meaningless to the student whose energies are tied up in dayto-day emotional or physical survival. We cannot overestimate the

impact of these negative conditions on our nation’s youth. Almost one

child in four lives in poverty (Kirst, 1989); it is estimated that at least

one in four girls and one in ten boys experience sexual abuse (Russell,

1984); reported cases of physical abuse are at an all-time high and

rising (Barth and Perry, 1989); and gang activity and violence and

general violent crime in most large cities are rising, as well (San Francisco Chronicle, April 18, 1992). At the same time, resources needed to

combat these conditions, such as child protective services, income

support for families, and supervised recreation programs, are increasingly strained. . . . These then are the presumptions of our ‘distractedmind’ model: first, that learning is basically a pleasurable activity;

second, that various conditions from inside and outside school distract

students from learning; and third, that the impact of these distractions

can be reduced so that more students will be motivated to remain in

school and to work harder while there.

Conclusion

School is one of many factors that impact student motivation. Students who

come from families that encourage learning for its own rewards and who

reinforce students for trying their best are likely to come to school intrinsically

motivated. But the reality is that many students come to school without this

kind of support and encouragement—all the more reason for schools to

“invite,” rather than “force,” learning.

15
Is There Evidence That Motivational Patterns

Can Be Changed?

Motivation is not an innate personality trait but a constellation of students’ past

successes, failures, goals, and beliefs about the value of effort, beliefs about

their ability, and environmental conditions. If schools are to focus on improving student motivation as a schoolwide goal, what evidence do we have that

they can be successful?

Research has clearly documented adaptive and maladaptive patterns of

achievement behavior. The adaptive (mastery) oriented pattern is characterized by challenge seeking and high, effective persistence in the face of

obstacles. Children displaying this pattern appear to enjoy exerting effort in

the pursuit of task mastery. In contrast, the maladaptive (helpless) pattern is

characterized by challenge avoidance and low persistence in the face of

difficulty. Children displaying this pattern tend to evidence negative affect

(such as anxiety) and negative self-cognitions when they confront obstacles.

(Dweck, 1986)

It is not purely intellectual ability that causes these differences. More important

is how students come to understand and attribute their success and failure. As

mentioned earlier, students, unlike infants, cannot define mastery for themselves. Whether or not they have good feelings about their work comes

from social agents who tell them how good their work is and what they

can do to improve it.

Students often need help in interpreting failure or mistakes. Failure is an important part of life. When second or third graders first experience failure—coming

in last in a gymnastics meet, missing three questions on a spelling test, etc.—

they may come to believe they are bad or stupid. Parents and teachers can turn

this thinking around and help them understand the role of effort and practice. If

parents and teachers are not there to help them learn the role of effort, with

repeated failure, they may develop a “learned helplessness” attitude.

Experimental Studies Have Shown That Helping Students

“Interpret” Their Failures Can Lead to Higher Motivation.

In a study of fifth-grade students, Elliot and Dweck (1988) demonstrated that

patterns of learned helplessness reflected learning conditions. When the

benefits of learning were emphasized (e.g., “Doing this task will sharpen your

mind”), students demonstrated a mastery-oriented learning pattern. When they

experienced difficulty or failure, they responded by trying different problemsolving strategies, concentrating harder, and staying focused on the task.

16
In contrast, when students were told their performance would be filmed and

judged by “experts,” they demonstrated a learned helpless pattern, especially if

they lacked confidence in their ability to perform the task. When these students

experienced difficulty or failure, they responded by using less effective problemsolving strategies, giving up attempts to find more effective ways of solving the

problem, expressing negative affect toward the task (“I’m going to hate this

part”), and blaming themselves for failure (“I’m not good at this” or “I’m confused”). These students essentially perceived their learning problems as insurmountable and stopped trying, even though they had an ability to learn.

Experimental motivational interventions have been implemented on individual

children who exhibit maladaptive responses to difficulty. In particular, researchers have worked with children to teach them to attribute their failures to

a lack of effort, rather than to a lack of ability. These interventions have produced changes in the degree to which these children persist in the face of

failure across a variety of tasks.

Teacher-based and Schoolwide Interventions to Increase Student

Motivation Also Report Success.

Carol Ames, a researcher who had been successful in improving student

motivation in settings outside of the school, initiated a project in the late 1980s

to work with elementary schools to change the culture of their classrooms. Her

focus was on student mastery and improvement rather than on getting good

grades or doing better than others. She assembled a large notebook of strategies that teachers and parents could try to help students focus on mastery. Her

results (Ames, 1990) focused on comparisons to students in control groups.

She found evidence that this use of new strategies by teachers led to more

positive attitudes toward school, higher self-concepts of ability, an enhanced

preference for challenging work, and reports of more intrinsic motivation by

their students than the control-group students.

Martin Maehr and Carol Midgely, at the University of Michigan, also motivational researchers, were interested in whether motivational research could be

applied at the school level to influence policies that affect students’ drive for

mastery. They felt that even though teachers could apply research to improving their classroom, schoolwide practices such as ability grouping might

undermine what individual teachers do.

Given the increased impact of the overall school culture on motivation

during the middle grade years (Maehr, 1991), the fact that middle school

environments stress ability-focused goals more and task-focused goals less

than elementary schools (Midgley, Anderman, & Hicks, 1995), and the fact

that a student’s overall experience in middle school is determined by the

sum of his or her experiences in several classes, Maehr and Midgley (1991)

developed a coalition project which used goal theory as a guiding principle

17
to change the motivational climate in middle grade schools. (Anderman &

Maehr, 1994)

The study group of researchers and educators met for three years to examine

policies. At the end of the project, the team had successfully implemented

some changes, such as doing away with ability grouping (except in math),

team teaching, block scheduling, and changes in the school awards programs.

The researchers acknowledge that the kinds of schoolwide changes that were

made were not unique to their project. What was unique was that the schools

had better-articulated reasons for making changes and had a clear goal in mind

(increasing intrinsic motivation). They could evaluate the changes made in

terms of the effects on student motivation and students’ personal investment in

the learning process.

Conclusions

So, what are the answers to our questions?

1. What is a highly motivated student? Students who accept mistakes and

learn from them, avoid shortcuts, initiate independent learning, enjoy

learning and take pride in their work, and select challenging tasks.

2. Is the lack of student motivation a problem in schools? Yes, particularly at

the middle and high school levels and with non-college bound and some

minority peer cultures.

3. Whose problem is lack of motivation? Students live in spheres of motivational influences (parents, peer culture, school culture, classroom culture).

All are important to understand.

4. What kind of motivation should schools aim to cultivate? Research suggests

that better learning occurs when intrinsic rewards or “mastery of tasks” is

emphasized over extrinsic motivators (grades, fear of quizzes, etc.) whenever possible. That is, an emphasis on interesting, engaging work for

students produces better learning than frequent grading on predictable

worksheets.

5. Why aren’t more students intrinsically motivated? In addition to typical

school cultures which stress extrinsic motivators (e.g. frequent grading),

parental child-rearing practices, students’ beliefs about the role of effort in

achieving success, and the home cultural environment all are factors that

affect students’ motivation to learn.

6. Is there evidence that schools can increase students’ motivation to learn

and, ultimately, life-long learning? YES!

18
Chapter Two

Using External Incentives

To Motivate Students

Chapter Preview

Many schools, when they consider ways to increase student motivation or

manage student behavior, jump immediately to rewards and consequences

because that is what they know best. This chapter asks educators to consider the effectiveness of their use of rewards and punishments (consequences) in light of the research presented.

Recommendations for the use of extrinsic incentives are provided. For

example, extrinsic incentives work best for routine learning tasks that hold

little intrinsic appeal for students (e.g., multiplication facts). For problemsolving, creative, or critical-thinking tasks, research suggests incentives may

be detrimental and interfere with concentration.

Studies over the last half-century show that punishment is counterproductive and that, when adults use approaches that are highly controlling and

punitive, children become more hostile and disruptive. Educators might

consider whether “consequences” are used for control (to obtain compliance) or whether they are used for “information” (to help students take

responsibility and better understand the impact of their actions).

This chapter also describes one school district’s experience with designing

schoolwide extrinsic incentive programs. In 1991, SERVE funded a research

project with the Birmingham Public Schools to look at the implementation

of incentive systems in four urban schools serving a number of at-risk

students. The experiences of these teachers and schools are used here in

looking at the issue of incentives.

We conclude that extrinsic incentives can be helpful for certain students

and for certain situations, but they are clearly only a piece of the motivation puzzle, given the long-term goal of students becoming responsible for

19
their own learning. The most effective motivation program is one that

encourages intrinsic reasons for engaging in learning tasks whenever

possible and uses incentives in an individual and strategic manner.

A

re extrinsic rewards overused in schools? Educators need to think carefully

about when and how much to use extrinsic incentives. Because the use of

rewards and punishments comes so easily and naturally to us as parents and

teachers, it is often the first strategy used in an attempt to improve motivation.

However, when overused, external rewards may send the message that learning is not pleasurable and rewarding in and of itself.

Many school systems have designed elaborate incentive programs to reward

students for good grades and school attendance, but this idea is not new.

Token economies were widely used in the 1970s to reward students for good

behavior. Now, incentive programs are being implemented on a much larger

scale than ever before, and many schools receive substantial support from the

business community for these programs. Through such partnerships, schools

now use incentives such as free pizzas, records, CD players, mountain bikes,

and even cars as rewards for school attendance and achievement.

Why Use Extrinsic Incentives?

Extrinsic incentives appear to work best for routine learning tasks that hold

little intrinsic appeal for students. For example, most students are not naturally

inclined to learn multiplication facts. Rewards are less effective for complex or

creative learning tasks because they interfere with concentration. Brophy

(1987a) states

Rewards are better used with routine tasks than with novel ones, better with

tasks intended to produce mastery or specific skills than with tasks designed

to encourage incidental learning or discovery, and better with tasks for

which speed of performance or quantity of output is of more concern than

creativity, artistry, or craftsmanship.

For many academic tasks, it may not be possible to experience intrinsic satisfaction from the task until one has acquired a minimal level of proficiency.

Extrinsic rewards can be used to “jump start” the learning process until students are able to experience new sources of motivation from the activity itself.

With regards to the development of literacy skills, Csikszentmihayi (1990)

states

A person usually learns the rudiments of reading and writing under compulsion. The goal is to avoid punishment and to get praise of adults who are

significant in our lives. But eventually, if the learning process has been

successful, we begin to enjoy our ability to read. At that point the goal

20
becomes intrinsic to the task

itself—the anticipation of reading

a book or solving a problem is

enough to motivate the activity.

Extrinsic incentives are also effective

for students who have negative

attitudes toward school and who, for

a variety of reasons, are not motivated by conventional methods.

When all other methods fail, a

reinforcement system may be very

valuable, especially when tangible

reinforcers are used as “primers of

behavior.” According to O’Leary,

Becker, Evans, and Saudargas (1969),

tangible reinforcers can have several

immediate effects:

They may serve as a concrete

demonstration to the recipient

that he can succeed—no small

accomplishment to an individual

who has experienced persistent

failures. Tangible reinforcers

many also prompt an individual

to engage in behavior he previously avoided, thereby creating

the opportunity for increased skill

and task-related satisfaction.

Consistent with these views, the

Birmingham teachers who participated

in the SERVE Research and Development study reported that incentives

were particularly useful for students

with behavior problems and with

negative attitudes toward learning.

They also described cases in which

incentives were initially used as

“primers” to induce the student to

learn. As the student achieved success, the source of motivation shifted

to the act of learning itself. One

middle school teacher stated that

students need to get to the point

I Don’t Know How to Do That!

Tammy is a fifth–grader who came to my class with low

self-esteem. She was very tall for her age and was a

repeater. Her favorite words were, “I don’t know how to

do that.”

I started off trying to get Tammy to try and do an assignment first before she would give up and say, “I don’t

know how to do that!” I found that Tammy’s weakness

was math. She feared math and thought it was some

unknown language. She would get very disruptive or ask

to be excused or go to sleep to avoid it. She was stronger in reading. So, to get Tammy involved, I started

praising her for everything she said or did in reading. I

would allow her time on the computer every time she

did well because she loved working on it.

I began to turn some of her math problems into word

problems and discuss them with her. An example was,

“We have 150 pencils. I must divide them equally with

the class. How many should each get, Tammy?”

Then, I would watch her reaction and try to observe how

she went about getting her answer. Even though it took

her a long time, she was able to find the answer by

putting her problems into words. As a result, I would

allow her free periods to work with lower grades or to

help the principal. At the end of the week, I would give

her mother a positive note saying how well Tammy

performed and give Tammy a lead pencil and a diary or

puzzle book. At approximately the end of the third nine

weeks, I noticed Tammy would study her multiplication

facts on her own. At the end of the year, she knew her

1s through 9s. I was very proud of her, and I kept

praising her. At the end of each nine weeks, she received

some type of incentive. It was very important to her to

be able to show her mom what she could do because

her mother was very critical of her.

At the end of the year, I could see that Tammy had

matured. She wrote me a note that said, “You are the

best teacher I ever had.”

21
where they are doing the work because they “know it’s beneficial, and it’s going

to help them in the end.” (The “I Don’t Know How to Do That” account on the

previous page was written by a Birmingham teacher to describe how teachers

can use incentives to achieve this goal.)

Rewards and Punishments

Extrinsic incentives or reinforcers can take a number of different forms. Tangible reinforcers include material objects such as food, stickers, pencils, and

crayons, to mention a few. Praise, awards, and special recognition are forms of

social or symbolic reinforcement. Special privileges and extra recess time also

serve as positive incentives.

It is difficult to find incentives or rewards that are universally effective. For

example, special awards for skill improvement or good attendance may work

for elementary school students who want adult approval, but in older students,

peer approval is much more critical. The Birmingham teachers found that

movies and assemblies, for example, were more rewarding for older students

because they allowed students to interact with their peers. Unless these rewards are valued by the peer group, they will lose their effectiveness.

Much research suggests that the “carrot” approach is more effective than the

use of aversive incentives, such as threats, reprimands, and punishments. As

one Birmingham teacher put it, “You can attract more flies with honey than

with vinegar.” Punishments as incentives to behave are particularly problematic

because they often (in the long run) lead to resistance and more of the behavior that is creating the problem.

Punishments at home or school include, but are not limited to, time-out,

spanking/hitting, humiliation by yelling at or criticizing publicly, withholding

privileges, and ignoring. School-related punishments or threats include F’s and

zeroes, additional assignments, trips to the principal’s office, suspensions,

name on board (public humiliation), group silence (heads on the desk), and

citations/tickets. Alfie Kohn concludes in Punished by Rewards (1993b)

The research literature leaves no doubt that punishment is counter-productive. Studies over more than a half a century show that when adults use

disciplinary approaches variously described as “highly controlling,” “power

assertive,” or just plain punitive, children become more disruptive, aggressive, and hostile.

It is not the short-term results that are in doubt. Clearly, many (but not all)

children will bend to power; punishment may work in the short-term to get

the desired behavior.

22
Does Punishment Help Children Become More Responsible for

Their Own Behavior?

No behavioral manipulation ever helped a child develop a commitment to

becoming a caring and responsible person. (Kohn, 1993b)

Kohn argues that if responsibility is conceived of as conformity to school rules

and general compliance and obedience, then rewards and punishments can

achieve the goal. But he said,

If by responsibility we mean the capacity to act carefully and thoughtfully,

to make ethical judgments and behave in accordance with them, then . . .

extrinsic motivators take us in the wrong direction.

Studies have shown that over the long term, frequent punishment or control of

behavior by negative consequences leads to resistance because the child feels

like his or her point of view is not important. The more children are forced

into a behavior and feel out of control, the more they will resist that behavior

(Kohn, 1993b).

Researchers have found that the more we restrict children’s choices—the

more controlling and heavy-handed we are—the less likely they will be to

comply.

The occasional time-out is not the issue; rather, the issue is the degree to

which the student/child perceives the environment as manipulative rather than

caring. An environment with numerous rules and punishments is generally not

one in which students are asked to confront why they are acting the way they

are (and the impact it has on others).

Kohn (1993b) argues that negative consequences are often difficult to distinguish from punishment.

A list of specific rules and consequences establishes a confrontational tone;

the message is not that members of a community will work together and try to

help someone who stumbles, but that anyone who violates a pre-established

edict is in trouble. Adults are principally defined as enforcers, obliged to prove

that they follow through on threats. Children are encouraged to focus in a

legalistic way on exactly what behavior is covered by each rule, how the rule

will be applied, what circumstances may create exceptions, and so forth. . . .

And, as with any other punitive arrangement, children learn more about the

use of coercion than about how or why to act responsibly.

23
One teacher pointed out that when students are engaged in establishing a few

class rules and are responsible for setting consequences, the percentage of

those who don’t take responsibility seriously decreases. She also suggested that

educators consider the extent to which misbehavior is created by an overabundance of rules, routines, and procedures that must be followed.

Research is clear that it is the controlling nature of the administration of punishments and consequences that is the problem. When they are administered

strictly to manipulate and control behavior, they teach only compliance—not

responsibility. Consequences when used as part of a learning process (when

the child is an active participant in understanding what he or she did and the

impact it had, and thus, a partner in the process of changing or rethinking the

behavior) may be more effective. Teachers might ask themselves if they are

administering a “consequence” system in a way that teaches students about

coercion and power or in a way that teaches students about responsibility and

self-assessment.

Summarizing Potential Problems with

Incentives and Associated Recommendations

Teachers are drawn to incentives and rewards because they generally see

immediate improvement in behavior. Research also shows that reinforcement

strategies are particularly useful for students with behavioral problems and that

even the most recalcitrant learner may respond to tangible rewards. It is

important to know what not to reward, what to reward, and how and when to

reward.

What Not to Reward

Rewarding the wrong things

The effects of rewards on task performance must be considered. Students are

less likely to engage in critical or creative thinking that takes time and effort

when they are focused on extrinsic rewards. Numerous studies suggest that the

administration of rewards can interrupt concentration, shift attention away

from the task, and ultimately impair performance (Lipe and Jung, 1971). Some

studies also suggest that rewards have a negative effect on students’ willingness to attempt challenging tasks (Harter, 1978). Rewards can even influence

how students work together. For example, one study showed that students

who were offered a reward for their success in tutoring younger students

tended to be more controlling and demanding than students who were not

rewarded (Garbarino, 1975).

Recommendation: Rewards should be used only for tasks that have limited

intrinsic appeal or for students who show little interest in learning on their own.

24
What to Reward

Rewarding for participation, regardless of quality of effort

Rewards have the strongest negative effect when they are contingent on simply

participating in an activity, rather than meeting a performance standard. If

students are praised or rewarded regardless of how well they perform, they

soon learn that the reward has no meaning. Rewards may be perceived as

“bribes” when they are used just to get students to do something, regardless of

how well they do it.

Recommendation: When incentives are offered for academic work or interpersonal behavior, they should be contingent on a particular level of mastery or

on the attainment of certain improvement goals. Incentives should be used to

inform students of the teacher’s standards and to focus their attention on

specific aspects of their performance (i.e., why they earned the reward).

How to Reward

Choosing inappropriate rewards

Rewards must have value to students. In Birmingham, elementary teachers

discovered that candy did not work as an incentive because children knew

that if they did not win any, they could still get it on their own. Others have

noticed that material rewards have less impact than social events for middle

school students.

Most teachers generally use a mixture of different incentives. The Birmingham

teachers used both tangible items such as stickers, treats, books, and pencils,

as well as social reinforcers such as praise, special awards, and certificates.

Smaller rewards and praise were given on a daily basis, whereas larger tangible awards or symbolic reinforcers were presented at the end of grading

periods or the school year.

A good place to start identifying appropriate rewards is to ask students to

describe the type of incentives that would motivate them. A study of this type

was done by a Birmingham elementary school. The teachers were surprised to

learn that what students wanted as incentives was very different from what the

teachers thought would work. They also learned that students do not always

need large incentives. Often a small incentive that is very popular at the time

works equally well.

Recommendation: Use interesting and challenging learning activities as rewards (games, computer tasks, opportunities to tutor younger children, extra

time to read or do homework, etc.). These rewards help to convey the value

of learning.

25
Recommendation: Threats, punishment, and other aversive incentives should

be avoided because they generate fear and anger, which undermine intrinsic

interest in learning.

Fairness

Rewards are sometimes used indiscriminately. Students are quick to pick up on

teacher favoritism, especially when the number of rewards is limited. Some

students are rewarded or praised for merely participating in an activity, while

others are rewarded on the basis of their performance. Group rewards (for the

“best” table) need to be carefully considered and designed. Students can turn

on and develop resentments against those students who cause them to lose

out on a group reward.

Recommendation: Incentives should be achievable by all students, not just the

high achievers. This goal can be accomplished by using improvement as a

standard for rewarding students as all students are capable of improving.

Students then must continue to make progress in order to receive additional

rewards.

Recommendation: Avoid rewarding students on a competitive basis (e.g., only

five of the best essays will be displayed). When students compete with others

for rewards, it focuses their attention on who will win or lose, rather than the

content of what they are learning.

Recommendation: If rewards are given on a group basis, there should be a

system of individual accountability so that students know how their own

behavior contributed to the group’s reward. Teachers should monitor and be

aware of how losing groups respond to students who they perceive as having

made them lose.

When to Reward

Time between behavior and reward

In order to be effective, incentives must be made contingent on the behavior

they are intended to increase. Most studies show that praise or reinforcement

immediately following the desired behavior produces the most dramatic

results. This requirement is difficult to fulfill if rewards are administered at the

end of the day, week, or marking period. Such long intervals between behavior and rewards can diminish the effectiveness of a particular incentive. High

school students may be able to delay payoffs for a relatively long period of

time, but younger children need more immediate reinforcement or they lose

interest.

Recommendation: Rewards should be used in ways that help students see the

connection between their behavior and the reward. When there are long time

delays, teachers should encourage students to keep personal records of their

progress and improvement.

26
Schoolwide Incentive Programs

As mentioned previously, the Birmingham Public School system participated in

a SERVE Research and Development study on the implementation of incentive

programs. Four inner-city pilot schools (two elementary and two middle

schools) were asked to implement an incentives program. The original idea

was to pilot an approach for motivating at-risk students only. However, several

of the schools involved were already in the process of developing schoolwide

award initiatives and did not like the idea of only targeting incentive “dollars”

on the most at-risk children. The teachers identified the following advantages

and disadvantages of targeted versus schoolwide recognition efforts.

Schoolwide programs that are developed and applied to the performance of

students in all classes and administered in schoolwide settings:

● Have the potential to reach all students

● Can reach average students through attendance and conduct awards

● Can support school-improvement goals related to improving school climate

(parent involvement)

● Can generate excitement within a school (field trips, meals, dances for

older students)

● Can create good feelings through all school assemblies

Targeted incentive programs which are intended to improve the behavior or

performance of certain at-risk segments of the student population:

● Are less expensive than schoolwide approaches

● Have less cumbersome record keeping

● Can be more helpful for certain types of students

● Are easier to manage

● Are often preferred by service groups and businesses

● Can be easier to track progress, impact

● Can help teachers build a closer relationship with students involved

At the two inner–city elementary schools, the faculty went with a schoolwide

incentive program. The program consisted of keeping records of student

27
attendance, conduct, and achievement. The committee that designed the

incentive program was responsible for the following: developing procedures,

writing a handbook for teachers, selecting and buying rewards, determining

and communicating deadlines, publicizing the plan, answering questions,

enlisting outside funding and support, and collecting and tabulating student

data for rewards. The group believed that a well-run incentive program would

have the following characteristics:

● Identified funding

● Clear-cut goals/purposes

● Teacher/administrator buy-in

● Guidelines in writing

● Well-publicized to all

● Positive approach to obtaining teacher involvement as opposed to threats

● Organized with schedules known in advance of due dates, rewards

● Record-keeping for teachers kept at a minimum

● Strong, respected planning committee

● Student and parent input obtained

● Implementation monitored and adjustments made to programs as needed

The planning team at this school clearly had pride and ownership in this

approach to increasing motivation and achievement. They took pride in making students feel good about their progress and achievement. Teachers sensed

that incentives were not a control mechanism to bribe students but a way to

celebrate success at whatever level students can first demonstrate they are

“trying.” Perhaps for some students, trying means coming to school. Coming to

school is a small step that can lead to other positive outcomes.

Philip was a bright third grader with conduct and attendance problems. His

relatives were in prison and did not care about him. After we started giving

him ice cream treats for improvement in attendance and conduct, he

started to come to school more regularly.

 I’ve had several students who never worried about getting to school on time.

When the incentive program started, they would come on time every day. A

28
child who never received a reward for anything would get one for attendance because it was easy to obtain.

The incentive committee evaluated the implementation process and made

adjustments as needed. They carefully chose the achievement areas for which

rewards were needed. For example, based on Chapter I test scores, they

determined that students needed more work on recognition and comprehension of sight words. Students received daily stickers, end-of-week stickers, and

a large, tangible incentive at the end of the grading period for demonstration

of word mastery. In this school, the incentive program was a good fit because

the principal and teachers were committed to finding a way to reach students

and setting high expectations.

At the same time, staff were aware that incentives weren’t the answer to

motivate all children.

Some children are just self-motivated. The incentives are an added reward.

We also have students who don’t care about incentives. I had two or three

this year that it didn’t matter what the incentive was. They had the ‘I-don’tcare’ attitude; so no, this does not work for all students.

Researchers (Ames, 1992) have also been clear about the fallacy of using

incentives for all students. The use of incentives can have multiple effects as a

function of the student’s initial level of interest. Rewards have a negative effect

on performance and intrinsic motivation when students indicate some initial

interest in the activity. But rewards can enhance the motivation of students

who are not highly motivated to learn or who do not find an activity of initial

interest (Lepper & Hoddell, 1989).

Given that incentives are effective for some students and for some situations,

problems arise when these differential effects are not considered. Researchers

point out that incentive systems can have unintended consequences when they

are applied to entire classrooms or schools of students with varying abilities

and interests. According to Ames (1992)

The relation of extrinsic rewards to individual differences is of critical

importance. In the classroom, extrinsic incentives are often intended to

motivate the least-attentive students or those who typically perform poorly;

however, the rewards are typically applied to the entire classroom or even

the entire school population, as in many reading incentive programs. The

hidden costs become most apparent when they are applied to these larger

groups where individual differences in interest, performance, and ability

are ignored.

29
Another teacher is clear that incentives are just one part of a complex motivational picture.

S. entered second grade with low self-esteem. She had not mastered firstgrade skills and was extremely shy. She received little encouragement from

home. I realized she needed extra attention and time, so I let her read 5-to10 minutes by herself sometime during the school day. With encouragement, special attention, and appropriate level materials, she quickly gained

self-confidence and pride. She attempted harder tasks, learned from her

mistakes, and felt good about herself. In time, she made the honor roll three

out of four times. She loved receiving tangibles related to school (pencils,

rulers, pencil box), and she was thrilled to be recognized as a knowledgeable student. She loved helping less able and younger students.

Clearly there are also risks associated with schoolwide incentive programs,

especially honor rolls and public rewards that not all can achieve. The comments below are additional observations from the Birmingham teachers. It is

important for a school that is using an incentive program to monitor closely

the impact on students so that decisions about continuing the program can be

based on a clear understanding of their positives and negatives.

Some of the children were trying for the honor roll and awards and didn’t

make it. They would be upset. It would take a few weeks before the child

would finally come around and try again.

Sometimes management and the awarding of an incentive does not

mean a positive experience for students. When awards are given, children

will feel bad who didn’t get any. When the “good” kids are held up to the

others as examples, the competition becomes a negative force.

Children can become too competitive and start fighting over rewards.

What about the child who put forth tremendous effort but could not master

the target percentage correct to get an award? The child was punished for

effort made. How can you help a child understand and feel good about

progress and at the same time help him realize what mastery means and

where he stands in relation to desired goals? The right program needs to

include something for effort because children know whether they are in the

“effort” or “mastery” group. Individualized goals for children at different

levels might be one way of keeping them involved.

The Birmingham study makes it clear that for incentive programs, as for any

educational change or program,

● The purpose must be clear

30
● The effort must be well-managed (good planning, organization, evaluation)

● The leader must be supportive

● The teachers must want the program and understand how it fits with their

school needs and philosophies

● The process must be one of continual improvement, learning from what is

attempted, and moving forward

Teachers in the Birmingham study realized that an incentive program is part of

a continual improvement process to motivate students to do their best. Exploring when and how to effectively use extrinsic incentives and consequences is

an ongoing process. To help generate some dialogue about what is working/

not working in schools and classrooms, we offer the following discussion

guide.

Discussion Guide for Use of Extrinsic Incentives

and Consequences

1. Canter’s (1989) Assertive Discipline has been widely used in schools.

Consider the following comments from Cunningham and Allington (1996)

and see if you agree:

Assertive Discipline takes a stern and generally inflexible approach to

discipline and behavior. His four steps—establishing rules, tracking

misbehavior, using punishment, and implementing positive consequences—seem logical for an adult-centered setting. The approach is

also easy to use because it simplifies and standardizes traditional school

rules. However, some evidence shows that discipline and behavior

problems actually increase after the system is implemented. The rigidity

of the system allows for little latitude in dealing with infractions and

works against developing internal self-control strategies in children. In

short, Assertive Discipline does little, if anything, to address the underlying causes of behavioral problems. The approach seems to benefit

educators more than children since continued misbehavior leads to

suspension, solving the problem the school is having, but suspension is

unlikely to enhance either the behavioral controls or achievement of the

suspended child.

2. Are there any children in your class or school who are often rewarded or

praised for outcomes that did not require much effort? What message might

that send?

31
3. Are there any children who are not consistently rewarded (with praise,

good marks, or recognition) even when they try?

4. Are there any reinforcements that, by the way they are set up, might

encourage quantity (number of books read) over quality (books that

challenge)?

5. Are behavioral rewards realistically available to all children or are they

more available to the “obedient” or “good” student to whom compliance

comes easily?

6. Do attendance awards impact attendance rates?

32
Chapter Three

What Can Teachers Do to

Increase Motivation in the

Classroom?

Chapter Preview

Many schools are beginning to implement teacher support (peer coaching

and mentoring) and professional growth systems (study groups, action

research) that provide opportunities for teachers to reflect on their practice

and experiment with changes (McColskey & Egelson, 1993). Such a supportive school environment is perfect for teachers to begin to assess their

success at providing a classroom environment that is highly motivating and

empowering.

If creating a motivating environment were easy, most teachers would have

already accomplished it. As Powell (1996) concludes

One study interviewed teachers who were unusually skilled with students at risk of dropping out. Since the students were not voracious for

academic content, the teachers appealed to their lifeworld concerns.

This meant getting to know the students and their lifeworlds more

closely than might appeal to many other teachers. The study confirmed

the magnitude of developing motivation among many American students. The work involved was extraordinarily difficult, especially if

taken seriously. Interesting lessons adapted to individual needs take

more work to prepare and to teach.

Thus, school leaders will need to provide time and support to teachers to

work together to explore ways to increase motivation, particularly in

disadvantaged schools where motivation can be a more difficult problem.

If teachers are left to go it alone, it is unlikely that they will have the time,

energy, or resources to make the needed changes.

33
The goal of any educational program must be to create a learning environment that supports or elicits students’ intrinsic interest in learning. This

goal is not easy to achieve, and it is not one that can be accomplished by

making a few minor adjustments. There is no step-by-step process that can

be outlined to make the changes needed. Rather, teachers traditionally

learn by trial and error, always keeping their eye on high levels of motivation from all students.

This chapter examines how teachers can create a classroom environment

that enhances intrinsic motivation to learn. The research is summarized

under three categories:

1. The quality of instructional activities

2. The quality of student assessment and teacher feedback

3. The quality of the classroom climate that requires

● High expectations for all students

● Fostering student autonomy and choice

● Promoting cooperation and teamwork rather than individual

competition

● Knowing the student

● Classroom management and discipline

A teacher checklist of the factors outlined is provided at the chapter’s end.

The Quality of Instructional Activities

The kind of work students do in the classroom is central to how much effort

they expend. Research has shown that student work assignments can be

evaluated along a variety of important dimensions that make a difference in

terms of students’ levels of engagement.

Diversity, Variety, and Novelty of Learning Opportunities

The diversity, variety, and novelty of learning tasks have an important influence on students’ motivation to learn. Brophy (1987a) observed that in most

classrooms, lessons are highly predictable. Brophy suggests that such “. . . . a

steady diet of routine and predictable lessons followed by routine and predictable assignments soon becomes ‘the daily grind’” (p. 34). The importance of

34
providing a variety of learning tasks cannot be overemphasized. Even minor

changes in the format of a lesson can have significant effects on students’

motivation to learn.

Also, to stimulate students’ curiosity, teachers can highlight ideas that are

surprising or discrepant from students’ current knowledge and understanding.

Teachers can stimulate interest by asking higher-order questions that involve

speculation, prediction, problem-solving, or debating. Students report a greater

interest in learning when they have opportunities to ask questions, offer

opinions, share personal experiences, or debate answers (Meece, 1991). For

more information on a successful training program in higher-order questioning, contact the Appalachian Regional Educational Laboratory and ask about

their QUILT training program—P.O. Box 1348, Charleston, WV 25325,

800-624-9120.

Tasks that call for students’ active participation in the learning process can

have a positive influence on motivation. “Hands-on” activities generate more

interest than passive forms of learning, such as listening. For example, in

science curriculum evaluations, results typically show a correlation between

the teachers’ use of hands-on activities, student interest in science, and student

achievement scores. In evaluation studies of a North Carolina middle school

science-reform effort conducted by SERVE, teachers who used more hands-on

activities (several per week) had students who reported greater interest in

science and who scored better on state-mandated science achievement tests

than students whose teachers used few hands-on activities. The Integrated

Science program developed by the University of Alabama is a middle school

science curriculum that offers rich resources for teachers interested in moving

to a more hands-on curriculum. For more information, contact Dr. Larry

Rainey at 800-477-8151.

Other teachers have found that problem-centered activities can increase students’ interest in learning mathematics (see Wood, Cobb, & Yackel, 1992). For

example, a group of second-grade teachers redesigned their mathematics

curriculum so that students could have a more active role in analyzing and

constructing solutions to mathematical problems. The students worked in pairs

to find solutions, then discussed their solutions in whole-class discussion. In

this way, the students had an opportunity to explain their answers and listen to

each others’ reasoning.

Because curriculum development is time-consuming, some teachers may

consider upgrading their instructional approaches through previously developed research-based curriculum programs. For example, elementary teachers

can receive training (a two-to-five year process) in teaching problem-based

math through a program called Cognitively Guided Instruction. For more

information, contact Dr. George Bright or Dr. Nancy N. Vacc, University of

North Carolina at Greensboro, at 910-334-3439. The Curriculum Research and

35
Development Group at the University of Hawaii has developed a HALP (Hawaii Algebra Learning Project) textbook called Algebra I: A Process and a

teacher’s guide that is being used by over 16,000 students in twelve states. The

curriculum uses cooperative problem-solving exercises and journaling to keep

students involved and places a premium on developing students’ skills at

communicating their knowledge. Teachers must attend a 45-hour training

course. For more information, contact Dr. Barbara Dougherty, University of

Mississippi, at 601-232-7905.

The use of long-term projects can have positive effects on students’ motivation

to learn, especially if these projects are organized around a driving question or

problem. Examples of project-based learning programs have been produced

on science topics by the Technical Education Research Center and the National

Geographic Society. These projects focus on authentic problems (e.g., acid

rain), involve students in data gathering and analysis, and require students’

active engagement over an extended period of time. Other types of projects

include writing a school newspaper, building a scale model, researching family

genealogy, and creating a video on the school’s history. Proponents of projectbased learning claim that these activities provide a way to bridge classroom

learning and real-world experiences as well as enhance students’ understanding of key concepts and principles (Blumenfeld, Soloway, Marx, Krajcik,

Guzdial, & Palinscar, 1991).

Appropriate Difficulty Levels of Work Assignments

Student motivation to learn is also influenced by the difficulty and complexity

of learning tasks. In one study of elementary school children trying to solve an

anagram task, researchers studied smiling behavior related to the difficulty of

the anagrams. The researchers (Harter, 1978) found that children reported

being annoyed and frustrated when the anagrams were extremely difficult for

them. Even the easy tasks did not produce much smiling. The most positive

emotion was observed when the anagrams were challenging but solvable with

some effort. Success at a challenging task is clearly rewarding.

When given a choice, most students prefer moderately difficult tasks that

provide opportunities for increasing their level of competence and skills. Doyle

(1983) describes four types of academic tasks: (1) memory tasks, (2) routine or

procedural tasks, (3) comprehension tasks, and (4) opinion tasks. In general,

the latter tasks are more intrinsically interesting to students than are tasks that

require memorization or simple application of rules and procedures (Corno &

Rohrkemper, 1985). Many students may say that they prefer rote-level learning

tasks because they are unambiguous and easy to complete. Divergent thinking,

comprehension, and opinion tasks involve more uncertainty and risk of failure.

However, students report greater interest in tasks that are cognitively demanding and ambiguous in a classroom environment in which teachers support

their learning efforts.

36
Thus, teachers can help foster an intrinsic motivation to learn by helping

students develop confidence in their abilities. However, learning tasks that are

too easy or too difficult will not lead to feelings of competency and efficacy.

Corno and Rohrkemper (1985) define optimally challenging tasks as those that

are within the child’s “zone of primal development.” Such activities are just

above the child’s existing capabilities but reachable with adequate instructional

support.

Students do not always respond favorably to challenging or cognitively demanding learning activities unless they are certain they can succeed with

reasonable effort. Teachers can help students maintain a task focus by supporting students’ independent learning efforts. However, too much teacher assistance may lead students to believe they could not succeed on their own. The

trick is to provide support that students are not yet able to provide for themselves, then withdraw that support as they become more knowledgeable or

skilled in a particular area. Farnham-Diggory (1990) refers to this teaching

strategy as “scaffolding and fading.” Teachers can support their students’

learning efforts by encouraging students to use effective learning strategies, by

modeling difficult procedures, and by problem solving with students when

they have difficulty.

Relevance and Meaningfulness of Instruction

Young students seem to blindly accept that what they are learning in school

has value and importance. Elementary school students generally rate every

subject as important and useful (Goodlad, 1984). However, students become

more skeptical as they progress in school, with the most pronounced change

taking place during the middle school years. At this time, students are much

more able to think about the future, possible occupations, and connections

between different areas of study. If teachers are going to hold the interest of

their students, they will need to emphasize the value of learning for students’

current and future lives as learning tasks must have a meaningful and worthwhile purpose. According to Brophy (1987b), “One cannot expect students to

develop motivation to learn if activities are essentially pointless in the first

place” (p. 194). Activities of this type include

continued practice of skills already mastered, reading about something that

is too abstract or so foreign to the students’ experience that it is essentially

meaningless, looking up or copying definitions that are never used in

assignments, and working on assignments merely to stay busy rather than

to attain some worthwhile instructional objective. (Brophy, 1987b)

When subjects are taught as discrete and isolated bodies of information,

students do not see connections between what they are learning in different

areas. To help students see the value of what they are learning for other

subjects, the curriculum could be organized around interdisciplinary themes.

For example, lessons in language arts, history, and social studies might focus

37
on patterns of migration during the Industrial Age, and mathematics and

science could be combined in a study of space travel.

Teachers may not have the time and support to make all learning tasks personally relevant and meaningful. At the very least, teachers can often point out the

goal of the assignment and the skills it will help students develop. Marshall

(1987) reported that in learning-oriented classes where intrinsic reasons for

engaging in schoolwork were stressed, teachers opened lessons by commenting on the relevance of the task, the purpose of the assignment, the enjoyment

students could expect from it, and the challenge it presented. As Stipek (1993)

points out, if teachers cannot offer a good explanation for completing a particular assignment, they might “reconsider the value of assigning it” (p. 97).

The Quality of Student Assessment Methods

and Teacher Feedback

To develop a sense of competency and efficacy, students need clear and

specific feedback that they are improving (Schunk, 1991). Thus, it is not only

meaningful instructional activities that are needed, but a feedback loop that

personalizes learning for each student. Assessment practices should be therefore examined carefully to see how effectively feedback is being used to help

students improve and reach for higher standards.

Clear Goals and Expectations

It is difficult for students to rise to the occasion with their learning efforts if

they don’t know what the benchmarks are. They need to understand expectations for the subject area (long-term) and for the particular assignments. Students are not as likely to perform well if they are kept in the dark about

expectations and asked to work without a real understanding of how their

work or performance will be assessed. Many teachers and schools have been

experimenting with rubrics for important skill areas as ways of helping students understand what is expected of them. Some examples of rubrics for key

skill areas are provided below.

Clear Expectations about Writing Quality

Vicki Spandel and Ruth Culham of the Northwest Regional Lab in Portland,

Oregon, have developed (and provide training on) a writing rubric that can be

used across grades and a variety of assignments. The six major evaluative

categories used are Ideas and Content, Organization, Voice, Word Choice,

Sentence Fluency, and Conventions. Students are taught how to rate their

writing on a scale of one to five using these categories. The scale for Word

Choice is shown in Table 1.

38
Table 1

Word Choice Rating Scale*

5 = Paper was extremely clear, visual, and accurate (e.g., I picked just

the right words for just the right places.)

All the words in my paper fit. The words are colorful, snappy, vital,

and brisk. You won’t find overdone, flowery language. Look at the

energetic verbs. Some of the words and phrases are so vivid that the

reader won’t be able to forget them.

3 = Paper was correct but not striking (e.g., The words in my paper get

the message across, but don’t capture anyone’s imagination or attention.)

I used everyday words pretty well, but I didn’t stretch for a new or

better way to say things. My words aren’t specific. There are many

tired-out clichés. Most of the time the reader will figure out what I

mean even if a few words are goofed up.

1 = Paper was confusing; misused words and phrases abound (e.g., My

reader is often asking, “What did you mean by this?”)

A lot of my words and phrases are vague: “We liked to do things” and

“We were friends and stuff.” My words don’t make pictures yet, like:

“Something neat happened.” I used the same words over and over.

* Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (Vicki Spandel and Ruth Culham)

Clear Expectations about Math Problem-Solving

The Hawaii Algebra Project is a research-based algebra curriculum that stresses

communication and problem solving skills. Journal writing and daily group

presentations of problem solutions are typical assessment procedures used to

build communication and problem-solving skills. Students respond to around

12 journal prompts (open-ended questions) per chapter. For example, one

prompt is “Is division a commutative property? Why or why not?” Students

know the grading criteria for their journal responses up front and can apply

the criteria themselves. For example, they know that they will receive a “4” if

they respond completely, support is given for their response by using examples, the ideas are clear to the reader, the writing is legible, and further

39
Table 2

Group Problem-Solving Presentation

Rubric*

Problem Set: 

Group: 

Presenter: 

Criteria Good Fair Needs

Improvement

Explained clearly. ____ ____ ____

Explained thinking, not just steps. ____ ____ ____

Asked class good questions. ____ ____ ____

Answered class questions. ____ ____ ____

If answer was incorrect, used it to

create a discussion. ____ ____ ____

Group is not rude to others. ____ ____ ____

Group worked together. ____ ____ ____

* Hawaii Algebra Project, University of Hawaii

questions are suggested or extensions are made. They will receive a “3” if they

omit one criteria, a “2” if they omit two criteria, etc.

The students in these algebra classes are also involved in developing a criteria

sheet for the group problem-solving presentations and in rating the group

presentations. Table 2 is a rubric they developed.

Clear Expectations about Science Problem-Solving

The Math and Science Consortium of the Far West Regional Educational Lab

(now WestEd) developed a science assessment that includes student and

teacher evaluations. The students score their work from 1 to 5 and justify why

40
Table 3

Experiment Evaluation Rubric*

Student Student Teacher

Rating Justification Feedback/

Comments

How well we did our

experiment to find out

which cleaners were

bases

How well we told about

what we did to find out

which base was the

strongest

How well we did our

experiment to find out

which base was strongest

How well we understood

and used our results to

decide which base was

strongest

How well we explained

our reasons for why we

knew which base was

strongest

* The above science assessment task is published in Toolkit for Professional Developers:

Alternative Assessment in Math and Science available from the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (NWREL) in Portland, Oregon. For more examples of rubrics for science

skills, see McColskey & O’Sullivan (1993), a SERVE publication entitled How to Assess

Student Performance in Science: Going Beyond Multiple-Choice Tests (see catalog in the

back of this publication).

they gave themselves such a score; then the teacher provides feedback on the

quality of students’ completed work. The assessment sheet followed a five-day

sequence of hands-on lessons about neutralizing acids and bases (Table 3).

41
As can be seen from the writing, math, and science rubric examples, laying out

the criteria clearly for the skills to be developed makes school less of a guessing or “gotcha” game for students. Rubrics are not just for teachers’ grading

use, but they are, more importantly, a communication tool for teachers and

students to use as a way of structuring directions and feedback so that students

are empowered to try to improve their performance. Generalized rubrics for

important skills (e.g., types of writing, math problem-solving, group presentations, journal writing, and science investigations) help students understand

what is expected and thus provide guidance for completing the assignment

and assessing their own work.

Multiple Methods of Assessment

Students also need multiple ways of demonstrating their competence and level

of understanding. Meece (1991) reported that students’ intrinsic motivation was

lower in classes where students’ grades were primarily based on quizzes and

tests. These evaluation methods tend to unfairly disadvantage students with

poor reading and writing skills. Notebooks, group work and presentations,

projects, journals, portfolios, oral performances (e.g., debates, presentations,

skits, peer tutoring), and graphic work (e.g., drawings, concept maps, flow

charts) are all assessment methods that can be used to assess students’ learning. Some students are very comfortable with oral debates about an issue,

while others show the depth of their knowledge more effectively through a

paper. Other students may be more excited about a skit or play. Thinking in

terms of allowing students to demonstrate what they know, rather than assessing to stamp a grade and rank the student, increases student motivation.

Consider the teacher reflection below that describes the motivation change that

could result from expanding the use of assessment methods beyond multiplechoice to the completion of performance tasks and portfolios.

They will probably not take chemistry again unless required to do so. They

may have even left discouraged that they did not, or could not, do better on

a very difficult multiple-choice final. I felt disheartened that, after working

very hard all year, once again my students did not do better on their final. I

never gave them an opportunity to show me what they had really learned.

They left not realizing the depth or breadth of their knowledge. No wonder

we become discouraged. . . .

The teacher goes on to describe, by contrast, the last day of a different class

called coordinated science, where students were required to complete performance tasks and portfolios rather than multiple-choice finals.

The coordinated science students spent their last day reviewing their own

work and realizing how much they had learned during the year. They

revisited their successes and what they had liked during the year. They

evaluated these pieces and how they could improve on them next year. They

42
evaluated their own behavior in groups and planned on improving their

interpersonal skills for achieving more success next year. . . students left

school with a sense of optimism and planning for next year. Their teacher

did too! (California Assessment Collaborative)

Feedback for Improvement

How will students know how to improve their work? Do students receive the

individual feedback they need to improve, persist, and stay interested? Individual is a key word, as learning is an individual process.

According to Grant Wiggins (1993)

The failure to receive good feedback is a legacy of defining education as

“teaching” and assessment as “testing” after teaching. Our inability to give

good feedback and our inability to find the time to give feedback of any

quality indicates that we fail to understand the inherent limits of “teaching”

as a means of achieving mastery. We must come to see that the successful

performance of complex tasks is possible only if students learn through the

effective use of more timely, frequent, and helpful feedback.

The assessment environment of a classroom can vary from feedback that is

very standardized and structured (test scores) to feedback that is very informal

and unstructured (classroom dialogue). If the only feedback students receive is

test scores, then they will likely assume that judgment, not improvement, is the

teacher’s goal. In one study by Meece (1991), teachers were categorized as

more- or less-motivating based on the responses of their students to intrinsic

motivation scales. Observations of the more- and less-motivating teachers

subsequently showed that the more-motivating teachers used more informal,

unstructured feedback mechanisms. The less-motivating teachers relied more

exclusively on test scores as feedback for students.

Research and observation suggest that classrooms could get by with much less

grading/judging/measuring of student performance and more commentary and

descriptive feedback that tells the student that he or she is off track, without

labeling the effort publicly. Oral feedback may be particularly underused in

most classrooms. When it is used fully, the teacher appears to be coaching

students, constantly encouraging them to try to articulate what they know,

providing feedback on misconceptions, and reminding them of expectations

(e.g., “Try to speak in complete sentences”).

In an inspiring video entitled Good Morning, Miss Toliver, award-winning math

teacher Kay Toliver is shown working with her math students at East Harlem

Tech/PS 72 elementary school. The oral feedback students receive is continual

(see reference list for ordering information on the video). Students receive

43
feedback on their persistence, creativity, teamwork, and skill at articulating

what they learned, both orally and in journals. In oral responses, she encourages students to restate and use complete sentences. They read their journal

entries out loud to others to see if they make sense. This video is a powerful

statement of how much can be accomplished with informal feedback, as

opposed to the formal test scores students often receive. Although classroom

dialogue may be an important component of many classrooms, the subtle

difference is that when a teacher is acting as a coach, the student responses

are taken as opportunities to provide descriptive feedback about the adequacy

of their knowledge or of their oral or thinking skills. In more traditional classrooms, the dialogue is a means for the teacher to get the desired answer and

to complete the lesson.

Butler (1987) compared the effects of individual comments, numerical grades,

standardized praise, or no feedback at all on sixth-grade students’ motivational

orientations. The results indicated that individual comments promoted higher

task involvement than did grades, praise, or no feedback. Specifically, students

who received comments rated the task as more interesting and attributed their

effort on the task to their interest. In a subsequent study of fifth- and sixthgraders, Butler (1988) found that written comments enhanced students’ interest

in the task, whereas grades with or without comments decreased both interest

and task performance. Specific and informative feedback may be especially

important for low-achieving students who generally feel they have little control

over their learning (Connell, 1985).

Sometimes it may be important to provide a critical reading of what worked or

didn’t work, made sense or didn’t, etc., in a student response to an assignment.

At higher levels, this kind of feedback takes a great deal of teacher time, so

some teachers have trained the students to become peer reviewers and to ask

critical questions of each other.

How often do students get “feedback for improvement” rather than a rank or

comparison grade? John Thomas (1993) concludes

Typical feedback practices do not often extend down to the level of student

performance on individual concepts or principles. In the survey we conducted with high school biology teachers, we found that although the

majority of these teachers collected and graded homework assignments,

only 33 percent returned homework with written comments. Similar

results were obtained for quizzes; 75 percent of teachers graded quizzes,

but only 25 percent provided written comments. . . . Although giving grades

on quizzes and homework may be informative with respect to a student’s

standing in the course, it does not help students to know how to alter their

study practices.

44
Opportunities to Improve

Teachers can also enhance students’ intrinsic motivation to learn by providing

multiple opportunities for students to complete tasks. When students are given

opportunities to redo their work, they come to view errors as a natural part of

learning, not as something that signals failure or inadequacy. Students can be

encouraged to redo work or rewrite papers to obtain a higher score. Teachers

could base the final grade on the average of the scores so that students would

try to get a high score in the first place.

Stipek (1993) describes a teacher who placed a dot next to items on written

assignments that were incorrect. After students corrected their work, dots could

be easily changed into marks indicating correctness. Such practices keep

students focused on the process of learning. Ames and Archer (1988) found

that when students perceived self-improvement, learning from errors, and

sustained effort as valued classroom norms, they report greater interest in

learning, greater preference for challenging tasks, and greater use of effective

learning strategies.

As Wiggins (1993) states

A low score is not, by itself, a disincentive to further learning. The disincentive comes from having no opportunity to profit from the assessment in the

form of useful feedback and opportunities to try again. In fact, a low score

on a valued test, with ample opportunity to get a higher score, is an incentive to harder work and better learning.

E

ast Forsyth High School in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, made some

changes to help ninth–graders make a smoother transition from middle

school. Some of the changes for ninth–graders involved more opportunities to improve. The following is excerpted from a newspaper report in the

Winston-Salem Journal, December 7, 1996:

School administrators and teachers also hope a new grading system will

encourage students to work harder. Students who are doing poorly get

grades of “not yet” instead of D’s or F’s. They are expected to keep

working until they can turn the “not yet” into a grade of C, B, or A. The

system is used only for ninth–graders. The difference between a “not

yet” and a D or F is as much about self-esteem as academic standing,

officials say. One teacher said that the “not yet” grade takes away some

of the anxiety her honors math students feel. Some who memorized

everything in middle school are struggling with the skills they must use

in high school math. The “not yet” grade keeps some students from

giving up.

45
Evaluating and Reporting on Student Progress

Research shows that student motivation declines over the school years. Although there are many factors that have been associated with this drop, a

significant change that occurs in later school years is that grading practices

increasingly set up a zero-sum game with winners and losers. The winners

stay in the game and the losers drop out, at least in terms of commitment to

effort. This reveals that it is important to be sensitive to the impact of grading

practices on students’ perceptions of their ability. Students as young as second

grade compare notes and realize that some students are “smarter” than others.

Stamping daily work with public labels (“m” for most of the time, “s” for some

of the time, and “n” for needs improvement) invites negative self-evaluations

and teasing.

Students quickly come to understand what their schools stand for and what

is valued. In many schools, students perceive that demonstrating ability is

the main goal and that how they stand in comparison to their peers is the

measure of their success. This is a school culture that emphasizes relative

ability and comparative performance and is, in our terms, “ability-focused.” In contrast, in some schools (all too few) students come to understand that what is valued is mastery, hard work, taking on challenging

tasks, and making academic progress. Competition and comparison are

discouraged. For the purpose of contrast, we call this a “task-focused” school

culture. In reality, schools are on a continuum between these two poles, but

too often, particularly at the secondary level, the culture stresses and rewards the demonstration of ability rather than the development of ability.

(Maehr et al, 1991, 1992, 1993)

Evaluation reduces interest in learning for some students when tests are based

on normative criteria. Normative grading means that a student’s performance is

judged in relation to his or her classmates; a small percent are expected to get

“A”s, a slightly larger percent get “B”s, a large percent get “C”s, and a smaller

percentage fail. Under this system of evaluation, low-achieving students lose

interest in learning because they have little hope of outperforming higherability students.

An interest in learning is maintained, if not enhanced, when teachers base their

performance assessments on improvement or mastery, while minimizing the

availability of social comparison information. According to Ames (1992),

students need to have opportunities to improve their grades, to feel it’s okay if

they make mistakes, and to know they can improve if they apply themselves.

These conditions reduce students’ concerns about their ability to perform and

maintain a focus on learning. Moreover, students of differing abilities have an

equal opportunity to be recognized and rewarded when evaluation is based on

individual improvement or mastery (MacIver, in press).

46
MacIver has examined the effects of an improvement-oriented grading system

within a sample of economically-disadvantaged students from 15 middle

schools in Baltimore, Md. The program featured three graded tasks or assignments within a given unit. At the start of the unit, a student would receive his

or her base score. For each subsequent test or quiz, students were instructed

to surpass their previous score by at least nine points. Students earned improvement points depending on how close they came to this goal. All students

who raised their performance level across the unit received a special certificate

recognizing their accomplishment. After one academic year, the author found

that students in the participating classes reported expending more effort, rated

their abilities and interest in learning slightly higher, and achieved higher

grades than did nonparticipating students. This program enhanced students’

motivation to learn because it provided a way for all students to demonstrate

improvement, provided concrete goals students could strive for on every

graded assignment, and recognized the improvements of all students.

Another approach might be to experiment with making a portion of a six- or

nine-weeks’ grade based on improvement. For example, in language arts, one

teacher used a state writing-test rubric and told students that they could get an

“A” for a portion of their six-weeks’ grade if they moved their writing up a

score level. Portfolios and student-led parent conferences are other approaches

to helping students honor “improvement” as opposed to relative ability.

Grading and reporting have a variety of purposes, and there are no easy

answers. Teachers who place a high value on student motivation tend to adopt

grading schemes that allow all students who work hard to succeed. Teachers

who value ability tend to adopt strict cut-offs—the most able students experience success. This struggle between values (sorting students versus helping

them succeed and believe in themselves) is played out in the following passages from LouAnne Johnson’s book, Dangerous Minds (1992), a teacher’s

story about her experiences with a school within a school for underachieving

high school students:

We had just received the first semester grade reports for Academy students.

Almost half had failed Bud’s computer application class. None had failed

English. I was delighted. Bud was disgusted. . . . You can’t have that many

good grades, Bud insisted. Why can’t an entire class of students desire to

succeed? I asked. Because an “A” doesn’t mean anything if too many kids get

one, Bud said. It diminishes the value. But what if everybody decides to pass

and does it, I said. Simple, Bud said. . . . Then the class is too easy. Too easy! I

sputtered. They passed because I told them exactly what I expected them to do.

I gave them challenging assignments, but I made them believe they could do

it. And I also made it very difficult and unappealing to fail. . . . I spent a lot of

time and energy motivating those kids to succeed, and they did.

47
Classroom Climate

High Expectations for All Students

Students’ motivation to learn is greatly influenced by their teachers’ expectations for student learning. Teacher expectations can function as “self-fulfilling

prophecies” in the classroom. Research has consistently shown that students

generally perform better in classes where the teacher expects all students to

achieve as opposed to classes where teachers do not communicate uniformly

high expectations. Teacher expectations are communicated in a variety of

ways. In general, high-expectation students receive more learning opportunities, more corrective feedback, and more attention than do low-expectation

students.

The following are examples of differences found between teachers and lowexpectation and high-expectation students in classroom studies conducted by

Brophy (1983):

● Teachers have fewer personal contacts with low-expectation students.

● Teachers are friendlier toward high-expectation students.

● Teachers give more difficult and varied assignments to high-expectation

students.

● Teachers call on high-expectation students more often.

● Teachers provide more clues or rephrase questions more often for highexpectation students when they answer incorrectly.

● Teachers wait longer for high-expectation students to answer questions.

● Teachers give high-expectation students more detailed and more accurate

feedback.

● Teachers criticize low-expectation students more for incorrect answers.

● Teachers praise low-expectation students for marginal or inadequate

responses.

● Teachers praise high-expectation students more frequently for correct

responses.

Research also suggests that students are very aware of differential teacher

treatment. For example, Weinstein and Middlestadt (1979) reported that students even in the first grade were able to identify several ways that low and

48
high achievers were treated differently. Examples include the following:

● The teacher watches low achievers more closely when they are working.

● The teacher asks other students to help low achievers.

● High achievers have special privileges.

● High achievers get to suggest activities.

Fostering Student Autonomy and Choice

Site-based management has been sold at least partially on the assumption that

teachers know best about how to work with students in their school and that

making choices and decisions about instruction at the school level will increase morale and motivation. Similarly, it can be argued that students best

know what their interests and feelings are and will be more motivated if they

are involved in making decisions about the learning process. Thus, teachers

can also influence students’ motivation to learn by providing opportunities for

students to control some aspects of their learning.

Research from many different perspectives emphasizes the importance of

helping students become independent learners. If students are always told

what to do and how to do it, they have limited opportunity to develop a sense

of personal responsibility for their learning and self-management strategies.

Classroom studies have shown that students vary considerably in how they

view the classroom. Some classrooms are seen as places where students can

be responsible, instrumental, and autonomous. Others are seen as places

where they are “pawns” (reactive, passive, and controlled by others). This

research has further shown that in classroom environments where students feel

more autonomous than passive, they report greater feelings of personal control, self-confidence, and intrinsic motivation to learn (Grolnick & Ryan, 1987).

When students can direct and assume responsibility for their own learning,

they are more likely to believe they are engaging in learning tasks by their

own volition. In contrast, when teachers control academic decisions, students

come to view their learning as controlled by others (Ryan, Connell, & Deci,

1985).

A number of classroom studies demonstrate the benefits of increasing student

choice, including the following:

● When high school students had an opportunity to decide for themselves

how to organize their chemistry experiments, they wrote better write-ups,

persisted longer, and learned more than students who had been told

exactly what to do (Rainey, 1965).

49
● When inner-city teachers were trained to involve students as active participants in all phases of the learning process, students in these classes missed

fewer days of school and scored better on standardized achievement tests

than did students in conventional classrooms (deCharms, 1976).

● Elementary students made significant gains in reading achievement when

their teachers were trained to (1) give students some flexibility in determining when to complete assignments, (2) set up independent learning centers, (3) contract with students for long-range assignments, and (4) allow

students to correct some of their own written work (Matheny & Edwards,

1974).

● When elementary students were given some opportunities to plan and

design science experiments, they reported greater intrinsic motivation to

learn (Meece, 1991).

● When elementary students perceived their classroom environment as

controlling and restrictive, they reported lower self-esteem, academic

competence, and mastery motivation (Ryan & Grolnick, 1986).

In many classrooms, students exercise limited control over the pace of lessons,

the materials used, and how to complete assignments. In a nationwide study

by Goodlad (1984), 55 percent of the elementary students reported not participating at all in choosing what they did in class. At the secondary level, more

than 60 percent of the students said they did not help make decisions in their

classrooms. There are a number of ways teachers can promote greater student

choice in the classroom. Some examples include

● Let students design some learning tasks. As suggested earlier, teachers can

offer students opportunities to write review questions, design experiments,

find solutions to open-ended problems, or generate questions for class

discussion.

● Give students a choice of learning tasks from several different options.

Stipek (1993) suggests that after reading a story, students could decide how

they want to express their understanding of the story (e.g., write a summary, write a sequel, or write a story about a similar experience of their

own).

● Give students some choice in how to complete activities. Students could

decide if they want to work alone or with a partner. They could also make

decisions concerning how to organize their time and effort in order to

complete the tasks. Kohn (1993a) suggests that each day should include

one block of time in which students can have complete freedom to decide

what to do (e.g., work on homework, read a library book, complete a class

project, or get extra help on an assignment).

50
Student Choice and Collaboration

You may wish to use this form to help you reflect upon the opportunities

for student choice and collaboration in your classroom.

NEVER OCCASIONALLY OFTEN

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

______ ______ _______

1. Students are allowed to

design learning tasks.

2. Students have a choice

of learning tasks.

3. Students are allowed to

choose how to complete their assignments.

4. Students are allowed to

correct their work.

5. Students are allowed to

choose the work they

want graded.

6. Students are allowed to

help determine the

grading criteria.

7. Students are allowed to

work with their peers.

8. Students can choose

their work partner(s).

9. Students are allowed to

help their peers.

10. Students are allowed to

work on projects that

involve group problem

solving.

51
● Allow older students to correct some of their own work. Many teachers let

students use an answer key to check homework or class assignments. This

strategy minimizes students’ dependence on teachers for feedback and

encourages them to take more responsibility for their learning.

● Allow students to help determine the criteria by which their work will be

judged (e.g., decide what will make a story interesting or an experiment

convincing). Involving students in discussions about grading criteria fosters

better understanding and acceptance.

● Involve students in developing guidelines for classroom behavior. Students

are much more likely to accept and obey rules under these conditions

because they feel in control, rather than controlled by others.

Although it may sound obvious, giving students more control does not mean

abdicating teacher authority. There is little evidence to suggest that students

benefit from a permissive classroom environment in which they may do

whatever they choose without adult guidance. Students of all ages need to

know what the limits are and what is expected of them. Teachers need to find

ways to increase student choice while maintaining reasonable limits and

expectations for behavior.

Promoting Cooperation and Teamwork Rather Than Individual

Competition

According to Ames (1992), an important goal for teachers is “to establish an

environment where individual differences are accepted and all students develop a feeling of ‘I belong here’” (p. 338). This objective is best achieved

through varied grouping arrangements that provide opportunities for peer

cooperation. Cooperative learning activities, where students work together on

joint assignments or projects, promote interest in learning by minimizing

individual fears of failure and competition among students (Ames, 1992).

Compared with traditional methods of instruction, cooperative grouping

practices also promote better relations among different ethnic groups and

greater acceptance of handicapped classmates (Slavin, 1983).

Some of the more successful cooperative learning programs combine the use

of heterogeneous and homogeneous ability groups. New material and skills are

taught to small groups of students performing at the same level. But students

then work on practice and enrichment activities in mixed-ability groups

(Slavin, 1990). Evidence suggests that both low- and high-ability students

benefit from cooperative learning groups that provide a structure for peer

tutoring. Higher achievers deepen their understanding of course material as

they teach it to lower achievers, and the low achievers benefit from peer

assistance. Cooperative learning groups are most effective when groups are

rewarded or evaluated based on the individual learning of all group members

(Slavin, 1984).

52
Children need group approaches to learning. Peers function as important

models and teachers (Schunk, 1991). Learning often best takes place when

students have opportunities to discuss, analyze, and express opinions, and

receive feedback from peers. Peer collaboration is especially critical during

early adolescence when the importance of peer relations is on the rise.

Research on motivation suggests that cooperative learning activities can have a

positive influence on students’ ability perceptions and motivational orientations. Cooperative learning tasks give students more responsibility for learning.

Students must plan, organize, and problem-solve with group members. In

addition, cooperative learning tasks reduce students’ concerns about failure

and evaluation because responsibility for learning is shared. Under these

conditions, students are more likely to tutor, help, and encourage classmates

(Johnson & Johnson, 1985).

There are a number of issues teachers need to consider when forming cooperative learning groups, including the following:

● Size of group. Most studies indicate that small groups of three-to-five

students work best.

● Ability composition of the group. The evidence suggests that mixed-ability

groups work best when there is a moderate range of abilities (highs with

mediums and mediums with lows). It is best to avoid groups with a wide

range of ability levels (Nastasi & Clements, 1991). Homogeneous ability

groups should be avoided as much as possible because this type of grouping creates a status hierarchy in the classroom.

● Gender composition of groups. Mixed-sex groupings tend to promote

better relations between boys and girls, although girls tend to take a more

active role in single-sex learning groups. Groups need to be well balanced

in terms of gender to facilitate the participation and learning of all students.

When there are just a few girls in a group, boys tend to assume leadership

roles and leave girls out of the activity (Webb, 1985).

Cooperative learning groups need to be carefully monitored to make sure

everyone is participating and contributing. Teachers should not assume

that students know how to work together and cooperate (Cohen, 1986).

Problems also arise when one or two students do the work for the entire

group. Teachers can avoid the unequal contribution problem by rewarding

groups on the basis of how well each individual member performs. To

make sure groups are not penalized by the performance of less competent

members, evaluation can be based on some measure of improved performance so that everyone has an equal chance to contribute to the overall

evaluation of the group.

53
Knowing the Student

All students want to feel successful and valued, but not all students can fit the

traditional mold of the “good” student. There are many ways for students to be

valued in their classrooms, but the starting point for everyone is the teacher’s

efforts to truly understand each child and see each student as an individual.

Learning styles and multiple intelligence research (Gardner, 1983) provide a

framework for teachers to see students in a range of ways, rather than just as a

good or bad student on traditional classroom tests.

As one Birmingham teacher explained, “All children are motivated; they are

just motivated to do different things. We have to understand the three or four

things that they are interested in and a way of setting goals for them. To teach

well, we need to get to know the children very well.” Teachers who have

experienced reductions in class size (K-5) or load (high school) frequently

comment that the change allows them to individualize their instruction and

understand what makes each student “tick.”

The following strategies support “knowing” the student:

In some elementary programs, parents are enlisted as partners in helping

teachers to better understand the students. Even just asking the question of

students and parents, “What can you tell me about yourself that would help

me help you learn?” sends a powerful message: “You are valued for what

you are and what you can become.”

Student projects are a way for students to demonstrate their individuality

and develop pride in their work, especially if the projects are shown or

exhibited in some way to other students or parents. The use of assessment

tools such as journals and portfolios can also contribute to the teacher’s

enhanced understanding of the student. These open-ended assessment

strategies also can improve home-school communications because teachers

have better-quality and more personal information to give parents. Some

schools are now trying student-led parent conferences as a way of personalizing the act of reporting progress.

Even little acts of demonstrating knowledge of the student can significantly

impact motivation. For example, in Dangerous Minds (1992), the teacher

decided to send home positive notes on students who had behavior problems.

In some cases, the notes caused a turnaround in behavior because of the

student’s realization that the teacher saw a positive side to them.

In addition to Bryan and Detrick, I tried to call at least two or three kids per

week, just to let them know I was thinking about them. After they got over

the initial wariness, they started to respond and most of my discipline

problems disappeared. If I called a kid and explained, for example, that

54
talking during my instruction was impolite and I’d appreciate it if he or she

would try not to be rude, there was no reason for the student to create a

power play out of the situation because nobody else knew what I had asked.

Classroom Management and Discipline

Curriculum, instruction, and assessment are obvious classroom elements that

influence student motivation. Less obvious is the hidden curriculum—the way

behavior is managed. Classrooms are social situations, and the way student

behavior is managed has implications for student motivation. McCaslin and

Good (1993) argue

Classroom management in practice typically remains rooted in a behavioral conception of teaching that places the responsibility for student

motivation and effort largely on the shoulders of teachers. Teachers

demand; students obey. Our management systems must do more than

elicit submission.

McCaslin and Good note that research on parenting directs teachers to look to

the middle. If permissive approaches to dealing with the child are on one end

and authoritarian (parent orders; child obeys) are at the other, the middle

(authoritative parenting) is the way to go. These parents discuss their standards

with their children, teach their children how to meet them, praise behavior that

reflects self-control, provide their children with opportunities to reflect on their

behavior and its impact on others, and in general, help them problem-solve

and understand responsible social action as conflicts arise. Research shows that

their children are more independent and have greater confidence and better

self-concepts.

McCaslin and Good maintain that this kind of approach to discipline and

behavior management should be considered by teachers. They argue that

student obedience and compliance should not be confused with student

motivation. Overuse of rewards and punishments keeps students externally

rather than internally focused. The middle road to motivating students to

manage their own behavior is one that keeps rewards and punishments as

subtle and informative feedback mechanisms, rather than controlling and

coercive.

McCaslin and Good (1993) note that current carrot-and-stick approaches to

managing student discipline and behavior are inconsistent with the growing

emphasis being put on a thinking curriculum.

There is a growing consensus that something is amiss in an education that

does not include problem-solving, integration, and elaboration of meaning

by self-regulated learners. Current beliefs are that a problem-solving orientation should undergird the education of all students, regardless of age,

55
ability, gender, economic status, or location. We maintain that present

enactments of management and instruction are incompatible within this

context of professed educational goals. This is because management of

students typically involves application of behavior modification and behavioral control programs.

Behavior modification systems of student management are compatible with

a curriculum of basic skills acquisition. In both systems, concern is with the

identification (by teacher), sequencing (by teacher), and reinforcement (by

teacher) of student performance of discrete skills. . . . It is of particular

consequence that even when curriculum changes are evoked to embrace

problem-solving processes by active and constructive learners, conceptions

of management remain static. Indeed, behavior-control programs stressing

perfunctory punishment in addition to routinized rewards to manage

student behavior are becoming increasing popular.

They conclude

There is a fundamental mismatch in the promotion of a problem-solving

curriculum within the context of behavior control management. We cannot

expect that students will profit from the incongruous messages we send

when we manage for obedience and teach for exploration and risk-taking.

They suggest that a successful management system

● Changes over time and is adjusted to allow students to progressively

assume more responsibility, both within a year and across years, as they

grow older (McCaslin and Good note that many kindergarten students have

more opportunity for choice and self-evaluation than do typical sixth-grade

students; they suggest this is the wrong direction)

● Depends on teachers having an opportunity to share and discuss what is

working and what is not

● Focuses on the goal of student self-regulation of behavior rather than just

reduction of disobedience—this minimizes the use of rewards and punishments (extrinsic motivators) and maximizes the use of approaches that

encourage meaningful student involvement in decisions about their behavior

● Requires an administrator’s understanding that too much emphasis on

teacher control over the classroom (keeping students quiet) puts pressure

on teachers to be controlling and coercive with students

56
● Is not likely to emerge as a quick fix but requires commitment and extensive dialogue and communication among all groups (parents, students,

administrators, and teachers)

Classrooms that are “caring communities” are those committed to kindness,

fairness, and self-responsibility. Research found that, in classrooms which

students report as “caring,” students also reported greater liking for school,

concern for others, more sophisticated conflict resolution skills, fewer feelings

of loneliness, and fewer delinquent acts (Schaps, Lewis, & Watson, 1995). The

article suggests the following activities that teachers can implement to build a

“caring” classroom:

● Hold regular class meetings in which children voice their aspirations for

the class, help shape classroom norms and practices based on these aspirations, and help solve problems that arise.

● Use activities that build a sense of unity within the class by joining students

together in shared, enjoyable pursuits (e.g., creating a class song, planning

a celebration, investigating an issue together).

● Use disciplinary approaches that deepen bonds with one another by

helping students understand the effects of their behavior on others; by

assuming the best, rather than worst, motives for their actions; by avoiding

techniques that isolate or embarrass individuals; and by encouraging

students to search for their own solutions and restitutions.

Assessing Teacher Needs

Chapter Three was comprehensive, with a variety of factors identified that

relate to improved student motivation. As a way of summarizing, we have put

the ideas in a checklist form. You are invited to individually complete the

checklist, then share your questions and “needs” with others. Perhaps as part

of a school improvement plan, the school might create a teacher study group

with each teacher setting goals relative to areas needing improvement or

enhancement.

Think of improving motivation in the classroom as a long-term journey, not a

quick fix. There will be successes and failures, but a clear focus on improved

motivation should be the guide to what works and doesn’t. Perhaps a longterm goal for the school could be a school-developed checklist that is derived

from experiences of teachers in the school rather than from the research. If

made public, it could become a visible guide to teachers in a school, a concrete statement of their beliefs about what motivates students.

57
Improving Student Motivation by Improving

Instruction, Assessment, and Climate

No Some Much

Improvement Improvement Improvement

Needed Needed Needed

Instruction

Instruction is varied;

a steady diet of routine

and predictable lessons

is avoided. _____ _____ _____

Hands-on, problem-centered

activities are used frequently

to actively involve students. _____ _____ _____

Pacing is adjusted to match

students’ needs; “scaffolding

and fading” are used to

provide support on difficult

tasks. _____ _____ _____

Teacher often explains to

students the relevance and

importance of topics studied

and work assigned. _____ _____ _____

Assessment

Course goals are

articulated for students,

and progress toward goals

is assessed. _____ _____ _____

Expectations for task performance are made clear to

students through the use of

rubrics for key skills and

other means (anchor papers). _____ _____ _____

Multiple assessment methods

are used including peer

and student self-assessment. _____ _____ _____

58
Good, informative feedback is

provided to help students

improve. _____ _____ _____

Grades are used sparingly

and purposefully so that

students perceive the teacher

as coach rather than judge. _____ _____ _____

Students are provided

opportunities to improve

their work/grades. _____ _____ _____

The process of developing

final grades allows all a

chance at success (grades

are not allocated based

on a bell curve). _____ _____ _____

Classroom Climate

Teacher communicates high

expectations to all students. _____ _____ _____

Teacher fosters student choice

and autonomy in learning,

rule-making, and resolution

of conflicts. _____ _____ _____

Opportunities for teamwork

and cooperation are provided. _____ _____ _____

Teacher can articulate

strategies used to get to know

students as individuals. _____ _____ _____

Classroom management and

discipline approaches

minimize blind obedience and

compliance and maximize

strategies that create a caring

community. _____ _____ _____

59
60
Chapter Four

Strategies for School

Improvement

Chapter Preview

It is clear that to improve student motivation, changes must occur at both

the classroom and school level. In this chapter, we describe how efforts to

enhance students’ intrinsic motivation in the classroom can be subverted

by schoolwide policies and practices that over-emphasize raising test

scores, offer too few opportunities for teacher collaboration, require strict

adherence to textbook coverage, or limit resources for staff development

or curriculum refinement.

School leaders must examine school policies and practices in light of the

school goal to improve student motivation and in light of what we know

about factors that affect student motivation.

Students live within educational incentive zones that are larger than

what they experience in classrooms and smaller than the economic or

cultural rewards available in the distant future. (Powell, 1996)

As an example of how this school-level incentive zone can be improved,

we include the following description of a new program for ninth-graders at

East Forsyth High School in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

When the school year started, the principal looked at the stressed-out

faces of many of the freshmen and saw a problem. Near the end of the

school year, she studied statistics about the class. Out of the four high

school grades, the ninth-graders had four times as many discipline

problems, the highest percentage of dropouts, and the highest percentage

of failures. She and the teachers decided they needed to try something

different to ease the transition to high school. The following year, the

ninth-graders attended the Quality Academy, a program that gave them

some of the security and routine of middle schools as they adjusted to

61
the academic and social demands of high school. The ninth-grade

academy was comprised of a variety of components designed to improve

student motivation and commitment to school work, including the

following:

● All ninth-grade students will explain their school work to their parents

at student-led parent conferences twice a year. They will bring notebooks filled with their work. Any work that is missing must be explained by students to their parents at the conference.

● Every ninth-grader is assigned a teacher advocate to look after them.

Each teacher is assigned 9 or 10 students.

● Two buildings are designated as freshman buildings so ninth graders

would be less intimidated by older students when changing classes.

● A new grading system was implemented (for ninth grade only) that

uses “not yet” instead of “D” or “F” so that students can continue

working on assignments and have less anxiety and fear of failure as

they make the transition to high school.

Chapter Three described how teacher decisions about instruction, assessment, and classroom management can affect motivation. Decisions about

curriculum, grouping, and evaluation practices made at the school level

can also affect motivation. Additionally, school leaders generally decide

how scarce resources are allocated for teacher professional development

and instructional materials. It is therefore important to consider how the

larger school environment may enhance or hinder students’ motivation to

learn.

M

aehr and Midgley (1991) point out that efforts to foster intrinsic motivation within the classroom can be undone by practices and policies at the

school level. Pressure from administrators, for example, to keep standardized

test scores up can lead teachers to be more controlling and less willing to try

more innovative instructional approaches. If school administrators require strict

adherence to textbook lesson plans, this can undermine the efforts of individual teachers to make learning tasks more interesting, challenging, and

personally meaningful for their students. Scheduling restrictions can further

limit the types of learning tasks teachers are able to provide for their students.

A 40-50 minute class period is more conducive to lecture and worksheet

activities than to hands-on projects or cooperative learning activities that

motivate students.

62
Managing for Results/School Improvement

Planning

One of the problems identified by some management philosophies (such as

Total Quality Management) is that often organizations are managed for results

rather than continual improvement. A school that has a strong policy orientation towards raising test scores may be inadvertently supporting an environment that reduces student motivation.

Teaching Under Pressure

What happens when teachers are pressured to produce high student performance? Do they engage in more controlling behavior? What happens to students’ performance under these conditions? To examine these questions, Fink,

Boggiano, and Barrett (1990) designed an experiment in which 15 fourth-grade

teachers and their students were randomly assigned to one of two learning

conditions. In the first condition teachers were instructed to maximize their

students’ performance on a set of learning tasks; teachers in the second condition were told to simply help their students learn. Following each teaching

session, student performance on the learning tasks was assessed. The results

showed that students taught by “pressured” teachers did not perform as well

on the tasks as students taught by the “non-pressured” teachers. In addition,

“pressured” teachers gave more hints, criticism, praise, and directives than did

the “non-pressured” teachers. The authors concluded that pressures to produce

high student performance can lead teachers to engage in more controlling

behavior that impairs rather than enhances learning.

Creating a School Norm for Working Collaboratively

A collaborative school is one that actively discusses the practice of teaching,

identifies problems, designs improvement plans, and develops programs and

materials using teams. When there are clear beliefs and focused goals that

guide the collaborative work, schools often achieve dramatic outcomes (increases in motivation and achievement). Conversely, when schools do not

have a collaborative structure and clear goals such that faculty are empowered

to improve the quality of instruction, improving conditions for students may be

difficult.

As a well-known researcher of school restructuring noted

It is becoming increasingly clear that the task of educating very diverse

learners to much higher standards of learning in a world with fast-changing educational demands will require more skillful teaching and more

responsive school organizations than current educational bureaucracies

allow. Many argue that new school organizations. . . . will need to rely on

much greater knowledge, skill, and judgment from all “front-line workers”

63
(in this case, teachers) along with collaborative and flexible forms of planning and problem-solving more responsive to the needs of clients and the

realities of change. As reforms in both the business and education sectors

mature, striking parallels are emerging between the organizational strategies of high-performance, high-involvement corporations and those of

extraordinarily successful schools. Studies of effective schools frequently find

smaller, more personalized structures with less departmentalization, greater

use of teaching teams, and substantial teacher participation in school

redesign and improvement. (Darling-Hammond, 1996)

Thus, in order to develop and achieve goals that involve increased motivation, schools must consider how they are to structure themselves to

find time to work together. A sense of school community cannot develop

if there are not many and varied opportunities for teams to work together on issues, problems, policies, individual improvement, etc.

Curriculum/Assessment

Curriculum decisions should be considered in light of the goal of improving

student motivation. Curriculum materials and programs that make use of

hands-on activities, cooperative groups, and journaling and support higherorder thinking and challenging assignments, build on those factors that are

known to increase student motivation. In addition to choosing curriculum

programs carefully so that motivation is enhanced, faculty can be given time

and support to revise curriculum and lesson plans to include more engaging

learning activities.

Just as many argue that teachers at the school level must be involved in collective discussions and decision making about instructional materials and methods, those who have worked closely with schools on alternative assessment

argue that these discussions and decisions must also be school-based.

When schools wrestle with their own standard setting, the collective struggle

to define directions, to evaluate progress, and to “map backward” into new

curriculum and teaching possibilities can create an engine for schoolwide

change that is absent when assessment is entirely externalized. . . . Assessments that are externally developed and scored cannot transform the

knowledge and understanding of teachers—and of school organizations—

even if they are more performance-based than current tests. (DarlingHammond and Ancess, 1994)

Based on work completed with a number of schools that have developed

more authentic assessment approaches, Darling-Hammond and Ancess (1994)

argue that it is the process of working through assessment development issues

64
that leads to a personal understanding of what is worth being known by

students and worth assessing by teachers.

As an example of a schoolwide authentic assessment development effort,

many schools are having success with the idea of a graduation exhibition or

senior project requirement in which the whole staff work together to give

students an opportunity to try their wings and explore an area of interest.

Students write a research paper, spend at least 15 hours creating a related

project, and speak to a panel of judges about their research, project, and

personal growth. The senior project breaks down some of the artificial disciplinary walls by making learning an integrated process. Students see learning

as a process with setbacks and successes along the road. A common byproduct of such a collaborative assessment approach is to increase the sense of

connectedness among faculty and to begin to plan curriculum and instruction

to achieve instructional goals that have fallen through the cracks (such as oral

speaking skills).

In addition to the support of school-based assessment projects, there is a

tremendous need for districts and schools to find ways to offer support to

teachers in developing and improving the tests and assessments they use in

the classroom. SERVE and the other regional educational laboratories have

collaborated on a resource for professional development in assessment (Toolkit

for Professional Developments: Alternative Assessment, available from the

Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory in Portland, Oregon) which helps

educators become better consumers and developers of assessments. It provides

21 professional development activities that engage educators in discussions

about key assessment issues. Also included are 19 sample assessments in math

and science for educators to adapt and use. The Toolkit is based on the assumption that classroom testing should not just be an afterthought to determine grades but an integral way of providing students with meaningful feedback on their performance related to key instructional objectives. (SERVE has a

four-day workshop series on quality classroom assessment that builds on ideas

from the toolkit. Contact: Nancy McMunn at 800-755-3277.)

School Organization and Structure that

Supports Personalization

There are many different ways of organizing that can help schools foster a

caring and personal environment for students. In her autobiography (Dangerous Minds), LouAnne Johnson describes her experiences of teaching in a

“school within a school.” In this model, reduced class sizes and resource

periods for teachers to provide tutoring and counseling constitute a program

for underachieving high school students. Students enroll voluntarily in the

65
tenth grade, and although they have low grade-point averages and poor

attendance, they have above-average standardized test scores.

Johnson states

Students remain with the same teachers and the same classmates for three

years, which allows a considerable amount of bonding to take place. It is

this bonding that is the key to the success of the Academy model programs.

When classes are small enough to allow individual student-teacher interaction, a minor miracle occurs: teachers teach and students learn.

SERVE has recently completed a publication on reduced class size in the early

grades that describes the powerful connection between size and achievement

and what some states and districts are doing with this information (Egelson,

Harman, & Achilles 1996). Reports on the impact of block scheduling at secondary levels also mention that the reduced teacher-to-student load has a

positive impact on the degree to which students feel known and cared about.

The opportunities for students to be invisible and fall between the cracks

decrease as class size and teacher loads decrease. Increasingly, research is

demonstrating the key role of smaller size in improving educational outcomes.

Work-Based Learning/Career Exploration

Older students are more motivated to learn when they perceive the skills and

content will have value for their lives beyond high school. Schools are in the

process of improving the school-to-work connections for students in a variety

of ways. In some states, federal school-to-work dollars support a variety of

work-based learning options. The state of Florida uses the following definitions:

● Service learning—The formal integration of service into academic instruction and vice versa. Service is integrated into students’ curricula and provides structured time for students to think, talk, or write about their service

activities.

● School-sponsored enterprises—A school-sponsored enterprise that engages

students in providing services or producing goods for sale. Individual or

sequenced high school courses are set up as actual student-run businesses.

● Clinical or field experience/practicum—Training and experience in the

actual work setting requiring direct supervision by a faculty member of the

program with expertise and experience in the occupation being pursued.

● Work-place mentoring—Provides individuals with career exploration

opportunities to experience and learn firsthand from professionals about

their chosen occupation.

66
● Job shadowing—Short-term, generally one day or less, exposure to the

work-place designed to serve as an observational experience for a student

in a career or occupational area of interest.

In addition, many believe that school counselors can play a key role in helping

students with career awareness and exploration. There are several well-defined

models available to schools revamping their guidance programs. Walz and Ellis

(1992) discuss three model career guidance and counseling programs: Gybers

Comprehensive Guidance Program Model, Myrick’s Teacher Advisor Program

Model, and Purkey’s Invitational Learning for Counseling and Development, all

proven effective for students with diverse needs. For more information about

exemplary career guidance programs, see “Exemplary Career Guidance Programs: What Should They Look Like?” Maddy-Bernstein and Cunanen, 1995,

National Center for Research in Vocational Education.

Conclusions

Efforts to increase students’ intrinsic motivation will require not only significant

changes in the classroom environment, but also fundamental changes in how

schools organize their improvement efforts.

As others have said, if it were easy to create a classroom environment that is

intrinsically motivating, teachers would have already done it. Creating this kind

of environment takes planning time to reflect and discuss with colleagues and

time to observe others. Time is not easy to find. Thus, a schoolwide commitment to the improvement of student motivation to learn is critical. The commitment should be a long-term one, not a quick fix.

Discussion Questions for School Improvement

Teams

1. How can the school best support teachers interested in working on ways

to improve students’ motivation in their classrooms?

2. Have schoolwide incentive programs been evaluated through student

interview, surveys, or parent focus groups to better understand their

positive and negative impacts? Are they reviewed and revised based on

such evaluation information?

3. List the policy areas that you believe impact student motivation

schoolwide. Are committees or study groups needed to revise and monitor

school policies and practices in the critical areas of curriculum, assessment,

guidance, discipline, school structure, etc.?

67
68
Chapter Five

Assessing Student Motivation

Chapter Preview

As a first step toward understanding the baseline level of motivation in

your classroom or school, consider

● In-depth analyses of achievement tests, grades, and other behavioral

indicators—A high number of failing grades in math or in the ninth

grade class, for example, can be a starting point for exploring those

students’ perceptions and attitudes toward school.

● Understanding the kinds and levels of motivation that students have—

Do students in the classroom or school report more intrinsic than

extrinsic reasons for doing their work? Published scales are available.

● Attitudes toward school and subjects and comfort in class—Attitude

and comfort questions can be given to students at the beginning of the

year as a way of better understanding their perceptions and feelings

(positive or negative attitudes). Kay Toliver, an award-winning math

teacher, described in a keynote address at a SERVE conference how

important it was to her as a math teacher to collect data on attitudes

from her students at the beginning of the year so she could better

understand their individual needs. She has them write to her about

how they feel about math.

● Informal discussions and focus groups—What can be learned from

talking with groups of students? What do students say about their

motivation and work habits? What are parents’ perspectives?

● Action research—Are there any teachers in the school who are interested in conducting classroom research on how students respond to

various efforts to improve their motivation? Can they form a study

group?

There are many ways to collect data. The important thing is to begin small

and find ways that provide good information. Student input and feedback

are critical.

69
Through a variety of informal and/or formal data collection procedures,

teachers, schools, and districts can begin to assess how successful they are

in developing highly motivated students. This section provides some ideas

relative to finding out how you are doing.

Some might say that motivation is too ambiguous to assess, and, indeed,

very few schools have systematically looked at the degree of effort students expend and their level of commitment to school tasks. But the point

of this chapter is that there are varied ways of “getting at” student motivation. As with most assessment, there is no single measure that will give a

teacher, school, or district a “true” picture of motivation. The best approach

is to look at all the evidence across a variety of assessment methods (performance, self-report, open-ended questions, behavioral observation, etc.).

Grades, Test Scores, and Other Indicators

Motivation is clearly linked to grades, test scores, and other measures of

academic performance. However, a student’s grade or test score should not be

used as the sole measure of student motivation. Some students can work very

hard but not know how to study. Thus, they do not perform well. Other

students can do well seemingly without trying. Some students who do well on

standardized tests may have confidence or motivational problems. In one study

(Phillips, 1984) of 117 fifth graders scoring above the 75th percentile on a

standardized test, 23 had low self-perceptions and persisted less on tasks than

other children in the sample with higher self-perceptions. By giving up too

easily, their school performance was probably more uneven, leading to the

low perceptions.

Failure rates across courses or grade levels can be examined as a preliminary

measure of student effort. For example, high failure rates in ninth graders

compared to those of eighth or tenth graders would indicate that this population of students is struggling and losing interest. Looking for dips in achievement scores across the grade levels can provide another indication of which

areas students might be working below capacity. Another approach that has

been used by schools in identifying motivational problems is to compare

performance on aptitude tests to performance on classroom or achievement

tests.

Retention, dropout rates, and course-taking patterns at the high school level

can also provide indications of problems. At the high school level, participation in higher-level academic courses and students’ reasons for avoiding them

should be examined closely.

70
Understanding the Kinds and Levels of

Motivation That Students Have

Surveys of students are easy ways to collect basic information about their

motivation. The following instruments are available for grades three to nine:

Harter (1981) developed the Scale of Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Orientation

in the Classroom for grades three through nine. Intrinsic motivation is

assessed along five dimensions: (a) preference for challenging work versus

easy work, (b) learning motivated by curiosity versus learning done to

please the teacher, (c) desire to work independently versus dependency on

the teacher, (d) independent judgment about selecting tasks versus reliance

on teachers’ judgment, and (e) internal criteria versus external criteria for

success or failure. This 30-item survey uses a structured alternative question format in which students identify the person that is most like them.

Sample items include

Some kids like school subjects where it’s pretty easy to just learn the

answers, BUT other kids like those school subjects that make them think

pretty hard and figure things out.

Some kids do their schoolwork because the teacher tells them to, BUT

other kids do their schoolwork to find out about a lot of things they’ve

been wanting to know.

Students’ respond using a four-point scale, with high scores indicating

greater intrinsic motivation. It does not assess intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as separate dimensions.

A new version of this scale does assess intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as

separate dimensions. Statements begin with the stem, “I do my schoolwork

because. . . .” The six intrinsic reasons include: what I learn is interesting; I

enjoy figuring things out; schoolwork is challenging; it makes me think

hard; I like to solve hard problems; and I enjoy trying to understanding

things I don’t already know. The six extrinsic reasons include: my teacher

will be pleased with me; I will get special privileges from the teacher for

getting my work done; if I don’t do my schoolwork, my teacher will be

mad or annoyed at me; and if I don’t do my schoolwork, I’ll get into

trouble with the teacher. Each item is rated on a four-point scale from very

true (4) to not very true (1). Additional information can be obtained from

Professor Susan Harter, Department of Psychology, 2155 S. Race Street,

University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208.

● The Children’s Academic Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (CAIM), developed

by Gottried (1985), is a 122-item self-report inventory. It contains five

subscales; four measure intrinsic motivation in reading, math, social stud

71
ies, and science. Items in this scale are identical, except for reference to a

specific subject area. Sample items include

I enjoy learning new things in .

I feel good inside when I know I have learned something new in .

I would like to learn more about .

I think it is interesting to do work in .

A fifth scale measures intrinsic motivation as a general orientation toward

school learning:

I keep working on a problem until I understand it.

I enjoy doing new work in school.

I like to learn.

When I get bored, I look for new things to do.

Students rate each item on a 5-point scale from (1) strongly agree to (5)

strongly disagree. The scale is appropriate for students in grades five

through eight. A description of this scale can be found in Gottfried (1985).

In addition to published scales assessing students’ intrinsic interest in

learning (enjoyment, desire to understand, preference for challenging

work, etc.), teachers can experiment with items in their classrooms and

assess the reasons students do work after they have completed certain

assignments. Students could be given the following statements in Table 4

(without the headings) and asked to rate each statement from 1 (not very

true of me) to 4 (very true of me).

Other Indicators of Motivation

Perceived Competence

Students can be asked to report on their perceptions of their academic competence. Harter, Whitesall, and Kowalski (1992) developed a scale for children

which asks them questions about how well they understand their schoolwork,

how easy it is for them to figure out class assignments, how smart they feel,

and how well they are doing in school. Although the researchers used rating

scales, teachers may find that these kinds of questions elicit more useful

feedback from students if they ask them as open-ended questions.

Perceived competence or confidence may be particularly important in subjects

where there is often anxiety, such as math. One way to assess confidence is to

ask students the following questions:

● How good are you at mathematics? (1=not very good, 4=very good)

72
Table 4

Rate each statement below from 1 (not very true of me) to 4 (very true

of me).

In doing my assignments this week . . .

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

Intrinsic Reasons

1. I wanted to learn as much as possible.

2. I wanted to get better at (fill in the

topic).

3. I wanted to learn something new.

4. I wanted to figure out the work on my

own.

External/Extrinsic Reasons

1. I wanted to make my parents happy.

2. I wanted to please my teacher.

3. I wanted to get a special reward.

4. I didn’t want to get into trouble.

Social/Comparative Reasons

1. I wanted the other students to think I

was smart.

2. I wanted to get the best grade in the

class.

3. I wanted to do well without trying too

hard.

4. I wanted to finish first.

Work-Avoidant Reasons

1. I wanted to do as little as possible.

2. I just wanted to do what I am supposed

to and get it over with.

3. I wanted to do things as easily as

possible so I won’t have to work very

hard.

● How good are you at figuring out problems in mathematics? (1=not very

good, 4=very good)

● Compared to other subjects, how good are you at math? (1=much worse,

4=much better)

73
● How sure are you that you will get a good grade in math if you work hard?

(1=not very sure, 4=very sure)

If you collect these data, tally the percentage of “1” and “2” responses, and

find all but a few of your students are in this range, then you may have some

problems to work through in terms of how to provide more support and

encouragement. One teacher found that her students were so math-anxious

that she decided to give them the answers and then focus on how those

answers were arrived at; thus, their anxiety decreased.

Attitudes Toward School or Class

Attitude items assess how well a student likes or dislikes something, in this

case, school, school subjects, or a particular subject. Although students can

dislike or like school for a variety of academic and social reasons, these data

can provide a starting point for better understanding how and why many

students are alienated.

Comparative liking for subject areas can also provide useful information. In a

program evaluation of a middle school science-curriculum reform, SERVE

asked the students to rate their liking of four core subjects (see below). The

results were very helpful in looking at trends across the subjects. For example,

whereas eighth grade science had been the most liked subject and social

studies had been the least liked, when these same students moved into ninth

grade, social studies was the most liked, and science was the least liked. These

data provide good information for school-improvement teams as they look at

the quality of the curriculum.

Like a lot (3) Like a little (2) Do not like (1)

Math 3 2 1

Science 3 2 1

Social Studies 3 2 1

English 3 2 1

Teachers may want to assess basic enjoyment and ask their students to answer

the following four items on a scale of 1 (not very much) to 4 (very much). The

following items are written for mathematics but could be written for any

subject.

● How much do you like doing mathematics?

● How much do you like learning about mathematics?

● How much do you like working on math assignments?

● How much do you like doing hard problems in math?

74
Finally, teachers may wonder about students’ perceptions of the usefulness of

class activities.

● How useful is what you learn in science for what you do outside of

school? (1=not very useful, 4=very useful)

● In general, I find working on science assignments ________. (1=boring,

4=very interesting)

● For me personally and my career goals, being good at science is ________.

(1=not important, 4=very important)

Collecting these data for a classroom, department, grade level, or school can

help begin a conversation with students about their attitudes toward learning.

Another more open-ended way to assess attitudes toward a subject area is to

ask students to complete sentences like the following:

1. When I am working on _____________________, I feel ________________.

2. Mathematics makes me feel _________________________.

3. When I get stuck on a math problem, I feel ______________________.

4. When I get a hard problem in math, I feel______________________.

Cognitive Engagement/Learning Strategies

Another measure related to motivation is how students learn. Items can assess

the degree to which students report regulating their own learning (e.g., I went

back over things I didn’t understand; I asked myself some questions as I went

along to make sure the work made sense to me; I tried to figure out how

today’s work fit with what I had learned before).

Other items assess whether students report using strategies to complete their

work with minimal effort (e.g., I copied down someone else’s answer; I

guessed a lot so I could finish quickly; I skipped the hard parts). These are

items a teacher could use after students complete assignments or tests. Students could rate the items from 1 (not like me) to 4 (a lot like me).

Comfort in Participating

In a survey of students at a North Carolina high school, SERVE found, as part

of a Tech Prep evaluation study, that many students, particularly in math class,

did not feel comfortable asking questions—a very basic aspect of learning.

Thus, finding out how many and which students and in which classes are

experiencing discomfort in asking questions can provide some guidance about

where to concentrate.

75
Open-Ended Questions/Interviews/Informal

Discussions

Although survey items such as those provided above are quick and easy

measures of students’ attitudes and feelings, they are limited in the depth of

understanding they allow. Qualitative data (interviews, group discussions,

journal writing, etc.) can help to enhance the picture started with survey data.

Some schools are starting to conduct focus groups (small group interviews)

with students to better understand the barriers to high levels of motivation. If a

teacher perceives that a particular class or group of students within a class is

not putting forth much effort, simply talking with them about the reasons can

be a starting point for improving their commitment. For example, in one North

Carolina high school, a teacher new to the school noticed that a number of her

algebra students seemed determined to fail and put forth little effort to pass

the course. She started talking to students about why they were “work

avoidant” and found out that they did not feel comfortable in the group classroom setting; they said they felt “dumb.” She set up an after-hours grade

retrieval lab and found that these same students would work diligently in

groups of three on computer programs to learn the same skills that they

refused to study in the regular classroom. Thus, asking students why they are

not doing the work is an easy, but seldom tried, approach. They may actually

have good reasons for being “work avoidant.”

Similarly, parents might be good sources of information about motivational

problems. As reported in Webb, Covington, and Guthrie (1993), the counselors

and teachers at a high school could not understand why their African-American girls took failing grades for their swimming portion of PE rather than

participate. They finally decided to ask the parents and found out that the

chlorine in the pool damaged the girls’ hair. The school decided to offer

alternative forms of exercise to the girls, and their grades improved.

Action Research

What might a teacher gain from doing action research (collecting quantitative or

qualitative data) on motivation in the classroom?

Teachers informally go through an evaluation process that includes trying out

new ideas or lessons, observing results, revising, and trying it again. Action

research translates this kind of informal reflection process into a more systematic inquiry. The systematic inquiry might involve a teacher journal, student

interviews, or audio or videotaping the classroom so that interactions can be

examined later. When a teacher hits a particularly hard-to-motivate class,

research on what to do when nothing seems to work might be a positive way

76
to deal with the situation. The excerpts below are from Studying Your Own

School, which provides examples of practitioner-based research (Anderson,

Herr, & Nihlen, 1994). The excerpts describe action research conducted by an

eighth grade language arts teacher who was faced with a class of students for

whom nothing seemed to work:

I wanted to determine what environmental factors in the classroom might

influence motivation and what types of rewards are effective. I used a

methodology that included a daily journal, . . . tape recording of class

activities, and student interviews and questionnaires. . . . I read the students my research proposal, enlisting their help to communicate with me

and to work together on the research process.

[I] began to try some interventions in the classroom; in my journal, [I] wrote

about an experiment in sending notes home to parents and the risks [I] felt

in trying this. . . . Searching for other positive motivators for my class, [I]

mounted a motivational bulletin board with a horse on a race track, illustrating the progress the class was making in attendance, homework, and

participation. [I] also devised a list of extrinsic motivators and tried to

prioritize them in the way [I] thought my students would. . . .

I had assumed the number-one item would be a bonus-point system where

the class earning the most bonus points in one six-week period would choose

their own reward. The class rated it as number ten and, after a little discussion, decided it didn’t even need to be on the list. They rated teaching

resources as number one. How wrong I was about them! I was also wrong

about the positive notes home. I shared my fear about them being too “cool”

for a positive note. Norman, Scott, and Dawn all said that’s not true. They

said they took their notes home and showed them. I was not only working

with the class to reorganize each strategy and develop classroom incentives,

but I was valuing their ideas. They cooperated fully, taking the activity

seriously. . . .

Clearly, I had wasted many days assuming the class was incapable of deep

reasoning. I was guilty of letting their outer appearance and low academic

ability sway my attitude. . . . If I want my students to be motivated to

achieve, I must care for them as persons.

At a later time, [I] asked my students to restate, in order, their four largest

inhibitors of motivation. These were comparing me with another student in

class, picking out a certain group of students as pets, lack of trust in students, and a teacher that always cuts you down. . . . Students had voted

that getting good grades was the first source of motivation. Second to this in

the students’ perceptions was having parents care, followed by having a

bright, caring teacher.

77
In examining these students’ grades in my class, [I] found improvements over

a four-week period. However, many of the students had not shown the same

kind of improvement in their other classes. When [I] asked them to explain, the

students placed the blame on the teachers for the most part. Remarks like “He

don’t like us,” “She don’t know how to teach,” and “All she does is pass out

worksheets” had been said before and were now being repeated.

[I] ended my study with an increased awareness of my role as a teacher, as

well as a greater sense of my students and what motivates them. [I] also got

the results [I] was looking for—that is, a class that performed at a higher

level, as measured in their grades.

[If this eighth–grade teacher] were to continue the research spiral, perhaps

she would have the opportunity to share her own learning and classroom

results in a larger arena, working with other educators in her school. This

kind of dissemination of her research could have an impact beyond her

classroom in the larger environment of the school, potentially creating a

new context for learning for all students.

Conclusions

How do we judge the success of our schools? Often, it is through scores on

state tests. But these measures are a step removed from the heartbeat of the

student: their motivation to learn. School change literature suggests that successful schools are those that truly engage and involve students and motivate

them for life. Test scores are not enough. Schools must have a finger on the

pulse of students’ emotional and cognitive reactions to their school environment. If students express significant levels of boredom, they are not likely to

be optimally motivated and learning. Surveys indicate that boredom is a major

problem, especially in middle and high schools. When a student who has

always been happy to go to elementary school moves up to middle school and

begins to hate school, asking to stay home because of how boring the day is,

we have a problem. We need to know how many students are bored,

uninvolved, turned off, feel like they are dumb, afraid to ask questions, etc.

Without this information, it is very difficult to interpret achievement scores and

to develop school-improvement and teacher professional-development plans.

78
Chapter Six

Conclusions: Using the

Information in This Document

A

fter becoming familiar with the information in this document, our first

recommendation for action is that teachers and school faculty begin to

collect data from students (see Chapter Five). The data collection could be

both formal (surveys) and/or informal (conversations with small groups of

students). It could be quantitative or qualitative. It is generally helpful to start

small and build in more data collection based on what you find with the first

effort. It is critical to get to know where students are coming from before

designing strategies to improve their motivation to learn.

The document is a rich resource for thinking about ways to improve student

motivation to learn.

1. Although extrinsic incentives can be effective for certain situations and

certain groups of students, they are not the only answer to improving test

scores or student motivation. A teacher, department, or school team may

want to review Chapter Two and evaluate their current use of extrinsic

incentives. It may be helpful to collect teacher, parent, and student input

about how well the incentives are working and their impact on students.

Secondly, it may be helpful to match your use of incentives to the recommendations laid out in Chapter Two and determine where you differ from

effective practices suggested by research.

We also suggest a review process of discipline and classroom-management

policies to discover if they are more adult-centered than student-centered.

That is, are they too controlling and heavy-handed, or are consequences

used in a way that encourages students to think about their actions and

discuss the impact of their actions with others? It may be helpful to read

the research on popular programs such as Assertive Discipline to better

understand the potential positive and negative impacts. At the school level,

it may be helpful to establish an ongoing classroom management/discipline

committee that can read the research, collect input, and continually revise

school programs based on what is learned.

79
2. Chapter Three is designed to help individuals or groups of teachers (grade

levels, departments, etc.) think about what they can do in the classroom to

increase student motivation to learn.

The Teacher Checklist of Factors to Improve Student Motivation will hopefully prove useful to teachers as a self-assessment tool. Some teachers may

feel they are doing well on the “Instruction” factors but are weak on the

“Assessment” factors, or strong on “Assessment” but weak on “Classroom

Climate.” Needs for improvement may also vary from year to year depending on the class population. The “Classroom Climate” factors may be fine

one year, but the next year with a more difficult class, they may need to be

reconsidered again.

We see the checklist as a resource to refer to in setting professional-improvement goals from year to year. Chapter Three could be the basis for

goal-setting as required in some school teacher-evaluation plans. If so, it is

critical that teacher goals be those chosen by them, based on their interests

and self-perceptions, not forced on them by administrators. If it is somewhat threatening for teachers to publicly identify goals to submit to the

principal, perhaps grade levels or departments could set team or gradelevel goals (e.g., to develop common rubrics for key skills expected to be

mastered by students).

The school media specialist might be enlisted to compile resources in some

of the areas of most interest to teachers (e.g., rubric development, cooperative groups, hands-on/problem-centered instructional activities). Principals

are critical in supporting study groups and other ways for teachers to work

together and support each other, sharing resources developed and ideas

that work to increase student motivation. Perhaps an “improving motivation” teacher study group could be supported with release time and other

resources (with teachers participating on a volunteer basis for a year).

Teachers who are frustrated by a lack of student motivation would most

likely welcome a supportive, collegial environment in which to express

their frustrations and explore ways to change.

3. The school leadership and school-improvement team are critical users of

the information in this document. It is they who can help determine the

extent to which the school has a “motivation” problem. They are the ones

who can make the larger commitment to collecting needed data (Chapter

Five) and to making the improvement of students’ motivation to learn a

visible school-improvement goal. School leaders can use Chapter Four as a

starting point for thinking about strategies to consider at the school level

that may increase student motivation. This process is not a “quick fix.”

Rather it is a commitment to adding improved student motivation to the

typical student achievement goals and then going beyond simply imple80
menting an incentive or consequences (extrinsic rewards and punishments)

action plan. The expanded look should include a commitment to

a. Assessing student motivation (even the addition of 4 to 5 student focus

groups a year on the topic would be significant)

b. Using these data to reflect on the total school program (management

style, curriculum design, assessment practices, opportunities for teachers to work together to improve their practice, class size and structure,

degree of personalization, and school-to-work connections)

c. Developing action plans and continually revising them as needed

Perhaps once a year (as a school-improvement evaluation activity), teachers could volunteer for participation on committees to reflect on the components of the schoolwide program listed above (e.g., curriculum quality

and resources, adequacy of school-to-work connections, professional

development needs). They could also consider strengths and weaknesses

to report to the school-improvement team for future action.

Finally, perhaps the most important recommendation of all for school

leaders is simply to start supporting conversations and planning around

improving motivation. If teachers aren’t talking about these issues, improvements are unlikely.

8167
82
For Further Reading

Ames, C. (1990). “Motivation: What Teachers Need to Know.” Teachers College

Record. 91, 410-421.

Berliner, D. C., & Casanova, U. (1993). Putting Research to Work in your

School. New York: Scholastic Inc.

Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the Grade: A Self-Worth Perspective on Motivation and School Reform. New York: Cambridge Press.

Gardner, H. (1991). The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think & How Schools

Should Teach. New York: Basic Books.

Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive

Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Marshall, H. (1992). Redefining Student Learning: Roots of Educational Change.

Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.

McCombs, B. L., Swartz, D., Wlodkowski, R., Whistler, J. S., & Stiller, J. D.

(1995). The learner-centered school and classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Publishers.

Powell, A. G. (1996). “Motivating students to learn: An American dilemma.” In

S. H. Fuhrman, & J. A. O’Day (Eds.), Rewards and Reform. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Tharp, R., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing Minds to Life. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Tomlinson, T. (1993). Motivating Students to Learn. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan

Publishing Corporation.

83
84
References

Allington, R. C., & Cunningham, P. M. (1996). Schools that work where all

children read and write. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Arbreton, A., & Roesner, R. (1993, April). Motivational influences on fifth

graders’ help-seeking strategy use in math classrooms. Paper presented at the

annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.

Ames, C. (1990a). The relationship of achievement goals to student motivation

in classroom settings. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American

Educational Research Association, Boston.

Ames, C. (1990b). “Motivation: What teachers need to know.” Teachers College

Record, 91, 409-421.

Ames, C. (1992). “Achievement goals and the classroom climate.” In D. H.

Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327-

348). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). “Achievement goals in the classroom: Student

learning strategies and motivation processes.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.

Anderman, E. M., & Maehr, M. L. (1994). “Motivation and schooling in the

middle grades.” Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 287-309.

Anderson, G. L., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A. S. (1994). Studying your own school. An

educator’s guide to qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Corwin Press, Inc.

Benware, C., & Deci, E. (1984). “Quality of learning with an active versus

passive motivation set.” American Educational Research Journal, 21, 755-765.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, R., &

Palinscar, A. (1991). “Motivation project-based learning: Sustaining the doing,

supporting the learning.” Educational Psychologist, 26, 369-398.

Boggiano, A. K., Barrett, M., Weiher, A. W., McClelland, G. H., & Lusk, C. M.

(1987). “Use of the maximal-operant principle to motivate children’s intrinsic

interest.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 866-879.

85
Braddock, J. H., & McPartland, J. (1993). “Education of early adolescents.” In L.

Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 19, pp. 135-

170), Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Brophy, J. (1981) “Teacher praise: A functional analysis.” Review of Educational

Research, 51, 5-32.

Brophy, J. (1983). “Research on the self-fulfilling prophecy and teacher expectations.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 631-661.

Brophy, J. (1987a). “Synthesis of research on strategies for motivating students

to learn.” Educational Leadership, 45, 40-48.

Brophy, J. (1987b). “Socializing students’ motivation to learn.” In M. Martin &

D. Kleiber (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 5, pp. 181-

210).

Brophy, J. (1987c). “On motivating students.” In D. Berliner & B. Roseshine

(Eds.), Talks to teachers (pp. 201-245). New York: Random House.

Brown, B. B. (1993). “School culture, social politics, and the academic motivation of U.S. students.” In T. Tomlinson (Ed.), Motivating students to learn.

Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.

Butler, R. (1987). “Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation:

Effects of different feedback conditions on motivation perceptions, interest,

and performance.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 474-482.

Butler, R. (1988). “Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects

of task-involving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance.”

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 1-14.

Canter, L. (1989). “Assertive discipline: More than names on the board and

marbles in the jar.” Phi Delta Kappan, 71, 57-61.

California Assessment Collaborative (1993). Charting the course toward

instructionally sound assessment. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory.

Csikszentmihayi, M. C. (1990). “Literacy and intrinsic motivation.” Daedalus

(spring), 116-140.

Cohen, E. (1986). Designing groupwork. New York: Teachers College Press.

Connell, J. (1985). A new multidimensional measures of children’s perceptions

of control. Child Development, 56, 1018-1041.

86
Corno, L., & Rohrkemper, M. (1985). “The intrinsic motivation to learn in

classrooms.” In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: The classroom milieu (Vol. 2, pp. 53-84). New York: Academic Press.

Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). “Restructuring schools for high performance.” In

S.H. Fuhrman, & J.A. O’Day (Eds.), Rewards and Reform. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Ancess, J. (1994). Authentic assessment and school

development. Teachers College, Columbia University: National Center for

Restructuring Education, Schools, and Teachers.

deCharms, R. (1976). Enhancing motivation. New York: Irvington Publishers.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). “A motivational approach to self: Integration

in personality.” In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol.

38, pp. 237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and education. New York: Collier (Original work

published in 1938).

Doyle, W. (1983). “Academic work.” Review of Educational Research, 53, 159-

199.

Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, P. H., Roberts, D. F., & Fraleigh, M.J.

(1987). “The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance.”

Child Development, 58, 1244-1257.

Dweck, C. S. (1986). “Motivational processes affecting learning.” American

Psychologist, 41 (10), 1040-1048.

Dweck, C. S., & Elliot, E.S.(1983). “Achievement motivation.” In E.M.

Hetherington (Ed.), Socialization, personality, and social development (Vol. 4

of P.H. Mussen, Ed., Handbook of child psychology, pp. 643-691). New York:

Wiley.

Eccles, J., Midgley, C., & Adler, A. (1984). “Grade-related changes in the school

environment: Effects on achievement motivation.” In J. Nicholls (Ed.), Advances in motivation and achievement, Vol. 3: The development of achievement

motivation (pp. 283-331). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

87
Egelson, P., Harman, P, & Achilles, C. M.(1996). Does class size make a difference?: Findings from state and district initiatives. Tallahassee, FL: SERVE (1-

800-352-6001).

Elliot, E., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). “Goals: An approach to motivation and

achievement.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5-12.

Fink, C., Boggiano, A. K., & Barrett, M. (1990). “Controlling teaching strategies:

Undermining children’s self-determination and performance.” Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 916-924.

Farnham-Diggory, S. (1990). Schooling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Garbarino, J. (1975). “The impact of anticipated rewards on cross-age tutoring.”

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 421-428.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.

Ginsburg, G. & Bronstein, P. (1993). “Family factors related to children’s intrinsic/extrinsic motivational orientation and academic performance.” Child Development, 64, 1461-1474.

Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw Hill.

Good Morning Miss Toliver. Video from FASE Productions, 4801 Wilshire Blvd.,

Suite 215, Los Angeles, CA, 90010. Phone: 213-965-8794.

Gottfried, A. (1985). “Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior

high school students.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 631-645.

Grolnick W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). “Parent styles associated with children’s

self-regulation and competence in school.” Journal of Educational Psychology,

81, 143-154.

Graham, S., & Golan, S. (1991). “Motivational influences on cognition: Task

involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information processing.” Journal

of Educational Psychology, 83, 187-196.

Harter, S. (1978). “Effectance motivation reconsidered: Toward a developmental model.” Human Development, 1, 34-64.

Harter, S. (1981). “A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom: Motivational and informational components.” Developmental Psychology, 17, 300-312.

88
Harter, S., Whitesell, N. R., Kowalski, P. (1992). “Individual differences in the

effects of educational transitions on young adolescent’s perceptions of competence and motivational orientation.” American Educational Research Journal,

29, 777-807.

Johnson, L. A. (1992). Dangerous minds. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1975). Learning together and alone: Cooperation, competition, and individualization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kohn, A. (1993a). “Choices for children: Why and how to let children decide.”

Phi Delta Kappan, 75(1), 9-20.

Kohn, A. (1993b). Punished by rewards. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Lepper, M.R., & Hodell, M. (1989). “Intrinsic motivation in the classroom.” In C.

Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, pp. 73-

105). New York: Academic Press.

Licht, B. (1992). “The achievement-related perceptions of children with learning problems: A developmental analysis.” In D. H. Schunk & J.L. Meece (Eds.),

Student perceptions in the classroom (pp.247-266). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Licht, B.G., Strader, S. R., & Swenson, C.C. (1989). “Children’s achievementrelated beliefs: Effects of academic area, sex, and achievement level.” Journal

of Educational Research, 82, 253-260.

Lipe, D., & Jung, S. (1971). “Manipulating incentives to enhance school learning.” Review of Educational Research, 41 (4), 249-280.

MacIver, D. (in press). “Effects of improvement-focused student recognition on

young adolescents’ performance and motivation in the classroom.” In M.

Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 8),

Greenwich, CN: JAI Press.

Maddy-Bernstein, C., & Cunanan, E.S. (1995). Exemplary career guidance

programs: What should they look like? Graduate School of Education, University

of California at Berkeley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education.

Maehr, M. L., & Anderman, E.M. (1993). “Reinventing schools for early adolescents: Emphasizing task goals.” The Elementary School Journal, 93 (5), 593-609.

Maehr, M. & Midgley, C. (1991). “Enhancing student motivation: A schoolwide

approach.” Educational Psychologist, 26(3 & 4), 399-427.

89
Maehr, M., Midgley, C., Urdan, T. (1992). “School leaders as motivators.”

Educational Administration Quarterly, 28, 410-429.

Malone, T.W., & Lepper, M.R. (1987). “Making learning fun: A taxonomy of

intrinsic motivation for learning.” In R. E. Snow & M.J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude,

learning, and instruction (Vol. 3). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Marshall, H. (1987). “Motivational strategies of three fifth-grade teachers.” The

Elementary School Journal, 88, 135-149.

Matheny, K. & Edwards, C. (1974). “Academic improvement through an experimental classroom management system.” Journal of School Psychology, 12, 222-

232.

McCaslin, M., & Good, T.C. (1993). “Classroom management and motivated

student learning.” In T. Tomlinson (Ed.), Motivating students to learn. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.

McClelland, D. C. (1958). “The importance of early learning in the formation of

motives.” In J.W. Atkinson (Ed.), Motives in fantasy, action, and society (pp.

437-452). Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.

McColskey, W., & Egelson, P. (1993). Designing teacher evaluation systems that

support professional growth. Greensboro, NC: SouthEastern Regional Vision for

Education: SERVE (1-800-755-3277).

McColskey, W., & O’Sullivan, R. (1993). How to assess student performance in

science: Going beyond multiple-choice tests. Greensboro, NC: SouthEastern

Regional Vision for Education: SERVE (1-800-755-3277).

Meece, J., Blumenfeld, P.C.,& Hoyle, R. (1988). “Students’ goal orientations and

cognitive engagement in classroom activities.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514-523.

Meece, J.L. (1991). “The classroom context and students’ motivational goals.”

In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement

(Vol. 7, pp. 261-286). Greenwich, CN: JAI Press.

Nastasi, B., & Clements, D. (1991). “Research on cooperative learning: Implications for practice.” School Psychology Review, 110-131.

Newby, T. (1991). “Classroom motivation: Strategies of first-year teachers.”

Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 195-200.

Nicholls, J.G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

90
Nicholls, J.G., Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E. & Patashnick, M. (1990). “Dimensions of success in mathematics: Individual and classroom differences.” Journal

for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(2), 109-122.

Nicholls, J.G., & Nolen, S. B. (in press). “Big science, little teachers: Knowledge

and motives concerning student motivation.” In J.G Nicholls & T. A.

Thorkildsen (Eds.), Widening the conversation on motivation in education.

NY: Teacher College Press.

Nolen S.B. (1988). “Reasons for studying: Motivational orientations and study

strategies.” Cognition and Instruction, 5, 269-287.

O’Leary, K.D., Becker, W.C., Evans, M. B., & Saudargas, R.A. (1969). “A token

reinforcement program in a public school: A replication and systematic analysis.” Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 2 (1), 3-13.

Phillips, D. (1984). “The illusion of incompetence among academically competent children.” Child Development, 55, 2000-2016.

Powell, A.G. (1996). “Motivating students to learn: An American dilemma.” In

S. Fuhrman, & J.A. O’Day, (Eds.), Rewards and reform. San Francisco: JosseyBass Publishers.

Rainey, R. (1965). “The effects of directed versus non-directed laboratory work

on high school chemistry achievement.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3, 286-292.

Ryan, R., Connell, J. P., & Deci, E. (1985). “A motivational analysis of selfdetermination and self-regulation in education.” In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.),

Research on motivation in education: The classroom milieu (Vol. 2, pp. 1-51).

New York: Academic Press.

Ryan, R., & Grolnick, W. (1986). “Origins and pawns in the classroom: Selfreport and projective assessments of individual differences in children’s perceptions.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 350-358.

Schunk, D. (1991). “Self-efficacy and academic motivation.” Educational

Psychologist, 26, 207-232.

Slavin, R. (1984). “Students motivating students to excel: Cooperative incentives, cooperative tasks, and student achievement.” Elementary School Journal,

84, 53-63.

Slavin, R. (1983). “When does cooperative learning increase student achievement?” Psychological Bulletin, 94, 429-445.

91
Slavin, R. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Stigler, J., & Stevenson, H. (1991). “How Asian teachers polish each lesson to

perfection.” American Educator, 15, 12-20.

Stipek, D. (1993). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice (Second Edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Thomas, J.W. (1993). “Expectations and effort: Course demands, students’ study

practices, and academic achievement.” In T. Tomlinson (Ed.), Motivating

students to learn. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.

Tomlinson, T. (1993). Motivating students to learn. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan

Publishing Corporation.

Walz, G.R., & Ellis, T.I. (1992). Counseling and guidance in schools: Three exemplary guidance approaches. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Webb, F.R., Covington, M. V., & Guthrie, J.W. (1993). “Carrots and sticks: Can

school policy influence student motivation?” In T. Tomlinson (Ed.), Motivating

students to learn. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.

Webb, N.(1985). “Verbal interaction and learning in peer-directed learning

groups.” Theory into Practice, 15, 69-83.

Weinstein, R., & Middlestadt, S. (1979). “Student perceptions of teacher interactions with male high and low achievers.” Journal of Educational Psychology,

71, 421-431.

Wiggins, G. P. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purposes

and limits of testing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass-Publishers.

Wood, T., Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1992). “Change in learning: Change in teaching.” In H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining student learning. Roots of educational

change. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

92
About SERVE

SERVE, directed by Dr. John R. Sanders, is an education organization with the mission to promote and support

the continuous improvement of educational opportunities for all learners in the Southeast. The organization’s

commitment to continuous improvement is manifest in a cycle that begins with research and best practice.

Building on theory and craft knowledge, SERVE staff develop tools and processes designed to assist practitioners, to refine the organization’s delivery of technical assistance to schools and educational agencies, and,

ultimately, to raise the level of student achievement in the region. Evaluation of the impact of these activities

combined with input from affected stakeholders expands SERVE’s knowledge base and directs future research.

This critical research-to-practice cycle is supported by an experienced staff strategically located throughout the

region. This staff is highly skilled in providing needs-assessment services, conducting applied research in

schools, and developing processes, products, and programs that inform educators and increase student

achievement. In the last three years, SERVE staff have provided technical assistance and training to more than

18,000 teachers and administrators across the region and partnered with over 170 southeastern schools on

research and development projects.

SERVE is governed by a board of directors that includes the governors, chief state school officers, educators,

legislators, and private sector leaders from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

At SERVE’s core is the Regional Educational Laboratory program. Funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s

Office of Educational Research and Improvement, SERVE is one of ten organizations providing services of the

Regional Educational Laboratory program to all 50 states and territories. These Laboratories form a knowledge

network, building a bank of information and resources shared nationally and disseminated regionally to

improve student achievement locally. Besides the Lab, SERVE is the lead agency in the Eisenhower Mathematics

and Science Consortium for the Southeast and the Southeast and Islands Regional Technology in Education

Consortium. SERVE also administers a subcontract for the Region IV Comprehensive Center and has additional

funding from the Department to provide services in migrant education and to operate the National Center for

Homeless Education.

Based on these funded efforts, SERVE has developed a portfolio of programs and initiatives that provides

a spectrum of resources, services, and products for responding to local, regional, and national needs. Program

areas include Assessment, Accountability, and Standards; Children, Families, and Communities; Education Policy;

Improvement of Science and Mathematics Education; Education Leadership; School Development and Reform;

and Technology in Learning. SERVE’s National Leadership Area is Expanded Learning Opportunities, which

involves researching and identifying promising practices that result in improved student outcomes on the

national, state, and local levels.

In addition to the program areas, the SERVE Evaluation Department supports the evaluation activities

of the major grants and contracts and provides evaluation services to state and local education agencies in the

region. The Technology Support Group provides SERVE staff and their constituents with systems, technical

assistance, and software applications. Through its Communications and Publications Department, SERVE publishes

a variety of studies, training materials, policy briefs, and program products. Through its programmatic, technology

support, evaluation, and publishing activities, SERVE also provides contracted staff development and technical

assistance in many areas of expertise to assist education agencies in achieving their school improvement goals.

SERVE’s main office is at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, with major staff groups located

in Tallahassee, Florida, and Atlanta, Georgia. Unique among the ten Regional Educational Laboratories, SERVE

maintains policy analysts at the state education agencies of each of the states in its region. These analysts act as

SERVE’s primary liaisons to the state departments of education, providing research-based policy services to

state-level education policymakers and informing SERVE about key educational issues and legislation.

SERVE Main Office • P.O. Box 5367 • Greensboro, NC 27435 • 336-315-7400 • 800-755-3277 • Fax 336-315-7457

John R. Sanders, Ed.D. • Executive Director

www.serve.org

93
1. Please complete the order form and mail with check

or purchase order to SERVE, Communications and

Publications, 1203 Governor’s Square Boulevard, Suite

400, Tallahassee, Florida 32301. Make check or

purchase order out to SERVE, a federally funded

contract administered by the University of North

Carolina at Greensboro (Federal ID EIN#56-6001-468).

Sorry, we cannot accept credit cards.

2. Discounts are available for most SERVE products when

you purchase units of 25 or more. Please contact the

Distribution Specialist at 800-352-6001 for discount

information.

3. If you are requesting an invoice, your order must

include a purchase order number.

4. We ship by U.S. Mail and United Parcel Service. Please

calculate your shipping charges from the table on the

order form. Shipping charges will be higher for

special orders and shipping outside the continental

U.S. Please allow three weeks for delivery from the

time we receive the order in our office. If you require

special shipping arrangements, let us know. In most

cases, we can accommodate your needs. Prices are

subject to change.

5. For more information regarding SERVE’s products and

ordering procedures, please call 800-352-6001.

SERVE Publications Ordering Information

Publications

Description Item Price

The 1997 SERVEing Young Children Specialty Area Annual Report ECAR1 $2.00

The 1998 SERVEing Young Children Specialty Area Annual Report ECAR2 $2.00

Achieving Your Vision of Professional Development HTAYV $10.00

Action Research: Perspectives from Teachers’ Classrooms Download Only

Assessment HotSpots (Volume 1) MAAHS $8.00

Assessment HotSpots (Volume 2) MAAHS2 $12.00

Assessment in Early Childhood Education: Status of the Issue ECESI $1.00

Blue Ribbon: Creating a Continuum of Excellence PCBRC $7.00

Blue Ribbon: Portraits of Success: Unlocking the Secrets of High-Performing Schools PCPOS $12.00

Building Babies’ Brains: A Training for Infant/Toddler Caregivers ECBBB PleaseCall

A Call to Action: Family Involvement as a Critical Component of Teacher Education Programs HTCTA $6.00

Chartering for Excellence: Developing and Implementing Charter School Legislation HTCFE $6.00

Children Exposed to Drugs: Meeting Their Needs HTSEC $10.00

Coming Together: Collaboration as a Tool for Change ECCTC $3.00

Continuity in Early Childhood: A Framework for Home, School, and Community Linkages ECECE2 Please Call

Designing the School of Your Dreams SSDSD $6.00

Designing Teacher Evaluation Systems that Support Professional Growth RDTES2 $8.00

Developing Leadership Programs for “Break-the-Mold” Public Schools SSBTM $10.00

Does Class Size Make a Difference? RDCSD $4.00

Dropping In (Vol 1, #1): A Brief Look at a Cross-Section of the Region’s Dropout

Prevention Programs SRDI $2.00

Dropping In (Vol 1, #2): A Brief Look at Intervention Strategies for Over-Age Students SRDI2 $2.00

The Education of Homeless Children and Youth: A Compendium of Research & Information SREHC $12.00

Families and Schools: An Essential Partnership SSFSP $6.00

Family-Focused Workplace Guide ECFFG $9.00

Head, Heart, and Hands for Our Youngest Children ECHHH $5.00

How to Assess Student Performance in Science: Going Beyond Multiple-Choice Tests RDSPS $10.00

Improving Reading: Southeastern School Strategies SSIRS $6.00

Improving Schools Now: SERVE’s Catalog of Programs, Products, and Publications (2001) PRISN FREE

Improving America’s Schools: Summer Institute 2000 PCIAS $6.00

Improving Student Motivation: A Guide for Teachers and School Improvement Leaders RDISM $12.00

Issues to Consider in Moving Beyond a Minimal Competency High School Graduation Test RDMCT $4.00

Language, Discourse, and Learning in Science: Improving Professional Practice through

Action Research MSLDL $29.95

Leading Change in Literacy: Southeastern District Stories SSLCL $6.00

Learning By Serving: 2,000 Ideas for Service-Learning Programs HTLBS $8.00

NCHE Parent Pack Folder NCHEF $3.00

NCHE Parent Pack Folder (Spanish Version) NCHES $3.00

94
Planning for School Improvement: A Report on a Comprehensive Planning Process SRPSI $1.00

Planning Into Practice TLPIP $30.00

PROBE: Designing School Facilities for Learning PRDSF $10.00

Promising Service-Learning Programs SSPSL $1.00

Ramping-Up Reform: Aligning Education Rhetoric, Resolve, and Results RDRUR $8.00

Reducing School Violence: Building a Framework for School Safety HTRSV $8.00

Reflecting on Progress: Site-Based Management and School Improvement in North Carolina RDSMB $4.00

School Readiness in North Carolina: Executive Summary SSRES Please Call

School Readiness in North Carolina: Full Report SSRFR Please Call

Science in the Elementary Classroom: Portraits of Action Research Download Only

Teacher Dialogue Forums SRTDF $4.00

Teacher Evaluation: The Road to Excellence SSTER $6.00

Terrific Transitions: Ensuring Continuity of Services for Children and Their Families ECTTC $5.00

Tomorrow’s Child: Benefiting from Today’s Family-School-Community-Business Partnerships SSTOC Please Call

Total Quality Management: Passing Fad or “The Real Thing”? An Implementation Study RDTQM $5.00

Using Accountability as a Lever for Changing the Culture of Schools:

Examining District Strategies RDUAL $8.00

Virtual Libraries in the Southeast: A Guide to Online Databases SRVIR $7.00

Videos and CD-ROMs

Promising Practices in Technology: Effective Strategies for Professional Development VPPPD $9.95

Promising Practices in Technology: Technology as a Tool for Student Assessment VPPSA $9.95

Promising Practices in Technology: Recognizing and Supporting Effective Teaching

with Technology VPPTT $9.95

Promising Practices in Technology: Using Technology to Enrich Teaching VPPET $9.95

The Senior Project: Student Work for the Real World VSPRW $9.95

Training and Seminars

For information on training programs, please call 800-352-6001.

Continuity in Early Childhood:

A Framework for Home, School, and Community Linkages Trainer’s Guide ECECET Please Call

Package Deals

Appreciating Differences: Teaching in a Culturally Diverse Classroom HTADI 10/$20.00

Children Exposed to Drugs: What Policymakers Can Do PBCED 10/$10.00

Improving Basic Education for All Learners: The Role of Arts Education PBIBE 10/$10.00

Interagency Collaboration: Improving the Delivery of Services to Children and Families HTICO 10/$20.00

A New Framework for School Accountability Systems RDFRA 10/$20.00

Overcoming Barriers to School Reform in the Southeast RDBAR 10/$20.00

Safe Schools: What the Southeast is Doing PBSSC 10/$10.00

School Board Member Training in the Southeast RDBMT 20/$20.00

Schools for the 21st Century: New Roles for Teachers and Principals HTSTC 10/$20.00

Selecting High-Quality Charter Schools: What Policymakers Can Do PBSCS 10/$10.00

South Pointe Elementary School: A Public-Private Partnership (Year 1) RDSP1 10/$8.00

South Pointe Elementary School: A Public-Private Partnership (Year 2) RDSP2 10/$8.00

South Pointe Elementary School: A Public-Private Partnership (Year 3) RDSP3 10/$8.00

Supporting Family Involvement in Early Childhood Education: A Guide for Business SRSFI 10/$10.00

Teachers of the Year Speak Out: Key Issues in Teacher Professionalization PBTOY 10/$10.00

Technology Infrastructure in Schools; Plugging In: Choosing and Using SOTPU all 3/

Educational Technology; and Using Technology to Improve Teaching and Learning $10.00

Together We Can: A Guide for Crafting a Profamily System of Education and

Human Services SRTWC 10/$20.00

Welfare to Work: Early Childhood Care and Education PBWTW 10/$10.00

Youth Apprenticeship: A School-to-Work Transition Program HTYAP 10/$20.00 95
SERVE Publications Order Form

Please photocopy this form for future orders.

Name

Title

Name of School

Address ❑ home ❑ work

City State Zip

 (Please do not abbreviate city.)

Phone ❑ home ❑ work ( ) Fax ❑ home ❑ work ( )

Item# Description Unit Price Quantity Total

Subtotal

Non-exempt Florida residents add 7% sales tax

Shipping & Handling Charge

Shipping & Handling Charges

Up to $30.00 ...................................... $2.50

$30.01 to $60.00 ................................ $5.00

$60.01 to $100.00 .............................. $7.50

$100.01 to $150.00 ............................ $10.00

$150.01 to $200.00 ............................ $12.50

$200.01 and above ............................. Call

Outside the U.S. ................................. Call

Special Orders .................................... Call

Mail or Fax to:

SERVE

Communications and Publications

Attn: Distribution Specialist

1203 Governor’s Square Boulevard

Suite 400

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

800-352-6001 Phone

850-671-6085 Fax

SERVE’s Federal ID EIN# 56-6001-468

Purchase Order Number Florida Tax Exemption Number

If you are requesting an invoice, your order must

include a purchase order number.

NOTE: Ordering information and this form are located in the back of most

SERVE publications.

Thank You for Your Order!

Total Please do not send cash.

Please do not staple items to order form.