STARTING ASSIGNMENT

STARTING ASSIGNMENT

Complete the questionnaire “Why are you writing in your

daily professional academic work”?

Calculate afterwards your average score for both

subscales:

MOT_AUT

MOT_CON

Reflect on what these scores mean for your academic

writing motiation

MEASURINGWRITING MOTIVATIONHilde Van Keer

LITERACY SKILLS

LEVEL OF LITERACY SKILLS

7

Encounter

difficulties with

reading

comprehension

(Mullis et al., 2012,

OECD, 2014)

Alarming

results on

students’ poor

writing

performance

(National Center for

Education Statistics,

2012)

LEARNING TO WRITE

Effective writing skills are

necessary to participate and

engage in today’s society

Writing education is found

accountable to provide high-

quality writing instruction so

students can develop these skills

8

9

AND THEN THERE IS ALSO SOMETHING AS … MOTIVATIONAL THINGS

Cognition

Performance

Motivation

MOTIVATION AND COGNITION = INSEPERABLE

MOTIVATION = KEY ROLE

12

De Smedt et al., 2016; Graham et al., 2007, Troia et al., 2013

WRITING = CHALLENGING

13

Cognitive challenges

Writers have to manage:

Writing environment

Writing topic

Intentions

Processes, knowledge,

skills

Motivational challenges

Educational writing experiences:

Not of interest to students

Difficult

Threathening

(Graham et al., 2013) (Hidi & Boscolo, 2006; Bruining & Horn, 2000)

15

MOTIVATION FOR WRITING

16

Writing (and also reading )

motivation appears to decline

from the end of primary school

on

(Cleary, 1991; Smith et al., 2012; Wigfield,

2004)

RECENTLY INCREASING ATTENTION FOR MOTIVATIONAL COMPONENTS AND CHALLENGES OF WRITING

“Writing motivation is inherently connected to students’

writing, as writers must be motivated to devote time and

effort in planning, revising, and finalizing texts until they

communicate effectively”

(Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997).

RECENTLY INCREASING ATTENTION FOR MOTIVATIONAL COMPONENTS AND CHALLENGES OF WRITING

CAN YOU THINK OF EXAMPLES?

In theories?

In empirical research?

…

THEORIES ON WRITING

Two strands of research on writing (Boscolo, 2008)

1.(Socio-)cognitive research: emphasizes the

complexity of writing as a basically solitary enterprise

2.Socio-cultural research: underlines the social and

cultural dimensions of writing

21

(SOCIO-)COGNITIVE RESEARCH

22

Hayes & Flower (1980)

Cognitive recourses

writers bring to the task

of writing

(SOCIO-)COGNITIVE RESEARCH

23

Hayes (2012)

Cognitive and

motivational recourses

writers bring to the task

of writing

SOCIO-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

Writing is inherently a social activity, situated within a specific context

(e.g., writing community)

Writing is a socialized acitvity that almost alway involves multiple

people (i.e., author and collaborators, author and readers, …)

“Writing cannot be fully understood without considering how the

communities in which it takes place and those involved in creating it

evolve, including how community and individuals reciprocally influence

each other”

(Barton, 1991, Hull & Schultz, 2001; Graham, 2018)

24

COMBINING BOTH STRANDS

A writer(s) Within Community Model of Writing

(Graham, 2018)

“A model that embraces both perspectives (cognitive and

socio-cultural) is likely to results in a fuller and richer

understanding of writing”

25

A WRITER(S) WITHIN COMMUNITY MODEL OF WRITING

Writing community =

“A group of people who share a

set of goals and assumptions

and use writing to achieve their

purposes”

26


“If the writing community is the social context in which

writing takes place, then individual writers and their

collaborators are the keys that turn the engine and

fuels the process behind meaning making in writing.” (Graham, 2018)

27


A schematic diagram of the

relationship between the

different cognitive

components involved in

writing. This schematic

structure is presented for a

single writer, even though

multiple members of a

community may be involved

as writers and collaborators

in carrying out a writing

project.

28

CAN YOU THINK OF POTENTIAL MOTIVATIONALVARIABLES

- Based on your own research?

- Based on what you read?

- Based on what you

saw/heared the past days?

AT LEAST I SAW SOME EXAMPLES …

30

AT LEAST I SAW SOME EXAMPLES …

31

A VARIETY OF MOTIVATIONAL VARIABLES

Motives for engaging in writing - writing motivation

Self-efficacy beliefs for writing

Interest

Perceived task value

Writing attitude

Goal orientation (mastery vs. performance goals)

Writing apprehension

Implicit theories of writing

Attributions for writing success and failure

…

(e.g. Troia et al., 2013)

32

Rooted resp. in the self-determination

theory (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2000b) and in

self-efficacy theory (SET; Bandura, 1977;

Bandura, 1997, Bandura, 2006)

compatible theoretical frameworks,

sharing assumption that humans are

agents of their behavior

(Sweet, Fortier, Strachan, & Blanchard,

2012)

SELF-EFFICACY FOR WRITING WITHIN SET

For example …

Bruning, Dempsey, Kauffman, McKim, and Zumbrunn (2013):

SE for ideation (i.e., self-beliefs about the ability to generate

ideas)

SE for conventions (i.e., self-beliefs about adhering to language

rules)

SE for regulation (i.e., self-beliefs about regulating writing

behavior)

Self-efficacy for Writing Scale (SEWS)

FOCUS TODAY: WRITING MOTIVATION

Motivation < movere = “setting in motion”

Which factors set writers “in motion”? (Vansteenkiste,

Lens, & Deci, 2006)

Drive, reason, motive of behavior?

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) as theoretical frame of

reference (Deci & Ryan, 2000)

34

• Promising, contemporary, innovative!

• Rationale: students/writers do not only vary in the

amount of their motivation but also in the quality (i.e.,

the kind of motives underlying one’s behaviour)

(Ryan & Deci, 2000)

THE SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY (SDT)

External

pressure

Controlled motivation Autonomous motivation

Internal pressure Inner sense of

satisfactionValue the activity

(Ryan & Deci, 2000)

... to obtain a

reward

... otherwise I feel

ashamed

... because I value

reading... because I enjoy

reading

SDT

External

pressure

Controlled motivation Autonomous motivation

Internal pressure Inner sense of

satisfactionValue the activity

Most optimal type of motivation

(Ryan & Deci, 2000)

SDT

Encouraging students’ autonomous motivation:

• Nurturing students’ psychological needs for autonomy,

competence, and relatedness

• Autonomy-supportive, structured, and involved teaching

behavior

• Need supportive teaching style vs. need-frustrating teaching

style

(Jang et al., 2010; Ryan & Deci, 2000;

Sierens et al., 2009)

SDT

39

IMPORTANT TO HAVE RELIABLE AND VALIDMEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS

40

CAN YOU THINK OF POTENTIALMEASUREMENT APPROACHES

- Advantages?

- Disadvantages?

POTENTIAL MEASUREMENT APPROACHES

Questionnaires

Interviews

Observations

Combination of … might be the way to go?

Considering other actors (teachers, parents, …)

Especially for some specific target or age groups

42

WE WENT FOR … A QUESTIONNAIRE

43

De Smedt, F., Merchie, E., Barendse, M.,

Rosseel, Y., De Naeghel, J., & Van Keer, H.

(2017). Cognitive and Motivational Challenges in

Writing: Studying the Relation With Writing

Performance Across Students' Gender and

Achievement Level. Reading Research

Quarterly, 53, 249-272

https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.193

https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.193

AIM OF THAT STUDY

How cognitive and motivational challenges mediate and correlate with students’

writing performance

How these relationships vary for boys and girls an for writers of different

achievement levels

44

METHOD

799 fifth and sixth graders completed:

45

Student questionnaires Self-efficacy for writing (SEWS) (Bruning et al., 2013)

Writing motivation (SRQ-Writing Motivation)

Writing strategies (Kieft et al., 2006-2008)

Writing tests Informational writing test

Narrative writing test

Preparatory analyses:

EFA/CFA/Multiple group

measurement invariance

Overall text quality: holistic

scoring procedure based on

benchmarking (Bouwer et al., 2016)

SRQ-WRITING MOTIVATION

Reliable and valid instrument for different age and target

groups?

46

METHOD - PARTICIPANTS

N = 2343 students from 127 classes from 26 different primary and

secondary schools in Flanders (Belgium)

47

Middle primary grades Upper primary grades Lower secondary

grades

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

N = 440 N = 445 N = 452 N = 391 N = 283 N = 332

METHOD: MEASURES

‒ Background information (cf., gender, home language, date of

birth, performance level)

‒ SRQ-Reading Motivation (De Naeghel et al., 2012)

‒ SRQ-Writing motivation (De Smedt et al., 2017)

48

Two contexts:

Academic context

Recreational context

Two types of motivation:

Autonomous motivation

Controlled motivation

17 items

5-point Likert-scale

METHOD: DATA-ANALYSIS

1. Can measures for reading and writing motivation be developed that are

invariant across gender, grades, and performance level?

2. How reliable are these measures?

3. What are trends concerning reading and writing motivation in the

academic and recreational context throughout primary and secondary

education

49

CFA + Measurement invariance

(Lavaan package in R)

Measures for internal consistency

(Bentler’s ρ)

(Lavaan package in R)

Descriptive statistics

(SPSS)

SRQ-WRITING MOTIVATION

Provides measures that are invariant across gender,

general achievement, and grades

Is a reliable instruments to measure writing motivation

within the innovative SDT-framework

50

RESULTS

Trends – Academic writing motivation

51

0

1

2

3

4

Middleelementary

Upperelementary

Low secondary



RESULTS

Trends – Recreational writing motivation

52

012345

Middleelementary

Upperelementary

Lowsecondary



CONCLUSION

Results confirm a decrease in students’ reading and

writing motivation as they progress from elementary to

secondary grades

53

However, to investigate

how students’ reading

and writing motivation is

developing over time, we

need longitudinal instead

of cross-sectional

research!

FURTHER READING …

FURTHER READINGBruning, R., Dempsey, M., Kauffman, D., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 105(1), 25–38. doi:10.1037/a0029692

Bruning, R., & Kauffman, D. (2016). Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.),

Handbook of Writing Research (pp. 160–173). New York: The Guilford Press.

Graham, S. (2018). A writer(s) within community model of writing. In C. Bazerman, V. W. Berninger, D. Brandt, S. Graham, J. Langer, S. Murphy, P.

Matsuda, D. Rowe, & M. Schleppegr (Eds.), The lifespan development of writing (pp. 272-325). Urbana, IL: National Council of English.

Graham, S., Berninger, V. W., & Fan, W. (2007). The structural relationship between writing attitude and writing achievement in first and third grade

students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 516-536.

Hidi, S., & Boscolo, P. (2006). Motivation and writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp.

144–157). New York: The Guilford Press.

Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2014). Implicit theories of writing and their impact on students’ response to a SRSD intervention. British Journal of

Educational Psychology, 84, 571-590. doi:10.1111/bjep.12042

Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2017). Relating beliefs in writing skill malleability to writing performance: The mediating role of achievement goals and

self-efficacy. Journal of Writing Research, 9, 97-125. doi:10.17239/jowr-2017.09.02.01

Pajares, F. (2007). Empirical properties of a scale to assess writing self-efficacy in school contexts. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and

Development, 39, 238-249.

Pajares, F., & Cheong, Y. F. (2003). Achievement goal orientations in writing: A developmental perspective. International Journal of Educational

Research, 39, 437-455. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2004.06.008

Pajares, F., Valiante, G., & Cheong, Y. F. (2007). Writing self-efficacy and its relation to gender, writing motivation and writing competence: A

developmental perspective. In S. Hidi & P. Boscolo (Eds.), Writing and motivation (pp. 141- 159). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

…

NOT TO FORGET! … TEACHERS AND THEIRMOTIVATION, BELIEFS, EMOTIONS, …

TEACHERS AND THEIR MOTIVATION, BELIEFS, EMOTIONS, …

Teacher beliefs about writing and writing instruction

(Pajares, 1992)

Teacher attitudes towards writing instruction (Brindle,

2013)

Teacher self-efficacy judgments (Graham et al., 2001)

Affect actual teaching behavior!

I ALSO SAW AN EXAMPLE …

POTENTIAL INSTRUMENTS

Writing Orientation Scale (Graham et al., 2002) (3 factors:

correct writing, explicit instruction, and natural learning)

Teachers’ attitude towards writing and writing instruction:

Brindle’s (2013) questionnaire

Teacher Efficacy Scale for Writing (TES-W) (Graham et al.,

2001)

Classroom Practices Survey (Cutler & Graham, 2008) (e.g.,

teaching writing strategies, collaborative writing, integrating

ICT).

Thanks for listening!?

I like to listen to your questions and suggestions.

Hilde Van Keer

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL STUDIES

[email protected]

http://www.onderwijskunde.ugent.be/user.php?u=hvankeer

http://www.onderwijskunde.ugent.be/user_articles.php?u=hvankeer

http://www.taallereninnoveren.ugent.be/

Documents

STARTING ASSIGNMENT