Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Writing Motivation in School: a Systematic Review of Empirical Research in the Early Twenty-First Century

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Motivation is a catalyst of writing performance in school. In this article, we report a systematic review of empirical studies on writing motivation conducted in school settings, published between 2000 and 2018 in peer-reviewed journals. We aimed to (1) examine how motivational constructs have been defined in writing research; (2) analyze group differences in writing motivation; (3) unveil effects of motivation on writing performance; (4) gather evidence on teaching practices supporting writing motivation; and (5) examine the impact of digital tools on writing motivation. Through database and hand searches, we located 82 articles that met eligibility criteria. Articles were written in English, focused on students in grades 1–12, and included at least one quantitative or qualitative measure of writing motivation. Across the 82 studies, 24 motivation-related constructs were identified. In 46% of the cases, these constructs were unclearly defined or not defined. Studies showed that overall girls were more motivated to write than boys. Most studies indicated moderate positive associations between motivation and writing performance measures. Authors also examined how students’ writing motivation was influenced by teaching practices, such as handwriting instruction, self-regulated strategy development instruction, and collaborative writing. Digital tools were found to have a positive effect on motivation. Based on this review, we suggest that to move the field forward, researchers need to accurately define motivational constructs; give further attention to understudied motivational constructs; examine both individual and contextual factors; conduct longitudinal studies; identify evidence-based practices that could inform professional development programs for teachers; and test long-term effects of digital tools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Items were formulated in the entity version and therefore lower scores indicated more incremental beliefs.

References

*References with an asterisk mark were included in this review.

  • *Abbott, J. A. (2000). ‘Blinking out’ and ‘having the touch’: Two fifth-grade boys talk about flow experiences in writing. Written Communication, 17(1), 53–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088300017001003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ainley, M. (2019). Curiosity and interest: Emergence and divergence. Educational Psychology Review, Advance online publication, 31(4), 789–806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09495-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. (2018). Past as prologue: Educational psychology’s legacy and progeny. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110, 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Allaire, S., Thériault, P., Gagnon, V., & Lalancette, E. (2013). Elementary students’ affective variables in a networked learning environment supported by a blog: A case study. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 39(3). https://doi.org/10.21432/t2w88v.

  • Allen, L. K., Jacovina, M. E., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). Computer-based writing instruction. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed., pp. 316–329). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alves, R. A. (2019). The early steps in becoming a writer: Enabling participation in a literate world. In J. S. Horst & J. V. K. Torkildsen (Eds.), International handbook of language acquisition (pp. 567–590). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alves, R. A., & Limpo, T. (2015). Fostering the capabilities that build writing achievement. In C. M. Connor & P. McCardle (Eds.), Advances in reading intervention: Research to practice to research. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co..

    Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association, A. P. A., & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Arens, A. K., & Jansen, M. (2016). Self-concepts in reading, writing, listening, and speaking: A multidimensional and hierarchical structure and its generalizability across native and foreign languages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(5), 646–664. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Bayat, S. (2016). The effectiveness of the creative writing instruction program based on speaking activities (CWIPSA). International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(4), 617–628.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Bayraktar, A. (2013). Nature of interactions during teacher-student writing conferences, revisiting the potential effects of self-efficacy beliefs. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (50), 63-85.

  • *Beck, N., & Fetherston, T. (2003). The effects of incorporating a word processor into a year three writing program. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2003(1), 139–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boscolo, P. (2009). Engaging and motivating children to write. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, J. Riley, & M. Nystrand (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of writing development (pp. 300–312). London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Boscolo, P., & Gelati, C. (2019). Best practices in promoting motivation for writing. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (3rd ed.). New York-London: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boscolo, P., & Hidi, S. (2007). The multiple meanings of motivation to write. In S. Hidi & P. Boscolo (Eds.), Writing and motivation (pp. 1–14). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Boscolo, P., Ariasi, N., Del Favero, L., & Ballarin, C. (2011). Interest in an expository text: How does it flow from reading to writing? Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 467–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.07.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Boscolo, P., Gelati, C., & Galvan, N. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to play with meanings and genre. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bouchamma, Y., & Lapointe, C. (2008). Success in writing and attributions of 16-year-old French-speaking students in minority and majority environments. 54, 194–209.

  • *Braaksma, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van der Bergh, H. (2018). Effects of hypertext writing and observational learning on content knowledge acquisition, selfefficacy, and text quality: Two experimental studies exploring aptitude treatment interactions. Journal of Writing Research, 9(3), 259–300. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2018.09.03.02.

  • *Bradford, K. L., Newland, A. C., Rule, A. C., & Montgomery, S. E. (2016). Rubrics as a tool in writing instruction: Effects on the opinion essays of first and second graders. Early Childhood Education Journal. 44(5), 463–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-015-0727-0.

  • Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruning, R., & Kauffman, D. F. (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, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Bruning, R., Dempsey, M., Kauffman, D. F., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Brunstein, J. C., & Glaser, C. (2011). Testing a path-analytic mediation model of how self-regulated writing strategies improve fourth graders’ composition skills: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 922–938. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bui, Y. N., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2006). The effects of a strategic writing program for students with and without learning disabilities in inclusive fifth-grade classes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(4), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00221.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Camacho, A., & Alves, R. A. (2017). Fostering parental involvement in writing: Development and testing of the program Cultivating Writing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 30(2), 253–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9672-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Chai, H. H. (2010). Adolescent girl writers: “I can be good at it, if I like it”. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 23(1), 29–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Chan, J. C. Y., & Lam, S.-f (2008). Effects of competition on students’ self-efficacy in vicarious learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(1), 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709907x185509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Chohan, S. K. (2011). Any letter for me? Relationships between an elementary school letter writing program and student attitudes, literacy achievement, and friendship culture. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0438-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Cocuk, H. E., Yanpar Yelken, T., & Ozer, O. (2016). The relationship between writing anxiety and writing disposition among secondary school students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 63, 335-352. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.63.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Collie, R. J., Martin, A. J., & Curwood, J. S. (2016). Multidimensional motivation and engagement for writing: Construct validation with a sample of boys. Educational Psychology, 36(4), 771–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1093607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conradi, K., Jang, B., & McKenna, M. (2014). Motivation terminology in reading research: A conceptual review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 127–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9245-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Cordeiro, C., Castro, S. L., & Limpo, T. (2018). Examining potential sources of gender differences in writing: The role of handwriting fluency and self-efficacy beliefs. Written Communication, https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088318788843.

  • Costa, A., & Faria, L. (2018). Implicit theories of intelligence and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(829). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00829.

  • Daly, J. A., & Wilson, D. A. (1983). Writing apprehension, self-esteem, and personality. Research in the Teaching of English, 17, 327–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Smedt, F. (2019). Cognitive and motivational challenges in writing: The impact of explicit instruction and peer-assisted writing in upper-elementary grades. Ghent: University of Ghent.

    Google Scholar 

  • *De Smedt, F., Van Keer, H., & Merchie, E. (2016). Student, teacher and class-level correlates of Flemish late elementary school children’s writing performance. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29(5), 833–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9590-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *De Smedt, F., Graham, S., & Van Keer, H. (2018a). The bright and dark side of writing motivation: Effects of explicit instruction and peer assistance. The Journal of Educational Research, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1461598.

  • *De Smedt, F., Merchie, E., Barendse, M., Rosseel, Y., De Naeghel, J., & Van Keer, H. (2018b). Cognitive and motivational challenges in writing: Studying the relation with writing performance across students’ gender and achievement level. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(2), 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *deFur, S. H., & Runnells, M. M. (2014). Validation of the adolescent literacy and academic behavior self-efficacy survey. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 40(3), 255–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Edwards, G., & Jones, J. (2018). Boys as writers: Perspectives on the learning and teaching of writing in three primary schools. Literacy, 52(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Ehm, J.-H., Lindberg, S., & Hasselhorn, M. (2014). Reading, writing, and math self-concept in elementary school children: Influence of dimensional comparison processes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 29(2), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-013-0198-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekholm, E., Zumbrunn, S., & DeBusk-Lane, M. (2018). Clarifying an elusive construct: A systematic review of writing attitudes. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 827–856. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9423-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5–12).

  • Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461–475. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.70.3.461.

  • *Erdogan, T., & Erdogan, Ö. (2013). A metaphor analysis of the fifth grade students’ perceptions about writing. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-012-0014-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Gambrell, L. B., Hughes, E. M., Calvert, L., Malloy, J. A., & Igo, B. (2011). Authentic reading, writing, and discussion: An exploratory study of a pen pal project. The Elementary School Journal, 112(2), 234–258. https://doi.org/10.1086/661523.

  • *Goldenberg, L., Meade, T., Midouhas, E., & Cooperman, N. (2011). Impact of a technology-infused middle school writing program on sixth-grade students’ writing ability and engagement. Middle Grades Research Journal, 6(2), 75–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S. (2006). Writing. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 457–478). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S. (2018). A revised writer(s)-within-community model of writing. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1481406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2016). A path to better writing: Evidence-based practices in the classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(4), 359–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2019). Evidence-based practices in writing. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & M. Hebert (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 3–28). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Fink, B. (2000). Is handwriting causally related to learning to write? Treatment of handwriting problems in beginning writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 620–633. https://doi.org/10.1057//0022-0663.92.4.620.

  • *Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. H. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 207–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Graham, S., Berninger, V., & Fan, W. (2007). The structural relationship between writing attitude and writing achievement in first and third grade students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 516–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Graham, S., Berninger, V., & Abbott, R. (2012a). Are attitudes toward writing and reading separable constructs? A study with primary grade children. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012b). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 879–896. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015). Research-based writing practices and the common core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Elementary School Journal, 115(4). https://doi.org/10.1086/681964.

  • *Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Kiuhara, S. A., & Fishman, E. J. (2017). The relationship among strategic writing behavior, writing motivation, and writing performance with young, developing writers. Elementary School Journal, 118(1), 82–104. https://doi.org/10.1086/693009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Graham, S., Daley, S. G., Aitken, A. A., Harris, K. R., & Robinson, K. H. (2018). Do writing motivational beliefs predict middle school students’ writing performance? Journal of Research in Reading, 41(4), 642–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S. (2018). A revised writer(s)-within-community model of writing. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1481406.

  • *Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C. F., Marsh, H. W., Larose, S., & Boivin, M. (2010). Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 711–735. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910x499084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Gunderson, E. A., Hamdan, N., Sorhagen, N. S., & D'Esterre, A. P. (2017). Who needs innate ability to succeed in math and literacy? Academic-domain-specific theories of intelligence about peers versus adults. Developmental Psychology, 53(6), 1188–1205. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hall, A. H., & Axelrod, Y. (2014). “I am kind of a good writer and kind of not”: Examining students’ writing attitudes. Journal of Research in Education, 24(2), 34–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Hamilton, E. W., Nolen, S. B., & Abbott, R. D. (2013). Developing measures of motivational orientation to read and write: A longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 28, 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.04.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R. (2018). Educational psychology: A future retrospective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. (2006). Improving the writing, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: Effects of self-regulated strategy development with and without peer support. American Educational Research Journal Summer, 43(2), 295–340. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043002295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2019). Interest development and its relation to curiosity: Needed neuroscientific research. Educational Psychology Review, Advance online publication, 31(4), 833–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09491-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hidi, S., Berndorff, D., & Ainley, M. (2002). Children’s argument writing, interest and self-efficacy: An intervention study. Learning and Instruction, 12(4), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00009-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hier, B. O., & Mahony, K. E. (2018). The contribution of mastery experiences, performance feedback, and task effort to elementary-aged students’ self-efficacy in writing. School Psychology Quarterly, 33(3), 408–418. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Igo, L. B. (2008). An interview with Roger Bruning. Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9070-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kanala, S., Nousiainen, T., & Kankaanranta, M. (2013). Using a mobile application to support children’s writing motivation. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 10(1), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/17415651311326419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kaplan, A., Lichtinger, E., & Gorodetsky, M. (2009). Achievement goal orientations and self-regulation in writing: An integrative perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karchmer-Klein, R. (2019). Writing with digital tools. In S. Graham, C. A. MarArthur, & M. Hebert (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (3rd ed., pp. 185–208). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Kear, D. J., Coffman, G. A., McKenna, M. C., & Ambrosio, A. L. (2000). Measuring attitude toward writing: A new tool for teachers. 54, 10-23. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.43.8.3.

  • Kellogg, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430(6997), 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1038/430311a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R. (2002). Writing in early adolescence: A review of the role of self-efficacy beliefs. Educational Psychology Review, 14(2), 173–203. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014626805572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Korat, O., & Schiff, R. (2005). Do children who read more books know ‘what is good writing’ better than children who read less? A comparison between grade levels and SES groups. Journal of Literacy Research, 37(3), 289–324. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3703_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kriegbaum, K., Becker, N., & Spinath, B. (2018). The relative importance of intelligence and motivation as predictors of school achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 25, 120–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lam, S.-F., & Law, Y.-K. (2007). The roles of instructional practices and motivation in writing performance. Journal of Experimental Education, 75(2), 145–164. https://doi.org/10.3200/jexe.75.2.145-164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lan, Y.-F., Hung, C.-L., & Hsu, H.-J. (2011). Effects of guided writing strategies on students’ writing attitudes based on media richness theory. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 148–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latif, M. M. M. A. (2019). Unresolved issues in defining and assessing writing motivational constructs: A review of conceptualization and measurement perspectives. Assessing Writing, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100417.

  • Lazowski, R. A., & Hulleman, C. S. (2015). Motivation interventions in education: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 602–640. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315617832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lee, J. (2013). Can writing attitudes and learning behavior overcome gender difference in writing? Evidence from NAEP. Written Communication, 30(2), 164–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313480313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lee, B. K., & Enciso, P. (2017). The big glamorous monster (or Lady Gaga’s adventures at sea): Improving student writing through dramatic approaches in schools. Journal of Literacy Research, 49(2), 157–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296x17699856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Leroy, C. (2000). “Why we do this is important”: An inner-city girl’s attitudes toward reading and writing in the classroom. Reading Horizons, 41(2), 69–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Li, X., Chu, S. K. W., Ki, W. W., & Woo, M. (2012). Using a wiki-based collaborative process writing pedagogy to facilitate collaborative writing among Chinese primary school students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1), 159-181. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Li, X., Chu, S. K. W., & Ki, W. W. (2014). The effects of a wiki-based collaborative process writing pedagogy on writing ability and attitudes among upper primary school students in Mainland China. Computers & Education, 77, 151–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Liao, C. C. Y., Chang, W.-C., & Chan, T.-W. (2018). The effects of participation, performance, and interest in a game-based writing environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 211–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2013). Modeling writing development: Contribution of transcription and self-regulation to Portuguese students’ text generation quality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *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(4), 571–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *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(2), 97-125. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2017.09.02.01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Mason, L. H., Meadan, H., Hedin, L. R., & Cramer, A. M. (2012). Avoiding the struggle: Instruction that supports students’ motivation in reading and writing about content material. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(1), 70–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Merisuo-Storm, T. (2006). Girls and boys like to read and write different texts. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830600576039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2000). A motivated exploration of motivation terminology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 3–53. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Nair, S. S., Tay, L. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2013). Students’ motivation and teachers’ teaching practices towards the use of blogs for writing of online journals. Educational Media International, 50(2), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2013.795351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics, NCES. (2012). The nation’s report card: Writing 2011. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Nicolaidou, I. (2012). Can process portfolios affect students’ writing self-efficacy? International Journal of Educational Research, 56, 10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Nolen, S. B. (2007). Young children’s motivation to read and write: Development in social contexts. Cognition and Instruction, 25(2), 219–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000701301174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen, A. L. (2009). The content of educational psychology: An analysis of top ranked journals from 2003 through 2007. Educational Psychology Review, 21(3), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9110-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Olinghouse, N. G., & Graham, S. (2009). The relationship between the discourse knowledge and the writing performance of elementary-grade students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pajares, F. (2007). Empirical properties of a scale to assess writing self-efficacy in school contexts. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 39(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2007.11909801.

  • *Pajares, F., & Cheong, Y. F. (2003). Achievement goal orientations in writing: A developmental perspective. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(4), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2004.06.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle school students: A function of gender orientation? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(3), 366–381. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2000.1069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pajares, F., Britner, S. L., & Valiante, G. (2000). Relation between achievement goals and self-beliefs of middle school students in writing and science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 406–422. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pajares, F., Hartley, J., & Valiante, G. (2001). Response format in writing self-efficacy assessment: Greater discrimination increases prediction. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33(4), 214–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pajares, F., Johnson, M. J., & Usher, E. L. (2007). Sources of writing self-efficacy beliefs of elementary, middle, and high school students. Research in the Teaching of English, 42(1), 104–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Perry, N. E., Nordby, C. J., & VandeKamp, K. O. (2003). Promoting self-regulated reading and writing at home and school. The Elementary School Journal, 103(4), 317–338. https://doi.org/10.1086/499729.

  • Peterson, E. G., & Cohen, J. (2019). A case for domain-specific curiosity in mathematics. Educational Psychology Review, Advance online publication, 31(4), 807–832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09501-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Continuities and discontinuities: Future directions for research in educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 29, 137–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. D. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

  • *Potter, E. F., McCormick, C. B., & Busching, B. A. (2001). Academic and life goals: Insights from adolescent writers. The High School Journal, 85(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2001.0018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Rosário, P., Högemann, J., Núñez, J. C., Vallejo, G., Cunha, J., Oliveira, V., Fuentes S. Rodrigues, C. (2017). Writing week-journals to improve the writing quality of fourth-graders’ compositions. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 30(5), 1009–1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9710-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saddler, B. (2012). Motivating writers: Theory and interventions. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Sessions, L., Kang, M. O., & Womack, S. (2016). The neglected “R”: Improving writing instruction through iPad apps. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 60(3), 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0041-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Smith, E. V., Jr., Wakely, M. B., De Kruif, R. E. L., & Swartz, C. W. (2003). Optimizing rating scales for self-efficacy (and other) research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(3), 369–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164403063003002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talsma, K., Schüza, B., Schwarzerc, R., & Norrisa, K. (2018). I believe, therefore I achieve (and vice versa): A meta-analytic cross-lagged panel analysis of self-efficacy and academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences, (61), 136–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.015.

  • Tollefson, J. (2018). China declared world’s largest producer of scientific articles. Nature, 553(7689), 390–390. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-00927-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troia, G. A., Shankland, R. K., & Wolbers, K. A. (2012). Motivation research in writing: Theoretical and empirical considerations. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Troia, G. A., Harbaugh, A. G., Shankland, R. K., Wolbers, K. A., & Lawrence, A. M. (2013). Relationships between writing motivation, writing activity, and writing performance: Effects of grade, sex, and ability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26(1), 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9379-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO. (2011). UNESCO and education: Everyone has the right to education. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, J. C., DuBois, D. L., & Cooper, H. (2004). The relation between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Villalón, R., Mateos, M., & Cuevas, I. (2015). High school boys’ and girls’ writing conceptions and writing self-efficacy beliefs: What is their role in writing performance? Educational Psychology, 35(6), 653-674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement, motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4948-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wentzel, K., & Miele, D. (2016). Overview. In K. Wentzel & D. Miele (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 1–8). New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02209024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Wijekumar, K., Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Lei, P.-W., Barkel, A., Aitken, A., Ray A. Houston, J. (2018). The roles of writing knowledge, motivation, strategic behaviors, and skills in predicting elementary students’ persuasive writing from source material. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32 6, 1431, 1457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9836-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2016). Automated essay evaluation software in English Language Arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality. Computers & Education, 100, 94–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Yarrow, F., & Topping, K. J. (2001). Collaborative writing: The effects of metacognitive prompting and structured peer interaction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(2), 261–282. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Yilmaz Soylu, M., Zeleny, M. G., Zhao, R., Bruning, R. H., Dempsey, M. S., & Kauffman, D. F. (2017). Secondary students' writing achievement goals: Assessing the mediating effects of mastery and performance goals on writing self-efficacy, affect, and writing achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01406.

  • *Zumbrunn, S., Marrs, S., & Mewborn, C. (2016). Toward a better understanding of student perceptions of writing feedback: A mixed methods study. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29(2), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9599-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Steve Graham and Hilde Van Keer for invaluable comments on earlier versions of this article. The authors thank also Mariana Silva for contributing to the study quality assessment.

Funding

This work was supported by a grant attributed to the first author from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (grant SFRH/BD/116281/2016).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, 4200-135, Porto, Portugal

    Ana Camacho & Rui A. Alves

  2. Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

    Pietro Boscolo

Authors
  1. Ana Camacho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rui A. Alves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pietro Boscolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Camacho.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(PDF 804 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Camacho, A., Alves, R.A. & Boscolo, P. Writing Motivation in School: a Systematic Review of Empirical Research in the Early Twenty-First Century. Educ Psychol Rev 33, 213–247 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09530-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09530-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation