Measuring Learning Outcomes in Higher Education: Motivation Matters
Abstract
With the pressing need for accountability in higher education, standardized outcomes assessments have been widely used to evaluate learning and inform policy. However, the critical question on how scores are influenced by students’ motivation has been insufficiently addressed. Using random assignment, we administered a multiple-choice test and an essay across three motivational conditions. Students’ self-report motivation was also collected. Motivation significantly predicted test scores. A substantial performance gap emerged between students in different motivational conditions (effect size as large as .68). Depending on the test format and condition, conclusions about college learning gain (i.e., value added) varied dramatically from substantial gain ( d = 0.72) to negative gain ( d = −0.23). The findings have significant implications for higher education stakeholders at many levels.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Lack of motivation can result in a reduction of learning outcomes and a negative atmosphere in the classroom.
“Lack of motivation can result in a reduction of learning outcomes and a negative atmosphere in the classroom (O.L. Liu, Bridgeman, & Adler, 2012).”
From The effect of using Kahoot! for learning – A literature review (2020) · cites this paper as O.L. Liu, Bridgeman, & Adler, 2012
Cites
Do Examinees Have Similar Test-Taking Effort? A High-Stakes Question for Low-Stakes Testing
Barry, C. L., Horst, S. J., Finney, S. J., Brown, A. R., & Kopp, J. P. (2010) · International Journal of Testing · doi:10.1080/15305058.2010.508569 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The effect of using Kahoot! for learning – A literature review
Wang, A. I., & Tahir, R. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103818 · Cited by 883 · see citing works
Integrating Augmented Reality, Gamification, and Serious Games in Computer Science Education
Lampropoulos, G., Keramopoulos, E., Diamantaras, K., & Evangelidis, G. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13060618 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
AL-Qadri, A. H., Mouas, S., Saraa, N., & Boudouaia, A. (2024) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-024-00253-5 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
- Authors
- Liu, O. L., Bridgeman, B., & Adler, R. M.
- Affiliations
- Educational Testing Service (US)
- Venue
- Educational Researcher
- Published
- 2012-12
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 352-362
- ISSN
- 0013-189X (ISSN-L)
- 1935-102X
- OpenAlex
- W1979626957
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 85.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational Researcher (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Keywords
- learning outcomes assessment, student motivation, value added, standardized testing, test score bias, higher education accountability
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review