An exploration of the psychology of the examinee: Can examinee self-regulation and test-talking motivation predict consequential and non-consequential test performance?

Contemporary Educational Psychology

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 6-26

  Sundre, Donna L ^a   Kitsantas, Anastasia ^b  

^a JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 1642559621     PISSN: 0361476X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00063-2     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Arvey, R. D., Strickland, W., Drauden, G., & Martin, C. (1990). Motivational components of test taking. Personnel Psychology, 43, 695-716.
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3. Banta, T. W., & Pike, G. R. (1989). Methods of comparing outcomes assessment instruments. Research in Higher Education, 30(5), 455-469.
4. Burke, P. (1991). You can lead adolescents to a test you can't make them try: Final report (Contract No. OTA-H3-6110.0). Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 378 221).
5. DeMars, C. E. (2000). Test stakes and item format interactions. Applied Measurement in Education, 13(1), 55-77.
6. Eccles, J. (1983). Expectancies, values & academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75 146). San Francisco: Freeman.
7. Ewell, P. T. (1991). To capture the ineffable: New forms of assessment in higher education. Review of Research in Education, 17, 75-126.
8. Gabbin, A. (2002). Experience with using samples to assess students in the major. Assessment Update, 14(2), 6-7, 9.
9. Jakwerth, P. R., Stancavage, F. B., & Reed, E. D. (1999). An investigation of why students do not respond to questions. (A NAEP Validity Studies Panel Paper). Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
10. Kitsantas, A. (2002). Test preparation and test performance: A self-regulatory analysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 101-113.
11. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
12. O'Donnell, A. M. (1997). Self-adapted testing: Fitting the test to oneself. Paper presented at AERA national conference. Chicago, IL: March.
13. Olsen, S. A., & Wilson, K. (1991). A follow-up of suspect sophomore scores on the COMP test. Kirkville, Missouri: Northeast Missouri State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 339 735).
14. O'Neil, J. H. P., Sugrue, B., & Baker, E. L. (1996). Effects of motivational interventions on the National Assessment of Educational Progress mathematics performance. Educational Assessment, 3(2), 135-157.
15. Paris, S. G., Turner, J. C., Lawton, T. A., & Roth, J. L. (1991). A developmental perspective on standardized achievement testing. Educational Researcher, 20, 12-20.
16. Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Pintrich, P. R. (1988). A process-oriented view of student motivation and cognition. In J. S. Stark, & R. Mets (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning through research (pp. 55-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18. Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In C. Ames, & M. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in achievement and motivation (Vol. 6, pp. 117-160). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
19. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
20. Schunk, D. L., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Sundre, D. L. (1997). Differential examinee motivation and validity: A dangerous combination. Paper presented at AERA annual conference. Chicago, IL: April.
22. Sundre, D. L. (1999). Does examinee motivation moderate the relationship between test consequences and test performance? (Report No. TM029964). Harrisonburg, Virginia: James Madison University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED432588).
23. Sundre, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2002, April). Enhancing the validity and value of learning assessment: Furthering the development of a motivation scale. Presented to the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA. [available for download at http://www.jmu.edu/assessment/].
24. Sundre, D. L., & Kitsantas, A. (2001, April). The relationship between self-regulated learning and examinee motivation on consequential and non-consequential classroom tests. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
25. Sundre, D. L., & Moore, D. L. (2002). The student opinion scale: A measure of examinee motivation. Assessment Update, 14(1), 8-9.
26. Wainer, H. (1993). Measurement problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 1-21.
27. Wolf, L. F., & Smith, J. K. (1995). The consequence of consequence: Motivation, anxiety, and test performance. Applied Measurement in Education, 8, 227-242.
28. Wolf, L. F., Smith, J. K., & Birnbaum, M. E. (1995). Consequence of performance, test motivation, and mentally taxing items. Applied Measurement in Education, 8, 341-351.
29. Wolf, L. S., Smith, J. K., & DiPaolo, T. (1996, April). The effects of test specific motivation and anxiety on test performance. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New York City, NY.
30. Wyatt, A. (2002). State suspends test-performance funding. New Media Index. Retrieved May 15, 2002, from http://index.truman.edu/issues/20012002/story.asp?week = 021402&SID = 573.
31. Zeidner, M. (1993). Essay versus multiple-choice type classroom exams: The student's perspective. In B. Nevo, & R. S. Jager (Eds.), Educational and psychological testing: The test taker's outlook (pp. 67-82). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Hogrefe & Huber.
32. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339.
33. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Self-regulation: Theory, research and application (pp. 13-39). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
34. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Developing writing revision skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 1-10.
35. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental changes in self-regulation: Shifting from strategic processes to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 29-36.
36. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.
37. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational psychology, 80, 284-290.