For Whom Are Motivational Interventions Developed? A Systematic Review Centering Race, Ethnicity, and Culture

• In Event: Calling in Motivation Researchers: Employing Multicultural and Critical Approaches in Pursuit of Responsible Scholarship

Abstract

Motivation in itself is important, and is essential for fostering performance and continued pursuit of academics (Wigfield & Cambria, 2010). Therefore, researchers have developed motivation interventions (see Lazowski & Hulleman, 2015). Given the situated nature of motivation (Nolen, 2020), the broader context and sample characteristics (i.e., race, ethnicity, and culture [REC]) are essential to consider for intervention effectiveness (DeCuir-Gunby & Schutz, 2014; Kaplan et al., 2020). However, little is known about (a) how REC has been incorporated into motivation interventions and (b) the REC sample demographics. Understanding who is –and is not– represented in motivation intervention research and how is essential for theoretical refinement and generating equitable and appropriately nuanced implications for educators. Therefore, this systematic review identifies for whom motivation interventions in K-12 science classrooms have been created. We focus on science based on the trend of students –particularly those who are minoritized– opting out of science due to structural inequities and suboptimal motivational experiences they often confront in these contexts (NSF, 2019; Rosenzweig et al., 2020; Williams et al., 2018). We investigate the following questions:

1. Are interventions considering students’ REC? If yes, how?
2. How are REC defined in the motivation intervention literature?
3. What is the REC sample composition of these studies?

Given our focus on REC, we draw from CRT, which centers race and racism and their continued implications for issues of power and equity (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). See Table 1 for a summary of the tenets. Additionally, given the focus on motivation, we draw from five social-cognitive motivation theories, chosen due to their prominence in the motivation intervention literature (see Koenka, 2020; Murphy & Alexander, 2000).

Drawing from PRISMA (Page et al., 2021), we retrieved 3,578 studies through a keyword database search, ancestry searches of two systematic reviews, and direct contact strategies (see Figure 1 for more detailed methods). We then screened abstracts and full texts for inclusion in the review (see Table 2 for inclusion criteria). We developed a codebook drawing from previous literature (e.g., Agger et al., 2022; DeCuir-Gunby & Schutz, 2014) and coded the reports.

Drawing from the 46 included reports, we found that researchers were generally not considering (a) students’ REC beyond reporting demographics and the (b) impact of interventions for varying REC groups. Additionally, researchers did not define REC and only one defined racism (Burrell, 2019). Additionally, largely when REC demographics were reported, students were predominantly white. Taken together, this systematic review provides researchers and practitioners with a comprehensive sense of for whom science motivation interventions have been created across elementary and secondary school. Given the dearth of motivation research that centers minoritized students, this systematic review calls into question (a) whether evidence-based strategies to promote science motivation apply to these students and (b) the extent to which motivation interventions reflect the lived experiences of these students. This synthesis also presents several promising examples of REC-focused and -reimaged science motivation intervention work. Taken together, this review identifies critical gaps in this literature and presents an actionable springboard for future research.

Authors

• Korinthia D. Nicolai, Virginia Commonwealth University
  Presenting Author

• Destini Braxton, St. Mary's College of Maryland
  Non-Presenting Author

• Margaret Wallace, Washington University in St. Louis
  Non-Presenting Author

• Alison C. Koenka, University of Oklahoma
  Non-Presenting Author