Catalyzing an Orientation for Agency: The Development of an Intervention to Support Active Motivation

• In Event: From Idea to Impact: Candid Reflections on Building Interventions

Abstract

Purpose
Agentic engagement involves students actively shaping their learning experiences to benefit themselves and peers (Patall, 2024; Reeve, 2013). Evidence shows that such engagement predicts instructor support, psychological needs fulfillment, motivation, and other engagement forms (Matos et al., 2018; Patall et al., 2019), making it a promising target for intervention. The current research team developed a brief intervention aimed at fostering students’ agentic orientation—encouraging a mindset and strategies for agency in education.

Background and Theoretical Framework
Over the past decade, attention to student motivation and engagement has increased due to concerning trends: many K-12 students lack motivation (Hrynowski, 2024), college motivation has declined post-COVID-19 (Henderlong-Corpus et al., 2022), and attrition from STEM programs persists (Wernick & Ledley, 2020). Targeting agentic orientation is a promising approach, theoretically grounded in self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017), social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2006), mindset theories (e.g., Yeager & Dweck, 2012), and motivation regulation (e.g., Thoman et al., 2019).
The intervention leverages the following key ideas:
1. Engagement is a self-sustaining predictor of learning and persistence (Lei et al., 2018; Skinner et al., 2009).
2. Satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and relatedness underpins motivation (Jang et al., 2012; 2016).
3. Classroom conditions—teacher and peer support—encourage need satisfaction (Reeve & Cheon, 2021).
4. Dialectical teacher-student social negotiations shape these conditions (Bandura, 2006).
5. Mindsets guide self-regulation and can be modified via brief activities (O’Keefe et al., 2018; Thoman et al., 2019; Yeager et al., 2019).

Methods and Data Sources
Developing an agentic orientation intervention required an iterative process of multiple steps. The development process began with consulting and synthesizing ideas from the various theoretical perspectives to inform a new, integrated approach to supporting student motivation and engagement via an agentic orientation. To date, the process of developing the intervention has relied on a series of five field experiments (total N ≈ 4,700 students) to test effects compared to controls, with revisions informed by: preliminary results, themes from focus groups with students and teachers, open ended survey responses, and consultation with other motivation, instruction, and interventionist experts.
Results
Six key insights emerged from the process of developing and testing this intervention.
1. Effective interventions persuade students that the targeted mindset reflects reality and provides instructions on specific, aligned behaviors.
2. Finding the right intervention “dosage” is challenging due to attention and fatigue issues.
3. Initial tests showed the intervention could improve agentic mindset, engagement, and perceptions of support, but effects were modest and heterogeneous, possibly due to challenges associated with intervening in classroom-level processes.
4. Qualitative data indicates promise, but also raises concerns about feasibility, sustainability, misalignment, and unintended consequences.
5. Recent college student trials mirrored previous modest effects, despite revisions.
6. Engaging the most vulnerable students remains a challenge.

Discussion and Significance
The research underscores that fostering students’ agency can create a positive feedback cycle of engagement and support. The process provides valuable lessons for future motivation-focused programs. Researchers are encouraged to proactively consider how these challenges might guide new approaches.

Authors

• Erika A. Patall, University of Southern California

• Amanda Vite, University of Southern California

• Jeanette Zambrano, California State University - San Bernardino

• Alana Aiko Uilani Kennedy, Northern Arizona University

• Nicole M. Yates, University of Southern California

• Germine Awad, University of Michigan

• Carlton J. Fong, Texas State University

• Keenan Pituch, Arizona State University

• Yanyan Zong, University of Southern California

• Pedram Zarei, Texas State University

• Lillian Nguyen, University of Michigan

• Diane Lee, University of Southern California

• Christa Bancroft, University of Southern California

• Kristy Daniel, Texas State University - San Marcos

• Timothy A. McKay, University of Michigan

• Stephen J. Aguilar, University of Southern California

• Kevin O'Neal Cokley, University of Michigan

• Joseph Vallin, University of Southern California

• Carolyn Jess, Texas State University

• Cassidy L. Martin, University of Southern California