No abstract

No abstract

Studies of interventions' impact on reading self-efficacy have been conducted since the 1980s. The purpose of this project was to conduct a systematic review of these studies because the primary studies often yielded divergent results. Included studies entailed an intervention, addressed reading specifically, and reported explicit pre-and postintervention measures of reading self-efficacy. Subjects were students in elementary grades through college. The results of a systematic search and screening procedure found 30 studies in which 2,300 subjects received treatments of various kinds while 1,957 were in control or comparison groups. A meta-analysis of three subsets of study designs revealed that each subset generated a significant effect size: treatment-control (g = 0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.10, 0.39]); treatment-comparison (g = 0.44, 95% CI [0.04, 0.84]); pretest-posttest (g = 0.36, 95% CI [0.16, 0.57]). Significant heterogeneity was found and modeled using moderator analyses conducted on several variables. The results indicated that significant moderators of effect sizes included grade level, number of sources shaping reading self-efficacy, a reading self-efficacy measurement index, and journal publication. In studies that measured the impact of the intervention on reading comprehension, its relationship with 743199R ERXXX10.3102/0034654317743199Unrau et al.Impact of Interventions on Reading Self-Efficacy research-article2017 Unrau et al. 168 reading self-efficacy was analyzed revealing a strong correlation between the two constructs. Discussion includes an exploration of the importance of these findings to future policy, practice, and research on the design of reading self-efficacy measurement instruments and on interventions that utilize major sources of experiences shaping reading self-efficacy.

The constructs of motivation for reading and reading engagement have frequently become blurred and ambiguous in both research and discussions of practice. To address this commingling of constructs, the authors provide a concise review of the literature on motivation for reading and reading engagement and illustrate the blurring of those concepts in theoretical discussions and in measurement instruments. The authors then identify differences, clarify the constructs, and show how distinguishing reading motivation from engagement can deepen our understanding of their uniqueness and interplay. Implications for research and applications to instruction are explored.The constructs of motivation for reading and reading engagement are frequently invoked to describe forces behind readers' behaviors. While often providing explanatory power for why readers read and their involvement in reading, these two constructs frequently lack conceptual and operational clarity. The blurring of their meanings often contributes to their commingling and their imprecise application and measurement. The existence of an array of theories and models of motivation for reading and reading engagement has contributed to a significant degree of perplexity for practitioners and researchers applying and investigating these constructs. Our intentions are (a) to provide a succinct review of the literature on motivation for reading and reading engagement, (b) to illustrate the blurring of those concepts in theoretical discussions and in measurement instruments, (c) to disentangle them, and (d) to suggest how distinguishing

No abstract