Answer_exampleofrelatingcurrentfindingstoliterature

1、selected section from zhaos discussion chapter11.3.2 stability of goal-related aspects of efl writing findings in the current study revealed some evidences that goal-related constructs such as mastery goals, outcome goals and goal-awareness seemed less responsive to the current strategy-focused inst

2、ruction (conclusions). firstly, the experimental group did not seem to differ significantly in mastery goals, outcome goals or goal awareness before and after they received the strategic instruction. nor did these aspects undergo significant change at maintenance when the experiment students shifted

3、 from strategy-focused instruction context to more product-orientated instructional context when the intervention ended (relating to results). secondly, students in the two group, though they received different approach of writing instruction, did not differ in goal orientations or goal awareness bo

4、th at posttest and at maintenance test 10 weeks later (relating to results). these findings seem to suggest that mastery goals, outcome goals and goal awareness are likely to remain stable across instructional contexts, at least for the college students in the current study (restating conclusion). h

5、owever, the current study has only explored this issue in terms of meanlevel changes and sample-level changes, and thus lacked the evidence of individual-level changes (commenting). as previous studies indicated that students adoptions of goals can be influenced by the learning context (ames, 1992;

6、roeser, modgley, & urdan, 1996; dweck & leggett, 1988), these findings were unexpected because the current intervention incorporated the instructional procedures and components that could orient students towards mastery and learning (andrate, 2001; page-voth & graham, 1999; schunk &

7、ertmer, 1999; schunk & swartz, 1993; zimmerman & kitsantas, 1997, 2002) (discussing unexpected findings & relating to method). there procedures included explicit-/process-goal setting, target problem solving, modelling and self-evaluation scaffolded by the use of procedural facilitation

8、tools (relating to research methods). though studies on stability of achievement goals have been relatively lacking, some researchers assumed that achievement goals are relatively stable personal characteristics (dweck & leggett, 1988), but more recent studies indicated that they are also subjec

9、tive to change (e.g., fryer & elliot, 2007; muis & edwards, 2009; senko & harackiewicz, 2005)(presenting different views in literature). the findings in the current study seem to support the researchers who argued that achievement goals are stable personal characteristics (e.g., dweck &a

10、mp; leggett, 1988) (interoreting). research in the field suggested that achievement goals emerge from and are embedded in stable factors such as motives and temperaments (elliot & church, 1997; elliot & trash, 2002). other sources underlying goals include self-concepts, implicit theory, cult

11、ural values and norms (elliot, 2006) and broader classroom features such as evaluation procedures, skills of the instruction, encouragement for competition (ames, 1992; urdan & turner, 2005). all these factors are relatively stable influences that shape the students goal adoption (using previous

12、 studies to confirm). they cannot be so easily changed through one single strategy-focused instruction offered for a limited period of time like the one that the participants experienced in the current study previous studies have tended to assess the effectiveness of goal instruction (i.e. process-g

13、oal setting and explicit goal setting) in terms of the changes in the students writing performance, quality of students composition or their use of writing strategies, but few studies have explored the impact of goal instruction on the students adoption of goal orientations (previous studies to just

14、ify an speculation follows). given inadequate findings regarding this issue in literature, we can only speculate that （making conditional claims）goal instruction, as it was primarily designed to facilitate task accomplishment in the current study and many previous studies, primarily served to make s

15、alient to the students the effectiveness of these procedures in facilitating problem-solving in efl writing. such saliency is more likely to elicit changes in task-related motivation such as self-efficacy, efficacy-attribution awareness, and task value as we found in the present study, but not neces

16、sarily lead to change the students general reasons for engagement in learning, that is, their adoption of goal orientation patterns (interpreting). future research should add the construct of goal orientations to the assessment of the effectiveness of strategic instruction, particularly the effectiv

17、eness of goal instruction on the students adoption of goal orientations (suggestions for future research, making specifically from the above mentioned need for further clarification). as they all belong to the students multi-level goal system despite that process- or explicit-goals are task-specific

18、 goals involving the standards or criteria that individuals use to evaluate their performance (bandura, 1997; locke & latham, 1990), whereas, academic goal orientations reflect a general orientation to academic tasks (pintrich 2000c), their relationship calls for further clarification in future

19、studies about strategic interventions. the findings also echo partially the general patterns of goal change indicated by fryer and elliot (2007), muis and edwards (2009), and senko and harackiewicz (2005). they all found that students displayed evidence for both stability and change of goal orientat

20、ions across tasks (previous studies to partially confirm). however, this partial consistency should be weighed in terms of one difference between the current study and these studies. the issue of goal change was explored across different instructional contexts in the current study, but it was explor

21、ed across different tasks in the aforementioned studies (previous studies for comparison,drawing attention to constrast btw current & previous studies). previous studies also showed that personal goals can be influenced by their perceptions of the classroom goal structures in instructional conte

22、xts (ames, 1992; dweck & leggett, 1988; pintrich, roeser & degroot, 1994; roeser, modgley, & urdan, 1996). thus another plausible explanation (two potential reasons raised)for the current findings regarding goal stability would be that the instructional components designed in the current

23、 intervention failed to have any impact on the aforementioned or other potential antecedents for achievement goal change, or on the students perceived goal structure in the intervention (interpreting). thus one valuable avenue for future study on issue of achievement goal change could be to go beyon

24、d examining goal change across learning tasks and to include the exploration of goal change across instructional contexts (suggestions for future research). such exploration, if conducted with refined research design, would help (conditioned claim) clarify what instructional components or how the go

25、al antecedents that were found in the previous studies such as anxiety, fear for failure, task value or task interest (e.g., fryer & elliot, 2007; muis & edwards, 2009; senko & harackiewicz, 2005) may affect students perceived goal structures, and how these factors, in turn, could impact

26、 students adoption of goal orientations. such information is crucial for teachers when they design learning tasks with an aim to enhance students motivation. 11.3.3 task value11.3.3.1 construct validity of task valuethe construct of task value in efl writing was conceptualized based upon eccles and

27、wigfields (1995) three categories of task value. attainment value refers to the individuals perception of the importance of a task to his self-schema or identity. intrinsic value refers to the enjoyment that task engagement brings about, and extrinsic utility value refers to the usefulness of the ta

28、sk in terms of the individuals future goals. considering that the task value scale was aimed to tap the students perceived importance, relevance or utility of efl writing, one of the five basic skills for chinese english learners, all the scale items were thus confined to issues related to their maj

29、or study or future career as an english major. exploratory factor analysis indicated a two-factor solutionintrinsic value and attainment-extrinsic value rather than a three-factor construction as proposed by eccles and wigfield (1995) (previous study used for contradiction). items reflecting intrins

30、ic value formed one distinct factor, but attainment items were unexpectedly intermingled with extrinsic items to form one single factor. this two-factor underlying construct was supported by confirmatory factor analysis using an independent sample (relating to methods). however, close examination of the content of the scale items of extrinsic and attainment value suggested that the finding was plausible (interpretation of the unexpected findings). the scale items reflecting attainment value in the current study were restricted to aspects concerning the importance or relevance of english