Should childhood be a journey of a race? Response to Harackiewicz et al. (2002).

By Avi Kaplan, Michael J. Middleton. 2002

147 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/44fb8f93c017d6d25de665198859c5fbdf706074

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Goal Theorists Should Move on From Performance Goals (2005, background): “However, other goal theorists (e.g., Kaplan & Middleton, 2002) have suggested that motivational theorists ought to be criticizing such achievement contexts as undesirable rather than appearing to condone them by suggesting that performance-approach goals are sometimes productive.”
Multiple Achievement Goals and Multiple Pathways for Learning: The Agenda and Impact of Paul R. Pintrich (2005, background): “Kaplan and Middleton (2002) responded to Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich, et al.’s (2002) position indicating agreement with many of the points made.”
Applying Learner-Centered Principles to Middle School Education (2003, background): “While the long-term impact of performance goals is not yet clear (Kaplan & Middleton, 2002), considerable evidence suggests that children and young adolescents benefit the most from classroom environments with a mastery focus (cf. Ames, 1992; Stipek, 2002).”
The Dilemma of Performance-Approach Goals: The Use of Multiple Goal Contexts to Promote Students' Motivation and Learning. (2005, background): “Rather, there is continued support for a mastery goal perspective1 in which mastery goals are thought to be the most beneficial for all students across socioemotional, cognitive, and achievement outcomes (Kaplan & Middleton, 2002; Midgley et al., 2001).”
Within-Grade Changes in Korean Girls' Motivation and Perceptions of the Learning Environment Across Domains and Achievement Levels. (2005, background): “Despite much empirical evidence supporting the seeming harmless nature of performance-approach goals, several researchers still contest the notion of performance-approach goals as an adaptive motivator (e.g., Kaplan & Middleton, 2002; Midgley, Kaplan, & Middleton, 2001).”
Different goals, different pathways to success: Performance-approach goals as direct and mastery-approach goals as indirect predictors of grades in mathematics (2018, unknown): “…seems to link performance-approach goals with grades, the route that links mastery-approach goals with grades through challenge seeking seems more interesting and in line with the school-as-a-journey view (Kaplan & Middleton, 2002), even in educational systems that might be normatively selective.”
Examining Hong Kong students’ achievement goals and their relations with students’ perceived classroom environment and strategy use (2008, background): “…2003), other researchers have argued that performance-approach goals are only adaptive for some achievement-related outcomes in some circumstances and that the deleterious consequences of performance goals should not be ignored (Kaplan & Middleton, 2002; Midgley, Kaplan, & Middleton, 2001).”
Goal Orientation, Academic Achievement, and Depression: Evidence in Favor of a Revised Goal Theory Framework (2005, result): “The present findings corroborate with the thesis of revised goal theory (e.g., Harackiewicz et al., 2002; Kaplan & Middleton, 2002; Midgley et al., 2001) that a focus on competence (academic and social) is adaptive for achievement purposes.”
Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction (2011, background): “How students learn to perform skills within complex game environments is of particular importance in physical education, where a significant allocation of instructional time is devoted to team games at elementary, middle, and high school levels.”
Performance-approach goals: good or bad forms of regulation? (2003, background): “…ask whether it is best to value such outcomes in the first place, whether these goals interfere with other important outcomes, and whether these goals simply represent effective coping strategies in a system that is itself problematic and in need of change (Kaplan & Middleton, 2002; Urdan, 1997).”