HJBS286103.

qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 161

Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences
Volume 28 Number 2
May 2006 161-186
The Role of Cognition, © 2006 Sage Publications
10.1177/0739986305286103
Motivation, and Emotion http://hjb.sagepub.com
hosted at

in Explaining http://online.sagepub.com

the Mathematics
Achievement Gap Between
Hispanic and White Students
Tara Stevens
Arturo Olivárez Jr.
Doug Hamman
Texas Tech University

The authors investigated the relationships between cognitive, motivational,

and emotional variables across Hispanic and White students to predict math-
ematics performance. A theoretically based structural model fit a total sample
of 666 4th- to 10th-grade students well, supporting that self-efficacy, sources
of self-efficacy, and emotional feedback were all stronger predictors of math-
ematics performance than general mental ability. Tests of the structural model
across ethnicity suggested a good fit for the White sample but not for the
Hispanic sample. However, the majority of the associations in the White
model were not significant. Because the model positing relationships among
motivational and cognitive variables has been well established, the findings
indicated that the inclusion of emotional feedback made it more complicated.

Keywords: mathematics; self-efficacy; interest; self-determination

R esearchers have consistently found a significant and positive relation-

ship between ability and academic performance. This relationship has
been well supported across multiple groups using a variety of measures
(e.g., Carvajal & Pauls, 1995; Eaves, Williams, Winchester, & Darch, 1994;

Authors’ Note: This work was sponsored by an AERA-IES research grant to the first and
second authors. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tara Stevens,
Department of Educational Psychology and Leadership, Box 41071, Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, TX 79409-1071.

161
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 162

162 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Kaufman, 1973; Martel, McKelvie, & Standing, 1987; McGrew & Hessler,
1995; Wiese, Lamb, & Piersel, 1988). As a result, general mental ability often
is viewed as a superior predictor of educational level (Plomin, 1999). The fre-
quent presentation of this relationship, without discussion of other important
cognitive, motivational, and affective factors, has likely had serious attribu-
tional consequences in mathematics education. Educators and some strug-
gling students may conclude that ability is the only predictor of mathematics
achievement and may adopt the belief that typical students will never be able
to understand mathematical concepts (Bruning, Schraw, & Ronning, 1999).
Although this misconception has adverse effects for all students, at-risk
and minority students, in particular, are ostensibly harmed. For example,
researchers have continued to document the low mathematics performance
of Hispanic students in contrast to their White counterparts (Bempechat,
Nakkula, Wu, & Ginsberg, 1996; Carpenter et al., 1988; Stevens, Olivárez,
Lan, & Tallent-Runnels, 2004; Stevenson, Chen, & Uttal, 1990). This is of
serious concern because mathematics has been considered the gateway to
college and mathematics-related careers, which in turn, lead to economic
benefits and enfranchisement (Moreno & Muller, 1999; Rivera-Batiz, 1992;
Schoenfeld, 2002).
Evidence supports that disenfranchisement of Hispanic students is
already an issue. Although the number of Hispanic students is increasing in
the public schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2002), dropout rates for
these students has remained constant. Hispanic students drop out at a rate
higher than that of their White and Black peers (U.S. Department of
Education, 2002). Thus, it is no surprise that the unemployment rate for
Hispanics is almost twice that of Whites (U.S. Department of Labor, 2003)
and Hispanics tend to be an important source for low-skilled, low-wage
labor in agriculture as well as other industries (Schmidt, 2003).
To lay the groundwork for intervention, Byrnes (2003) developed a three
conditions (3C) model consisting of three classes of predictors that included
socioeconomic status, exposure to learning opportunities, and motivation.
Using the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data,
Byrnes (2003) found that his 3C model accounted for 45% to 50% of the
variance in 12th-grade students’ mathematics performance. Furthermore,
he was able to show that performance differences across ethnic groups
“essentially disappear” when students are matched using these predictors
(p. 325). He concluded that theories should be the basis for reform, espe-
cially those that include variables that can be influenced by the school, and
stated that emphasis on those variables over which educators have little
influence, such as socioeconomic status and cognitive disabilities, can lead
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 163

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 163

to pessimism concerning the possibility for change. In particular, Byrnes

(2003) cautioned that although motivational beliefs can be altered, bringing
about change is difficult and, ultimately, motivational beliefs may be resis-
tant to change. This comment highlights the need for a clear understanding
of how motivational theories function in specific contexts with specific
populations of students.
As the gap between Hispanic and White students’ mathematics perfor-
mance is increasing (Lee, 2002), the investigation into the role of malleable
variables such as motivation-related constructs is warranted. The impor-
tance of these variables in the prediction of mathematics performance has
been studied but few have considered them simultaneously while evaluat-
ing the relevance of their relationships across ethnicity. This approach may
be useful in understanding the widening gap in performance. For example,
Stevens et al. (2004) compared the relationships between self-efficacy, self-
determination, the intent to take additional mathematics courses, and math-
ematics performance while controlling for prior mathematics achievement
and ability. They found that Hispanic students were influenced more by
nonability factors when developing efficacy beliefs about mathematics.
Therefore, the emphasis placed on ability in many schools and the negative
opinion of the intellectual abilities of students of underrepresented groups
(Good, Aronson, & Inzlicht, 2003) may create a poor fit between the school
environment and students’ beliefs, which may account for the declining
mathematics performance of Hispanic youth.
By developing and testing a theoretically based model, the results lend
greater insight into how these variables work together to influence students’
mathematics performance, which is more advantageous than isolating and
studying individual variables. Also more advantageous is the approach of
starting with a model based on a total sample of students selected from var-
ious schools. Byrnes (2003) warned that evaluating only similar students,
for example, those in the same school district or, in the present case, those
of the same ethnicity, would result in an incomplete theoretical picture: “If
students in a school are similar along many but not all dimensions, researchers
would find that only one or two of the distinguishing dimensions would
emerge as significant predictors” (p. 325). Therefore, the purpose of the
present study was to evaluate a model describing relationships between
motivation, cognition, and emotion and their prediction of mathematics
performance using a sample of West and South Texas students and then
applying the model to the individual samples of Hispanic and White
students. This strategy allowed the assessment of a model that would explain
the psychological environment of a variety of classrooms.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 164

164 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Its Sources

Mathematics self-efficacy, or the belief one holds concerning his or

her ability to successfully accomplish a task, has been shown to mediate
the direct effects of ability on mathematics performance in both White
students (Pajares & Kranzler, 1995) and Hispanic students (Stevens et al.,
2004). These findings suggest that students with adequate ability will not
automatically succeed in mathematics. Instead, these students also must
possess strong feelings of efficacy or confidence in the ability to achieve
their potential. This logic is valuable because it emphasizes the importance
of beliefs, which can be altered through praise and feedback, mastery expe-
riences, physiological feedback, and observation (Bandura, 1986) rather
than ability alone.
This relationship between efficacy and achievement may be different
among racial/ethnic groups. For example, Stevens et al. (2004) found
that prior mastery achievement was more important to Hispanic students’
self-efficacy than it was for that of White students. They speculated that
Hispanic students may not experience the same advantages of White students,
such as praise and feedback or possessing models similar to them who
are successful in mathematics or related fields, and suggested that future
researchers look at not only mathematics self-efficacy but its precursors
as well. Typically, mathematics self-efficacy is assessed by presenting
students with mathematics problems and asking them to rate their confi-
dence that they can successfully calculate the answer (e.g., Marsh, Roche,
Pajares, & Miller, 1997). Although this strategy lends insight into how the
belief affects mathematics performance, it does not reveal how differences
develop. Therefore, differences in the sources of self-efficacy need to be
considered when investigating how beliefs affect the mathematics perfor-
mance of students from various groups.
A fourth precursor to self-efficacy, physiological feedback, is also of inter-
est. Perhaps the most common emotional concern in mathematics education
is mathematics anxiety. This is not surprising because anxiety is negatively
correlated with almost every aspect of scholastic achievement (Covington &
Omelich, 1987). According to Ashcraft and Kirk (2001), this negative rela-
tionship is likely due to the disruption of central executive processes caused
by anxiety. Because mathematics anxiety appears to increase as students
progress through the school system (Gierl & Bisanz, 1995), understanding its
role in the development of mathematics self-efficacy in conjunction with that
of the aforementioned sources of efficacy across groups of students seems
warranted (Willig, Harnisch, Delwyn, & Hill, 1983).
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 165

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 165

Self-Efficacy and Its Relationship

to Intrinsic Motivation
The importance of understanding self-efficacy in predicting mathematics
performance is evident because efficacy beliefs have been linked to acade-
mic achievement (Bandura, 1993; Zimmerman & Bandura, 1994), effective
use of cognitive strategies, and better performance on class work and exams
(Pintrich & DeGroot, 1990). Efficacy beliefs also may be related to other
important motivational constructs. For example, Bandura (1986) proposed
that efficacy influences choice, effort, and persistence. Individuals with high
efficacy are more likely to choose a task, try hard, and persist longer in the
face of difficulty. When experiencing high levels of efficacy, students may
be more likely to choose to enroll in more advanced mathematics courses
and to attempt more complex mathematics tasks. As a result, these students
also would experience greater feelings of autonomy and self-determination,
which are related to intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000) or the per-
ception that one is engaged in a task because he or she simply chooses
to do so.
Researchers have found that increased intrinsic motivation is related
to greater conceptual understanding in mathematics (Nichols, 1996; Stipek
et al., 1998; Valas & Sovik, 1993). Although differences in actual performance
or grades are not always evident, intrinsic motivation also has been associ-
ated with more global measures of mathematics achievement (Schiefele &
Csikszentmihalyi, 1995) and the intent to take additional mathematics
courses (Stevens et al., 2004). Therefore, intrinsically motivated behavior is
considered to be more advantageous to that which is extrinsically motivated
(Stipek, 1992).
Educators also should be aware that students from various ethnic groups
may be more likely to experience specific levels of motivation due to cul-
tural issues and the struggle to identify with the demands of the school envi-
ronment, which typically reflects White values (Ogbu, 1987). Researchers
have posited that students from underrepresented groups may be more likely
to reject the external influences of teachers because acceptance would rep-
resent adopting White values (Mirón & Lauria, 1998; Ogbu, 1987; Sanders,
1998). As a result, Hispanic students may be more likely to respond to
motivation that encourages their autonomy and decision making. Because
the majority of classrooms continue to emphasize grades and external
reward systems, those students who prefer to be motivated from within are
likely at a disadvantage in such environments that do not recognize their
need for autonomy.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 166

166 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

According to the aforementioned theory, to promote higher levels of

intrinsic motivation, which would benefit all students but especially those
who have a greater need for autonomy, educators can work to build the self-
efficacy of students by providing praise and feedback and the opportunities
to view similar successful models, and to ensure that all students are pre-
sented with tasks that they can incrementally master. In addition, educators
should encourage an autonomy-supportive environment that will make salient
students’ feelings of autonomy and competence that will enhance intrin-
sic motivation (Valas & Sovik, 1993). Finally, intrinsic motivation can be
influenced by students’ interest in mathematics (Bergin, 1999; Hidi, 2000;
Renninger, 2000; Schiefele, 1999).

Intrinsic Motivation and Mathematics Interest

Interest is another affective variable associated with higher mathematics

achievement (Schiefele & Csikszentmihalyi, 1995). Interest may be either
situational or individual (Hidi, 2000). Situational interest is an emotional
response to the environment that can be triggered and maintained for a lim-
ited period of time. Individual interest represents a long-term inclination
toward certain topics that results in ongoing directed attention (Hidi, 2000).
Some have posited that interest, both situational and individual, influ-
ences the strength of one’s intrinsic motivation (Renninger, 2000; Schiefele,
1999). That is, a student interested in mathematics will experience a high
level of arousal, sparking cognitive and affective processes. If those processes
result in confidence, enjoyment, and self-determination, then performance
will be enhanced. However, if those processes result in self-doubt, anxiety, and
feelings of being controlled, then the students’ performance will decline.
Interest, however, is distinct from intrinsic motivation. “Whereas both
intrinsic motivation and interest result in self-intentional, autotelic activities,
the former is a broader concept and is less focused on object specificity than
interest” (Hidi, 2000, p. 317). This distinction helps explain perseverance
when tasks are boring, overly complex, and unlikely to be solved (Hidi,
2000). In effect, interest might be lost in these situations, but the mechanisms
associated with intrinsic motivation, such as enjoyment, autonomy, and a
desire for competence, might propel a person to continued engagement.
Researchers, however, have not investigated differences in the level of
mathematics interest across groups. Therefore, it is not clear whether
Hispanic and White students have a similar interest in mathematics. Even
so, one would expect that all students are likely drawn to novelty and other
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 167

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 167

Figure 1
Theoretical Model Evaluating Cognition, Motivation,
and Emotion in Mathematics Performance

Ability

Self-
Determination
Math
Interest

Sources of Math
Efficacy Performance

Emotional
Feedback
Math Self-
Efficacy
Prior Math
Grade

triggers that result in mathematics interest; however, this arousal may not
result in intrinsic motivation if other information, such as low levels of self-
efficacy, indicates that success in mathematical tasks is not likely (Stevens
et al., 2004).

Purpose and Predictions

The purpose of the present study was to test a theoretical model explain-
ing the relationships between cognitive, motivational, and emotional vari-
ables in their prediction of mathematics performance across ethnic groups
and to examine differences that may exist between two ethnic groups of
students (see Figure 1). We focused on malleable variables or characteristics
of students that tend to be influenced by educators and the school environ-
ment. The tested theoretical model improved on the path model evaluated by
Stevens et al. (2004) by including emotional factors (i.e., interest, anxiety)
and the sources of self-efficacy. Furthermore, several latent variables were
developed in the present study so that the measurement of these variables
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 168

168 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

themselves as well as their proposed relationships could be evaluated. These

additions allowed for a better understanding of how mathematics self-efficacy
develops across groups of students to influence mathematics performance
while simultaneously accounting for ability, motivation, and affect.
Based on the aforementioned literature review, we expected that a com-
parison of means between Hispanic students and White students would yield
significant differences in mathematics performance, self-efficacy, intrinsic
motivation, and anxiety, with Hispanic students experiencing the disadvan-
tages. In addition, we hypothesized that Hispanic students would report
having fewer models for mathematics, less praise and feedback, and fewer
mastery experiences. We expected that the model would provide an ade-
quate fit to a sample of Hispanic students and a sample of White students.
However, we suspected that certain paths or relationships might be more
important for one group than the other.

Method

Participants
Participants were students attending schools in west and south Texas.
Although the schools were conveniently sampled, classrooms were ran-
domly selected for a total of 666 participants. Students’ ages ranged from 8
to 18, with the majority of students classified as eighth graders (59.2%).
Almost 20% of the participants were classified as 4th graders and 10.7%
were classified as 10th graders. The final 10.6% were students in the
remaining grade levels above grade 4. Participants were close to evenly
split across gender and ethnicity, with 47.6% describing themselves as
Mexican American and 44% describing themselves as White. The remain-
ing 6.9% described themselves as either African American, Asian, or Native
American. A small number (1.5%) failed to respond to the item.

Procedures
Approximately 2 weeks prior to the anticipated test date, the mathematics
teachers were invited to participate and assist in the collection of data and were
trained in the collection procedure. Teachers were given a script to be read ver-
batim, providing an introduction explaining the purpose of testing to the
students as well as instructions for each of the included instruments. The mea-
sures presented to students were counterbalanced; however, the measurement
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 169

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 169

of the malleable affective variables prior to mathematics performance was

necessary because the measurement of self-efficacy, interest, motivation,
and anxiety would have been affected if students had the opportunity to
attempt to work the actual problems first. Also, because the test of general
mental ability was group administered, it was always taken first for the con-
venience of the teachers. The test was administered during the students’
regular mathematics periods and students completed the entire process in
approximately 1hr, on average.

Instruments
Students completed the test of general mental ability, a questionnaire,
and two mathematics tests. The subtests of the sources of self-efficacy and
mathematics interest measures were utilized to construct related latent vari-
ables in the model, whereas the total scores for the remaining variables
were employed in the model.

Sources of self-efficacy. The Mathematics Experiences Scale (MES) is an

18-item instrument created by the authors to assess the four areas identified by
Bandura (1986) to encourage the development of self-efficacy. Participants
were asked to rate how well statements described them using a scale from
1 (not at all true of me) to 4 (very true of me). Internal reliability estimates
using Cronbach’s alpha were acceptable for the Anxiety (.81), Math Models
(.67), Praise and Feedback (.82), and Mastery Experiences (.68) subscales,
and confirmatory factor analysis supported the presence of the four factors.

Mathematics self-efficacy. Participants were asked to endorse their level

of confidence in correctly solving 19 grade-level–appropriate mathematics
problems based on a 7-point linear scale ranging from extremely uncertain
to extremely certain. The mathematics items assessed were developed by
the authors to be parallel to those that the students would encounter on the
mathematics performance measure. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was
high, reaching .92.

Intrinsic motivation. The Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire

(SRQ-A) developed by Ryan and Connell (1989) was employed to measure
the degree to which participants felt autonomous or self-determined in contrast
to feeling controlled in the academic setting. Students were presented with
sentence stems including “I do my math homework because” and “I do my
class work in math because” and were asked to decide how true subsequent
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 170

170 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

statements described them using a scale from 1 (not at all true of me) to
4 (very true of me). Internal consistency estimates for the four subscales—
External, Introjected, Identified, and Intrinsic—were acceptable, ranging
from a low of .76 to a high of .92. A Relative Autonomy Index was calcu-
lated by weighting the subscales before combining them.

Mathematics interest. The Mathematics Interest Inventory (MII) was uti-

lized to assess participants’ interest in mathematics. The MII was developed
by Stevens and Olivárez (2005) and is composed of three subscales: posi-
tive valence, negative valence, and time. Participants were presented with
27 statements about behavior and feelings toward mathematics and were
asked to rate how well each described them using a scale from 1 (not at all
like me) to 4 (very much like me). Cronbach’s alpha estimates of internal
consistency revealed coefficients of .91, .85, and .69 for positive valence,
negative valence, and time, respectively.

Prior mathematics achievement. Students were asked to provide their

typical grade in mathematics classes. Mathematics grades were initially
reported as letter grades but then recoded using a scale from 1 to 5, with a
1 representing an A, a 2 representing a B, and so on.

General mental ability. The Cattell (1973) Culture Fair Tests of

Intelligence was utilized to measure students’ general mental ability. The
measure is based on Cattell’s (1971) theory of fluid abilities, which
assumes that intelligence involves information-processing skills that reflect
the child’s ability to adapt and learn from the environment as time passes.
The Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 estimate for the present sample was .83.

Mathematics performance. Two subtests, Calculation and Mathematics

Fluency, of the Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Achievement (Woodcock,
McGrew, & Mather, 2001) were employed to assess mathematics perfor-
mance. Because the test is standardized, more appropriate comparisons of
mathematics performance could be made across students from varying
grade levels. The Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 estimate for the present
sample was .88 and .99 for the Fluency and Calculation tests, respectively.

Statistical Analyses
Subsequent to the calculation of descriptive statistics and mean com-
parisons, an evaluation of the measurement model’s fit to a sample of
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 171

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 171

333 students randomly selected from the total sample was accomplished using
LISREL 8.52 (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1996) and the Simplis programming
language. Goodness-of-fit indices were selected based on the recommen-
dations of Hu and Bentler (1999). A two-index presentation strategy that
involved an estimate of close to .09 for the maximum likelihood–based
(ML-based) standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) and close to .95
for the ML-based comparative fit index (CFI) was employed. Modifications
were made to the measurement model based on theory and statistical feed-
back. The model was then cross-validated to the total sample of 666 students
and the structural model was subsequently evaluated. Modifications to the
structural model were not considered because this model was specified
based on theory; however, the model was cross-validated to the sample split
by ethnicity. The aforementioned combinational rule was utilized to evalu-
ate the model’s fit to the sample of 293 White students and 317 Hispanic
students.

Results

Comparison of Means
As expected, mean comparisons between Hispanic and White students
revealed that Hispanic students are typically at a disadvantage, experienc-
ing significantly lower mathematics performance, feelings of self-efficacy,
amounts of praise, and levels of mastery, as well as higher levels of mathe-
matics anxiety. Even so, Hispanic students’ reports revealed several advan-
tages evidenced by significantly higher mathematics interest and intrinsic
motivation. In addition, Hispanic students reported knowing more individ-
uals who were good at math that they would want to be like (i.e., models
for mathematics) than did the White students. All mean scores, t values, and
significance levels are reported in Table 1. Table 2 presents the correlations
among the variables, which were all related to the expected degree and in
the expected directions.

Evaluation of the Theoretical Model

For all models, maximum likelihood estimation was utilized and para-
meter estimation matrices were positive definite, with no parameter estimates
outside their permissible range. The initial measurement model presented
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 172

172 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Independent t Tests
Between Ethnicity Groups
Mean SD

Variable Hispanic White Hispanic White t Value p Value

Mathematics performance 101.90 105.82 14.05 15.41 −3.92 .001

Mathematics self-efficacy 97.27 102.15 23.45 25.11 −4.88 .013

Sources of self-efficacy
Models 12.90 12.10 3.76 3.69 2.92 .004
Praise 10.14 10.78 3.42 3.58 −2.27 .024
Mastery experiences 9.95 10.63 2.91 3.05 −2.83 .005
Anxiety 10.97 12.03 3.36 3.21 −3.99 .000

Self-determination
Relative autonomy −0.66 −1.16 1.87 2.13 3.10 .002
External regulation 2.76 2.83 0.63 0.63 −1.24 .214
Introjected regulation 2.79 2.76 0.74 0.77 0.61 .545
Identified regulation 3.02 2.87 0.73 0.79 2.41 .016
Integrated regulation 2.32 2.19 0.85 0.91 1.85 .065

Mathematics interest 56.16 53.57 15.33 13.40 2.23 .026

in Figure 2 did not provide adequate fit to the data (CFI = .88, SRMR = .10).
A review of parameter estimates and modification indices indicated that
mathematics anxiety should not be treated as a part of the latent variable,
sources of self-efficacy information. In addition, the second factor, negative
valence, of the MII appeared to be highly related to anxiety as well.
Although the second factor did not specifically address feelings of anxiety,
these items were related to emotion. Thus, it seemed appropriate to create
a broader emotional variable, titled emotional feedback, separate from
sources of self-efficacy, especially because the anxiety scale was likely lim-
ited in representing Bandura’s (1986) definition of physiological feedback.
The revised measurement model (see Figure 3) fit the data well (CFI = .95,
SRMR = .07) and was successfully cross-validated to the total sample of
666 students (CFI = .95, SRMR = .08).
The structural model, which was not modified due to its theoretical
basis, also fit the total sample well (CFI = .94, SRMR = .08) using the afore-
mentioned goodness-of-fit criteria (see Figure 4). Even so, the parameter
estimate from ability to self-efficacy was not statistically significant at the
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 173

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 173

Table 2
Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient for Manifest
Variables in the Study
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13

V1 1.00
V2 .34 1.00
V3 .23 .37 1.00
V4 .05 .00 .15 1.00
V5 .21 .23 .36 .42 1.00
V6 .24 .18 .46 .42 .64 1.00
V7 .18 .21 .23 −.28 .14 .16 1.00
V8 −.02 .03 .18 .09 .23 .27 .27 1.00
V9 .15 .10 .18 .46 .37 .34 −.21 −.38 1.00
V10 .10 .06 .22 .55 .41 .45 −.20 .03 .64 1.00
V11 .10 .09 .27 .54 .44 .48 −.07 .37 .53 .77 1.00
V12 .08 .10 .30 .43 .50 .53 .10 .72 .33 .58 .69 1.00
V13 .17 .14 .29 .40 .50 .54 .22 .62 .27 .50 .66 .82 1.00

M 105.5 103.5 100.0 12.5 10.4 11.4 −0.92 2.80 2.78 2.96 2.25 2.25 54.7
SD 13.8 14.9 24.3 3.8 3.5 3.0 3.3 2.0 0.63 0.75 0.76 0.89 14.3

Note: V1 = Cattell’s Culture Fair Intelligent Test (standard scores); V2 = mathematical per-
formance (Woodcock-Johnson Math subscale total score); V3 = mathematics self-efficacy
total score; V4 = mathematics self-efficacy–models subscale score; V5 = mathematics self-
efficacy–praise subscale score; V6 = mathematics self-efficacy–mastery experiences subscale
score; V7 = mathematics self-efficacy–anxiety subscale score; V8 = self-determination–relative
autonomy subscale score; V9 = self-determination–external regulation subscale score; V10 =
self-determination–introjected regulation subscale score; V11 = self-determination–identified
regulation subscale score; V12 = self-determination–integrated regulation subscale score;
V13 = mathematics interest.

p < .05 level. The cognitive, motivational, and emotional variables accounted
for 19% of the variance of mathematics performance. Self-efficacy, the sources
of self-efficacy, and interest accounted for 48% of the variance in intrinsic
motivation. Finally, ability, the sources of efficacy, prior mathematics grade,
and emotional feedback accounted for 30% of the variance in mathematics
self-efficacy.
Cross-validation to the Hispanic (n = 317) and White (n = 293) samples
revealed adequate model-to-data fit for the White sample (CFI = .95,
SRMR = .08) but poor model-to-data fit for the Hispanic sample (CFI = .90,
SRMR = .10). A review of parameter estimates for the Hispanic sample was
inappropriate due to the poor fit of the model. Even so, these are reported in
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 174

174 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Figure 2
Initial Measurement Model

Cattell 1.00 General

Culture Mental Ability
Fair Tests

Mastery
Experience
.86
Models for
.55
Math Sources of
.23 Self-Efficacy
Anxiety .79

Praise and Math Self-

Feedback Efficacy
1.00

Math Self-
Efficacy
Intrinsic
1.00
Motivation
SRQ-A

WJ-III
Composite 1.00 Mathematics
Math Score Performance

Prior Math
Grade 1.00
Prior Math
Achievement
Positive
Valence
.90

Negative .74
Math Interest
Valence
.54

Time

Note: SRQ-A = Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire; WJ-III = Woodcock Johnson III

Tests of Achievement.

Figure 5. An analysis of the model parameters for the White sample indicated
six parameters that were not statistically significant (see Figure 6). Ability,
emotion, and prior mathematics grades all independently failed to signifi-
cantly predict mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics self-efficacy failed
to predict self-determination, which in turn failed to predict mathematics
performance.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 175

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 175

Figure 3
Revised Measurement Model

1.00 General
Cattell
Mental Ability

Mastery .84
.52 Sources of
Models
.78 Self-Efficacy

Praise

.88 Emotional
Anxiety 1
.86 Feedback

Anxiety 2 .70

.75 Math Self-

Anxiety 3
Efficacy

Anxiety 4 1.00

Math Self- Intrinsic

1.00 Motivation
Efficacy

SRQ-A .43
Mathematics
WJ-III 1.00
Performance
Composite
Math Score

Prior Math 1.00

Prior Math
Grade
Achievement
Positive
Valence .95

.61
Negative Math Interest
Valence

.55
Time

Note: SRQ-A = Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire; WJ-III = Woodcock Johnson III

Tests of Achievement.

Discussion

Advantages and Disadvantages Across Groups

As expected, Hispanic students’ mathematics performance was signifi-
cantly below that of White students, supporting the continued presence of a
gap in mathematics achievement (Lee, 2002). Other significant differences
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 176

176 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Figure 4
Theoretical Model Evaluating Cognition, Motivation,
and Emotion in Mathematics Performance of the Total Sample

Ability
.17 Self-
–.03a Determination
Math
Interest .90 –0.8

–.44
Sources of Math
Efficacy Performance .10
.34

.19
Emotional .28
Feedback .10
Math Self-
Efficacy
Prior Math .25
Grade

a. All parameter estimates are statistically significant at the p < .05 level, with the exception
of Ability to Mathematic Self-Efficacy.

also were present, lending insight into the possible causes for the gap. For
example, Hispanic students’ significantly lower levels of mathematics self-
efficacy indicate that Hispanic students likely do not possess the confidence
in their skills and knowledge that they can successfully accomplish mathe-
matical tasks. As a result, they may give up easily when confronted with
challenges or may avoid such tasks altogether.
When considering the sources of mathematics self-efficacy, or those
aspects that help to develop strong feelings of mathematics self-efficacy,
Hispanic students seem to be at a disadvantage in comparison to their White
peers in experiencing praise as well as success or mastery. In addition, they
may experience more anxiety when engaged in mathematics, which further
decreases their feelings of self-efficacy. Even so, Hispanic students seem to
have a greater access to models who are good at mathematics and generally
have a greater interest in mathematics. Finally, they reported a greater
amount of identified self-determination. This suggests that Hispanic students,
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 177

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 177

Figure 5
Theoretical Model Evaluating Cognition, Motivation,
and Emotion in Mathematics Performance of the Hispanic Sample

Ability
.18 Intrinsic
.03a Motivation
Math
Interest .88
–.07a

–.28
Sources of Math
Efficacy Performance .03a
.44

.08a
Emotional .27
Feedback .03a
Math Self-
Efficacy
Prior Math .13a
Grade

a. Parameter estimate is not statistically significant at the p < .05 level. All others are statisti-
cally significant at the p < .05 level.

more so than their White counterparts, take in and truly accept the demands
of educators in the domain of mathematics. Although this is closer on the
Ryan and Connell (1989) continuum of self-determination to intrinsic moti-
vation than extrinsic motivation, this finding indicates that Hispanic
students still may not take in these values and regulations as a part of the
self. However, White students did not integrate these values at a signifi-
cantly greater rate and overall had less intrinsic motivation than the
Hispanic students. Despite their interest and self-determination, Hispanic
students still failed to perform as well as the White students on the mathe-
matics tests.

Explanation of the Theoretical Model

These results support the fact that despite several positive aspects, Hispanic
students are at a disadvantage in the mathematics classroom. Because
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 178

178 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Figure 6
Theoretical Model Evaluating Cognition, Motivation,
and Emotion in Mathematics Performance of the White Sample

Ability
.21 Intrinsic
.07a Motivation
Math
Interest .88
–.04a

–.56
Sources of Math
Efficacy Performance .14
.36

.23
Emotional .27
Feedback .31
Math Self-
Efficacy
Prior Math –.04a
Grade

a. Parameter estimate is not statistically significant at the p < .05 level. All others are statisti-
cally significant at the p < .05 level.

“important developmental outcomes are nearly always determined by a

confluence of multiple factors” (Byrnes, 2003, p. 325), a model was tested
to explain the relationships between the identified variables. The model
provided a good fit to the total sample, indicating that the a priori theory
was viable, but important differences emerged when the ethnic samples
were analyzed separately.
Mathematics self-efficacy was the strongest predictor of mathematics
performance, even stronger than general mental ability. Typically, the
reduction in the strength of the relationship between ability and mathemat-
ics performance has been seen as resulting from the mediation of ability’s
effects by self-efficacy. However, the current results indicate that ability is
not related to mathematics self-efficacy, suggesting that mathematics self-
efficacy appears to contribute to mathematics performance independently
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 179

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 179

and not as a mediator of ability, even further supporting the importance of

self-efficacy in the academic environment. This is in sharp contrast to prior
research (e.g., Pajares & Kranzler, 1995; Stevens et al., 2004) and requires
further investigation.
The inclusion of the sources of self-efficacy into the model seems to be
related to the reduction of the strength of relationship between general
mental ability and mathematics self-efficacy. By accounting for variance in
mathematics self-efficacy that is related to having access to multiple sources
of efficacy information, the relationship between general mental ability and
mathematics self-efficacy significantly declined to an association close to
zero. Emotional feedback also independently explained variance in mathe-
matics performance to a degree even greater than that explained by general
mental ability. Because these aspects typically have not been assessed by
other researchers (e.g., Pajares & Kranzler, 1995; Stevens et al., 2004), it is
possible that ability’s association with mathematics self-efficacy has been
overstated. Instead, the sources of self-efficacy, which have been empha-
sized by Bandura (1986), rather than general mental ability tend to predict
mathematics self-efficacy. This is a positive finding that deemphasizes the
role of ability and emphasizes the role of malleable variables such as simply
providing praise and opportunities for success.
The sources of self-efficacy latent variable also was a significant and
strong predictor of self-determination or intrinsic motivation. Mathematics
self-efficacy was a significant predictor but the effect was quite small. As a
result, the same aspects that lead to the development of strong beliefs in one’s
abilities seem to be important in encouraging intrinsic motivation. However,
these sources encourage an extrinsic rather than intrinsic orientation, which
is typically less desirable. This creates an interesting dilemma. As praise,
mastery, and models are emphasized, self-efficacy tends to increase, but so
does extrinsic motivation. Of interest, the resulting self-efficacy beliefs tend
to be related to increased intrinsic motivation, albeit this relationship is small.
Therefore, by attempting to raise one’s levels of mathematics self-efficacy,
educators could potentially harm intrinsic motivation.
Mathematics self-efficacy tended to be a much stronger predictor of
mathematics performance than intrinsic motivation, even though both
appear linked to the same sources. The weak association between intrinsic
motivation and mathematics performance was somewhat expected because
intrinsic motivation is typically associated with broader outcomes such as
the intent to take additional mathematics courses (Stevens et al., 2004) and
conceptual understanding (Stipek et al., 1998). Although it was anticipated
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 180

180 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

that the Calculation and Math Fluency subscales from Woodcock Johnson
III would provide some assessment of conceptual understanding, they appar-
ently failed to provide a deeper evaluation of this quality. The inclusion of
the Applied Problems subscale of the Woodcock Johnson III might have
proven advantageous; however, individual administration would have been
necessary and was not practical for the present sample size. Despite this
caveat, the benefit of mathematics self-efficacy, or its stronger association to
mathematics performance, suggests that the risk should be taken to increase
efficacy even at the possible cost of intrinsic motivation. However, these
relationships require further investigation.
Intrinsic motivation also can be influenced by mathematics interest. This
strong association suggests that interest sparks affective processes instead
of functioning only as an outcome (Renninger, 2000; Schiefele, 1999). By
working to catch the interest of students, educators may be able to encour-
age the intrinsic motivation of their students. Even though intrinsic motiva-
tion may not be strongly related to mathematics performance, it is likely
that other long-term advantages will result.

Appropriateness of the Model Across Groups

The tested theoretical model was able to successfully explain the role
of cognitive, motivational, and affective variables in their prediction of
mathematics performance for the total sample of students across both
ethnic backgrounds. Although this is the appropriate starting point when
considering that students are educated in the same schools and classrooms,
testing the model’s fit to the individual ethnic samples seems to offer fur-
ther information specific to the gap in mathematics achievement between
groups.
Of interest, the theoretical model provided a good fit to the White sam-
ple but not to the Hispanic sample. Because of the lack of fit, a comparison
of the strength of specific relationships across groups could not be evalu-
ated. Another problem encountered was that the majority of the associa-
tions in the White model were weak and not significant. This finding was
consistent with Byrnes’s (2003) concern that evaluating only homogeneous
groups would result in an incomplete theoretical picture, with only a few
parameters reaching significant levels.
Despite concerns with homogeneity, the poor fit of the model to the
Hispanic sample seems problematic. Stevens et al. (2004) found support for
a model positing relationships among motivational and cognitive variables in
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 181

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 181

independent samples of Hispanic and White students. The present findings

indicate that as more affective variables are included in the model, the model’s
ability to explain Hispanic students’ mathematics performance weakens.
This could mean that the model itself is a poor theoretical representation of
cognition, motivation, and affect and their effect on mathematics performance.
Simply applying principles that have been effective in explaining the perfor-
mance of samples of predominately White students does not appear to be
acceptable. Further research is necessary to explore how and why emotional
feedback complicates the understanding of motivation and cognition in their
prediction of mathematics performance across groups.

Limitations
Even though the comparison of group models could not occur and the
addition of affective variables may suggest that the model is not appropriate,
the strongest advantage of the present model is its heavy reliance on a plau-
sible theoretical perspective. Certainly, other models would fit the data
equally well (MacCallum, Roznowski, & Necowitz, 1992); however, other
possible models would not likely have such well-developed theoretical frame-
works. Considering that other researchers have supported the importance of
self-efficacy (e.g., Pajares & Kranzler, 1995; Pintrich & DeGroot, 1990;
Stevens et al., 2004; Zimmerman & Bandura, 1994), continued emphasis on
developing higher levels of self-efficacy in all students seems warranted;
however, the possibility of other viable models developed through alternative
interpretations of theory that describe the relationships between the motiva-
tional, cognitive, and emotional variables should be ruled out.
Future researchers also should consider selecting measures that not only
employ self-report but also objective and subjective reports from others,
such as educators, parents, and peers. The current study’s reliance on self-
report, although important due to the nature of the self-perspective variables
under study, may have resulted in certain individuals or possibly groups
attempting to portray themselves in either a positive or negative light.
Although this issue may have affected the present results, the consis-
tency of the findings with current theory as well as achievement data
would suggest that students were honest in their responses. Even so, a
greater variety of data sources could have provided more information con-
cerning the school context and home environment, resulting in an even
better understanding of the development of self-efficacy and, in turn, math-
ematics outcomes.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 182

182 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Finally, future models should include not only mathematics performance

as an outcome but also mathematics achievement. Performance involves the
ability of an individual to accomplish an academic task on demand, which
represents many testing and evaluation situations. In contrast, an achieve-
ment measure incorporates many academic situations, including tests, daily
assignments, homework, and classroom participation. By including the
broader assessment of mathematics achievement, the importance of certain
variables, such as intrinsic motivation, may increase. This is important
because the study of achievement as well as performance may offer a better
explanation and understanding of the relationships between cognition, moti-
vation, and emotion.

Implications for Practice

The findings of the present study continue to indicate the importance of
self-efficacy in the prediction of mathematics performance as well as the
importance of measuring the sources of self-efficacy to better understand
how self-efficacy influences this performance in the presence of other vari-
ables, such as ability, interest, and self-determination. With this understand-
ing, educators can work to ensure that all students benefit from models,
receive praise and positive feedback, and experience feelings of mastery in
their work. Regardless of ability, these factors will likely increase students’
self-efficacy and subsequently their mathematics performance.
The results also support that educators need to take advantage of
Hispanic students’ higher levels of interest in mathematics and intrinsic
motivation. With the increasing demands for high standardized test scores,
many educators tend to become more controlling in the classroom, which
results in a poor environment for those who are more intrinsically moti-
vated. Control or the lack of autonomy for those who are already interested
can result in a reduced amount of enjoyment and, ultimately, interest (Ryan
& Deci, 2000). Because Hispanic students appear to already be interested
in mathematics and more intrinsically motivated, they stand to lose the
most. Educators must be careful because praise and grading (i.e., mastery
experiences) can be perceived as controlling. Although these aspects can
enhance mathematics self-efficacy, they can be destructive to intrinsic moti-
vation. Therefore, it appears that the cognitive, motivational, and affective
environment in the mathematics classroom is highly complicated. The com-
mitment of future research to understand how to create an appropriate
balance between these psychological factors for all students is imperative.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 183

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 183

References
Ashcraft, M. H., & Kirk, E. P. (2001). The relationship among working memory, math anxiety,
and performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 224-237.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational
Psychologist, 28, 117-148.
Bempechat, J., Nakkula, M. J., Wu, J. T., & Ginsburg, H. P. (1996). Attributions as predictors
of mathematics achievement: A comparative study. Journal of Research & Development in
Education, 29, 53-59.
Bergin, D. A. (1999). Influences on classroom interest. Educational Psychologist, 34, 87-98.
Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., & Ronning, R. R. (1999). Cognitive psychology and instruction
(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Byrnes, J. P. (2003). Factors predictive of mathematics achievement in White, Black, and Hispanic
12th graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 316-326.
Carpenter, T. P., Lindquist, M. M., Brown, C. A., Kouba, V. L., Silver, E. A., & Swafford, J. O.
(1988). Results of the fourth NAEP assessment of mathematics: Trends and conclusions.
Arithmetic Teacher, 36, 38-41.
Carvajal, H., & Pauls, K. (1995). Relationships among Graduate Record Examination scores,
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Revised IQs, and undergraduate grade point average.
College Student Journal, 29, 414-416.
Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Cattell, R. B. (1973). Measuring intelligence with the culture fair tests. Champaign, IL:
Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Covington, M. V., & Omelich, C. (1987). “I knew it cold before the exam”: A test of the anxiety-
blockage hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 393-400.
Eaves, R. C., Williams, P., Winchester, K., & Darch, C. (1994). Using teacher judgment and IQ
to estimate reading and mathematics achievement in a remedial-reading program. Psychology
in the Schools, 31, 261-272.
Gierl, M. J., & Bisanz, J. (1995). Anxieties and attitudes related to mathematics in grades 3 and 6.
Journal of Experimental Education, 63, 139-158.
Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test perfor-
mance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Develop-
mental Psychology, 24, 645-662.
Hidi, S. (2000). An interest researcher’s perspective: The effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors
on motivation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motiva-
tion: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 309-339). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIM-
PLIS Command Language, Scientific Software International, Chicago, IL.
Kaufman, A. S. (1973). Comparison of the WPPSI, Standford-Binet, and McCarthy scales as
predictors of first-grade achievement. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 36, 67-73.
Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward equity?
Educational Researcher, 31, 13-25.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 184

184 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

MacCallum, R. C., Roznowski, M., & Necowitz, L. B. (1992). Model modifications in covariance
structure analysis: The problem of capitalization on chance. Psychological Bulletin, 111,
490-504.
Marsh, J. L., Roche, L. A., Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1997). Item-specific efficacy judg-
ments in mathematical problem-solving: The downside of standing too close to the trees
in the forest. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 363-377.
Martel, J., McKelvie, S. J., & Standing, L. (1987). Validity of an intuitive personality scale:
Personal responsibility as a predictor of academic achievement. Educational Psychological
Measurement, 47, 1153-1163.
McGrew, K. S., & Hessler, G. L. (1995). The relationship between the WJ-R Gf-Gc cognitive
clusters and mathematics achievement across the life-span. Journal of Psychoeducational
Assessment, 13, 21-38.
Mirón, L. F., & Lauria, M. (1998). Student voice as agency: Resistance and accommodation
in inner-city schools. Anthropology in Education Quarterly, 29, 189-213.
Moreno, S. E., & Muller, C. (1999). Success and diversity: The transition through first-year
calculus in the university. American Journal of Education, 108, 30-57.
Nichols, J. D. (1996). The effects of cooperative learning on student achievement and motivation
in a high school geometry class. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 467-476.
Ogbu, J. C. (1987). Variability in minority school performance: A problem in search of an
explanation. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18, 312-334.
Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in mathe-
matical problem-solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 426-443.
Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components
of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
Plomin, R. (1999). Genetics and general cognitive ability. Nature, 402, C25-C29.
Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic moti-
vation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The
search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 373-404). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Rivera-Batiz, F. L. (1992). Quantitative literacy and the likelihood of employment among
young adults in the United States. Journal of Human Resources, 27, 313-328.
Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining
reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-761.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). When rewards compete with nature: The undermining of
intrinsic motivation and self-regulation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 13-54).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Sanders, M. G. (1998). Overcoming obstacles: Academic achievement as a response to racism
and discrimination. Journal of Negro Education, 66, 83-93.
Schiefele, U. (1999). Interest and learning from text. Science Studies Reading, 3, 257-280.
Schiefele, U., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1995). Motivation and ability as factors in mathematics
experience and achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 163-181.
Schmidt, P. (2003). Academe’s Hispanic future: The nation’s largest minority group faces big
obstacles in higher education, and colleges struggle to find the right ways to help. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, 50. Retrieved July 24, 2004, from http://chronicle.com/
weekly/v50/i14/14a00801.htm
Schoenfeld, A. (2002). Making mathematics work for all children: Issues of standards, testing
and equity. Educational Researcher, 31, 13-25.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 185

Stevens et al. / Addressing the Achievement Gap 185

Stevens, T., & Olivárez, A., Jr. (2005). Development and evaluation of the Mathematics Interest
Inventory. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 38, 141-152.
Stevens, T., Olivárez, A., Jr., Lan, W. Y., & Tallent-Runnels, M. K. (2004). Role of mathematics
self-efficacy and motivation in mathematics performance across ethnicity. Journal of
Educational Research, 97, 208-221.
Stevenson, H. W., Chen, C., & Uttal, D. H. (1990). Beliefs and achievement: A study of Black,
White, and Hispanic children. Child Development, 61, 508-523.
Stipek, D. (1992). Motivation and instruction. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calree (Eds.), Handbook
of educational psychology (pp. 85-113). New York: Macmillan Library Reference.
Stipek, D., Salmon, J. M., Givvn, K. B., Kazemi, E., Saxe, G., & MacGyvers, V. L. (1998).
The value (and convergence) of practices suggested by motivation research and promoted
by mathematics education reformers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29,
465-488.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002). The condi-
tion of education 2002 (NCES 2002-025). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2003). Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by
race, sex, age, and Hispanic origin. Retrieved January 15, 2003, from http:www.bls.gov/news.
release/empsit.t02.htm
Valas, H., & Sovik, N. (1993). Variables affecting students’ intrinsic motivation for school math-
ematics: Two empirical studies based on Deci & Ryan’s theory on motivation. Learning
and Instruction, 3, 281-298.
Wiese, M. J., Lamb, C., & Piersel, W. C. (1988). WISC-R factor scores and student self-ratings
of behavior as predictors of academic achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 25, 35-41.
Willig, A. C., Harnisch, D. L., & Hill, K. T. (1983). Sociocultural and educational correlates of
success-failure attributions and evaluation anxiety in the school setting for Black, Hispanic,
and Anglo children. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 385-410.
Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock Johnson III Tests of
Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing course
attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 845-862.

Tara Stevens received her EdD from Texas Tech University. She returned to Texas Tech as
an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Leadership after an
appointment at the University of Illinois, Springfield. Her research interests include the devel-
opment of self-perceptions and the relationship between self-perceptions and adjustment as
well as academic variables. She runs most days for the simple enjoyment of doing so and plays
the piano for entertainment. However, she is most happy when playing with her 10-month-old
daughter.

Arturo Olivárez Jr. is an associate professor at Texas Tech University. He earned his PhD
in educational psychology with a specialization in research, measurement, and statistics at
Texas A&M University. His research topics include math and reading research, psychometric
issues as they relate to minority populations assessment, mathematic self-efficacy across
student populations, educational program evaluation, and leadership issues in schools. In his
few spare hours a week, he can be found tinkering away under the hood of his old BMW and
playing with his three children. Dr. Olivárez has been an active member of AERA since 1986
and a two-time visiting scholar at the Educational Testing Service.
HJBS286103.qxd 3/27/2006 3:20 PM Page 186

186 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

Doug Hamman received his PhD from the University of Texas at Austin in educational psy-
chology. Currently, he is an assistant professor at Texas Tech University, where he teaches ado-
lescent development for undergraduate, preservice, secondary-level teachers. His research
interests include teacher possible selves and pedagogical interaction that occurs between coop-
erating and student teachers. In his spare time, he enjoys creating digital movies and trying to
play soccer.