本研究主要目的有三：（一）探討國中生學習動機歷程之波動情形。（二）檢驗期初、期中和期末動機歷程之間的關係。（三）驗證本研究根據理論文獻與實徵研究所建構的動機歷程縱貫模式與觀察資料的適配度。
　　為完成前述目的，本研究採歷程導向的觀點，以Boekaerts（2001）的評價模式為基礎，整合Kuhl（1985）的行動/狀態導向和Ames（1992）的課室結構理論，探究國中生數學科學習動機之波動歷程。本研究以台灣南部國中二年級學生為研究對象，抽取九所公私立國中13個班級共414人為研究樣本。受試學生於上學期期初接受研究者自編的「行動導向量表」、「課室結構量表」、「學習評價量表」、「情緒狀態量表」、「學習目標量表」之測量；期中接受「學習評價量表」、「情緒狀態量表」和「學習目標量表」之測量；期末則接受「學習評價量表」、「情緒狀態量表」、「學習目標量表」和「持續性動機量表」之測量。本研究所蒐集的資料以單因子重複量數變異數分析、多元迴歸分析和結構方程模式來考驗各項假設。

　　本研究的發現如下：
一、國中生動機變項在三次測量階段有差異。
（一）主觀能力和個人關連性方面，以期初施測的分數最高，其次分別為期末和期中施測的分數。
（二）在工作吸引力方面，其在期初、期中和期末施測的分數都無顯著差異
（三）就情緒狀態而言，其期初施測的分數顯著高於期中施測的分數。
（四）就抱負水準、付出的時間和投入的努力而言，以期初施測的分數最高，其次分別為期中和期末施測的分數。
二、期初動機歷程對期中動機歷程有效果，且期中動機歷程對期末動機歷程有效果。
（一）在期初動機歷程中，國中生之決定可負向預測期初學習目標，而期初主觀能力、期初工作吸引力和期初情緒狀態能正向預測期初學習目標。
（二）在期初至期中的動機歷程中，國中生期初主觀能力能正向預測期中主觀能力；期初工作吸引力和期初情緒狀態能正向預測期中工作吸引力；期初個人關連性能正向預測期中個人關連性；期初工作吸引力和期初情緒狀態能正向預測期中情緒狀態；期初學習目標和期中主觀能力可正向預測期中學習目標。
（三）在期中至期末的動機歷程中，國中生期中主觀能力能正向預測期末主觀能力；學習工作、期中工作吸引力和期中學習目標能正向預測期末工作吸引力，期中主觀能力和期中個人關連性能正向預測期末個人關連性；學習工作、期中主觀能力和期中情緒狀態能正向預測期末情緒狀態；期中學習目標、期末主觀能力和期末情緒狀態可正向預測期末學習目標。
（四）在期末的動機歷程中，期末主觀能力和期末學習目標能正向預測期末學業成就；學習工作、期末主觀能力和期末工作吸引力能正向預測期末持續性動機。
三、本研究所建構的國中生動機歷程縱貫模式模式並未違反基本模式適配度，而在整體模式適配度也都顯示理論模式具有理想的品質，應適合用來解釋國內國中生的觀察資料。
本研究根據研究結果進行討論，並提出國中教學與學習輔導之建議，以及未來研究可進行之方向。

　The purposes of this study aimed to (a) investigate the waves of junior high school students’ learning motivation; (b) examine the relationship to the motivation process among the tests at beginning, intermediate, and final; (c) assess the model fit between the empirically observed data and the motivation process, as well as the longitudinal model is proposed in this study.
　In order to achieve this goal, the concept of process orientation which is based on Boekaert’s appraisal model, Kuhl’s action/state orientation and Ames’s classroom structure theory was adopted. The research design was employed to explore the waves of motivation process of junior high school students. The participants were 414 students in 13 classes from nine junior high schools in the southern Taiwan. The instruments, such as Action State Scale, Classroom Structure Scale, Learning Appraisal Scale, Affective State Scale and Learning Goal Scale were measured at the beginning of the semester in 2004. Learning Appraisal Scale, Affective State Scale, and Learning Goal Scale were measured in the intermediate semester. Learning Appraisal Scale, Affective State Scale, Learning Goal Scale, and Continuing Motivation Scale were measured in the final of the semester. The statistical methods applied to analyze the data were one-repeated measures ANOVA, multiple regression analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM).

　The results of this study were summarized as follows:
(a) Junior high school students’ motivation variable has significant differences on three phases of measurement. First, their subjective competence and personal relevance at beginning was higher than the ones in the intermediate and final. Second, their task attraction has non-significant differences on three phases of measurement. Third, their affective state at beginning was higher than the status in the intermediate. Fourth, the aspiration level, time, and effort at beginning were higher than the ones in the intermediate and final.
(b) The motivation process at beginning has effect to the one in the intermediate, and the motivation process in the intermediate has effect to the one in the final. First, in the motivation process at beginning, junior high school students’ decisions could negatively predict the learning goals at the beginning. Contrarily, the subjective competence at the beginning, task attraction at the beginning and the affective status could predict the learning goals at the beginning. Second, the process of motivation from the beginning to the intermediate, junior high school students’ subjective competences at the beginning could predict the subjective competence in the intermediate. The task attraction at beginning and the affective status at the beginning could postively predict the task attraction in the intermediate. The personal relevance at the beginning could predict the personal relevance in the intermediate. The task attraction at the beginning and the affective status at the beginning could predict the affective status in the intermediate. The learning goals at beginning and the subjective competence in the intermediate could predict the learning goal in the intermediate. Third, the process of motivation from the intermediate to the final, junior high school students’ subjective competence in the intermediate could predict the subjective competence in the final. The learning task, the task attraction in the intermediate and the learning goal in the intermediate could predict task attraction in the final. The subjective competence in the intermediate and personal relevance in the intermediate could predict the personal relevance in the final. The learning task, subjective competence in the intermediate and affective status in the intermediate could predict affective state in the final. The learning goal in the intermediate, the subjective competence in the final and affective status could predict the learning goal in the final. Fourth, in the motivation process of the final, the subjective competence in the final and learning goal could predict their achievement in the final. The learning task, the subjective competence in the final, and the task attraction in the final and affective status in the final could predict the continuing motivation in the final.
(c) The theoretical model fitted the data well; either when overall structure model fit criteria was used.
Based upon findings in this study, suggesting the instructions for junior high schools, educational guidance and further studies are proposed.

一、中文部分
林清山和程炳林（1996）。青少年心理發展與適應：國中生學習行動控制模式的建構與驗證暨教學輔導策略實驗分案效果之研究（Ⅰ）。國科會專案研究計畫報告，NSC86-2413-H-003-010-G10。
林清山和程炳林（1998）。行動導向量表編制報告。測驗年刊，45（1），65-82。
侯玫如（2002）。（2004）。多重目標導向對國中生認知、動機、情感與學習行為之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
張春興（1999）。教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐。台北：東華。
張憲卿（2002）。大學生行動控制之研究：學習動機之機轉。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵（2003）多變量分析方法—統計軟體應用。台北：五南。
陳嘉成（1999）。成就目標、動機氣候、自我歷程與自我調整策略、持續學習動機和數學成就之關係。國立政治大學教育系博士論文。
陳麗芬（1995）。行動控制觀點的自我調節學習及相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
彭淑玲（2004）。四向度課室目標結構、個人目標導向與課業求助行為之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
程炳林（2000）。行動/狀態導向、目標層次、工作複雜度對國中生行動控制策略與工作表現之影響。教育心理學報，31（1），67-92。
程炳林（2001）。動機、目標設定、行動控制、學習策略之關係：自我調整學習歷程模式之建構及驗證。師大學報：教育類，46（1），67-92。
程炳林（2003）。四向度目標導向模式之研究。師大學報：教育類，48（1），15-40。
黃文山（1997）。教育上有關動機研究的歷史。高市文教。60，31-40頁。
楊岫穎（2003）。國中生自我設限情境及歷程因素分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
劉佩雲（1998）。兒童自我調整學習之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士班論文。
謝岱陵（2003）。國中生四向度目標導向之前因及後果變項之研究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
蘇嘉鈴（2004）。國中生行動/狀態導向、目標導向與動機調整策略之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

二、英文部分
Ames, C. (1984). Achievement attributions and self-instructions under competitive and individualistic goal structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 478-487.
Ames, C. (1992). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Student’s learning strategies and motivation process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260-267.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academic of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
Bandura, A. (1977). self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Barbara A. G., Raymond B. M., Michael C., Bryan L. D., & Kristine L. A. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagemenrt and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary educational psychology, 29, 462-482.
Beckmann, J. (1994). Volitional correlates of action versus state orientation. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality (pp. 155-166). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
Boekaerts, M. (1994). Action control: How relevant is it for classroom learning？ In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality (pp. 427-433). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe ＆ Huber.
Boekaerts, M. (1996). Personality and the psychology of learning. European Journal of Personality, 10, 377-404.
Boekaer, M.(1999).Motivated learning: Studying student situatiom transactional units. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 9, 41-55.
Boekaerts, M. (2001). Context sensitivity: Activated motivational beliefs, current concerns and emotional arousal. In S. Volet, & S. Jarvela (Eds.),Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and methodological implications (pp. 17-31). New York: Pergamon.
Boekaerts, M. (2002). The On-line Motivation Questionnaire: A self-report instrument to assess students’ context sensitivity. In S. Volet, ＆ S. Karabenick (Eds.), Motivation in Learning Contexts: Theoretical Advances and Methodological Implications. (pp. 17-31). New York: Pergamon.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. NY: Wiley.
Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 43-54.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivation, beliefs, values, and goals. Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge (Great Britain): Cambridge University Press.
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Gentry, M., Gable, R. K. & Rizza, M. G. (2002). Students' perceptions of classroom activities: Are there grade-level and gender differences? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 539-544.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2001). LISREL (Version 8.51) [Computer software]. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Krapp, A. (2002). Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: Theroretical considerations from an ontogenetic perspective. Learning and instructional, 12, 383-409.
Klinger, E. (1996). Emotional influences on cognitive processing, with implications for theories of both. In P. H. Gollwitzer, & J. A. Bargh (Eds,). The Psychology of Action. (pp. 168-192). New York: The Guilford Press.
Klinger, E., & Murphy, M. D. (1994). Action orientation and personality: Some evidence on the construct validity of the Action Control Scale. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and Personality (pp. 297-315). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
Kuhl, J. (1985). Volitional mediators of cognitive-behavior consistency: Self-regulatory process and action versus state orientation. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action Control: from Cognition Behavior (pp. 101-128). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Kuhl, J. (1987). Action control: The maintenance of motivational state. In F. Halische, & J. Kuhl (Eds.), Motivation, intention, and volition (pp. 279-291). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Kuhl, J. (1994). A theory of action and state orientations. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality (pp. 9-46). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
Kuhl, J. (1994). Action versus state orientation: Psychometric properties of the Action Control Scale（ACS-90）. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality (pp. 47-59). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
Maehr, M. & Midgley, C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A school-wide approach. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4), 399-427.
Maehr, M. (1976). Continuing motivation: An analysis of a seldom considered educational outcome. Review on Educational Research, 46(3), 443-462.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & Hau, K.T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds), Advanced structural equation modeling techniques (pp. 315-353). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 391-410.
McGregor, H. A. & Elliot, A. J. (2002). Achievement goal as predictors of achievement-relevant processes prior to task engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 381-395.
Menec, V. H. & Perry, R. P. (1995). The effect of adverse learning conditions on action-oriented and state-oriented college students. Journal of Experimental Education, 63(4), 281-300.
Pintrich, P. R. & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (2002a). Introduction to the study of motivationh. In P. R. Pintrich, & D. H. Schunk, (Eds.), Motivational in education: Theory, research, and applications(2nd ed). (pp. 89-99). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (2002b). Historical and metatheoretical perspectives on motivation. In P. R. Pintrich, & D. H. Schunk, (Eds.), Motivational in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed). (pp.23-65). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (2002c). The role of expectancy and self-efficacy beliefs. In P. R. Pintrich, & D. H. Schunk, (Eds.), Motivational in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed). (pp. 89-99). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. ()
Rubio, D. M., Berg-Weger, M., & Tebb, S. S. (2001). Using structural equation modeling to test for multidimensionality. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(4), 613-626.
Volet, S. E. (1997). Cognitive and affective variables in academic learning: The significance of direction and effort in students' goals. Learning and instruction, 7(3), 235-254.
Vermeer, H. J. Boekaerts, M. & Seggers, G. (2000) Motivational and gender differences: sixth-grade students＇mathematical problem-solving behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 308-315
Volet, S. E., & Chalmers, D. (1992). Investigation of qualitative differences in university students＇learning goals, based on an unfolding model of stage development. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 17-34
Weiner, B. (1972). Theories of motivation. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Wigfied, A. & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.