Teacher feedback is an important prerequisite for primary school students’ learning processes. Feedback is defined as an information of a reference person (e.g., parents, teachers, peers) with the aim to support students’ learning processes (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Referring to Eccles’ (2005) ‘Expectancy-Value-Theory’, teacher feedback can lead to positive or negative effects on students’ self-concepts and their intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. An individual’s self-concept represents cognitions about own strengths and weaknesses in academic and nonacademic contexts (Marsh, Xu, & Martin, 2012). Motivation is understood as a person’s intention to learn something or to perform an activity or task. Intrinsically motivated persons act for a subject itself, whereas extrinsically motivated persons act out of external stimulations (Graham & Weiner, 2012). In recent studies, correlations between primary school teachers’ feedback, students’ self-concepts and their motivation were found (Burnett, 1999; Burnett & Mandel, 2010; Chen, Thompson, Kromrey, & Chang, 2011; Cooper, 1977; Henderlong Corpus & Lepper, 2007; Morgan, 2001; Pintrich & Blumenfeld, 1985). In detail, the results of the studies show uniform promoting effects of positive teacher feedback on students’ self-concepts in primary schools (Burnett, 1999; Chen et al., 2011; Morgan, 2001; Pintrich & Blumenfeld, 1985). Until now, the relationship of primary school teachers’ negative feedback and students’ self-concepts was examined much less frequently. Additionally, the state of research proves to be inconsistent. On the one hand, Chen at al. (2011) document inhibiting effects of negative teacher feedback on primary school students’ self-concepts in their study. On the other hand, no evidence for a correlation between the two aforementioned variables was found in the study of Pintrich and Blumenfeld (1985). Furthermore, the correlation between primary school teachers’ feedback und students’ motivation was examined in various studies. The investigations of Burnett and Mandel (2010) and Henderlong Corpus and Lepper (2007) show that a high frequency of positive teacher feedback is associated with a high level of student motivation. Unfortunately, there are hardly any current studies concerning the correlation between negative teacher feedback and students’ motivation in primary schools. The existing (but comparatively dated) studies of Cooper (1977) and Morgan (2001) give empirical evidence that a high level of negative teacher feedback has negative effects on students’ motivation. In summary, focusing on the current state of research, there are only some studies that have examined correlations between teachers’ positive and negative feedback and primary school students’ self-concepts and motivation. However, there is a paucity of studies touching the question if and to what extent the correlation of teacher feedback and primary school students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is mediated by their self-concepts. This research gap is addressed in the present study. With reference to the ‘Expectancy-Value-Theory’ of Eccles (2005) and the cited empirical studies (Burnett, 1999; Burnett & Mandel, 2010; Chen et al., 2011; Cooper, 1977; Henderlong Corpus & Lepper, 2007; Morgan, 2001; Pintrich & Blumenfeld, 1985), we assume that children’s perceived positive and negative teacher feedback is in each case a significant predictor for their self-concepts (H1) and for their intrinsic motivation (H2) and extrinsic motivation (H3) in primary school science lessons. Additionally, we expect – due to a lack of existing research studies – on the basis of Eccles (2005) that the correlation between children’s perceived positive and negative teacher feedback and their intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is significantly mediated by their self-concepts (H4).

In our study, N=744 third and fourth grade primary school students (349 boys, 395 girls) from Germany were asked to fulfill questionnaires. Children’s perceived positive teacher feedback (6 items; M=2.74; SD=0.67; Min=1.00; Max=4.00; α=.89; e. g.: “How often does your teacher say these sentences to you after you have said something in a science class? – Well done.”) and their perceived negative teacher feedback (5 items; M=1.67; SD=0.59; Min=1.00; Max=4.00; α=.82; e. g.: “How often does your teacher say these sentences to you after you have said something in a science class? – That’s wrong.”) were measured on the basis of scales by Burnett (2002). 4-point Likert scales were used to collect the children’s answers (1=never, 2=rare, 3=often, 4=always). Additionally, students were asked to give information on their self-concepts (4 items; M=2.38; SD=0.89; Min=1.00; Max=4.00; α=.85; e. g.: “How do you rate yourself in science lessons? – I am one of the best students in science lessons.”). For this purpose, existing scales of Helmke (1992) were adapted. Based on scales of Stutz, Schaffner, and Schiefele (2017), children’s intrinsic motivation (5 items; M=3.36; SD=0.63; Min=1.00; Max=4.00; α=.74; e. g.: “Why do you make an effort in science lessons? – Because I want to know everything about science.“) and their extrinsic motivation (4 items; M=2.93; SD=0.81; Min=1.00; Max=4.00; α=.75; e. g.: “Why do you make an effort in science lessons? – Because I want my teacher to give me lots of praise.“) were collected. The children’s self-concepts and their intrinsic and extrinsic motivation were surveyed using 4-point Likert scales (1=disagree, 2=nearly disagree, 3=nearly agree, 4=agree). For the evaluation of our hypotheses, a structural equation model was calculated in Mplus to test whether children’s intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (endogenous variables) can be predicted by their self-concepts (mediating variable) and by their perceived positive and negative teacher feedback (exogenous variables) in primary school science lessons. Furthermore, children’s gender and their grade level formed control variables in the model.

The results of our study indicate a good fit of the empirical structural equation model to the theoretical model structure (χ2=617.859; df=280; χ2/df=2.21; CFI=.93; TLI=.92; RMSEA=0.043; pclose=1.00). Furthermore, hypotheses H1 and H2 can be verified. Differences in children’s self-concepts are significantly explained by their perceived positive (β=.51; p≤.001) and negative teacher feedback (β=-.22; p≤.001). Likewise, the perceived positive (β=.14; p≤.05) and negative teacher feedback (β=-.24; p≤.001) are significant predictors for children’s intrinsic motivation. In contrast, hypothesis H3 can only be partially accepted. Children’s extrinsic motivation in primary school science lessons is significantly predicted by their perceived negative teacher feedback (β=.23; p≤.001), but not by their perceived positive teacher feedback (β=.05; p=.43). In detail, 39 percent of the variance in children’s response behavior concerning their self-concepts can be explained by their perceived positive and negative teacher feedback. Additionally, children’s perceived positive and negative teacher feedback and their self-concepts clarify 32 percent of variance of their intrinsic motivation and 25 percent of their extrinsic motivation. Supporting hypothesis H4, the effect of the perceived positive teacher feedback on children’s intrinsic motivation is significantly mediated by their self-concepts. There is also a mediating effect of children’s self-concepts regarding the relationship between their perceived negative teacher feedback and their intrinsic motivation as well as between their perceived negative teacher feedback and their extrinsic motivation. In contrast to hypothesis H4, the correlation between children’s perceived positive teacher feedback and their extrinsic motivation is not significantly mediated by their self-concepts. In summary, the results of our study indicate that teacher feedback is of great importance for primary school students’ self-concepts and their motivation in science lessons. In future investigations, our research questions should be examined in a long-term perspective.

Burnett, P. C. (1999). Children’s self-talk and academic self-concepts. The impact of teachers’ statements. Educational Psychology in Practice, 15(3), 195–200. Burnett, P. C. (2002). Teacher feedback. retrieved from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/26833/2/26833.pdf, date of retrieval: 28th January 2021. Burnett, P. C., & Mandel, V. (2010). Praise and feedback in the primary classroom: teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 10, 145–154. Chen, Y.-H., Thompson, M. S., Kromrey, J. D., & Chang, G. H. (2011). Relations of student perceptions of teacher oral feedback with teacher expectancies and student self-concept. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79(4), 452–477. Cooper, H. M. (1977). Controlling personal rewards: Professional teachers’ differential use of feedback and the effects of feedback on the student’s motivation to perform. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69(4), 419–427. Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121). New York: Guilford. Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (2012). Motivation: Past, present, and future. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Educational psychology handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 367–397). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. Helmke, A. (1992). Selbstvertrauen und schulische Leistungen [Confidence and academic performance]. Göttingen: Hogrefe. Henderlong Corpus, J., & Lepper, M. R. (2007). The effects of person versus performance praise on children’s motivation: Gender and age as moderating factors. Educational Psychology, 27(4), 487–508. Marsh, H. W., Xu, M., & Martin, A. J. (2012). Self-concept: A synergy of theory, method, and application. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Educational psychology handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 427–458). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Morgan, C. (2001). The effects of negative managerial feedback on student motivation: Implications for gender differences in teacher-student relations. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 44(9–10), 513–535. Pintrich, P. R., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1985). Classroom experience and children’s self-perceptions of ability, effort, and conduct. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(6), 646–657. Stutz, F., Schaffner, E., & Schiefele, U. (2017). Measurement invariance and validity of a brief questionnaire on reading motivation in elementary students. Journal of Research in Reading, 40(4), 439–461.