Learning and Motivation 63 (2018) 126–132

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Learning and Motivation

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/l&m

A positive psychological intervention for failing students: Does it

T
improve academic achievement and motivation? A pilot study
⁎
Anna Muroa, , Joaquim Solerb, Àusias Cebollac, Ramon Cladellasd
a
Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
b
Psychiatry Service, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
c
Department of Basic and Clinical Psychology, Universitat Jaume I, Valencia, Spain
d
Department of Basic and Educational Psychology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain

A R T IC LE I N F O ABS TRA CT

Keywords: In the last decade, positive psychology interventions (PPI) applied in both clinical and non-
Positive psychology clinical samples have demonstrated a proven efficacy to increase positive emotions, well-being,
Academic achievement and life satisfaction. However, few studies have used objective indicators of performance to
School motivation explored the efficacy of PPI to increase students' motivation to study or to improve performance.
Failing students
Therefore, we developed and applied a PPI in a sample of high-school students with poor aca-
demic achievement. A pre-post study design including both an interventional and a control group
was developed to compare the two groups in terms of average grades and number of failed
subjects. Average grades increased significantly in both groups (repeated-measures ANOVA), but
this increase was higher in the PPI group. Based on regression analyses, the two factors that
explained 40% of the motivation to continue studying were allocation to the PPI group and the
overall grade average post-intervention. These findings suggest that PPIs are effective in in-
creasing motivation to study and in enhancing the academic performance of poor performing
high school students.

1. Introduction

In recent years, several studies have shown that the Response to Intervention (RtI) approach is an effective preventive inter-
vention for improving education for students in general, particularly for students at risk of experiencing learning difficulties
(Jiménez, 2017; Salmela-Aro, Savolainen & Halipainen, 2009b; Tilly, 2006). RtI is conceptualized as a three-tiered service delivery
approach with universal, targeted, and intensive interventions (Sailor, 2009), emphasizing the need for early identification and
treatment of at-risk students. RtI offers functional behavioural assessment that involves identifying the variables that support con-
tinued problem behaviour and then designing interventions tailored to addressing those variables (Kearney & Graczyk, 2014). This
model is compatible with other multi-tier approaches such as those used in mental health delivery systems (Sailor, Doolittle, Bradley,
& Danielson, 2009) as well as the positive behavioural interventions and support framework, which has also demonstrated its
effectiveness among children and youth with emotional and behavioural disorders (Lewis, Jones, Horner, & Sugai, 2010). Recently,
several studies have also reported the use of Positive Psychology Interventions (PPI) as an effective multi-tier approach for preventive
and motivational purposes in educational settings. The results of those studies indicate that PPI help to improve academic perfor-
mance, motivation, and attitudes toward school (Dahlin, Fjell, & Runeson, 2010; Feldman & Dreher, 2012; Muscott, Mann, & LeBrun,
2008; Proctor et al., 2011; Seligman, 2006; Seligman, Ernst, Gillham, Reivich, & Linkins, 2009; Sheldon, 2002, 2006). The concept of

⁎
Corresponding author: Department of Health and Clinical Psychology, Edifici B, Campus de la UAB, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193, Bellaterra, Spain.
E-mail address: anna.muro@uab.cat (A. Muro).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2018.04.002
Received 11 January 2018; Received in revised form 26 April 2018; Accepted 26 April 2018
Available online 11 June 2018
0023-9690/ © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
A. Muro et al. Learning and Motivation 63 (2018) 126–132

Positive Education (Seligman et al., 2009) is the application of PPI in educational settings and it is defined as education for both
traditional skills and for happiness. It aims to develop student’s and teacher’s cognitive, emotional and behavioural strengths to
increase motivation for teaching and learning and to improve academic outcomes and school climate. This approach is in line with
theoretical models of motivated learning (Schunk, 2012) that suggest that motivation is intimately linked with learning and that they
can affect one another. Students’ motivation influence what and how they learn. In turn, as students learn and perceive that they are
becoming more skillful, they are motivated to continue learning and their academic outcomes improve. Positive Psychology is also in
line with more recent contemporary models of achievement motivation (Eccles et al., 2005; Wigfield, Byrnes, & Eccles, 2006;
Wigfield, Tonks, & Klauda, 2009), which moved the field of motivation to a more complex cognitive model. An important con-
tribution was emphasizing both expectancies for success and perceived value of engaging in the task as factors affecting achievement.
Contemporary models of achievement motivation reflect this subjective emphasis and, in addition, have incorporated other cognitive
variables such as goals and perceptions of capabilities. These cognitive variables are a key factor for Positive Education, oriented to
develop attitudes that facilitate students’ the experience of motivated learning by the positive reinforcement of self-esteem, self-
concept and self-confidence (Seligman et al., 2009). Reinforcement is also the key element in most behaviour change programs such
as Applied Behaviour Analysis (Dardig et al., 2005), concerned with applying techniques based upon the principles of learning to
change behaviour of educational significance and in which student’s behaviour is strengthened towards an enhancement of academic
performance (Flora, 2004; Michael, 2004).
Academic performance has been largely studied in educational psychology since poor academic achievement has been identified
as the most significant predictor of educational failure and it might also be an indicator of psychosocial problems or learning
disorders (McLeod, Uemura, & Rohrman, 2012; Battin-Pearson et al., 2000; Archambault, Janosz, Morizot, & Pagani, 2009; Fall &
Roberts, 2012; Fortin, Marcotte, Potvin, Royer, & Joly, 2006; Janosz, Le Blanc, Boulerice, & Tremblay, 2000). Failing students are a
central concern for educators, students and their families since underperformance might decrease the motivation to study and thus
the likelihood of successful inclusion in the work structures of society (Goetz, Frenzel, Stoeger, & Hall, 2010; Tuominen-Soini,
Salmela-Aro, & Niemivirta, 2012). In addition, poor academic performance has been linked to academic burn out (Kiuru, Aunola,
Nurmi, Leskinen, & Salmela-Aro, 2008), depression (Bakker et al., 2000, Salmela-Aro, Savolainen & Holopainen, 2009b; Salmela-Aro,
Kiuru, Leskinen, & Nurmi, 2009a), and motivational problems (Tuominen-Soini et al., 2012). Moreover, research has shown that
students who perform poor at school begin substance use at an earlier age (Fergusson, Horwood, & Swain-Campbell, 2003; Reddy,
Resnicow, Omardien, & Kambaran, 2007; Smart & Ogborne, 2000), show more aggressive behaviours, have greater delinquency
rates, and present higher dropout rates (McLeod et al., 2012). As a consequence, such students are more likely to be unemployed, to
have lower income levels, and to experience lower levels of life satisfaction (Bynner & Parsons, 2002; Geary, 2011; Janosz et al.,
2000; Lamb, 2011; Levin, Belfield, Muenning, & Rouse, 2007; Rumberger & Lamb, 2003; Sum, Khatiwada, McLaughlin, & Palma,
2009).
For all these reasons, prevention programs are important, not only to improve academic performance, but also to reduce the
behavioural risks associated with underperformance or absenteeism (Campbell & Ramey, 1994; Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor,
& Schellinger, 2011; Kearney & Graczyk, 2014; Lipsey & Wilson, 1993). Conventional interventions to increase academic perfor-
mance consist primarily of private tutoring (Berberoğlu & Tansel, 2014; Jheng, 2015). Although some studies have found that private
tutoring enhances academic performance (Ireson & Rushforth, 2005), other studies have found that tutoring has no positive effect on
other measures of achievement, suggesting that this approach may only have a significant and positive effect on low achieving urban
students and in schools with certain educational quality (Kenny & Faunce, 2004; Smyth, 2008; Zhang, 2013). Private tutoring consists
primarily of teaching and explaining school-related facts, repetition of school content, helping with homework and exam preparation,
providing feedback and suggestions about how to study, and asking questions or choosing tasks (Lambert & Spinath, 2014; Wittwer,
2008). By contrast, this tutoring does not address important psychological factors such as motivation, negative emotions, self-esteem,
or problem solving. Therefore, not all students will benefit from private tutoring because some students need more help in improving
or developing cognitive-behavioral and/or emotional skills, which requires specialized training that cannot be provided by con-
ventional tutoring (Lambert & Spinath, 2014; Mercer & Miller, 1992).
Positive psychology is defined as the scientific study of positive human functioning and well-being on multiple levels that include
the personal, social, cultural, and global dimensions of life (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). During the last decade, the value of
this theoretical approach has been empirically reported in various interventional and prevention programs applied in both clinical
and non-clinical settings (Bolier et al., 2013; Ruini et al., 2009; Vázquez & Hervás, 2008). Applied Positive Psychology include a set of
techniques oriented to increase positive emotions, to establish and achieve personal goals and a meaningful life, and to perceive and
identify personal strengths, which contribute to the development of psychological well-being and life satisfaction.
PPI have demonstrated their efficacy in high-school and college students, providing empirical evidence of the significant impact of
PPI in reducing disruptive behaviours, depression and anxiety symptoms, and in increasing school motivation, positive emotions, and
well-being (Bradshaw, Mitchell, & Leaf, 2010; Ruini et al., 2009; Seligman et al., 2009). Previous studies analysing the effects of
school-based PPI have yielded promising results, not only in terms of student wellbeing but also in improving academic outcomes,
school climate, and teacher well-being (Shankland & Rosset, 2017; Shoshani & Steinmetz, 2014).
Studies conducted to date to evaluate the efficacy of PPI in academic settings have mainly used self-reported behavioural
measures of performance; by contrast, the efficacy of PPI in terms of its impact on objective outcomes of academic performance has
received scant attention (Knoop, 2011; Ruini et al., 2009). Furthermore, PPI have been rarely implemented and no empirical data has
been reported using objective indicators of performance in Spanish educational settings (Arguís, Bolsas, Hernández, & Salvador,
2012; Jiménez, 2017). For these reasons, replication of previous research using objective outcome measures of academic achievement
in samples that include participants from other cultural backgrounds is needed to confirm the benefits of PPI (Bolier et al., 2013;

127
A. Muro et al. Learning and Motivation 63 (2018) 126–132

Knoop, 2011). To this end, the present exploratory study was designed to analyse the impact of PPI on academic performance by
using objective academic indicators in a sample of high-school students in Spain with low academic performance.

2. Method

2.1. Participants and procedure

Participants with low academic performance (LAP) were recruited from a private tutoring centre in the city of Sabadell
(Barcelona) during a five-year period from 2010 to 2015. The study was repeated every year in different groups of students. This
private centre specializes in providing academic support for LAP students who need extra tutoring and support classes (ETSC) in
specific disciplines such as maths, language, physics, etc. The ETSCs are offered after school (i.e., outside of the compulsory school
schedules) in one-on-one or small groups to improve skills and knowledge in the specific areas and disciplines requiring improve-
ment. The PPIs are offered mainly to improve motivation, self-esteem, and/or academic attitudes and behaviour. Students and their
parents voluntarily chose to receive either ETSC alone or ETSC combined with PPI. Since the ETSCs were offered at a private school,
the students’ families were responsible for financing these classes.
The final sample consisted of 164 high school students (118 boys, 46 girls), all of whom were receiving ETSCs related to one or
more discipline. The participants ranged in age from 12 to 18 years, with a mean age of 15 years.
Of the 164 students, 92 elected to receive ETSC alone (control group) while the other 72 students received ETSC plus PPI
(intervention group).
The duration of the ETSC classes was one hour per class and participants attended from 2 to 5 h of classes per week, which were
taught by a specialized support-teacher. The maximum group size was five pupils per class. Each class was taught by a teacher/tutor
with specialized training in the subject.
In the intervention group (ETSC + PPI), the PPI was based on previously-developed positive intervention programs (Arguís et al.,
2012; Muro, 2016; Vázquez & Hervás, 2008), designed to help students improve their school performance and motivation. The PPI
program included a total of 8–12 one-hour sessions delivered weekly or biweekly based on the following exercises:

• Phase 1 (First two sessions), Goal training exercises: These exercises were created for students to develop a list of goals during the
PPI. Establishing goals helps students to improve their academic achievement and overall performance at school by regulating
their academic experience as they pursue these goals. Establishing personal goals has been recognized as an important route to
personal growth and achievement (Hervás, 2008; Sheldon, Kasser, Smith, & Share, 2002) since goals represent the person’s
energized initiatives to achieve positive self-change, enhanced meaning and purpose in life (Ryff & Singer, 1998).
• Phase 2 (middle sessions), PPI activities. The aim of the PPI exercises is to increase psychological well-being through intentional
activities that cultivate positive feelings, behaviours, or cognitions about students’ self-concept and attitudes about their academic
experience. These activities include the following:
i
i Writing gratitude letters, counting blessings, practicing positive thinking, replaying positive academic experiences (e.g., Fordyce,
1977; Hervás, 2008; Lyubomirsky, Dickerhoof, Boehm, & Sheldon, 2008; Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005).
ii Identification and development of personal strengths to develop a better self-concept and sense of self-efficacy (Seligman et al.,
2005)
iii Writing about the best possible selves in the present and in the future (Hervás, 2008; King, 2001; Sheldon, 2006).
• Phase 3 (final two sessions): Overall self-evaluation of the intervention, motivational levels, progress made, achievements, and
openness to new academic goals or personal expectations. Writing exercises designed to encourage the students to think about
themselves and their own life are emphasized in these final sessions.

The university Ethics Committee and the management team of the private school approved the study protocol.

2.2. Measurement

Baseline measures of academic performance were: 1) current overall grade average, and 2) number of failed subjects. These
measures were obtained prior to enrolment in the study and after completion of the study. To assess motivation, the following
question was asked at the end of the intervention: Do you feel motivated to keep on studying? Participants who answered “yes’’ were
categorised as motivated and those who answered “no’’ were categorised as non-motivated.

2.3. Statistical analyses

Descriptive statistics were obtained for age, average grades, and number of failed subjects by gender and intervention group (PPI
vs. control). Analyses of variance (ANOVA) were performed to contrast age, pre-intervention average grades, and pre-intervention
number of failed subjects by gender and intervention group. A General Linear Model (GLM) of repeated measures was performed to
contrast pre-post results in average grades and number of failed subjects by intervention group controlled for gender. Partial eta-
square (η2) and observed power were also calculated.
Finally, a logistic regression analyses was performed to determine the best predictors (type of intervention, gender, pre- and post-

128
A. Muro et al. Learning and Motivation 63 (2018) 126–132

Table 1
Means and standard deviations for age, average grades, and number of failed subjects by intervention group and by gender.
Age Average grade Failed subjects

Intervention group
PPI (56%) 15.08 (1.56) 4.10 (.91) 4.50 (1.44)
Control (44%) 14.86 (1.59) 4.30 (.55) 4.28 (1.18)
Gender
Boys (62%) 15.05 (1.58) 4.08 (.80) 4.59 (1.36)
Girls (38%) 14.81 (1.56) 4.43 (.57) 4.03 (1.13)
Total sample 14.96 (1.58) 4.21 (.73) 4.38 (1.30)
(n = 164)

Notes: PPI = Positive Psychological Intervention.

intervention average grades and number of failed subjects) of the motivation to study (yes-no). Statistical tests were bilateral with
type I error set at 5%. The statistical package SPSS 22 was used to perform all the calculations.

3. Results

Descriptive statistics for age, average grades, and number of failed subjects before the interventions are reported in Table 1. The
first ANOVA, which controlled for gender, showed no age differences (F = .820; p = .367) but there were differences in pre-inter-
vention average grades (F = 9.232; p = .003) and in the number of failed subjects before the intervention (F = 7.520; p = .007). A
second ANOVA controlling for intervention groups showed no differences in age (F = .820; p = .367), average grades (F = 2.83;
p = .094), or in the number of pre-intervention failed subjects (F = 1.13; p = .290).
The GLM ANOVA showed a significant increase in average grades (F (1,161) = 244,967; p < .000; η2 = .603; observed
power = 1.000) and a significant decrease in the number of failed subjects (F (1,161) = 124,610; p < .000; η2 = .436; observed
power = 1.000) after both interventions (Fig. 1). In terms of post-intervention motivation, 64.6% of participants responded "yes" to
the question "Do you feel motivated to keep on studying?" and were thus considered motivated while 35.4% were considered non-
motivated.
However, the effect size was significantly higher for the PPI group in both average grades (F(1,161) = 12,58; p < .001; η2 = .072;
observed power = .941) and in the number of failed subjects (F (1,161) = 9,08; p < .05, η2 = .053; observed power = .850). No
significant interaction was seen between gender and the intervention groups. Regression analyses showed that the best predictors of
motivation were post-intervention grades and allocation to the PPI arm, explaining together 43% of the motivation to keep on
studying (Table 2).

4. Discussion

4.1. Conclusions

The present study explored, for the first time, the impact of PPIs on school motivation and academic performance using objective
indicators of performance in a sample of Spanish high-school students. Our findings show that, compared to a control group of
students who received only private tutoring, students with poor academic performance achieved a greater increase in their average
grades and motivation after receiving a PPI. These results were independent of gender differences, thus indicating that PPI has the
same positive effect for both girls and boys.
Based on these findings, we conclude that PPI might help underperforming students to improve academically and thus decrease

Fig. 1. Pre-post differences in average grade and number of failed subjects by intervention groups.

129
A. Muro et al. Learning and Motivation 63 (2018) 126–132

Table 2
Results of multiple regression analyses of pre-post average grades and number of failed subjects in relation to motivation to study.
B Wald Sig Exp(B) R2

Motivation to study Post-intervention average grades 2.43 25.32 0.000 11.337

Intervention 1.99 14.02 0.000 7.346 0.428

the likelihood of future educational failure (Archambault et al., 2009; Battin-Pearson et al., 2000; Fall & Roberts, 2012; Fortin et al.,
2006; McLeod et al., 2012; Janosz et al., 2000). Our findings are in line with previous reports suggesting that students who receive
PPI are likely to have a lower probability of developing future behavioural and emotional problems related to academic under-
performance (Bakker et al., 2000; Fergusson et al., 2003; Kiuru et al., 2008; McLeod et al., 2012; Salmela-Aro et al., 2009b, Salmela-
Aro et al., 2009a).
Consistent with previous studies (Campbell & Ramey, 1994; Durlak et al., 2011; Lipsey & Wilson, 1993), our results indicate that
PPI combined with private tutoring promotes a greater improvement in academic performance and has a higher impact than private
tutoring alone (Berberoğlu & Tansel, 2014). Accordingly, although private tutoring has been shown to enhance academic perfor-
mance in urban students (Ireson & Rushforth, 2005; Kenny & Faunce, 2004; Smyth, 2008; Zhang, 2013), our results suggest that a
combined approach that includes PPI would have an even greater impact, probably because PPIs focus on developing psychological
factors such as positive emotions, personal strengths, self-esteem, and intrinsic motivation, none of which are directly developed by
the conventional approach of private tutoring (Lambert & Spinath, 2014; Mercer & Miller, 1992). Therefore, PPI could also be
considered a multi-tier approach to learning (Sailor et al., 2009) for those students with emotional and behavioral disorders and at-
risk for educational failure. PPI could answer to the educational challenge of early treatment of those students who need psycho-
logical suport and not just extra-tutoring classes (Lewis et al., 2010; Seligman et al., 2009). Also in line with theoretical models of
motivated learning (Schunk, 2012) and with contemporary models of achievement motivation (Eccles et al., 2005; Wigfield et al.,
2006, 2009), the present results suggest that students’ motivation and learning process are influenced by a set of complex cognitive
factors that can be modified. Both student’s motivation and learning process can also be improved not just by the expectancies of
success or the value of engaging in the task, but also by the identification and reinforcement of personal strengths, the cognitive
control of positive emotions or the active seeking of a meaningful purpose of academic experience (Seligman et al., 2009). Ac-
cordingly, Positive Interventions might be regarded as a systematic procedure of cognitive reinforcement for managing school
performance, and thus, as an educational intervention that includes the basic principles of Applied Behaviour Analysis (Dardig et al.,
2005; Kerr & Nelson, 2010), by which student’s behaviour is strengthened towards academic achievement (Flora, 2004; Michael,
2004; Seligman et al., 2009).
The present results are also in line with the reported outcomes of the pioneering PPI interventions performed in the United States
(Bradshaw et al., 2010; Dahlin et al., 2010; Feldman & Dreher, 2012; Muscott et al., 2008; Proctor et al., 2011; Seligman, 2006;
Seligman et al., 2009; Sheldon, 2002, 2006; Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2006). Consequently, our results provide cross-cultural evidence
of the significant impact of PPIs on students’ academic performance but—importantly—the present results were obtained using
objective outcome measures of achievement (Bolier et al., 2013). The increase in average grades, the decrease in the number of failed
subjects, and the significant increase in school motivation in the students who received the PPI shows that these kinds of psycho-
logical interventions and prevention programs could be successfully implemented in educational settings to improve students’ overall
performance, thereby reducing academic failure rates, depression and anxiety symptoms and the negative long-term consequences
thereof (Seligman et al., 2009).

4.2. Limitations and future directions

The present study has several limitations. First, it was a cross-sectional study. Also, we did not evaluate the impact of PPI alone
(i.e., without private tutoring). In addition, the study included only students with poor academic performance who wanted to
improve their grades, since the sample was recruited from a private tutoring centre where, presumably, the students were motivated.
Accordingly, future studies should include a longitudinal design to test the long-term efficacy of PPI and such studies should include
both average students and underperformers not enrolled in private tutoring classes in order to improve the generalizability of the
results. Future studies should also use more valid and reliable measures of motivation (Hietajärvi, Tuominen-Soini, Hakkarainen,
Salmela-Aro, & Lonka, 2015), since the present study assessed motivation dichotomically by asking students directly about how
motivated they felt. Furthermore, it would be desirable to include a wider age range of students at different grade levels to determine
whether the results obtained in the present sample of high school students are applicable at other grade levels. Ideally, future studies
should have a randomized controlled study design. Although we used a control group, students were not randomly allocated to the
groups. Given the limitations described here, this study should be regarded as a pilot or exploratory study. Clearly, more tightly
controlled studies are necessary to reach more definitive conclusions regarding the efficacy of PPI on academic achievement.

4.3. Implications

This study has several significant implications, primarily that the application of PPIs could have a large, positive impact on
student performance and motivation in educational settings. Consistent with previous studies conducted in other cultures (Bolier

130
A. Muro et al. Learning and Motivation 63 (2018) 126–132

et al., 2013; Knoop, 2011; Ruini et al., 2009), the findings presented here suggest that implementation of this approach in the schools
might improve not only academic performance, but also the overall well-being of all the members (students, teachers, adminis-
trators). For this reason, it could be considered as part of a multi-tier approach to learning that should be included in the pedagogical
horizons of future education (Knoop, 2011). Therefore, PPI should be regarded as a useful pedagogical tool to potentiate students’
academic performance and motivation, and for academic strategies that seek to facilitate students’ motivation and well-being.

References

Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Morizot, J., & Pagani, L. (2009). Adolescent behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement in school: Relationship to drop-out. Journal of
School Health, 79(9), 408–415.
Arguís, R., Bolsas, A. P., Hernández, S., & Salvador, M. M. (2012). Programa aulas felices: Psicología positiva aplicada a la educación. [Happy schools program: Positive
psychology applied in education]. Recuperado deZaragoza: equipo SATI. http://catedu.es/psicologiapositiva/index.htm.
Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Demerouti, E., Janssen, P. P. M., Van der Hulst, R., & Brouwer, J. (2000). Using equity theory to examine the difference between
burnout and depression. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 13(3), 247–268.
Battin-Pearson, S., Newcomb, M. D., Abbott, R. D., Hill, K. G., Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (2000). Predictors of early high school dropout: A test of five teories.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 568–582.
Berberoğlu, G., & Tansel, A. (2014). Does private tutoring increase students’ academic performance? Evidence from Turkey. International Review of Education, 60(5),
683–701.
Bolier, L., Haverman, M., Westerhof, G. J., Riper, H., Smit, F., & Bohlmeijer, E. (2013). Positive psychology interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled
studies. BMC Public Health, 13(Article 19), http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-119.
Bradshaw, C., Mitchell, M., & Leaf, P. (2010). Examining the effects of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a
randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133–148.
Bynner, J., & Parsons, S. (2002). Social exclusion and the transition from school to work: The case of young people not in education, employment or training (NEET).
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60(2), 289–309.
Campbell, F. A., & Ramey, C. T. (1994). Effects of early intervention on intellectual and academic achievement: A follow-up study of children from low-income
families. Child Development, 65(2), 684–698.
Dahlin, M., Fjell, J., & Runeson, B. (2010). Factors at medical school and work related to exhaustion among physicians in their first postgraduate year. Nordic Journal of
Psychiatry, 64(6), 402–408.
Dardig, J. C., Heward, W. L., Heron, T. E., Nancy, A. N., Peterson, S., Diane, M. S., ... Susan, B. H. (2005). Focus on behavior analysis in education: Achievements,
challenges, and opportunities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-
analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432.
Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Handbook of competence and motivation105–121.
Fall, A. M., & Roberts, G. (2012). High school dropouts: Interactions between social context, self-perceptions, school engagement, and student drop-out. Journal of
Adolescence, 35, 787–798.
Feldman, D. B., & Dreher, D. E. (2012). Can hope be changed in 90 minutes? Testing the efficacy of a single-sessions goal-pursuit intervention for college students.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 13, 745–759.
Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., & Swain-Campbell, N. R. (2003). Cannabis dependence and psychotic symptoms in Young people. Psychological Medicine, 33(1),
15–21.
Flora, S. R. (2004). The power of reinforcement. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Fordyce, M. W. (1977). Development of a program to increase personal happiness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24(6), 511.
Fortin, L., Marcotte, D., Potvin, P., Royer, E., & Joly, J. (2006). Typology of students at risk of dropping out of school: Description by personal, family and school
factors. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21(4), 363–383.
Geary, D. C. (2011). Cognitive predictors of achievement growth in mathematics: A 5-year longitudinal. Developmental Psychology, 47(69), 1539–1552.
Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Stoeger, H., & Hall, N. C. (2010). Antecedents of everyday positive emotions: An experience sampling analysis. Motivation and Emotion, 34(1),
49–62.
Hervás, G. (2008). Aplicaciones clínicas de la Psicología Positiva. [Clinical applications of positive psychology]. April 8Seminar Presented at the Masters Degree of Family
Therapy and Systemic Interventions of the Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca.
Hietajärvi, L., Tuominen-Soini, H., Hakkarainen, K., Salmela-Aro, K., & Lonka, K. (2015). Is student motivation related to socio-digital participation? A person-oriented
approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 1156–1167.
Ireson, J., & Rushforth, K. (2005). Mapping and evaluating shadow education. ESRC research project RES-000-23-0117. London: Institute of Education, University of
London.
Janosz, M., Le Blanc, M., Boulerice, B., & Tremblay, R. E. (2000). Predicting different types of school drop-outs: A typological approach with two longitudinal samples.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 171–190.
Jheng, Y. J. (2015). The influence of private tutoring on middle-class students’ use of in-class time in formal schools in Taiwan. International Journal of Educational
Development, 40, 1–8.
Jiménez, J. E. (2017). Implementation of response to intervention model in the Canary Islands. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 43, 47–50.
Kearney, C. A., & Graczyk, P. (2014). A response to intervention model to promote school attendance and decrease school absenteeism. Child & Youth Care Forum,
1(43), 1–25.
Kenny, D. T., & Faunce, G. (2004). Effects of academic coaching on elementary and secondary school students. The Journal of Educational Research, 98, 115–126.
Kerr, M. M., & Nelson, C. M. (2010). Strategies for addressing behavior problems in the classroom. Boston, MA: Pearson.
King, L. A. (2001). The health benefits of writing about life goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 798–807.
Kiuru, N., Aunola, K., Nurmi, J. E., Leskinen, E., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2008). Peer group influence and selection in adolescents’ school burnout: A longitudinal study.
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 54(1), 23–55.
Knoop, H. H. (2011). Education in 2025: How positive psychology can revitalize education. Applied Positive Psychology: Improving Everyday Life, Health, Schools, Work,
and Society, 97–116.
Lamb, S. (2011). Pathways to school completion: An international comparison. In S. Lamb, E. Markussen, R. Teese, J. Polesel, & N. Sandberg (Eds.). School dropout and
completion: International comparative studies in theory and policy (pp. 21–73). London: Springer.
Lambert, K., & Spinath, B. (2014). Do we need a special intervention program for children with mathematical learning disabilities or is private tutoring sufficient?
Journal for Educational Research Online, 6(1), 68–93.
Levin, H., Belfield, C., Muenning, P., & Rouse, C. (2007). The costs and benefits of an excellent education for all of America’s children. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Lewis, T. J., Jones, S. E., Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (2010). School-wide positive behavior support and students with emotional/behavioral disorders: Implications for
prevention, identification and intervention. Exceptionality, 18(2), 82–93.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist,
48, 1181–1209.
Lyubomirsky, S., Dickerhoof, R., Boehm, J. K., & Sheldon, K. M. (2008). How and why do positive activities work to boost well-being? An experimental longitudinal

131
A. Muro et al. Learning and Motivation 63 (2018) 126–132

investigation of regularly practicing optimism and gratitude. Manuscript Under Review, 11, 65–76.
McLeod, J. D., Uemura, R., & Rohrman, S. (2012). Adolescent mental health, behavior problems, and academic achievement. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 53,
482–497. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022146512462888.
Mercer, C. D., & Miller, S. P. (1992). Teaching students with learning problems in math to acquire, understand, and apply basic math facts. Remedial and Special
Education, 13(3), 19–61.
Michael, J. (2004). Concepts and principles of behavior analysis. Kalamazoo, MI: Society for the Advancement of Behavior Analysis.
Muro, A. (2016). Eficacia de una intervención psicológica positiva en alumnos de secundaria en riesgo de fracaso escolar [Efficacy of a positive psychological
intervention in high school underperformers] Barcelona, Spain. Poster Presented at the II International Congress of Clinical and Health Psychology on Children and
Adolescents.
Muscott, H., Mann, E., & LeBrun, M. (2008). Positive behavioral interventions and supports in New Hampshire: Effects of large-scale implementation of schoolwide
positive behavior support on student discipline and academic achievement. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(3), 190–205.
Proctor, C., Tsukayama, E., Wood, A. M., Maltby, J., Eades, J. F., & Linley, P. A. (2011). Strenghts gym: The impact of a character strengths-based intervention on the
life satisfaction and well-being of adolescents. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(5), 377–388.
Reddy, P., Resnicow, K., Omardien, R., & Kambaran, N. (2007). Prevalence and correlates of substance use among high school students in south Africa and the United
States. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 1859–1864.
Ruini, C., Ottolini, F., Tomba, E., Belaise, C., Albieri, E., Visani, D., ... Fava, G. A. (2009). School intervention for promoting psychological well-being in adolescence.
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 40(4), 522–532.
Rumberger, R. W., & Lamb, S. P. (2003). The early employment and further education experiences of high school dropouts: A comparative study of the United States
and Australia. Economics of Education Review, 22, 353–366.
Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (1998). The contours of positive human health. Psychological Inquiry, 9(1), 1–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0901_1.
Sailor, W. (2009). Making RTI work: How smart schools are reforming education through schoolwide response-to-intervention. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sailor, W., Doolittle, J., Bradley, R., & Danielson, L. (2009). Response to intervention and positive behavior support. In W. Sailor, G. Dunlap, G. Sugai, & R. Horner
(Eds.). Handbook of positive behavior support (pp. 729–753). New York: Springer.
Salmela-Aro, K., Kiuru, N., Leskinen, E., & Nurmi, J. E. (2009a). School burnout inventory (SBI). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25, 48–57.
Salmela-Aro, K., Savolainen, H., & Holopainen, L. (2009b). Depressive symptoms and school burnout during adolescence: evidence from two cross-lagged longitudinal
studies. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(10), 1316–1327.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Boston: Pearson.
Seligman, M. (2006). Alterworld: Breaking the 65 percent barrier. In En M. Csikszentmihalyi e, & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.). A life worth living: Contributions to positive
psychology (pp. 230–236). New York: Oxford University Press.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
Seligman, M. E., Ernst, R. M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K., & Linkins, M. (2009). Positive education: Positive psychology and classroom interventions. Oxford Review of
Education, 35(3), 293–311.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60,
410–421.
Shankland, R., & Rosset, E. (2017). Review of brief school-based positive psychological interventions: A taster for teachers and educators. Educational Psychology
Review, 29(2), 363–392.
Sheldon, K. M. (2002). The self-concordance model of healthy goal-striving: When personal goals correctly represent the person. In E. L. Deci, & R. M. Ryan (Eds.).
Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 65–86). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Sheldon, K. M. (2006). Getting older, getting better? Recent psychological evidence. In M. Csikszentmihalyi, & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.). A life worth living:
Contributions to positive psychology (pp. 215–229). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sheldon, K. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. The
Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 73–82.
Sheldon, K. M., Kasser, T., Smith, K., & Share, T. (2002). Personal goals and psychological growth: Testing an intervention to enhance goal-attainment and personality
integration. Journal of Personality, 70, 5–31.
Shoshani, A., & Steinmetz, S. (2014). Positive psychology at school: A school-based intervention to promote adolescents’ mental health and well-being. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 15(6), 1289–1311.
Smart, R. G., & Ogborne, A. C. (2000). Drug use and drinking among students in 36 countries. Addictive Behaviors, 25(3), 455–460.
Smyth, J. (2008). The more, the better? Intensity of involvement in private tuition and examination performance. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14, 465–476.
Sum, A., Khatiwada, I., McLaughlin, J., & Palma, S. (2009). The consequences of dropping out of high school. Boston, MA: Center for Labor Market Studies.
Tilly, W. D., III (2006). What Is It? Why Do It? Is It Worth It? The Special Edge, 19(2).
Tuominen-Soini, H., Salmela-Aro, K., & Niemivirta, M. (2012). Achievement goal orientations and acadèmic well-being across the transition to upper secondary
education. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(3), 290–305.
Vázquez, C., & Hervás, C. (2008). Psicología Positiva Aplicada [Applied positive psychology]. Bilbao: Desclee de Brower.
Wigfield, A., Byrnes, J. P., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Development during early and middle adolescence. Handbook of educational psychology, 2, 87–113.
Wigfield, A., Tonks, S., & Klauda, S. L. (2009). Expectancy-value theory. Handbook of motivation at school55–75.
Wittwer, J. (2008). What influences the agreement among student ratings of science instruction? Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft (Sonderheft 10), 205–220.
Zhang, Y. (2013). Does private tutoring improve students’ national college entrance exam performance?—A case study from Jinan, China. Economics of Education
Review, 32, 1–28.

132