Students’ Motivation for Classroom Music: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

Music learning can provide students with significant emotional and educational benefits, including stress relief, increased confidence, self-expression, brain development, enhanced attention, and perseverance. Despite these advantages, many students perceive music lessons as less important and tend to pay less attention in music classrooms. Consequently, motivation plays a crucial role for both teachers and students in facilitating an effective teaching and learning process in music education. Although motivation is generally understood as a student’s desire to engage in the learning process, it remains a complex concept that researchers and educators continue to explore across various educational contexts. This study aimed to review students’ motivation for classroom music by analyzing research from different studies in music education. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 27 studies were reviewed and included. The findings identified four theoretical constructs related to motivation in classroom music: expectancy–value theory, self-determination theory, mastery motivation, and achievement goal theory. Among these, the first two were most commonly discussed across the reviewed studies. All the reviewed studies employed self-reported questionnaires as their primary assessment tools. Most studies indicated that girls demonstrated higher motivation levels than boys in music classrooms. Additionally, the findings emphasized that teachers’ instructional strategies are critical for enhancing students’ motivation. This study contributes to the field of music education by highlighting the pivotal role of teacher strategies in fostering motivation and by providing a comprehensive review of motivational theories, assessment tools, and gender-related motivational differences in music education.

1. Introduction

Motivation is a crucial factor in achieving high proficiency in any skill or activity, as it directly affects the intensity of the effort invested in pursuing and mastering that skill (Comeau et al., 2019). In music education, motivation plays a vital role, influencing students’ achievement, performance, well-being, and their intentions to continue participating in music learning (Evans & Liu, 2019). Consequently, motivating music students is one of the most important responsibilities for music teachers. To support students in actively engaging with music lessons and developing essential skills, teachers must effectively apply motivational strategies to promote students’ musical achievements (Asmus, 2021). The motivational climate of the music classroom, shaped by both the environment and the teacher’s behavior, significantly impacts students’ motivation for music (Freer & Evans, 2019).

Motivation is a complex and multifaceted concept that has been extensively researched by educators and scholars. It can be defined in three ways, as follows: (1) as the collection of motives prompting individuals to engage in activities; (2) as the process of participating in an activity to achieve specific outcomes; and (3) as a personality trait (Strenacikova & Strenacikova, 2020). This study focuses on reviewing motivation in all three senses.

In music education, motivation is further defined as the process through which goal-directed activity is initiated and sustained by the individual (Smith, 2015). Additionally, it is seen as the product of past experiences, enduring attitudes and abilities, the immediate environment, and current cognitive processes (Smith, 2015). Students’ desires to participate in musical activities vary across different contexts (Chraif et al., 2014), and various motivational theories offer frameworks for assessing these differences in music education.

For instance, Self-Determination Theory (SDT) emphasizes the fulfillment of psychological needs—competence, relatedness, and autonomy—as key to fostering personal growth and autonomous motivation in music learning (Evans, 2023). SDT provides a unifying theoretical framework for previous research on motivation in music education and offers insights into maintaining and nurturing motivation through effective teaching practices (Shaheen, 2022). Supporting this view, Evans and Bonneville-Roussy (2016) found that fulfilling these psychological needs was associated with more frequent and higher-quality practice, along with a preference for more challenging tasks.

Another significant framework is the expectancy–value theory (EVT), which explains motivation in achievement-related activities, such as task choice, persistence, and performance, through two key constructs: expectancy, or belief in one’s ability to succeed, and value, or the perceived importance of the activity (Yang & Xu, 2018). According to the EVT, task choice influences a person’s performance, effort, and perception of their ability and value related to the task (Burak, 2014).

Individuals differ in motivation based on various theoretical perspectives, as well as by gender, age, learner type (e.g., music learners vs. non-music learners), and subject matter (music vs. other subjects). For example, one study (Soares-Quadros Júnior et al., 2019) shows that females showed a greater preference for styles with emotional content, dance music, and music closely linked to mass culture, while males preferred more rigorous styles. The differences between music and non-music students are also well documented; music students typically aim to improve as musicians, viewing their experiences as means to achieve artistic goals, while non-music students often participate for relaxation and enjoyment (Kokotsaki & Hallam, 2011). Similarly, music learners exhibit significantly higher motivation levels towards music and certain academic subjects compared to non-music learners (McPherson & Hendricks, 2010). Ng (2017) also found motivation and learning intention differences between Australian students engaged in instrumental and choral music programs, depending on whether they intended to continue or discontinue participation.

While previous research (e.g., Evans, 2023; Evans & Bonneville-Roussy, 2016; Soares-Quadros Júnior et al., 2019; Yang & Xu, 2018) has provided valuable insights into various aspects of motivation in music classrooms, several gaps remain. In particular, existing reviews often combine diverse learning environments, including extracurricular music activities, instrumental learning, or choral participation. This study focuses specifically on classroom music within formal school settings. By narrowing the scope to this context, the review offers a more targeted synthesis of how motivation operates during regular, curricular music lessons, providing insights that are directly relevant to general music education practice in schools. Additional gaps in the literature include the need for a comprehensive understanding of common methodological designs and data collection tools, variations in motivational constructs across demographic groups, differences in motivational levels between music and other subjects, and limited analysis of the effectiveness of suggested strategies to enhance motivation. To address these gaps, this study systematically reviews the literature, focusing on the following research questions:

• RQ1: What are the common methodological approaches and data collection tools used in studies examining motivation in music classrooms?
• RQ2: How do motivational constructs vary across different demographic factors such as gender, age, and type of learner (music learners or non-music learners)?
• RQ3: What are the key differences in motivational levels between music and other academic subjects?
• RQ4: What strategies have been suggested in the literature to improve student motivation in music classrooms, and how effective are these strategies?

2. Method

2.1. Eligibility Criteria

The inclusion criteria for studies were the following: (1) published between 2010 and February 2024; (2) written in English; (3) investigating motivation for music learning within a classroom setting; (4) including participants who were primary or secondary school students; and (5) published in peer-reviewed journals.

Studies were excluded if they (1) were literature reviews; (2) focused on private instrumental music learning rather than general music classes; (3) examined motivation solely after intervention programs; (4) targeted populations outside the student group; or (5) did not directly address student motivation.

These criteria were selected to ensure consistency and reliability across the reviewed studies. The 2010–2024 time frame was chosen to include key studies from 2010 that were identified in preliminary searches as foundational to the field, while still reflecting recent developments in music education and motivational research.

Only English-language articles were included to ensure accurate interpretation. Peer-reviewed journal articles were selected to ensure the inclusion of high-quality studies.

The included studies were grouped according to (1) methodological characteristics (sampling styles, methodological designs, data-collection tools), (2) theoretical results or motivational constructs, and (3) other related results (motivational differences based on genders, ages and learners’ styles, strategies or activities for motivational development, and ways of improving students’ motivation).

2.2. Information Sources and Search Strategy

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement (Page et al., 2021). No review protocol was registered.

An initial exploratory search helped refine the most appropriate keywords. The final systematic search was conducted in five databases: Scopus, ERIC, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Sage. All databases were searched using a standardized Boolean string, tailored to each platform. The asterisk ensures the search also picks up words beginning with “class”, such as “classroom”.

music AND (education OR class* OR lesson) AND (motivation OR attitude)

Searches were applied to the title, abstract, and keyword fields of each database. Filters for English language and publication years were applied where the platform allowed. All databases were searched on 18 February 2024. No other sources, such as the gray literature, reference list screening, citation tracking, or manual searches, were used.

2.3. Selection and Extraction Procedures

The selection process was conducted using Rayyan, an online tool designed to facilitate systematic reviews. After duplicate removal with Zotero, two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts based on the predefined eligibility criteria. Full texts of potentially relevant studies were then retrieved and assessed independently by the same reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion until a consensus was reached. No automation tools were used in the screening or selection process.

Data extraction was performed independently by the same two reviewers using a pre-defined data extraction form. The extracted data included each study’s methodological approach, theoretical framework, data collection tools, sample characteristics, and reported outcomes. Discrepancies between reviewers were resolved through discussion. No automation tools were used in the data collection process.

Outcomes were also analyzed, with particular attention to age and gender differences, differences between music learners (students receiving extracurricular instrumental or vocal training) and non-music learners (students receiving only classroom music instruction), and other relevant factors such as parental or teacher influence, motivational differences between music and other school subjects, and proposed strategies for improving motivation. Study limitations were documented where available.

2.4. Risk of Bias Assessment and Effect Measures

To minimize bias, the systematic review employed a comprehensive search across multiple databases using clearly defined search terms and eligibility criteria. Duplicate removal and independent screening by two reviewers further ensured reliability. Potential biases were addressed through transparency in study selection and data extraction procedures, following PRISMA 2020 recommendations.

No formal effect measures were used in this review. Outcomes were synthesized narratively based on the reported findings in each study. The review aimed to identify patterns and themes rather than compute statistical effect sizes.

2.5. Synthesis Methods

A narrative synthesis was conducted to summarize the findings across the included studies. Studies were grouped based on thematic similarities in their objectives and findings. No statistical synthesis or meta-analysis was performed.

A detailed summary of the included studies is presented in

Table A1. Summary of selected papers.

Author and Year	Country	Age/Grade	Sample Size	Design	Data Collection Tools	Motivational Construct
(González-Moreno, 2010)	Mexico	NA/4–12th	3613	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Hentschke, 2010)	Brazil	NA/6–12th	1848	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Leung & McPherson, 2010)	Hong Kong	14–17/9–11th	4495	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(McPherson & Hendricks, 2010)	USA	NA/6–12th	3037	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(McPherson & O’Neill, 2010)	8-country	NA/4–12th	24,143	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Portowitz et al., 2010)	Israel	NA/5–12th	2257	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Juvonen, 2011)	Finland	NA/5–12th	1654	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Lowe, 2011)	Australia	12–13/8th	222	Test and re-test	5-point Likert scale on attainment, intrinsic values, and utility values developed by the researcher.	Expectancy–value theory
(Seog et al., 2011)	South Korea	NA/5–12th	2671	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Xie & Leung, 2011)	China	NA/5–12th	2750	International mapping exercise	Questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Arriaga Sanz & Madariaga Orbea, 2014)	Spain	11–13/6th	116	Survey	Motivation test;	NA
					Questionnaire of Academic Goals;
					Sidney Attribution Scale;
					items on the perception of difficulty, habits and preferences, and family habits.
(McPherson et al., 2015)	Australia	5–12/NA	2727	Survey	Adaptation of the questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise.	Expectancy–value theory
(Kokotsaki, 2017)	England	NA/6–7th	352	Qualitative method	Researcher-designed semi-structured focus-group interviews;	NA
					Adaptation of Attitudes to Music questionnaire.
(Freer & Evans, 2018)	Australia	NA/7–8th	204	Survey	Balanced Measure of Psychological Needs;	Expectancy–value theory, self-determination theory
					Motivation and Engagement Scale—High School;
					items on instrumental experience and elective intentions.
(Freer & Evans, 2019)	Australia	NA/7–8th	395	Survey	Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Frustration Scale;	Self-determination theory
					items on elective intentions based on the theory of planned behavior;
					7-point Likert scale on perceived teacher needs support (autonomy, competence, relatedness);
					teachers providing students’ grades;
					SES based on the Australian Socioeconomic Index;
					report on prior music learning.
(McCarthy et al., 2019)	Ireland	16–17/NA	24	Qualitative method	Semi-structured interviews were designed by the researcher.	NA
(Mawang et al., 2020)	Kenya	16–21/12th	201	Survey	Adaptation of Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised;	Achievement goal theory
					Adaptation of Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire;
					Adaptation of Consensual Assessment Technique.
(Kingsford-Smith & Evans, 2021)	Australia	NA/7–8th	180	Two-wave longitudinal study	Adaptation of Balanced Measure of Psychological Needs;	Self-determination theory
					Motivation and Engagement Scale;
					report on expected grade;
					7-point Likert scale on elective intentions.
(Mustafa, 2021)	Turkey	9–14/NA	64	Survey	Items about students’ demographic features;	NA
					Music Education Lessons Attitude Scale.
(Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021)	Cyprus	12–14/sec.sch. A–C	749	Mixed-method research design	Self-report questionnaire designed by the researcher.	NA
(Kibici, 2022)	Turkey	NA/5–8th	246	Causal comparative research	Kaufman Creativity Scale;	NA
					music achievement scale based on the Music Lesson Curriculum;
					Attitude Towards Music Scale.
(Venter & Panebianco, 2022)	South Africa	15–16/9–10th	180	Survey	Adaptation of the questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise;	Expectancy–value theory
					items on elective intentions.
(Janurik et al., 2023)	Hungary	NA/7th	139	Survey	Musical Mastery Motivation Questionnaire;	Mastery motivation
					Adjusted Musical SC Inquiry;
					items on elective instrumental training, usefulness of school music, musical family background, mother’s level of education, and music grade.
(Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023)	England	NA/7–9th	37	Qualitatively driven mixed methods	Interview questions designed by the researcher.	NA
(Papageorgi & Economidou Stavrou, 2023)	Cyprus	12–14/sec.sch. 1st–3rd	749	Survey	Ad hoc self-report questionnaire;	NA
					Classroom Environment Scale adapted to Greek students.
(Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024)	England	11–14/7–9th	581	Mixed-method research design	Researcher-designed questionnaire on students’ enjoyment, attitude, the importance attributed to music compared to other subjects, elective intentions, and out-of-school musical activities.	NA

Note: NA: Not available.

. It presents an overview of the included studies, including the year, country, sample characteristics, study design, data collection tools, and motivational constructs addressed.

3. Results

3.1. Study Selection

A total of 2962 records were retrieved from five databases. After removing 1296 duplicates, 1666 records were screened by the title and abstract. Of these, 41 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 27 studies met all the inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. Reasons for exclusion at the full-text stage included the following: being a literature review (n = 1), not addressing general music classes (n = 3), being intervention-based (n = 6), using an irrelevant sample (n = 1), or not focusing on motivation (n = 3). The selection process is illustrated in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1).

3.2. Study Characteristics

The characteristics of the reviewed studies are presented by dividing them into three main parts: (1) methodological results, (2) theoretical results or motivational constructs, and (3) other related results.

All reviewed studies are summarized in the following Table A1. It provides a structured overview of the studies included in the synthesis. For each study, the table summarizes key methodological and contextual information, including the year of publication, authors, country of origin, participants’ age or grade level, sample size, research design, data collection tools, and the motivational construct investigated.

3.3. Methodological Results

3.3.1. Samplings of the Reviewed Studies

All the reviewed studies focused on students in the upper grades of primary or secondary school. In the eight-country mapping exercise, the researchers identified three school levels that appeared across most participating countries. The first level included grades 4 to 7 (McPherson & O’Neill, 2010); however, no study included students from grade 4. Therefore, the reviewed studies examined students from grades 5 to 12. Most of the studies with smaller sample sizes focused on a critical age range, around grade 7 (Freer & Evans, 2018, 2019; Janurik et al., 2023; Kokotsaki, 2016, 2017; Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024). This period may be critical in music education due to the onset of puberty, including changes in boys’ voices, which can impact their motivation to sing.

Regarding the sample size, the countries participating in the international mapping exercise had the largest numbers of respondents, ranging from 1848 to 4495 students (González-Moreno, 2010; Hentschke, 2010; Juvonen, 2011; Leung & McPherson, 2010; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; Portowitz et al., 2010; Seog et al., 2011; Xie & Leung, 2011). One Australian study also involved a large sample (N = 2750), where the same questionnaire was used with slight modifications (McPherson et al., 2015). The largest total sample was reported in McPherson and O’Neill (2010), with 24,143 participants; however, this number represents the combined total from the international mapping exercise across all countries.

The remaining studies involved smaller samples, typically fewer than 600 participants. The smallest sample sizes were found in studies employing qualitative or mixed-method approaches. For instance, 37 students took part in a qualitatively driven mixed-method study (Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023), and the lowest number—24 participants—was reported in an interview-based study (McCarthy et al., 2019).

The sampling decisions in these studies were influenced by the research design, the methods used to assess students’ motivation, and whether students and/or their parents consented to participation.

3.3.2. Methodological Design of the Reviewed Studies

Most of the reviewed studies employed quantitative research designs and utilized surveys for data collection. Two studies adopted longitudinal designs: one conducted assessments twice with a six-month interval (Kingsford-Smith & Evans, 2021), and the other measured outcomes at the beginning and end of the school year (Lowe, 2011). Kokotsaki (2017) conducted three rounds of data collection; however, the participants were not necessarily the same in each round. Three studies used mixed-methods research designs, (Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021; Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024), while two employed qualitative methodologies (Kokotsaki, 2017; McCarthy et al., 2019).

An international mapping exercise was also included among the reviewed studies, encompassing eight countries. The researchers aimed to compare students’ motivational profiles—including competence beliefs, values, and perceived task difficulty—across Brazil, China, Finland, Hong Kong, Israel, South Korea, Mexico, and the United States. Individual articles were published for each country (González-Moreno, 2010; Hentschke, 2010; Juvonen, 2011; Leung & McPherson, 2010; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; Portowitz et al., 2010; Seog et al., 2011; Xie & Leung, 2011), along with one comparative article synthesizing the international data (McPherson & O’Neill, 2010).

3.3.3. Data Collection Tools of the Reviewed Studies

Questionnaires were the most commonly used data collection tools across the reviewed studies. Most studies employed pre-existing instruments or adapted versions of them. In several cases, additional items were incorporated to gather more detailed information on background variables, such as elective intentions (Freer & Evans, 2018; Kingsford-Smith & Evans, 2021; Venter & Panebianco, 2022) and musical training (Freer & Evans, 2018, 2019; Janurik et al., 2023).

Only three studies relied exclusively on researcher-developed questionnaires (Lowe, 2011; Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024), and one study utilized an ad hoc self-report instrument (Papageorgi & Economidou Stavrou, 2023). Three studies collected data using interviews, with all interview protocols designed by the respective researchers (Kokotsaki, 2017; McCarthy et al., 2019; Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023). A detailed overview of all instruments used in the reviewed studies is presented in Table A1.

McPherson and O’Neill (2010) developed a standardized questionnaire for the international mapping exercise, which was implemented consistently across participating countries. Adaptations of this instrument were also used in two additional studies (McPherson et al., 2015; Venter & Panebianco, 2022).

With the exception of a few studies employing interviews, nearly all reviewed research used questionnaires as the primary method of data collection. The questionnaire developed by McPherson and O’Neill (2010) was the only tool applied across multiple studies.

3.4. Theoretical Frameworks or Motivational Constructs

Four distinct motivational constructs appeared in the reviewed studies: expectancy–value theory, self-determination theory, mastery motivation, and achievement goal theory.

The questionnaire used in the international mapping exercise was grounded in expectancy–value theory. It measured participants’ competence beliefs, perceived task difficulty, and values related to music. Within the value domain, interest, importance, and usefulness were assessed (González-Moreno, 2010; Hentschke, 2010; Juvonen, 2011; Leung & McPherson, 2010; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; McPherson & O’Neill, 2010; McPherson et al., 2015; Portowitz et al., 2010; Seog et al., 2011; Venter & Panebianco, 2022; Xie & Leung, 2011). Freer and Evans (2018) aimed to predict students’ elective intentions by examining their values toward classroom music, while Lowe (2011) investigated the relationship between classroom learning activities and students’ subjective task values.

Self-determination theory (SDT) was the second most frequently used motivational framework in the reviewed studies. In addition to expectancy–value theory, Freer and Evans (2018) emphasized SDT to explore how students’ valuation of music develops. SDT focuses on the satisfaction of three basic psychological needs: (1) autonomy—experiencing volition and choice; (2) competence—feeling effective in one’s environment; and (3) relatedness—feeling connected and valued by others (Freer & Evans, 2018). Their study tested the hypothesis that fulfilling these needs enhances students’ music-related values and, consequently, their elective intentions. In a subsequent study, they further examined how the classroom environment supports psychological need satisfaction and how this influences students’ intentions to continue music education (Freer & Evans, 2019). Kingsford-Smith and Evans (2021) also explored the relationship between need satisfaction, value, and students’ expected grades and elective choices.

Mastery motivation was examined by Janurik et al. (2023), who investigated both instrumental and expressive components of students’ musical motivation and their relationship with musical self-concept. The assessment focused on two key dimensions: (1) an instrumental component, referring to music learning persistence, including rhythm acquisition, singing, music reading, and musical knowledge; and (2) an expressive component, comprising musical mastery pleasure, and negative reactions to musical failure.

Achievement goal theory was employed by Mawang et al. (2020) as their theoretical framework to investigate the relationship between achievement goal motivation and compositional creativity in music lessons. They used the Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised (AGQ-R), a five-point Likert scale instrument, to assess students’ motivational orientations toward musical achievement. The AGQ-R includes three subscales: mastery approach, performance approach, and performance-avoidance goals.

The remaining ten studies either did not apply a specific motivational framework or did not explicitly mention one. For clarity, the common motivational constructs and their corresponding assessment tools used in the reviewed studies are summarized in

Table 1. Motivational constructs and their assessment factors.

Motivational Constructs	No. of Studies	Assessed Factors
Expectancy–value theory	13	Competence beliefs, perceived task difficulty, values (interest, importance, and usefulness)
Self-determination theory	3	Basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, relatedness
Mastery motivation	1	Instrumental component: rhythm acquisition, singing acquisition, acquisition of music reading, musical knowledge. Expressive component: musical mastery pleasure, negative reaction to musical failure
Achievement goal theory	1	Mastery approach, performance approach, performance-avoidance goals

.

3.5. Key Findings Related to Student Motivation

3.5.1. Motivational Differences Based on Gender

Many of the reviewed studies examined whether gender differences exist in students’ motivation toward music. In most cases, girls demonstrated greater interest in the subject and reported higher levels of enjoyment compared to boys (Juvonen, 2011; Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021). They also reported higher self-competence (Janurik et al., 2023), stronger competence beliefs (Juvonen, 2011; McPherson & O’Neill, 2010), more positive attitudes toward music (Kibici, 2022; Kokotsaki, 2016), and higher values assigned to the subject (McPherson & O’Neill, 2010). Additionally, girls tended to perceive music as easier than boys did (Juvonen, 2011; McPherson & O’Neill, 2010; McPherson et al., 2015). According to Kokotsaki (2016), girls also enjoyed singing more than boys. However, this may be influenced by the sample characteristics, as the study focused on students in grades 6 and 7, a developmental stage during which voice changes may affect boys’ willingness to sing.

Only one study reported that boys had higher values for music, although the difference was not statistically significant (Venter & Panebianco, 2022). Two other studies found no significant gender differences. One of these had a relatively small sample size, which may have limited its findings (Mustafa, 2021), while the other included 395 participants (Freer & Evans, 2019). The latter study suggested that a music classroom environment that satisfies students’ basic psychological needs—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—can support motivation regardless of gender.

Overall, the majority of studies concluded that girls tend to be more motivated toward music than boys. They generally enjoy music lessons more, assign higher value to the subject, and perceive it as easier. However, the evidence also suggests that when students’ psychological needs are adequately supported, all learners can benefit from and engage with music education effectively.

3.5.2. Motivational Differences Based on Age

Out of the 18 studies that reported findings on age- or grade-related differences in students’ motivation, 14 found that motivation declines as students grow older. Primary school students tended to perceive music as more valuable than secondary school students (Juvonen, 2011; Leung & McPherson, 2010) and showed greater interest in the subject (McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; McPherson et al., 2015). In contrast, secondary school students were more likely to find music difficult (Leung & McPherson, 2010; McPherson et al., 2015; Seog et al., 2011; Xie & Leung, 2011).

The international mapping exercise revealed that Brazil was an exception among the eight participating countries. Brazilian students reported increased competence beliefs and values for music, alongside decreased perceived task difficulty. This trend may be due to the unique context in Brazil, where relatively few schools offered music education at the time of the study (Hentschke, 2010; McPherson & O’Neill, 2010). Another notable exception was found in the study by Venter and Panebianco (2022), which used the same questionnaire with a South African sample. These students reported the second-highest values for music after Brazilian students. However, the sample was smaller and consisted of students from grades 9 and 10, with grade 10 students having selected music as an elective subject. Two studies did not report significant age-related differences. In one of them, students already had a high motivational profile, having ranked music as their second favorite subject out of 15 options (Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021). The other study suggested that when psychological needs are fulfilled, students of all ages can maintain high levels of motivation (Freer & Evans, 2019).

Overall, the reviewed literature suggests that students’ motivation to study music generally declines with age. However, in specific educational contexts or when lessons are perceived as enjoyable and needs supportive, motivation can be maintained or even improved. These patterns are further illustrated in

Table 2. Country-level summary of motivation-related findings in reviewed studies.

Country	No. of Studies	Trend by Age	Trend by Gender	Trend by Learner Type
Australia	5	decreases/stable	girls/no difference	music learners
Brazil	1	increases	-	-
China	1	decreases	-	-
Cyprus	2	decreases/stable	girls	music learners
England	4	decreases	girls	music learners
Finland	1	decreases	girls	music learners
Hong Kong	1	decreases	-
Hungary	1	-	girls	no difference
Ireland	1	-	-	music learners
Israel	1	decreases	-	music learners
Kenya	1	-	-	-
Mexico	1	-	-	music learners
South Africa	1	increases	boys not sig.	-
South Korea	1	decreases	-	-
Spain	1	-	-	no difference
Turkey	2	decreases	girls/no difference	music learners
USA	1	decreases		music learners

Note. “-” indicates that the variable was not examined or reported in the respective study.

, which summarizes country-level trends in students’ motivation by age, gender, and learner type across the reviewed studies.

3.5.3. Motivational Differences Between Music Learners and Non-Music Learners

Half of the reviewed studies examined the differences between students who receive music instruction outside of school (e.g., instrumental or vocal training) and those who participate only in school-based music lessons. The findings suggest that students with extracurricular music experience tend to enjoy school music more (Juvonen, 2011; Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021), show greater interest in the subject (Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021), and assign higher value to music as a school subject (Freer & Evans, 2018; González-Moreno, 2010; Hentschke, 2010; McPherson & O’Neill, 2010; Portowitz et al., 2010). Furthermore, these students often demonstrate a higher motivational profile not only in music but also in other academic subjects (Freer & Evans, 2019; González-Moreno, 2010; Juvonen, 2011; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; McPherson et al., 2015; Mustafa, 2021; Portowitz et al., 2010; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024).

Two studies did not find significant differences in school music motivation between students with and without extracurricular music experience. In one of these studies, only 21.6% of the participants were music learners, which may have limited the generalizability of the findings (Arriaga Sanz & Madariaga Orbea, 2014). In the other, the authors found that elective instrumental training did not significantly influence students’ musical self-concept, suggesting that individual differences may play a more substantial role (Janurik et al., 2023). Notably, no study indicated that students without extracurricular music experience were more motivated to engage in school music than their peers who studied music outside of school.

The reviewed studies consistently show that students engaged in music activities beyond the school setting tend to exhibit greater motivation toward music education in school as well.

3.5.4. Motivational Differences Between Music and Other Subjects

Several studies using the questionnaire developed for the international mapping exercise compared students’ motivation toward music and other school subjects, including mother tongue, mathematics, science, physical education (PE), and art (McPherson & O’Neill, 2010).

In the United States, music was rated the least interesting subject, and students reported the lowest competence beliefs and values for both music and art (McPherson & Hendricks, 2010). In South Korea, music was among the least valued subjects and ranked second lowest in competence beliefs; however, it was the only subject for which interest did not decline over time (Seog et al., 2011). In Mexico, students ranked music as the least valuable subject and perceived it as more difficult than science, their mother tongue, and PE—yet it was also rated the most enjoyable and interesting (González-Moreno, 2010). In China, music was perceived as easier than other subjects but also less valuable (Xie & Leung, 2011). In Israel, music was considered the easiest subject by upper primary students, but the most difficult by upper secondary students, indicating a shift in perceived task difficulty over time (Portowitz et al., 2010). Students in Hong Kong reported lower competence beliefs and values for music compared to academic subjects (Leung & McPherson, 2010).

Brazil was an exception to these patterns. Students there demonstrated higher competence beliefs and increased values for music compared to other subjects. Nevertheless, mathematics, science, and mother tongue were still considered more important overall (Hentschke, 2010). In South Africa, Venter and Panebianco (2022) adapted the same questionnaire to compare elective subjects. Music emerged as the most enjoyable subject and ranked third in perceived importance and value, after physical sciences and biology.

Other studies also found that music was considered less useful than core academic subjects (McCarthy et al., 2019), often perceived as an extracurricular or leisure activity rather than a serious academic pursuit (Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024).

Overall, most students perceive academic subjects—such as mathematics, mother tongue, and science—as more important and useful than music. Several studies suggest underlying reasons for this perception. One key factor is parental expectation, as parents often encourage their children to prioritize subjects that are critical for college entrance exams (Seog et al., 2011) and future careers (Leung & McPherson, 2010; Xie & Leung, 2011). Additionally, school curricula tend to emphasize academic subjects, further reinforcing the perception that music is of lesser importance (González-Moreno, 2010).

3.5.5. Activities of the Music Lesson

Several studies discussed the types of classroom activities that students either favored or disliked during music lessons. Practical, collaborative, and creative tasks were consistently identified as the most enjoyable. Students expressed particular enjoyment in composing their own music (Kokotsaki, 2017; Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023; Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024) and making music with their peers (Kokotsaki, 2016, 2017). Many preferred working in groups or pairs (Kokotsaki, 2017; Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024), and appreciated opportunities to use available musical instruments (Kokotsaki, 2017; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024). Listening to contemporary or popular music was also among the most favored activities (Arriaga Sanz & Madariaga Orbea, 2014; Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021), with students expressing a desire to perform these songs themselves (Kokotsaki, 2017).

In contrast, written or theoretical tasks were reported as the least enjoyable (Kokotsaki, 2017; Kokotsaki & Whitford, 2023; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024). Students expressed disinterest in learning about musical notation (Stavrou & Papageorgi, 2021) and disliked working in silence (Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024). Additionally, performing in front of others caused anxiety for some students (Kokotsaki, 2017; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024).

The findings suggest that students are more engaged and motivated when music lessons emphasize active, creative participation and offer them a degree of autonomy, particularly in music selection. This aligns with the principles of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which emphasizes the importance of satisfying students’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Students are more likely to be motivated when they can choose what they listen to, feel competent through creative expression, and experience a sense of social connection in the classroom. Designing lessons that meet these needs may foster more positive attitudes toward music education.

3.5.6. Strategies for Improving Motivation

Several articles offered suggestions for improving students’ motivation in music education. A common recommendation was to raise students’ awareness of the value and relevance of music. Since students often prioritize academic subjects they perceive as essential for future studies, emphasizing the importance and usefulness of music education may help increase their motivation during music lessons (González-Moreno, 2010; Leung & McPherson, 2010; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; McPherson & O’Neill, 2010; Seog et al., 2011).

Studies grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) highlight the need for teachers to create classroom environments that support students’ basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Freer & Evans, 2018, 2019; Kingsford-Smith & Evans, 2021). Other researchers also emphasize the importance of promoting autonomy in music lessons as a means of enhancing motivation (Arriaga Sanz & Madariaga Orbea, 2014; Kokotsaki, 2016; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; Seog et al., 2011).

The teacher’s role in shaping student motivation was a recurring theme across several studies. Teaching style can significantly influence students’ attitudes toward music (McCarthy et al., 2019; Papageorgi & Economidou Stavrou, 2023), and students may be more motivated when they have a positive relationship with their teacher (Freer & Evans, 2019; González-Moreno, 2010; Kokotsaki, 2017; Whitford & Kokotsaki, 2024). Consequently, researchers suggest that music educators should remain attuned to evolving social and cultural contexts and integrate these into their teaching practices to foster engagement (Arriaga Sanz & Madariaga Orbea, 2014). Additionally, providing teachers with resources that encourage student creativity is recommended (Kibici, 2022; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; Seog et al., 2011).

In summary, the reviewed studies indicate that enhancing students’ motivation and attitudes toward music is largely the responsibility of music teachers. Motivation can be increased through lesson activities that offer choice, appropriate challenges, and opportunities for social interaction. Another effective strategy is to emphasize the transferable skills developed in music lessons, which may benefit students in various aspects of their future lives.

4. Discussion

4.1. General Interpretation of the Results

This systematic literature review sought to summarize the existing literature on primary and secondary students’ motivation regarding classroom music education. Based on the defined criteria, 27 articles were included in the synthesis. The study aimed to examine the research methods and instruments used, the theoretical frameworks applied, and the results of the reviewed studies, in relation to four research questions.

Regarding the first research question, the reviewed studies predominantly employed quantitative, survey-based designs, often using self-report questionnaires to assess motivation. While this approach allows for efficient data collection, it may limit objectivity and depth. Many studies also presented methodological limitations, such as small or demographically narrow samples, which constrain the generalizability of their findings. Additionally, the lack of longitudinal designs restricts insight into how student motivation evolves over time. These factors highlight the need for a more diverse, mixed-method and longitudinal research in this field.

The second research question addressed the motivational constructs applied across demographic backgrounds. A recurring feature of the reviewed literature is the consistent use of similar theoretical and methodological approaches, particularly expectancy–value theory. This is especially evident in the international mapping exercise, where a shared theoretical framework was deliberately applied across multiple national contexts. Several unrelated studies likewise relied on the same theoretical framework. Such alignment facilitates meaningful cross-country comparisons and highlights the value of using common models in international music education research. Following the example of existing comparative studies may thus help broaden understanding of motivational patterns in diverse educational systems.

The analysis of motivational constructs across demographic variables reveals several trends. Gender differences reveal that girls often value interest and importance more, while boys emphasize competence and task difficulty, suggesting the need for tailored programs to engage both genders. Age variations indicate that younger students benefit from structured support, while older students try with more autonomy and self-expression opportunities. Differences between music learners and non-music learners are also apparent; those engaged in music outside of school typically show higher intrinsic motivation and stronger competence beliefs. According to Freer and Evans (2019), some of the motivational differences between students could be reduced by satisfying students’ basic psychological needs during music lessons.

These variations point to the need for differentiated instructional strategies that consider learners’ backgrounds and developmental stages. Meeting students’ basic psychological needs during lessons—through collaborative activities, familiar music, diverse instruments, and creative tasks—may enhance engagement and mitigate motivational gaps. Designing flexible, student-centered classroom environments is therefore crucial for supporting motivation in music education.

The third research question explored differences in the motivational levels between music and other academic subjects. Most reviewed studies revealed that students considered music less valuable than core subjects like mathematics, science, and language learning (Leung & McPherson, 2010; McPherson & Hendricks, 2010; McPherson & O’Neill, 2010; Portowitz et al., 2010; Seog et al., 2011; Xie & Leung, 2011). Exceptions were found in Brazil and South Africa (Hentschke, 2010; Venter & Panebianco, 2022), where music was perceived as more enjoyable and, in some cases, more important. One explanation is parental pressure to focus on academic subjects needed for college entrance (Leung & McPherson, 2010; Seog et al., 2011; Xie & Leung, 2011).

The last research question addressed strategies to improve student motivation in music classrooms and their effectiveness. The reviewed studies reveal that students’ motivation is significantly influenced by the types of activities involved. Students tend to favor practical and creative tasks rather than written or theoretical ones. These findings align with self-determination theory, which emphasizes the importance of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in fostering motivation. The consistency of these preferences across studies suggests that student-centered, choice-based learning environments may be particularly effective in sustaining motivation in school music education.

It is also important to consider how broader cultural and educational policy contexts may shape students’ motivation in music education. For example, higher motivation levels reported in studies from Brazil and South Africa may be partially explained by contextual factors. In the Brazilian case (Hentschke, 2010), only schools that offered music lessons were included, and music education is not consistently available across the country. Similarly, in the South African study (Venter & Panebianco, 2022), music was presented as an elective subject, suggesting that students who chose it may have already had a personal interest or external support. These cases illustrate that curricular mandates—such as whether music is compulsory or elective—can significantly influence students’ perceptions of its value.

Furthermore, societal and parental expectations around music also play a key role. In educational systems where academic achievement in core subjects is prioritized by families and institutions, music may be perceived as secondary. This perception can reduce motivation during music lessons, especially among students whose families or peer environments do not recognize the value of music education. The findings reviewed here suggest that classroom motivation is not only shaped by individual factors but also reflects broader cultural attitudes and systemic educational priorities. A deeper understanding of these influences is essential for designing responsive music education programs.

4.2. Limitations of the Included Evidence

Several limitations of the reviewed studies were noted. Many studies relied on small, non-representative samples or focused on limited demographic groups, such as boys only or students from similar socio-economic backgrounds. Most data collection tools were self-report questionnaires, which may limit the accuracy of results due to students’ subjective interpretations. This reliance on self-reported data may lead to biases such as inaccurate self-assessment, which should be taken into account when interpreting students’ reported levels of motivation. Furthermore, only a few studies employed longitudinal or mixed-method designs, reducing the diversity and depth of the evidence base.

4.3. Limitations of the Review Process

This review also has limitations related to the review process. Only peer-reviewed journal articles published in English were included, which may have excluded relevant studies in other languages or the gray literature. All sources were retrieved from online databases, excluding books or printed publications. The exclusion of studies on instrumental learning and interventions also narrows the scope of the review. Additionally, a formal risk of bias assessment was not conducted using a standardized tool, although inclusion/exclusion criteria and independent screening procedures were applied to reduce potential bias.

4.4. Implications

Teachers play an essential role in shaping students’ motivation through their teaching style, classroom practices, and responsiveness to students’ psychological needs. Educational policy should aim to integrate music more meaningfully into the general curriculum, highlighting its value for personal and social development. Music education should not be limited to entertainment but recognized for its contributions to academic success, emotional well-being, and lifelong learning skills.

This review also highlights the importance of developing diverse and comprehensive methodological approaches in future research, including larger and more heterogeneous samples, as well as longitudinal and mixed-method designs. Differences in gender, age, and learner type should be taken into account to ensure that music education meets a wide range of motivational needs. Finally, future studies should explore in more detail the reasons behind students’ declining motivation for music and how classroom activities and teacher interventions can be tailored to reverse this trend.