Are changes in performance that result from increased motivation suitable as evidence for learning?

To understand why the belief that changes in performance solely due to increased motivation are not suitable as evidence for learning is significant, it's essential to delineate the relationship between motivation, performance, and learning. Learning is typically defined as a relatively permanent change in behavior or knowledge that occurs as a result of experience.

While increased motivation can indeed lead to enhanced performance, this change does not automatically indicate that learning has taken place. For instance, a motivated individual might perform better due to temporary emotional or mental states rather than acquiring new skills or understanding. Additionally, external factors such as pressure to perform or the influence of competition can also temporarily boost performance, further muddying the waters between motivation and actual learning outcomes.

In the context of a learning environment, it's crucial to have evidence that indicates a deeper understanding or improvement in skills that are consistent over time, rather than a fluctuation in performance driven purely by motivation. Therefore, while motivation plays a critical role in performance, it does not equate to learning on its own.