In 2020, researchers conducted a survey in the German-speaking countries of Austria, Germany, and Switzerland soliciting the perspectives of various stakeholders, including parents, students, school staff (e.g., teachers, administrators, authorities, and support), policymakers, and educational institutes. The School Barometer found that many students spent less time engaged in formal learning during the first school shutdown in March 2020 than during regular on-site schooling (Huber and Helm, 2020; König et al., 2020). This would suggest that students spent less time reading—and learning to read. Because the time spent reading is an important predictor of students’ reading comprehension (Allington, 2002), decreased time spent reading could negatively affect the students’ reading comprehension. We are accustomed to thinking of the young as digital natives—they have grown up surrounded by and using myriad devices, applications, and forms of connectivity. However, not all students have easy access to technical equipment or internet connections. Furthermore, most first graders are unfamiliar with the use of communication technologies necessary for distance learning, such as videoconferencing applications (Drexler, 2018; Huber and Helm, 2020; König et al., 2020). Many younger students have found online learning challenging and need help from their parents, older siblings, or others (Ewing and Cooper, 2021). Indeed, empirical evidence suggests that only a small percentage of elementary teachers conducted live online lessons. Instead, most elementary teachers developed and distributed lesson plans for the students (Flynn et al., 2021; Huber and Helm, 2020). While evidence suggests that learning plans can effectively substitute for in-person learning (Tomasik et al., 2021), they cannot make up for small-group collaboration. Because collaboration in pairs or small groups positively affects reading comprehension (Guthrie et al., 2007; Taylor et al., 2000), the lack of social interactions during distance learning might also have negatively impacted young students’ reading skills (Allington, 2002; Guthrie et al., 2007). Given teachers’ self-reported disinclination to use online communication tools (Huber and Helm, 2020), we can assume that their direct instruction and guidance were severely restricted during distance learning. Direct teacher instruction also fosters students’ reading comprehension (Allington, 2002; Rupley et al., 2009), and its decline during the school shutdowns might also have affected students’ reading comprehension education.

Online distance learning can also hinder teachers’ task individualization, which is more difficult during videoconferences involving whole classes or large groups than in on-site learning. Very young children typically have limited concentration spans, so most education videoconferences are shorter than an in-person lesson; the limited time must be focused on covering material and assigning tasks that apply to the whole class. Although teachers could deliver one-to-one sessions, the amount of time this would require makes this an unrealistic option. Evidence shows that online learning during COVID-19 has been less individualized than regular on-site learning (Ewing and Cooper, 2021). Some teachers have always routinely individualized work packages for each student. However, during the school lockdowns, teachers lacked the easy student access that would enable them to assess the tasks’ adequacy readily, so days might elapse during which the students struggled with ineffectual assignments. Elementary children, especially first graders, benefit from individualized reading instruction (Connor et al., 2013; Förster et al., 2018). Thus, the hiatus in individualization might have affected their reading comprehension development. However, the children who attended school during the lockdown because their families could not spend education-focused time with them during the days probably enjoyed a favorable learning environment with more individual training than their pre-pandemic in-person schooling. Overall, research suggests that the quality of reading instruction for first and second graders decreased during distance learning, even though many parents tried to support their children’s learning (Flynn et al., 2021). More data are needed on the achievement-related outcomes of elementary students during COVID-19.

To investigate how distance learning during COVID-19 might have affected reading motivation, we used the framework of self-determination theory (SDT). SDT holds that highly self-determined types of motivation, such as intrinsic motivation and identified regulation, predict desirable outcomes such as deep-level learning and psychological well-being. Intrinsically motivated behaviors are inherently satisfying and require no external incentives or rewards; we engage in them because we enjoy them. Identified regulation concerns behaviors that might not be inherently pleasant, but we recognize as having value (Ryan and Deci, 2020).

While intrinsic motivation is considered an optimal basis for learning, identified regulation can support learning in domains that are not inherently enjoyable. According to SDT, motivational regulations are enhanced by supports for student’s basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Niemiec and Ryan, 2009; Ryan and Deci, 2020). However, some evidence suggests that the sudden shift to distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic has affected basic psychological needs satisfaction. For example, one study found that it negatively affected university students’ basic psychological needs satisfaction and self-determined motivation (Author, submitted). Similarly, a retrospective study by Zaccoletti et al. (2020) found lower academic motivation during the pandemic-related school closures for children in grades 1–9. Extrapolating from these findings, we could expect a decline in self-determined reading motivations among first and second graders related to the school shutdowns. However, as with reading comprehension, we have insufficient data on how the pandemic-related restrictions affected elementary students’ motivational regulations.

As this research investigates the impact of the pandemic on the reading skills of first and second graders, it is important to consider changes in general conditions that might have affected student achievement. Beside the school lockdowns changes in general conditions such as educational expenditure or school reform might have affected students’ academic achievements and learning motivation. In Austria expenditure on education has progressively increased since 2000 (Statistik Austria, 2021). However, according to the results of the Progress in Reading Literacy Study the improvement in financial resources has not led to a meaningful improvement in students’ reading comprehension from 2006 to 2016 (M ₂₀₀₆ = 538; M ₂₀₁₆ = 542; Mullis et al., 2007; Mullis et al., 2017). It is therefore unlikely, that changes in financial resources affected students’ reading comprehension between 2015 and 2019. Another change concerned the implementation of a preparatory program for students with poor German language knowledge. While the resources for language support did not change between 2015 and 2019, in the school year 2018–19 attending a preparatory program became mandatory for students with poor German language knowledge (Federal Ministry—Education, Science and Research, 2019). Before then teachers could decide whether a student should attend a preparatory program or an immersion program with systematic language support, and many schools used both types of language promotion (Author, 2021). Research on the effectiveness of these types of language support is still inconclusive and presumably the quality and the quantity of support matters more than the type of program (Stanat and Cristensen, 2006). Overall, there were some changes in the general conditions in the educational system, but it seems unlikely that they led to meaningful changes in student outcomes. If anything, many fear that the implementation of a compulsory preparatory program for students with poor German language knowledge may have reduced immersion and negatively affected German language acquisition (Thomas et al., in press).

The tenuous findings regarding the impact of the COVID-related school shutdowns on students’ achievement and self-determined learning motivation inspired the following research questions and hypotheses:

1) Did reading comprehension differ between the students whose first 2 years of school fell during the COVID-19 pandemic and students who had regular on-site lessons during their first 2 years in school?

H1: Students who did (did not) experience pandemic-related shutdowns during their first 2 years of school differed in reading comprehension.

H2: Students who did (did not) experience pandemic-related shutdowns during their first 2 years of school differed in self-determined reading motivations.

To answer these research questions, reading comprehension and self-determined reading motivations of students who started school in fall 2019 and thus, experienced COVID-19 related school shutdowns during their first two school years, were compared with outcomes from students who attended elementary school before the pandemic.

A quasi-experiment was conducted to answer the research questions. The participants were 206 students from five schools: Sample 1 comprised 102 students who started school in the fall of 2015 and experienced no school shutdowns; Sample 2 comprised 104 students who started school in the fall of 2019 and experienced pandemic-related shutdowns in their first and second year of school. As teachers could apply to participate in this research these are convenience samples. Both samples were drawn from the same five schools and thus, students of both samples had comparable social backgrounds. Two schools (four classes, n _sample2 = 67, n _sample2 = 68) were located in cities, and the other three schools were from rural locations. None of the schools had a catchment area with students from a privileged socioeconomic background. Because student characteristics and teacher characteristics are the most influential predictors of student achievement (Hattie, 2003), it is of great importance for the comparability of the samples that the catchment area and the teachers are the same in both samples. In fall 2015 participating teachers had 16–34 years of teaching experience. This is important because teachers might have gained additional experience from fall 2015 to fall 2019. However, research suggests that increases in teaching experience are associated with additional gains in student achievement only in novice teachers (Burroughs et al., 2019). Therefore, it is unlikely that the additional teaching experience gathered between 2015 and 2019 affected student outcomes. Of the 206 students participating in this study, one child from Sample 2 was excluded from all the analyses because a diagnosis of learning disabilities meant there were confounding differences in reading comprehension development. Therefore, the final sample consisted of 205 students. However, because of school and class changes, COVID-related absences from school, and lack of parental consent, only 186 students participated in both assessments (Table 1). It is important to note that principals of participating schools and participating teachers reported that they contacted parents of children with poor German language knowledge as well as parents with challenging domestic circumstances to let their children attend school during the school shutdown in the 2020–2021 school year.

In Sample 1, 38.2% of the students were female, and 82.4% spoke German as their first language. In Sample 2, 48.5% of the students were female, and 78.6% spoke German as their first language. The differences in sex (χ² = 2.22, df = 1, p = 0.14) and first language (χ² = 0.45, df = 1, p = 0.50) were not significant, indicating that the two samples were comparable. At t1, the students’ mean age was 7.02 years (SD = 0.55). In both samples, the students’ reading comprehension and self-determined reading motivation were assessed at the end of grade one (t1) and the end of grade two (t2). Data collection was approved by the relevant school authorities and was conducted during regular classes by the author. Participating students had to provide their parents’ written consent.

Reading Comprehension in grade one was measured with two subtests assessing word comprehension and sentence comprehension. Word comprehension was assessed with 63 word–picture assignment tasks in which the children chose one word out of four to correspond with the picture; sentence comprehension was assessed using a maze format with five response options for 17 items. For each subtest, we gave the students 3 minutes of working time. The second graders completed a standardized reading comprehension test called Ein Leseverständnistest für Erst- bis Sechstklässler (Reading Comprehension Test for First to Sixth Graders) (ELFE 1-6; Lenhard and Schneider, 2006), validated for use with students in grades 1–6. The ELFE 1–6 comprised three subtests to assess word comprehension, sentence comprehension, and text comprehension. All three subtests used a multiple-choice answer format. The children had 3 minutes (each) to complete the word-comprehension and sentence-comprehension subtests and 7 minutes to complete the text-comprehension subtest.

Reading Motivations were measured at the end of grade two with an adapted version of the Scales Assessing Motivational Regulation for Learning (SMR-L, Thomas and Müller, 2016). The SMR-L measures intrinsic, identified, introjected, and external motivational regulation with three items per scale answered on a four-point Likert scale ranging from “not true” (1) to “true” (4). The SMR-L was validated with children from grades three to eight and tested in various pilot studies with children from grade two (Thomas, 2015; Thomas and Müller, 2016). The present study used only the items assessing intrinsic motivation and identified regulation.

Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to assess the differences in reading achievement and reading motivation between the students in Sample 1 and Sample 2. First, we tested the assumptions for all outcome variables. For outcome variables at t1, the Box’s M test (p = 0.18) and the Levene test (p _{word comprehension} = 0.57; p _{sentence comprehension} = 0.24) indicated that the covariances and error variances did not differ significantly between groups. Thus, the application of the MANOVA was adequate for all the variables at t1 (Model 1). For the reading comprehension variables at t2, the Box’s M test (p = 0.18) was not significant, indicating adequate congruence between the covariance matrices. Levene’s tests yielded non-significant results for the variables assessing reading comprehension (p _{word comprehension} = 0.07; p _{sentence comprehension} = 0.86; p _{text comprehension} = 0.50). However, the Levene’s test for motivational regulations was significant (p _{intrinsic motivation} = 0.02; p _{identified regulation} = 0.04). Therefore, a MANOVA was run only for the outcome variables assessing reading comprehension (Model 2) and a Welch’s t-test was applied for intrinsic motivation and identified regulation (Model 3). Because empirical evidence suggests that second-language learners might have lower reading comprehension scores (Stanat and Cristensen, 2006), I extended Models 1 and 2 to include first language (German vs. other) as a covariate (Model 4, Model 5). Pillai trace was used to evaluate the significance because it has adequate power for similar group sample sizes (Mayers, 2013).