本研究之目的在整合成就目標理論之情境與個人層面兩大研究取向，依據最近動機測量的情境特定觀點，採調節取向與多重目標設計，探討課室目標線索與個人目標導向對學習者解題成就及自我調整學習之交互影響。本研究採3（課室目標線索）× 3（個人目標導向）× 3（測量階段）受試者間受試者內混合實驗設計，藉由教導小六學童「由左到右」乘法解題技巧這項特定學習工作以進行課室目標線索操弄。受試者是台南縣市 366名小六學童，實驗過程採小組進行。研究結果顯示：（一）在解題成就上，接受多重課室目標線索操弄者，其延後測得分顯著高於接受趨向精熟課室目標線索操弄者。（二）在自我調整學習方面，接受趨向表現課室目標線索操弄之精熟目標組的認知處理策略得分下滑，但趨向表現目標組得分卻提高；精熟目標組與多重目標組之後設認知策略得分均高於趨向表現目標組；接受趨向表現課室目標線索及多重課室目標線索操弄者，其主觀能力之得分均隨時間增加而提高；三個測量階段均顯示精熟目標組與多重目標組之工作價值得分高於趨向表現目標組、持多重目標者之工作價值隨時間下降，但持趨向表現目標者卻隨時間提高；精熟目標組與多重目標組的努力堅持得分均高於趨向表現目標組，但無論持何種目標，其努力堅持得分均隨時間而下降；三個測量階段均顯示精熟目標組與多重目標組之工作選擇得分高於趨向表現目標組。本研究根據研究結果進行討論，並提出未來研究之建議。

The study attempted to integrate the contextual and individual approaches in achievement goal theory. The researchers adopted the view of situation-specific motivation assessments and the concept of moderated effect and multiple goals. The aim of this study was to explore the interaction effect between the cues of classroom goal and individual goal orientation on mathematics problem solving and self-regulated learning. A 3（the cues of classroom goal）× 3（personal goal orientation）× 3（measurement occasion）mixed design was used. A total of 366 sixth-grade students were divided into several groups and were taught “left-to-right” multiplication solving skills. The following results were obtained: In mathematics problem solving, students operating under the cues of multiple classroom goals scored much higher on delayed post-test than those under the cues of approach-performance classroom goal. In self-regulated learning, (a) the mastery goal group under the cues of approach-performance classroom goal showed a trend of decrease in cognitive processing strategy, whereas the group of approach-performance goal improved; (b) the groups of mastery goal and multiple goals both scored higher than approach-performance group in metacognition; (c) the students operating under the cues of approach-performance and multiple classroom goals were making progress along with time in subjective ability; (d) groups of mastery goal and multiple goals both scored higher than approach-performance in task values on three measurement occasions; however, the group of multiple goals regressed with time while the group of approach-performance goal progressed; (e) the groups of mastery goals and multiple goals both scored higher than approach-performance goal group in effort and persistence, but all regressed along with time; (f) the groups of mastery goal and multiple goals both scored higher than approach-performance group in task choice on three measurement occasions. Based on the findings, further discussions were made. Implications for elementary school education and suggestions for future studies were also presented.