Meece and Holt review data from a 1988 study applying cluster analysis methods to what had been reported through linear, correlation and regression analysis. The data was from a study of 275 fifth and sixth graders in science classes taught by five different teachers.

Cluster analysis was chosen because it allowed the researchers to look more effectively at the relationships in the data. Clustering also allows for the grouping of the data to best explain the differences in the data. The cluster analysis was used to group students, on the basis of goal orientation, into three groups or clusters. The researchers then compared the clusters to the achievement of the students in the clusters.

To determine the goal orientations of the students, the researchers used a 9 point questionnaire. To determine the academic achievement of the students, they combined a self-report of students on their approach to science, a 10 item teacher rating scale, scores from the most recent achievement test and student grades.

The three clusters formed were: high mastery orientation which included 85 students; combined mastery and ego orientation which included 103 students; and low mastery and ego orientation which included 69 students. The results of the study are summarized in the following table.

Goal Orientation	Task Mastery	Ego-Social	Work Avoidant
Cluster
High Mastery	High orientation	Low orientation	Low orientation
Combined Mastery and Ego	High orientation	High orientation	Low orientation
Low Mastery and Ego	Low orientation	Low orientation	High orientation

The study concluded that there was a high correlation between task mastery goals and Performance Goals and a high negative correlation between mastery and work , avoidant goals. The cluster analysis further showed that the combined mastery and ego cluster did not perform as well as the high mastery, even though some research has indicated that the opposite might be true.

The cluster analysis further discovered that there was a correlation between the goal orientation and both teacher and gender. That is, certain teachers seemed to elicit high mastery orientation while others did not. In the gender analysis, the number of girls with high mastery goals were many more than the boys and the number of boys with low mastery-ego goals far outnumbered the girls.