This study investigated Geometerâ€™s sketchpad (GSP) and studentsâ€™rngeometry learning motivation and problem solving ability. In this studyrnpretest-posttest quasi experimental design with non equivalent comparisonrngroup was used. Two groups of 9th grade were selected using purposivernsampling based on their first semester mathematics achievement. The tworngroups were assigned as experimental group (n=68) and comparison grouprn(n=65) using lottery method. During 4 weeks instruction, the Interventionrngroup received instruction with the GSP while the other groups wererntaught with traditional paper-pencil instruction. Data of study wererncollected through Motivation Measuring Questionnaire (MMQ) containingrntwo parts: Self Efficacy Measuring Questionnaire (SEMQ), EffortrnMeasuring Questionnaire (EMQ) and Problem Solving Ability MeasuringrnQuestions (PSAMQ). The content Validity Indices (CVI) were .79, .84rnand .83 for SEMQ, EMQ and PSAMQ taken in order. Moreover therninternal consistence had Cronbachâ€™s alpha values of .873 and .902 forrnSEMQ and EMQ respectively. Data were analyzed using the pairedrnsamples t-test, independent samples t-test and regression analysis.rnFindings of the study indicated that there was no statistical significantrndifference between the Intervention and comparison groups prior to therntreatment in both motivation and problem solving ability. But, there wasrnstatistical significant difference between the Intervention and comparisonrngroups after the treatment in both motivation and problem solvingrnability. That is the Intervention groups showed better improvements thanrnthe comparison groups. For Intervention groups, the low achievers andrnmedium achievers showed better improvement as compared to the highrnachievers. It is recommended that instruction in geometry should bernsupported with appropriate use of GSP in order to improve studentsâ€™rnmotivation and problem solving ability