نقش واسطهای فرایندهای نظام خود و هیجانهای تحصیلی در رابطه بین محیط حامی خودپیروی و درگیری تحصیلی

نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار

2 دانشجوی دکتری

چکیده

هدف این پژوهش تعیین نقش واسطه‌ای فرایندهای نظام خود و هیجان‌های تحصیلی در رابطه میان محیط حامی خودپیروی و درگیری تحصیلی بود. نمونه پژوهش شامل 416 نفر (233 زن و 183 مرد) از دانشجویان دانشگاه شیراز و ابزارهای پژوهش شامل پرسشنامه درگیری تحصیلی (ریو، 2013)، مقیاس نیازهای بنیادین روان‌شناختی (گانیه، 2003)، پرسشنامه محیط حامی خودپیروی (آسور و دیگران، 2002؛ آسور 2012)، مقیاس هیجان امید (پکران و دیگران‌، 2002)، پرسشنامه کنجکاوی (لیتمن و دیگران، 2010) و پرسشنامه همدلی (وسن و دیگران، 2016) بود. یافته‎ها نشان داد محیط حامی خودپیروی اثر مستقیم بر فرایندهای نظام خود و درگیری تحصیلی و اثر غیرمستقیم، به واسطه فرایندهای نظام خود و هیجان‌های تحصیلی، بر درگیری تحصیلی دارد. این متغیر، به واسطه فرایندهای نظام خود، اثر غیرمستقیم بر هیجان‌های تحصیلی داشت. فرایندهای نظام خود، اثر مستقیم بر هیجان‌های تحصیلی و درگیری تحصیلی و همچنین به واسطه هیجان‌های تحصیلی، اثر غیرمستقیم بر درگیری داشت. هیجان‌های تحصیلی نیز دارای اثری مثبت و معنادار بر درگیری تحصیلی بود. بر این اساس، فرایندهای نظام خود و هیجان‌های تحصیلی نقش واسطه‌ای بین محیط حامی خودپیروی و درگیری تحصیلی ایفا می‎کند

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


ابراهیمی، س.، پاکدامن، ش. و سپهری، ص. (1390). روابط بین هدف‎های پیشرفت، جو کلاس، توانایی و سودمندی ادراک شده. مجله روانشناسی تحولی: روانشناسان ایرانی، 8 (29)، 44-35

بشارت، م. و رنجبرکلاگری، ا. (1392). مقیاس ارضای نیازهای بنیادین روان‎شناختی: پایایی، روایی و تحلیل عاملی. فصلنامه اندازهگیری تربیتی، 4 (14)، 168-147.

کدیور، پ.، فرزاد، و.، کاوسیان، ج. و نیکدل، ف. (1388). رواسازی پرسشنامه هیجان‎های تحصیلی پکران. فصلنامه نوآوریهای آموزشی، 8 (32)، 38-7.

کوروش‎نیا، م. و لطیفیان، م. (1390). بررسی رابطه بین ابعاد الگوهای ارتباطات خانوادگی-دانشگاهی و گرایش‎های تفکر انتقادی دانشجویان با واسطه‎گری ارضای نیازهای روان‎شناختی پایه. فصلنامه خانوادهپژوهی، 7 (28)، 519-493.

میرز، ل.، گامست، گ. و گارینو، ا. (1391). پژوهش چندمتغیری کاربردی. ترجمه ح. حسن‎آبادی و دیگران. تهران: انتشارات تحول (تاریخ انتشار اثر اصلی، 2006).

Amabile, T., Hill, K., Hennessey, B., & Tighe, E. (1994). The work performance inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 950-967.

Assor, A. (2012). Allowing choice and nurturing an inner compass: educational practices supporting students’ need for autonomy. In S. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 421-439). New York: Springer.

Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and supporting teacher behaviors predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 27, 261-278.

Brandtstadter, J. (1998). Action perspectives on human development. In W. Damon, & R. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: theoretical models of human development (pp. 993-1028). Hoboken, NJ: Wiely.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon, & R. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: theoretical models of human development (pp. 993-1028). Hoboken, NJ: Wiely.

Buss, A., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression question-naire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(3), 452-459.

Chapman, M. (1984). International action as a paradigm for developmental psychology: A symposium. Human Development, 27, 113-114.

Cheon, S. H., & Reeve, J. (2014). A classroom-based intervention to help teachers decrease students’ amotivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 3, 24-37.

Chi, U. J. (2014). Classroom engagement as proximal level for student success in higher education: what a self-determination framework within a multi-level developmental system tells us. Ph.D. Dissertation in Applied Psychology, Portland State University.

Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy and relatedness: a motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. Gunnar, & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology: Self- processes in development (pp. 43-77). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Davis, M. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85-87.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

Dertmers, S., Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., Goetz, T. Frenzel, A., & Pekrun, R. (2011). Students’ emotions during homework in mathematics: testing a model of antecedents and achievement outcomes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 25-35.

Dincer, A., Yesilyurt, S. & Takkac, M. (2012). The effects of autonomy-supportive climates on EFL learners’ engagement, achievement and com-petence in english speaking classrooms. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3890-3894.

Federici, R. A., & Skaalvik (2014). Students’ perception of emotional and instrumental teacher support: relations with motivational and emotional responses. International Education Studies, 7(1), 21-36.

Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). Positive emotions broaden and build. In E. Ashby plan, & P. G. Devine (Eds.), Advances on experimental social psychology (pp. 1-53). Burlington: Academic Press.

Gagne, M. (2003). The role of autonomu support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engage-ment. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199-223.

Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: it is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588-600.

Johnston, M., & Finney, S. (2010). Measuring basic needs satisfaction: evaluating previous research and conducting new psychometric evaluation of the basic needs satisfaction in general scale. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 280-296.

King, B., McInerney, D., Ganotice, F., & Vilarosa, J. (2015). Positive affect catalyzes academic engage-ment: Cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental evidence. Learning and Individual Differences, 39, 64-72.

Kline, R. B. (2011). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

Linnenbrink- Garcia, L., Rogat, T. K., & Koskey, K. (2011). Affect and engagement during small group instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 13-24.

Litman, J.A., Crowson, H. M., & Kolinski, K. (2010). Validity of interest and deprivation-type epistemic curiosity distinction in non-students. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 531-536.

McIlroy, D., & Bunting, B. (2002). Personality, behavior, and academic achievement. Contemporary Edu-cational Psychology, 27, 326-337.

Marchand, G., & Gutierrez, A. (2012). The role of emotion in the learning process: Comparisons between online and face-to-face learning setting. Internet and Higher Education, 15, 150-160.

Muis, K., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M., Azavedo, R., Trevors, G., Meier, E., & Heddy, B. C. (2015). The curious case of climate change: Testing a theoretical model of epistemic beliefs, epistemic emotions, and complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 39, 168-183.

Mussel, P. (2010). Epistemic curiosity and related constructs: Lacking evidence of discriminant validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 506-510.

Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: assumptions, corollaries, and implication for educational research and practice. EducationalPsychology Review,18, 315-341.

Pekrun, R. Goetz, T. Titz, W., & Perry, R P. (2002). Academic emotions in student self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 91-105.

Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2014). Inter-national handbooks of emotions in education. New York: Routledge.

Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012). Academic emotions and student engagement. In S. Christenson, A. L., Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 421-439). New York: Springer.

Reeve, J. (2009). Understanding motivation and emotion. New York: Wiely.

Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 421-439). New York: Springer.

Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: the concept of agentic engagement. American Psycho-logical Association, 105(3), 579-595.

Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding the sociocultural influences on student motivation. In D. McInerney, & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning: Big theories revisited (pp. 31-59). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Reeve, J., & Sickenius, B. (1994). Development and validation of a brief measurement of the three psychological needs underlying intrinsic motivation: the AFS scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 506-515.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.

Ryzin, M. J. (2011). Protective factors at school: Reciprocal effects among adolescents’ percep-tions of the school environment, engagement in learning, and hope. Journal of Youth Adole-scence, 40, 1568-1580.

Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. L. (2009). Engagement and dis-affecttion as organizational constructs in the dyna-mics of motivational development. In K. Wentzel, & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation in school (pp. 223-245). Malvah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Skinner, E. A., Kinderman, T. A., & Furrer, C. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 493-525.

Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 421-439). New York: Springer.

Skinner, E. A., Pitzer, J., & Brule, H. (2014). The role of emotion in engagement, coping, and the development of motivational resilience. In R. Pekrun, & L. Linnenbrink-Garcia (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 331-347). New York: Routledge.

Tulis, M., & Fulmer, S. M. (2013). Students’ motivational and emotional experiences and their relationship to persistence during academic challenge in mathe-matics and reading. Learning and Individual Differ-ences, 27, 35-46.

Tze, V. M., Klasson, R. M., & Daniels, L. M. (2014). Patterns of boredom and its relationship with
perceived autonomy support and engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 175-187.

Vossen, H. G., Piotrowski, J. T., & Valkenborg, P. M. (2015). Development of the adolescence measure of empathy and sympathy (AMES). Personality and Individual Differences, 4, 66-71.

Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruc-tion, 28, 12-23.

Wonglorsaichon, B., Wongwanich, S., & Wiratchai, N. (2014). The influence of students’ school engage-ment on learning achievement: A structural equation modeling analysis. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1748-1755.