MOTIVATION AND LEARNING STRATEGIES AS PREDICTORS OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ MATH ACHIEVEMENT

Year 2013, Volume: 42 Issue: 1, 96 - 109, 08.03.2014

Devrim Erdem Keklik , İbrahim Keklik

Abstract

As a country striving toward economic and technological development, having remarkable number of school age children, in need of improving it’s science and mathematics education-particularly given the disappointing PISA results, and aiming at establishing highly functional school counseling services, Turkey will greatly benefit from studies exploring student variables associated with their success in various subject areas. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine as to which motivation and learning strategies high school students use for mathematics courses predict their achievement level in the respective courses. A convenient sample of 440 high school students attending totwo public high schools in the Altındağ District of Ankara, Turkey during the academic year of 2010-2011. A Personal Information Form and Motivation and Learning Strategies Scale were used for data collection.Step-wise regression analysis was used as the data analytic procedure. Results showed that factors such as task value (M), time/study environment (LS), self-efficacy (M), extrinsic goal orientation (LS), test anxiety (M), peer learning (LS) and organization (LS)] significantly predicted students’ mathematics achievement. Some factors of motivation and learning strategies significantly predict students’ achievement levels in mathematics according to gender.  Different factors of motivation and learning strategies significantly predicted students’ achievement levels in mathematics for each grade level. Results, limitations of the study, implications for school counseling services, mathematics education and future research were discussed.

Keywords

Motivation, learning strategies, mathematics achievement, high school students, regression analysis

Devrim ERDEM KEKLİK*a; İbrahim KEKLİKb

Abstract

References

• Barkley, R. A. (2010). Differential diagnosis of adults with ADHD: The role of executive function and self-regulation. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 71, e17. Retrieved from http://www. psychiatrist.com/abstracts/abstracts.asp?abstract=201007/0710e17.htm
• Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A school-based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 537-550.
• Coutinho, S. A., & Neuman, G. (2008). A model of metacognition, achievement goal orientation, learning style and self-efficacy. Learning Environments Research 11 (2): 131–151.
• Dinç Kahraman, S. (2010). Kadınların toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliğine yönelik görüşlerinin belirlenmesi.12.Ulusal Halk sağlığı Kongresi’nde poster olarak sunulmuştur Erciyes Üniversitesi Atatürk Sağlık Yüksekokulu Talas/ Kayseri.
• Duncan, T. G., & McKeachie, W. J. (2005). The making of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Psychologist, 40, 117-128.
• Dunn, K. E., Lo, W. J., Mulvenon, S. W., & Sutcliffe, R. (2012). Revisiting the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire: A Theoretical and Statistical Reevaluation of the Metacognitive Self-Regulation and Effort Regulation Subscales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72(2), 312-331.
• Eraslan, A. (2009). Finlandiya’nın PISA’daki başarısının nedenleri: Türkiye için alınacak dersler. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 3 (2), 238–248.
• Ergöz, G. (2008). Investigation of self-regulated learning and motivational beliefs in mathematics achievement. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Ankara: Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi.
• Ferla, J., Valcke, M., & Cai, Y. (2009). Academic self-efficacy and academic self-concept: Reconsidering structural relationships. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 499–505.
• Garcia, T, & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). Assessing Students’ Motivation and Learning Strategies in the Classroom Context: The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Alternatives in Assessment of Achievements, Learning Processes and Prior Knowledge Evaluation in Education and Human Services, 42, 319-339.
• Heatherton, T. F., & Wagner, D. D. (2011). Cognitive neuroscience of self-regulation failure. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 132-139.
• Karadeniz, Ş., Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö. E., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., & Demirel, F. (2008). The Turkish adaptation study of Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) for 12–18 year old children: Results of confirmatory factor analysis. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7 (4), article 12.
• Lynch, D. J. (2010). Motivational beliefs and learning strategies as predictors of academic performance in college physics. College Student Journal, 44, 920–928.
• Moschner, B., Anschuetz, A., Wernke, S., & Wagener, U. (2008). Measurement of epistemological beliefs and learning strategies of elementary school children. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs. Epistemological studies across diverse cultures. New York: Springer.
• Mousoulides, N., & Philippou, G. (2005). Students’ motivational beliefs, self-regulation strategies and mathematics achievement. In Chick, H. L. & Vincent, J. L. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 3, pp. 321–328. Melbourne: PME.
• Niemczyk, M. C., & Savenye, W. (2005). Self-regulation in a computer literacy course. Academic Exchange Quarterly 9 (4): 55–61.
• Özturk, B., Bulut, S., & Koç, Y. (2007). Motivation and self-regulation in mathematics. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 11(2): 149–154.
• Pintrich, P. R. (1988). A process-oriented view of student motivation and cognition. In J. S. Stark & L. Mets (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning through research. New directions for institutional research, 57 (pp. 55-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 82(1): 33–40
• Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research 63: 167–199.
• Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning. Michigan: School of Education Building, The University of Michigan. ERIC database number: ED338122.
• Schraw, G., & Moshman, M. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371.
• Schunk, D. H. & Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self reflective practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Seo, D. C., & Taherbhai, H. (2009). Motivational beliefs and cognitive processes in mathematics achievement, analyzed in the context of cultural differences: A Korean elementary school example. Asia Pacific Education Review 10 (2): 193–203.
• Tanner, H., & Jones, S. (2003). Self-efficacy in mathematics and students’ use of self-regulated learning strategies during assessment events. In N.A. Pateman, B.J. Dougherty, & J.T. Zilliox, Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME27), pp. 275-82. Honolulu, HI.
• Üredi, I., & Üredi, L. (2005). İlköğretim 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin öz-düzenleme stratejileri ve motivasyonel inançlarının matematik başarısını yordama gücü. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(2), 250-261.
• Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (1989). Test anxiety in elementary and secondary school students. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 159–183.
• Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms. Instructional Science 26: 27–47.
• Yükseltürk, E., & Bulut, S. (2005). Relationships among self-regulated learning components, motivational beliefs and computer programming achievement in an online learning environment. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies 10 (1): 91–112.
• Yükseltürk, E., & Bulut, S. (2009). Gender differences in self-regulated online learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (3), 12–22.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–72.
• Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23,( 4), 614-628.
• Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284–290.