Öğretmen adaylarında düşünme stilleri, amaç yönelimleri ve akademik başarı arasındaki yordayıcı ilişkilerin analizi

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 62 - 71, 01.08.2016

Mustafa Buluş

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, öğretmen adaylarında düşünme stillerinin amaç yönelimleri ve her iki değişkenin birlikte akademik başarı üzerindeki yordayıcı etkilerini incelemektir. Araştırmaya Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi'nde farklı bölümlerde öğrenim gören 270 öğrenci katılmıştır. Veri toplama araçları olarak Düşünme Stilleri ve Amaç Yönelimleri Ölçekleri ile Kişisel Bilgi Formu kullanılmıştır. Korelasyon analizi sonuçları düşünme stilleri, amaç yönelimleri ve akademik başarı arasında anlamlı ilişkiler olduğunu göstermiştir. Yapılan regresyon analizinde düşünme stillerinin amaç yönelimlerini ve her iki değişkenin birlikte akademik başarıyı anlamlı olarak yordadığı görülmüştür. Bu bağlamda I. Tip düşünme stillerinden hiyerarşik ve liberal stiller öğrenme amaç yöneliminin, yargısal stil ise performans amaç yöneliminin; II. Tip düşünme stillerinden muhafazakar düşünme stili kaçınma amaç yöneliminin anlamlı yordayıcıları olmuştur. Ayrıca, akademik başarının en güçlü yordayıcılarının öğrenme ve kaçınma amaç yönelimleri olduğu bulgulanmıştır. Araştırmada, elde edilen sonuçlar eğitimciler açısından tartışılmış ve önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Akademik başarı, amaç yönelimleri, düşünme stilleri

Predictive Analysis Among Thinking Styles, Goal Orientations and Academic Achievement of Student Teachers

Öz

The aim of this study was to investigate the predictive power of the student teachers' thinking styles on their goal orientations and the predictive power of both thinking styles and goal orientations on their academic achievement. The participants were 270 undergraduate students studying in different departments of the Faculty of Education at Pamukkale University. Thinking Styles and Goal Orientations Inventories and Demographic Information Sheet were used to gather the data. The results of the correlational analysis show significant relationships among thinking styles, goal orientations and academic achievement. Regression analysis indicates that thinking styles predict goal orientations and goal orientations together with thinking styles predict academic achievement. In that sense, hierarchical and liberal Type I thinking styles are the primary predictors of mastery, judicial Type I thinking style is the primary predictor of performance, conservative Type II thinking style is the primary predictor of avoidance goal orientations and mastery and avoidance goal orientations are the primary predictors of academic achievement. In the study, implications of the findings are discussed and suggestions are given.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Thinking styles, goal orientations, academic achievement

Kaynakça

• Akkuş İspir, O., Ay, Z. S., and Saygı, E. (2011). High achiever students’ self regulated learning strategies, motivation towards mathematics, and their thinking styles. Education and Science, 36(162), 235–246.
• Ames, C. (1992). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271.
• Ames, C., and Ames, R. (1981). Competitive versus individualistic goal structures: The salience of past performance information for causal attributions and affect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(3), 411–418.
• Ames, C., and Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Student learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260–267.
• Archer, J. (1994). Achievement goals as a measure of motivation in univer- sity students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 430–446.
• Balkis, M., and Bayezid Işıker, G. (2005). Relationship between thinking styles and personality types. International Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 33(3), 283–294.
• Başol, G. ve Türkoğlu, E. (2009). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının düşünme stil- leri ile kontrol odağı durumları arasındaki ilişki. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 732–757.
• Beyaztaş, D. İ., and Senemoğlu, N. (2015). Learning approaches of success- ful students and factors affecting their learning approaches. Education and Science, 40(179), 193–216.
• Buluş, M. (2006). Assessment of thinking styles in the theory of mental self- government, academic achievement and student teachers’ characteris- tics. Eğitim ve Bilim, 31(139), 35–48.
• Cano-Garcia, F., and Hewitt Hughes, E. (2000). Learning and thinking styles: An analysis of their interrelationship and influence on academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 20(4), 413–432.
• Chan, D. W. (2008). Goal orientations and achievement among Chinese gifted students in Hong Kong. High Ability Studies, 19(1), 37–51.
• Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J., and Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of class- room environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 43–54.
• Diener, C. I., and Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy, and achievement cogni- tions following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(5), 451–462.
• Duman, B., and Çelik, Ö. (2011). The relationship between the elementary school teachers’ thinking styles and the teaching methods they use. Elementary Education Online, 10(2), 785–797.
• Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048.
• Dweck, C. S., and Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273.
• Elliot, A. J., (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 169–189.
• Elliot, A. J., and Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 218–232.
• Elliot, A. J. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A meditational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 461–475.
• Elliot, A. J., and McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal frame- work. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519.
• Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., and Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549–563.
• Emir, S. (2013). Contributions of teachers’ thinking styles to critical think- ing dispositions (İstanbul-Fatih sample). Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(1), 337–347.
• Fan, W., and Zhang, L. F. (2009). Are achievement motivation and think- ing styles related? A visit among Chinese university students. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(2), 299–303.
• Fenollar, P., Román, S., and Cuestas, P. J. (2007). University students’ aca- demic performance: An integrative conceptual framework and empiri- cal analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4), 873–891.
• Grant, H., and Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 541–553.
• Grigorenko, E. L., and Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Styles of thinking, abilities, and academic performance. Exceptional Children, 63(3), 295–312.
• Gutman, L. M. (2005). How student and parent goal orientations and class- room goal structures influence the math achievement of African Americans during the high school transition. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1891–1902.
• Hidi, S., and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 151–179.
• Ho, I. T., and Hau, K. T. (2008). Academic achievement in the Chinese context: The role of goals, strategies, and effort. International Journal of Psychology, 43(5), 892–897.
• Hsieh, P., Sullivan, J. R., and Guerra, N. S. (2007). A closer look at college students: Self efficacy and goal orientation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(3), 454–476.
• Linnenbrink, E. A. (2005). The dilemma of performance- approach goals: The use of multiple goal contexts to promote students’ motivation and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 197–213.
• Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., and Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students’ goal orientation and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 514–523.
• Middleton, M. J., and Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 710–718.
• Midgley, C., and Urdan, T. (2001). Academic self-handicapping and achievement goals: A further examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(1), 61–75.
• Midgley, C., Middleton, M., and Kaplan, A. (2001). Performance-approach goals: Good for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 77–86.
• Midgley, C. Middleton, M.J., Gheen, M.H. and Kumar, R. (2002). Stage- environment fit revisited: A goal theory approach to examining school transitions. In C. Midgley (Ed.), Goals, goals structures, and patterns of adaptive learning, (pp. 109–142). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Nolen, S. B. (1988). Reasons for studying: Motivational orientations and study strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 5(4), 269–287.
• Osborne, J. W., and Waters, E. (2002). Four assumptions of multiple regression that researchers should always test. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 8(2), 1–5.
• Özgüngör, S. (2006). Üniversite öğrencilerinin amaç tarzlarının ve öğret- menlerinin özerklik destekleyici davranışlarına ilişkin algılarının öğrencinin motivasyonu ve akademik davranışlarıyla ilişkisi. Türk PDR Dergisi, 3(25), 27–36.
• Pajares, F., Britner, S. L., and Valiante, G. (2000). Relation between achievement goals and self-beliefs of middle school students in writing and science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 406–422.
• Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 459–470.
• Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544–555.
• Pintrich, P. R., and De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulat- ed learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40.
• Seifert, T. L. (1995). Academic goals and emotions: A test of two models. The Journal of Psychology, 129(5), 543–552.
• Senemoğlu, N. (2011). College of education students’ approaches to learn- ing and study skills. Education and Science, 36(160), 65–80.
• Skaalvik, E. M. (1997). Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-per- ceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 71–81.
• Somuncuoğlu, Y., and Yıldırım, A. (1999). Relationships between achieve- ment goal orientations and use of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Research, 92(5), 267–278.
• Sternberg, R. J., and Lubart, T. I. (1992). Buy low and sell high: An invest- ment approach to creativity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(1), 1–5.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1988). Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human Development, 31(4), 197–224.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Thinking styles: Theory and assessment at the interface between intelligence and personality, In R. J. Sternberg, and P. Ruzgis (Eds.), Intelligence and personality (pp. 169–187). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Sternberg, R. J., and Wagner, R. K. (1992). Thinking styles inventory, Unpublished test. New Haven, CT: Yale University.
• Urdan, T., Midgley, C., and Anderman, E. M. (1998). Classroom influ- ences on self-handicapping strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 101–122.
• Yıldız, K. (2012). Primary schools administrators’ social skill levels and thinking styles. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 14(2), 49–70.
• Zhang, L. F. (2000a). Are thinking styles and personality types related? Educational Psychology, 20(3), 271–284.
• Zhang, L. F. (2000b). Relationship between thinking styles inventory and study process questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 29(5), 841–856.
• Zhang, L. F. (2001a). Thinking styles and personality types revisited. Personality and Individual Differences, 31(6), 883–894.
• Zhang, L. F. (2001b). Approaches and thinking styles in teaching. The Journal of Psychology, 135(5), 547–561.
• Zhang, L. F. (2001c). Thinking styles, self-esteem, and extracurricular experiences. International Journal of Psychology, 36(2), 100–107.
• Zhang, L. F. (2002a). Thinking styles and cognitive development. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(2), 179–195.
• Zhang, L. F. (2002b). Thinking styles: Their relationships with modes of thinking and academic performance. Educational Psychology, 22(3), 331–348.
• Zhang, L. F. (2003). Contributions of thinking styles to critical thinking dispositions. The Journal of Psychology, 137(6), 517–544.
• Zhang, L. F. (2004a). Thinking styles: University students’ preferred teach- ing styles and their conceptions of effective teachers. The Journal of Psychology, 138(3), 233–252.
• Zhang, L. F. (2004b). Revisiting the predictive power of thinking styles for academic performance. The Journal of Psychology, 138(4), 351–370.
• Zhang, L. F., and Postiglione, G. A. (2001). Thinking styles, self-esteem, and socio-economic status. Personality and Individual Differences, 31(8), 1333–1346.
• Zhang, L. F., and Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Thinking styles, abilities, and aca- demic achievement among Hong Kong university students. Educational Research Journal, 13, 41–62.
• Zhang, L. F., and Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Are learning approaches and thinking styles related? A study in two Chinese populations. Journal of Psychology Interdisciplinary and Applied, 134(5), 469–490.
• Zhang, L. F., and Sternberg, R. J. (2005). A threefold model of intellectual styles. Educational Psychology Review, 17(1), 1–53.