The role of achievement goal orientations and interest on metacognitive strategy use of preservice science teachers

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 3, 4 - 15, 30.07.2015

Volkan Atasoy

https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.44440

Cited By: 1

Öz

The purpose of this study was to determine contribution of achievement goal orientations and personal interest on prediction of metacognitive strategy use of preservice science teachers. This study was conducted with three hundred and twenty-two preservice science teachers who are freshmen, sophomore, junior and senior of elementary science education program. Data was collected by using three instruments which are “Metacognitive Self-Regulation Subscale ofMotivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire”, “Achievement Goals Questionnaire” and “The Academic Interest Questionnaire”. Data was controlled with respect to reliability and validity. The collected data was analyzed by hierarchical regression. Results of this analysis showed that mastery approach goal orientation predicted significantly metacognitive strategy use of preservice science teacher in science course. On the other hand, mastery avoidance, performance approach, performance avoidance goal orientations and personal interest was not founded to predict significantly to metacognitive strategy use.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Achievement goal orientations, personal interest, metacognitive strategy

Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının başarı hedefi yönelimleri ve ilgilerinin bilişüstü strateji kullanımındaki rolü

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının başarı hedefi yönelimleri ve kişisel ilgilerinin bilişüstü strateji kullanımını yordamadaki katkısını belirlemektir. Bu çalışma, ilköğretim fen bilgisi eğitimi programında okuyan birinci, ikinci, üçüncü ve dördüncü sınıfta olan toplam 322 fen bilgisi öğretmen adayı ile yürütülmüştür. Veriler, “Öğrenmede Güdüsel Stratejiler Ölçeğinin Bilişüstü Özdüzenleme Alt Ölçeği”, “Başarı Hedefleri Anketi” ve “Akademik İlgi Anketi” kullanarak toplanmıştır. Güvenirlik ve geçerlilik açısından, veriler kontrol edilmiştir. Daha sonra, bu veriler hiyerarşik regresyon ile analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma bulguları sonucunda, ustalık-yaklaşım hedef yöneliminin, bilişüstü strateji kullanımını önemli ölçüde istatiksel olarak yordadığı görülmüştür. Bunun yanında, ustalık-kaçınma hedef yöneliminin, başarım-yaklaşım hedef yönelimi, başarım-kaçınma hedef yönelimi ve kişisel ilgilerin bilişüstü strateji kullanımı önemli ölçüde tahmin etmediği bulunmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

Başarı hedef yönelimi, kişisel ilgi, bilişüstü strateji

Kaynakça

• Akyol, G., Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2010). The contribution of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to students' science achievement.Educational Research and Evaluation, 16(1), 1-21.
• Alexander, J. M., Carr, M., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: Directions for future research. DevelopmentalReview, 15(1), 1-37.
• Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Student learning strategies and motivation processes. Journalof Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
• Arsal, Z. (2009).The effects of diaries on self-regulation strategies of preservice science teachers. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 5(1), 85-103.
• Baird, J. R., & White, R. T. (1996).Metacognitive strategies in the classroom. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit, & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), Improving teaching and learningin science and mathematics (pp. 190-200). New York: Teachers College Press.
• Bembenutty, H. (2012). A latent class analysis of teacher candidates’ goal orientation, perception of classroom structure, motivation, and self-regulation.Psychology Journal, 9(3).97-106.
• Bulus M. (2011). Goal orientations, locus of control and academic achievement in prospective teachers: An individual differences perspective. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice,11(2), 540-546.
• Bulus.M., Duru, E., Balkıs, M., & Duru, S. (2011).The role of learning strategies and individual characteristics in predicting academic achievement in prospective teachers.Education and Science, 36(161),186-198.
• Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245-281.
• Butler, R. (2007). Teachers’ achievement goals and associations with teachers’ help-seeking: Examination of a novel approach to teacher motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 241-252.
• Cellar, D. F., Stuhlmacher, A. F., Young, S. K., Fisher, D. M., Adair, C. K., Haynes, S.….Riester, D. (2011). Trait goal orientation, self-regulation, and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(4), 467-483.
• Clercq, M. D.,Galand, B., & Frenay, M. (2013). Chicken or the egg: Longitudinal analysis of the causal dilemma between goal orientation, self-regulation and cognitive processing strategies in higher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39, 4-13.
• Corbiere, M., Fraccaroli, F., Mbekou, V., & Perron, J. (2006). Academic self-concept and academic interest measurement: A multi-sample European study. European Journal of Psychologyof Education, 21, 3-15.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. (1985).Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
• Dweck, C. S., & Elliott, E. S. (1983).Achievement motivation. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality, and social development (vol. (Vol. IV)). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988).A social cognitive approach to motivation and personality.Psychological Review,95, 256-273.
• Ee, J., Moore, P. J., & Atputhasamy, L. (2003). High achieving students: Their motivational goals, self-regulation and achievement and relationship to their teachers’ goal and strategy-based instruction. High Ability Studies, 14, 23-39.
• Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivaiton and achievement goals.Educational Psychologist, 34, 169-189.
• Elliot A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997).A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation.Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 72, 218-232.
• Elliot, A. J., & Mcgregor, H. A. (2001).A 2x2 achievement goal framework.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501-519.
• Elliot, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 54, 5-12.
• Fox, K., Goudas M., Biddle, S., Duda, J., & Armstrong, N. (1994). Children’s task and ego goal profiles in sport. British Journalof Educational Psychology, 64, 253-261.
• Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., Jacobsen, D. R., & Bullock, T. L. (1990).Tools for learning.Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment.
• Garcia, T., & Pintrich, P. R. (1994).Regulating motivation and cognition in the classroom: The role of selfschemas and self-regulatory strategies.In D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self regulation of learning and performance.issues and educational applications (pp. 127-153). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates..
• Ho, I. T., & Hau, K. T. (2008). Academic achievement in the Chinese context: The role of goals, strategies, and effort. InternationalJournal of Psychology, 43(5), 892-897.
• Iverach, M.R. & Fisher, D.L. (2008). An interdisciplinary investigation of high schools’ approaches to learning sciences: The relations amongst achievement goals, constructivist pedagogical dimensions, motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 233-255.
• Kahraman, N., & Sungur S. (2011).The contribution of motivational beliefs to students’ metacognitive strategy use.Education and Science, 36(160), 3-10.
• Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practices of structural equations modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.
• Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (1992).Interest, learning and development. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Lee, W., Lee, M. J., & Bong, M. (2014).Testing interest and self-efficacy as predictors of academic self-regulation and achievement.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 86-99.
• Leibham, M. B., Alexander, J. M., & Johnson, K. E. (2013).Science interests in preschool boys and girls: Relations to later self-concept and science achievement.Science Education, 97(4), 574-593.
• Leutwyler, B. (2009). Metacognitive learning strategies: Differential development patterns in high school, Metacognition Learning, 4, 111-123.
• Maehr, M. L., & Midgley, C. (1991).Enhancing studnets motivation: A schoolwide approach.Educational Psychologist, 26, 339-427.
• Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., Middleton, M., Maehr, M., Urdan T., Hicks A. L., Anderman, E., & Rooser, R. (1998).The development and validation of scales assessing students’ achievement goal orientations.Contemporary educational Psychology, 23, 113-131.
• Miller, R. B., Behrens, J. T., Greene, B. A., & Newman, D. (1993). Goals and perceived ability: Impact on student valuing, self-regulation and persistence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 2-14.
• Ministry of National Education of Turkey. (2006). Science and technology curriculum of elementary schools (6th –8th grades) [in Turkish].Board ofEducation.
• Nicholls, J. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328-346.
• 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 institutionalresearch, 57(pp. 55-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• O’Keefe, P. A., & Garcia, L. L. (2014).The role of interest in optimizing performance and self-regulation.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 53, 70-78.
• Osborne, J. (2007). Science education for the twenty first century. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(3), 173-184.
• Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
• 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. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 92, 544-555.
• Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M.Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 452-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
• Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E.V. (1990).Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
• Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia.T. (1991).Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Goals and self-regulatorvprocesses (Vol.7, pp. 371-402), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Pintrich, P. R., Roeser, R. W., & De Groot, E. A. M. (1993). Classroom and individual differences in early adolescents’ motivation and self-regulated learning.Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 139-161.
• Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991).A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: National Centre for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, The University of Michigan.
• Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002).Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
• Poondej, C., Koul, R., & Sujivorakul, C. (2013).Achievement goal orientation and the critical thinking disposition of college students across academic programmes.Journal of Further and Higher Education, 37(4), 504-518.
• Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2002). Student interest and achievement: Developmental issues raised by a case study. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 173-195). New York, NY: Academic.
• Sansone, C., & Thoman, D. B. (2005).Interest as the missing motivator in self-regulation.European Psychologist, 10, 175-186.
• Senler, B., & Sungur, S. (2007, November). Hedef yönelimi anketinin Türkçe’ye çevrilmesi ve adaptasyonu. A paper presented at 1. Ulusal İlköğretim Kongresi, Ankara, Turkey.
• Senler, B., & Sungur S. (2009). Parental influences on students’ self-concept, task value beliefs, and achievement in science. The Spanish Journal of Psychology 12(1), 106-117.
• Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995).Metacognitive theories.Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371.
• Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006).Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning.Reseacrh in Science Education, 36, 114-139.
• Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning and motivation.Educational Psychologist, 26, 299-323.
• Schiefele, U., Krapp, A., & Winteler, A. (1992). Interest as a predictor of academic achievemnt: A metaanalysis of research. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp.183-212). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 95, 323-332.
• Somuncuoğlu, Y. & Yıldırım, A. (1999).Relationships between achievement goal orientations and use of learning strategies.Journal of Educational Research, 92(5), 267-278.
• Sungur, S. (2004).The implementation of problem-based learning in secondary school biology courses.Unpublished dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
• Sungur.S. (2007).Modeling the relationships among students’ motivational beliefs, metacognitive strategy use, and effort regulation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51(3), 315-326.
• Sungur, S., & Senler, B. (2009).An analysis of Turkish high school students’ metacognition and motivation.Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(1), 45-62.
• Sungur, S., & Senler, B. (2010).Students' achievement goals in relation to academic motivation, competence expectancy, and classroom environment perceptions.Educational Research and Evaluation, 16(4), 303-324.
• Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006).Effects of problem-based learning and traditional instruction on self-regulated learning.Journal of Educational Research, 99(5), 307-317.
• Tai, R. T., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. T. (2006).Planning early for careers in science.Science, 312, 1143-1144.
• Taylor, N., & Corrigan, G. (2005). Empowerment and confidence: Pre‐service teachers learning to teach science through a program of self‐regulated learning, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 5(1), 41-60.
• Tung-hsien, H. (2004). The relations among trichotomous achievement goals, self-efficacy, and self-regulation in EFL sixth-grade classes in Taiwan.Journal of National Taipei Teachers College, 17, 11-134.
• Valle, A., Cabanach, R. G., Nunez, J. C., Gonzalez-Pienda, J., Rodriguez, S., & Pieniro, I. (2003).Cognitive, motivational, and volitional dimension of learning.Research in Higher Education, 44, 557-580.
• Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000).Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
• Wolters, C., Yu, S. & Pintrich, P. (1996).The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning.Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 211-238.
• Xu, J. (2008). Models of secondary students’ interest in homework: A multilevel analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 1180-1205.