Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
classroom goal structure
self-regulated learning strategies
The purposes of the present research were aimed to: (a) construct a motivational process model of creativity in which future goal, classroom goal structure, self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies and creativity are examined with an investigation of empirical model-fitting analysis based on the performance of Taiwanese junior high students; (b) explore the effects of situational goal cues, personal goal orientation, and measurement stages on self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies, and creativity. Two studies were conducted in these regards. In study 1, Future Goal Scale, Classroom Goal Structure Scale, Self-Determination Motivation Scale, Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Scale, and Mathematical Creativity Test were used as instruments to measure the performance of the participating 913 junior high school students and the results were analyzed by Structure Equation Model (SEM). In study 2, 10 classes with 232 7th grades of 2 junior high schools in Taipei City were selected. All the classes were conducted as the individual study groups for different manipulations which included 5 distinct levels: teaching group of approach-mastery classroom goal, teaching group of future intrinsic goal plus approach-mastery classroom goal, teaching group of multiple classroom goal, and teaching group of future intrinsic goal plus multiple classroom goal and control group. The interaction effects between the cues of situational goal and individual goal orientation on self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies, and creativity were examined at three different study stages: pretest, posttest and delayed posttest. All the instruments were adopted as Study 1 but Personal Goal Orientation Scale and a divergent production measurement only for the posttest stage. The principal findings of Studies 1 and 2 include: 1. The result of study1 pointed out that the motivational process of creativity fits the empirically observed data well. Moreover, future goal had indirect effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies through self-determination; and classroom goal structure had indirect effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies through self-determination. However, not all kinds of future goal and classroom goal structure were benefit to creativity and self-regulated learning strategies. Only the future intrinsic goal and mastery classroom goal structure had a positive effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies; and future extrinsic goal and performance classroom goal structure were found have no effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies, respectively. 2. For Study 2: (1) There was a significant two-way interaction effect between the cues of situational goal and individual goal orientation on cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies. It was revealed that the score of cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies of the experiment teaching group were higher than control group. And if the subjects of control group who had multiple goal or performance goal, they would have better scores of cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies. (2) A two-way interaction effect between the cues of situational goal and measurement stages on autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies exists. It was found that the multiple classroom goal structure has a largest protection effect on learning behavior. In meanwhile, it could maintain the same level of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies at the pretest stage and had a superior delayed effect on autonomous motivation. Furthermore, the protection effect can be viewed as a approach-mastery classroom goal structure and it could keep the same level of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies but it had no any delayed effect. Also, the scores of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies for the control group declined with time. (3) The two-way interaction effect between cues of situational goal and measurement stages on fluency and flexibility of divergent production was found significant. It was indicated that the score of fluency of experiment teaching group was higher than control group in the posttest. The score of flexibility of experiment teaching group was higher than control group in the posttest, but the scores of flexibility of approach-mastery classroom goal group and control significantly appeared to decline from the pretest to the posttest.
|Appears in Collections:||學位論文|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.