跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.97.14.82) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/12/14 10:02
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:賴美璇
研究生(外文):Mei-Hsuan Lai
論文名稱:動機調整策略融入英語科之教學效果
論文名稱(外文):Motivational Regulation Strategy Teaching and Learning in English Classroom
指導教授:程炳林程炳林引用關係
指導教授(外文):Biing-Lin Cherng
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:綜合教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2006
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:336
中文關鍵詞:動機涉入動機信念動機調整策略教學效果行動/狀態導向組
外文關鍵詞:action-state orientated groupsmotivational beliefmotivational regulation strategyeffectmotivational engagement
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:35
  • 點閱點閱:718
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:165
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
本研究之目的為:一、探討動機調整策略融入英語科教學課程之效果;二、分析動機調整策略融入英語科教學課程與個人特質(行動/狀態導向)對學習動機之交互影響;三、探究動機調整策略融入英語科教學課程與個人特質(行動/狀態導向)對學習動機之交互影響,是否會受時間因子的調節。

為完成前述目的,本研究設計「動機調整策略融入英語科教學課程」,採「不等組前測-後測-延後測實驗設計」進行教學實驗,受試者抽選自台南市、縣地區之國中一年級學生。本研究之自變項為教學組別、行動/狀態導向組及測量階段,依變項為動機調整策略、動機信念、動機涉入及學業成就,所蒐集的資料以2 × 2 × 3三因子混合設計變異數分析及2 × 2二因子獨立樣本共變數分析考驗各項假設。

本研究發現如下:
一、動機調整策略方面:(1)教學組別、行動/狀態導向組與測量階段在情緒調整策略、降低考試焦慮策略、負向刺激策略之三因子交互作用達顯著水準;(2)教學組別與行動/狀態導向組在九項動機調整策略(內在目標導向策略、興趣策略、重要性策略、效用性策略、控制信念策略、自我效能策略、情緒調整策略、降低考試焦慮策略、負向刺激策略)之二因子交互作用達顯著水準,教學組別與測量階段在前述九項動機調整策略之二因子交互作用亦達顯著水準;(3)教學組別、行動/狀態導向組及測量階段在九項動機調整策略之主要效果皆達顯著水準。

二、動機信念方面:(1)教學組別、行動/狀態導向組與測量階段在考試焦慮之三因子交互作用達顯著水準;(2)教學組別與測量階段在內在目標導向、興趣、重要性、效用性、控制信念、自我效能、正向情感之二因子交互作用達顯著水準;(3)教學組別在興趣、重要性、效用性、控制信念、自我效能、正向情感、負向情感、考試焦慮之主要效果達顯著水準,行動/狀態導向組在內在目標導向、考試焦慮之主要效果達顯著水準,測量階段在興趣、正向情感、負向情感之主要效果亦達顯著水準。

三、動機涉入方面:(1)教學組別與測量階段在堅持、工作選擇、工具性求助之二因子交互作用達顯著水準,行動/狀態導向組與測量階段在工具性求助之二因子交互作用也達顯著水準;(2)教學組別在堅持、努力、工作選擇、工具性求助之主要效果達顯著水準,測量階段在工作選擇之主要效果亦達顯著水準。

四、學業成就:(1)教學組別在第二次段考成績之主要效果達顯著水準;(2)教學組別、行動/狀態導向組在第三次段考成績之二因子交互作用達顯著水準;(3)教學組別在第三次段考成績之主要效果亦達顯著水準。

本研究依據研究結果提出建議,以提供國中教學、學習輔導及未來研究之參考。
The main objects of this study were: A. To present the effects and impacts of Motivational Regulation Strategy Teaching and Learning in English classroom” program. B. To analyze the interactive effects between “Motivational Regulation Strategy Teaching and Learning in English classroom” program and the roles of action-state orientation on learning motivation. C. To examine the interactive effects between “Motivational Regulation Strategy Teaching and Learning in English classroom” program and the roles of action-state orientation on learning motivation at different measurement occasions.

In order to achieve desirable results,
Motivational Regulation Strategy Teaching and Learning in English classroom” program has been designed. A nonequivalent pretest-posttest experimental design was employed. Participants for the study were 7th graders in Tainan. The independent variables were experimental and control groups, action-state oriented groups, and measurement occasion, while the dependent variables were motivational regulation strategy, motivational belief, motivational engagement, and achievement. Three-way mixed design ANOVA and two-way ANCOVA were conducted.

The results of this study can be summarized as follows:

A. In terms of motivational regulation strategy: (a) the three-way interactions among experimental and control groups, action-state orientated groups, and measurement occasion on emotion regulation strategy, test anxiety alleviation strategy, and aversive stimulation strategy were found. (b) the two-way interactions between experimental and control groups and action-state orientated groups on nine motivational regulation strategies (intrinsic goal-oriented strategy, interest enhancement strategy, importance enhancement strategy, utility enhancement strategy, control belief strategy, efficacy self-talk strategy, emotion regulation strategy, test anxiety alleviation strategy, and aversive stimulation strategy) were found; the two-way interactions between experimental and control groups and measurement occasion on nine motivational regulation strategies were found as well. (c) the main effects of three independent variables on nine motivational regulation strategies were found.

B. In terms of motivational belief: (a) the three-way interaction among experimental and control groups, action-state orientated groups, and measurement occasion on test anxiety was found. (b) the two-way interactions between experimental and control groups and measurement occasion on intrinsic goal-oriented, interest, importance, utility, control belief, self-efficacy, and positive affect were found. (c) the main effects of experimental and control groups on interest, importance, utility, control belief, self-efficacy, positive affect, negative affect, and test anxiety were found; the main effects of action-state orientated groups on intrinsic goal-oriented and test anxiety were found; the main effects of measurement occasion on interest, positive affect, and negative affect were found as well.

C. In terms of motivational engagement: (a) the two-way interactions between experimental and control groups and measurement occasion on persistence, task choice, and instrumental help seeking were found; the two-way interaction between action-state oriented groups and measurement occasion on instrumental help seeking was found as well. (b) the main effects of experimental and control groups on persistence, effort, task choice, and instrumental help seeking were found; the main effect of measurement occasion on task choice was found as well.

D. In terms of achievement: (a) the main effect of experimental and control groups on mid-term was found. (b) the two-way interaction between experimental and control groups and action-state oriented groups on final exam was found. (c) the main effect of experimental and control groups on final exam was found.

Based on the findings of this study, applications and suggestions for teaching, educational guidance, and further research were proposed.
中文摘要 Ⅰ
英文摘要 Ⅱ
目次 Ⅲ
表目次 Ⅴ
圖目次 Ⅹ

第一章 緒論 01
第一節 研究動機與目的 01
第二節 研究問題 06
第三節 名詞定義 08

第二章 文獻探討 18
第一節 動機理論與研究 18
第二節 動機調整策略的義涵與類別 30
第三節 動機調整策略的教學 39
第四節 行動/狀態導向特質與動機調整策略之關係 45

第三章 研究方法 56
第一節 研究假設與對象 56
第二節 研究工具 67
第三節 研究程序 83
第四節 教學實驗程序 86
第五節 資料分析 89

第四章 研究結果 91
第一節 基本統計分析 91
第二節 教學組別、行動/狀態導向組及測量階段對動機調整策略之效果 98
第三節 教學組別、行動/狀態導向組及測量階段對動機信念之效果 147
第四節 教學組別、行動/狀態導向組及測量階段對動機涉入之效果 175
第五節 教學組別、行動/狀態導向組對學業成就之效果 188

第五章 討論、結論與建議 193
第一節 討論 193
第二節 結論 207
第三節 建議 219

參考書目 224
中文部份 224
西文部份 226

附錄一 行動導向量表 234
附錄二 動機調整策略量表 238
附錄三 動機信念量表 242
附錄四 動機涉入量表 245
附錄五 教師手冊 247
附錄六 動機調整策略融入英語科教學課程設計 254
一、中文部分

李玫蓉(2004)。國中生趨向表現目標、文化價值觀與適應性學習組型之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

李旻樺(2002)。高中學生之自我效能、成功期望、學習任務價值與課業學習動機調整策略之研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商所碩士論文。

林易慧(2005)。課室目標線索與個人目標導向對國小學童解題成就及自我調整學習之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

林桑瑜(2002)。高中生自我調整學習策略之研究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

林清山、程炳林(1997)。國中生學習行動控制模式的建構與驗證暨教學輔導策略實驗方案效果之研究(Ι)。國科會專案研究報告。SC86-2413-H-003-010-G10。

侯玫如(2002)。多重目標導向對國中生認知、動機、情感與學習行為之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

張憲卿(2002)。大學生行動控制之研究:學習動機之機轉。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

陳嘉成(1999)。成就目標、動機氣候、自我歷程與自我調整策略、持續學習動機和數學成就之關係。國立政治大學教育系博士論文。

陳麗芬(1995)。行動控制觀點的自我調節學習及相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。

彭月茵(2002)。目標層次、回饋訊息對數學工作表現與學習動機之效果:考量國中生的控制信念。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

彭淑玲(2004)。四向度課室目標結構、個人目標導向與課業求助行為之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

程炳林(1998)。認知/意動成分與學習表現之關係暨二階驗證性因素分析模式之適配性研究。國科會專案研究報告。NSC87-2413-H-035-002。

程炳林(2000)。行動/狀態導向、目標層次、工作複雜度對國中生行動控制策略與工作表現之影響。教育心理學報,31(1),67-92。

程炳林(2001)。動機、目標設定、行動控制、學習策略之關係:自我調整學習歷程模式之建構及驗證。師大學報:教育類,46(1),67-92。

程炳林(2002)。大學生學習工作、動機問題與自我調整學習策略之關係。教育心理學報,33(2),79-102。

程炳林(2003)。四向度目標導向模式之研究。師大學報:教育類,48(1),15-40。

程炳林、林清山(1998)。行動導向量表編製報告。測驗年刊,45(1),65-82。

程炳林、林清山(1999)。國中生學習行動控制模式之驗證及行動控制變項與學習適應之關係。教育心理學報,31(1),1-35。

程炳林、林清山(2000)。中學生自我調整學習之研究(1/2)。國科會專案研究報告。NSC89-2413-H-035-001。

程炳林、林清山(2001)。中學生自我調整學習量表之建構及其信效度研究。測驗年刊,48(1),1-41。

傅郁雅(2005)。高中生知覺的課室目標結構、學習動機與學業成就之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

劉佩雲(1998)。兒童自我調整學習之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。

謝岱陵(2003)。國中生四向度目標導向之中介效果分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。

蘇嘉鈴、程炳林(2005)。國中生行動導向、目標導向與動機調整策略之關係。教育心理學報,36(4),395-415。

二、西文部分

Ames, C. (1992). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.

Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Student’s learning
strategies and motivation process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3),260-267.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Beckmann, J. (1994). Volitional correlates of action versus state orientation. In J. Kuhl
& J. Beckman (Eds.), Volition and personality (pp. 297-315). Seattle, WA:Hogrefe & Huber.

Boekaerts, M. (1999).Self-regulated learning:Where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 445-457.

Boekaerts, M. (2001). Context sensitivity: Activated motivational beliefs, current
concerns and emotional arousal. In S. Volet & S. Jarvela (Eds.), Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and methodological implications (pp. 17-31). New York: Pergamon.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of
learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

Corno, L. (1989). Self-regulated learning: A volitional analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman
& D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 83-110). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Corno, L. (1993). The best-laid plans: Modern conceptions and educational research.
Educational Researcher, 22(2), 14-22.

Corno, L. (1994). Student volition and education: Outcomes, influence, and practice. In
D. H., Schunk & B. J., Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 229-254). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Corno, L., & Kanfer, R. (1993). The role of volition in learning and performance.
Review of Research in Education, 19, 301-341.

Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). The flow experience and its significance for human
psychology. In M. Csikszentmihalyi, & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal
experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness (pp. 15-35). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

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

Eccles, J. S. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco: Freeman.

Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivation, beliefs, values, and goals. Annual
Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.

Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon
(Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Volume Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3,
pp. 1017-1095). New York: Wiley.

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1996). The expert learner: Strategic self-regulated, and
reflective. Instructional Science, 24, 1-24.
Garcia, T., McCann, E. J., Turner, J. E., &

Roska, L. (1998). Modeling the mediating
role of volition in the learning process.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 392-418.

Garcia, T., & Pintrich, P. R. (1993). Self-schemas, motivational strategies, and
self-regulated learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational research Association, Atlanta, GA.

Kuhl, J. (1985). Volitional mediators of cognitive-behavior consistency: Self-regulatory
process and action versus state orientation. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp.101-128). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Kuhl, J. (1987). Action control: The maintenance of motivational state. In F. Halische
& J. Kuhl (Eds.), Motivation, intention, and volition (pp.279-291). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Kuhl, J. (1994). A theory of action and state orientations. In J. Kuhl & J.
Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality (pp.9-46). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.

Kuhl, J. (1994). Action versus state orientation: Psychometric properties of the Action Control Scale (ACS-90). In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and
personality (pp.47-59). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic
success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327.

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student
engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly:
Overcoming learning difficulties, 19(2), 119-137.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Markus, H. R., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social-psychological
perspective. In Rosenzweg, M. R., & Porter, L. W. (Eds.) Annual Review of
Psychology, 38, 299-337. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.

McCann, E. J. & Garcia, T. (1999). Maintaining motivation and regulating emotion:
Measuring individual differences in academic volitional strategies. Learning and
Individual Differences, 11(3), 259-279.

Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students’ goal orientations and
cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Education Psychology, 80(4), 514-523.

Pekrun, R. & Frese, M. (1992). Emotions in work and achievement. In C. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 153-200). Chichester, UK:Wiley.

Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the
college classroom. In C. Ames & M. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and
achievement: Motivation enhancing environments (Vol. 6, pp.117-160). Greenwich, CT: JAJ Press.

Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated
learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 459-470.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000a). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000b). Multiple goals , multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544-555.

Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student
motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.

Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and
self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.

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., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students’ motivational beliefs and their
cognitive engagement in classroom tasks. In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.),
Students perceptions in the classroom: Causes and consequences (pp. 149-183). Hillsdales, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and
applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Merrill.

Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., & Mckeachie, W. J. (1989). A manual for the use of the
Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). MI: National Center
for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.

Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding
intrinsic motivation. In C. Sansone, & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.) Intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation: The Search for optimal motivation and performance (pp.
375-407). New York: Academic Press.

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external of
reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80(1), 1-28.
Schiefele, U. (1999). Interest & learning from text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3,
257-280.
Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self-efficacy and school learning. Psychology in the Schools, 22,
208-223.
Schunk, D. H. (1996). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Merrill.

Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed.) (pp. 125-151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P.A. (2000). Self-regulation and academic learning:
Self-efficacy enhancing interventions. In M. Boekaerts, P. R., Pintrich & M.
Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 631-649). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory
competence. Educational Psychologist, 32, 195-208.
Snow, R. E., Corno, L., & Jackson III, D. (1996). Individual differences in affective and
conative functions. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 243-310). New York: Macmillan.

Weiner, B. (1980). The role of affect in rational (attributional) approaches to human
motivation. Educational Researcher, 9, 4-11.

Weinstein, C. E., Husman, J., & Dierking D. R. (2000). Self-regulation interventions
with a focus on learning strategies. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner
(Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 727-747). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C.
Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 315-327). New York: Macmillan.

Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49-78.

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.

Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students’ regulation of motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 224-235.

Wolters, C. A. (1999). The relation between high school students’ motivational regulation and
their use of learning strategies, effort, and classroom performance. Learning and Individual Difference, 11(3), 281-299.

Wolters, C. A. (2003). Understanding procrastination from a self-regulated learning
perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 179-187.

Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structure
and goal orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236-250.

Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation
and self-regulated learning mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms.
Instructional Science, 26, 27-47.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In
M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation
(pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical
perspectives (2nd ed.) (pp. 1-37). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Zimmermann, B., & Kitsantas, A. (1997).
Developmental phases in self-regulation:
Shifting from process to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 29-36.

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, 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(1), 284-290.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated
learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top