臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究之主要目的在探究國中小學生在知識信念、目標導向與認知投入的表現情形；探究國中小學生在知識信念、目標導向與認知投入上的差異情形；探討年級與性別對知識信念、目標導向與認知投入的交互作用效果；分析知識信念、目標導向與認知投入之間的關係；最後再探究年級、性別、知識信念與目標導向對認知投入的預測情形。
本研究採問卷調查法，以苗栗縣公立國中與國小學生共323人為研究對象，以「知識信念量表」、「目標導向量表」與「認知投入量表」為研究工具，並以描述性統計、單因子重複量數變異數分析、二因子多變量變異數分析、Pearson積差相關分析、多元迴歸分析及階層迴歸分析等方法進行統計處理。
本研究之重要發現如下：
一、國中小學生在四種知識信念上有顯著差異。國中小學生所持的知識信念以能力天生最高、其次是知識簡單、第三是快速學習，最低為知識確定。
二、國中小學生在四種目標導向上有顯著差異。國中小學生所持的目標導向以逃避精熟目標為最高、其次是趨向精熟目標、第三是趨向表現目標，最低為逃避表現目標。
三、國中小學生在兩種認知投入上有顯著差異。國中小學生所使用的認知投入以深層投入較高、次之為淺層投入的使用。
四、不同年級在「能力天生」及「快速學習」信念上有顯著差異，六年級學生比八年級學生較不傾向相信「能力天生」及「快速學習」。不同年級在「趨向精熟目標」與「趨向表現目標」上有顯著差異，六年級學生比八年級學生傾向抱持「趨向精熟目標」及「趨向表現目標」。不同年級在認知投入上有顯著差異，六年級學生對於淺層及深層策略的使用情形高於八年級學生。
五、性別在知識信念與目標導向上無顯著的差異。性別在認知投入淺層策略上有顯著的差異，女學生在淺層策略的使用上高於男學生。
六、年級與性別在知識信念、目標導向、認知投入上無交互作用效果。
七、知識簡單、知識確定、能力天生、快速學習與深層策略呈顯著正相關；知識簡單與淺層策略呈顯著負相關。
八、趨向精熟目標、逃避精熟目標、趨向表現目標與淺層及深層策略呈顯著正相關；逃避表現目標與深層策略呈顯著負相關。
九、知識簡單、知識確定、能力天生、快速學習與趨向精熟目標呈顯著正相關、與逃避表現目標呈顯著負相關；知識簡單與逃避精熟目標呈顯著正相關；知識確定、能力天生、快速學習與趨向表現目標呈顯著負相關。
十、知識簡單、快速學習能正向測趨向精熟目標；年級能負向預測趨向精熟目標；人口變項（性別）、知識簡單信念能正向預測逃避精熟目標；能力天生能負向預測逃避精熟目標；人口變項（年級）、知識確定、能力天生能負向預測趨向表現目標；知識簡單、能力天生能負向預測逃避表現目標。
十一、趨向精熟目標及逃避精熟目標能正向預測淺層策略與深層策略，而逃避表現目標能負向預測淺層策略與深層策略；趨向表現目標則僅能正向預測淺層策略。
十二、國中小學生之知識簡單對其淺層策略的效果完全受到其趨向精熟、逃避精熟目標與逃避表現目標所中介；不同年級參與者對淺層策略的效果受到趨向精熟目標和趨向表現目標的部份中介；參與者的性別對淺層策略的效果是受到逃避精熟目標的部份中介；而參與者的知識確定對其淺層策略的效果則受到趨向表現目標的部份中介。
十三、不同年級參與者對其深層策略的效果完全受到其趨向精熟與趨向表現所中介，國中小學生之知識簡單與快速學習信念對深層策略的效果受到趨向精熟目標的部份中介。
本研究最後根據研究結果提出各項建議，以提供教師及未來研究之參考。

The main purposes of this study were to (1)explore the differences in epistemological beliefs, goal orientations and cognitive engagement of the Junior High School and Elementary School students, (2)investigate the interactive effects on epistemological beliefs, goal orientations and cognitive engagement in terms of age and gender, (3)examine the correlation among epistemological beliefs, goal orientations, and cognitive engagement, (4) examine how the age, gender, epistemological beliefs, and goal orientations predicted cognitive engagement.
A total of 323 students, selected from public Junior High Schools and Elementary Schools in Miaoli, completed the Epistemological Beliefs Scale, Goal Orientations Scale, and Cognitive Engagement Scale. The statistical methods used to analyze the data were descriptive analysis, one-way repeated measures ANOVA, two-way MANOVA, Pearson’s product-moment correlation, and hierarchical regression analysis.
The findings of this study were summarized as follows:
1. There were significant differences in epistemological beliefs of the Junior High School and Elementary School students. The highest score was fond in ‘innate ability’, the second was ‘simple knowledge’, the third was ’quick learning’, and the lowest was ‘certain knowledge’.
2. There were significant differences in goal orientations of the Junior High School and Elementary School students. The highest score was fond in ‘avoidance-mastery goal’, the second was ‘approach-mastery goal’, the third was ’approach-performance goal’, and the lowest was ‘avoidance- performance goal’.
3. There were significant differences in cognitive engagement of the Junior High School and Elementary School students. The score was found higher in deep processing strategies than in shallow processing strategies.
4. Significant differences were found on ‘innate ability’ and ’quick learning’ based on age level. 6th-grade students were less likely than 8th-grade students to believe in ‘innate ability’ and ’quick learning’. Significant differences were found on ‘approach-mastery goal’ and’ approach-performance goal’ based on age level. 6th-grade students were more likely than 8th-grade students to hold ‘approach-mastery goal’ and approach-performance goal’. Significant differences were found on cognitive engagement based on age level. 6th-grade students engaged more than 8th-grade students in shallow and deep processing strategies.
5. There was no significant difference of epistemological beliefs and goal orientations based on gender level. Significant differences were found on shallow processing strategies based on gender level. Girl students engaged more than boy students in shallow processing strategies.
6. There were no significant interaction effects in age or gender level of the Junior High School and Elementary School students regarding epistemological beliefs, goal orientations, and cognitive engagement.
7. There were significant positive correlations between ‘simple knowledge’, ‘certain knowledge’, ‘innate ability’, ‘quick learning’ and deep processing strategies. There were significant negative correlations between ‘simple knowledge’ and shallow processing strategies.
8. There were significant positive correlations between ‘approach-mastery goal’, ‘avoidance-mastery goal’,’ approach-performance goal’ and shallow as well as deep processing strategies. There were significant negative correlations between ‘avoidance-performance goal’ and deep processing strategies.
9. There were significant positive correlations between ‘simple knowledge’, ‘certain knowledge’, ‘innate ability’, ‘quick learning’ and ‘approach-mastery goal’, but significant negative correlations with ‘avoidance-performance goal’. There were significant positive correlations between ‘simple knowledge’ and ‘avoidance-mastery goal’. There were significant negative correlations between ‘certain knowledge’, ‘innate ability’, ‘quick learning’ and ‘approach-performance goal’.
10. ‘Simple knowledge’ and ‘quick learning’ could be used to positively predict ‘approach-mastery goal’. ‘Age’ could be used to negatively predict ‘approach-mastery goal’. ‘Gender’, ‘simple knowledge’ could be used to positively predict ‘avoidance-mastery goal’. ‘Innate ability’ could be used to negatively predict ‘avoidance-mastery goal’. ‘Age’, ‘certain knowledge’, and ‘innate ability’ could be used to negatively predict ‘approach-performance goal’. ‘Simple knowledge’ and ‘innate ability’ could be used to negatively predict ‘avoidance-performance goal’.
11. ‘Approach-mastery goal’ and ‘avoidance-mastery goal’ could be used to positively predict shallow and deep processing strategies. ‘Avoidance -performance goal’ could be used to negatively predict shallow and deep processing strategies. ‘Approach-performance goal’ could be used to positively predict shallow processing strategies.
12. ‘Approach-mastery goal’, ‘avoidance-mastery goal’, and ‘Avoidance -performance goal’ had complete mediating effect on simple knowledge and shallow processing strategies. ‘Approach-mastery goal’ and ‘Approach-performance goal’ had partial mediating effect on age and shallow processing strategies. ‘Avoidance-mastery goal’ had partial mediating effect on gender and shallow processing strategies. ‘Approach-performance goal’ had partial mediating effect on certain knowledge and shallow processing strategies.
13. ‘Approach-mastery goal’ and ‘Approach-performance goal’ had complete mediating effect on age and deep processing strategies. ‘Approach-mastery goal’ had partial mediating effect on simple knowledge as well as quick learning and deep processing strategies.
Finally, some suggestions for teachers and future research were proposed according to the results.

目次

第一章 緒論 ………………………………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究動機與目的 …………………………………………………………………1
第二節 研究問題 …………………………………………………………………………5
第三節 研究方法與步驟 …………………………………………………………………6
第四節 名詞釋義 …………………………………………………………………………7
第五節 研究範圍與限制 …………………………………………………………………10

第二章　文獻探討…………………………………………………………………………11
第一節 知識信念理論與相關研究 ………………………………………………………11
第二節 目標導向理論與相關研究 ………………………………………………………24
第三節 認知投入理論與相關研究 ………………………………………………………32
第四節 知識信念、目標導向與認知投入的關係 ………………………………………37

第三章 研究方法 …………………………………………………………………………45
第一節 研究架構 …………………………………………………………………………45
第二節 研究假設 …………………………………………………………………………46
第三節 研究對象與取樣方法 ……………………………………………………………46
第四節 研究工具 …………………………………………………………………………48
第五節 資料處理 …………………………………………………………………………58

第四章 研究結果與結論 …………………………………………………………………61
第一節 基本統計分析 ……………………………………………………………………61
第二節 年級與性別對知識信念的交互作用效果 ………………………………………65
第三節 年級與性別對目標導向的交互作用效果 ………………………………………67
第四節 年級與性別對認知投入的交互作用效果 ………………………………………70
第五節 知識信念、目標導向與認知投入的相關分析 …………………………………72
第六節 人口變項、知識信念、目標導向對認知投入之預測 …………………………76

第五章 結論與建議 ………………………………………………………………………87
第一節 結論 ………………………………………………………………………………87
第二節 建議 ………………………………………………………………………………90

參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………………95

附錄…………………………………………………………………………………………107
附錄一 學習經驗預試問卷 ………………………………………………………………107
附錄二 學習經驗正式問卷 ………………………………………………………………110

壹、中文文獻
王永裕（2006）。雲林縣國中、小學生成就目標導向、認知投入、考試焦慮與學業成就之關係研究－以數學領域為例。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
王永裕、吳璧如（2007）。國中、小學生成就目標導向與其認知投入、考試焦慮、數學成就的關係。彰化師大教育學報，11，25-50。
王霞（2007）。某醫學院高職醫學生成就目標與學習成績關係研究。山西醫科大學社會醫學系碩士論文，未出版，山西省。
向天屏（2000）。國中小學生成就目標導向、學習策略、自我跛足策略與學業成就關係之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
何宗翰（1998）。主修領域背景對大學生知識信念與學習策略的影響。國立政治大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
吳明隆（2007）SPSS操作與應用：問卷統計分析實務。台北：五南書局。
吳明隆、涂金堂（2006）。SPSS與統計應用分析。台北：五南書局。
吳翠霞（2006）。「以調整知識信念為主的教學及班級經營策略」對高中生學習表現之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系在職進修碩士班碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
呂虹霖（2004）。國中學生知識信念、父母期望與學業成就之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
李仁豪（2003）。成就目標與學習行為的關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
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，未出版，台南市。
林紀慧（2001）。國小學童知識信念的發展以及與學業成績之相關研究。臺中師院學報，15，191-206。
林宴瑛（2006）。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習策略之關係及潛在改變量分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台南市。
邱上真（1991）。學習策略教學的理論與實際。特殊教育與復健學報，1，1-49。
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，未出版，台南市。
胡駿松（2009）。大學生知識信念型態與自主學習策略之相關研究。臺北市立教育大學課程與教學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
施淑慎（2004）。成就目標、自我效能、以及策略使用在考試焦慮上所扮演之角色。國立臺北師範學院學報：教育類，17，355-377。
洪碧霜（2005）。教師知識信念與專業承諾之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
唐淑華（2000）。以讀書治療挑戰低成就學生之知識信念的實驗研究。中華輔導學報，8，21-50。
張春興（1991）。張氏心理學辭典。台北市：東華。
張淑女（2005）。從認識論的觀點探究大學生論證思考之能力與模式。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
莊石瑛（2004）。英文寫作自我效能、目標導向與自我調整學習策略之探討。屏東科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。
許嘉家（2007）。高中職生個人知識論信念與創造性人格、創意生活經驗之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳萩卿（2005）。知識信念影響學習運作模式之驗證暨「調整知識信念的教學策略」對國中生學習歷程影響之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳萩卿、張景媛（2007）。知識信念影響學習運作模式之驗證。教育心理學報，39，23-43。
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。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳碩琳（2003）。目標導向、學習滿意度與學習績效關係之研究~以國立空中大學高雄學習指導中心為例。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
程炳林（1991）。國民中小學生激勵的學習策略之相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
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，46，67-92。
程炳林（2002）。多重目標導向、動機問題與調整策略之交互作用。師大學報：教育類，47，39-58。
程炳林（2003）。四向度目標導向模式之研究。師大學報：教育類，48，15-40。
黃郁青（2007）。國民小學語文領域教師知識信念與教學行為關係之研究─以台中市為例。東海大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台中縣。
黃儒傑（2002）。國小初任教師教學信念、教學成敗歸因及其有效教學表現之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系博士論文，未出版，高雄市。
葉建成（2007）。國小六年級學生數學科主動學習使用認知策略與後設認知策略之研究。高雄師範大學數學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
廖真瑜（2005）。國中學生自我效能、目標導向、課業任務價值與學業延宕之關係研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商學系所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
劉佩雲（2005a）。大學生知識信念與數位學習環境中知識管理能力之研究。管理與教育研究學報，4，57-84。
劉佩雲（2005b）。知識信念的內涵、發展的及其與網路訊息搜尋間關係探討之研究。成人及終身教育學刊，5，139-168。
劉佩雲（2008）。知識信念調整的學業學習。教育研究月刊，173，19-30。
劉佩雲（2009）。課室結構知覺對科學知識信念、學習成就與迷思概念的影響。課程與教學季刊，12(2)，135-160。
蔡宜妙 (2002)。成就動機的文化特徵：台灣地區青少年的努力信念。國立台灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
蔡瓊華（2005）。高中學生知識信念、學習風格與學業成就之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
盧玉芬（2007）。不同年級幼保科學生知識信念發展之研究。國立臺北教育大學幼兒教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
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，未出版，台南市。
魏麗敏（1996）。影響國小兒童數學成就之自我調節學習與情感因素分析及其策略訓練效果之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。　
蘇嘉鈴（2004）。國中生行動/狀態導向、目標導向與動機調整策略之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台南市。

貳、英文文獻
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
Anderman, E. M., & Young, A. J. (1994). Motivation and strategy use in science: Individual difference and classroom effects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 811-831.
Anderman, E. M., & Midgley, C. (1997). Changes in achievement goal orientations, perceived academic competence, and grades across the transition to middle-level schools. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 269-298.
Baron, R. M., ＆ Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender-related patterns in students’ intellectual development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
Bråten, I., & Olaussen, B. S. (1998). The relationship between motivational beliefs and learning strategy use among Norwegian college students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 182-194.
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2006). Epistemological beliefs, interest, and gender as predictors of Internet-based learning activities. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(6), 1027–1042.
Buehl, M. M., Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Beliefs about schooled knowledge: Domain general or domain specific? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 415-449.
Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 203–221.
Cano, F. & Cardelle-Elawar, M. (2007). Family Environment, Epistemological Beliefs, Learning Strategies, and Academic Performance: A Path Analysis. In M. S. Khine(Ed.), Knowing, Knowledge and Beliefs : Epistemological Studies Across Diverse Cultures (pp. 219-240). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Chan, K. W. (2003). Hong Kong teacher education students’ epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning. Research in Education, 69(1), 36–50.
Chan, K. W., & Elliott, R. G. (2002). Exploratory study of Hong Kong teacher education students’ epistemological beliefs: Cultural perspectives and implications on beliefs research. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 392-414.
Chan, K. W., & Elliott, R.G. (2004). Relational analysis of personal epistemology and conceptions about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 817–831.
Chan, K. W. (2007). Hong Kong Teacher Education Students’ Epistemological Beliefs and their Relations with Conceptions of Learning and Learning Strategies. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 16(1), 199-214.
Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J., & Gable, S. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 43-54.
Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 186-204.
Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88-108.
Craik, F. I. M., and Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 11, 671-684.
Dahl, T. I., Bals, M., & Turi, A. L. (2005). Are students’ beliefs about knowledge and learning associated with their reported use of learning strategies? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 57–273.
DeBacker, T. K., & Crowson, H. M. (2006). Influences on cognitive engagement: Epistemological beliefs and need for closure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 535–551.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.
Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage-environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. In R. E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 3 (pp. 139-186). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218-232.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 169-189.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501-519.
Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 549-563.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of concept, state of evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
Greene, B. A., & Miller, R. B. (1996). Influences on course achievement: Goals, perceived ability, and cognitive engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21,181–192.
Heyman, G. D., & Dweck, C. S. (1992). Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: Their relation and their role in adaptive motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 16, 231–247.
Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378–405.
Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and instruction . Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353–382.
Hofer, B. K. (2004). Exploring the dimensions of personal epistemology in differing classroom contexts: Student interpretations during the first year of college. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 129-135.
Hofer,B.K., & Pintrich,P.R. (1997) . The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research,67(1),88-140.
Kagan, D. M. (1990). Ways of evaluating teacher cognition: Inferences concerning the Goldilocks Principle. Review of Educational Research, 60, 419-469.
Kardash, C. M., & Howell, K. L. (2000). Effects of epistemological beliefs and topic-special beliefs on undergraduates’ cognitive and strategic processing of dual-positional text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 524-535.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical think in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills for argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Kizilgunes, B., Tekkaya, C., Sungur, S. (2009). Modeling the Relations Among Students’ Epistemological Beliefs, Motivation, Learning Approach, and Achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(4), 243-255.
Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. (1988). Students’ goals orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514-523.
Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 710-718.
Miller, R. B. Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B., & Nichols, J. (1996). Engagement in academic work: The role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others, and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 388-422.
Moely, B. E., Olsen, F. A., Halwes, T. G. & Flavell, H. H. (1969). Production deficiency in young children’s clustered recall. Developmental Psychology, 1, 26-34.
Newmann, F., Wehlage, G. G., & Lamborn, S. D. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In F. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 11-39). New York: Teachers College Press.
Nicholls, J G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328-346.
Nolen, S. B. (1987). The hows and whys of studying: The relationship of goals to strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington DC, April 20-24, 1987. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 283852)
Nolen, S. B. (1988). Reasons for studying: Motivational orientations and study strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 5, 269–287.
Paulsen, M. B., & Feldman, K. A. (1999). Student motivation and epistemological beliefs. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 78, 77–80.
Perry, W. G. Jr. (1970). Forms intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. Holt, New York: Rienhart & Winston.
Phan, H. P. (2008). Multiple regression analysis of epistemological beliefs, learning approaches, and self-regulated learning. Journal of Research in Educational Psychology,14(6), 157-184.
Phan, H. P. (2009). Amalgamation of future time orientation, epistemological beliefs, achievement goals and study strategies: Empirical evidence established. British Journal of Educational Psychology,79,155-173.
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 (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, 544-555.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990) Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Education Psychology, 82, pp. 33-40.
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, Michigian: National Center for Research to Improve Teaching and Learning, School of Education, The university Michigan.
Qian, G., & Alvermann, D. (1995). Role of epistemological beliefs and learned helplessness in secondary school students’ learning science concepts from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 282-292.
Ravindran, B., Greene, B. A., & Debacker, T. K. (2005). Predicting pre-service teachers’ cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs. Journal of Educational Research, 98(4), 222-232.
Roeser, R. W., Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. C. (1996). Perceptions of the school psychological environment and early adolescents’ psychological and behavioral functioning in school: The mediating role of goals and belonging. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 408–422.
Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents, motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 437-460.
Schommer, M.（1990）.Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology,82(3),498-504.
Schommer, M.（1993）. Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 406-411.
Schommer, M. (1994). Synthesizing epistemological belief research: Tentative understanding and provocative confusions. Educational Psychology Review, 6(4), 293-318.
Schommer, M., Crouse, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text comprehension: Believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 435-443.
Schommer, M. (1997). The development of epistemological beliefs among secondary students: A longitudinal study. Journal of educational Psychology, 89(1),37-40.
Schommer, M., & Dunnell, P. A. (1997). Epistemological beliefs of gifted high school students. Roeper Review, 19(3), 153-156.
Schommer-Aikins, M. (2004). Explaining the epistemological belief system: Introducing the embedded systemic model and coordinated research approach. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 19-29.
Schommer-Aikins, M., & Easter, M. (2008). Epistemological beliefs’ contributions to study strategies of Asian and European Americans . Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 920-929.
Schommer, M., & Walker, K. (1995). Are epistemological beliefs similar across domains? Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 424-432.
Urdan, T. C. (1997). Achievement goal theory: Past results, future directions. In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol.10, pp.99-141). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Urdan, T., ＆ Midgley, C. (2001). Academic self-handicapping: What we know, what more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 115-138.
Volet, S. E. (1997). Cognitive and affective variables in academic learning: The significance of direction and effort in students’ goals. Learning and Instruction, 7, 235-254.
Wehlage, G. G., Rutter, R. A., Smith, G. A., Lesko, N. L., & Fernandez, R. R. (1989). Reducing the risk: Schools as communities of support. Philadelphia: Farmer Press.
Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students' regulation of motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 224-235. Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientation to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96 (2), 236-250.
Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 211-238.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student difference in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Education Psychology, 82, 51-59.