臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：寫作自我調整學習策略的發展現象暨寫作自我調整教學效果之研究
作者：江民瑜
作者(外文)：Min-YuChiang
校院名稱：國立成功大學
系所名稱：教育研究所
指導教授：程炳林
陳正昌
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2013
主題關鍵詞：寫作自我調整學習策略；成長混合模式；成就需求組型；寫作自我效能；課室目標結構；classroom goal structure；growth mixture model；patterns of need for achievement；writing self-efficacy；writing self-regulated learning strategies
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:71
本研究主要目的：（一）探討國小高年級學童寫作自我調整學習策略的潛在軌跡類別；（二）探討寫作自我效能與課室目標結構對寫作自我調整學習策略的潛在軌跡類別與類別內潛在成長因素的解釋情形；（三）設計「寫作自我調整學習策略方案」並進行寫作教學，分析教學組別與成就需求組型在寫作自我調整學習策略與寫作表現的交互作用效果，以及隨著測量階段的改變情形。
為達成上述目的，進行兩個研究。研究一採縱貫研究設計，選取828位高雄市國小高年級學生為樣本，測量工具包括「寫作自我效能量表」、「課室目標結構量表」與「寫作自我調整學習策略量表」，受試者從100學年度上學期到101學年度上學期共追蹤施測四次，蒐集的資料以成長混合模式與有條件成長混合模式進行分析。研究二選定101學年度就讀於高雄市一所國小六年級的四個班級學童為教學實驗樣本，將四位教師分派為兩班實驗組與兩班對照組的授課教師，實驗組進行「寫作自我調整學習策略方案」之教學，對照組進行一般的議論文寫作教學課程，使用的研究工具有「成就需求量表」與三題作文題目，以及研究一的「課室目標結構量表」與「寫作自我調整學習策略量表」。研究二以三因子混合設計變異數分析來考驗各項假設。
本研究的發現如下：
一、研究一結果顯示，寫作自我調整學習策略的使用呈現多樣貌成長軌跡類別，而非一致的隨學習階段進展而下降；寫作自我效能與課室目標結構對潛在類別內成長因素的解釋會因為潛在類別成長型態而有所不同，對於具負向成長趨勢的潛在類別，寫作自我效能隨時間下降的趨勢強化策略運用亦隨時間下降，但對傾向持平或具正向成長趨勢的潛在類別，寫作自我效能型態因子的影響則不顯著；精熟課室目標結構影響策略運用的初始水準，亦正向解釋多數負向成長組的型態因子，顯示精熟課室目標結構除了營造有利於策略使用的起始情境，亦能緩和負向成長組的下降趨勢。
二、研究二結果顯示：
（一）教學組別、成就需求組型與測量階段在計畫策略、期望調整策略的三因子交互作用達顯著水準。結果指出在實驗組前測，成功導向組與過度努力組顯著高於失敗逃避組，但在後測與延後測，四組成就需求組型無顯著差異；在實驗組，四組成就需求組型的後測與延後測均顯著高於前測，但後測與延後測無顯著差異。
（二）教學組別、成就需求組型與測量階段在轉譯策略、修改策略、價值調整策略、情感調整策略、適應性求助策略、環境建構策略與寫作成就的二因子交互作用達顯著水準。在後測與延後測，實驗組均顯著高於對照組，在前測，實驗組與對照組無顯著差異；在實驗組，後測與延後測均顯著高於前測，但後測與延後測無顯著差異。根據上述，本寫作自我調整學習策略方案對提升實驗組失敗逃避組與失敗接受組的策略運用有相當效果。
本研究亦根據研究結果提出建議，供寫作教學與未來研究之參考。
This study aimed at (a)identifying the developmental trajectories of writing self-regulated learning strategies of fifth and sixth grade students; (b)relating the writing self-efficacy and classroom goal structure to latent trajectory classes and the latent growth factors within latent classes; (c)examining the interactive effects among experimental and comparison groups, patterns of need for achievement and measurement occasions on writing self-regulated learning strategies and writing achievement.
Two studies were conducted in these regards. In study 1, using longitudinal design to confirm aims (a) and (b), the scales of writing self-efficacy, classroom goal structure, and writing self-regulated learning strategies were completed at 4 measurement occasions by the 828 elementary school students in Kaohsiung City and the data were analyzed via growth mixture model and cinditional growth mixture model. The participants who enrolled in the academic year of 100 were administered a longitudinal assessment following for 4 times on 3 consecutive semesters starting in the first semester of the fifth grade, with further points of measurement in the second semester of the fifth grade and in the first semester of the sixth grade. In study 2, using instruction intervention to confirm aim (c), each of the four classes in the sixth grade taught by one of the four teachers were selected in the academic year of 101, including two classes assigned to the experimental group and others the comparison group. In order to achieve desirable results, Writing Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Program had been designed for experimental group. The scales of mastery classroom goal structure, writing self-regulated learning strategies, and need for achievement as well as three essay topics were adpoted as instructments. The data were analyzed by three-way mixed design ANOVA.
The results of study 1 and study 2 were summarized as followings.
1.The results of study 1 showed that growth mixture modeling identified diverse latent classes representing different developmental trajectories toward the application of writing self-regulated learning strategies, rather than past studies advocated that all declined with time. For the latent classes with negative growth trend, the writing self-efficacy declining with time strengthened the application of strategies also declining with time, but the effects was not significant for the latent classes with flat and positive growth trend. The mastery classroom goal structure positively affected the within-class level factors and most of the shape factors within negative growth latent classes. It showed that the mastery classroom goal structure not only created favorable beginning context for the application of strategies, but alleviated the declining trend within the negative growth latent classes.
2.Regarding study 2:
(1)The three-way interactions among experimental and comparison groups, four patterns of need for achievement and measurement occasions on planning strategy and expectation regulation strategy were found. It showed that on the pretest of experimental group the success oriented individuals and overstrivers were significantly higher than failure avoiders, but on the posttest and delayed posttest the difference between four patterns of subjects was not significant.
(2)The two-way interactions between experimental and comparison groups and measurement occasions on translating strategy, revision strategy, value regulation strategy, affective regulation strategy, adaptive help seeking strategy, environmental structuring strategy, and writing achievement were found. The two-way interactions between experimental and comparison groups and four patterns of subjects on environmental structuring strategy were found. The two-way interactions between four patterns of subjects and measurement occasions on writing achievement were found as well.
Based on the findings of this study, implications and suggestings for teaching, educational guidance and further research were proposed.
王翌蘋（2009）。自我調整策略發展寫作教學與概念圖寫作教學對提升國小六年級學生之寫作自我調整、寫作表現與寫作動機之比較。未出版碩士論文，國立屏東教育大學，屏東市。
白明靜（2007）。「自我調整策略方案」對國中生英語科自我調整輔導成效之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立東華大學，花蓮。
向天屏（2006）。國小五年級兒童自我調整寫作歷程的教與學。未出版博士論文，國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。new window
江民瑜、程炳林（2011）。四分法成就需求架構之驗證及其對成就目標導向模式的調節效果。教育心理學報，43（2），397-418。new window
巫博瀚（2012）。成長曲線模式之樣本單位數決定研究：蒙地卡羅模擬。未出版博士論文，國立成功大學，台南市。new window
林易慧、程炳林（2006）。課室目標線索與個人目標導向對國小學童解題成就與自我調整學習之交互效果。教育心理學報，37（3），231-255。new window
林宴瑛、程炳林（2007）。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習策略之潛在改變量分析。教育心理學報，39（2），173-194。new window
侯玫如、程炳林、于富雲（2004）。國中生多重目標導向與其自我調整學習之關係。教育心理學報，35（3），221-248。new window
施淑慎（2008）。學習情境中之自主支持與國中生成就相關歷程間關係之探討。教育與心理研究，31（2），1-26。new window
張新仁（1992）。過程導向寫作教學法對國小學童之訓練成效。國科會專案研究報告。NSC80-0301-H-017-03。
陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵（2009）。多變量分析方法統計軟體應用（第五版）。臺北：五南。
陳嘉成（2008）。調節假設或適配假設？─二個相競假設的檢驗與知覺目標結構變化對學習組型影響之研究。教育與心理研究，31（2），27-58。new window
陳鳳如（2007）。國中學生寫作能力的學習潛能評估之分析研究。師大學報：教育類，52（2），73-94。new window
彭月茵、程炳林、陸偉明（2005）。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。教育心理學報，36（3），265-286。new window
彭淑玲（2010）。創造力動機歷程模式：未來目標、課室目標結構、自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略與創造力之關係。未出版博士論文，國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。new window
彭淑玲、程炳林（2005）。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。師大學報：教育類，50（2），69-95。new window
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（1），39-58。new window
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。new window
程炳林、林清山（2002）。學習歷程前決策與後決策階段中行動控制的中介角色。教育心理學報，34（1），43-60。new window
劉政宏、張景媛、許鼎延、張瓊文（2005）。國小學生學習動機成分之分析及其對學習行為之影響。教育心理學報，37（2），173-196。new window
歐惠娟（2003）。「PLAN」策略教學對國小五年級學習障礙學生說明文寫作表現影響之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立彰化師範大學，彰化市。
賴美璇（2006）。動機調整策略融入英語科之教學效果。未出版碩士論文，國立成功大學，台南市。
謝岱陵（2003）。國中生四向度目標導向之中介效果分析。未出版碩士論文，國立成功大學，台南市。
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。new window
Ames, C. (1992a). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
Ames, C. (1992b). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D. H. Schunk ＆ J. L. Meece (Eds.). Student perceptions in the classroom(pp. 327-348). NJ: LEA.
Ames, C., ＆ Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
Black, A. E. ＆ Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructor's autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective. Science Education, 84, 740-756.
Bong, M. (2005). Within-grade changes in Korean girls’ motivation and perceptions of the learning environment across domains and achievement levels. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 656-672.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum.
Connell, A. M., ＆ Frye, A. A. (2006). Growth mixture modeling in developmental psychology: Overview and demonstration of heterogeneity in developmental trajectories of adolescent antisocial behavior. Infant and Child Development, 15, 609-621.
Corno, L. (1993). The best-laid plans: Modern conceptions and educational research. Educational Research, 22, 14-22.
Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Covington, M. V. ＆ Müeller, K. J. (2001). Intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation: An approach/avoidance reformulation. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 157-175.
Covington, M. V., ＆ Omelich, C. L. (1991). Need achievement revisited: Verification of Atkinson’s original model. In C. D. Spielberger, I. G. Sarason, Z. Kulcsar, ＆ G. L. Van Heck(Eds.), Stress and emotion: Anxiety, anger, and curiosity(Vol. 14)(pp.85-105). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Covington, M. V., ＆ Roberts, B. (1994). Self-worth and college achievement: Motivational and personality correlates. In P. R. Pintrich, D. R. Brown, ＆ C. E. Weinstein(Eds.), Student motivation, cognition, and learning: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie(pp. 157-187). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Eccles, J. S. ＆ Wigfield A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34, 169-189.
Elliot, A. J., ＆ Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461-475.
Elliot, A. J., ＆ McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501-519.
Elliot, A. J., ＆ Thrash, T. M. (2002). Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: Approach and avoidance temperaments and goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 804-818.
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.
Glaser, C. ＆ Brunstein, J. C. (2007). Improving fourth-grade students’ composition skills: Effects of strategy instruction and self-regulation procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 297-310.
Graham, S. ＆ Harris, K. R. (1997). Self-regulation and writing: Where do we go from here? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 102-114.
Graham, S. ＆ Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, ＆ S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities(pp. 323-344). NY: Guilford Press.
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., ＆ Troia, G. (1998). Writing and self-regulation: Cases from the self-regulated strategy development model. In D. H. Schunk ＆ B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practices(pp. 20-41). New York: Guilford.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Pintrich, P. R., Elliot, A. J., ＆ Trash, T. M. (2002). Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 638-645.
Harris, K. R. ＆ Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy ＆ S. E. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 1-27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Jones, B. L. ＆ Nagin, D. S. (2007). Advances in group-based trajectory modeling and an SAS procedure for estimating them. Sociological Methods and Research, 35, 542-571.
Kaplan, A. ＆ Midgley, C. (1997). The effect of achievement goals: Does level of perceived achievement competence make a difference? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 415-435.
Kaplan, A., Lichtinger, E., ＆ Gorodetsky, M. (2009). Achievement goal orientations and self-regulation in writing: An integrative perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 51-69.
Kaplan, A., Middleton, M. J., Urdan, T., ＆ Midgley, C. (2002). Achievement goals and goal structures. In C. Midgley (Ed.), Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning(pp.21-54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Kline, R. B.(2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
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. ＆ Goschke, T. (1994). A theory of action control: Mental subsystems, modes of control, and volitional conflict-resolution strategies. In J. Kuhl ＆ J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality: Action versus state orientation(pp. 93-124). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe ＆ Huber Publishers.
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, 197-213.
Linnenbrink, E. A. ＆ Pintrich, P. R. (2001). Multiple goals, multiple contexts: The dynamic interplay between personal goals and contextual goal stress. In S. Volet, ＆ S. Järvelä (Eds.), Motivation in learning context: Theoretical advances and methodological implications. New York: Pergamon.
Linnenbrink, E. A. ＆ Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Achievement goal theory and affect: An asymmetrical bidirectional model. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 69-78.
Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., ＆ Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487-503.
Midgley, C., ＆ Urdan, T. (2001). Academic self-handicapping and achievement goals: A further examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 61-75.
Murayama, K. ＆ Elliot, A. J. (2009). The joint influence of personal achievement goals and classroom goal structures on achievement-relevant outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 432-447.
Muthén, B. O. (2001). Second-generation structural equation modeling with a combination of categorical and continuous latent variables: New opportunities for latent class/latent growth modeling. In Collins, L. M. ＆ Sayer, A. (Eds.), New methods for the analysis of change(pp. 291-322). Washington D.C.: APA.
Muthén, B. O. (2004). Latent variable analysis: Growth mixture modeling and related techniques for longitudinal data. In D. Kaplan(ed.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences(pp. 345-368). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Muthén, B. O. (2008). Latent variable hybrids: Overview of old and new methods. In Hancock, G. R. ＆ Samuelsen, K. M. (eds.), Advances in latent variable mixture model. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
Muthén, B. O. ＆ Asparouhov, T. (2008). Growth mixture modeling: Analysis with non-Gaussian random effects. In Fitzmaurice, G., Davidian, M., Verbeke, G. ＆ Molenberghs, G. (eds.), Advances in longitudinal data analysis. Chapman ＆ Hall/CRC Press.
Muthén, B. O. ＆ Muthén, L. K. (2000). Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 24, 882-891.
Muthén, L. K. ＆ Muthén, B. O. (1998-2007). Mplus user’s guide. (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén ＆ Muthén.
Muthén B., Brown, C. H., Masyn, K., Jo, B., Khoo, S. T., Yang, C. C., Wang, C. P., Kellam, S., Carlin, J., Liao, J. (2002). General growth mixture modeling for randomized preventive interventions. Biostatistics, 3, 459-475.
Newman, R. S. (2002). How self-regulated learners cope with academic difficulty: The role of adaptive help seeking. Theory Into Practice, 41, 132-138.
Niemivirta, M. (2002). Individual differences and developmental trends in motivation: Integrating person-centered and variable-centered methods. In P. R. Pintrich, ＆ M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: New directions in measures and methods (Vol. 12, pp.241-275). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Pajares, F. (2008). Motivational role of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk ＆ B. J. Zimmerman(Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications(pp. 111-139). NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 315-341.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999a). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 459-470.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999b). Taking control of research on volitional control: Challenges for future theory and research. Learning and Individual Differences, 11, 335-354.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000a). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 544-555.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000b). 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. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667-686.
Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 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, 33-40.
Pintrich, P. R., ＆ Zusho, A. (2002). The development of academic self-regulation: The role of cognitive and motivational factors. In A. Wigfield ＆ J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 249-284). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Randi, J. ＆ Corno, L. (2000). Teacher innovation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, ＆ M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.651-685). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Ryan, R. M. ＆ Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.
Ryan, R. M. ＆ Deci, E. L. (2002). An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci ＆ R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.
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 Associates.
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. (2007). Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading ＆ Writing Quarterly, 23, 7-25.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., ＆ Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications(3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Soenens, B. ＆ Vansteenkiste, M. (2005). Antecedents and outcomes of self-determination in 3 life domains: The role of parents’ and teachers’ autonomy support. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 589-604.
Urdan, T., Midgley, C., ＆ Anderman, E. M. (1998). The role of classroom goal structure in students’ use of self-handicapping strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 101-122.
Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., ＆ Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic and extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41, 19-31.
Wang, M. ＆ Bodner, T. E. (2007). Growth mixture modeling: Identifying and predicting unobserved subpopulations with longitudinal data. Organizational Research Methods, 10, 635-656.
Watt, H. M. G. (2004). Development of adolescents’ self-perceptions, values, and task perceptions according to gender and domain in 7th- through 11th-grade Australian students. Child Development, 75, 1556-1574.
Wigfield, A. ＆ Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
Wigfield, A. ＆ Eccles, J. S. (2002). The development of competence beliefs, expectancies for success, and achievement values from childhood through adolescence. In A. Wigfield ＆ J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 91-120). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R. W., ＆ Davis-Kean, P. (2006). Development of achievement motivation. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child Psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 933-1002). New York: Wiley.
Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students’ regulation of motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 224-235.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 189-205.
Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goals theory: Using goal structure and orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 236-250.
Wolters, C. A. ＆ Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms. Instructional Science, 26, 27-47.
Wolters, C. A. ＆ Rosenthal, H. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms. Instruction Science, 26, 27-47.
Wolters, C. A. ＆ Rosenthal, H. (2000). The relation between students’ motivational beliefs and their use of motivational regulation strategies. International Journal of Educational Research, 33, 801-820.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000a). 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. (2000b). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.
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 Associates.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Achieving self-regulation: The trial and triumph of adolescence. In F. Pajares ＆ T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic motivation of adolescents(pp. 1-27). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 166-183.
Zimmerman, B. J. ＆ Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 241-250.
Zimmerman, B. J. ＆ Kitsantas, A. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 660-668.
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. ＆ Risemberg, R. (1997). Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 73-101.
Zimmerman, B. J. ＆ Schunk, D. H. (2008). Motivation: An essential dimension of self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk ＆ B. J. Zimmerman(Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications(pp. 1-30). NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zito, J. R., Adkins, M., Gavins, M., Harris, K. R., ＆ Graham, S. (2007). Self-regulated strategy development: Relationship to the social cognitive perspective and the development of self-regulation. Reading ＆ Writing Quarterly, 23, 77-95.
Zusho, A. ＆ Pintrich, P. R. (2001). Motivation in the second decade of life: The role of multiple developmental trajectories. In T. Urdan ＆ F. Pajares (Eds.), Adolescence and education: General issues in the education of adolescents(pp.163-200). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1120（臺灣：1069，外國：51） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1586744 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67389832
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上