نمذجة العلاقات السببية بين استراتيجيات الحديث الذاتي لتنظيم الدافعية والاندماج الطلابي والتحصيل الدراسي

Modeling causal relationships between self-talk strategies for motivation regulation, student engagement and academic achievement

د. إبراهيم بن عبد الله الحسينان

الكلمات المفتاحية: تنظيم الدافعية, الحديث الذاتي, الاندماج الطلابي, التحصيل الدراسي, Motivation Regulation, Self-Talk, Student Engagement, Achievement

هدفت الدراسة إلى اختبار النموذج السببي المقترح للتأثيرات المباشرة وغير المباشرة لاستراتيجيات الحديث الذاتي لتنظيم الدافعية على التحصيل الدراسي من خلال الاندماج الطلابي، الذي تم بناؤه وَفْق الإطار النظري والدراسات السابقة المتعلقة بعلاقة تنظيم الدافعية بالاندماج الطلابي والتحصيل الدراسي. 

وللإجابة على أسئلة الدراسة استخدم الباحث أسلوب تحليل المسار. وتكونت عينة الدراسة من 117 طالباً من طلاب كلية التربية بجامعة المجمعة، حيثُ تَمَّ تطبيق أدوات الدراسة المكونة من مقياس استراتيجيات الحديث الذاتي للحسينان (2010)، ومقياس الاندماج الطلابي من إعداد الباحث عليهم. 

وأشارت نتائج الدراسة إلى أن النموذج السببي المقترح قد حقق مؤشرات المطابقة، وكشفت النتائج عن وجود تأثير مباشر دالّ لإستراتيجية الحديث الذاتي الموجه للإتقان على جميع أبعاد الاندماج الطلابي. 

كما تبين أنه يوجد تأثيرٌ مباشرٌ دالّ لإستراتيجية الحديث الذاتي الموجه للقدرة النسبية على الاندماج العاطفي فقط، وأنه لا يوجد تأثير مباشر دالّ لإستراتيجيات الحديث الذاتي للأداء الخارجي على الاندماج الطلابي. 

كما أشارت النتائج إلى أنه لا يوجد تأثير مباشر دالّ لإستراتيجيات الحديث الذاتي لتنظيم الدافعية على التحصيل الدراسي.

كما تبين أن الاندماج المعرفي وحده يستقل بتأثيره في التحصيل الدراسي من بين أبعاد الاندماج الأخرى.

وبالرغم من أنه لم يتمَّ العثورُ على توسطٍ دالّ لمعظم أبعاد الاندماج الطلابي، إلا أن النتائج تشير إلى أن هناك تأثيرًا غير مباشر لإستراتيجية الحديث الموجه للإتقان على التحصيل الدراسي من خلال الاندماج المعرفي.

The study aimed to test the Suggested causal model of direct and indirect effects of self-talk strategies for motivation regulation on academic achievement through student engagement, which was built according to the theoretical framework and previous studies related to the relationship of motivation regulation to student engagement and academic achievement.
To answer the study questions, the researcher used the path analysis method. The sample of the study consisted of 117 students from the Education College at Majmaah University, where study tools consisting of Motivational self-talk strategies scale for Alhusaynan (2010) and Student engagement scale by the researcher were applied to them.
The results of the study indicated that the Suggested causal model showed a fairly adequate ?t, and the results revealed a direct effect of mastery self-talk strategy on all dimensions of student engagement.
It was also found that there is only a direct effect of Relative Ability Self-Talk strategy on emotional engagement, and there is no direct effect of external performance self-talk strategy on student engagement.
The results also indicated that there is no direct effect of self-talk strategies for motivation regulation on academic achievement. It was also found that cognitive engagement alone is independent of its effect on academic achievement, among other dimensions of engagement.
Although no significant mediation was found for most dimensions of student engagement, the results indicate that there is an indirect effect of mastery self-talk strategy on academic achievement through cognitive engagement.

أولاً - المراجع العربية:

- ابو العلا، مسعد ربيع عبد الله (2011). نمذجة العلاقات بين توجهات الهدف وفعالية الذات والاندماج المدرسي والتحصيل الأكاديمي لدى عينة من طلاب المرحلة الثانوية. مجلة البحوث النفسية والتربوية، 26(1)، 257-302.

- أحمد، هيثم محمد، وأبو دنيا، ناديه عبده، وعبد المعطي، محمد السيد (2016). العلاقة بين استراتيجيات التعلم المنظم ذاتيا والكفاءة الذاتية المدركة لدى طلاب السنة التحضيرية جامعة الملك سعود، دراسات عربية في التربية وعلم النفس- السعودية، 73، 219- 252.

- تيغزة، أمحمد بوزيان (2012). التحليل العاملي الاستكشافي والتوكيدي: مفاهيمها ومنهجيتهما بتوظيف حزمة SPSS وليزرل LESREL. عمان، الأردن: دار المسيرة.

- الحسينان، ابراهيم عبد الله (2010). استراتيجيات التعلم المنظم ذاتياً في ضوء نموذج بينتريش وعلاقتها بالتحصيل والتخصص والمستوى الدراسي والأسلوب المفضل للتعلم. رسالة دكتوراه غير منشورة، جامعة الامام محمد بن سعود الاسلامية، الرياض.

- عبداللاه، عبدالرسول عبد الباقي (2017). النظريات الضمنية للذكاء والاندماج المدرسي رباعي الأبعاد كمنبئات بالتحصيل الدراسي لدى عينة من طلاب المرحلة الثانوية. مجلة كلية التربية، 68(4)، 574-639.

ثانياً - المراجع الأجنبية:

- Abdullah, A. A.(2017). Implicit theories of intelligence and four dimensional school engagement as predictors academic achievement for a sample of high school students. Education College Journal, 68 (4), 574-639.

- Abu Al-Ela, M. R. A.(2011). Modeling the relationships between goal orientations, self-efficacy, school engagement, and academic achievement among a sample of high school students. Journal Of Psychological and Educational Researches, 26(1), 257- 302.

- Alhusaynan, I. A.(2010). Self- Regulated Learning Strategies in the Light of Pintrich's Model and Their Relationship to Achievement, Specialization ,Academic Level, and the Preferred Learning  Styles. Unpublished PhD thesis, Imam Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University, Riyadh.

- Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Lehr, C. A. (2004). Check & Connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 95-113.

- Appleton, J., Christenson, S., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427-445.

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

- Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory : An Agentic Perspective . Annual Reviews Psychology, 52, 1- 26.

- Bernard, M. (2018). An Assessment of Learners’ Engagement in Mathematics: Towards Building Mathematics Culture in South African Schools. Sci & Tech Res, 4(4), 4084-4088.

- Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), pp. 199-231.

- Corno, L. (1986). The metacognitive control components of self–regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 333–346.

- Daniela, P.(2015). The Relationship Between Self-Regulation, Motivation And Performance At Secondary School Students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences   191  ( 2015 )  2549 – 2553.

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

- Dogan, U.(2014). Validity and Reliability of Student Engagement Scale. Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(2), 390 – 403.

- Elliott, A.J., & Dweck, C.S. (2005). Handbook of competence and motivation. New York: Guilford Press.

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

- Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.

- Froiland, J. M. &  Worrell, F. C. (2016). Intrinsic motivation, learning goals, engagement, and achievement in a diverse high school. Psychology in the Schools, 53(3), 321-336.

- Furlong, M. J., Whipple, A. D., St. Jean, G., Simental, J., Soliz, A., & Punthuna, S. (2003). Multiple contexts of school engagement: Moving toward a unifying framework for educational research and practice. The California School Psychologist, 8, 99-113.

- Gunuc, S., (2014). The Relationships between student engagement  and their academic achievement. International  Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 5(4), 216- 231.

- Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758-773. doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.59850.

- Karabıyık, C. (2019). The relationship between student engagement and tertiary level English language learners’ achievement. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching 6(2), 281-293.

- Kim, C., Park, S. W., Cozart, J., & Lee, H. (2015). From Motivation to Engagement: The Role of Effort Regulation of Virtual High School Students in Mathematics Courses. Educational Technology & Society, 18 (4), 261–272.

- Kuh, G.D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development 50: 683-706.

- Hardy, J., Hall, C. R., & Hardy, L. (2005). Quantifying athlete self-talk. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(9), 905–917.

- Li, Y. & Lerner RM.(2013). Interrelations of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive school engagement in high school students. • Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(1), 20-32.

- Lupyan, G., & Spivey, M. J. (2010). Redundant spoken labels facilitate perception of multiple items. Attention, Perception and Psychophysics, 72, 2236-2253.

- Miller, R. B, Greene, B. A, Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B., & Nichols, J. D (1996). Engagement in academic work: The role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others, and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(4), 388-422.  

- National Survey of Student Engagement. (2014). About NSSE. Retrieved from http://nsse.iub .edu/html/about.cfm.

- Newmann, F.M., Wehlage, G & Lamborn, S. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools, 11-39. New York: Teachers College Press.

- Nota, L., Soresi, S., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation and academic achievement and resilience: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 198–215.

- Parsons, J., & Taylor, L. (2011). Student engagement: What do we know and what should we do? Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta.

- Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149–172). Boston, MA: Springer US.

- Reeve, J. (2014). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 579–595.

- Reeve, J., & Lee, W. (2014).  Students’ classroom engagement produces longitudinal changes in classroom motivation.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 106 (2), 527-540.

- Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36 (4), 257-267.

- Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contempory Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67. 

- Sciarra, D. T. & Seirup, H. J. (2008). The multidimensionality of school engagement and math achievement among racial groups. ASCA – Professional  School Counseling, 11(4), 218-228.

- Schiefele, U., & Rheinberg, F. (1997). Motivation and knowledge acquisition: Searching for mediating processes. In E Pintrich & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (pp. 251-302). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

- Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 23–52.

- Schwinger, M. & Stiensmeier-Pelster, J. (2012). Effects of motivational regulation on effort and achievement: A mediation model. International Journal of Educational Research, 56, 35- 47.

- Schwinger, M., Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2012). Not all roads lead to Rome—Comparing different types of motivational regulation profiles. Teaming and Individual Differences, 22, 269-279.

- Sedaghat M., Abedin A., Hejazi E., Hassanabadic H., (2011). Motivation, cognitive engagement, and academic achievement. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15 , 2406– 2410.

- Smit, K., Brabander, C. J., Boekaerts, M. & Martens, R.L. (2017). The self-regulation of motivation: Motivational strategies as mediator between motivational beliefs and engagement for learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 82, 124–134.

- Tegze, Amhamed Bouziane (2012). Exploratory and Confirmatory analysis: their concepts and methodology by employing SPSS and LESREL. Dar Al Masirah, Amman, Jordan.

- Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. York, UK: Higher Education Academy.

- Trowler, V. & Trowler, P. (2010). Student engagement evidence summary. York, UK: The Higher Education Academy.

- Walker, L., & Logan, A. (2008). Learner engagement. Bristol, UK: Futurelab.

- Wang, C., Shim, S. & Wolters, C.(2017). Achievement goals, motivational self-talk, and academic engagement among Chinese students. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18, 295–307.

- Whitton, N. & Moseley, A.(2014). Deconstructing Engagement: Rethinking Involvement in Learning. Simulation & Gaming, 45(4-5) 433 –449. 

- Winsler, A. (2009). Still talking to ourselves after all these years: A review of current research on private speech. In A. Winsler, C. Fernyhough & I. Montero (Eds.), Private speech, executive functioning and the development of verbal self-regulation (pp. 341). New York, NY: Cambridge University 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. (1999). The relation between high school students’ motivational regulation and their use of learning strategies, effort, and classroom performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 11(3), 281–299.

- Wolters, C. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self- regulation learning. Education Psychologist, 38(4), 189-205.

- Wolter , C ; pintrich ,p. & karabenick ,S. (April 2003). Assessing academic self – regulated learning , paper prepared for the conference on indicators  of positive development : definitions , measures , and prospective validity .

- Zepke, N. & Leach, L. (2010). Beyond hard outcomes:‘Soft’outcomes and engagement as student success. Teaching in Higher Education 15: 661-73. 

- Zimmerman, B. J., & Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 614–628.