انگيزش و هيجان‌هاي تحصيلي بر اساس نيم‌رخ‌هاي درگيري تحصيلي دانش‌آموزان دوره اول متوسطه شهر تهران

Academic Motivation and Emotions Based on Academic Engagement Profiles for High School Students

هدف از پژوهش حاضر مقايسۀ انگيزش و هيجان‌هاي تحصيلي دانش‌آموزان براساس نيم‌رخ‌هاي درگيري تحصيلي در آنها با رويكردي فرد-محور بود. بدين منظور تعداد 586 نفر از دانش‌آموزان پايۀ نهم از دبيرستان‌هاي شهر تهران به روش نمونه‌گيري تصادفي خوشه‌اي سه مرحله‌اي انتخاب شده، و به پرسش‌نامه‌هاي درگيري تحصيلي، انگيزش تحصيلي و هيجان‌هاي تحصيلي پاسخ دادند. با استفاده از روش تحليل نيم‌رخ نهفته چهار نيم‌رخ از درگيري تحصيلي دانش‌آموزان مشخص شد، كه با عناوين نيم‌رخ درگيري زياد، درگيري متوسط، درگيري كم و حداقل درگيري نام‌گذاري شدند. اين چهار گروه در كاركردهاي انگيزشي و هيجاني تفاوت داشتند، به‌اين‌صورت كه ميزان هيجان لذت در دانش‌آموزان با نيم‌رخ درگيري زياد در بالاترين حد و در نيم‌رخ حداقل درگيري، كمترين مقدار بود. هيجان منفي اضطراب در دانش‌آموزان با نيم‌رخ حداقل درگيري، بيشترين و در نيم‌رخ درگيري زياد، كمترين ميزان بود. براي انگيزش درون‌زاد و برون‌زاد نيز در دانش‌آموزان با نيم‌رخ درگيري زياد، بيشترين ميزان و در نيم‌رخ حداقل درگيري كمترين ميزان به دست آمد، اما بي‌انگيزشي در نيم‌رخ حداقل درگيري بيشترين ميزان و در نيم‌رخ درگيري زياد، كمترين ميزان را داشت. الگوهاي به دست آمده نشان‌دهندۀ اين است كه، انگيزش و هيجان‌هاي تحصيلي دانش‌آموزان به عنوان تابعي از تركيب ابعاد درگيري تحصيلي تغيير مي‌كند. اين مطالعه نه تنها شواهد تجربي از ماهيت چندبعدي درگيري تحصيلي را نشان مي‌دهد، بلكه در رابطه با انگيزش و هيجان‌هاي مرتبط با پيشرفت نيز كاربرد دارد. در نظر گرفتن ابعاد چندگانۀ‌ درگيري تحصيلي دانش‌آموزان به صورت هم‌زمان با ديدگاه فرد-محور، استفاده از يك رويكرد مفيد براي نشان دادن ناهمگني نمونه، پيدا كردن الگوهاي متفاوت درگيري ‌تحصيلي و پيشايندهايش را نويد مي‌‌دهد.

Student engagement in educational activities is one of the most important issues in explaining the rate of academic dropouts as well as the number of students remaining at schools or entringhigher levels of education and work (Christensen, Rashly & Wyle, 2012). Students who are more engaged in school earn higher grades and show better psychological adjustment to school (Li & Lerner, 2011). Conversely, students who are disengaged in school are more likely to experience academic failure, school dropout, and a host of other negative psychosocial outcomes (Archambault, Janosz, Fallu, & Pagani, 2009; Wang & Holcombe, 2010).Engagement is a multidimensional construct. Engagement encompasses four distinct, but highly intercorrelated aspects, including behavior, emotion, cognition and agency (Reeve & Tseng, 2011). Therefore, judging how actively the student is involved in the learning activity requires a consideration of their concentration, attention, and effort, which are aspects of their behavioral engagement. Further important are the presence of task-facilitating emotions such as interest and the absence of task-withdrawing emotions such as distress (emotional engagement), the use of sophisticated rather than superficial learning strategies (cognitive engagement), and the extent to which they trie to enrich the learning experience rather than just passively receiving it as a given (agentic engagement) (Reeve, 2012).Such a multidimensional conceptualization of engagement provides a rich characterization of how students act, feel, and think (Wang & Peck, 2013). Despite the large number of studies devoted to school engagement and academic achievement, the literature has two critical gaps.Primarily, it is necessary to carify the distinctions among the different dimensions of school engagement. Recent theoretical work points to the importance of conceptualizing school engagement as a multidimensional construct (Fredricks et al., 2004; Skinner & Wellborn, 1994). Empirical studies, however, either focus on the behavioral dimension or combine various dimensions of engagement on a single, global scale (Marks, 2000). The practice of combining items onto global scales precludes both the examination of distinctions among the different types of engagement and comparing between these types of engagement and the educational and developmental outcomes (Wang & Peck, 2013).Secondly, it is essential to explore how individual differences among the students might affect their school engagement in general and the particular aspects of their engagement in particular. The majority of the studies conducted in this regard have used variable-centered approaches to examine how levels of global school engagement are associated, on average, with different levels of academic outcomes. A critical, yet seldom investigated assumption of such variable-centered approaches is that the individuals sampled from the population are homogeneous with respect to the causal dynamics among the study variables (Bergman, von Eye, & Magnusson, 2006). If the homogeneity assumption is proved valid, estimates of average relations among variables will correspondingly have strong external validity; if, however, this assumption is invalid, the average effect generalized from the sample to the population may not apply to a single individual. To examine the validity of the homogeneity assumption, therefore, a person-centered approach toboth theory and data analysis should be adopted, verifying (a) how individuals vary in their multivariate profiles, and (b) how different profiles have different implications for individual developmental processes (Bergman & Andersson, 2010).Accordingly,this study aims to determine student academic engagement profiles in a person-centered approach, and to compare academic motivation and emotions among these profiles.