自我調整、動機信念、選題策略與作業表現關係的研究暨自我調整訓練課程效果之評估

A Study of the Relationship between Self-Regulation, Motivational Belief, Item-Selection Strategy, and Task Performance and the Evaluation of the Effect of Self-Regulation Training Course

本研究目的有四：1.了解自我調整、動機信念和作業表現的關係。2.比較不同選題策略學生的自我調整、動機信念和作業表現的差異。3.分析不同選題策略學生在第一題選題難度上的差異情形以及第一題選題難度和作業表現的關係。4.評估自我調整訓練課程的效果。本研究的受試以國小六年級90名學生為對象。使用的研究工具包括：自我調整量表、動機信念量表、數學填空測驗（甲、乙卷）以及自我調整訓練課程。資料分析則採皮爾遜積差相關、典型相關、單因子變異數分析、混合設計二因子變異數分析及包卡爾對稱性考驗加以統計分析。本研究經資料分析後，得到下列結果：1.自我調整和動機信念之相關達顯著水準，動機信念可解釋自我調整總變異量的43％。但自我調整和作業表現無相關。動機信念中的內在價值、成就動機和作業表現有相關存在。2.不同選題策略學生在自我調整的四個變項中，只有自我評鑑和自我修正有差異存在；在動機信念的三個變項中，只有成就動機有差異存在；作業表現也有差異存在。上述有差異的變項均為容忍挫折策略的學生得分較高。3.不同選題策略學生選擇第一題的客觀難度有差異存在，容忍挫折策略的學生選擇較難的題目開始作答。全部受試選擇第一題的客觀難度與作業表現呈負相關。4.自我調整訓練課程實施後，實驗組學生在自我調整及動機信念上的得分均高於控制組學生，且實驗組學生後測得分高於前測得分。但在作業表現上，實驗組學生與控制組學生間並無顯著差異存在。這些結果支持：1.Pintrich & DeGroot（1990）及Zimmerman（1986）的看法－對於自我調整的運用，動機因素具有相當的影響力。2.DeJong（1990）的研究結果－自我調整的訓練有助於學生自我調整能力的提昇。

The purposes of this study were: (1) to investigate the relationship between self-regulation, motivational belief, and task performance; (2) to compare the differences of self-regulation, motivational belief, and task performance respectively between students with different item-selection strategies; (3) to compare the differences of the difficulty level of the first item between students with different item-selection strategies and to analyze the relationship between task performance and the difficulty level of the first chosen item; and (4) to evaluate the effects of self-regulation training course. The subjects were 90 sixth-grade students (42 boys and 48 girls) drawn from Ku-Ting Elementary School in Taipei City. Each subject was given Self-Regulation Inventory, Motivational Belief Inventory, and Arithemtic Computation Task (A, B). Forty-Five subjects of the entire sample received the self-regulation trining course. The data were analyzed with product-monent correlation, canonical correlation, one-way ANOVA, mixed design two-way ANOVA, and Bowker's test of symmetry. The findings were as follows: (1) Self-regulation had significant correlation with motivational belief, and the latter accounted for 43% of the former's variance. The two factors-intrinsic value and achievement motivation-of motivational belief had significant positive correlation with task performance; but, self-regulation was not related to task performance. (2) Between different item-selection strategies, there were differences on self-evaluation and self-revision of the process of self-regulation; there was also significant difference on achievement motivation which was one of the three factors of motivational belief. In addition, there was a difference on task performance between students with different item-selection strategies. The sutdents who used failure-tolerant stategy got higher scores than those who used the other strategies on self-evaluation, self-revision, and achievement motivation. (3) There were differences on the difficulty level of the first selected item bwteen students with different item-selection strategies. The student who used failure-tolerant strategy began with more difficult items than those who used other item-selection strategies. (4) with the self-regulation training course, the experimental group obtained higher scores in self-regulation and motivational belief than those of the control group; but no difference was found between their task performance. These results support the viewpoint of Pintrich & DeGroot (1990) and Zimmerman (1986) that motivation factor had influences on the use of self-regulation. The findings of this study that subjects' abilities of self-regulation can be improved with self-regulation training are also in congruence with the result of DeJong's research (1990).