JPBS. The Effect of Motivation Management Education on Self- Regulation of Students. Maryam Akhoundi *, Ramezan Hassanzadeh, Bahram Mirzaeeyan

Transcription

1 The Effect of Motivation Management Education on Self- Regulation of Students JPBS JOURNAL OF Vol 4(7): ISSN: Copyright 2016 PSYCHOLOGY & BEHAVIORAL STUDIES Maryam Akhoundi *, Ramezan Hassanzadeh, Bahram Mirzaeeyan Department of Psychology, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran * Corresponding Author maryamakhoundi6@gmail.com ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of motivation management education on students' selfregulation. The research method was an experiment by pretest and posttest with control group. Statistical population was all female students of high school students in area one of Sari twonship. Number of them was 1168 individuals. One high school was purposefully selected from the high schools in this area. Two classrooms by 33 students as the experimental group and two classrooms by 33 students as control group were selected randomly among the four classrooms. Self-regulation questionnaire was used for data collection. Covariance analysis was used for data analysis. The findings showed that education of motivation management leads to an increasing in selfregulation of students. KEYWORDS Academic Progress, Education and Training, Self- Regulation. INTRODUCTION In the third millennium, education and training have the meaning that it is distinguished compared to other periods. Although heredity factor and environment or intelligence, enrich the learning environment and improving the teaching methods have somewhat impact on improving the educational situation but the heart of education is motivation. If motivation is not; nobody will learn anything. Motivation is generally tendency to academic progress and motivate in particular state is tendency to specific lesson. Therefore, teachers should study the interests and desires by deeper looking and considering the psychology new horizons because ideally, students are motivated to enhance understanding, concept and solving problems. Brophy (1986) named this ideal target "motivation for learning". Today, we know that each teaching methods the extent to which will be effective in advancing our targets. What has benefits and how can we help to enrich the experience. We know disadvantages of each method and also know their advantages and shortcomings, there 231

2 should be no way and there must be no way for shortcomings. Giving the daily lesson topics and past experiences are the important part of stimulation the curiosity and pushing interests and creation the rich and pure experiences. Complementary and extracurricular activities, encouraging to meuristic learning, teaching methods of dramatic, role playing, problem solving patterns can becaused that students centered the training activities and find out necessary willingness, motivation and curiosity for learning. In the third millennium, with dramatic changes in behavioral sciences and discover new horizons, meta-cognitive theories and strengthen self-concept in students are the most important priorities of education. Lemos (1999) believed that self-regulation means the capacity of individuals to modify the proportional behavior with conditions and changes in the external and internal environment. He explained that a person's ability for organizing and managing its motivation, lead to selfmanagement of behavior to achieve various objectives of learning. Self-regulator students are metacognitive and are aware of study values and their learning. A student who monitors their learning process and effective factors on learning and obstacles, in fact, is used from metacognition. On the other hand, it is believed that the students in dealing with assignments that are the internal provocative will experience more pleasure and emotional involvement. From this description, the role of motivation is as one of the most important elements of learning and knowing quite obvious. When students to be powerful in learning, can enhance their own strengths and repair weaknesses of their studies (Hassanzadeh and Mehdi-Nejad, 2012). All interpretations were explained the role of motivation management by students. In this method, the student was educated all the models and methods to guide their motives, increasing motivation, making favorable conditions to help its motivational orientations, promoting positive motivation and increase its efficiency (Hassanzadeh and Mehdi-Nejad, 2012). Thus, present study looking for answering this question "has education of motivation management effect on student's self-regulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS The research method was an experiment by pretest and posttest with control group. Statistical population were all female students of high school students in area one of Sari twonship that were educated in the academic year and had 15-year-old. Number was 1168 individuals. Since the conducting the research needed to cooperation of schools authorities, inevitably simple and available random sampling method was used. In this way, the total number of samples was selected 66 individuals. One high school were purposefully selected from the high schools in this area. All the first year of mentioned high school students were 66 individuals and were located at the four classrooms. Two classrooms as the experimental group and two classrooms as control group were selected randomly among the four classrooms.. Finally, 33 students as the experimental group and 33 students as a control group were determined. To perform the research, after gregarious implementation of pretest on research population, selecting the research sample replacing randomly the sample into two experimental and control groups, experimental group were educated by education of motivation management that was a research-making program for two months (one session per every week). Therefore, training sessions and practical exercises was set in eight sessions (every session in two hours) by using the mentioned education program. So that in beginning of each education sessions were presented discussions about training topics, then issue was discussed and studied into groups. At the end of each education sessions, some exercises were presented thereby all participants were exercised empirically the training discussion out of training situations. The important point was that the basis of this education was the experimental group activities in each of the sessions. Experimental and control groups were evaluated again using a self-regulation questionnaire a week after the end of the course. Boufard questionnaire 232

3 was used for data collection. The questionnaire included 14 questions that were designed by Boufard et al (1986) based on Bandura cognitive theory and were normalized by Kadivar et al (2001) in Iran. The questions were in Likert scale and subscale has cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Reliability of cognitive and meta-cognitive subscales were reported 0.70 and 0.68, respectively. The reliability of mentioned test has been reported 0.67 and 0.69 in a research that was conducted Nikdel (2006) and Arabzade (1999), respectively. To determine its validity, factorial results showed a good correlation between questions and assessment tool consisted of two factors. The value of factors was within acceptable limits and this tool was able to explain the 0.52 of self-regulation variance. Its validity was within normal limits (Kadivar, 2001). Also, Kadivar (2001) was reported that coefficient reliability of all questionnaire were 0.71 based on Cronbach's alpha. In this test, for each question was considered five points that include: strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and strongly disagree and were rated 1 to 5 scores, respectively. Scoring the 5, 13 and 14 questions were reversely. Minimum and maximum obtained scores by the participants were 14 and 60. Analysis of covariance was used to analyze the data. In all analyzes, the significance level was considered lower than RESULTS Self-regulation scores of participants in both groups were presented (Table 1). Table 1. Descriptive statistics of students' self-regulation scores in pre-test and post-test. Pre-test Post-test Average Experimental group Control group SD Experimental group Control group Results of Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro tests showed normal distribution of the data (p>0.05). T-test results are presented in Table 2. It can be said that the average of the two groups of students (experimental and control) in the pretest had no significant difference and these two groups were similar with a confidence level of 95% in the self-regulation. The selfregulation average of two groups of students (experimental group and control group) was the same or both experimental group and control group had the same average scores. Average of the two groups of students (experimental and control) in the posttest had significant difference and these two groups were different by confidence level of 95 percent in the self-regulation. The self-regulation average of students in the experimental group was more than in the students of control group. Average the two groups (pretest-control and posttest-experimental) of students were significantly different from each other and two groups were different by confidence level of 99 percent in the self-regulation. The self-regulation average of students in the posttest-experimental was more than in the students of pretest-control. Average the two groups (posttest-control and pretest-experimental) of students were significantly different from each other and two groups were different by confidence level of 95 percent in the selfregulation. The self-regulation average of students in the posttest-control was less than in the students of pretest- experimental. 233

4 Table 2. Study the students self-regulatory of experimental groups and control groups in different state groups using the t-test with two independent groups. Situation Group types Sample number Average SD Result Pretest Control Sig=2.383 Experimental Sig=0.921 Posttest Control Sig=15.33 Experimental Sig=0.00 Pretest Pretest-control Sig=5.012 Posttest Posttest- experimental Sig=0.00 Posttest Posttest-control Sig=7.31 Pretest Pretest experimental Sig=0.04 As you can consider, calculated F (19.47) was significance level equal to 0.00 (less than 0.05). This means that in the posttest stage, SPSS software determined the difference between the effect of education of motivation management on student's self-regulation in the experimental and control groups lower levels than Another result of Table 3 were coefficient of determination in the down the table. This coefficient that modified of this was 0.231, indicated that the education of motivation management variable as independent variables influencing the students self-regulation could determine the 0.23 percent of the variance in dependent variables (Table 3). Table 3. Test the effects of the covariance. The dependent variable: self-regulation of students in posttest. S.O.V Corrected Model Intercept pretest Between group Within groups SS (a) df MS F P-value Partial Eta square Total Corrected Total

5 Adjusted R Squared =0.231 R Squared = Due to calculated F (19.47) with df 1 =1 and df 2 =63, and significance level (α=1%) was more than critical F (7.07), thus it be concluded that if self-regulation rate of pretest students be entered the covariance process (and be controlled their effects as associated variable), there was significant differences between students' self-regulation in the experimental and control groups in post-test. This means that motivation management education had effect on students' self- regulation with confidence equal to 99% (Table 4). Table 4. Result of covariance analysis. df 1 and df 2 Sig. Calculated F Critical F 1 and DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of education of motivation management on students' self-regulation. The results showed that there was a significant difference between pretest and posttest scores of self-regulation in experimental and control groups. These findings were consistent with results of Ahmadi-mobarake (2010), atarkhameneh and Seif (1999), Sharifi (2006), Liu et al (2012), Eisenkopf (2008), chu and Hsieh (2007), Nutrisiani and Basuki (2006). Thus, In order to increase the learning rate can be used to motivation management. In other words, self-regulated learners have feeling of competence (the feeling of performance) and autonomy. In addition, self-regulated learners tend to determine the dominance targets for their performance and connect the successful implications to the things they have done. Students with learning the self-regulation skills can control their problems, and generally these students are not at risk of school dropout. Self-regulator students have potential to balance the motivation because motivation during doing the homework can be changed. Also, self-regulated learners like to expand their learning and just do not rely on textbook content. Self-regulated learners in addition to knowledge of learning strategies and applying their efficacy, have the ability to maintain and promote their motivation to carry out academic duties even when faced with homework that are complex and difficult or boring. Motivational, cognitive and environmental aspects of learning process were integrated by self-regulation learning on own axis and by itself. Self-regulated learner selects some objectives for itself and its efforts are focused on achieving the goals and programs. If necessary, it will use the help of others and its learning process will monitor, evaluate and modify if necessary. All the above findings showed that a direct relationship between selfregulated learning strategies and academic performance and certainly cannot be denied the role of self-regulation skills in high-level learning. However, based on the limited findings of this study can be said from impact of education of management on increasing students' learning and self-regulation. How much are stable the above results and also, such methods can be used in other fields, need to future researches and should be waiting for future findings. According to the findings suggested that education of motivation management increased self-regulation of student. So, using the motivation management tools for self-regulation of students can confirm independently such as distance learning, virtual schools, and doing challenging homework. Conflict of interest The authors declare no conflict of interest 235

6 REFERENCES Ahmadi-mobarake F, The relationship between thinking styles and learning strategies with motivation progress. Attarkhameneh F, Seif AK, Impact the study of metacognitive learning strategies on the student achievement motivation. Journal of Psychology, Educational Psychology studies. 9: Brophy J, Socializing student motivation to learn. (Institute for research on teaching. Research series no. 169). Michigan state university. East Lansing. Michigan. Chu HC, Hsieh MC A study of career development, learning motivational, and learning saticpaction of adult learning in unconvetional scheduling graduate programs. Shu-Te University. Yu Da college of Business. Eisenkopf G, Peer effects, motivation, and learning. University of Konstansz, department of economics. Hasanzade R, Mehdinejad-gorji G, Motivation theories in education. Tehran. Psycho. Kadivar P, Evaluation of efficacy, autonomy, intelligence and academic progress of students believes, in order to model for optimal learning. Journal of Education and Psychology. 1 & 2: 46- Lemos SL, Student's geals and self-regulation in the classroom. International Journal of Education. LIU EF, LION PY JIAN PM, The dynamics of motivation and learning strategy in a creativity-supporting learning environment in higher education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. 11(1): Nutrisiani D, Basuki H, Relationship between learning motivation in students who Are Active in OSIS in SMU 72. Facuthy of psychology, Gunad Arama University. www. Gunadarma. ac.id. Sharifi HP, Assessment of internal and external progress motivations and attitudes of students from each level of classes toward education issues and the contribution of these variables in explaining their academic achievement. Journal of Educational Innovations. 18(5):