تأثیر یادگیری موقعیتی تلفیقی بر انگیزش تحصیلی، پیشرفت تحصیلی و اضطراب امتحان دانشجویان

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترا دانشگاه پیام نور

2 دانشیار دانشگاه پیام نور تهران

3 استادیار دانشگاه پیام نور تهران

4 استادیار دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شیراز

چکیده

هدف از انجام تحقیق، تعیین تأثیر یادگیری موقعیتی تلفیقی بر انگیزش تحصیلی، پیشرفت تحصیلی و اضطراب امتحان دانشجویان بود. تحقیق از نوع شبه تجربی و جامعه‌ی آماری شامل کلیه‌ی دانشجویان سال سوم رشته روان­شناسی عمومی دانشگاه پیام نور مرکز تهران که در نیم­سال دوم سال تحصیلی 90-1389 در درس آسیب­شناسی روانی یک ثبت نام کرده بودند، می‌گردید. تعداد 16 دانشجو در روش آموزش مستقیم و 18 دانشجو در برنامه‌ی ‌یادگیری موقعیتی تلفیقی شرکت کردند. دانشجویانی که قبلاً این درس را اخذ کرده بودند و یا به همکاری با پژوهش­گر تمایل نداشتند از برنامه حذف گردیدند. از بین کلاس‌هایی که در آن ترم تحصیلی درس یادشده در آن‌ها ارائه می‌شد، دو کلاس به صورت تصادفی برای اجرای برنامه‌های آموزش مستقیم و یادگیری موقعیتی تلفیقی انتخاب شدند. به منظور تعیین میزان پیشرفت تحصیلی در گروه‌ها، بانک سؤالی تهیه شد و از هر بخش، محتوای بخش اختلالات اضطرابی درس آسیب­شناسی روانی1، تعدادی سؤال به صورت تصادفی انتخاب شدند و در هر دو گروه در مرحله‌های پیش آزمون و پس آزمون به صورت یکسان استفاده گردید. اضطراب امتحان از طریق پرسش‌نامه‌ی اضطراب اهواز (1375) و انگیزش تحصیلی دانشجویان با استفاده از فرم کوتاه شده‌ی پرسش‌نامه استاندارد انگیزش تحصیلی مک اینرنی و سینکلایر (1372) مورد سنجش قرار گرفت. تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها با استفاده از آزمون آماری من ویتنی انجام شد. نتایج نشان دادند که در مقایسه با روش آموزش مستقیم، یادگیری موقعیتی تلفیقی موجب افزایش پیشرفت تحصیلی، افزایش انگیزش تحصیلی و کاهش اضطراب امتحان گردیده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


الف. فارسی

1. ابوالقاسمی، عباس. و نریمانی، محمد. ( 1384). آزمون­های روان شناختی. اردبیل: انتشارات باغ رضوان.

2. بحرانی، محمود. (1372). بررسی رابطه انگیزش تحصیلی و عادات مطالعه گروهی از دانش­آموزان متوسطه شیراز. رساله­ی کارشناسی ارشد. شیراز: دانشگاه شیراز.

3. صالحی، ساناز. (1388). بررسی انگیزش تحصیلی در گونه­های مختلف خانواده بر اساس مدل فرآیند محتوای خانواده. رساله­ی کارشناسی ارشد. شیراز: دانشگاه شیراز.

ب. انگلیسی

4. Akkoyunlu, B. Yilmaz, M. (2008). Development of a scale on learners' view on blended learning and its implementation process. Internet and Higher Education. 11(1): 26-32.

5. Armestrong, P., Elliot, T., Ronald, J. & Paterson, R. (2009). Comparison of traditional and interactive teaching methods in UKemergency department. Europian Journal of Emergency Medicine. 16(6): 327-9.

6. Allen, M. (2007). Designing successful e-learning. New York: John Wiley and sons, Inc.

7. Bonk, C. J., & Zhang, K. (2008). Empowering Online learning. USA. New York: Jossey- Bass.

8. Banaccio, S., & Reeve, C. (2010). The nature and relalative importance of students' perceptions of the sources of test anxiety. Learning and Individual Learning. 20(6): 617-625.

9. Carbonaro, M. (2008). Integration of e-learning technology in an interprofessional heath science course. Medical Teacher.
 30(1): 25-33.

10. Crouch, M. A. (2009). Advanced Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy course blending on line and face to face instruction. American Journal of Pharmaceutical  Education. 27(3): 51-73.

11. Deshmukh, V., Manchekar, S., & Hardikar, G. (2010). Situated Learning Design for e-B. Ed. Course of I-CONSENT: practitioners perspectives, presented in the third annual forum on e-learning Excellence bringing global Quality to local context, 3-1. February, Dubai: U.A.E.

12. Furstenau, B. Y. (2008). Exploration of an Industrial Enterprise as a Method of boundary-using vocational Education. In Tuomi-Gröhn, Tertlu and Engeström: Between school and work new perspective on transfer and boundary-crossing. (pp:85-119), United Kingdom: Emerald.

13. Galea , J., Legarreta, J. L., Martí, A., & Gisbert, M .(2002). On the design of learning contents for 3d virtual environments. Proceedings of ICTE. International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies in Education. Information Society and Education: Monitoring a Revolution.Spain. ISBN 84-95251-70-0.

14. Gulikers, J. T. M., Kester, L., Kirchner, P. A., & Bastians. T. J. (2008). The effect of practical experience on perception of assessment, Authenticity, study approach and learning outcomes.  Learning and Instruction. 18(2): 172-186.

15. Halse, K., & Hage, A. (2006). An acute hospital ward densely populated with students during a 12 week clinical period. Journal of Nurse Educator. 45(4):133-6.

16. Hassandra, M., Goudas, M. & Chroni, S.t. (2003). Examining factors Associated with intrinsic Motivation in physical education: a qualitatioe approach. Phychology of Sport and Exercise. 4: 211-223.

17. Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design Framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development. 48(3): 23-48.

18. Hsiao, C. (2008). The design and development  of  personal Digital Interface for location based learning system. URN etd-0710108-221137.

19. Ketelhut, J. (2006). Studying situated learning in a multi-user environment.
http://muve.gse.harvard.edu/rivercityproject/documents/rivercity.

20. Koka, A., & Hein, V. (2003). Perceptions of teacher's feedback and learning environment as predictors of intrinsic motivation in physical education. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 4(4): 333-346.

21. Lameras, P., & paraskakis, I. (2007). Pedagogy and tools for
E-learning practice Informatics.
Proceeding of the informatic Education Europe II Conference, South-East European Research Center: 304-293.

 22. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2008). Situated learning legimated peripheral participation. United Kingdom: Cambridge university Press.

23. Lok, B. (2006). Applying virtual reality in medical communication education: Current findings and potential teaching and benefits of immersive virtual patients. Virtual Reality. 10(3-4): 185-195.

24. Lunce, M. (2006). Simulation: Bringing the benefits of situated learning to traditional classroom. Journal of Applied Educational Technology. 4(1): 37-45.

25. Lux, L.R., Russel, M.L., Nelles, L.J., & Smith, C.M. (2009). ScaffoldingKnowledgeBuildingin a web based communication and cultural competence program for international Medical graduates. Academic Medicine. 84(10): 55-58.

26. Morrison, G.R., Ross, S.M., & Kemp, J.E. (2007). Designing effective instruction. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

27. Nguyen, H.T. (2006). Constructing expertness: a novice pharmacist's development of interaction competence in patient consultation. Communication and Medicine. 3(2): 147-160.

28. Oriol, M. D., Tumulty, G., & Snyder, K. (2010). Cognitive Apprenticeship as a framework   for teaching Online. Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 6(1): 210-217.

29. Putwin, D. W., & Daniels, R.A. (2010). Is the relationship between competence belief and test anxiety influenced by goal orientation. Learning and Individual Differences. 20(1): 8-11.

30. Quaintance, J. L., & Arnold, L. (2010). What students learn about professionalism from faculty stories: an "appreciative inquiry" approach. Academic Medicine. 85(1): 118-123.

31. Refat, R. M., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Learning about shape semantics: a situated learning approach. Proceedings of third conference on computer aided architectural design research inAsia. Osaka: Osaka University. pp: 375-384.

32. Richardson, B. (1999).   Professional development. Physiotherapy. 85(9): 467-474.

33. Rieger, V. M. (2009). Effective acquisition of basic surgical techniques through blended learning. Chirung. 80(6): 537-43.

34. Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully Online graduate course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 5, 2, ISSN: 1492-3831.

35. Sanden, J. V., & Teurlings, C. (2008). Developing competence during practice period: the learner's perspective. In Tuomi-Gröhn, tertlu and Engeström. Between school and work new perspective on transfer and boundary-crossing. (pp:110-137), United Kingdom: Emerald.

36. Schutt, M. (2007). The effects of instructor immediacy in Online learning environment. University of sandrago. AAT 3301290.

37. Serrano, H. M., Gonzalez, S. M. & Munoz, R. J. (2009). Designing learning environments improving social interactions: essential variables for virtual training space. Procedural Social and Behavioral Science. 1: 2411-2415.

38. Shaikhi Fini, A., & Khajehzadeh Fini, H. (2010). A comparison effect of group counseling methods, behavioral, cognitive and cognitive behavioral to reduce students test anxiety in university of  Hormozgan. Procedural Social and Behavioral Science. 5: 2256-2261.

39. Smith, P. J. (2003). Workplace learning and flexible delivery. Review of Educational Research. 73)1): 53-88.

40.Smith, l., & laurd, L. (2010). Exploring the advantages of blended instruction at community colleges and technical schools. Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 6(2): 508-515.

41. So, J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student's perception of collaborative learning environment: Relationship and critical factors. Computer and Education. 51(1): 318-336.

42. Stalmeijer, R. E. (2009). Cognitive apprenticeship in chemical practice: can it stimulate learning in the opinion of students. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 14(4): 535-546.

43. Standal, Ø. F., & Jespersen, E. (2008). Peers as resources for learning: a situated learning approach to adapted physical activity in rehabilitation. Adapted Physical Activity, Quartery. 25(3): 208-227.

44. Steinmayer, R., & Spinath, B. (2009). The importance of motivation as a predictor of school achievement. Learning and Individual Differences. 19: 80-90.

45.Stoeber, J.,  Feast, A.R., & Hayward, J. A. (2009). Self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism: Differential relationship and text anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences. 47: 423-428.

46. Sung, Y.H.,  Kauon, I.G., & Rya, E. (2008). Blended Learning on Medication administration for new nurses: Integration of e-learning and face to face instruction classroom. Nurse Education Today. 28(8): 943-952.

47. Unal, C., & Inan, H. Z. (2010). Student's perception of a situated learning environment. Procedural Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2(2): 2171-2175.

48. Walker, C. O., Greene, B.A., & Mansell, R. A. (2006). Identification with academic intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Learning and Individual Differences. 6(1): 1-12.

49. Wang, M. (2010). Online Collaboration and offline interaction between students using asynchronous tools in blended learning. Australian Journal of Education Technology. 26(6): 830-846.

50. Weltering ,V.; Tlerrier, A. ; Spitzer, K. and Spreckelsen C. (2009). Blended learning positively affects students' satisfaction and the role of the tutor in the problem based learning process: results of mixed-method evaluation. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 14(5): 725-38.

51. West, C.,  Stain, C.,  Sanbom, W.,  & Volicer, B. (2009). Computer-based simulation in blended learning curriculum for Hazardous waste site worker health and safety training. International Journal of Information Communication Technology Education. 5(1): 62-73.

52. Yushau, B. (2006). The effects of blended E-learning on Mathematics and computer attitudes in pre-calculus Algebra. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiant. 3(2): 176-183.