پديد آورندگان :
اشرف زاده، شايسته دانشگاه آزاد اسلامي، كرمان، ايران , انديشمند، ويدا دانشگاه آزاد اسلامي، كرمان، ايران - گروه روان شناسي تربيتي , منظري توكلي، حمدالله دانشگاه آزاد اسلامي، كرمان، ايران - گروه روان شناسي تربيتي
كليدواژه :
راهبردهاي فراشناختي , راهبردهاي شناختي , باورهاي انگيزشي , واسطه هاي يادگيري
چكيده فارسي :
زمينه و هدف: باورهاي انگيزشي و راهبردها و سبك‌هاي يادگيري از متغيرهاي مهم در عملكرد تحصيلي دانش‌آموزان با اختلالات يادگيري است. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تبيين راهبردهاي شناختي و فراشناختي دانش‌آموزان داراي اختلالات يادگيري برمبناي باورهاي انگيزشي و ميانجيگري سبك‌هاي يادگيري انجام شد.
روش‌بررسي: روش پژوهش توصيفي و از نوع همبستگي بود. جامعهٔ آماري را دانش‌آموزان داراي اختلال يادگيري مقطع متوسطهٔ ابتدايي كرمان در سال تحصيلي 97-1396 تشكيل دادند. بدين‌منظور نمونه‌اي شامل 202 دانش‌آموز داراي اختلال يادگيري مقطع ابتدايي (چهارم تا ششم) با روش نمونه‌گيري دردسترس از مراكز اختلال يادگيري انتخاب شدند. سپس مقياس‌هاي راهبردهاي شناختي و فراشناختي (داوسون و مك اينري، 2004) و سبك‌هاي يادگيري (كلب، 2000) و باورهاي انگيزشي (پينتريج و ديگروت، 1990) روي آنان اجرا شد. تحليل داده‌ها با استفاده از الگوي معادلۀ ساختاري صورت گرفت.
يافته‌ها: مدل نهايي الگويي خاص از روابط متغيرهاي پژوهش را با يكديگر نشان داد كه 0٫44 از تغييرات خودكارآمدي و 0٫37 ارزش‌گذاري دروني و 0٫22 اضطراب امتحان را تبيين مي‌كند (0٫001≥p). شاخص‌هاي برازش مدل نيز برازش مدل را با داده‌ها نشان مي‌دهد (1٫81= χ2 و 0٫61=p و 0٫01=RMSEA و 1٫00=GFI و 0٫99=AGFI و 1٫00=CFI و 0٫99=NFI). همچنين اثر مستقيم راهبردهاي شناختي بر باورهاي انگيزشي تأييد نشد؛ اما اثر غيرمستقيم آن با ميانجيگري سبك‌هاي يادگيري بر سه بعد باورهاي انگيزشي تأييد شد. اثر مستقيم و غيرمستقيم راهبردهاي فراشناختي نيز بر هر سه بعد باورهاي انگيزشي معنادار بود (0٫001≥p).
نتيجه‌گيري: راهبردهاي فراشناختي بيش از راهبردهاي شناختي تبيين‌كنندۀ باورهاي انگيزشي دانش‌آموزان بوده كه بيانگر اهميت اساسي نقش راهبردهاي فراشناختي در باورهاي انگيزشي دانش‌آموزان داراي اختلال يادگيري است.
چكيده لاتين :
Background & Objectives: A learning disorder is a disability in one or more of the psychological processes necessary to understand or use language, writing or speech, which may be in the form of disability in listening, thinking, speaking, reading, spelling and performing mathematical calculations. Student learning disruptions lead to academic failure, drop in motivation and graduation, and will have psychological and economic harm to the child and family and the education system. One of the factors associated with motivational beliefs is cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Students’ motivational beliefs in the amount of learning and using cognitive strategies and self–regulation learning are
very influential and are the determinants of academic achievement. Many students' problems in learning related to weak cognitive and
metacognitive skills. Cognitive strategies help them to connect new information, combine them with previously learned information, and prepare
them for storage in long–term memory. Metacognition is the acquisition of knowledge and recognition of weaknesses, strengths, and cognitive
activities that guide them in the process of cognitive activity. The main objective of this study was to explain the cognitive and metacognitive
strategies of students with learning disabilities based on motivational beliefs and mediation of learning styles.
Methods: The research method was descriptive, correlational and the statistical population of the study included students with elementary school
(4th–6th grade) learning disorder in Kerman (south of Iran) during the academic year of 1969–97. For this purpose, 202 students with elementary
school learning disorder was selected using available sampling method from Kerman learning disability centers, then the cognitive and
metacognitive strategies (Dawson and McAdamry, 2004), learning styles (Colb, 2000), and motivational beliefs (Pinttir and Drogrot, 1990)
(three dimensions, internal evaluation, and test anxiety) were performed on them. Data were analyzed using structural equation model (SEM).
Results: The final model showed a specific pattern of relationships between research variables, which explained 0.44 of self–efficacy, 37.0
internal evaluation and 22.0 exam anxiety (p≤0.001). The fitting indexes of the model showed the fit of the model with the data (p=0.61, χ2=1.81,
RMSEA=0.01, GFI=1.00, AGFI=0.99, CFI=1.00, NFI=0.99). The direct effect of cognitive strategies on motivational support was not confirmed,
but its indirect effect was confirmed by the mediation of learning styles on three dimensions of motivational beliefs. Direct and indirect effects
of meta–cognitive strategies were significant on all three dimensions of motivational beliefs (p≤0.001).
Conclusion: Metacognitive strategies were more effective than cognitive strategies explaining the motivational beliefs of students, which
indicates the importance of the role of meta–cognitive strategies in motivational beliefs of students with learning disabilities. The results of this
study indicated that the quantity and quality of motivational beliefs (self–efficacy, internal evaluation, and test anxiety) influenced by cognitive and meta–cognitive strategies of students with learning disabilities.
