基于自我决定理论的课程评价探讨

E. Heinrich
{"title":"基于自我决定理论的课程评价探讨","authors":"E. Heinrich","doi":"10.59197/asrhe.v2i1.5321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This ‘Research in Progress’ article explores how to build on self-determination theory (SDT) in the context of first year university course evaluations. It suggests the use of an established SDT scale, Balanced Measure of Psychological Needs (BMPN), plus two course specific scales on course design features and perceived knowledge gains. The scales form a conceptual design linking course design, needs fulfilment and knowledge gains. Two information technology courses have been examined and findings indicate the usefulness of the conceptual design for course evaluation. Per course, data from the three scales combine to coherent pictures; across courses differences show up that might be explained via course maturity. While approaches for a combined statistical analysis for the three scales are indicated, participant numbers were too small for testing of models. Several areas for follow up research are suggested and include refinement of the scales, application to other courses for comparison regarding course maturity or subject specifics, examination of SDT for application in modern technology-supported and blended course environments, as well as combination with qualitative data for a deeper understanding.","PeriodicalId":158792,"journal":{"name":"Advancing Scholarship and Research in Higher Education","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring course evaluations based on self-determination theory\",\"authors\":\"E. Heinrich\",\"doi\":\"10.59197/asrhe.v2i1.5321\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This ‘Research in Progress’ article explores how to build on self-determination theory (SDT) in the context of first year university course evaluations. It suggests the use of an established SDT scale, Balanced Measure of Psychological Needs (BMPN), plus two course specific scales on course design features and perceived knowledge gains. The scales form a conceptual design linking course design, needs fulfilment and knowledge gains. Two information technology courses have been examined and findings indicate the usefulness of the conceptual design for course evaluation. Per course, data from the three scales combine to coherent pictures; across courses differences show up that might be explained via course maturity. While approaches for a combined statistical analysis for the three scales are indicated, participant numbers were too small for testing of models. Several areas for follow up research are suggested and include refinement of the scales, application to other courses for comparison regarding course maturity or subject specifics, examination of SDT for application in modern technology-supported and blended course environments, as well as combination with qualitative data for a deeper understanding.\",\"PeriodicalId\":158792,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advancing Scholarship and Research in Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advancing Scholarship and Research in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59197/asrhe.v2i1.5321\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advancing Scholarship and Research in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59197/asrhe.v2i1.5321","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇“研究进展”的文章探讨了如何在大学一年级课程评估的背景下建立自我决定理论(SDT)。本研究建议使用已建立的SDT量表,即心理需求平衡测量量表(BMPN),加上两个课程设计特征和感知知识增益的课程特定量表。量表形成了一个连接课程设计、需求满足和知识获取的概念设计。对两门信息技术课程进行了审查,结果表明概念设计对课程评价是有用的。每个过程中,三个尺度的数据结合成连贯的图片;不同课程之间的差异可以通过课程成熟度来解释。虽然指出了对三个量表进行联合统计分析的方法,但参与者人数太少,无法对模型进行测试。本文提出了后续研究的几个领域,包括改进量表,将SDT应用于其他课程以比较课程成熟度或学科特点,检查SDT在现代技术支持和混合课程环境中的应用,以及与定性数据相结合以获得更深入的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring course evaluations based on self-determination theory
This ‘Research in Progress’ article explores how to build on self-determination theory (SDT) in the context of first year university course evaluations. It suggests the use of an established SDT scale, Balanced Measure of Psychological Needs (BMPN), plus two course specific scales on course design features and perceived knowledge gains. The scales form a conceptual design linking course design, needs fulfilment and knowledge gains. Two information technology courses have been examined and findings indicate the usefulness of the conceptual design for course evaluation. Per course, data from the three scales combine to coherent pictures; across courses differences show up that might be explained via course maturity. While approaches for a combined statistical analysis for the three scales are indicated, participant numbers were too small for testing of models. Several areas for follow up research are suggested and include refinement of the scales, application to other courses for comparison regarding course maturity or subject specifics, examination of SDT for application in modern technology-supported and blended course environments, as well as combination with qualitative data for a deeper understanding.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信