Volume 2, Issue 2 (June 2020)
IEEPJ 2020, 2(2): 120-130 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Saranjam R. (2020). Psychometric Properties of Self-Regulating Climate Questionnaire. IEEPJ. 2(2), 120-130. doi:10.29252/ieepj.2.2.120
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-196-en.html
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-196-en.html
Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas
Abstract: (1774 Views)
The study sought to determine the psychometric properties of self -regulatory climate questionnaire among Iranian students as well as comparing the self- regulatory climate in Gifted and Public Schools. The statistical population included the first-year high school male students in gifted and public schools in 2018. In the first study, 200 students were selected through random sampling. 30 students were randomly assigned to each group via a random sampling method in the second study. The self-regulatory climate questionnaire was used for the collection of data. The reliability of the questionnaire was also evaluated by Cronbach's alpha and to test its validity, the confirmatory factor analysis was used. Also, the multivariate analysis of variance was used to test the research hypothesis. The findings showed that self-regulatory climate questionnaire had proper internal consistency for subscales and total scale. Besides, the fitness indices obtained from confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the scale had proper construct validity and all items had an appropriate load factor. The results also revealed that the gifted schools have a higher self-regulation climate. In general, the results of the present study supported the usefulness of the self-regulatory climate questionnaire among the Iranian sample and provided some evidence of the role of characteristics of the gifted schools in the self-regulatory climate. In general, self-regulatory climate is a valid and effective construct which has positive consequences for academic performance.
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Psychology
Received: 2020/01/10 | Accepted: 2020/03/10 | Published: 2020/06/20
Received: 2020/01/10 | Accepted: 2020/03/10 | Published: 2020/06/20
References
1. Adams, C. M., Forsyth, P. B., Dollarhide, E., Miskell, R., & Ware, J. (2015). Self-regulatory climate: A social resource for student regulation and achievement. Teachers college record, 117(2), 1-28.
2. Adams, C. M., Ware, J. K., Miskell, R. C., & Forsyth, P. B. (2016). Self-regulatory climate: A positive attribute of public schools. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(2), 169-180. [DOI:10.1080/00220671.2014.934419]
3. Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy‐enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students' engagement in schoolwork. British journal of educational psychology, 72(2), 261-278. [DOI:10.1348/000709902158883]
4. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia? Journal of educational psychology, 96(3), 523. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.523]
5. Barber, B. K., & Olsen, J. A. (1997). Socialization in context: Connection, regulation, and autonomy in the family, school, and neighborhood, and with peers. Journal of adolescent research, 12(2), 287-315. [DOI:10.1177/0743554897122008]
6. Barber, B. K., & Schluterman, J. M. (2008). Connectedness in the lives of children and adolescents: A call for greater conceptual clarity. Journal of Adolescent Health, 43(3), 209-216. [DOI:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.01.012]
7. Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self‐determination theory perspective. Science education, 84(6), 740-756.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<740::AID-SCE4>3.0.CO;2-3 [DOI:10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:63.0.CO;2-3]
8. Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers college record, 111(1), 180-213.
9. Connor, C. M., Day, S. L., Phillips, B., Sparapani, N., Ingebrand, S. W., McLean, L., . . . Kaschak, M. P. (2016). Reciprocal Effects of Self‐Regulation, Semantic Knowledge, and Reading Comprehension in Early Elementary School. Child development, 87(6), 1813-1824. [DOI:10.1111/cdev.12570]
10. Connor, C. M., Ponitz, C. C., Phillips, B. M., Travis, Q. M., Glasney, S., & Morrison, F. J. (2010). First graders' literacy and self-regulation gains: The effect of individualizing student instruction. Journal of School Psychology, 48(5), 433-455. [DOI:10.1016/j.jsp.2010.06.003]
11. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182. [DOI:10.1037/a0012801]
12. Ford, T. G., & Ware, J. K. (2018). Teacher self-regulatory climate: Conceptualizing an indicator of leader support for teacher learning and development. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 17(1), 27-51. [DOI:10.1080/15700763.2016.1197283]
13. Forsyth, P., Adams, C., & Hoy, W. (2011). Collective trust: Why
14. schools can't improve without it. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
15. Forsyth, P. B., Adams, C. M., & Hoy, W. K. (2011). Collective Trust: Why Schools Can't Improve without It: ERIC.
16. Goddard, R. D., Sweetland, S. R., & Hoy, W. K. (2000). Academic emphasis of urban elementary schools and student achievement in reading and mathematics: A multilevel analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(5), 683-702. [DOI:10.1177/00131610021969164]
17. Greene, J. A., Moos, D. C., Azevedo, R., & Winters, F. I. (2008). Exploring differences between gifted and grade-level students' use of self-regulatory learning processes with hypermedia. Computers & Education, 50(3), 1069-1083. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.004]
18. Hardre, P. L., & Reeve, J. (2003). A motivational model of rural students' intentions to persist in, versus drop out of, high school. Journal of educational psychology, 95(2), 347. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.347]
19. Hoy, W. K., Smith, P. A., & Sweetland, S. R. (2002). The development of the organizational climate index for high schools: Its measure and relationship to faculty trust. The High School Journal, 86(2), 38-49. [DOI:10.1353/hsj.2002.0023]
20. Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Hoy, A. W. (2006). Academic optimism of schools: A force for student achievement. American educational research journal, 43(3), 425-446. [DOI:10.3102/00028312043003425]
21. Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of educational psychology, 102(3), 588. [DOI:10.1037/a0019682]
22. Martin, J. (2004). Self-regulated learning, social cognitive theory, and agency. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 135-145. [DOI:10.1207/s15326985ep3902_4]
23. McCaslin, M. (2009). Co-regulation of student motivation and emergent identity. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 137-146. [DOI:10.1080/00461520902832384]
24. McClelland, M. M., & Cameron, C. E. (2011). Self‐regulation and academic achievement in elementary school children. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2011(133), 29-44. [DOI:10.1002/cd.302]
25. McNeely, C. A., Nonnemaker, J. M., & Blum, R. W. (2002). Promoting school connectedness: Evidence from the national longitudinal study of adolescent health. Journal of school health, 72(4), 138-146. [DOI:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2002.tb06533.x]
26. Mitchell, R. M., Kensler, L., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2018). Student trust in teachers and student perceptions of safety: positive predictors of student identification with school. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 21(2), 135-154. [DOI:10.1080/13603124.2016.1157211]
27. Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009a). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. School Field, 7(2), 133-144. [DOI:10.1177/1477878509104318]
28. Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009b). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and research in Education, 7(2), 133-144. [DOI:10.1177/1477878509104318]
29. Paloş, R., Munteanu, A., Costea, I., & Macsinga, I. (2011). Motivational and cognitive variables with impact on academic performance Preliminary study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 138-142. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.063]
30. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and psychological measurement, 53(3), 801-813. [DOI:10.1177/0013164493053003024]
31. Reeve, J., Ryan, R., Deci, E. L., & Jang, H. (2008). Understanding and promoting autonomous self-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications, 223-244.
32. Ruban, L., & Reis, S. M. (2006). Patterns of self‐regulatory strategy use among low‐achieving and high‐achieving university students. Roeper Review, 28(3), 148-156. [DOI:10.1080/02783190609554354]
33. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2016). Facilitating and hindering motivation, learning, and well-being in schools: Research and observations from self-determination theory. Handbook on motivation at schools, 96-119.
34. Sajjadimonazah, H., & pirkhaefi, A. (2017). Effectiveness of Creativity Therapy Model on Improving Motivation and Students' Educational Performance. Journal of Research in School and Virtual Learning, 3(4), 39-48.
35. Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2005). Antecedents and outcomes of self-determination in 3 life domains: The role of parents' and teachers' autonomy support. Journal of youth and adolescence, 34(6), 589-604. [DOI:10.1007/s10964-005-8948-y]
36. Weinstein, C. E., Palmer, D., & Schulte, A. C. (1987). Learning and study strategies inventory (LASSI). Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.
37. Wibrowski, C. R., Matthews, W. K., & Kitsantas, A. (2017). The role of a skills learning support program on first-generation college students' self-regulation, motivation, and academic achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 19(3), 317-332. [DOI:10.1177/1521025116629152]
38. Zee, M., & de Bree, E. (2017). Students' self-regulation and achievement in basic reading and math skills: the role of student-teacher relationships in middle childhood. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(3), 265-280. [DOI:10.1080/17405629.2016.1196587]
39. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(2), 64-70. [DOI:10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2]
40. Zimmerman, B. J., & Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American educational research journal, 23(4), 614-628. [DOI:10.3102/00028312023004614]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
