Author: Maja Matrić
Institution: University of Maribor
Author: Katja Košir
Institution: University of Maribor
Year of publication: 2014
Source: Show
Pages: 215-228
DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.14.37.3.17
PDF: tner/201403/tner3717.pdf

Many authors have spoken against controlling environments and in favour of autonomous ones. In order to estimate perceived autonomy levels in the classroom, we decided to compare teachers’ perceptions with students’ ones, gaining a more accurate idea of the autonomy levels present in the classroom. The study participants (231 students, 18 teachers) provided data which showed how the teachers’ perceptions differ from the students’ ones in all cases, generally the teachers rating autonomy levels higher than the students. We also found indicators of differences present among teachers of the same subject areas as well as in terms of the students’ gender, school and age.

REFERENCES:

  • Benware, C. & Deci, E.L. (1984). The quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 755-766.
  • Black, A.E. & Deci, E.L. (2000). The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A selfdetermination theory perspective. Science Education, 84, 740-756.
  • Deci, E.L., Schwartz, A.J., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R.M. (1981). An instrument to assess adults’ orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 642- 650.
  • Griner, D. (August, 2012). Student Autonomy: A Case Study of Intrinsic Motivation in the Art Classroom. Retrieved from http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/ETD/id/3415
  • Grolnick, W.S. & Ryan, R.M. (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning: An experimental and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890-898.
  • Grolnick, W.S., Kurowski, C.O., Dunlap, K.G. & Hevey, C. (2000). Parental resources and the transition to Junior High. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10, 465-488.
  • Niemec, C.P., Lynch, M.F., Vansteenkiste, M., Bernstein, J., Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (2006). The antecedents and consequences of autonomous self-regulation for college: A self-determination theory perspective on socialization. Journal of Adolescence, 29, 761-755.
  • Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S. & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28, 147-169.
  • Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
  • Stroet, K., Opdenakker, M.K. & Minnaert, A. (2013). Effects of need supportive teaching on early adolescents’ motivation and engagement: A review of the literature. Educational Research Review, 9, 65-87.
  • Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W. & Deci, E.L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41, 19-31.

Wiadomość do:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart