نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد قم، قم، ایران

2 استادیار گروه روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد قم، قم، ایران.

3 دانشیار گروه روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد قم، قم، ایران.

چکیده

هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی مدل درگیری تحصیلی بر اساس سرمایه روان‌شناختی با میانجی‌گری خودتعیین‌گری بود. این پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر روش توصیفی از نوع همبستگی می­باشد. جامعه مورد مطالعه پژوهش را کلیه دانش‌آموزان دختر پایه دوازدهم استان تهران در سال تحصیلی 99-1398 تشکیل می‌دهند. نمونه پژوهش 305 نفر از دانش‌آموزان دختر پایه دوازدهم شهرستان رباط کریم و پرند بود که به روش نمونه‌گیری چند مرحله‌ای انتخاب شدند. دانش‌آموزان به پرسشنامه‌های درگیری تحصیلی (ریو، 2013)، سرمایه روان‌شناختی  و خودتعیین‌گری پاسخ دادند. پس از جمع‌آوری داده‌ها، تحلیل داده‌ها با نرم‌افزار Spss-24 و Amos-21  و با روش آماری ضریب همبستگی پیرسون و معادلات ساختاری انجام گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که نقش میانجی‌گر خودتعیین‌گری در ارتباط بین سرمایه روان‌شناختی با درگیری تحصیلی، مثبت و معنادار است و الگوی پیشنهادی 33 درصد از واریانس درگیری تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان را تبیین می‌کند. بر پایه یافته‌های پژوهش مشخص شد تأثیر سرمایه روان‌شناختی بیش از آن‌که مستقیم باشد غیرمستقیم و از طریق خودتعیین‌گری است. در نتیجه با افزایش سرمایه روان‌شناختی، خودتعیین‌گری و درگیری تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان افزایش می‌یابد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Model of Academic Engagement Based on Psychological Capital with the Mediating of Self-Determination

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ali Sepahvand 1
  • Monirpour Nader 2
  • Majid Zargham Hajebi 3

1 دانشجوی دکترای تخصصی روان‌شناسی تربیتی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد قم، قم، ایران.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Qom Branch, Qom, Iran.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Qom Branch, Qom, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Introduction
In the last two decades, the academic conflict has attracted the attention of researchers and educators because of its comprehensiveness in describing students 'motivation and learning, as well as a strong predictor of students' performance, progress, and success in school. There are many different definitions of academic conflict, with some researchers considering conflict as a process while others have conceptualized it as an outcome. The framework of student achievement blueprints includes several identified personality and psychological elements that potentially influence student achievement; In this regard, we can refer to psychological capital and self-determination. The aim of the present study was a model of academic engagement based on psychological capital mediated by self-determination.  
 
Method
This research is applied in terms of purpose and correlational in terms of the descriptive method. The study population consists of all twelfth-grade female students in Tehran province in the academic year 2009-2010. The sample consisted of 305 twelfth-grade female students in Robat Karim and Parand who were selected by multi-stage sampling. Students answered the questionnaires on academic engagement (Rio, 2013), psychological capital (Lutans et al., 2007), and self-determination (Ryan and Desi, 2000). After collecting the data, they were analyzed using Spss-24 and Amos-21 software and Pearson correlation coefficient and structural equations. 
Results
The assumed model was fitting in the research community. The results of the analysis showed that the mediating role of self-determination in the relationship between psychological capital and academic conflict is positive and significant and the proposed model explains 33% of the variance of students' academic conflict. The research findings showed that psychological capital and self-determination, directly and indirectly, predict 33% of the variance of academic engagement. Therefore, it can be concluded that psychological capital and academic engagement have a mutual effect, and in other words, a causality and circular relationship can be considered between psychological capital and academic engagement.
 
Conclusion
Based on the research findings, it was found that the effect of psychological capital is more indirect and self-determining than direct. As a result, students' self-determination and academic engagement increase with increasing psychological capital. Psychological capital facilitates the processes of being required to pay attention, interpret, and maintain positive and constructive emotions in interaction and participation with educational environments due to positive cognitive evaluation of events, which can lead to more involvement with materials. The lesson is to act at the optimal level and increase performance. In fact, people with higher self-efficacy use study and learning strategies more effectively to achieve the desired result, these people use cognitive and metacognitive strategies more, and in educational activities with planning Purposeful and comprehensive effort, overcome academic problems and challenges.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Academic conflict
  • Psychological capital
  • Self-determination
  • Students
Appleton, J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427–445.
Avey, J. B., Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2010). The additive value of positive psychological capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Management, 36(2), 430–452.
Ahi, Gh., Mansouri, A., Dortaj, F., Delavar, A., & Ebrahimi Ghavam, S. (2016). Modeling the relationship between parental academic engagement and academic achievement of high school students with respect to the mediating role of motivation and student academic engagement. Journal of Psychological Achievements, 23(2), 69-90. [Persian]
Camelo-Lavadores A. K., Sanchez-Escobedo P., & Pinto-Sosa J. (2017). Academic self-efficacy of high achieving students in Mexico. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 6(2), 84-89.
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. New York: Springer.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2016). Optimizing students' motivation in the era of testing and pressure: A Self-determination theory perspective,” in Building Autonomous Learners: Perspectives from Research and Practice Using self-Determination theory, eds W. C. Liu, J. C. K. Wang, and R. M. Ryan (Singapore: Springer), PP: 9–29.
Dunna, T. J., & Kennedy, M. (2019). Technology Enhanced Learning in higher education; motivations, engagement and academic achievement. Computers & Education, 137, 104-113.
Erickson, A. S. G., Noonan, P. M., Zheng, C., & Brussow, J. A. (2015). The relationship between self-determination and academic achievement for adolescents with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 36, 45-54.
Ejei, J., Khezri, A., Heiman, B., & Amani, J. (2008). Structural pattern of relationships between supports for teacher perceived autonomy, basic psychological needs, intrinsic motivation, and effort. Journal of Research in Mental Health, 2(4), 47-56. [Persian]
Fredrikson, B. L. (2013). Positive emotions broaden and build. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1–53.
Gagne, M. (2014). The oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self-determination theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ghasemi, V. (2011). Estimation of optimal sample size in structural equation models and evaluation of its adequacy for social researchers. Iranian Journal of Sociology, 12(4), 138-161. [Persian]
Golestaneh, M., Soleimani, L., & Dehghani, Y. (2017). The relationship between transformational capitals and academic achievement: with the mediating role of psychological capital. Journal of Psychological Achievements, 24(1), 127-150. [Persian]
Hooman, H. A. (2009). Structural Equation Modeling Using LISREL Software. Tehran: Samat Publications. [Persian]
Hollett, R. C., Gignac, G. E., Milligan, S., & Chang, P. (2020). Explaining lecture attendance behavior via structural equation modeling: Self-determination theory and the theory of planned behavior. Learning and Individual Differences, 81, 101907.
Howard, M. C. (2017). The empirical distinction of core self-evaluations, psychological capital, and the identification of negative core self-evaluations and negative psychological capital. Personality and Individual Differences, 114(Supplement C): 108-118.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.
Klink, J. L., Byars-Winston, A., & Bakken, L. L. (2008). Coping efficacy and perceived family support: Potential factors for reducing stress in premedical students. Medical Education, 42, 572-579.
La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(3), 367-384.
Luthans, F., & Youssef-Morgan, C. M. (2017). Psychological capital: An evidence-based positive approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behaviour, 4, 339–366.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. (2007). Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 541-572.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., Sweetman, D. S., & Harms, P. D. (2013). Meeting the leadership challenge of employee well-being through relationship PsyCap and Health PsyCap. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(1), 118–133.
Martineka, D. & Kipmana, U. (2016). Self-determination, self-efficacy and self-regulation in school: A longitudinal intervention study with primary school Pupils sociology study. Journal of Sociology Study, 6(2), 124‐133.
Moreira, P. A. S., & Lee, V. E. (2020). School social organization influences adolescents' cognitive engagement with school: The role of school support for learning and of autonomy support. Learning and Individual Differences, 80, 101885.
Nota, L., Ferrari, L., Soresi, S., &Wehmeyer, M. (2007). Selfdetermination, social abilities and the quality of life of people with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 51(11), 850-865.
Parker, S. L., Jimmieson, N. L., & Amiot, C. E. (2010). Self- determination as a moderator of demands and control: Implications for employee strain and engagement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(1), 52-67.
Pekrun, R., & Perry, R. P. (2014). Control-value theory of achievement emotions. In R. Pekrun & L. Lin-nenbrink- Garcia (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education (120–141). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Peterson, S. J., & Byron, K. (2007). Exploring the role of hope in job performance: Results from four studies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(6), 785–803.
Reeve, J., & Tseng, M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of student engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257–267.
Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 579–595.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2007). Active human nature: Self-determination theory and the promotion and maintenance of sport, exercise, and health. In M. S. Hagger & N. L. D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 1–19). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self-determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1157-1586.
Ramezani, M., & Khamesan., A. (2017). Psychometric Indices of Rio 2013 Academic Conflict Questionnaire: Introducing factor conflict. Educational Measurement Quarterly, 8(29), 185-204. [Persian]
Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Free Press.
Silva, M. N., Marques, M. M., & Teixeira, P. J. (2014). Testing theory in practice: The example of self-determination theory-based interventions. European Health Psychologist, 16(5), 171-180.
Ucol-Ganiron, T. (2012). The additive value of psychological capital in predicting structural project success and life satisfaction of structural engineers. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2(4), 291-295.
Van Lange, P. A. M., Kruglanski, A.W., &Higgins, T. (2012). Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Wang, J. L., Zhang, D., & Jakson, L.A. (2013). Influence of self-esteem, locus of control, and organizational climate on psychological empowerment in a sample of Chinese teachers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(7), 1428-1435.
Wehmeyer, M. L. (2014). Self‐determination: A family affair. Family Relations, 63(1), 178-184.
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Field, S. (2007). Selfdetermination: Instructional and Assessment Strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Wehmeyer, M. L. (2006). Self-determination and individuals with severe disabilities: Reexamining meanings and misinterpretations. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30(3), 113-120.
Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomousmotivation for prosocial behavior and its influence onwellbeing for the helper and recipient. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 98(2), 222-244.
Welters, R., Mitchell, W., & Muysken, J. (2014). Self determination theory and employed job search. Journal of Economic Psychology, 44, 34-44.
Yi-Ti, L. (2020). The interrelationship among psychological capital, mindful learning, and English learning engagement of university students in Taiwan. Psychological Reports – Original Research, 24, 1-12.