Cognitive and motivational orientations of U.S. and European students: differences and structural correspondences

Nenniger, Peter

doi:10.1016/0883-0355(88)90004-3

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, German students were found to focus more on the process of learning and be more mastery oriented than their American counterparts (see Nenniger, 1988Nenniger, , 1991Pintrich, Zusho, Schiefele, & Pekrun, 2001). In addition, Nenniger (1988) found that German students were more likely to self-organize their learning environment and to make use of various study aids and learning strategies, such as active reading. Recent studies also suggest that American students are more oriented toward extrinsic goals and more motivated by external factors, whereas German students find intrinsic goals more important (Schmuck, Kasser, & Ryan, 2000).…”

Section: Undergraduate College Education In Germany and The United Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autonomy and Competence in German and American University Students: A Comparative Study Based on Self-Determination Theory.

Lévesque

Zuehlke

Stanek

et al. 2004

Journal of Educational Psychology

345

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to self-determination theory (R. M. Ryan & E. L. Deci, 2000), supports for autonomy and competence are essential for growth and well-being in any learning environment. Educational contexts differ in their relative support for these 2 needs. The authors examined the role of autonomy and competence in 2 German and 2 American university settings, as they were predicted to differ in terms of their relative emphasis on competence versus autonomy. Invariance analyses supported the construct comparability of the measures and demonstrated that German students felt significantly more autonomous and less competent than American students. Perceived pressures and positive informational feedback were modeled as antecedents of autonomy and competence, and well-being was examined as a consequence. The hypothesized model was generally supported across the 4 samples. According to self-determination theory (SDT), psychological needs are nutriments essential for psychological growth and wellbeing in every human being (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Specifically, the theory posits that within any significant life domain, opportunities to experience autonomy, competence, and relatedness (each representing a basic psychological need) are essential in promoting life satisfaction and well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Evidence suggests that people will naturally tend toward contexts, activities, and relationships that support the satisfaction of these needs (

show abstract

Section: Undergraduate College Education In Germany and The United Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autonomy and Competence in German and American University Students: A Comparative Study Based on Self-Determination Theory.

Lévesque

Zuehlke

Stanek

et al. 2004

Journal of Educational Psychology

345

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This insight led to the extension of the traditional behavioristic paradigms of learning with expectancies (Hull, 1943(Hull, , 1951Spence, 1958). Nenniger (1988) introduced a content motive and described it as "an enduring, highly general and very stable personality trait that determines the person's sensitivity to situational determinants" (p. 159). For example, McClelland's (1955) butterfly hypothesis stated that optimal arousal should not be defined in general terms but in terms of the individual's optimal level of environmental stimulation in learning situations.…”

Section: Past Motivation Research: Exchange Of Ideas Across the Atlanticmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction

Boekaerts

Nenniger

1999

Eur J Psychol Educ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivation: A construct with a long traditionDespite the highly acclaimed place of motivation within pedagogical practice and instruction models, the construct has not been well integrated into theories of learning and instruction. Many researchers involved in educational research still focus mainly on cognitive and metacognitive aspects of learning. When being confronted with this observation, they argue that the construct is too complex to be integrated in their theories and models and that much is to be gained by better conceptualizations and operationalizations of the motivation construct. Why do they demand greater clarity? In popular language motivation is equated with goal-directed behavior and, is as such, easily understood. However, educational researchers who wanted to include this seemingly clear construct into their models of learning and instruction soon discovered that it was a blanket term which refers to a variety of interrelated cognitions and affects, including expectations, goal orientation, perception of control, interest, self-concept of ability, and intentions. Furthermore, each facet of the motivation construct has been intensively researched within its own conceptual niche, a situation which has resulted in a kaleidoscope of overlapping constructs and complementary measurement instruments. It is therefore not surprising that educational researchers are baffled by the multitude of terms and labels and demand more conceptual clarity. Quite clearly, the presence of too many motivation-related constructs has hindered the integration of the concept within models of learning and instruction. Our position here is not that there is no room for competing theories. On the contrary, we welcome competing theories for they stimulate thoughtful comparisons of findings assembled by different research schools. Rather, what we are saying is that there should be an extensive exchange of ideas between researchers working in the same area of research, yet belong to a different school of thought. Such an exchange of ideas will not only deepen each researcher's understanding, it will also force researchers to agree on the labels being used for the various facets of the motivation construct. In our view it is essential that all involved in the study of motivation a.nd learning form a community of investigators who speak the same scientific language, making use of a similar conceptual framework. Acceptance of shared tools will ignite the desire to share ideas and exchange empirical results, thus maximizing the chances that a more comprehensive theory of learning and motivation will develop. In contrast, using 4

show abstract

“…Αυτό κρίθηκε απαραίτητο διότι, όπως αναφέρθηκε προηγουμένως, οι σημερινοί ερευνητές θεωρούν ότι η ερμηνεία της επίδοσης πρέπει να στηρίζεται σε ένα ενιαίο θεωρητικό πλαίσιο στο οποίο αλληλεπιδρούν δυναμικά πολλοί παράγοντες, όπως γνωστικοί παράγοντες και παράγοντες κινήτρων (Nenniger, 1988• Sorrentino & Higgins, 1986.…”

Section: IVunclassified

Οι Σχεσεις Των Διαστασεων Της Εικονας Του Εαυτου Και Του Επιπεδου Γνω- Στικης Αναπτυξης Με Τις Επιδοσεις Στο Σχολειο

Δερμιτζάκη¹,

Dermitzaki²

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive and motivational orientations of U.S. and European students: differences and structural correspondences

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

Autonomy and Competence in German and American University Students: A Comparative Study Based on Self-Determination Theory.

Autonomy and Competence in German and American University Students: A Comparative Study Based on Self-Determination Theory.

Introduction

Οι Σχεσεις Των Διαστασεων Της Εικονας Του Εαυτου Και Του Επιπεδου Γνω- Στικης Αναπτυξης Με Τις Επιδοσεις Στο Σχολειο

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About