Õpetajate juhendamispraktika seosed õpilaste kaasatusega õppimisse I ja III kooliastme tundides

Katrin Poom-Valickis, Anna-Liisa Jõgi, Inge Timoštšuk, Annika Oja

Abstract


Artiklis keskendutakse õpetajate juhendamispraktika seostele õpilaste kaasatusega õppimisse. Õpetaja poolt tunnis rakendatud juhendamisstiili väljaselgitamisel võeti aluseks isemääramisteooria (self-determination theory), mille kohaselt on õppijate motivatsiooni ja seda väljendavat kaasatust toetava õpikeskkonna loomisel olulised kaks õpikeskkonna dimensiooni: autonoomsuse toetamine ja struktureeritus. Täpsemalt analüüsiti, millist mõju avaldavad õpetajapoolne autonoomsuse toetamine ja struktureeritus põhikooli 2. klassi (N = 260) ja 7. klassi õpilaste (N = 207) kaasatusele tunnis. Andmete kogumisel kasutati tunnivaatlust ning küsitleti õpilasi. Uurimistulemuste põhjal võib öelda, et 2. klassi õpilaste hinnangud oma kaasatusele olid 7. klassi õpilaste omadega võrreldes oluliselt kõrgemad ning tüdrukud hindasid mõlemas klassis enda kaasatust kõrgemalt kui poisid. Kaasatuse komponentidest ennustas õpetajapoolne autonoomsuse toetamine 2. klassi õpilaste pingutamist ning 7. klassi õpilaste tunni nautimist. Tunni struktureeritusel oli mõju õpilaste kaasatusele ainult 7. klassis, kus enam struktureeritud tundides olid õpilased keskmiselt tähelepanelikumad ning pingutasid samuti tugevamini.

 Summary


Keywords


isemääramisteooria, õpetaja juhendamisstiil, autonoomsuse toetamine, struktureeritus, õppijate kaasatus

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Van den Berghe, L., De Meyer, J., & Haerens, L. (2014). Fostering a need-supportive teaching style: Intervention effects on physical education teachers’ beliefs and teaching behaviors. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 36(6), 595–609. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2013-0229

Brophy, J. (2014). Kuidas õpilasi motiveerida: Käsiraamat õpetajatele. Tallinn: SA Archimedes.

Chirkov, V. I., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Parent and teacher autonomy-support in Russian and U.S. adolescents: Common effects on well-being and academic motivation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 618–635. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032005006

Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284–290. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self- determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109–134. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6

Finn, J. D., & Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). New York: Springer Science & Business Media. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_5

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

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), 588–600. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019682

Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F. J., & Holt, K. D. (1984). Setting limits on children’s behavior: The differential effects of controlling versus informational styles on intrinsic motivation and creativity. Journal of Personality, 54(3), 233–248. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1984.tb00879.x

Lietaert, S., De Fraine, B., Verschueren, K., & Laevers, F. (2014). The role of teacher support for the gender gap in students’ behavioral engagement. International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI). Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

Ots, A. (2014). Õpilaste heaolu resilientsus ja mõistestruktuuri areng: erinevused kooliga rahulolu säilitamisel ebameeldivate koolikogemuste ja klassiõpetaja kasvatusstiili taustal. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 2(1), 132–161. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/eha.2014.2.1.06

Ots, A., Vaher, K., Selliov, R., & Laanoja, P. (2008). Ülevaade Eesti õpetajaskonnast. Külastatud aadressil http://www.hm.ee/index.php?popup=download&id=8781.

Põhikooli riiklik õppekava (2010). Riigi Teataja I, 29.08.2014, 20. Külastatud aadressil https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/129082014020.

Reeve, J. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 183–203). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.

Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their students benefit. Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225–236. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/501484

Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 159–175. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520903028990

Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149–172). New York: Springer Science & Business Media. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_7

Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding socio-cultural influences on student motivation. In D. M. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisited (pp. 31–60). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press.

Reeve, J., & Lee, W. (2014). Students’ classroom engagement produces longitudinal changes in classroom motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 527–540. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034934

Reyes, C. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027268

Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Baroody, A. E., Larsen, R. A. A., Curby, T. W., & Abry, T. (2015). To what extent do teacher–student interaction quality and student gender contribute to fifth graders’ engagement in mathematics learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 170–185. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037252

Ruus, V-R., Veisson, M., Leino, M., Ots, L., Pallas, L., Sarv, E-S., & Veisson, A. (2007). Õpilaste edukus, toimetulek ja heaolu koolis. M. Veisson & V-R. Ruus (koost.), Eesti kool 21. sajandi algul. Kool kui arengukeskkond ja õpilaste toimetulek (lk 17–58). Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikooli Kirjastus.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.

Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., & Dochy, R. (2009). The synergistic relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in the prediction of self-regulated learning. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 57–68. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709908X304398

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571

Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, doping, and everyday resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). New York: Springer Science & Business Media. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_2

Skinner, E. A., Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1990). What it takes to do well in school and whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control and children’s engagement and achievement in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 22–32. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.22

Timoštšuk, I., & Jaanila, S. (2015). Primary teachers’ instructional behavior as related to students’ engagement in science learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1597–1602. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.117

Tire, G. (toim.) (2013). PISA 2012 Eesti tulemused. Eesti 15-aastaste õpilaste teadmised ja oskused matemaatikas, funktsionaalses lugemises ja loodusteadustes. Tallinn: SA Innove. Külastatud aadressil www.hm.ee/index.php?popup=download&id=12473.

Tucker, C. M., Zayco, R. A., Herman, K. C., Reinke, W. M., Trujillo, M., Carraway, K., ... Ivery, P. D. (2002). Teacher and child variables as predictors of academic engagement among low-income African American children. Psychology in the Schools, 39(4), 477–488. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.10038

Übius, Ü., Kall, K., Loogma, K., & Ümarik, M. (2014). Rahvusvaheline vaade õpetamisele ja õppimisele. OECD rahvusvahelise õpetamise ja õppimise uuringu TALIS 2013 tulemused. Tallinn: SA Innove. Külastatud aadressil https://www.hm.ee/sites/default/files/talis2013_eesti_raport.pdf.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2016.4.1.09

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




ISSN: 2346-562X

Journal DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/issn2346-562X

http://www.eha.ut.ee