特稿

行为观、心理观与社会文化观:大学生学习投入研究的视域转移——兼论中国高校教学质量改进

  • 尹弘飚
展开
  • 香港中文大学教育学院,香港

网络出版日期: 2020-11-16

基金资助

香港研究资助局一般研究拨款项目“多元视角下中国高校大学生数学学习投入的追踪研究”(CUHK 14618118)

The Behavioral, Psychological and Socio-cultural Perspectives of Student Engagement Research: Perspective Shift and its Implications for Improving the Quality of Teaching and Learning in Chinese Universities

  • Yin Hongbiao
Expand
  • Faculty of Education, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

Online published: 2020-11-16

摘要

当前主流的大学生学习投入研究秉承了行为观的视角,忽视了大学生学习投入行为和内部心理状态之间可能存在的差异,也难以看到大学生学习投入与特定社会文化脉络之间的关联。因此,大学生学习投入研究亟待研究视域的转移和多元视角的参与。作为一种心理观的解读,“动机与投入轮”为研究大学生学习投入提供了更为适当的理论框架和研究工具。三项依据“动机与投入轮”、针对中国大学生群体进行的实证研究结果分别表明:(1)中国大学生的学习投入可分为四种类型,其中两类学习者在学习动机和行为方面存在着“表里不一”的情况,且“适应不良但行为投入的学习者”集中反映了中国社会文化情境对大学生学习产生的影响。(2)尽管学习动机与投入行为之间的关系很大程度上符合英美学者已有的研究经验,但对中国大学生来说,适应不良的动机并不会削弱反而有可能激励他们积极投入学习,从而反映出大学生学习投入的文化依附性。(3)大学生课程经历会显著影响他们的学习动机与投入。依据课程经历各因子发挥的作用,可将其分为“理想指标”“反常指标”与“奇异指标”三个类别,其中后两类指标直接体现了中国高校教学的特征与积弊。改善中国大学生的学习投入和高校教学质量,教学管理者与教师应该澄清高等教育阶段“好的教学”的内涵,强调学生的独立性和自主学习,发挥评估促进教学的功能,同时留意中国文化与学校教育传统对教学的双重影响。上述三项研究虽从心理观出发,却有助于研究者看到大学生学习投入与社会文化情境之间的密切联系,且不忽视对学习投入行为的考察,因此使研究者有可能迈向整体观的大学生学习投入研究。

本文引用格式

尹弘飚 . 行为观、心理观与社会文化观:大学生学习投入研究的视域转移——兼论中国高校教学质量改进[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2020 , 38(11) : 1 -20 . DOI: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2020.11.001

Abstract

The dominant research approach to student engagement in higher education follows a behavioral perspective, which neglects the possible discrepancies between students’ behavioral engagement and psychological status, making largely invisible the links between student engagement and specific socio-cultural contexts. Therefore, there is an urgent need for the research on student engagement in higher education to shift its views and include diverse perspectives. The Motivation and Engagement Wheel, a psychological perspective of student engagement, provides a more appropriate conceptual framework and research tools. Targeting Chinese university students, three empirical studies based on the Motivation and Engagement Wheel revealed a series of findings. First, there were four types of learners among Chinese university students according to their motivation and engagement, and two of them showed some discrepancies between their internal motivation and external behaviors. Those “maladaptive but engaged learners” typically reflect the influence of Chinese cultural and educational traditions on student engagement. Second, although the relationships between motivation and engagement largely echoed Anglo-American researchers’ previous findings, maladaptive motivation was found to sometimes facilitate, rather than impair Chinese university students’ engagement. These findings reflect the cultural specificity of student engagement in higher education. Third, students’ course experiences significantly influenced their motivation and engagement. According to the nature of effects, these course experience factors can be classified as ideal, paradoxical and weird indicators. The paradoxical and weird indicators mirror some characteristics and long-standing problems of university teaching and learning in China. To improve the quality of university teaching, academic affairs administrators and instructors should clarify the connotations of good teaching in higher education, attach more importance to the cultivation of students’ independence and self-regulated learning, and promote assessment for learning in university teaching. They also need to pay attention to the double-edge effects of Chinese cultural and pedagogical traditions on learning and teaching in higher education. Meanwhile, although the three studies follow a psychological perspective, they can not only help us identify the close associations between student engagement and the socio-cultural context in China, but also take account of students’ engagement behaviors, which makes it possible for researchers to conduct student engagement research from a holistic perspective in future.

参考文献

金耀基. (2006). “面”“耻”与中国人行为之分析. 载杨国枢主编. 中国人的心理 (第249—269页). 南京: 江苏教育出版社.
陆根书. (2013). 大学生的课程学习经历、学习方式与教学质量满意度的关系分析. 西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),33(2),96-103
罗燕, 罗斯, 岑逾豪. (2009). 国际比较视野中的高等教育测量——NSSE-China工具的开发: 文化适应与信度、效度报告. 复旦教育论坛,7(5),12-18
吕林海. (2016). 大学生学习参与的理论缘起、概念延展及测量方法争议. 教育发展研究, (21),70-77
史静寰, 王文. (2018). 以学为本, 提高质量, 内涵发展: 中国大学生学情研究的学术涵义与政策价值. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),36(4),18-27
尹弘飚. (2016). 大学生学习投入的研究路径及其转型. 高等教育研究,37(11),70-76
尹弘飚, 李瑾瑜. (2015). 优化高校教学: 来自大学生课程经历的启示. 高等教育研究,36(8),62-69
Biggs, J. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 3-19
Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning. Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press.
Brown, G. T. L., & Wang, Z. (2013). Illustrating assessment: How Hong Kong university students conceive of the purposes of assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 38(7), 1037-1057
Brown, G. T. L., & Wang, Z. (2016). Understanding Chinese university student conceptions of assessment: Cultural similarities and jurisdictional differences between Hong Kong and China. Social Psychology of Education, 19(1), 151-173
Coates, H. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25-36
Coates, H., & McCormick, A. C. (2014). Engaging university students: International insights from system-wide studies. Dordrecht: Springer.
Earl, L. M. (2013). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Entwistle, N. J. (1991). Approaches to learning and perceptions of the learning environment. Higher Education, 22(3), 201-204
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), 598-109
Green, J., Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. W. (2007). Motivation and engagement in English, mathematics and science high school subjects: Towards an understanding of multidimensional domain specificity. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(3), 269-279
Kahn, P. E. (2014). Theorising student engagement in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 40(6), 1005-1018
Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758-773
Kember, D. (2016). Why do Chinese students out-perform those from the West? Do approaches to learning contribute to the explanation?. Cogent Education, 3, 1248187
Kember, D., & Gow, L. (1990). Cultural specificity of approaches to study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(3), 356-363
Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Education, 33(3), 10-17
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540-563
Lee, J. C. K., Huang, Y. X., Zhong, B. (2012). Friend or foe: The impact of undergraduate teaching evaluation in China. Higher Education Review, 44(2), 5-25
Lee, W. O. (1996). The cultural context of Chinese learners: Conceptions of learning in the Confucian tradition. In D. Watkins & J. Biggs (Eds.), The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological, and contextual influences (pp. 25-41). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre/Australian Council for Educational Research.
Li, J. (2002). A cultural model of learning: Chinese ‘heart and mind for wanting to learn’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(2), 248-269
Li, J. (2003). U.S and Chinese cultural beliefs about learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 258-267
Li, J. (2012). Cultural foundations of learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Li, W. S., & Hui, S. K. F. (2007). Conceptions of assessment of Mainland China college lectures: A technical paper analyzing the Chinese version of COA-Ⅲ. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 16(2), 185-198
Liem, G. A. D., & Martin, A. J. (2012). The motivation and engagement scale: Theoretical framework, psychometric properties, and applied yields. Australian Psychologist, 47(1), 3-13
Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 27-52
Macfarlane, B., & Tomlinson, M. (2017). Critiques of student engagement. Higher Education Policy, 30(1), 5-21
Martin, A. J. (2007). Examining a multidimensional model of student motivation and engagement using a construct validation approach. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 413-440
Martin, A. J. (2008a). How domain specific is motivation and engagement across school, sport, and music? A substantive-methodological synergy assessing young sports people and musicians. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 785-813
Martin, A. J. (2008b). Enhancing student motivation and engagement: The effects of a multidimensional intervention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(2), 239-269
Martin, A. J. (2009). Motivation and engagement across the academic life span: A developmental construct validity study of elementary school, high school, and university/college students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(5), 794-824
Martin, A. J. (2012). Motivation and Engagement – University/College. Sydney: Lifelong Achievement Group.
Martin, A. J., & Liem, G. A. D. (2010). Academic personal best (PBs), engagement, and achievement: A cross-legged panel analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(3), 265-270
Martin, A. J., Yu, K., & Hau, K. T. (2014). Motivation and engagement in the ‘Asian Century’: A comparison of Chinese students in Australia, Hong Kong, and Mainland China. Educational Psychology, 34(4), 417-439
Martin, A. J., Yu, K., Papworth, B., Ginns, P., & Collie, R. J. (2015). Motivation and engagement in the United States, Canada, United Kindom, Australia, and China: Testing a multi-dimensional framework. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33(2), 103-114
Marton, F., Wen, Q., & Wong, K. C. (2005). “Read a hundred times and the meaning will appear….” Changes in Chinese university students’ views of the temporal structure of learning. Higher Education, 49(3), 291-318
Parsons, S. A., Nuland, L. R., & Parsons, A. W. (2014). The ABCs of student engagement. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(8), 23-27
Ramsden, P. (1991). A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: The Course Experience Questionnaire. Studies in Higher Education, 16(2), 129-150
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). Boston, MA: Springer.
Richardson, J. T. E. (1994). Cultural specificity of approaches to studying in higher education: A literature survey. Higher Education, 27(4), 449-468
Richardson, J. T. E. (2005). Instruments for obtaining student feedback: A review of the literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 387-415
Tam, K. Y., Heng, M. A., & Jiang, G. H. (2009). What undergraduate students in China say about their professors’ teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(2), 147-159
van Egmond, M. C., Kühnen, U., & Li, J. (2013). Mind and virtue: The meaning of learning, a matter of culture?. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(3), 208-2016
Webster, R. J., Chan, W. S., Prosser, M. T., & Watkins, D. (2009). Undergraduates’ learning experience and learning process: Quantitative evidence from the East. Higher Education, 58(3), 375-386
Watkins, D. (2000). Learning and teaching: A cross-cultural perspective. School Leadership and Management, 20(2), 161-173
Wilson, K., Lizzio, A., & Ramsden, P. (1997). The development, validation and application of the course experience questionnaire. Studies in Higher Education, 22(1), 33-53
Yin, H. (2018). What motivates Chinese undergraduates to engage in learning? Insights from a psychological approach to student engagement research. Higher Education, 76(5), 827-847
Yin, H., & Ke, Z. (2017). Students’ course experience and engagement: An attempt to bridge two lines of research on the quality of undergraduate education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(7), 1145-1158
Yin, H., & Wang, W. (2015). Assessing and improving the quality of undergraduate teaching in China: The Course Experience Questionnaire. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(8), 1032-1049
Yin, H., & Wang, W. (2016). Undergraduate students’ motivation and engagement in China: An exploratory study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(4), 601-621
Yin, H., Lu, G., & Wang, W. (2014). Unmasking the teaching quality of higher education: University students’ course experience and approaches to learning in China. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(8), 949-970
Yin, H., Wang, W., & Han, J. (2016). Chinese undergraduates’ perceptions of teaching quality, approaches to studying and course satisfaction. Higher Education, 71(1), 39-57
Zepke, N. (2015). Student engagement research: Thinking beyond the mainstream. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(6), 1311-1323
文章导航

/