2016
DOI: 10.14786/flr.v4i5.227
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Within-student variability in learning experiences, and teachers’ perceptions of students’ task-focus

Abstract: (SD = 4.6; nepisodes = 3,433). We defined mean squared successive differences (MSSD) for each manifest indicator of task difficulty, competence evaluation and intrinsic motivation. We also demonstrate how to specify multivariate models for investigating convergent validity of the variability constructs. Overall, our study provides support for intraindividual variability as a construct in its own right, which has the potential to provide novel insight into students' learning processes.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
3

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
5
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…One is encouragement to “think ‘within-person’” (Hamaker, 2012). Writers explain that understanding the experiences and actions of individual students (Malmberg, Lim, Tolvanen, & Nurmi, 2016; Murayama et al, 2017)—and individuals in general (Boag, 2018; Fisher, Medaglia, & Jeronimus, 2018; Lamiell, 2013; Molenaar, 2004)—requires theory and research that addresses the intra individual organization of psychological structures and processes. A second is a call for assessments that are context-sensitive (e.g., Frenzel, Becker-Kurz, Pekrun, & Goetz, 2015; Little, 2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One is encouragement to “think ‘within-person’” (Hamaker, 2012). Writers explain that understanding the experiences and actions of individual students (Malmberg, Lim, Tolvanen, & Nurmi, 2016; Murayama et al, 2017)—and individuals in general (Boag, 2018; Fisher, Medaglia, & Jeronimus, 2018; Lamiell, 2013; Molenaar, 2004)—requires theory and research that addresses the intra individual organization of psychological structures and processes. A second is a call for assessments that are context-sensitive (e.g., Frenzel, Becker-Kurz, Pekrun, & Goetz, 2015; Little, 2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By directly showing them the entire process, starting with the formulation of a research questions and hypothesis, figuring out how to test it, performing the tests, evaluating how they relate to the hypothesis, and finally forming some kind of conclusions, they were able to observe and participate in the scientific method directly. While their motivation varied in the course of the day, which was to be expected for students of their age [48], overall they seemed very motivated and proud, especially when they realised that they actively were involved in activities as young scientists and understood something that they did not before. Moreover, teachers' interest in conducting similar activities in the future also was sparked.…”
Section: Outcome and Impactmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the multilevel context we can also test whether students differ from one another in how much their motivation fluctuates "from one instance to the next," for example using the mean square successive difference (MSSD, see, e.g., Malmberg et al 2016). To calculate the MSSD in the present data, lagged (t-1) versions of the motivation variables needed to be added to the data set (see Appendix B).…”
Section: Rq 1: How Much Do Student Motivation and Teacher Behavior Fluctuate From Moment To Moment?mentioning
confidence: 99%