پیش‌بینی پیشرفت تحصیلی توسط ادراک دانش‌آموزان از سبک‌های ارتباطی معلم
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسی
1 - استادیار سازمان پژوهش و برنامه ریزی سازمان پژوهش و برنامه ریزی آموزشی، پژوهشگاه مطالعات و برنامه ریزی آود، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: سبک ارتباطی مثبت معلمان, پیشرفت تحصیلی, سبک ارتباطی منفی معلمان,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف از این پژوهش، پیش‌بینی پیشرفت تحصیلی توسط ادراک دانش‌آموزان از سبک‌های ارتباطی معلم بود .طرح این پژوهش توصیفی از نوع همبستگی است. جامعه آماری آن دانش‌آموزان دختر سال سوم دوره راهنمایی ـ تحصیلی مدارس دولتی شهر تهران بودند که آمار آنان 27339 نفر گزارش شده است .بدین منظور، نمونه‌ای با حجم 480 نفردانش‌آموز ان دختر پایه سوم راهنمایی مدارس دولتی معمولی شهر تهران با میانگین سنی 13 سالبه روش نمونه‌گیری چند مرحله‌ای انتخاب و داده‌ها با استفاده از پرسشنامه سبک‌های ارتباطی معلم و دانش‌آموز و معدل تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان در نیمسال اول 1389 ـ 1388جمع‌آوری شدند. اعتبار و روایی پرسشنامه مذکور با استفاده از ملاک‌های روان سنجی احراز شد. داده‌های حاصله با استفاده از آمار توصیفی یعنی میانگین و انحراف معیار و تحلیل رگرسیون چند متغیری مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که طبق ارزیابی دانش‌آموزان، میانگین رفتارهای مثبت معلمان در کلاس از قبیل رهبری، درک و فهم، آزادی و کمک کنندگی و نیز میانگین رفتارهای منفی معلمان مانند تردید، پرخاشگری، نارضایتی و سخت‌گیری پایین است. علاوه بر این، نتایج تحلیل رگرسیون چند متغیری نشان داد که سبک ارتباطی مثبت قادر است پیشرفت تحصیلی (0001≥p،81/275= F، 366/0=R2) و سبک ارتباط منفی قادر است افت تحصیلی ( 0001≥p،41/134= F، 504/0=R2) را پیش‌بینی نماید. در سبک ارتباطی مثبت خرده مؤلفه‌های رهبری و آزادی از توانایی پیش‌بینی کنندگی برخوردارند که قوی‌ترین پیش‌بینی کننده رهبری معلم بود. این متغیر به تنهایی توانست 7/38 پیشرفت تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان را به طور معناداری پیش‌بینی کند ( 0001/0≥p ،041/302= F، 387/0=R2). در سبک ارتباطی منفی ضمن این که همه خرده متغیرها از توانایی پیش‌بینی کنندگی برخوردار بودند، ولی متغیر تردید قدرت پیش‌بینی کنندگی بالاتری داشت. تحلیل داده‌ها نشان داد که این متغیر به تنهایی می‌تواند 6/27 افت تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان را به طور معناداری پیش‌بینی کند (0001/0≥p،01/182= F، 276/0= R2 ).
The purpose of this research was to predict the students’ academic achievements, based on their perception of the teachers’ communicative style. The method being used was of the descriptive, co relational, one.27339 girl students, in third grade of junior high school in Tehran, were the statistical population. Amongst whom, 48 students, being about 13 years old, were selected by multiple cluster sampling. Data, then, were collected by a questioner, focusing on the student- teacher relationship style as well as the average scores of the students, during the first semester in1388-1389. By means of the psychometric criteria, both the validity and the reliability of the questioner have been verified. Descriptive analysis (mean, slandered deviation) and multiple regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Based on the findings, it was concluded that the mean scores of the both positive behaviors of the teachers, as: leadership, understanding, freedom, supporting, and negative behaviors, as: indecisiveness, aggressiveness, dissatisfaction and seriousness, were very low. It is, also, represented from the multiple regression analysis that not only can positive relationship style predict the academic achievements of the students (R2=0/366, F=275/81, p < 0/0001), but also, by means of the negative one, students’ low achievements would be predicted, (R2=0/504, F=134/41, p < 0/0001). In positive relationship style, freedom and supporting are the best predictors however, the most powerful one is the leadership of the teacher, predicting the student achievements up to 38/7(R2=0/387, F=302/041, p < 0/0001). Although all the elements in negative style are able to predict the low achievements of the student, the indecisiveness is the best indicators, 27/6, (R2=0/276, F=182/01, p < 0/0001).
Avalos, B.(2005).Learning to teach in the knowledge society: The case of chile, In Juan Manuel Moreno, Learning to teach in the knowledge society, Final report world Bank. Abyar, S, (2005) ,Study of factors affecting teacher effectiveness in teaching processes based administers vision. Master dissertation , Tehran of Payamnoor university,[Persian]. Avalos, B.(2005).Learning to teach in the knowledge society: The case of chile, In Juan Manuel Moreno, Learning to teach in the knowledge society, Final report world Bank. Azkia, M,(2003).Applied research methods, Keyhan publision,Tehran [Persian]. Bazargan,Z& sadeghi ,N(2001),Interpersonal behavior of teachers and students girl’sguidesschool , Journal of educational & psychology, vol31, number,20, pp99-121, [Persian]. Berger, C.(1989).Goals & plans & discourse comprehension in J .Bradac (ed) .Message effects in communication science , Sage , New bury Park. Brekelmans, M,& Wubbels, T, & Creton, H.(1990).A study of student perceptions of physics teacher behavior. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27,(4) 335-350. Cornelius-White, J.(2007).Learner-centerd teacher- student relationships are effective: A meta analysis.Review of educational research, 77, 113-143. Daeezadeh, Shariatmadari, A, Naderi ,E, Saif Naraghi,M, ( 2006), A Survey of High School Teachers’ Knowledge of Fundamentals Curriculum Development and Learning Principles, Journal on Knowledge & research in education , vo1, 1, Number,13, pp1-24[Persian]. Elhampour,H,(!995),Comparison of teacher training institutions teaching postgraduate and undergraduate education .Council Research of Education ,Ahvaz , [Persian]. Fisher, D, & Henderson, D, & Fraser, B.(1995).Interpersonal behaviour in senior high school biology classes. Research in Science Education, 25(2), 125-133. Hamre, B., & Pianta, R.(1999).Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children's academic and behavior outcomes through eighth grade. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia. Hong , J&Jeou-Shyan, H &Chan-li, L & Lih-juan,C.(2008).Competency disparity between pre-servise teacher educationand in-service teaching requirement in Taiwan.International journal of educational development , vol28, No1, pp4-20. Huntly,H.(2003).Teachers"work: Beginning Teachers Conceptions of competence, Thesis, Central Queensland university. Kerlinger , F ,(1986), Principles of Research in Behavioral Science (Volume 2) , Translator , Hassan pasha sssharifi & jafar najafiizand ( 1996), Ava-e-noor publication, Tehran [Persian]. khaliliazar , H, ( 2006), Comparison Emotional Intelligence between Normal and Gifted Students and It's Relation Ship With Academic Achievement, Journal of Knowledge & research in education , Islamic Azad university (Isfahan) , Number 14, pp107-124, [Persian]. Leitão, N.&Waugh,R.(2007).Students’ Views of Teacher-Student Relationships in the Primary School. A paper presented at the 37th Annual International Educational Research Conference, held by the Australian Association for Research in Education at Fremantle, Western Australia. Mahdian,M,(2002),The study of Obstacles of applying active teaching methods by teachers in teacher training institutions and training centers institutions. Council Research of Education, Mazandaran province [Persian]. Mehrabifar ,F , Mortazavi , M, & Lesani , M(2012), Reviewing the types of computer games and the time spent on them and their relationship with the students’ educational achievement in Kerman’s high schools (2009-2010), Research in Curriculum Planning, volume 9,Number, 7, ( continus, 34),pp125-135 [Persian]. Pianta, R.(1999).Enhancing relationships between children and teachers. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Saft, E, & Pianta, R.(1999).Teachers' perceptions of their relationships with students: Relations with child age, and gender and ethnicity of teachers and children. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia. Sarmad, Z . (1996), Overview of a selection of multivariate analysis in the behavioral sciences.Journal of educational &psychology Tehran university, vol, 1, number4, pp, 15-31[Persian]. Salimi, M, (2009), Compare student achievement in Popular and Isolated Students. Compare student achievement, and the hermit popular, Journal of knowledge & Research in Education, Azad University (Khorasgan), Number, 24, pp119-130[Persian]. Sarmad, Z, Bazargan, A, Hegazi, E,(1997), Research methods in the behavioral sciences, Aghah publication, Tehran [Persian]. Stipek, D.(2006).Relationships Matter. Educational Leadership. Vol. (64) Issue 1, 46-49. Timperley, H,Wilson , A.BBarrar, H.& Fung, I.(2007).Teacher professional learning and development : Best evidence synthesis iteration. Vahedi,M,(2005)” The study of Barriers to participation of teachers in decision making related to school administration, Hamadan: Education management and planning organization. Hamedan, [Persian]. Weinberger, E, & McCombs, B.(2002).The impact of learner-centered practices on college level courses, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA . Wubbels, T& , Brekelmans, M.& , van Tartwijk, J., & Admiral, W.(1999).Interpersonal relationships between teachers and students in the classroom. In H. C. Waxman & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), new directions for teaching practice and research (pp. 151–170). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Wubbels,T,& Brekelmans,M.,& Hooymayers, H.(1991).Interpersonal teacher behaviour in the classroom. In B.J. Fraser & H.J. Walberg (Eds.).Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences (pp. 141-160). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. Wubbels, T, & Levy, J. (Eds.).(1993).Do you know what you look like?: Interpersonal relationships in education. (Ist.ed).England: London: Falmer Press. Wubbels, T,& Creton, H, & , Levy, J, & Hooymayers, H.(1993).The model for interpersonal teacher behavior. In Th. Wubbels, & J. Levy (Eds.), Do you know what you look like?: Interpersonal relationships in education (pp. 13-28). London: Falmer Press. Zolghi, A, (2007), Recognizing & analyzing application qualitative avaluation by teachers, unpublished research reports , Council Research of Education, Province lorestan , [Persian].
_||_