Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2018.38.1.57

An Analysis of Learning Interest and Self-Regulated Learning by Giftedness and Thinking Style  

Lee, Hyunjoo (Myongji University)
Chae, Yoojung (KAIST)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.38, no.1, 2018 , pp. 57-68 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to categorize learning style groups and to analyze students' learning interest and self-regulated learning abilities, according to their learning style and giftedness. One hundred and twenty-three (123) science-gifted student and 296 regular students participated in this study, responding to learning style, self-regulated learning, and learning interest questionnaires. Data were analyzed, using 2-stage cluster analysis, $x^2$ test, two way-MANOVA test, and $Scheff{\acute{e}}$ test. The results are as follows: First, by 2-stage cluster analysis, four groups were categorized: 'high-score thinking style,' 'external-liberal,' 'executive-conservative,' and 'low-score thinking style.' In the gifted group, high-score thinking style (51.2%) was the most popular, then executive-conservative (30.2%), external-liberal (17.1%), and low-score thinking style (1.6%); in the regular student group, the executive-conservative group was the biggest, then high-score thinking style (20.6%), external-liberal (11.6%), and then the low-score thinking style (8.7%). Second, in terms of learning interest, the analysis by thinking style showed that the high-score thinking style group had higher learning interest compared to the executive-conservative and the low-thinking style group. The high-thinking style group's thoughtful interest also scored the highest compared with the others. The gifted students' thoughtful interest and investigative interest also were higher than regular students '. Third, in terms of the self-regulated learning, the analysis by thinking style showed that the high-score thinking style group showed higher scores on all sub-variances than other groups, especially having highest control-belief scores. Also, gifted students had higher scores on control-belief and searching information. Based on these results, the ways for effective education and support were discussed.
Keywords
thinking style; learning interest; self-regulated learning; gifted student;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Kim, S. O., Seo, H. A. (2011). Self-regulated learning ability related to science inquiry skill and affective domain of science in middle school students. Journal of Science Education, 35(2), 307-323.   DOI
2 Kim, S. Y. (2012). The difference of self-regulated learning with respect to achievement for the middle school students. Journal of Secondary Education, 60(1), 243-264.   DOI
3 Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (1992). Interest, learning and development. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbanm.
4 Lee, F. K., Sheldon, K. M., & Turban, D. B. (2003). Personality and goal-striving process: The influence of achievement goal patterns, goal level, and mental focus on performance and enjoyment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 256-265.   DOI
5 Lee, H. (2014). A Comparison of the science gifted and regular elementary students in levels of and structural relation between offline learning characteristics and online learning attitude: focusing on school attitude, self-regulated learning and learning interest. Korean Journal of Educational Research, 52(1). 303-331.
6 Lee, J., Park, S., & Kim, Y. (2011). Thinking styles and their relationship with self-regulated learning ability and scientific inquiry ability of the scientifically gifted students. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 21(3), 773-796.   DOI
7 Lee, M. (1997). The effects of the self-regulated learning strategies training on children's problem-solving ability and self-efficacy. Graduate School of Korea National University of Education, Master's thesis.
8 Lee, S. (2017). Educational psychology in the age of the fourth industrial revolution. The Korea Educational Review, 23(1), 231-260.
9 Cascallar, E., Boekaerts, M., & Costigan, T. (2006). Assessment in the Evaluation of Self-Regulation as a Process Educational Psychology Review, 18(3), 297-306   DOI
10 Chae, Y., & Lee, S. (2015). An analysis of differences in motivation, self-regulation strategy use, learning style preference among high, medium, low achievers in an online gifted program. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 25(6), 905-926.   DOI
11 Chan, D. (2001). Learning styles of gifted and nongifted secondary students in Hong Kong. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(1), 35-44.   DOI
12 Chang, Y. (2017). The direction of data science education in the fourth industrial revolution era: Focusing on understanding of artificial intelligence and data initiative. The Journal of Integrated Humanities, 9(1), 155-180.
13 Cho, B. H. (2004). A study on standardization of learning interest inventory for elementary school children. The Journal of elementary education, 17(2), 227-252.
14 Choi, K., Lee, S., & Chae, Y. (2017). Development of evaluation criteria for online problem-based science learning. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 37(5), 879-889.
15 Corno, L. (1986). The metacognitive control components of self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 333-346.   DOI
16 Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. E. (1981). Learning style inventory. Lawrence, KS: Price Systems.
17 Moon, B. S. (2000). A difference of academic self-regulation between gifted and nongifted children. The Journal of Elementary Education, 14(1). 181-197.
18 Lee, S., You, M., & Choi, B. (2008). The differences of attribution tendency and self-regulated learning strategy between gifted students and general students in elementary school. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 18(3), 425-442.
19 Lee, S., & Hong, J. (2011). A comparison of psychological, physical and environmental characteristics of the general students and gifted students, and among gifted students' specific gifted areas. The Korea Educational Review, 17(1), 351-371.
20 Lim, J., Ryu, K., & Kim, B. (2017). An Exploratory Study on the Direction of Education and Teacher Competencies in the 4th Industrial Revolution. The Journal of Korean Education. 44(2), 5-32.
21 Na, D. J., & Kim, J. C.(2004). The structural difference between science-gifted students and ordinary students in the triarchic intelligence, thinking styles, and academic performance. The Korean Journal of Education Psychology, 18(1), 115-130.
22 Oh, H. S. (2003). The effects of planning strategies on self-directed learning and motivation for learning. Graduate School, Sogang University, Master's thesis.
23 Park, S. K., & Kim, K. H.(2005). Analysis on the Relationship between Gifted Science Students' Thinking Style Types and Academic Achievement and Science Concepts. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 25(2), 307-320.
24 Griggs, S. A., & Dunn, R.(1984). Selected case studies of the learning style preferences of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24(3), 115-129.
25 Dai, D. Y., & Feldhusen, J. F.(1999). A validation study of the thinking style inventory: Implications for gifted education. Poeper Review, 21(4), pp. 302-307.
26 Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
27 Davis, G. A., Rimm, S. B., & Siegle, D. (2011). Education of the gifted and talented (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
28 Grigorenko, E.L., & Sternberg, R.J. (1995). Thinking styles. In: D.H. Saklofske & M. Zeidner(Eds.), International Handbook of Personality and Intelligence, New York: Plenum Press.
29 Grigorenko, E. L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Styles of thinking, abilities, and academic performance. Exceptional Children, 63(3), 295-312.   DOI
30 Hair, J. F., Jr., & Black, W. C. (2000). Cluster analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding more multivariate statistics(pp. 147-205). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
31 Han, K., & Kim, H. (2010). The Relationship between Thinking Styles and Learning Styles of Gifted Children in Elementary School. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 20(1), 289-316.
32 Hidi, S. (2006). Interest: A unique motivational variable. Educational Research Review, 1(2), 69-82.   DOI
33 Hong, J., & Moon, H. (2017). Study on social issue with semantic network analysis of news on 4th industrial revolution. Korean Academic Society of Business Adiministration, 180-201.
34 Seong, T. (2017). Suggestions for the human character and education in the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Korean Journal of Educational Research, 55(2), 1-21.
35 Park, K., Ryu, C., & Choi, J. (2017). An Analysis of Learning Objective Characteristics of Educational Programs of Centers for the University Affiliated Science-Gifted Education Using Semantic Network Analysis. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 27(1), 17-35.   DOI
36 Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.   DOI
37 Pintrich, P. R., De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning component of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.   DOI
38 Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic motivation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 373-404). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
39 Renzulli, J. S., Rizza, M. G., & Smith, L. S. (2002). Learning Styles Inventory Version 3.0 Technical Manual. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
40 Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299-323.   DOI
41 Schmitt, M. C., & Newby, T. J. (1986). Metacognition: Relevance to instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 9(4), 29-33.   DOI
42 Shin, J. Lee, H., Kim, Y., & Kim, Y. (2006). The research on classification of leaners and development of e-learning system model based on learning behavior in e-learning environment. Seoul: KERIS.
43 Yun, M. (1997). A study on the thinking styles and academic performance. Graduate School, Korea University, Master's thesis.
44 Shin, M., & Ahn, D. (2014). Factors influencing self-regulated strategies: On autonomy support and beliefs of intelligence ability of gifted and non-gifted students. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 24(5), 877-892.   DOI
45 Shin, Y. H., Kim, A. (2005). Studies on the relationships among academic self-regulation, failure tolerance, and self-esteem in the middle school gifted and non-gifted students. Journal of Educational Studies, 35(3), 65-79.
46 Shirey, L. L., Reynolds, R. E. (1988). Effect of interest on attention and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 159-166.   DOI
47 Yang, M. H. (2000). The Study on the development and validation of self-regulated learning model. Graduate School, Seoul National University, Doctoral dissertation.
48 Yun, K. M., & Yoo, S. H. (2011). A comparison of career patterns among the gifted in science, the gifted in human and social science and average middle school students by Holland career theory. Journal of Secondary Education, 59(4), 1001-1029.   DOI
49 Yun, S. H. (2005). A Study on the instructional model based on thinking style of information gifted. Graduate School of Korea National University of Education, Master's thesis.
50 Tomlinson, C. A. (2014) The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
51 Kim, M., Yoon, C., & Cho, S. (2005). Cognitive and affective characteristics of Korean junior high school gifted students : A comparison with nongifted students. Asian Journal of Education, 6(3), 25-58.
52 Jin, S., & Ko, H. (2004). Based on Sternberg's thinking styles classification: Thinking styles of gifted and nongifted students in elementary schools. Journal of Special Education, 11(2), 157-177.
53 Jun, H., & Cha, Y (2009). The effect of the self-regulated learning strategies on the elementary school students's creativity and academic achievement. Journal of School Education Research, 5(1), 141-163.
54 Jung, H. C., Cho, S., Seo, H. A, & Shin, M. K. (2004). An exploratory study on the self-directed research ability of the gifted. CR 2004-43. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
55 Kim, J. H., & Park, Y. H.(2003). Validation of self-directed learning ability diagnostic scale for elementary higher graders, Journal of Educational Evaluation, 16(1), 183-200.
56 Kim, M. (2013). A comparison of self-regulated learning ability of high schoolers. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 19(2), 289-311.
57 Kim, M. S., Cho, S., Yoon, C., & Jin, S. (2004). Cognitive and Affective Characteristics of and Teaching Strategies for the Korean Junior High School Gifted Students. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
58 Kim, M. S., & Yeo, S. I. (2014). Comparison of thinking styles between gifted elementary students in science and invention. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 33(3), 558-565.   DOI
59 Kim, S. H., Kim, K. Y., & Lee, C. H.(2005). Comparison of features of mathematically gifted, scientifically gifted and common students in cognitive, affective and emotional aspects. Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematical Education Series A: The Mathematkcal Education, 44(1), 113-124.