高校环境与学生动机对自主参与的调节机制研究
|
摘要
进入21世纪以来，我国高等教育招生规模日益扩大，教育大众化的进程也是逐步加速，社会各界对高等院校的教育质量给予了广泛的关注。如何对高校教育质量进行科学的评价，如何规划高校的教育资源投入方向和投入力度，从而使我国的高等教育重点从体制变革转为内部质量提升，是二十一世纪我国高等教育改革的大方向。但是，目前我国高等教育质量评价体系却存在着三大问题：第一，就评估客体而言，重视教学资源质量（输入）和所谓最终“产品质量”——学生培养质量（结果）的“性价比”，而非顾客导向的服务质量（过程）；第二，就评价主体而言，重视行政评估，而非多元化利益相关者的评估；第三，就权力向度而言，重视自上而下，而非自下而上；重校外评估为主，而非“以学生为中心”的自评。作为完善我国高校环境建设的参考依据，学生参与理论和自我决定理论的发展为探究学生的在校学习体验和学习过程、分析动机对学生参与行为选择的影响提供了新思路。
本文以促进学生认知、实践、情感三方面素质的成长为研究视角，以学生参与行为过程为研究目标，以学生参与理论和自我决定理论为研究方法，以偏最小二乘为算法的结构方程模型和Logistic回归为研究工具，在以下三个方面对学生参与的内化过程、动机对参与行为的影响以及高校环境对参与的调节机制进行了详细研究：
第一，在总结了有关学生参与的经典理论之后，借鉴前人建立的理论模型的优势和缺陷，建立了新的学生参与内化机制全模型，在此基础上，又对理论模型的四个主链条“参与—收获”、“环境—参与”、“动机—参与”和“环境—动机”分别进行了分析，以期找到影响学生参与和学生成长的关键的环境要素，这些要素对培养学生的能力可以起到事半功倍的“杠杆效应”。
第二，自我决定理论从动机的角度为分析学生在学校的学习参与过程中的心理变化提供了有力的工具，弥补了当前国内大部分学者对学生就读体验以及收获成长的研究只是局限于研究学生行为和表面感知的缺陷，从心理学的层面挖掘决定学生参与行为选择的深层原因。
第三，在加入了动机变量来分析学生参与对成长收获的作用机制之后，学生与学校的良性互动就形成了一个螺旋式上升的循环回路。随着螺旋的上升，学校的服务质量和环境建设会随着学生参与程度的提高和深入一同提升，形成学生和学校之间交替促升的局面，最终达到学校与学生共同成长的目标。
In China, enrollment scale of higher education has been enlarged increasinglyfrom21century. The process of educational popularization is accelerating step by step,and drew public attention with the quality of education from colleges and universities.How to assess the quality of higher education scientifically, and how to plan thedirection and intensity of college educational resources investment had been thegeneral orientation of the development of educational reform, in order to transformthe institution reform into internal quality promotion in21century. However, there arethree problems in the assessment system of higher education quality in our country:firstly, for assessment object, scholars pay more attention to―the cost performance‖between instructional resources (input) quality and final product quality (students’cultivation quality) rather than service quality of customer orientation (process).Secondly, for assessment subject, colleges pay more attention to assessment ofadministration rather than diversification assessment from stakeholders. Thirdly, forauthority dimension, the leaders of higher education would accept the reform from topto bottom, rather than the changes from bottom to top; external assessment alsoreplaced the dominance of student centered self-assessment. As the reference framefor perfecting the construction of college environment, the development of studentinvolvement theory and self-determination theory (SDT) provide a new thought forexploring students’ learning experiences and learning procedure and analyzing theimpact of motivation on student involvement.
In this study, research perspective is how to promote the growth of studentscognition, practice and emotion; research object is the procedure of studentinvolvement; research methods contain student involvement theory andself-determination theory; partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM)and Logistic regression are the research tools for analyzing the data. We research theinternalization procedure of involvement, the impact of motivation on studentbehavior and the regulatory mechanism of college environment from three aspects indetail.
Firstly, after summarizing the classical theories about student involvement, weconstruct a new full model measuring student internalization system based on the superiorities and defects of the theoretical model constructed by the predecessors. Onthis basis, the full model was split into four primary chains: involvement-gains,environment-involvement, motivation-involvement and environment-motivation. Weexpected to discriminate the key environment elements impacting student gains andinvolvement through our analyzing. These elements will make students get twiceresults with half effort on training their abilities, which is called―lever effect‖.
Secondly, self-determination theory has become an important instrumentmeasuring the psychological changes in the process of analyzing students learninginvolvement. SDT remedied the defects that the focus of most current studies onstudents’ learning experiences was limited in students’ superficial behaviors andperception. It also contributes to excavate deep reasons of deciding students’behaviorselection.
Thirdly, after introducing the variable of motivation to analyze the mechanism ofaction of student involvement on their gains, the benign interaction between studentsand colleges formed a circulation loop of spiral escalation. With the escalation ofspiral, the service quality of college and environmental construction would bepromoted together with the improvement of student involvement, and form a kind ofsituation of improving between students and colleges alternately. It will lead togrowing together between students and colleges.
本文以促进学生认知、实践、情感三方面素质的成长为研究视角，以学生参与行为过程为研究目标，以学生参与理论和自我决定理论为研究方法，以偏最小二乘为算法的结构方程模型和Logistic回归为研究工具，在以下三个方面对学生参与的内化过程、动机对参与行为的影响以及高校环境对参与的调节机制进行了详细研究：
第一，在总结了有关学生参与的经典理论之后，借鉴前人建立的理论模型的优势和缺陷，建立了新的学生参与内化机制全模型，在此基础上，又对理论模型的四个主链条“参与—收获”、“环境—参与”、“动机—参与”和“环境—动机”分别进行了分析，以期找到影响学生参与和学生成长的关键的环境要素，这些要素对培养学生的能力可以起到事半功倍的“杠杆效应”。
第二，自我决定理论从动机的角度为分析学生在学校的学习参与过程中的心理变化提供了有力的工具，弥补了当前国内大部分学者对学生就读体验以及收获成长的研究只是局限于研究学生行为和表面感知的缺陷，从心理学的层面挖掘决定学生参与行为选择的深层原因。
第三，在加入了动机变量来分析学生参与对成长收获的作用机制之后，学生与学校的良性互动就形成了一个螺旋式上升的循环回路。随着螺旋的上升，学校的服务质量和环境建设会随着学生参与程度的提高和深入一同提升，形成学生和学校之间交替促升的局面，最终达到学校与学生共同成长的目标。
In China, enrollment scale of higher education has been enlarged increasinglyfrom21century. The process of educational popularization is accelerating step by step,and drew public attention with the quality of education from colleges and universities.How to assess the quality of higher education scientifically, and how to plan thedirection and intensity of college educational resources investment had been thegeneral orientation of the development of educational reform, in order to transformthe institution reform into internal quality promotion in21century. However, there arethree problems in the assessment system of higher education quality in our country:firstly, for assessment object, scholars pay more attention to―the cost performance‖between instructional resources (input) quality and final product quality (students’cultivation quality) rather than service quality of customer orientation (process).Secondly, for assessment subject, colleges pay more attention to assessment ofadministration rather than diversification assessment from stakeholders. Thirdly, forauthority dimension, the leaders of higher education would accept the reform from topto bottom, rather than the changes from bottom to top; external assessment alsoreplaced the dominance of student centered self-assessment. As the reference framefor perfecting the construction of college environment, the development of studentinvolvement theory and self-determination theory (SDT) provide a new thought forexploring students’ learning experiences and learning procedure and analyzing theimpact of motivation on student involvement.
In this study, research perspective is how to promote the growth of studentscognition, practice and emotion; research object is the procedure of studentinvolvement; research methods contain student involvement theory andself-determination theory; partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM)and Logistic regression are the research tools for analyzing the data. We research theinternalization procedure of involvement, the impact of motivation on studentbehavior and the regulatory mechanism of college environment from three aspects indetail.
Firstly, after summarizing the classical theories about student involvement, weconstruct a new full model measuring student internalization system based on the superiorities and defects of the theoretical model constructed by the predecessors. Onthis basis, the full model was split into four primary chains: involvement-gains,environment-involvement, motivation-involvement and environment-motivation. Weexpected to discriminate the key environment elements impacting student gains andinvolvement through our analyzing. These elements will make students get twiceresults with half effort on training their abilities, which is called―lever effect‖.
Secondly, self-determination theory has become an important instrumentmeasuring the psychological changes in the process of analyzing students learninginvolvement. SDT remedied the defects that the focus of most current studies onstudents’ learning experiences was limited in students’ superficial behaviors andperception. It also contributes to excavate deep reasons of deciding students’behaviorselection.
Thirdly, after introducing the variable of motivation to analyze the mechanism ofaction of student involvement on their gains, the benign interaction between studentsand colleges formed a circulation loop of spiral escalation. With the escalation ofspiral, the service quality of college and environmental construction would bepromoted together with the improvement of student involvement, and form a kind ofsituation of improving between students and colleges alternately. It will lead togrowing together between students and colleges.
引文
[1]蒋华林,李华等.学习性投入调查：本科教育质量保障的新视角[J].高教发展与评估,2010（4）：45-46.
[2]陈玉琨.高等教育质量保障体系概论[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2004.
[3]刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002.
[4]徐辉,杨大平.以特制胜：大众化高等教育的发展战略[J].高教探索,2006(5)：9-11
[5]刘宏哲,刘金兰,林盛.大学环境影响学习收获的自主参与模型解析[J].复旦教育论坛,2012（5）：39-44
[6]刘俊学.高等教育服务市场的几点思考[J].江苏高教,2002(5)：11-13
[7]李建军等.高等教育质量运行与预警管理系统的构建[J].江苏高教.2005(2).
[8]雷洪,苏巧平.大学生教学改革意愿的调查与分析[J].高等教育研究.1996(4)
[9]刘俊学.高等教育的服务质量观[J].中国高教研究.2002(7)
[10]刘俊学,王小兵.试论高等教育服务价格[J].高等教育研究,2005(2).
[11]严标宾,郑雪,邱林.自我决定理论对积极心理学研究的贡献[J].自然辩证法通讯,2003,3：94一99
[12]李嘉曾.―以学生为中心‖教育理念的理论意义与实践启示[J].中国大学教学,2008(4)：5
[13] Pascarella, E.,&Terenzini, P.. How college affects students： Findings andinsights from twenty years of research[M]. San Francisco： Jossey-Bass,1991.
[14] Astin A.W.. Student involvement：a development theory for higher education[J].Journal of College student Development,1999,40(5),518-529.
[15] Tinto V.. Leaving College：Rethinking the Causes and Cures of student Attrition,2nd edition[M]. Chicago：The university of Chicago Press,1993.
[16] Chickering A.W.&Gamson Z.E. Seven Principles for Good Practice inUndergraduate Education[J]. AAHE Bulletin,1987,39(7),3-7.
[17] Pascarella E.. College Environmental Influences on Learning and CognitiveDevelopment：A Critical Review and synthesis. In J.C. Smart(Ed.), Highereducation： handbook of theory and research (vol.1)[M]. New York： AgathonPress,1985,1-66.
[18] Kuh, G. D.. What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE[J].Change,2003,35(2),28–30.
[19]暴占光,张向葵.自我决定认知动机理论研究概述[J].东北师大学报(哲社版),2005,6：141-14
[20] Deci E.L.&Ryan R.M.. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in humanbehavior[M]. New York： Plenum Publishing Co,1985.
[21] Deci E.L.&Ryan R.M.(Eds.). Handbook of self-determination research[M].Rochester, NY： University of Rochester Press,2002.
[22]许敖敖,李嘉曾.以学生为中心：一种挑战性的先进教育理念[J].澳门教育,2006(4)：16-19
[23]丹尼尔·W·朗恩著施晓光译.―世界级‖大学是比较出来的吗?[J].北京大学教育评论,2005(l)：16-25
[24]徐雪天.浅析中美高等教育模式及促进学生学习动力的方法[J].中国轻工教育,2007(4)：85
[25]孙志麟.教育指标的概念模式[J].教育政策论坛,2000,3(1)：117-135.
[26]王保进.国家层级大学指标系统建构之研究[J].初等教育学刊,2004,18：25-50.
[27]罗晓燕,陈洁瑜.以学生学习为中心的高等教育质量评估—美国NSSE―全国学生学习投入调查‖解析[J].比较教育研究,2007(9)：22-24
[28]罗燕,海蒂·罗斯,岑逾豪.国际比较视野中的高等教育测量-NSSE-China工具的开发[J].复旦教育论坛,2009(4)：45-47
[29]靳海卿.高等教育质量评估的新视角——―全美大学生投入性学习‖NSSE的解析[J].科技信息,2011(1)：52
[30]陆秋萍.美国NSSE视角下的大学生学习质量探讨[J].浙江青年专修学院学报,2010(2)：34-37
[31]张德启,汪霞.对普通高校本科教学工作水平评估方案改进的商榷——基于与美国NSSE比较的视角[J].高等理科教育,2007(11)：11-15
[32]胡赤弟.高等教育中的利益相关者分析[J].教育研究,2005(3).
[33] Pike, G.R.,. NSSE benchmarks and institutional outcomes： a note on theimportance of considering the intended uses of a measure in validity studies[J].Research in Higher Education,2012,53(4)
[34] Hair J F. Multivariate Data Analysis[M]. Prentice-Hall,Upper SaddleRiver,NJ,1998.
[35] Wold H. Soft modeling：the basic design and some extensions. In： SystemsUnder IndirectObservation：Causality,Structure,Prediction.Amsterdam,North-Holland,1982,1-54.
[36]冯向东.从―主体间性‖看教学活动的要素关系[J].高等教育研究,2004(5)
[37]任长松.探究式学习：学生知识的自主建构[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2005.
[38]段建国,孟根龙．构建大学和谐校园理论与实践[M]．北京：社会文献出版,2006：265-270
[39]郭本禹(主编).当代心理学的新进展[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2003年
[40]孙煌明.动机心理学[M].南京：南京大学出版社,1993年
[41]伯纳德·维纳(孙煌明译).人类动机：比喻、理论和研究[M].宁波：浙江教育出版社,1999
[42]恽广岚.动机研究的新进展：自我决定理论[M].南通大学学报(教科版),2005,9：38-41
[43]张向葵,暴占光.国外自我决定研究述评[J].中国特殊教育,2005,9：78-80
[44]张剑,郭德俊.内部动机与外部动机的关系[J].心理科学进展,2003,11：545-550
[45]张爱卿.论人类行为的动机——一种新的动机理论构理[J].华东师范大学学报(教科版),1996,1：71一80
[46]严标宾.大学生主观幸福感的跨文化研究来自48个国家和地区的调查报告[J].心理科学,2003
[47]袁贵仁．教育——哲学片论[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2004,(5)：200-210
[48]郭晓明.课程结构论——一种原理性探寻[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2002.6
[49]郝德永.走向文化批判与生成的建构性课程文化观[J].教育研究,2001(6)
[50]冯向东.张力下的动态平衡：大学中的学科发展机制[J].现代大学教育,2002(2)
[51]冯向东.从―主体间性‖看教学活动的要素关系[J].高等教育研究,2004(5)
[52]高文.建构主义研究的哲学与心理学基础[J].全球教育展望,2001(3)
[53]郝德永.人的存在方式与教育的乌托邦品质[J].高等教育研究,2004(4)
[54]约翰.亨利.纽曼著.大学的理想[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,2001
[55]陈洪捷.德国古典大学观及其对中国大学的影响[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2002
[56]陈侠.课程论[M].北京：人民教育出版社,1989年
[57]王邦虎．校园文化论．北京：人民教育出版社．2000,(9)：87-92
[58]苗元江,余嘉元.积极心理学：理念与行动[J].南京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2002,2
[59] Adam C. Carle,David Jaffee, Neil W. Vaughan&Douglas Eder.. PsychometricProperties of Three New National Survey of Student Engagement BasedEngagement Scales： An Item Response Theory Analysis[J]. Research HighEducation,2009,50
[60] Adee Athiyaman. Linking student satisfaction and service quality perceptions：the case of university education[J]. European Journal of Marketing,1997,31(7),531-540.
[61] Adrianus de Kock, Peter Sleegers&Marinus J.M. Voeten. New learning andthe classicification of learning environments in secondary education[J]. Reviewof Educational research,2004,74(2)
[62] Astin, A.. The methodology of research on college impact (I). Sociology ofEducation,1970,43,231–242.
[63] Astin, A. What matters in college? Four critical years revisited[M]. SanFrancisco： Jossey-Bass,1993.
[64] Attinasi, L. C., Jr.. Getting in： Mexican Americans’ perceptions of universityattendance and the implications for freshman year persistence[J]. Journal ofHigher Education,1989,60,257–272.
[65] Berdie, R.. Self-claimed and tested knowledge[J]. Educational andPsychological Measurement,1971,31,630–636.
[66] Betz,E.L. Klinggensmith,J.E.&Menne,J.W.. The measurement and analysis ofcollege student satisfaction[J]. Measurement and Evaluation inGuidance,1970,3(2),117-123.
[67] Catherine O.Conell.. Research discourses surrounding global universityrankings： exploring the relationship with policy and practicerecommendations[J]. Higher Education,2012,46(3)
[68] Chen Y.K.. Introduction of higher education quality guarantee system[M].Beijing： Beijing normal university press,2004
[69] Chickering, A. Commuting versus residential students： Overcomingeducational inequities of living off campus[M]. San Francisco：Jossey-Bass,1974.
[70] Davis, T. M.,&Murrell, P. H.. A structural model of perceived academic,personal, and vocational gains related to college student responsibility[J].Research in Higher Education,1993,34,269–287.
[71] Deci E.L..The relation of interest to motivation and human needs：Theself-determination theory viewpoint. In L.Hoffmann, A Krapp, K.A.Renninger,&J Baumert (Eds)[J]. Interest and Learning,1998,146-142
[72] Deci E.L., Koestner R.,&Ryan R.M.. The undermining effect is a reality afterall： Extrinsic rewards, task interest, and self-determination[J]. PsychologicalBulletin,125,692-700.
[73] Deci,E.L.,Koestner,R.,&Ryan,R.M.. A meta-analytic review of experimentsexamining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation[J].Psychological Bulletin,1999,125,645-667.
[74] Deci E.L.&Ryan R.M.(Eds.). Handbook of self-determination research.Rochester, NY： University of Rochester Press,2002.
[75] Dirk T Tempelaar et al.. The role of self-and social directed goals in aproblem-based, collaborative learning context[J]. Higher education,2013,65(1)
[76] Fang Z.H.. Review of Rogers’ student-centered instructional theory[M]. Beijing：Beijing educational science press,1990
[77] Feldman, K. A.,&Newcomb, T.. The impact of college on students[M]. SanFrancisco： Jossey-Bass,1969.
[78] Hu, S.,&Kuh, G.D.. Diversity experiences and college student learning andpersonal development[J]. Journal of College Student Development,2005.
[79] Jin H.Q.. The new view of higher education assessment[J]. Science&Technology Information,2011,1,552
[80] Johan de Jager,Gbolahan Gbadamosi. Specifc remedy for specifc problem：measuring service quality in South African higher education[J]. Research HighEducation,2010,60
[81] John M. Braxton, Deborah Olsen, and Ada Simmons. Affinity Disciplines AndThe use of Principles Of Good Practice For Undergraduate Education[J].Research In Higher Education,1989,39(3),15
[82] Karen L. Webber, Joseph C. Hermanowicz&Kangjoo Lee..A StructuralEquation Model Examining The Relationship Between Motivation, Perceptionsof the College Environment, Quality of Effort, and Student Achievement in theFirst Year of College[J]. Relationship Between Motivation, Environment, Effortand Gains.
[83] Kuh GD.,Kinzie J.,Buekley J.A.,Bridges B.K.,&Hayek J.C.. What Matters toStudent Success： A Review of the Literature. National PostsecondaryEducation Cooperative(NPEC) Commissioned Paper,2006.
[84] Kuh, G. D., Pace, C. R.,&Vesper, N.. The development of process indicators toestimate student gains associated with good practices in undergraduateeducation[J]. Research in Higher Education,1997,38,438-449
[85] Mats Alvesson.. Methodology for close up studies-struggling with closeness andclosure[J]. Higher Education,2003,46(2),167-193
[86] Mergen,Erhan&Grant,Delvin： Widrick,Stanley M.. Quality managementapplied to higher education[J]. Total Quality Management,2000,11(3),348-353.
[87] Morris Rosenberg. Self-Concept Research： A Historical Overview[J]. SocialForces,1989,l68(1),36-41.
[88] Owlia,Mohammad S.&Aspinwall,Elaine M.. Quality in higher education-asurvey[J]. Total Quality Management,1996,7(2),168-172.
[89] Pace C.R.. Achievement and the Quality of student effort[M]. Washington, DC：Department of Education,1982.
[90] Pace, C. R.. The credibility of student self-reports. Los Angeles： Center for theStudy of Evaluation, University of California Los Angeles,1985.
[91] Pace, C. R.,&Kuh, G.. College Student Experiences Questionnaire, FourthEdition. Bloomington, IN： Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning,Indiana University,1998.
[92] Pascarella, E.. Using student self-reported gains to estimate college impact： Acautionary tale[J]. Journal of College Student Development,2001,42,489–490.
[93] Peter, Hodson&Harold Thomas. Quality assurance in Higher Education： fitfor the new millennium or simple year2000compliant?[J]. Higher Education,2003,45(3),375-387
[94] Pike, G.. The effects of residential learning communities and traditionalresidential living arrangements on educational gains during the first year ofcollege[J]. Journal of College Student Development,1999,38,612–620.
[95] Pike, G.,&Killian, T.. Reported gains in student learning： Do academicdisciplines make a difference?[J]. Research in Higher Education,2001,42,431–454
[96] Pike, Gary R., Kuh. George D.. First-and Second-Generation College Students：A Comparison of Their Engagement and Intellectual Development[J]. TheJournal of Higher Education,2005,76
[97] Pike, G.R.. NSSE benchmarks and institutional outcomes： a note on theimportance of considering the intended uses of a measure in validity studies[J].Research in Higher Education,2012,53(4)
[98] Pu-Shih Daniel Chen, Robert M. Gonyea, Shimon A. Sarraf.. Analyzing andInterpreting NSSE Data[J]. New directions for institutional research,2009,10
[99] Rachel E. Maunder et al.. Listening to student voices： student researchersexploring undergraduate experiences of university transition[J]. Highereducation,2012,64(6)
[100] Shavelson R.J. et al.. Self-Concept： Validation of Construct Interpretations[J].Review of Educational Research,1976,46(3),411-431.
[101] Shouping Hu et al.. An engagement-based student typology and its relationshipto college outcomes[J]. Research in Higher Education,2012,53(7),738-754
[102] Thanh-Thanh, Tieu et al.. Helping out or hanging out： the features ofinvolvement and how it relates to university adjustment[J]. Higher Education,2010,60(3),343-355
[103] Vicente M.Lechuga.. Faculty-graduate mentoring relationships： mentor’sperceived roles and responsibilities[J]. Higher Education,2011,62(6),757-771
[104] Williams,W.M.&Ceci,S.J.. How’m I Doing： Problems with Student Ratingsof Instructors and Courses[J]. Change,1997,29(5).
[105] Wu M.L.. Structure equation model： the operation and application of AMOS.Chongqing： Chongqing university press,2007.
[106] Ye H.. The thoughts about enhancing students’ conversion thought[J]. TheResearch of Higher Career Education,2008,20,198-200
[107] Zhang W.Y.&Li H.B.. The enlightenment of NSSE on undergraduateteaching[J]. The Research of Chinese Higher Education,2009,10,19-22
[108]叶赋桂.大学评价和排名：最新的发展及其对大学的意义[J].清华大学教育研究,2008(2)：56-71.
[109]林飞宇,李晓轩.中美高校学生满意度测量方法的比较研究[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006(5)：115-118.
[110]丰蓓.美国高校学生事务与学术事务关系的新发展——加强学生事务与学术事务的合作[J].复旦教育论坛,2006,Vol4(2)：81-85.
[111]刘玉祥.浅析《参与学习》对美国本科教育的影响[J].中国高等教育,2007(15).
[112]方展画.罗杰斯“学生为中心”教学理论述评[M].北京教育科学出版社,1990.
[113]张文毅.NSSE对我国本科教学工作评估的启示[J],中国高教研究,2009(10).
[114]冯增俊,陈时见,项贤明.当代比较教育学[M].人民教育出版,2008.
[115]雷庆.北美地区高等教育质量保证体系研究[M].北京航空航天人学出版社,2008.
[116]约翰·杜威著,赵祥麟等译.学校与社会——明日之学校[M].人民教育出版社,2005.
[117]孙根午.课程体系优化的系统观念及系统方法[J].高等教育研究,2001(2).
[118]冷余生.从讲授为主到自学为主：论我国大学教学方法的历史性变革[J].高等教育研究,1996,(2).
[119]张雨金.转变观念改革高校教学方法[J].高等农业教育,2000(7).
[120]周作宇,周廷勇.大学生就读经验：评价高等教育质量的一个新视角[J].大学研究与评价,2007(l).
[2]陈玉琨.高等教育质量保障体系概论[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2004.
[3]刘本固.教育评价的理论与实践[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,2002.
[4]徐辉,杨大平.以特制胜：大众化高等教育的发展战略[J].高教探索,2006(5)：9-11
[5]刘宏哲,刘金兰,林盛.大学环境影响学习收获的自主参与模型解析[J].复旦教育论坛,2012（5）：39-44
[6]刘俊学.高等教育服务市场的几点思考[J].江苏高教,2002(5)：11-13
[7]李建军等.高等教育质量运行与预警管理系统的构建[J].江苏高教.2005(2).
[8]雷洪,苏巧平.大学生教学改革意愿的调查与分析[J].高等教育研究.1996(4)
[9]刘俊学.高等教育的服务质量观[J].中国高教研究.2002(7)
[10]刘俊学,王小兵.试论高等教育服务价格[J].高等教育研究,2005(2).
[11]严标宾,郑雪,邱林.自我决定理论对积极心理学研究的贡献[J].自然辩证法通讯,2003,3：94一99
[12]李嘉曾.―以学生为中心‖教育理念的理论意义与实践启示[J].中国大学教学,2008(4)：5
[13] Pascarella, E.,&Terenzini, P.. How college affects students： Findings andinsights from twenty years of research[M]. San Francisco： Jossey-Bass,1991.
[14] Astin A.W.. Student involvement：a development theory for higher education[J].Journal of College student Development,1999,40(5),518-529.
[15] Tinto V.. Leaving College：Rethinking the Causes and Cures of student Attrition,2nd edition[M]. Chicago：The university of Chicago Press,1993.
[16] Chickering A.W.&Gamson Z.E. Seven Principles for Good Practice inUndergraduate Education[J]. AAHE Bulletin,1987,39(7),3-7.
[17] Pascarella E.. College Environmental Influences on Learning and CognitiveDevelopment：A Critical Review and synthesis. In J.C. Smart(Ed.), Highereducation： handbook of theory and research (vol.1)[M]. New York： AgathonPress,1985,1-66.
[18] Kuh, G. D.. What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE[J].Change,2003,35(2),28–30.
[19]暴占光,张向葵.自我决定认知动机理论研究概述[J].东北师大学报(哲社版),2005,6：141-14
[20] Deci E.L.&Ryan R.M.. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in humanbehavior[M]. New York： Plenum Publishing Co,1985.
[21] Deci E.L.&Ryan R.M.(Eds.). Handbook of self-determination research[M].Rochester, NY： University of Rochester Press,2002.
[22]许敖敖,李嘉曾.以学生为中心：一种挑战性的先进教育理念[J].澳门教育,2006(4)：16-19
[23]丹尼尔·W·朗恩著施晓光译.―世界级‖大学是比较出来的吗?[J].北京大学教育评论,2005(l)：16-25
[24]徐雪天.浅析中美高等教育模式及促进学生学习动力的方法[J].中国轻工教育,2007(4)：85
[25]孙志麟.教育指标的概念模式[J].教育政策论坛,2000,3(1)：117-135.
[26]王保进.国家层级大学指标系统建构之研究[J].初等教育学刊,2004,18：25-50.
[27]罗晓燕,陈洁瑜.以学生学习为中心的高等教育质量评估—美国NSSE―全国学生学习投入调查‖解析[J].比较教育研究,2007(9)：22-24
[28]罗燕,海蒂·罗斯,岑逾豪.国际比较视野中的高等教育测量-NSSE-China工具的开发[J].复旦教育论坛,2009(4)：45-47
[29]靳海卿.高等教育质量评估的新视角——―全美大学生投入性学习‖NSSE的解析[J].科技信息,2011(1)：52
[30]陆秋萍.美国NSSE视角下的大学生学习质量探讨[J].浙江青年专修学院学报,2010(2)：34-37
[31]张德启,汪霞.对普通高校本科教学工作水平评估方案改进的商榷——基于与美国NSSE比较的视角[J].高等理科教育,2007(11)：11-15
[32]胡赤弟.高等教育中的利益相关者分析[J].教育研究,2005(3).
[33] Pike, G.R.,. NSSE benchmarks and institutional outcomes： a note on theimportance of considering the intended uses of a measure in validity studies[J].Research in Higher Education,2012,53(4)
[34] Hair J F. Multivariate Data Analysis[M]. Prentice-Hall,Upper SaddleRiver,NJ,1998.
[35] Wold H. Soft modeling：the basic design and some extensions. In： SystemsUnder IndirectObservation：Causality,Structure,Prediction.Amsterdam,North-Holland,1982,1-54.
[36]冯向东.从―主体间性‖看教学活动的要素关系[J].高等教育研究,2004(5)
[37]任长松.探究式学习：学生知识的自主建构[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2005.
[38]段建国,孟根龙．构建大学和谐校园理论与实践[M]．北京：社会文献出版,2006：265-270
[39]郭本禹(主编).当代心理学的新进展[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2003年
[40]孙煌明.动机心理学[M].南京：南京大学出版社,1993年
[41]伯纳德·维纳(孙煌明译).人类动机：比喻、理论和研究[M].宁波：浙江教育出版社,1999
[42]恽广岚.动机研究的新进展：自我决定理论[M].南通大学学报(教科版),2005,9：38-41
[43]张向葵,暴占光.国外自我决定研究述评[J].中国特殊教育,2005,9：78-80
[44]张剑,郭德俊.内部动机与外部动机的关系[J].心理科学进展,2003,11：545-550
[45]张爱卿.论人类行为的动机——一种新的动机理论构理[J].华东师范大学学报(教科版),1996,1：71一80
[46]严标宾.大学生主观幸福感的跨文化研究来自48个国家和地区的调查报告[J].心理科学,2003
[47]袁贵仁．教育——哲学片论[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2004,(5)：200-210
[48]郭晓明.课程结构论——一种原理性探寻[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2002.6
[49]郝德永.走向文化批判与生成的建构性课程文化观[J].教育研究,2001(6)
[50]冯向东.张力下的动态平衡：大学中的学科发展机制[J].现代大学教育,2002(2)
[51]冯向东.从―主体间性‖看教学活动的要素关系[J].高等教育研究,2004(5)
[52]高文.建构主义研究的哲学与心理学基础[J].全球教育展望,2001(3)
[53]郝德永.人的存在方式与教育的乌托邦品质[J].高等教育研究,2004(4)
[54]约翰.亨利.纽曼著.大学的理想[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,2001
[55]陈洪捷.德国古典大学观及其对中国大学的影响[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2002
[56]陈侠.课程论[M].北京：人民教育出版社,1989年
[57]王邦虎．校园文化论．北京：人民教育出版社．2000,(9)：87-92
[58]苗元江,余嘉元.积极心理学：理念与行动[J].南京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2002,2
[59] Adam C. Carle,David Jaffee, Neil W. Vaughan&Douglas Eder.. PsychometricProperties of Three New National Survey of Student Engagement BasedEngagement Scales： An Item Response Theory Analysis[J]. Research HighEducation,2009,50
[60] Adee Athiyaman. Linking student satisfaction and service quality perceptions：the case of university education[J]. European Journal of Marketing,1997,31(7),531-540.
[61] Adrianus de Kock, Peter Sleegers&Marinus J.M. Voeten. New learning andthe classicification of learning environments in secondary education[J]. Reviewof Educational research,2004,74(2)
[62] Astin, A.. The methodology of research on college impact (I). Sociology ofEducation,1970,43,231–242.
[63] Astin, A. What matters in college? Four critical years revisited[M]. SanFrancisco： Jossey-Bass,1993.
[64] Attinasi, L. C., Jr.. Getting in： Mexican Americans’ perceptions of universityattendance and the implications for freshman year persistence[J]. Journal ofHigher Education,1989,60,257–272.
[65] Berdie, R.. Self-claimed and tested knowledge[J]. Educational andPsychological Measurement,1971,31,630–636.
[66] Betz,E.L. Klinggensmith,J.E.&Menne,J.W.. The measurement and analysis ofcollege student satisfaction[J]. Measurement and Evaluation inGuidance,1970,3(2),117-123.
[67] Catherine O.Conell.. Research discourses surrounding global universityrankings： exploring the relationship with policy and practicerecommendations[J]. Higher Education,2012,46(3)
[68] Chen Y.K.. Introduction of higher education quality guarantee system[M].Beijing： Beijing normal university press,2004
[69] Chickering, A. Commuting versus residential students： Overcomingeducational inequities of living off campus[M]. San Francisco：Jossey-Bass,1974.
[70] Davis, T. M.,&Murrell, P. H.. A structural model of perceived academic,personal, and vocational gains related to college student responsibility[J].Research in Higher Education,1993,34,269–287.
[71] Deci E.L..The relation of interest to motivation and human needs：Theself-determination theory viewpoint. In L.Hoffmann, A Krapp, K.A.Renninger,&J Baumert (Eds)[J]. Interest and Learning,1998,146-142
[72] Deci E.L., Koestner R.,&Ryan R.M.. The undermining effect is a reality afterall： Extrinsic rewards, task interest, and self-determination[J]. PsychologicalBulletin,125,692-700.
[73] Deci,E.L.,Koestner,R.,&Ryan,R.M.. A meta-analytic review of experimentsexamining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation[J].Psychological Bulletin,1999,125,645-667.
[74] Deci E.L.&Ryan R.M.(Eds.). Handbook of self-determination research.Rochester, NY： University of Rochester Press,2002.
[75] Dirk T Tempelaar et al.. The role of self-and social directed goals in aproblem-based, collaborative learning context[J]. Higher education,2013,65(1)
[76] Fang Z.H.. Review of Rogers’ student-centered instructional theory[M]. Beijing：Beijing educational science press,1990
[77] Feldman, K. A.,&Newcomb, T.. The impact of college on students[M]. SanFrancisco： Jossey-Bass,1969.
[78] Hu, S.,&Kuh, G.D.. Diversity experiences and college student learning andpersonal development[J]. Journal of College Student Development,2005.
[79] Jin H.Q.. The new view of higher education assessment[J]. Science&Technology Information,2011,1,552
[80] Johan de Jager,Gbolahan Gbadamosi. Specifc remedy for specifc problem：measuring service quality in South African higher education[J]. Research HighEducation,2010,60
[81] John M. Braxton, Deborah Olsen, and Ada Simmons. Affinity Disciplines AndThe use of Principles Of Good Practice For Undergraduate Education[J].Research In Higher Education,1989,39(3),15
[82] Karen L. Webber, Joseph C. Hermanowicz&Kangjoo Lee..A StructuralEquation Model Examining The Relationship Between Motivation, Perceptionsof the College Environment, Quality of Effort, and Student Achievement in theFirst Year of College[J]. Relationship Between Motivation, Environment, Effortand Gains.
[83] Kuh GD.,Kinzie J.,Buekley J.A.,Bridges B.K.,&Hayek J.C.. What Matters toStudent Success： A Review of the Literature. National PostsecondaryEducation Cooperative(NPEC) Commissioned Paper,2006.
[84] Kuh, G. D., Pace, C. R.,&Vesper, N.. The development of process indicators toestimate student gains associated with good practices in undergraduateeducation[J]. Research in Higher Education,1997,38,438-449
[85] Mats Alvesson.. Methodology for close up studies-struggling with closeness andclosure[J]. Higher Education,2003,46(2),167-193
[86] Mergen,Erhan&Grant,Delvin： Widrick,Stanley M.. Quality managementapplied to higher education[J]. Total Quality Management,2000,11(3),348-353.
[87] Morris Rosenberg. Self-Concept Research： A Historical Overview[J]. SocialForces,1989,l68(1),36-41.
[88] Owlia,Mohammad S.&Aspinwall,Elaine M.. Quality in higher education-asurvey[J]. Total Quality Management,1996,7(2),168-172.
[89] Pace C.R.. Achievement and the Quality of student effort[M]. Washington, DC：Department of Education,1982.
[90] Pace, C. R.. The credibility of student self-reports. Los Angeles： Center for theStudy of Evaluation, University of California Los Angeles,1985.
[91] Pace, C. R.,&Kuh, G.. College Student Experiences Questionnaire, FourthEdition. Bloomington, IN： Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning,Indiana University,1998.
[92] Pascarella, E.. Using student self-reported gains to estimate college impact： Acautionary tale[J]. Journal of College Student Development,2001,42,489–490.
[93] Peter, Hodson&Harold Thomas. Quality assurance in Higher Education： fitfor the new millennium or simple year2000compliant?[J]. Higher Education,2003,45(3),375-387
[94] Pike, G.. The effects of residential learning communities and traditionalresidential living arrangements on educational gains during the first year ofcollege[J]. Journal of College Student Development,1999,38,612–620.
[95] Pike, G.,&Killian, T.. Reported gains in student learning： Do academicdisciplines make a difference?[J]. Research in Higher Education,2001,42,431–454
[96] Pike, Gary R., Kuh. George D.. First-and Second-Generation College Students：A Comparison of Their Engagement and Intellectual Development[J]. TheJournal of Higher Education,2005,76
[97] Pike, G.R.. NSSE benchmarks and institutional outcomes： a note on theimportance of considering the intended uses of a measure in validity studies[J].Research in Higher Education,2012,53(4)
[98] Pu-Shih Daniel Chen, Robert M. Gonyea, Shimon A. Sarraf.. Analyzing andInterpreting NSSE Data[J]. New directions for institutional research,2009,10
[99] Rachel E. Maunder et al.. Listening to student voices： student researchersexploring undergraduate experiences of university transition[J]. Highereducation,2012,64(6)
[100] Shavelson R.J. et al.. Self-Concept： Validation of Construct Interpretations[J].Review of Educational Research,1976,46(3),411-431.
[101] Shouping Hu et al.. An engagement-based student typology and its relationshipto college outcomes[J]. Research in Higher Education,2012,53(7),738-754
[102] Thanh-Thanh, Tieu et al.. Helping out or hanging out： the features ofinvolvement and how it relates to university adjustment[J]. Higher Education,2010,60(3),343-355
[103] Vicente M.Lechuga.. Faculty-graduate mentoring relationships： mentor’sperceived roles and responsibilities[J]. Higher Education,2011,62(6),757-771
[104] Williams,W.M.&Ceci,S.J.. How’m I Doing： Problems with Student Ratingsof Instructors and Courses[J]. Change,1997,29(5).
[105] Wu M.L.. Structure equation model： the operation and application of AMOS.Chongqing： Chongqing university press,2007.
[106] Ye H.. The thoughts about enhancing students’ conversion thought[J]. TheResearch of Higher Career Education,2008,20,198-200
[107] Zhang W.Y.&Li H.B.. The enlightenment of NSSE on undergraduateteaching[J]. The Research of Chinese Higher Education,2009,10,19-22
[108]叶赋桂.大学评价和排名：最新的发展及其对大学的意义[J].清华大学教育研究,2008(2)：56-71.
[109]林飞宇,李晓轩.中美高校学生满意度测量方法的比较研究[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006(5)：115-118.
[110]丰蓓.美国高校学生事务与学术事务关系的新发展——加强学生事务与学术事务的合作[J].复旦教育论坛,2006,Vol4(2)：81-85.
[111]刘玉祥.浅析《参与学习》对美国本科教育的影响[J].中国高等教育,2007(15).
[112]方展画.罗杰斯“学生为中心”教学理论述评[M].北京教育科学出版社,1990.
[113]张文毅.NSSE对我国本科教学工作评估的启示[J],中国高教研究,2009(10).
[114]冯增俊,陈时见,项贤明.当代比较教育学[M].人民教育出版,2008.
[115]雷庆.北美地区高等教育质量保证体系研究[M].北京航空航天人学出版社,2008.
[116]约翰·杜威著,赵祥麟等译.学校与社会——明日之学校[M].人民教育出版社,2005.
[117]孙根午.课程体系优化的系统观念及系统方法[J].高等教育研究,2001(2).
[118]冷余生.从讲授为主到自学为主：论我国大学教学方法的历史性变革[J].高等教育研究,1996,(2).
[119]张雨金.转变观念改革高校教学方法[J].高等农业教育,2000(7).
[120]周作宇,周廷勇.大学生就读经验：评价高等教育质量的一个新视角[J].大学研究与评价,2007(l).
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |