創造力動機歷程模式：未來目標、課室目標結構、自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略與創造力之關係

彭淑玲

指導教授 ： 陳學志

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育心理與輔導學系/博士(2010年)

摘要

本研究的研究目的為二：（一）研究一主要是建構一個包含未來目標、課室目標結構、自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略與創造力之「創造力動機歷程模式」，並蒐集實徵資料考驗該模式的適配度，以瞭解各動機構念與創造力之關係。（二）研究二則是依據研究一結果，採用實驗教學方法，考驗未來目標、課室目標結構對創造力的因果關係。故研究者操弄課室目標結構與未來目標兩者（合稱情境目標線索），用以探討情境目標線索融入數學科教學課程與個人目標導向之交互作用，是否會對自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略及創造力產生效果，並分析此效果隨時間改變之情形。
為完成上述研究目的，本研究共進行兩個研究。首先。在研究一中，本研究抽取913位國中生為研究樣本，研究工具包括「未來目標量表」、「課室目標結構量表」、「自我決定動機量表」、「自我調整學習策略量表」與「數學創造力測驗」，並將蒐集的資料以SEM法進行考驗。其次，在研究二，本研究在北部地區抽取兩所國中，十個班級、共計232位國一學生為研究樣本，以進行「情境目標線索融入數學科教學方案」。研究以班級為單位進行實驗操弄，共分為趨向精熟課室目標教學組、未來內在目標＋趨向精熟課室目標教學組、多重課室目標教學組、未來內在目標＋多重課室目標教學組與對照組五個水準，以前測、後測、延後測（創造力無延後測）三階蒐集受試者資料，以作為分析情境目標線索與學習者個人目標導向在自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略與創造力上的交互作用。除了個人目標導向量表與後測使用的擴散性生產測驗（周長12公分的各種圖形）以外，所使用的測量工具與研究一同。本研究將蒐集的資料以三因子混合設計變異數分析來考驗各假設。
本研究發現如下：
一、 研究一結果顯示：本研究建構的「創造力動機歷程模式」可用來解釋國中生的觀察資料，分析結果顯示：未來目標能透過自我決定動機，進而對創造力與自我調整學習策略產生間接效果；課室目標結構亦可形塑個體的自我決定動機，進而影響創造力與自我調整學習策略。然而，並非所有的未來目標、課室目標結構均有助於創造力與自我調整學習策略。結果指出只有以內在焦點為主的未來目標及精熟導向的課室目標結構才對創造力及自我調整學習策略有正向效果，而未來外在目標與表現導向的課室目標結構則無助於創造力與自我調整學習策略。
二、 研究二結果顯示：
（一） 在認知調整策略、動機/情感調整策略與行為調整策略上，情境目標線索×個人目標導向二因子交互作用達顯著水準。結果指出當個體未持有任何目標時，接受實驗教學組（趨向精熟與多重課室目標教學組）的認知、動機/情感與行為調整策略的得分會顯著高於未接受實驗教學組（對照組）；而若未接受教學實驗的對照組個體若本身持有多重或表現目標，其在認知、動機/情感與行為調整策略的得分也會高於未持有任何目標者。
（二） 在自主動機與動機/情感調整策略上，情境目標線索×測量階段二因子交互作用達顯著水準。結果指出多重課室目標結構對個體學習的保護效果最大，其能維持自主動機與動機/情感調整策略的狀態，並在自主動機上有延宕效果；其次則為趨向精熟課室目標結構，亦能維持自主動機與動機/情感調整策略的狀態，但並無延宕效果產生；而對照組在自主動機與動機/情感調整策略的狀態則會隨時間經過有下降的趨勢。
（三） 在擴散性生產之流暢力與變通力上，情境目標線索×測量階段二因子交互作用達顯著水準。結果發現在流暢力上，接受教學實驗組（趨向精熟與多重課室目標教學組）的流暢力在後測上會顯著高於對照組；而在變通力上，接受教學實驗組的變通力在後測上易顯著高於對照組，但趨向精熟課室目標教學組與對照組的變通力均有明顯下降的情況發生。
本研究依據研究結果提出建議，以作為提供國中教學學習輔導與未來研究之參考。

關鍵字

數學創造力 ； 未來目標 ； 課室目標結構 ； 自我決定動機 ； 自我調整學習策略

並列摘要

The purposes of the present research were aimed to: (a) construct a motivational process model of creativity in which future goal, classroom goal structure, self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies and creativity are examined with an investigation of empirical model-fitting analysis based on the performance of Taiwanese junior high students; (b) explore the effects of situational goal cues, personal goal orientation, and measurement stages on self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies, and creativity.
Two studies were conducted in these regards. In study 1, Future Goal Scale, Classroom Goal Structure Scale, Self-Determination Motivation Scale, Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Scale, and Mathematical Creativity Test were used as instruments to measure the performance of the participating 913 junior high school students and the results were analyzed by Structure Equation Model (SEM). In study 2, 10 classes with 232 7th grades of 2 junior high schools in Taipei City were selected. All the classes were conducted as the individual study groups for different manipulations which included 5 distinct levels: teaching group of approach-mastery classroom goal, teaching group of future intrinsic goal plus approach-mastery classroom goal, teaching group of multiple classroom goal, and teaching group of future intrinsic goal plus multiple classroom goal and control group. The interaction effects between the cues of situational goal and individual goal orientation on self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies, and creativity were examined at three different study stages: pretest, posttest and delayed posttest. All the instruments were adopted as Study 1 but Personal Goal Orientation Scale and a divergent production measurement only for the posttest stage.

The principal findings of Studies 1 and 2 include:

1. The result of study1 pointed out that the motivational process of creativity fits the empirically observed data well. Moreover, future goal had indirect effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies through self-determination; and classroom goal structure had indirect effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies through self-determination. However, not all kinds of future goal and classroom goal structure were benefit to creativity and self-regulated learning strategies. Only the future intrinsic goal and mastery classroom goal structure had a positive effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies; and future extrinsic goal and performance classroom goal structure were found have no effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies, respectively.
2. For Study 2:
(1) There was a significant two-way interaction effect between the cues of situational goal and individual goal orientation on cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies. It was revealed that the score of cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies of the experiment teaching group were higher than control group. And if the subjects of control group who had multiple goal or performance goal, they would have better scores of cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies.
(2) A two-way interaction effect between the cues of situational goal and measurement stages on autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies exists. It was found that the multiple classroom goal structure has a largest protection effect on learning behavior. In meanwhile, it could maintain the same level of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies at the pretest stage and had a superior delayed effect on autonomous motivation. Furthermore, the protection effect can be viewed as a approach-mastery classroom goal structure and it could keep the same level of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies but it had no any delayed effect. Also, the scores of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies for the control group declined with time.
(3) The two-way interaction effect between cues of situational goal and measurement stages on fluency and flexibility of divergent production was found significant. It was indicated that the score of fluency of experiment teaching group was higher than control group in the posttest. The score of flexibility of experiment teaching group was higher than control group in the posttest, but the scores of flexibility of approach-mastery classroom goal group and control significantly appeared to decline from the pretest to the posttest.

並列關鍵字

mathematical creativity ； future goal ； classroom goal structure ； self-determination motivation ； self-regulated learning strategies

參考文獻

林易慧、程炳林（2006）。課室目標線索與個人目標導向對國小學童解題成就及自我調整學習之影響。教育心理學報，37，231-255。

林宴瑛、程炳林（2007）。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習策略之潛在改變量分析。教育心理學報，39，173-194。

林清山、程炳林（1996）。國中生自我調整學習因素與學習表現之關係暨自我調整的閱讀理解教學策略效果之研究。教育心理學報，28，15-58。

洪素蘋、黃宏宇、林珊如（2008）。重要他人回饋影響創意生活經驗？以模式競爭方式檢驗創意自我效能與創意動機的中介效果。教育心理學報，90，303-322。

彭淑玲、程炳林（2005）。四向度課室目標結構、個人目標導向與課業求助行為之關係。師大學報：教育類，50，69-95。