Helping education undergraduates to use appropriate criteria for evaluating accounts of motivation

Rebecca Soden, Effie Maclellan

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The aim of the study was to compare students in a control group with those in a treatment group with respect to evaluative comments on psychological accounts of motivation. The treatment group systematically scrutinized the nature and interpretation of evidence that supported different accounts, and the assumptions, logic, coherence and clarity of accounts. Content analysis of 74 scripts (using three categories) showed that the control group students made more assertions than either evidential or evaluative points, whereas the treatment group used evaluative statements as often as they used assertion. The findings provide support for privileging activities that develop understanding of how knowledge might be contested, and suggest a need for further research on pedagogies to serve this end. The idea is considered that such understanding has a pivotal role in the development of critical thinking.
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages445-458
    Number of pages13
    JournalStudies in Higher Education
    Volume30
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Aug 2005

    Fingerprint

    education
    Group
    content analysis
    student
    interpretation
    evidence
    coherence

    Keywords

    • higher education
    • motivation
    • critical thinking

    Cite this

    @article{92d19f25ecae4a669baf5c3d181df02b,
    title = "Helping education undergraduates to use appropriate criteria for evaluating accounts of motivation",
    abstract = "The aim of the study was to compare students in a control group with those in a treatment group with respect to evaluative comments on psychological accounts of motivation. The treatment group systematically scrutinized the nature and interpretation of evidence that supported different accounts, and the assumptions, logic, coherence and clarity of accounts. Content analysis of 74 scripts (using three categories) showed that the control group students made more assertions than either evidential or evaluative points, whereas the treatment group used evaluative statements as often as they used assertion. The findings provide support for privileging activities that develop understanding of how knowledge might be contested, and suggest a need for further research on pedagogies to serve this end. The idea is considered that such understanding has a pivotal role in the development of critical thinking.",
    keywords = "higher education, motivation, critical thinking",
    author = "Rebecca Soden and Effie Maclellan",
    year = "2005",
    month = "8",
    doi = "10.1080/03075070500160145",
    language = "English",
    volume = "30",
    pages = "445--458",
    journal = "Studies in Higher Education",
    issn = "0307-5079",
    number = "4",

    }

    Helping education undergraduates to use appropriate criteria for evaluating accounts of motivation. / Soden, Rebecca; Maclellan, Effie.

    In: Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 30, No. 4, 08.2005, p. 445-458.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Helping education undergraduates to use appropriate criteria for evaluating accounts of motivation

    AU - Soden, Rebecca

    AU - Maclellan, Effie

    PY - 2005/8

    Y1 - 2005/8

    N2 - The aim of the study was to compare students in a control group with those in a treatment group with respect to evaluative comments on psychological accounts of motivation. The treatment group systematically scrutinized the nature and interpretation of evidence that supported different accounts, and the assumptions, logic, coherence and clarity of accounts. Content analysis of 74 scripts (using three categories) showed that the control group students made more assertions than either evidential or evaluative points, whereas the treatment group used evaluative statements as often as they used assertion. The findings provide support for privileging activities that develop understanding of how knowledge might be contested, and suggest a need for further research on pedagogies to serve this end. The idea is considered that such understanding has a pivotal role in the development of critical thinking.

    AB - The aim of the study was to compare students in a control group with those in a treatment group with respect to evaluative comments on psychological accounts of motivation. The treatment group systematically scrutinized the nature and interpretation of evidence that supported different accounts, and the assumptions, logic, coherence and clarity of accounts. Content analysis of 74 scripts (using three categories) showed that the control group students made more assertions than either evidential or evaluative points, whereas the treatment group used evaluative statements as often as they used assertion. The findings provide support for privileging activities that develop understanding of how knowledge might be contested, and suggest a need for further research on pedagogies to serve this end. The idea is considered that such understanding has a pivotal role in the development of critical thinking.

    KW - higher education

    KW - motivation

    KW - critical thinking

    UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070500160145

    U2 - 10.1080/03075070500160145

    DO - 10.1080/03075070500160145

    M3 - Article

    VL - 30

    SP - 445

    EP - 458

    JO - Studies in Higher Education

    T2 - Studies in Higher Education

    JF - Studies in Higher Education

    SN - 0307-5079

    IS - 4

    ER -