FACTORS AFFECTING U.S. COLLEGE STUDENTS’ KNOWLEDGE ... · Vivi's poster for APA-36-48-07312018...
1
Introduction While previous studies have documented that autonomy-supportive learning climate and collaborative learning could promote students’ knowledge transfer, few researchers examined the influential factors of knowledge transfer with multilevel modeling techniques. Cong Wang ([email protected]), Levesque-Bristol Chantal PURDUE UNIVERSITY Conclusion v Female students tend to perceive a higher level of knowledge transfer than male students did. v Autonomy-supportive learning climate and self-determined motivation are strong predictors of perception of knowledge transfer. v None of the class-level variables can predict perception of knowledge transfer. FACTORS AFFECTING U.S. COLLEGE STUDENTS’ KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A MULTILEVEL MODELING ANALYSIS Method ØParticipants: 6,461 undergraduates taking 165 courses at a large, research-intensive university in the American Midwest. ØScales: v Learning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ; Williams & Deci, 1996): 6 items, α = 0.95; Ex. “My instructor conveyed confidence in my ability to do well in the course.” v The situational motivation scale (SIMS; Guay & Vallerand, 1997): 18 items, α = 0.84- 0.96; Ex. “ I take the class because it’s a practical way to acquire new knowledge.” v Perceived knowledge transfer scale (PKTS; Levesque-Bristol, et al., under review): 8 items, α = 0.97. Ex. “I feel as if the material covered in this course is relevant to my future career.” v Group work: measures to what extent, the class involves group work. Instructors of the classes responded to the group work question on a six-point, Likert-type scale anchored by none of the assignments (0) and most of the assignments (5). Result Independent Variable Model 1: Unconditional Model Model 2: Within Class Model Model 3: Between Class Model Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Intercept 5.19*** 0.05 5.31*** 0.17 5.53*** 0.37 Flipped 0.13 0.16 Hybrid -0.06 0.16 Replacement 0.04 0.08 Supplemental -0.05 0.07 STEM -0.05 0.06 Group work 0.04 0.06 100-level course -0.27 0.18 200-level course -0.12 0.18 300-level course -0.17 0.18 African American -0.38* 0.18 -0.37* 0.18 Hispanic -0.19 0.18 -0.19 0.18 International 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03 Perceived LC 0.29*** 0.01 0.29*** 0.02 Motivation 0.07*** 0.00 0.07*** 0.00 Female 0.09** 0.03 0.10*** 0.03 URM 0.31+ 0.16 0.31+ 0.16 Intercept variance 0.33*** 0.05 0.12*** 0.02 0.12*** 0.02 Residual variance 1.68*** 0.03 0.83*** 0.01 0.83*** 0.02 Deviance 21996.63 17107.00 16945.80 # of parameters 3 11 19
Transcript of FACTORS AFFECTING U.S. COLLEGE STUDENTS’ KNOWLEDGE ... · Vivi's poster for APA-36-48-07312018...
IntroductionWhile previous studies have documented that autonomy-supportive learning climate and collaborative learning could promote students’ knowledge transfer, few researchers examined the influential factors of knowledge transfer with multilevel modeling techniques.
CongWang([email protected]),Levesque-BristolChantalPURDUEUNIVERSITY
ConclusionvFemale students tend to perceive a higher level of knowledge transfer than male students did.
vAutonomy-supportive learning climate and self-determined motivation are strong predictors of perception of knowledge transfer.
vNone of the class-level variables can predict perception of knowledge transfer.
FACTORS AFFECTING U.S. COLLEGE STUDENTS’ KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER:A MULTILEVEL MODELING ANALYSIS
MethodØParticipants: 6,461 undergraduates taking 165 courses at a large, research-intensive university in the American Midwest. ØScales: vLearning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ; Williams & Deci, 1996): 6 items, α = 0.95;
Ex. “My instructor conveyed confidence in my ability to do well in the course.” vThe situational motivation scale (SIMS; Guay & Vallerand, 1997): 18 items, α = 0.84-
0.96;Ex. “ I take the class because it’s a practical way to acquire new knowledge.”
vPerceived knowledge transfer scale (PKTS; Levesque-Bristol, et al., under review): 8 items, α = 0.97.Ex. “I feel as if the material covered in this course is relevant to my future career.”
vGroup work: measures to what extent, the class involves group work. Instructors of the classes responded to the group work question on a six-point, Likert-type scale anchored by none of the assignments (0) and most of the assignments (5).
ResultIndependent
VariableModel 1:Unconditional Model
Model 2:Within Class Model
Model 3:Between Class Model
Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Coefficient SE
Intercept 5.19*** 0.05 5.31*** 0.17 5.53*** 0.37
Flipped 0.13 0.16Hybrid -0.06 0.16
Replacement 0.04 0.08Supplemental -0.05 0.07
STEM -0.05 0.06Group work 0.04 0.06
100-level course -0.27 0.18200-level course -0.12 0.18300-level course -0.17 0.18
African American -0.38* 0.18 -0.37* 0.18Hispanic -0.19 0.18 -0.19 0.18
International 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03Perceived LC 0.29*** 0.01 0.29*** 0.02
Motivation 0.07*** 0.00 0.07*** 0.00Female 0.09** 0.03 0.10*** 0.03URM 0.31+ 0.16 0.31+ 0.16
Intercept variance 0.33*** 0.05 0.12*** 0.02 0.12*** 0.02
Residual variance 1.68*** 0.03 0.83*** 0.01 0.83*** 0.02
Deviance 21996.63 17107.00 16945.80
# of parameters 3 11 19
