The effects of motivational styles on group work and discussion-based seminars

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 47, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 461-473

  Bahar, Mehmet ^a  

^a ABANT IZZET BAYSAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Discussion; Group Work; Motivational Styles

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847094515     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00313830308591     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. ADAR, L., 1969. A Theoretical Framework for the Study of Motivation in Education, Jerusalem: Hebrew University.
2. AL-NAEME, F.F.A., 1991. The influence of various learning styles on practical problem solving in Scottish secondary schools, Glasgow University. Unpublished doctoral thesis
3. BAHAK, M., and HANSELL, M.H., 2000. The relationship between some psychological factors and their effect on the performance of grid questions and word association tests. Educational Psychology, 20: 349–363.
4. CANA-GARCIA, F., and HEWTTT, H.E., 2000. Learning and thinking styles: an analysis of their interrelationship and influence on academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 20: 413–431.
5. FISHER, R., 1987. Problem Solving in Primary Schools, Kernel Hempstead: Blackwell/Simon & Schuster.
6. GAYFORD, C.G., 1992. Patterns of group behaviour in open-ended problem solving in science classes of 15-year-old students in England. International Journal of Science Education, 14: 41–49.
7. GAYFORD, C.G., 1993. Discussion-based group work related to environmental issues in science classes with 15-year-old pupils in England. International Journal of Science Education, 15: 521–529.
8. HODGE, B., and TRIFF, D., 1986. Children and Television, Cambridge: Polity Press.
9. HOFSTFJN, A., and KEMPA, R.F., 1985. Motivating strategies in science education: attempt at analysis. European Journal of Science Education, 7: 221–229.
10. JOHNSTONE, A.H., 1997. “ Know how your pupils learn, and teach them accordingly ”. In Monitoring Change in Education: science education in the 21st century, Edited by: THOMPSON, D.L., Hants: Arena.
11. JOHNSTONE, A.H., and AL-NAEME, F., 1991. Room for scientific thought. International Journal of Science Education, 13: 187–192.
12. JOHNSTONE, A.H., and AL-NAEME, F., 1995. Filling a curriculum gap in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 17: 219–232.
13. KEMPA, R.F., and DIAZ, M.M., 1990a. Students' motivational traits and preferences for different instructional modes in science education, Part I: Students' motivational traits. International Journal of Science Education, 12: 195–203.
14. KEMPA, R.F., and DIAZ, M.M., 1990b. Students' motivational traits and preferences for different instructional modes in science education, Part II. International Journal of Science Education, 12: 205–216.
15. KOLB, D.A., 1984. Experiential Learning. Experience as the source of learning and development, Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
16. LYALL, R.K., and JOHNSTONE, A.H., 1999. Communication: computer programs which respond to learning styles. University Chemistry Education, 3: 68–71.
17. MARTON, F., HOUNSELL, D., and ENTWISTLE, N., 1984. The Experience of Learning, Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
18. PASK, G., 1988. “ Learning strategies, teaching strategies, and conceptual or learning style ”. In Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, Edited by: SCHMECK, R., New York, NY: Plenum Press.
19. SOLOMON, J., 1991. Group discussions in the classroom. School Science Review, 72: 29–34.
20. SOLOMON, J., 1992. The classroom discussions of science-based social issues presented on television: knowledge, attitudes and values. International Journal of Science Education, 14: 431–444.
21. STERNBERG, R.J., 1997. Thinking Styles, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. WITKIN, H.A., and GOODENOUGH, D.R., 1981. Cognitive Styles: essence and origins field dependence and field independence, New York, NY: New York University Press.