0000jem.atu.ac.ir/article_2659_f46ce7c2e2df8015a89c8b02d4d61eee.pdf · à z¼ ¾Ëy ʼ¸ ½y...
TRANSCRIPT
5 1390
)) www.srlst.com ((
- 3777/11/3 17/3/1389
( ) .
5 1390 :
: :
:
: : :
: : - 600
:
:44737574 :44737472
1
2 3
4 5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
.
. .
. .
.
. 1 : . )
. ( . ( )
2 ) : .200 ) (6 . ( 3 .
. ( ) 4 . :
.( ) . : . ) .( . :
. . .( ). :( ) : . .
.( ). : . » « : . .( )
. .( ). : .» «
( ) . .. :
- : .( ).» « . .
5 .3 word . 6 . .
1 . )3 (2 .
1 . . 2 . » « . 3 . .
) (.....................................................................1
) ............................................................................................................................(.....................27
87-86
) (..........................................................................................................41
) ...........(.......................................................................................67
) .............(...........................................................................................................................97
) .........................................(......................................................................................................111
) (...................................................................................................................131
2 5 90
:
.
: .
) 1 2002(
)2000 (
) 2 2000 3 1997 - 4
2001.( ) 5 2006 (
1. Hofer 2. Ravindran, Grene & Debacker 3. Pintrich 4. Brownlee, Purdie & Boulton-Lewis 5. Buehl & Alexander
3
) 1 2010( .
)2 2002(
) 2008 (
)3 2002 .(
) - 4 2004 (
) - 5 2002 ( ) 6 2009 ( .
) ( ) ( )
( ) 7 2002( . ) 1997( )2000 (
) 8
1. Chen & Pajares 2. Elder 3. Hammer & Elby 4. Schommer-Aikins 5. Hutter 6. Bromme, Pieschl & Stahl 7. Schraw, Bendixen & Dunkle 8. Perry
4 5 90
1970 1 1987( )2 1981 (
.
)1970 (
) 2000.( 1970 9
)1997.( 1990
. 3 )1990 (
.
) ( ) ( ( )
( ) ) . (
) 1990 ( - )2002( 1. Baxter Magolda 2. Kitchener & King 3. Schommer
5
) (
.
) 1993( .
. ) 1990 (
) 1990( . 1 )2005 ( ) 1990 ( 1600
( )
) ( ) ( .
2 )2002 ( )1990 ( )1993(3 80 .
5
1. Cano 2. Wood & Kardash 3. Jehng, Johnson, & Anderson
6 5 90
)1990( .
) 2002( )1990 (
)1990 ( .
. - 1 )2005 ( -
2 )2002 ( .
) 1997 ( )1990 ( .
. )
( ) ( ) (
) . (
) 2001.(
3 )2004( ) 2000 ( )2002(
1. Duell 2. Mau & Brookhart 3. Conley, Pintrich, Vekiri & Harrison
7
.) 2001 (
. : )1 (
)2 ( . » «
: )3( ) .4(
.
.
.
) 1997 1 2005 2
2008 (3 )1978 ( .
.) 1997 (
.) 1998 () 2002(
1. Karabenick & Moosa 2. Tabak & Weinstock 3. Vygotsky
8 5 90
.
1 )2009 (
)1990( 70/0 .
. )1990 (
.
( )
89 -90 )4342 17 . ( 400 9
366 .
1. Ordonez, Ponsoda, Abad & Romero
9
)1990 1993 ( . 5 )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( . . 12 ) 11 () 8) (5 ) (6(
) 4 ) (6) (4 ( ) 5 ) (4 (
) 3 ) (5 () 2 ( 63 .
) (5 )
( . - )2001 ( 74/0
63/0 85/0 .
.
10 5 90
.
.
.
.
.
18 7/8
12
.
34
. ) ) (
( .
11
) .(
3 5 7 9 11 17 19 18 21 22 29 36 37 41 42 36 56 58 60 61
) 2.(
.
)
( .
9
. ( ) )
) ( ( .
37 44 40 .
) 1 . ( ) 2 . (
9
12 5 90
3 . 9
.
1.
X2 /DF p RMSEA GFI AGFI CFI NNFI
07/0 62/0 03/0 1 99/0 1 15/1 46/0 63/0 00/0 1 99/0 1 28/1
08/1 36/0 01/0 99/ 98/0 99/0 98/0 32/0 72/0 00/0 1 1 1 21/1
33/1 26/0 03/0 1 98/0 98/0 93/0
26/1 27/0 02/0 99/0 98/0 98/0 97/0
75/2 06/0 06/0 99/0 96/0 82/0 90/0 11/1 34/0 01/0 99/0 98/0 99/0 99/0
84/0 43/0 00/0 1 99/0 1 05/1
)x2(
) 1 1980 2 1993 3 2008 .(
)RMSEA( 08/0 )4 1998 ()CFI ( 1. Bentler & Bonnet 2. Joreskog & Sorbom 3- Hooper, Coughlan & Mullen 4- Kelin
13
) GFI) (AGFI (
90/0 ) 1 1999 ( .
2.
31/3 16/1 19/0- 79/0- 04/0 33/0 80/0
.
83/1 06/1 29/1 93/0 17/0 30/0- 08/0
61/3 17/1 06/0- 28/0- 07/0 47/0 16/0
.
57/3 17/1 57/0- 45/0- 05/0 19/0 03/0
.
60/3 10/1 41/0- 44/0- 04/0 35/0 10/0
.
69/2 11/1 25/0 53/0- 06/0 40/0 13/0
47/2 06/1 36/0 24/0- 02/0 33/0 09/0
1 - Hu & Bentler
14 5 90
.
.
66/3 12/1 60/0- 25/0- 08/0 42/0 14/0
.
25/3 21/1 24/0- 73/0- 20/0 02/0 01/0
.
81/2 19/1 20/0 57/0- 08/0 16/0 01/0
.
90/3 11/1 82/0- 04/0- 05/0 21/0- 03/0
.
55/2 23/1 46/0 62/0- 02/0 52/0 18/0
. 74/3 33/1 74/0 63/0- 03/0 44/0- 11/0
.
31/2 42/1 71/0 81/0- 08/0 46/0 10/0
09/3 16/1 05/0- 87/0- 10/0 29/0 06/0
.
23/3 13/1 18/0- 50/0- 05/0 04/0 01/0
.
38/2 12/1 60/0 26/0- 10/0 85/0- 57/0
15
33/2 06/1 52/0 16/0- 05/0 24/0- 05/0
.
71/2 43/1 20/0 34/1- 06/0 39/0 07/0
60/3 32/1 62/0- 74/9- 20/0 80/0 37/0
78/2 36/1 21/0- 15/1 33/0 43/0 09/0
.
78/3 08/1 82/0- 14/0- 07/0 16/0 02/0
.
92/1 02/1 27/1 41/1 17/0 18/0 44/0
.
82/1 06/1 34/1 18/1 31/0 36/0 64/0
.
92/1 09/1 26/1 98/0 24/0 18/0 47/0
.
11/2 18/1 89/0 06/0- 14/0 06/0 30/0
87/2 40/1 10/0 31/1- 25/0 03/0 25/0
16 5 90
.
10 %90. %
28/2 25/1 60/0 71/0- 12/0 19/0 02/0
.
78/1 12/1 40/1 02/1 16/0 28/0 06/0
90/1 13/1 24/1 79/0 25/0 72/0 40/0
.
93/2 43/1 10/0 34/1- 25/0 29/0 04/0
.
18/3 29/1 20/0- 97/0- 11/0 19/0- 02/0
.
90/1 10/1 11/1 37/0 22/0 44/0- 16/0
.
12/3 44/1 12/0- 27/1- 37/0 91/0- 40/0
.
77/2 32/1 17/0 22/1- 30/0 43/0 10/0
96/1 09/1 02/1 26/0 16/0 35/0- 10/0
62/3 24/1 61/0- 79/0- 11/0 39/0 10/0
17
.
98/3 20/1 04/1- 08/0 10/0 59/0 24/0
01/2 18/1 06/1 13/0 19/0 23/0- 04/0
.
99/2 37/1 01/0- 17/1- 10/0 36/0 07/0
18 5 90
3. - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 .
27/0 01/0 01/0- 01/0 05/0- 01/0- 01/0- 02/0 03/0
2 .
02/0- 31/0 04/0 02/0 02/0 05/0 03/0 04/0 02/0
3 . 03/0- 14/0** 33/0 01/0 01/0 03/0 05/0 08/0 01/0 4 .
01/0- 07/0 04/0 29/0 01/0 09/0 06/0 05/0 01/0-
5 . 13/0** 04/0 02/0 02/0 57/0 01/0- 08/0 70/0 10/0 6 .
01/0- 13/0* 10/0 26/0** 01/0- 40/0 14/0 16/0 04/0
7 .
01/0- 08/0 02/0 15/0** 15/0** 32/0** 48/0 15/0 04/0
8 .
63/0 11/0* 02/0 14/0** 14/0** 36/0** 32/0** 47/0 07/0
9 . 08/0 07/0 03/0 02/0- 30/0** 10/0 09/0 16/0** 43/0
01/0< P 05/0< P.
9 .
KMO KMO 65/0
19
001/0 .
. .
)1958 (35/0 9 35/0 43/0
32/0 25/0 80/0 .
)
) ( ( ) (
. 4 .
1 2 3 53/0
75/0 68/0
69/0 44/0
76/0 72/0
68/0 77/0
13/3 28/2 81/1 43/0 32/0 25/0
20 5 90
) (
5 1 .
1 .
21
5.
X2 /DF P RMSEA GFI AGFI CFINNFI 31/1 00/0 02/0 84/0 82/0 88/0 88/0
. 1 )1994 ( 70/0 .2 )1993 (
57/0 62/0 41/0 39/0 .
) . 1376 (
57/0 ) 1997 (
70/0 47/0 . 17 9 3
.
1. Nunnally & Bernstein 2. Cortina
22 5 90
) 1990 (
.
9
. )2009 (
) 1990( ) 1990(
. )2005 (
)1990 (1600 .
)1990 ( .
) 1990 2005 1997 2001 (
) 2001 1997 (
23
.
) 1990 (
.
. ) 2005 (
) 2002) (1990 ( 41/0 64/0 58/0 68/ .
( ) .
.
24 5 90
) . 1374 .(
Bendixen, L. D., Schraw, G., & Dunkle, M. E. (1998). Epistemic beliefs and moral
reasoning. The Journal of Psychology,132,187–200. Bromme, R., Pieschl, S., & Stahl, E. (2009). Epistemological beliefs are standards for
adaptive learning: a functional theory about epistemological beliefs and metacognition. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 7-26.
Browne, M. W., &Cudeck, R. (1993).Alternative ways of assessing model fit. InK. A. Bollen & J. SLong (Eds.), Testing structural equations models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Brownlee, J., Purdie, N. & Boulton-Lewis, G. (2001). Changing epistemological beliefs in pre-service teacher education students”. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 247-68.
Buehl, M. (2008). Assessing the multidimensionality of students’ epistemic beliefs across diverse cultures. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs. Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 65–112). New York: Springer.
Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2001). Beliefs about academic knowledge. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 385–418.
Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2006). Examining the dual nature of epistemological beliefs. International Journal of Educational Research, 45, 28–42.
Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 203–221.
Chen, J. A., & Pajares, F. (2010). Implicit theories of ability of grade 6 science students: Relation to epistemological beliefs and academic motivation and achievement in science . Contemporary Educational Psychology 35 75–87.
Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, L., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29,186-204.
Cortina, J.M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and aplications. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.
Elder, A. D. (2002). Characterizing fifth grade students’ epistemological beliefs in science. In B. K. Hofer, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epis- temology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
25
Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2002). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer
& P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 169–190). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378–405.
Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and teaching. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4). 48-57.
Hofer, B.K. & Pintrich, P.R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to earning. Review of Educational Research, 67 (1), 88-140.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling : Guidelines for determining model fit structural equation modelling. Atlantic, 6(1), 53-60.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–5.
kaiser, H., F.(1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. psychometric, 23,187-200.
Karabenick, S. A., & Moosa, S. (2005). Culture and personal epistemology: U.S. and Middle Eastern students’ beliefs about scientific knowledge and knowing. Social Psychology of Education, 8, 375–393.
Kline, R.B. (2005), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd Edition ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: Mc Graw-Hill.
Ordonez, X. G., Ponsoda, V., Abad, F. J., & Romero, S. J. (2009). Measurement of Epistemological Beliefs: Psychometric Properties of the EQEBI Test Scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 287-302.
Ravindran, B., Grene, B.A. & Debacker, T.K. (2000). Predicting preservice teachers’ cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs. Department of Educational Psychology, 22-32.
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498–504.
Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among second- ary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 406–411.
Schommer, M., & Hutter, R. (2002). Epistemological beliefs and thinking about everyday controversial issues. Journal f Psychology, 136, 5-20.
Schommer, M., Calvert, C., Gariglietti, G., & Bajaj, A. (1997). The development of epistemological beli- efs among secondary students: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 37-40.
Schommer-Aikins, M., Duell, O., & Hutter, R. (2005). Epistemological beliefs, mathematical problem solving beliefs, and academic performance of middle school students. The Elementary School Journal, 105(3), 290-304.
26 5 90
Schommer-Aikins, M., Mau, W. Brookhart, S., & Hutter, R. (2000). Understanding middle students’ beliefs about knowledge and learning using a multidimensional paradigm. The Journal of Educational Research, 94 (2), 120–127.
Schraw, G. S., Dunkle, M. E., and Bendixen, L. D. (1995). Cognitive processes in well- defined and ill-defined problem solving. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 9: 523–538.
Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Dunkle, M. (2002). Development and validation of the Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI). In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 261–251). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Tabak, I., & Weinstock, M. (2008). In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge, and beliefs: epistemeol-ogy across diverse cultures. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wood, P., & Kardash, C. M. (2002). Critical elements in the design and analysis of studies of epistemolo- gy. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 231–260). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Hofer, B. K. (2002). Personal epistemology as a psychological and educational con- struct: An introducti- on. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemol- ogy: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 3-14). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28 5 90
)1 2008 .(
. )2 2003 .(
)3 1991( 4 5 .
6 )1967 ( . .
. 7TAI-G
)1996 ( . 30 .8
10 6 6 ) 8 2006 .(
9 10 23 . )1375 (
1. Beauchemine 2. Keith 3. Seipp 4. Worry 5. Emotionality 6. Liebert and Morris 7. German Test Anxiety Inventory 8. VARELA & BIGGS 9. Friedman 10. Jacob
... 29
25 . 4 . 0 75 .
77/0 94/0 82/0 . .
)1 2010 .( 2 )1984 (
)1984 ( )1972 ( . ) 3 1952 (
4 .
. 5 ) 2001 .(
6 )1983( 7 )1984( 8 )1984( 9
)1985( 10 )1992( 11 )1990( 12 )1991( 13
1. Hagtvet 2. Sarason 3. Mandler & Sarason 4. Constructs 5. Unidimensional 6. Stephan 7. Salamé 8. Schwarzer 9. Schwarzer and Quast 10. Schwarzer and Jerusalem 11. Birenbaum 12. Hodapp 13. Zeidner and Nevo
30 5 90
)1992 ( 1 )1992 ( .
)2010 ( 2 3 4 .
5 6
. 6 :
.
- .
90-89 .
200 . 18 39 54/24 .
. 18 .
1. Losiak 2. Dimension 3. Referent Facet 4. Concern Facet5. Self-Referenced Cognitions 6. Other-Referenced Cognitions
... 31
1977 1 2 . 23
. 4 .
81/0 91/0 . .
.
13 91/0 .
. - - 3 )78/0 ( 4 99
. 13 4 70 .
1. Friedman 2. Jacob 3. Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin Measure (KMO) 4. Bartletts test of Sphericity
32 5 90
1.
164/474/3574/3564/474/3574/3568/332/2832/28214/248/1622/5214/248/1622/5255/263/1996/47325/168/990/6125/168/990/6164/126/1122/59403/196/787/6903/196/787/6938/165/1087/69
1.
1 ) (4 1 70
1. Eigen value
... 33
. 4 .
4/0 .
2.
1234q1882.q4847.q2835.q3804.q5780.q11831.q12794.q10756.q9689.q8871.q22716.q13838.q15682.
4 2
. .
34 5 90
5/8 1
. 2 . 2 .
)61/81.95 ( . ) 3
2007( )4 2006 5 2000 .( 6 )RMSEA ( 06/0
08/0 ) 1384 7 1993 .( 8 )CFI( 9 )GFI( 10 )AFGI(
11 )NFI ( 12 )NNFI ( 9/0 95/0 1
) 13 2006 14 2005 1384 .( .
1. Lisrel 8.5 2. Maximum likelihood 3. Tabachnich & Fidell 4. Kahn 5. Watkins 6. Root Mean Squared Error Of Approximation 7. Brown & Cudeck 8. Comparative Fit Index 9. Goodness Of Fit Index 10. Adjust Goodness Of Fit Index 11. Normed Fit Index 12. Non- Normed Fit Index 13. Henson & Roberts 14. Kline
... 35
2.
3.
NNFI NFIAFGI GFI CFIChi-Squre
df P-Value
RMSEA
937/0 92/0 92/0 98/0 97/0 95/81 61 04/0 06/0
.
2 . 13 4
36 5 90
. .
4.
R
R2
1 1 .
816/0 666/0 0.882 59/0
2 2 .
729/0 531/0 835/0 53/0
3 3 .
818/0 669/0 804/0 65/0
4 4 .
853/0 728/0 847/0 65/0
5 5 .
798/0 636/0 780/0 63/0
6 11 .
747/0 55/0 831/0 45/0
7 12 . 622/0 386/0 794/0 23/0 8 10 . 777/0 604/0 756/0 58/0 9 9
. 629/0 395/0 689/0 42/0
10 8 .
527/0 278/0 781/0 40/0
11 22 .
743/0 553/0 716/0 51/0
12 13 .
465/0 216/0 838/0 36/0
... 37
13 15 .
660/0436/0 682/0 41/0
4 . .
4 .
.
. .
. .
.
.
1 2 .
1. Friedman 2. Jacob
38 5 90
. . 23
10 13 4 1 )1983( 2 )1984( 3 )1984(
4 )1985( 5 )1992( 6 )1990( 7 )1991( 8 )1992( 9 )2008 ( 10 )1992 (
. 91/0
13 4 . .
. .
. )1375.(
. .3)7(38-29.
1. Stephan 2. Salamé 3. Schwarzer 4. Schwarzer and Quast 5. Schwarzer and Jerusalem 6. Birenbaum 7. Hodapp 8. Zeidner and Nevo 9. Milner 10. Losiak
... 39
. )1384 .( : .
Beauchemine J.( 2008) Mindfulness meditation may lessen anxiety promote social skills
and improve academic performance among adolescents with learning disabilities. J psychol. 11: 34-45.
Birenbaum, M. (1990). Test anxiety components: comparison of different measures.Anxiety Research, 3, 149-159.
Brown, M.W.,& Cudeck, R, (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. long (Eds.), testing structural equation model, Newbury park, CA: sage.136-164.
Hagtvet, K. A., Man, F., & Sharma, S. (2001). Generalizability of Self-Related Cognitions in Test Anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 1147-1171.
Hagtvet, K.A. min, YE, Frantisek, MAN, Suchitra, PAL, Sagar, sharma. (2010). inquiry into a domain of worry cognitionsnin test anxiety research. cognition brain & behavior, Volume XIV, NO>4 (December),pp.365-399.
Henson,R.K & Roberts,J.K, (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: common errors and some comment on improved practice, Educational and psychological measurement, 66, 393-416.
Hodapp, V. (1991). Das Prüfungsängstlichkeitsinventar TAI-G: Eine erweiterte und modifizierte Version mit vier Komponenten [The Anxiety Inventory TAI-G: An expanded and modified version with four components]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 5, 121-130.
Kahn,J.H (2006). Factor analysis in counseling psychology research, training, and practice: principle, advances, and application, the counseling psychologist, 34, 684-718.
keith nina, volker hodapp, karin schermelleh-engel and helfried moosbrugger.(2003). cross-sectional and longitudinal confirmatory factor models for the german test anxiety inventory: a construct validation, journal Anxiety, Stress & Coping. Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 251_/270
Kline,R.B, (2005). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling, New York: Guilford press.
Liebert, R.M. and Morris, L.W. (1967). Cognitive and emotional components of test anxiety: A distinction and some initial data. Psychological Reports , 20, 975_/978.
Losiak, W. (1992). Polish adaptation of Spielberger's Test Anxiety Inventory. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference of the Stress and Anxiety Research Society. Leuven, Belgium, July 17-19.
Mandler, G., & Sarason, S. B. (1952). A study of anxiety and learning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 166-173.
40 5 90
Milner LC, Crabbe JC (2008) Three murine anxiety models: results from multiple inbred strain comparisons. Genes Brain Behav 7:496–505
Salame, R. F. (1984). Test anxiety: Its determinants, manifestations and consequences.In H. M. van der Ploeg, R. Schwarzer, & C. H. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. 3, pp. 83 - 119). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Sarason, I. G. (1972). Experimental approaches to test anxiety attention and the uses of information. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety. Current trends in theory and research. (Vol. 2., pp. 381-403). New York: Academic Press.
Sarason, I. G. (1984). Stress, anxiety, and cognitive interference: reactions to tests.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 929-938.
Schwarzer, R. (1984). Worry and emotionality components as separate components in test anxiety. International Review of Applied Psychology, 33, 267-275.
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1992). Advances in anxiety theory: A cognitive process approach. In K. A. Hagtvet & T. B. Johnsen (1992). Advances in Test Anxiety Research. Vol. 7. (pp. 2-17). Publisher: Swets & Zeitlinger, Amsterdam/Lisse, The Netherlands.
Schwarzer, R., & Quast, H.-H. (1985). Multidimensionality of the anxiety experience: Evidence for additional components. In H. M. van der Ploeg, R. Schwarzer, & C. H. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. 4, pp. 3 - 14). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Seipp, B. (1991). Anxiety and academic performance: a meta-analysis of findings.Anxiety Research , 4, 27_/41.
Stephan, E., Fischer, S., & F. Stein (1983). Self-related cognitions in test anxiety research: An empirical study and critical conclusions. In H. M. van der Ploeg, R. Schwarzer, & C. H. Spielberger (Eds.) Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. 2, pp. 45 - 66). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Tabachnick, B.G & Fidell, L.S, (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th Ed.), New York, Allyn and Bacon.
varela r. enrique, & bridget k. biggs.(2006). Reliability and validity of the Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS) across samples of Mexican, Mexican American, and European American children: a preliminary investigation. journal Anxiety, Stress, and Coping. 19(1): 67_/80
Watkins, M.W,(2000). Mac parallel analysis (computer software). State College, PA: Author.
Zeidner, M., & Nevo, B. (1992). Test anxiety in examinees in a college admission testing situation: Incidence, dimensionality, and cognitive correlates. In K. A.
87-86
1 2 3
: 12/6/90 : 21/12/90
)
( 87 -86 .
.
29 400
)212 188 ( . 3/0
11 10
1- ( )2- [email protected]
42 5 90
. 29 . ) 000/0 (KMO 88/0 PC .
5 37/48 . 87/0
81/0 83/0 86/0 77/0 81/0 79/0 .
. 85/0 ( )82/0 . ( ) 77/0
. .
01/88 . 2/7 8/3 2/11 .
: .
. ) 1999(.
.
.
... 43
.
» « )1 2001 1382 .(
.
-
)2 2005.(
. . .
. .
)3 1996 .(
) 4 2001 2005 .(5 :»
1. Hergenhahn & Olson 2. Taylor & Novaco 3. Kannel et al 4. Suinn 5. John Hunter
44 5 90
.« ) 1982 (
25 . ) 2005 .(
.
1 )2004 ( .
2 )2004 ( 3 )2001 (
) 2005 .() 1373 (
. ) 2001 2001
4 1999 5 1990 1982 6 2004 1982 7 2004 1377 1373 (
.
1. Stric &Stepto 2. Eaker, Sullivan , Kelly-Hayes , D Agostion & Benjamin 3. Rosenberg et al. 4. McCraty, Atkinson, Tomasino, Goelitz, Mayrovitz 5. Spielberger, &Londen 6. Fuller 7. Koch
... 45
1 ) 2001 (
. 1980
.
. 2 )1982 (
. .
.
. ) 1373 (
.
) 2005 .( .
.
1. Monahan2. Barefoot, Dahlstrom & Williams
46 5 90
) 1 2001 2 2001.(
) 1380 .(
.
)2550 (
) 87 -1386 ( . 400
)87 -1386 ( . 25/53 % 75/46 %
75/35 %75/32 %50/31%
1. Bar-On 2. Mayer
... 47
400 212 188 143 )80 63
.(131 ) 70 61 ( 126 )63 63 (
. 29
. DSM IV
. .
5
. 50 .
. .
. 50
. STAXI-II 50 .
4
.
48 5 90
51
.
30/0 . 11
30/0 39 .
KMO
KMO 88/0 . 034/3777 000/0
)1(.
9 )3( )5( :
. 5
36/48 . 15/4 33/14 06/4 01/14
13/2 37/7 85/1 40/6 80/1 23/6
... 49
)5(. .
) (8 82/0 ( )9 84/0 ) (4 62/0 ( )4 56/0
) ( 4 60/0 . , 50
83/0 86/0 . 77/0 81/0 79/0 )12( .
85/0 ( )82/0 ) (77/0 . 63/0 - 77/0
.76/0 .
. .
87/62 33/15
69/16 74/5 88/16 66/6 26/9 10/3 01/10 03/3 48/9 08/3 )15(.
50 5 90
STAXI-II 71/0 .
T Z . 01/88
2/7 8/3 2/11 . 77/82
58/92 . .
2/78 53/93
53/93 . .
1. KMO
KMO 88/0
034/3777
406 000/0
... 51
2.
-
872/0 487/0 67/219 65/60 1
872/0 469/0 53/218 62/60 2
873/0 442/0 44/219 88/60 3
875/0 327/0 72/222 17/60 4
871/0 524/0 41/217 65/60 5
873/0 429/0 86/219 87/60 6
870/0 561/0 28/215 77/60 7
872/0 474/0 91/217 57/60 8
870/0 536/0 67/216 71/60 9
871/0 512/0 38/219 13/61 10
871/0 507/0 02/217 90/60 11
872/0 486/0 68/217 85/60 12
873/0 418/0 49/219 43/60 13
870/0 537./ 07/215 88/60 14
871/0 520/0 19/217 03/61 15
873/0 418/0 74/220 22/61 16
875/0 320/0 56/223 72/60 17
871/0 416/0 52/227 25/60 18
873/0 425/0 57/223 21/60 19
872/0 456/0 35/219 04/61 20
874/0 349/0 91/225 26/60 21
873/0 441/0 52/219 92/60 22
869/0 571/0 44/214 91/60 23
875/0 328/0 42/222 30/60 24
52 5 90
872/0 462/0 60/218 93/60 25
870/0 549/0 97/228 02/60 26
872/0 448/0 11/224 35/60 27
874/0 364/0 44/221 06/61 28
872/0 451/0 21/219 09/61 29
3.
1856/7145/20145/202955/2576/7721/273037/2222/5943/324718/1404/4347/375273/1263/3610/406182/1031/3641/437157/1966/2607/468096/1809/2416/499063/1725/2141/52
... 53
4.
1 7/080 24/414 24/414 7/080 24/414 24/414 4/158 14/338 14/338 2 2/403 8/286 32/700 2/403 8/286 32/700 4/064 14/014 28/352 31/907 6/577 39/278 1/907 6/577 39/278 2/139 7/377 35/729 41/494 5/152 44/430 1/494 5/152 44/430 1/859 6/409 42/138 51/144 3/946 48/376 1/144 3/946 48/376 1/809 6/237 48/376 60/977 3/369 51/745
70/9273/19754/94280/9013/10658/04890/8612/96961/017
100/8162/81363/830110/7982/75366/583120/7792/68669/269130/7172/47171/740140/6992/40974/149150/6732/31976/468160/6522/24878/717170/6252/15480/870180/6042/08182/951190/5802/00084/951200/5411/86686./818210/5271/81888/636220/4961/70990/345230/4841/66892/012240/4551/56993/581
54 5 90
250/4501/55095/131260/4091/41096/541270/3831/31997/860280/3391/17099/03129345/0965/0100
5.
1158/4338/14338/142064/4014/14352/283139/2377/7729/354859/1409/6138/425809/1237/6376/48
6.
1 2345
1 640/02673/03646/04 672/05578/06543/07692/0
... 55
8548/09645/0
10599/011511/012411/013584/014561/015720/016752/017682/0 18765/019614/020477/021649/0 22625/023617/024 431/025479/026 559/027 732/028587/0 29729/0
56 5 90
7.
8.
–
11 92/1433/36508/0 829/0 14 89/1476/35519/0 828/0 15 04/1589/34653/0 813/0 16 23/1565/35607/0 819/0 22 93/1424/36533/0 826/0 23 92/1486/34609/0 818/0 25 94/1482/36475/0 832/0 28 07/1564/36476/0 833/0 29 10/15 41/35 602/0 819/0
–
1 47/1456/26533/0807/0 2 44/1485/25531/0808/0 3 70/1497/25521/0809/0 5 47/1490/25551/0 805/0 6 69/1449/26471/0 816/0 7 59/1454/24649/0 790/0 9 53/1444/25581/0 800/0
10 95/1460/26547/0 806/0
... 57
9.
-
17 12/722/6418/0 544/0 18 64/684/5443/0 524/0 19 60/675/5413/0 547/0 20 44/759/6341/0 597/0
10.
–
21 95/770/5346/0497/0 24 99/708/6310/0 524/0 26 71/713/6323/0 513/0 27 03/876/5418/0 438/0
11.
–
4 78/630/6 323./ 580./ 8 18/772/5447./ 486./
12 46/715/6362./ 551./ 13 04/783/5410./ 515./
58 5 90
12.
83/0 86/0 77/0 81/0
79/0 81/0
13.
212 75/59 04/14
188 38/66 98/15
14. - 400
87/62 33/15
Z - 30/1 041/0
... 59
15.
8 69/16 74/5 988/16 66/6
426/910/3 4 01/10 03/3 4 48/9 07/3
) + = × 64/1(.
64/1
) 1998 .(
01/88 ) =64/1× 33/15 +(87/62 =
17.
29-88 3718/928/9288 292/7100
400 100
60 5 90
18.
29-88 2042/962/9688 88/3100
29-88 1678/888/8888 212/11100
19.
- 29-88 133 7/93 7/93
88 9 3/6 100 29-88 117 4/91 4/91
88 11 6/8 100 29-88 121 1/93 1/93
88 9 9/6 100
21. 10/26 80/27 34/14 97/14
51/14
87-1386
... 61
.
.
51
. .
50 .
11 39 . 400
.4
) 1( ) 2( ) 3( ) 4 ( . 50
.
.
: .
62 5 90
87/0 82/0 84/0 62/0 56/0 60/0
. ) ( 84/0
) ( 56/0 . 812/0
.
84/0 95/0 .
:
.
. .
5
3/0 .
. 3/0 . .
... 63
KMO . KMO 88/0 000/0 .
.
9 . 9
. 8 9 4 4
4 . 30/0
4 4
. 10 29 .
5 : .
. 33/14 04/14 37/7 40/6 23/6 5
37/48
. STAXI-II 71/0
.
64 5 90
:
) ( 33/15 78/62
01/88 . . 01/88 .
2/7 8/3 2/11 .
. .
:1- 2- .
:
1- ...
.
... 65
2-
. 3- .
). 1377 .(
: .( ) ..
). 1373 .( ). : .(
). 1380 .( . : . ). . . 1382 .( ) .(
) . :2001.(
Averil J.R. (1982). Anger and Aggression:An Essay on Emotion. NewYourk: Springer-
Verlag. Averill J.R.(1983). Studies on anger and aggression: Implication for theories of emotion.
American Psychologist, 38, 1145-1160. Stric &Stepto .(2004).. Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Conduct Disorder (6th
edn).U.S.A: Taylor & Francis.
66 5 90
Barefoot, J. C. Dahlstrom, G. & Williams,R.B.(1982).Hostility,CHD, Incidence, and Total morality: A 25-year follow-up study of 255 physicianse. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55, 59-64.
Bar-On, Reuven.(2001). Emotional Intelligence and Self-Actualization. In Joseph Ciarrochi, Joseph P. Fogas, and John D. Mayer(Eds.) Emotional Intelligence in Everday Life.(pp.82-97). U.S.A: Taylor & Francis.
Eaker, Sullivan , Kelly-Hayes , D Agostion & Benjamin.(2004). Effectiveness of a rural anger management program in preventing domestic violencerecidivism. (Digital Dissertations). UMI. ProQuest(2005).
Rosenberg et al .(2001). Anger in young men and subsequent premature cardiovascular disease. Archives of Internal Medicine, 162, 901-906.
Fuller .(2004). The efficacy of an anger management program for middle school students with emotional handicaps (Digital Dissertations). UMI. ProQuest(2006).
Koch .(2004). The Second Step Violence Prevention Program.Salovey, P.(2001). Applied Emotional Intelligence: Regulating Emotions to become
Healthy, wealthy. and wise. In Joseph Ciarrochi, Joseph P. Fogas, and John D. Mayer(Eds.) Emotional Intelligence in Everday Life(pp.168-184). USA:
Spielberger, C.D.(1999). State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-21M :Professional Manual(2nd edn). Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Spielberger, CD., & Londen, P.(1990). Blood pressure and injustice. Psychology Today, January/February, 48-51.
Spielberger, C.O., & Londen, P.(I982). Rage boomerangs. American Health, I, 52-56. Spielberger, C.D . & Reheiser, E.C.(2007). Measuring Anxiety. Anger, Depression, and
Curiosity as Emotional States and Personality Traits with STAI,STAXI, and STPI. In M.Hersen,M.J.Hilsenroth and D.L. Segal(Eds.) Comprehensive handbook of Psychological Assessment, Vo1.2, personality Assessment. Hoboken,N.J: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Spielberger, C.D., Reheiser, E.C., & Sydeman, S.J.(1995).Measuring the experience, expression, and control of anger. In H.Kassinove(Ed.), Anger disorder:
Spielberger, C.D., Ritterband, L.M., Sydeman, S.J., Reheiser, E.C., & Unger, K.K.(1995).Assessment of emotional states and personality traits :Measuring. psychological vital signs. In J.N. Butcher(Ed.) Clinical personality assessment: Practical approaches(pp. 42-58). New York:Oxford University Press.
Taylor, G.J.(2004). Overview of the alexithymia construct. In Joseph Ciarrochi, Joseph P. Fogas, and John D. Mayer(Eds.) Emotional Intelligence in Everday Life(pp.67-81). USA: Taylor & Francis.
Taylor, G.J., & Novaco, R.W.(200S). Anger Treatment for people with Developmental Disabilities: A theory, evidence and manual based approach. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Siegel, J.M.(1986).The multidimentional anger inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psichology,51,191-200.
68 5 90
) ( . 2
. . :
. :
.
.
: .
.
. )2009 (
. 2002 2007 6/9 9/21
.... 69
.
. .
. –
) 1387(. .
) 2000 .)2003 .( :
)1384((.
) : )1388( (
.
»
« . )2005 2(
70 5 90
.
) 120072 2009 3 2009 4 2009(.
) 5 2005 6 2006 7 2006 2009 2010(.
. )2001 636 ( »
...
« )636 .(
. .
1. Gaytan, J., & McEwan2. Barbera3. Chen, C., & Chen4. Wang5. Strudler, N., & Wetzel6. Bartlett, A., & Sherry7. Meeus, W., Questier, F., &Derks
.... 71
)2006 ( ) :1 ( )2 ( )3 ( )4 ( )5 ( .
. . » «1
:
1- 2: .
) ( .
2- 3: ) ( .
.
3 - 4: .
.
1. IMS Global Learning Consortium 2. Assessment ePortfolios3. Presentation ePortfolios 4. Learning ePortfolios
72 5 90
4- 1:
. .
5- 2: .
.
6- : . .
»3 « .
.
. : .
.
.
1. Personal development ePortfolios 2. Multiple-owner ePortfolios3. NLII
.... 73
) . . . 1 2005(.
) 2 2001(.
CDs, DVDs ) 3 2009(. )2006 (
.
. 4 )2009 (
.
.
1. RIDE et al 2. Chang 3. Umut Akçıl4. Zubizarreta
74 5 90
.
. » «
» « ) )2008 .( )1390 (
) 1 2007 2 2004(. 3 )2001 (
.
) ( ) ( ) – 4 2006 5 2004(.
6 )2003 (
. .
1. Lambert, DePaepe, Lambert, & Anderson 2. Liu, Zhuo, & Yuan3. American Association of Higher Education 4. Buzzetto -More 5. Wright6. ePortConsortium
.... 75
. .
: –
) 1386 .( .
)1387 ( ) (
:1- 2-
3- – .
)2007 ( .
)30 ( .
. .
1 )2009 ( . 363
1. Akçıl, Arap
76 5 90
.
. 1 )2010 (
.
.
. )2010 (
. . 41 .
.
.
1. Cheng Chang
.... 77
.
1 .
2 .
3 .
.
1-
.
2-
.3-
.
78 5 90
-
.
90-1389 . 25 .
5 40 20 .
. 5 .
. )
2 ( .
.
.... 79
) (
t . spss 16 .
1. t
DFt
6/1- 38 81/0- 42/0
15/0 38 048/0 96/0
20/0 38 35/0 73/0
1
. )05/0p<.(
.
) D( . )
(
80 5 90
1 2T 3 4 ) f
.(
2.
FDf Df
18/0 59/54 3 36 000/0
)59/54 =F3,36
)01/0 p<.(
) ( .
.
. 3 .
1. Pillai’s Trace 2. Wilks’ Lambda 3. Hotelling’s Trace 4. Roy’sLargestRoot
.... 81
3.
F
62/950162/95059/10002/0 22/6682 1 22/6682 127.55 000/0
40/176 1 40/176 00 /33 000/0
3 . .
)012/0( .
.
. .
82 5 90
.
.
.
.
)2009( )2010( )1387 ( . )2009 (
. )2010 (
. )1387 ( ) (
.... 83
.
– )2001 ( .
.
. .
. .
.
.
)2010( )2003( )2001 ( .
) ( .
)2003 ( ) (
. )2001 (
84 5 90
.
6 .
.
. .
.
.
.
)1384 ( .
)2010( )1388( )1387( )2003( )2009(
.... 85
. )2010 (
. )1388 (
. )1387 ( ) (
. )2009 ( .
.
.
.
. .
.
.
86 5 90
.
. .
)2004( )1995 ( . )2004(
. )1995 ( .
. )2004 (
.
.
. )1995 ( .
.... 87
. .
.
.
. )2009( )2010( )2005( )1388( )1378(
)2004 ( . )2009 ( .
. )2010 (
. .
)2005( .
.
88 5 90
)1388 ( .
. )1387 ( ) (
- . )2004 (
. 1378 .
.
) (
.
.
. .
.... 89
.
. )2007 ( )1991 (
)2004( )2001( )1995 ( . )2007(
.
. )1991 (
. )2004 ( .
. )2001 (
. . )1995 (
. .
.
90 5 90
. .
.
. )1992
1998 ( 78 %
. .
.
. .
.
.
. »
« .
.... 91
.
-
. -
» « .
: 1-
) (
.2-
.
3-
.
92 5 90
4-
.5-
.6-
.
.)2005.( ) (
1 26-27. . )1383 .( ) (.
: . . . . . :
)1388 .( : . .) .1387 .( ) (
) (
.... 93
86-87 .
) .1386 .( . )
( : . ) .1378 .(
. . 1 .50-39 . ) .1384 .( ) . .( : .
) .1388 .( ) ( . . : : : :
) . (. .)1387.(
88- 1387
.)1386 .( . .
. ) .1389 .(
2001 2010 ) ( 10 11 .
. . .).2003 .( 21) .( : )1384 .( : .
94 5 90
. .) .2003(. : )1387( : .
).2008(. : )1390.(. )(.
Akçıla, Umut, Arap, brahim. (2009). The opinions of education faculty students on learning
processes involving e-portfolios, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 1, 395–400, Available online at www. sciencedirect. com
Alexiou, Aikaterini, Paraskeva, Fotini .(2010). Enhancing self-regulated learning skills through the implementation of an e-portfolio tool. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 3048-3054, Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Alexiou, Aikaterini, Paraskeva, Fotini .(2010). Enhancing self-regulated learning skills through the implementation of an e-portfolio tool. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 3048-3054, Available online at www.sciencedirect. com
American Association for Higher Education. (2001). Electronic portfolios: Emerging practices for students, faculty and institutions. Retrieved 2/28/06 from http: //aahe. ital. utexas. edu/electronicportfolios/index. html
Barbera, E. (2009). Mutual feedback in e-portfolio assessment: An approach to the netfolio system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 342–357. doi: 10. 1111/ j. 1467-8535.2007. 00803. x
Barbera, E. (2009). Mutual feedback in e-portfolio assessment: An approach to the netfolio system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 342–357. doi: 10. 1111/ j. 1467-8535.2007. 00803. X
Barrett, H. (2005a). Differentiating electronic portfolios and online assessment management systems. Retrieved October 15, 2005, from http: //www. electronicportfolios. com/portfolios/SITE2004paper. pdf
Barrett, Helen C (2006). Using Electronic Portfolios for Formative/Classroom-based Assessment. The REFLECT Initiative Researching Electronic portFolios: Learning,Engagement and Collaboration through Technology, Submitted to the Connected Newsletter
Bartlett, A., & Sherry, A. C. (2006). Two views of electronic portfolios in teacher education: Non-technology undergraduates and technology graduate students.International Journal of Instructional Media, 33(3), 245–253. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
.... 95
Baturay, MeltemHuri and Daloglu, Aysegul. (2010), E-portfolio assessment in an online English language course, Computer Assisted Language Learning Vol. 23, No. 5, 413–428
Bol, H., Stephanson, p. l., O Connell, A., &Vunnery, J. A. (1998).Influnce of experience, grade Level, and subject area on teachers assessment practices. The Journal of Educational Research.91(6).323-330
Brokhart, S.M. &Durkin, D. T. (2003).Classroom assessment, student motivation, and achievement in high school social studies classes. AppliedMeasurment in Education.16(1).27-54
Butler, S.M. ,&McMunn, N. D. (2006). A teacher's guide to classroom assessment. USA: Josseey – Bass.
Chang, C. -C. (2001a). Construction and evaluation of a Web-based learning portfolio: An electronic authentic assessment tool. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(2), 144-155.
Chang, C. -C. (2001a). Construction and evaluation of a Web-based learning portfolio: An electronic authentic assessment tool. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(2), 144-155.
Chang, C. -C. (2001b). A study on the evaluation and effectiveness analysis of Web-based learning portfolio (WBLP). British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4), 435-458.
Chen, C., & Chen, M. (2009). Mobile formative assessment tool based on data mining techniques for supporting web-based learning. Computers & Education, 52(1), 256–273. doi: 10. 1016/j. compedu.2008.08. 005
Chi-Cheng Chang.(2010), Self-Evaluated Effects of Web-Base Portfolio Assessment for Various Student Motivation Levels, Learning Forum London 2010 proceedings, Internet of Subjects Forum ePortfolio - Key Competencies – Identity London, Savoy Place Published by EIfEL
Eggen, P., &Kaychak, D . (2001). Educational Psychology: Windos on classrooms( 5thed).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill / Prentice-Hall.
ePortConsortium. Org. (2003). Electronic portfolio white paper [Version 1. 0]. Retrieved 4/14/06 fromhttp: //eportconsortium. org
Gaytan, J., & McEwan, B. C. (2007). Effective online instructional and assessment strategies. American Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 117–132. doi: 10. 1080/ 08923640701341653
K. Betts (2009) Online Human Touch (OHT) Training&Support: A Conceptual Framework to Increase Faculty Engagement, Connectivity, and Retention in Online Education, Part 2. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Vol.5, No. 1
Knight, William E, Hakel, Milton D, Gromko, Mark (2005). The Relationship Between Electronic Portfolio Participation and Student Success. Ohio, Green State University.
Lambert, C., DePaepe, J., Lambert, L., & Anderson, D. (2007). ePortfolios in Action.Kappa Delta Pi Record, 43(2), 76-83.
Liu, E. Z., Zhuo, Y., & Yuan, S. (2004). Assessing higher-order thinking using a networked portfolio system with peer assessment. International Journal of Instructional Media, 31(2), 139–149. Retrieved from WilsonWeb database.
96 5 90
Macciomei, N. R. (1995). The effects of portfolio assessment on academic achievement and intrinsic motivation for student with specific learning disabilities.Doctoral Dissertation.university of south Carolina.
Meeus, W., Questier, F., &Derks, T. (2006). Open source eportfolio: Development and implementation of an institution-wide electronic portfolio platform for students.Educational Media International, 43(2), 133–145. doi: 10. 1080/09523980600641148
Mortazavi, batool.(2010). self assessment surveillance using e-portfolio, papar in the second international conference on e-learning and e-teaching. iran/Tehran
Rhode Island Department of Education and the Education Alliance at Brown University. (2005). Portfolio toolkit. Retrieved October 3, 2006 from Rhode Island Diploma System Local Assessment Toolkits Web site:
http: //www. ride. ri. gov/ HighSchoolReform/DSLAT/portfolio/por_intr. Shtml Seals, G, J. (2001).The effects of portfolio use as a learning tool on algebra II students
achievement and their attitudes towards mathematics. Doctoral Dissertation, the university of Mississippi.
Stefanaou, C, &Parkes, J. (2003). Effects of classroom assessment on student motivation in fifth-grade science.The Journal of Educational Research.96(3), 152-161.
Strudler, N., & Wetzel, K. (2005). The diffusion of electronic portfolios in teacher education: Issues of initiation and practice. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(4), 411–433. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database
Üstünel, Eda, Deren, Ertan(2010). The effects of e-portfolio based assessment on students’ perceptions of educational environment. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 1477–1481, Available online at www. sciencedirect. com
Van Evera, we.(2004). Achievement and motivation in the middle school science classroom: The effects of formative assessment feedback. Doctoral Dissertation, George Masson university.
Waddell, C. A. (2004). The effect of negotiated written feedback within formative assessment on fourth-grade students motivation and goal orientations. Doctoral Dissertation.University of Missourio-saint Louis.
Wang, C. X. (2009). Comprehensive assessment of student collaboration in electronic portfolio construction. TechTrends, 53(1), 58–66. doi: 10. 1007/s11528-009-0238-1
Wiggins, G. (1991). Standard, not standardization: Evorking quality student work.Educational Leadership.51. 74-79.
Zubizarreta, J. (2009). The learning portfolio: Reflective practice for improving student learning (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
1
: 8/7/90 : 21/12/90
.
247 ) 142 105 ( . .
12 ) 5 ( -
) 4 ( ) 3 ( 85/0 77/0 6/0
70/0 . ) 1991 (35/0
.
.
: - .
98 5 90
1
) 2 2003 (
) 3 1999 ) (4 2005 .( (procrastinare)
) 5 1993 .( 6 )1998 (
: .
) 1375(.
(... )
. ) 7 1992 8 1993 9 1995 10 1997 11 2003
1. Academic Procrastination 2. Chase 3. Johansen & Carton 4. Oweini & Harraty 5. Desimon 6. Milgram , Mey-Tal & Levison 7. Ferrari., Parker & Ware 8. Haykok 9. Ferrari , Johnson & McGown 10. Ellis & Knaus 11. Woltters
99
1 2004 2 005 ( . 3 )1992 ( 70
.4 )1994 (50
. 5 )1994 ( 30 40
. 6 )1996 (
.7 )1998 ( 70
. 8 )1998 ( 90 9 )2000 (95 .
10 )2002 ( 80 95 50 ) .2005 (
70 . 11 )2009 ( 40
1. Ferrari,, O’Callaghan & Newbegin 2. Hoover 3. Ferrari , Parker & veyare 4. Solomon & Rothblum 5. Clark & Oliver 6. Harris , Pannbacker & Lass 7.Ferrari & Beck 8. Knaus 9. Onwuegbuzie & Jiao 10. O’Brien11. Özer, Demir &Ferrari
100 5 90
95 .1 )2008 (70 20 .
)1385 ( 4/15 ) 17 14 . (
. .
.
.
1. 2.
.
. 50
. 247 ) 142 105 (
.
1. Goode
101
13 .
) 50 ( .
) () 1() 2) (3) (4 ( .
.
spss 16 .
760/0 =1KMO 2 76/162X2= )0001/0p< ( .
.
3 )4 . ( 5
1. Kaiser Meyer Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 2. Bartlett test of spherity 3. Orthogonal Rotation 4. Varimax 5. Eigenvalue
102 5 90
11/61 49 /0 . 1
.
1.
17/34 77/6 60/4 20/23 20/23 5 42/35 02/10 44/1 52/20 72/43 4 64/36 27/10 29/1 38/17 11/61 3 12
1 17/34 77/6
60/4 20/23 20/23 42/35 02/10 44/1 52/20
72/43 64/36 27/10 29/1 38/17 11/61 .
12 . 12 5
4 3 .
. -
103
.
. 2 .
2.
1 826/0 2 820/0 3 697/0 4
617/0
5 507/0
1
797/0
2 751/0 3 746/0 4 639/0
1 788/0 2
759/0
3
612/0
104 5 90
2 )826/0 (» « )507/0 (» « .
) 797/0 ( » « ) 639/0 ( »
« . ) 788/0 (»
« ) 612/0 ( » « . »
« .
85/0 77/0 6/0 70/0 . 3 .
) 1.(
105
3. ( )
77/0 5 6/0 4 70/0 3 85/0 12
1 )1991 (
35/0 003/0 .
) 2.(
247 )142 105 (
. 13 . 12
.
. » « )826/0 ( »
1. Tuckman
106 5 90
« )507/0 ( . .
. 1 )2008 ( 889
.2 )2005 ( .
.
» «) 797/0 ( » «
) 639/0 . (
. 3 )1993 ( )
( .
1. Moore 2. Kumuyi 3. Lay & Schouwenburg
107
.
) . 1994 (
. . 1 )1999 (
.
. .
. .
« « ) 788/0 ( » «
)612/0 . (
.
. 5-3 6-4 ... 2 )1999 (
1. Vodanovich,S & Rupp 2. Dominguez
108 5 90
) .( .
1 )2008 (
.
.)1385(.
. .
3 30-1. .)1375 .( . :
.
Chase, L. (2003). Procrastination: the new master skill of time management. Agency
Sales Magazine, 33, 60-62. Clark, Jeffrey L. and Oliver, Hill, W. (1994). Academic Procrastination among African-
American . College Students. Psychological Reports .75,2 931.36. Desimon, L. A. (1993). Patterns of academic procrastination. Journal of Coledge
Reading And Learning,30,120-13. Dominguez,Linda,R.(1999).What to do when being overworked leads to procrastination .
Workforce; 6-7 .
1. Essau , Ederer , Ocallaghan & Ashemann
109
Ellis, A., & Knaus W. J.(1997).Overcoming procrastination. NY: New American Library.
Essau, C,A Ederer , E , M Ocallaghan,J, & Ashemann, B . (2008). Doing it now or later?A poster presentation at the presentation at the 8 th Alps-Adria psychology Conference , October 2-4, Liubljana,Slovenia .
Ferrari, J.R., O’Callaghan, J., & Newbegin, I. (2005). Prevalence of procrastination in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia: Arousal and avoidance delays among adults. North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 1-6
Ferrari J., Parker, J., & Ware, C. (1992). Academic procrastination: Personality correlates with Myers-Briggs types, self-efficacy, and academic locus of control. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7, 495-502.
Ferrari,J.,R ,Johnson, J . L McGown , W. C.(1995). Procrastination & task avoidance: Theory , research , & treatment , New York : Plenum Press .
Ferrari,J.R , Ocallahan , J .& Newbegin , I . (2004) .Prevalence of procrastination in the United States , United Kingdom & Australia. Arousal & Avoidance Delay among adults . North American Journal of Psychology ,6 , 1- 6
Ferrari,J.R. & Beck, B.L. (1998).Affective responses before and after fraudulent excuses by academic procrastinator. Education, 118(4), 529-538.
Goode, C. (2008). Effects of Academic procrastination Retrieved from website http ; // homeworktree. Com on October 13 , 2008.
Hariss , Donna. Pannbacker , M. & Lass , Norman , J . (1996). Academic Procrastination by speech – language pathology & Audiology students . National student speech language Hearing Association Journal . 3 ,42-45 .
Haycock,L.A.(1993).The cognitive mediation of procrastination: An investigation of the relationship between procrastination and self-efficacy beliefs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minesota.
Hoover , E. (2005) . Tomorrow, I love Ya, Researchers are learning more about chronic dawdlers but see no easy cure for procrastination.The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retreved February 11.
Jansenn,T.& Carton,J.S.(1999). The effects of locus of control and task difficulty on procrastination. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 160.
Knaus, W. J. (1998). Do it now! USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Kumuyi , W , F . (2005) . Perils of procrastination . Higher Every Day. April-June Edn.
Abuja : Life press publications. Lay,C. & Schouwenburg,H.(1993). Trait procrastination, time management and
academic behavior. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 647–662. Lay, C.& Silverman, S.
Macan,T.H .(1994) .Time management : Test of a process model .Journal of Applied psychology,79,381-391.
Milgram N, Mey-Tal G, Levison Y. (1998). Procrastination, generalized or specific, in college students and their parents. Pers. Indiv. Differ., 25(2): 297-316.
110 5 90
Moore Randy, (2008).Academic Procrastination and Course Performance among Developmental Education. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 24, 2; ProQuest Education Journals. 56.
O’Brien, W.K. (2002). Applying the transtheoretical model to academic procrastination. Dissertation Abstracts International. Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. 62 (11-B):5359.
Onwuegbuzie,A.J & Jiao .(2000). I will Go to the library later: The relationship between Academic procrastination & library Anxiety. College & Research libraries.
Oweini, A. & Harraty, N (2005).The carrots or the stick: What motivate students? A Manuscript. Lebanese American University. USA.
Özer, B. U., Demir, A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2009). Exploring academic procrastination among Turkish students: Possible gender differences in prevalence and reasons. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149(2), 241–257.
Solomon,L., & Rothblum,E.(1994). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive-behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 503–519.
Tuckman,B.W. (1991).The development and concurrent validity of the procrastination scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement 51(2), 473-480.
Vodanovich,S J. & Rupp , D, E. (1999). Are procrastinators prone to boredon? Social Behavior & Personality , 27 , 1 , 11- 16 .
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Understanding procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 179–187.
1
2
:25/6/90 :21/12/90
. ) :1 (
. )2 ( ) .3 (
.
. 105 88-1387
.
.
: .
1- . 2-
112 5 90
. .
.
)1 1994 .( ) 1387 (
.
- 2 )1996 (
. .
3 4 -5 . - 6
.
1. Fellows 2. Ruiz-Primo & Shavelson 3. Roundhouse Diagrams 4. Vee Diagrams 5. Node-link diagrams 6. Concept Maps
113
) 1 2003 .( .
.
)2 1990 .(3 )1997 (
. )1990 (
. )1991 (
.
.
.
) 4 1996 5 2003 6 1993 7 2003 8 1995
1. Chullarut & DeBacker 2. Wandersee 3. Huai 4. Hall & O'Donnell 5. Potelle & Rouet 6. Horton, McConny, Gallo, Woods & Hamelton 7. All, Huycke & Fisher 8. Shern, Trochim & LaComb
114 5 90
1995 1 2002 - 2 2005 .( -
) 1384 1385 1387 1384 .(
.
)3 2003(
.
. )2005 (
. . .
.
.
. .
1. West, Park, Pomeroy, & Sandoval 2. Shavelson, Ruiz-Primo & Wiley 3. Kilic
115
)2005 ( 128 .
)1998 ( .
. 1 2 .
. )2005 ( ) :1 (
)2 ( )3 ( )4 (
. .
.
.
1. Validity 2. Reliability
116 5 90
)1984 (
. )1984 (
. )1994 ( )1984 ( .
: .
1 .
.
1 .
117
1.
. 1
.
. 1
.
118 5 90
.
1 .
. ) 1 .( 1
. ) 1 .(
.
) » « »« .(
.
1. ) 2002(
2 10 5
2 1
0
1. Network concept maps 2. Cross-link
119
. .
. ) :1 ( )2 ( )3 (
. )2 .(
.
2. ) 2002(
3
2
1 0
)2001 ( 1 .
1. Similarity index
120 5 90
) 2 ( ) 3 ( . .
. )1996 (
.
.
2. ) 1386(
121
3. ) 1386(
105
88-1387 1 . .
.
. . A4
1. Multistage Cluster Sampling
122 5 90
.
. .
)1368 ( .
1 . 2 ) 1382 (
. .
) (
. :
)1 ( : . )1984 (
.
. )
3 2003:(
1. Evaluation Research 2. Rossi3. Chularut & DeBacker
123
. .
. .
.
)2 ( : .
. .
.
)3 ( : .
1 2 . ) 3 (
) 2 ( .
) 20 ( .
124 5 90
2 3 .
. t .
.
t . 3 .
3.
68/0 91/0 36/5
61/0 85/0 05/5 49/0 72/0 12/2
1. Criterion validity 2. Discriminative validity 3. Interrator reliability
125
3 )68/0( )91/0 =r ( )36/ 5=t (
. )49/0=r(
)72/0=r ( )12/2=t ( .
.
.
.
.
.
. 1 )1990 (
.
1. Stensvold & Wilson
126 5 90
.
. ) (
) 1999 2002.( . )1999 ( )2002 (
.
. )1999 ( ) (
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. t
127
. . )2000 (
) ( .
)2002 ( .
.
.
.
. .
) 1984 .( . .
.
128 5 90
. )
1388 (
. ) 1387 (
.
.
. . . . .) .1368 .(
.) .( 1956 . : .
) .1384 .( . .
. ) .1387 .( : . :
.
129
).1384 .( . -
.13 31 -11. ) .1385 .(
– . . : 1385
. ) .1387 .(
- - . . 8 . .
) .1388 .( . :
.
All, C.A., Huycke, L.I., & Fisher, M.J. (2003). Instructional tools for nursing education:
Concept maps, Nursing Education Perspectives, 24(6), 311-317. Chang, K.E., Sung ,Y.T., & Chen, S.F. (2001). Learning through computer- based
concept mapping with scaffolding aid. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 21-33.
Chularut, P., & DeBacker, T.K. (2003). The influence of concept mapping on achievement, self-regulation, and self-efficacy in students of English as a second language. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 248-263.
Fellows, N.J. (1994). A window into thinking: using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 985–1001.
Hall, R.H. & O'Donnell, A.M. (1996). Cognitive and affective outcomes of learning from knowledge maps. Contemporary Psychologist, 21, 94-101.
Herl, H., & Baker, E.D. (1996). Construct validation of approach to modeling cognitive structure of US history knowledge. Journal of Education Research, 89, 213–230.
130 5 90
Horton, P.B., McConny, A.A., Gallo, M., Woods, A.L., & Hamelton, O. (1993). An investigation of the effectiveness of concept mapping as an instructional tool. Science Education, 77(1), 95-111.
Huai,H. (1997). Concept mapping in learning biology: Theorical review on cognitive and learning styles. Journal of interactive learning research, 8, 38-48.
Kilic, G.B. (2003). Concept maps and language: a Turkish experience. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1299-1311.
Markham, K.M., Mintzes, J.J. & Jones, M.G. (1994).The concept map as a research and evaluation tool: further evidence of validity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,31, 91-101.
McClure, J, R., Sonak, B., & Suen, H, K. (1999). Concept map assessment of classroom learning:Reliability, validity, and logistical practicality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4, 475–492.
Novak J. D., & Musonda, D. (1991). A twelve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning. American Educational Research Journal, 28( 1 ), 117-153.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Concept mapping for meaningful learning.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Potelle, H., & Rouet, J.F. (2003). Effects of content representation and readers’ prior knowledge on the comprehension of hypertext. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 327-345.
Rice, D.C., Ryan, J.M. & Samson, S.M. (1998). Using concept mapping to assess student learning in the science classroom: Must different methods compete? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1103-1127.
Ruiz-Primo, M.A. & Shavelson, R.J. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 569–600.
Shavelson, R.J., Ruiz-Primo, M., & Wiley, E. (2005). Windows into the mind. Higher Education, 49, 413–430.
Shern, D., Trochim, W.M., & LaComb, C.A. (1995). The use of concept mapping for assessing fidelity of model transfer: An example from psychiatric rehabilitation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 18, 143–153.
Stensvold, M.S., & Wilson, J.T. (1990). The interaction of verbal ability with concept mapping in learning from a chemistry laboratory activity. Science Education, 74, 4, 473–480.
Wandersee, J.H. (1990). Concept mapping and the cartography of cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 923-936.
West, D., Park, J., Pomeroy, J., & Sandoval, J. (2002). Concept mapping assessment in medical education: A comparison of two scoring systems. Medical Education, 36, 820–826.
West, D.C, Pomeroy, J.R, Park, J.K, Gerstenberger, E.A, & Sandoval, J.H. (2000). Critical thinking in graduate medical education: a role for concept mapping assessment? Journal of American Medicine Association, 284, 1105–10.
1
2
: 22/7/90 : 21/12/90
:
. :
. :
. : 1 -
2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 -
. 47 182 . .
132 5 90
.
.
. : ):3 : 2: 1 (
:
- .
.
: .
. .
.
133
)2002
123 / .(
) 12004 21 .(
)22003 86(.
. ) 1381 636(. ) 1383(.
( ) .
) 2007 ( : -
-
-
1. OECD 2. ESIB
134 5 90
-
- .
.
:
1 -
2 -
3 -
4 -
5 - .
.
1 -
2 -
3 -
135
4 -
5 -
.
.
: 1 - ( )
2 -
3 -
4 - .
5 - .
136 5 90
: - .
-
.
- 30 14 16
15 5 .
- 15 15 .
- 7 .
( ) ( ( ) ( (
) .( .
137
1
892/0 914/0 .
1.
1
-
2
3
4
-
5
6
1. spss
138 5 90
7
.
) ( )1380
112 2011 222 .( )
2008 117 .( 1
)1380 112 .(
: – - .
) 2011 1380 1381 1383 (...
: 1 -
1. International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in higher education
139
2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - ( ) 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 -
10 - 11 - 12 -
.
.
47 7 . 7
182 . 2 .
.
140 5 90
.
.
1.
:
:
141
2 .
142 5 90
)
) ( (
. 3 .
143
3. ) (
/ / /
1 - 2 1 2 3 33/2
1 66/3
34/2 5 67/3
) (
1 2 3
66/1 1
33/2 67/1
3 34/2
66/1 1
33/2 67/1
3 34/2
66/1 1
33/2 67/1
3 34/2
7 47 182
144 5 90
.
12 35
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
145
.
.
8 21 .
1 17 1 23 1 2
2 3 .100 10 .
. .
14 8 .
80 .
4 . 2 1 .
3/14 % .
146 5 90
60 .
18 22 23 25 .
. 5/78 5/21
46 54 .
. .
10 90 .
.
. 02/3 74/3 .
.
46/2 85/3 . 29/2 53/3
. .
.
147
. .
5 21
.
.
.
.
– – 4 20
.
.
98/2 43/3
148 5 90
.
. .
6 28 . .
05/4 78/3 23/4
.
. .
.
.
. 27/3
89/2 11/3 53/3
149
33/2 43/3 .
50/4
.
- - 5 23
. .
.
. 4 .
150 5 90
4.
12 35 08/2 8 21 38/2
7 34 06/2 5 21 71/1
– 4 20 1/2 6 28 89/1
- 5 23 87/1 47 182 14/2
2.
7 6
151
1 .
. 38/2
.
71/1 .
.
( )
.
:
1-
152 5 90
. 1
) 1999.( 2-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1. Gordon
153
.
. .
. :
.
. 1
) 2010 .( :
. )
( ( ) ) (
.( )
1. Tari
154 5 90
.
-
- - -
- ) (... -
-
- .
- -
155
-
-
- -
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
156 5 90
-
-
-
-
- .
-
.
- -
-
157
- .
- -
.
-
-
-
- -
- .
-
158 5 90
- -
- .
. )1380 .( ) ( . :. . )1381 .(
.
. )1383 .( .
.)1381 .( ) – ( .
. )1383.( .
.
Ahmadi, Azam. , Bazargan, A and Havas Beigi, F(2011). Relationship between
organizational characteristics and implementation of internal evaluation in universities educational departments, case: University of Tehran. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. Volume 15, 2011, Pages 221-228
Bazargan, A.(2002).Issues and Trends in Quality Assurance and Accreditation: A case study of Iran.Proceedings of the First Global Forum on International Quality
159
Assurance,Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education, UNESCO,Paris:17-18 October,2002. (pp123-128).Paris: UNESCO.
Bazargan, Abbas (2007) “Problems of Organising and Reporting Internal and External Evaluation in Developing Countries: The Case of Iran’’ Quality in Higher Education. Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 207 – 214.
ESIB, (2003), “European Student Handbook on Quality Assurance in Higher Education” Available at: http://www.vssunes.ch. Farasatkhah, M., Ghazi, M. and Bazargan, A.(2008), “Quality Challenge in Iran’s
Higher Education: A Historical Review”, Iranian Studies, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp.115-137. Gordon, George (1999). “Creating Effective Internal Processes for Quality Assessment,
Management and Development”. Assessment Update. Vol. 11, No. 6, pp 6-12. OECD Education & Skills, (2004), “Quality and recognition in higher education – the
cross-border challenge”, Vol. 9, pp.18-26. Tarı´,Juan Jose (2010), “Self-assessment processes: the importance of follow-up for
success”. Quality Assurance in Education.Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 19-33
Quarterly
quality,program
KeyworAllameh
ly Educational
and clarm/institution
rds: Internalh Tabataba'
l Measuremen
rifying the n.
l evaluationi University
nt V.2 – N.5 –
mission,
n, Departmey, Higher Ed
– Spring & Sum
goals and
ent of Educaducation, ac
mmer 2011
d objective
ational Manccreditation.
10
s of the
nagement, .
9
Int
Abstra
Backeducatioapproacused. TevaluaticountryObjectievaluatiof Ppsyto improMethodimplemdepartmand quafaculty well ascollectiochecklisResultsseven cstructurprocessin threeConclucontinudevelophigher
Abstr
ternal evaManagem
act
kground: Eon. In few lch to evaluaThe first pion of Edu
y.ive: This paion in the D
ychology anove educatid: This pape
menting intement of educantitative mmembers, s the immedon includedsts. s: In generalcriteria undre, Faculty es, Implem
e departmentusion: This uous improvping the needucation,
ract
aluation ofment of Al
A.M. Sh
Evaluationlast decadesate and valiphase of hcational De
aper aims tDepartment nd Educationonal qualityer points ouernal evalucational man
methodologiestudents, aludiate manad interview
l, the resultsder evaluatmembers,
mented coursts was quitereport can bvement of ecessary cul
monitoring
f the Depallameh Ta
Abbaspour (harghi (PhD
is an imps, in the highidate the highigher educepartments
to report onof Educatio
n in Allamey.ut the findinuation, encnagement ofes were usedumni, and ligers of the
ws, docume
s of the resetion (DepaStudents, A
ses, educatie desirable.be a basis fthe quality
lture and cg the intern
artment oabataba'i
(PhD) student)
mportant coher educatiogher educatcation evalin most un
n the implemonal Manageh Tabataba
gs obtainedcompassing f a universitd to collect ibrary staff e alumni. Tent review,
earch showeartment maAlumni, Teonal equipm
for the procy of Educaconditions fnal quality,
of EducatiUniversit
omponent ion of Iran, vtion systemuation was
niversities a
mentation ogement of tha'i University
d from a cas12 steps
ty in Iran. Qdata from tof the depar
The methodquestionna
ed that the aanagement eaching andments and r
cedures neceational Depfor accountimproving
ional ty
in higher validation
m has been s internal across the
of internal he college y in order
e study of s, in the Qualitative the heads, rtment, as
ds of data aires, and
average of goal and
d learning resources)
essary for partments, tability in
the staff
Quarterl
Exa
Abstra
Backachievestudy inrelationseparategiven tothat in wmap andObjectivaliditycritical used to Methodin TabriResultsquantitihas the Conclustudents
Keywormethod
ly Educationa
amining t
act
kground: Cement measuntroduces th
nal methodely was scoo hierarchicwhich a stud assign scoive: The ob
y and reliabvalidity, inidentify the
d: the subjeiz city who s: Results shies of the inlowest indic
usion: Thess' academic
rds: Acades, validity, r
al Measureme
he validitbased tes
J.
Concept murement toohree scorin
d that in ored. (2) strcal organizadent’s conc
ore for each bjective of tbility of co
nterpreter ree most approcts of the rewere presen
howed that dicators thaces in compe findings machievemen
emic evaluareliability.
ent V.2 – N.5 –
ty and relists scorin
Mesrabadi (P
maps usageols great a cng methods which a rructural me
ation of the cept map co
section of tthe present oncept mapliability andopriate methesearch comnt in four clthe relation
an other metparison withmay have snt which wi
ation, conc
– Spring & Su
iability ofg method
PhD)
expandinchallenge inof the con
relationshipethod that bconcepts. (mpares withthe map.
research wp-based tesd discriminhod of scori
mprised 105 lasses.nal method othods. Similh two other msome implicill be discus
cept map-b
ummer 2011
f concept ds
g as an n scoring th
ncept maps p between based on sc(3) similarith a teacher’
was to examsts scoring ative reliabing. high schoo
of scoring hlarity scorinmethods. cations in essed in this p
based tests
8
map-
academic hem. This tests: (1) concepts
cores was ty method ’s concept
mining the methods.
ility were
ol students
has higher ng method
evaluating paper.
, scoring
7
Abstra
Backin recenand alsoactivitieObjectipsychomMethodUniverssamplinResults(vaimaxvariancewere sa0/6 & tcombincausingprogramTuckmaConcluhas a gstudents
Keyworvalidity
Abstr
Construc
act
kground: Acnt years, ando a behaviores (Johansenive: The mmetric proped: 247 (142sity of Ahvng method. s: A factorx rotation) e. Cronbach
atisfactory fothird factored from 3
g procrastmming. Valan (1991) qu
usion: It cangood reliabils' academic
rds: Academy.
ract
ction and proc
K
cademic prod many reseral problemn and Cartonmain purpoerties of aca2 females avaz were s
r analysis,resulted in h's Alpha r
for the wholr: 0/70. Fac
factor (deltination, alidity of thuestionnairen be conclulity and valprocrastina
mic procra
standardcrastinatio
K. Sevari (Ph
ocrastinatioearchers seethat many an, 1999).
ose of this ademic procand 105 maselected usin
using the three facto
reliability cle scale wasctor analysiliberating pand procr
his test obtae with constuded that thlidity, and
ation.
astination, t
ization ofon test
hD)
n has been e it as a badadults exper
research wcrastinationales) studenng randoml
principal cors that concoeffients (is ./85 (first fis showed procrastinatrastination ained throutructed test he academicis a useful
test, standar
f Academi
an importad habit (Charience it in t
was to exatest. nts of Payaly multi-sta
componentsnsisted of 6internal confactor: 0/77that construion, Physic
causing ugh relation(0/ 35). c procrastininstrument
rdization, r
ic
ant debate ase, 2003) their daily
amine the
ame Noor ge cluster
s analysis 61/11% of nsistency)
7 , second: ucted test cal-mental
withoutn between
nation test to assess
reliability,
Quarterl
were tratoward Concluthe mod
KeyworMotivat
ly Educationa
ained througthe examina
usion: We cadern method
rds: E-portfotion, Attitud
al Measureme
gh e-portfolation and hian suggest tds in assessm
folio, Measude.
ent V.2 – N.5 –
lio, had a high academithe use of e-ment.
urement, Ev
– Spring & Su
high motivatic achievem-portfolio in
aluation, ac
ummer 2011
tion, positivment respectin e-learning
cademic ach
6
ve attitude ively.
g as one of
hievement,
5
TheanN
Abstra
BackevolutioenvironlearningObjectiof e-poKhajeh MethodpopulatLearnincoursecomprispurposivcooperarandomgroup, group experimwith coexamineat the enanalysisResultsmotivatexperim
Abstr
Impact ofnd AcadeNasirddin
act
kground: E-onary trennments are g is also a chive: The objortfolio on Nasirddin T
d: The reseion include
ng Center sin the secosed Two cvely. The
ation of 10 smly divided i
a pre-test wwas expos
mental grouponventional e the obtainnd of 2 mons the data.s: Tthe retion and ac
mental group
ract
f Using Emic Achie
n Toosi Un
E. ZaE
-teaching and duringfree from
hallenging pbjective of th
attitude, mToosi Univeearch methed all the students whond semesteclasses of
two classestudents, thinto experimwas done ied to the p trained wmethod du
ned variationths. Descri
esults showcademic achps compare
-portfolioevement oniversity's
araii ZavarakE. Rezaei (M
nd e-learningthe recentime and
problem in she present smotivation ersity's E- Lhods was qu
Khajeh Nho were enrer of 1389-9data struct
es had 50e sample sizmental and in same co
independenwith e-portfuring of 2 mns, a post-tiptive and i
wed signifihievemented with the
o on Attituof Studens E- Learn
ki (PhD) MA)
g as modernnt decadesspace, asse
such settingstudy was toand academ
Learning Cenuasi-experim
Nasirddin Trolled in co90 academiture course
students tze was 40 icontrol gronditions annt variablefolio and cmonths of sest of the enferential st
icantly an toward thee control g
ude, Motits In Khaning Cent
n methods hs. Since eessment of
gs.o examine tmic achievnter Studentmental and oosi Univeomputer enic year . Ths that werthat due toindividuals ups. At firs
nd then expe. In this ontrol grousemester. Ineach group wtatistics wer
increased examinatioroup. Stude
ivationajehter
has had an e-learning
f students'
the impact vement of ts. statistics ersity's e- ngineering he sample re chosen o lack of who were
st, of each perimental way that
up trained n order to was taken re used to
attitude, on in the ents, who
Quarterl
interferewith thepoint, ththe maleConcluvalid in
Keywor
ly Educationa
ence rate we average anhe percent oe and 11/2 f
usion: it cannstrument to
rds: Constru
al Measureme
ere calculatnd standardof interferenfor the feman be sugges measure stu
uct, standard
ent V.2 – N.5 –
ted. The cutd deviation wnce rate 7/2 ale.sted the muudents' ange
dization, mu
– Spring & Su
t point for thwas 88/01. Ain the whol
ultidimensioer.
ultidimentio
ummer 2011
his test, in pAccording tle sample w
onal anger
onal Anger.
4
proportionto this cut
was 3/8 for
scale is a
3
Con
Abstra
Backallocateresearchalso anoObjectimultidiminternalstudentsMethodfirst. Tframewthe formtests anfor the males aand ranResultsfactors principlquestionand corrfive facoutlookThe divhalves 0test was
Abstr
nstructionan
act
kground: Died to a speh. Construcother importive: The aimmensional al angers as.d: The theo
Then, the rwork resultedm and contend removing
final perfoand 188 femdom testing
s: The resultequaling to
les of the nnaire throurelational rectors are 0/
k) 0/86(Angvision metho0/85 and 0/8s 0/77. Afte
ract
n and stanger scale
RAF
ifferent waycial place iting and vatant point. m of this reanger scale (and anger-e
oretical prinresearchersd from studynt of the rai
g the inapprormance onmales) who g method. t of factor ao 0/88, varstructure w
ugh Kranbuesults betwe/79 (Anger
ger In), 0/8od was used82 respectiver analyzing
ndardizatiin high sc
R. Parvaz (MA. Delavar (PF. Dortaj (Ph
ys to expresin fundame
alidating a u
esearch was(anger aroueliciting si
nciples of thdesigned
ying the achised questioropriate onen a group c
were slect
analysis by criance exprewere indicauch alfa 0/87een the firstr arousal), 3 (Anger-E
d to get surevely. The tog the data, f
ion of muchool stud
MA)hD)
hD)
ss anger andental and apuseful scale
s to make asal, hostile ituations) a
he previous a questionhieved resou
ons in relatioes, 29 questcomposed oed by the r
cycle methoession paraated .The s7 and testint and second0/81(Anger
Eliciting Site of the sustotal sustainafinding the
ultidimensdents
d its conseqpplied psyc
e to measure
and to find outlook, extamong hig
studies wernnaire basedurces. Afteron to each otions were pof 400 studrelative clas
od of Varimlleling to tsustainabilit
ng method-rd performanr out), 0/77tuation) resainability fo
ability of thenorms, cut
sional
quences is chological e anger is
norms of ternal and
gh school
re studied d on the r studying of the sub-performed
dents (212 ssification
mex of five theoretical ty of the retest 0/81 nces in the 7 (Hostile pectively. or the two e assumed point and
Quarterl
Determ
Abstra
Backimpact instrumObjectipsychomstudents(Other-RMethod(n=200)factor aby confResultsstructurtest anxConcluand it ca
Keyworproperti
ly Educationa
mining thin
act
kground: Onon studen
ment to measive: The metric props. The purReferenced,d: The test). Dimensioanalysis. Thfirmatory fas: The resulres a (i.e., acxiety. usion: The tean trustily b
rds: Test aies.
al Measureme
he psychomnventory i
D. M
ne of the imnts' perfor
sure test anxaim of thperties of rported fou, Self-esteemt anxiety inonality assu
he trait concactor modelslts were supcceptable m
est anxiety be used for I
anxiety, co
ent V.2 – N.5 –
metric prin univers
Manavipour
mportant issrmance. Fuxiety is also he present
a Test Anur dimensiom, Worry annventory wumptions wception wass and a prinpportive of
model fit) as
inventory hIranian univ
onfirmatory
– Spring & Su
operties osity stude
(PhD)
sues relatedurther, hava significanstudy was
nxiety Inveonal structund Blame) w
was given twere tested s tested sep
ncipal compof the purporwell as of th
has a good reversity stude
factor ana
ummer 2011
of the test ents
d to test anxving a stant factor.s to deterentory in uures of teswere tested. to the samp
using conparately for onent factorrted four-dimhe trait conc
eliability anents.
alysis, psyc
2
anxiety
xiety is its andardized
rmine the university
st anxiety
ple group nfirmatory
subscales r analysis. mensional ception of
nd validity,
chometric
Factor structure of Schommer’s epistemology beliefs scale
S. A. Khaleghinejad (MA Student) M. A. Besharat (PhD)
E. Zamanpour (PhD Student) Abstract
Background: One of the important subjects in learning process is individual’s epistemology beliefs. These beliefs related to individual’s understanding, how to obtain and validity of knowledge and individual imagination of ability and speed for learning. Objective: This research was done with the aim of confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis of Schommer’s epistemology beliefs scale among Iranian students. Method: The method of research is correlation. Participants were 366 first grade students of high school in Baharestan town whom were selected with random cluster sampling. They answered to the 63-item of Schommer’s epistemology belief scale. The data were analyzed through first and second confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Results: A first confirmatory factor analysis confirmed existing nine components and second confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that all of the bring components located in epistemology belief concept. An exploratory factor analysis executed on nine components lead to created 3 subscales: individual prejudice about understanding, person beliefs about the ability and speed for learning, and knowledge certainty. Conclusion: In sum, Schommer’s modified epistemology beliefs scale has a good reliability and validity, and we can use them to evaluate students' epistemology beliefs. Keywords: Epistemology belief, validation, confirmatory factor analysis, exploratory factor analysis, students.
IN THE NAME OF GOD
QUARTERLY
Training Educational
Volume 2. No. 5. Spring & Summer 1390 (2011)