Dergiler / SDU International Journal of Educational Studies / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 1

Exploring the Correlation between Thinking Styles and Social and Academic Integration in English Major Students

Sayfa
19–35
Yayın Tarihi
2021-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The findings of the study indicate that the most common thinking styles are oligarchic, executive, and liberal thinking style while the least common thinking styles are conservative and hierarchical thinking style and it was the liberal thinking styles that mostly correlated with academic and social integration.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In educational psychology, individual differences have always received remarkable attention, with attention increasing in mental aspects such as thinking styles in recent years and with implications for teaching and learning.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The present study was conducted with 79 pre-service EFL teachers, all of whom are 4th grade learners.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The findings of the study indicate that the most common thinking styles are oligarchic, executive, and liberal thinking style while the least common thinking styles are conservative and hierarchical thinking style and it was the liberal thinking styles that mostly correlated with academic and social integration.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Thinking styles · academic and social integration · higher education

Abstract

In educational psychology, individual differences have always received remarkable attention, with attention increasing in mental aspects such as thinking styles in recent years and with implications for teaching and learning. The aim of the present study is to investigate the possible connection between thinking styles and academic and social integration. It is well-known that psychological constructs like thinking styles play a role in certain behaviors or preferences and studying them can shed light on the educational process. The present study was conducted with 79 pre-service EFL teachers, all of whom are 4th grade learners. One reason for having 4th grade learners is that they have well-established ideas and attitudes towards academic and social integration. In order to collect data, two questionnaires were used. The first one is the Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI), developed by Sternberg and Wagner (1991). It is a comprehensive tool containing 104 items. There are 13 subscales, with 8 items each. The second tool is the Academic and Social Integration Scale, developed by Pascarella & Terenzini (1980). It contains 5 sub-dimensions, peer-group interaction, interactions with faculty, faculty concern for student development & teaching, academic & intellectual development, and institutional and goal commitments. The findings of the study indicate that the most common thinking styles are oligarchic, executive, and liberal thinking style while the least common thinking styles are conservative and hierarchical thinking style and it was the liberal thinking styles that mostly correlated with academic and social integration.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KIRMIZI, Ö., UÇAR, N. G. (2021). Exploring the Correlation between Thinking Styles and Social and Academic Integration in English Major Students. SDU International Journal of Educational Studies, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 1, 19–35. https://ajindex.com/articles/799324

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (11)

  1. Apaydin, B.B. & Cenberci, S. (2018). Correlation Between Thinking Styles and Teaching Styles of Prospective Mathematics Teachers, World Journal of Education 8(4), 36-46.
  2. Aypay, A., Sever, M. ve Demirhan, G. (2012). Üniversite öğrencilerinin sosyal ve akademik entegrasyonu: Boylamsal bir araştırma. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(2), 407–422.
  3. Bean, J. P. (1983). The application of a model of turnover in work organizations to the student attrition process. The Review of Higher Education, 6(2): 129-148.
  4. Bean, J.P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a causalmodel of student attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12(2), 155-187.
  5. Bernardo, A. B. I., Zhang, L. F., & Callueng, C. M. (2002). Thinking styles and academic achievement among Filipino students. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(2), 149–164.
  6. Betoret, F. D. (2007). The influence of students’ and teachers’ thinking styles on student course satisfaction and on their learning process. Educational Psychology, 27(2), 219-234
  7. Braxton, J. M. (Ed.) (2000). Reworking the student departure puzzle, Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
  8. British Council (2014). Integration of international students—a UK perspective. London: British Council Available at https://www.britishcouncil.org/education/ihe/knowledge-centre/student-mobility/reportintegration international-students Buluş, M. (2016). Predictive Analysis Among Thinking Styles, Goal Orientations and Academic Achievement of Student Teachers, Journal of Higher Education, 6(2), 62–71.
  9. Cabrera, A. F., Castaneda, M.B., Nora, A., & Hengstler, D. (1992). The convergence between two theories of college persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 63(2), 143-164.
  10. Cano-Garcia, F., & Hughes, E. H. (2000). Learning and thinking styles: An analysis of their interrelationship and influence on academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 20(4), 413–430
  11. Celik, D. (2016). Sinif ogrencilerinin Dusunme stilleri, ogrenme stratejileri ve dusunme stilleri ile ogrenme stratejileri arasindaki ilişki, M.Sc Thesis, Pamukkale University Educational Science Institute, Denizli, Turkey Dincer, B. (2009). Ögretmen adaylarının düşünme stilleri profillerinin çesitli değiskenler açısından degerlendirilmesi, M.Sc. Thesis, Adnan Menderes University Social Science Institute, Aydin. Emamipour, S. & Shams-Esfandabad, H. (2013). Developmental study of thinking styles in Iranian university students. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 84, 1736-173