학습자의 몰입에 영향을 주는 동기 요인, 심리적 중재 요인, 사회적 요인 간의 구조적 관계 규명 = (The) structural relationship among social factor, psychological mediators and motivational factor for enhancing learners’ engagement

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

There have been great changes since information technology has impacted on learning environment, so learners can access and utilize abundant educational resources and interact with others regardless of time and place. In this kind of interactive learning environment, effective learning can occur when learners are actively engaged in their learning process and construct meaningful knowledge voluntarily. Since the learning process is considered as an important part of learning, learning outcome should include learners’ experiences from their learning process.
From this perspective, engagement would be considered as a good indicator reflecting learners’ whole learning experience. Engagement is a ‘metaconstruct’ which represents multidimensional learning and consists of cognitive, behavioral and emotional engagements. Engagement is defined as the energy and the quality of effort students devote to accomplish their learning goals, so it is clear that the quality of learning process leads to the quality of learning outcome.
In order to enhance learners’ engagement, students need to actively interact with learning activities. For being deeply engaged in their learning, students’ autonomous motivation is an important factor for both cognitive and emotional learning outcomes. Self-determined motivation is a theory which explains motivation in terms of one’s autonomy. According to self-determination theory, when learners autonomously decide to study, learners are more intrinsically motivated to study and experience positive feelings. Therefore, they tend to persist learning and are highly engaged in their learning process.
However, students in Korea are often criticized due to the severe imbalance between the high level of academic achievement and the low level of psychological well-being. If the learning outcome is evaluated in terms of multidimensional learning experiences, this result would not be seen as successful learning. This imbalanced learning experience between cognitive and affective aspects of learning might be resulted from the strong emphasis on academic success in Korean society. Students in Korea have studied under such a heavy pressure, so they are motivated to achieve a high score, but they fail to be motivated to learn autonomously. Therefore, this study was undertaken to seek possible solutions for enhancing engagement by promoting self-determined motivation and autonomy support.
The purpose of this study was to propose and test a motivational model of engagement in learning environment. The model posits that perceived instructors’ autonomy support in social context positively influences learners’ perceived academic autonomy and academic competence. In turn, these perceived academic autonomy and academic competence positively influence learners’ self-determined motivation which in turn positively influences learners’ engagement.
The research questions consist of three parts as following:
Test of the proposed model
1. Does the proposed model including social factor (perceived autonomy support), psychological mediators (academic autonomy, academic competence), motivational factor (self-determined motivation) and engagement is valid for Korean learners?
Test of direct effects
2. Does social factor (perceived autonomy support) have a direct effect on psychological mediators (academic autonomy, academic competence)?
3. Does social factor (perceived autonomy support) have a direct effect on motivational factor (self-determined motivation)?
4. Does social factor (perceived autonomy support) have a direct effect on engagement?
5. Do psychological mediators (academic autonomy, academic competence) have direct effects on motivational factor (self-determined motivation)?
6. Do psychological mediators (academic autonomy, academic competence) have direct effects on engagement?
7. Does motivational factor (self-determined motivation) have a direct effect on engagement?
Test of mediating effects
8. Do psychological mediators (academic autonomy, academic competence) have mediating effects on the relationship between social factor (perceived autonomy support) and motivational factor (self-determined motivation)?
9. Do psychological mediators (academic autonomy, academic competence) have mediating effects on the relationship between social factor (perceived autonomy support) and engagement?
10. Does motivational factor (self-determined motivation) have a mediating effect on the relationship between social factor (perceived autonomy support) and engagement?
11. Does motivational factor (self-determined motivation) have a mediating effect on the relationship between psychological mediators (academic autonomy, academic competence) and engagement?
The proposed model was tested with university students in Korea. The survey was conducted on students who were enrolled in 14 courses from two 4-year universities. Among collected data, cases having either unreliable responses or missing responses were removed and a total of 453 cases were used in the study. For statistical analysis, structural equation modeling analysis was employed to test the proposed model and the causal relationships among the variables.
The major findings of this study are as follows.
First, results from structural equation modeling analysis were found to support the proposed model which included motivational factor, psychological mediators, social factor and engagement. These results indicated that the proposed model was fitting for Korean students, and self-determination theory was empirically proved its validity even in collectivistic culture.
As a second part of the findings, the direct effects between the variables were analyzed and discussed. First, social factor had a significant direct effect on psychological mediators which were academic autonomy and academic competence. This result indicated that learners’ perceptions of academic autonomy and academic competence would be enhanced when learners perceived autonomy support from social contexts. Therefore, when instructors let learners have ownership on their learning and provide the autonomy supported facilitation, the learners’ motivational resources would be stimulated.
Second, psychological mediators had positive direct effects on motivational factor. This result confirmed self-determination theory which premised that learners who perceived more autonomy and competence would internalize their regulation for learning. Also the result showed that academic autonomy relatively had a more effect on self-determined motivation than academic competence had.
Third, self-determined motivation had positively influenced learners’ engagement. This result implies that the more autonomously motivated, the more learners will be engaged in their learning cognitively, behaviorally, and emotionally. Since self-determination theory posits to be related with enhanced psychological functioning, not only cognitive and behavioral engagements are increased but also positive emotional engagement is strengthen.
Fourth, although academic autonomy failed to have a direct effect on engagement, a direct path was obtained between academic competence and engagement, indicating that higher levels of perceived competence predicted higher levels of engagement. These results reveal the importance of perception of academic competence for accomplishing academic success.
As the last part of the findings, the mediating effects of psychological mediators and motivational factor were tested and discussed. First, psychological mediators including academic autonomy and academic competence were tested for their mediating effects. Both academic autonomy and academic competence had significant mediating effects between perceived autonomy support and self-determined motivation.
Second, academic autonomy did not have a mediating effect between perceived autonomy support and engagement. However, academic competence had a significant mediating effect between perceived autonomy support and engagement. This implies perceived academic competence is an important determinant influencing on engagement.
Third, motivational factor did not have a mediating effect between social factor and engagement, but with psychological mediators it had an indirect effect on engagement. This result implies that both perception of autonomy and competence and self-determined motivation are necessary for having indirect effects from social factor to engagement.
Fourth, motivational factor had a significant mediating effect between psychological mediators and engagement. Based on these results, it should be recognized that motivational factor is a significant determinant for engagement, and motivational factor also takes a mediating role between psychological mediators and engagement.
These findings offer theoretical background and practical implications for Korean learners to enhance cognitive engagement, emotional engagement and behavioral engagement by promoting self-determined motivation and providing autonomy support in learning environment.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

최근 웹, 모바일 기기, 디지털텍스트북 등 다양한 매체를 사용할 수 있게 된 학습환경에서 학습자는 시공간의 제약 없이 동료나 전문가와 상호작용하고 자유롭게 학습자원을 활용할 수 있게 되었다. 이렇게 개방된 학습환경에서 성공적인 학습을 위한 핵심역량은 학습자가 학습과정에 자발적으로 참여하며 개인에게 의미 있는 지식을 구축해 나가는 능력이다. 이 같은 능력은 학습자가 학습과정에서 보이는 심층적 몰입(engagement)을 전제로 습득된다.
몰입은 학습과정에서 학습자가 스스로 학습목표를 성취하고자 학습과정에 쏟는 에너지와 노력의 강도로 정의되며 행동적 몰입, 인지적 몰입과 감성적 몰입으로 이루어진 다차원적인 변인이다. 특히 자기주도성이 강조되는 몰입은 학습자가 자율에 의해 학습활동을 수행할 때 증진되며, 이렇게 몰입된 학습자는 높은 학습성취도를 보이며 학습에 대한 긍정적인 태도를 가지게 된다고 한다.
그런데 한국의 학습자는 학습성취 면에서 세계적인 수준으로 평가됨에도 불구하고 학습자의 자율적 학습동기나 학습에 대한 태도에서는 최하위를 보이고 있다. 이는 학습성취가 지나치게 강조되는 사회에서 장기간에 걸쳐 타율적으로 학습을 해왔기 때문으로 판단된다. 이제는 교육현장에서 학습자가 자기주도 학습을 할 수 있도록 자율적인 학습동기를 강화시키고, 학습의 결과뿐 아니라 학습과정에서 겪는 학습경험의 질을 향상시키는데 초점을 두어야 할 때라고 본다.
이에 본 연구에서는 학습상황에서 학습자의 몰입에 영향을 주는 동기 요인, 심리적 중재 요인, 사회적 요인 간의 관계를 설명하는 구조모형을 고안하고, 설정된 변인들 간의 직•간접적인 영향력을 분석하고자 하였다. 선행연구의 고찰을 통해 동기 요인으로는 자기결정성 동기, 심리적 중재 요인에는 학업적 자율성과 학업적 유능감 변인, 그리고 사회적 요인으로는 학습자가 지각하는 교수자의 자율성 지지 변인을 설정하고 연구모형을 상정하였다.
본 연구에서 다루고자 하는 연구문제는 크게 모형검증, 직접효과 검증과 매개효과 검증으로 이루어지며 상정된 연구문제는 다음과 같다.
A. 모형 검증
1. 사회적 요인(지각된 자율성 지지), 심리적 중재 요인(학업적 자율성, 학업적 유능감), 동기 요인(자기결정성 동기), 몰입 간의 관계에 대한 가설적 인과모형은 한국의 학습자들에게 적합한가?
B. 직접효과 검증
2. 사회적 요인(지각된 자율성 지지)은 심리적 중재 요인(학업적 자율성, 학업적 유능감)에 직접적인 영향을 미치는가?
3. 사회적 요인(지각된 자율성 지지)은 동기 요인(자기결정성 동기)에 직접적인 영향을 미치는가?
4. 사회적 요인(지각된 자율성 지지)은 몰입에 직접적인 영향을 미치는가?
5. 심리적 중재 요인(학업적 자율성, 학업적 유능감)은 동기 요인 (자기결정성 동기)에 직접적인 영향을 미치는가?
6. 심리적 중재 요인(학업적 자율성, 학업적 유능감)은 몰입에 직접적인 영향을 미치는가?
7. 동기 요인(자기결정성 동기)은 몰입에 직접적인 영향을 미치는가?
C. 매개효과 검증
8. 심리적 중재 요인(학업적 자율성, 학업적 유능감)은 사회적 요인(지각된 자율성 지지)과 동기 요인(자기결정성 동기) 간의 관계를 매개하는가?
9. 심리적 중재 요인(학업적 자율성, 학업적 유능감)은 사회적 요인 (지각된 자율성 지지)과 몰입 간의 관계를 매개하는가?
10. 동기 요인(자기결정성 동기)은 사회적 요인(지각된 자율성 지지)과 몰입 간의 관계를 매개하는가?
11. 동기 요인(자기결정성 동기)은 심리적 중재 요인(학업적 자율성, 학업적 유능감)과 몰입 간의 관계를 매개하는가?
본 연구의 대상은 국내 4년제 대학 두 곳에서 2010년도 1•2학기에 개설된 14개 강좌의 남•여 수강생 453명이었다. 연구 분석 방법은 상정된 모형의 적합도 검증과 변인 간의 관계를 분석하기 위하여 구조방정식 모형분석 방법을 사용하였다. 분석절차는 설정된 측정모형을 분석하여 연구에 사용된 측정도구의 적합성과 타당성을 검증한 후 구조모형의 적합도와 타당도를 검증하였다. 또한 이 모형에 포함된 변인 간의 직•간접효과를 분석하고 Sobel test를 사용하여 매개효과에 대한 유의성을 검증하였다.
연구문제에 따른 주요 연구 결과와 논의를 요약하면 다음과 같다.
첫째, 본 연구에서 고안된 학습자의 몰입 향상에 영향을 미치는 동기 요인, 심리적 중재 요인, 사회적 요인 간의 구조적 모형은 적합한 것으로 나타났다.
둘째, 모형에 포함된 변인 간의 직접효과는 다음과 같다. 1) 학습자가 지각하는 교수자의 자율성 지지는 학업적 자율성 지각과 학업적 유능감 지각에 각각 유의한 직접적인 영향력을 나타내었다. 2) 학습자가 지각하는 학업적 자율성과 학업적 유능감은 자기결정성 동기에 각각 정적으로 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 3) 학업적 자율성 지각은 몰입에 직접적으로 영향을 미치지 못한 반면, 학업적 유능감 지각은 몰입에 직접적으로 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 확인되었다. 4) 자기결정성 동기는 몰입에 유의한 정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 분석되었다.
셋째, 심리적 중재 요인과 동기 요인이 고안된 연구모형 내에서 가지는 매개효과를 검증한 결과는 다음과 같다. 1) 학습자가 지각하는 교수자의 자율성 지지는 학업적 자율성과 학업적 유능감 변인의 매개를 통해 자기결정성 동기에 간접적으로 영향을 미치는 것으로 분석되었다. 2) 학업적 자율성은 지각된 자율성 지지와 몰입 간의 매개역할을 하지 못한 반면 학업적 유능감의 매개효과는 유의한 것으로 분석되었다. 3) 동기 요인은 사회적 요인과 몰입 간의 관계를 단독으로 매개하지 못하는 것으로 나타났으나, 심리적 중재 요인과 동기 요인의 공동 매개를 통해 사회적 요인이 몰입에 간접적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 분석되었다. 4) 자기결정성 동기는 학업적 자율성과 몰입 간, 학업적 유능감과 몰입 간의 관계에서 각각 유의한 매개효과를 나타내는 것으로 확인되었다.
본 연구가 가지는 학문적 의의는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 최근 학습자들이 경험하고 있는 개방적이고 자율적인 학습자 중심 환경에서 학습자의 몰입에 영향을 주는 요인을 규명함으로써, 학습 성취를 인지적 측면뿐 아니라 감성적, 행동적 측면으로까지 이끌어 내려는 시도를 하였다는 것이다. 둘째, 교수자가 제공하는 학습환경과 교수-학습전략은 학습상황에서 사회적 요인이다. 이러한 사회적 요인이 학습자의 동기와 몰입에 미치는 영향을 규명함으로써 교수자의 교수-학습 전략 모색의 방향을 제시하고자 하였다. 이는 이러닝 설계 및 운영 등 교육효과 향상을 위한 교육환경 설계 및 학습 촉진전략 구축을 위한 실제적인 방안을 제공할 것으로 기대된다. 셋째, 한국 학습자를 대상으로 자기결정성 이론의 타당성을 검증하고 이를 적용할 수 있는 방안을 마련하였다는 것이다. 이는 한국 학습자가 직면한 자율적 학습동기 결여와 외적 압력에 의한 심리적 불안감 등의 문제를 완화시키는 동시에 학습경험을 심화할 수 있는 방안을 제시할 것으로 기대된다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 1
• A. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 1
• B. 연구문제 6
• C. 용어의 정의 8
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 14
• A. 몰입(Engagement) 14
• 1. 몰입의 개념 14
• 2. 몰입 변인의 중요성 16
• 3. 몰입 관련 연구 18
• B. 동기 요인: 자기결정성 동기 19
• 1. 자기결정성 이론의 출현 배경 19
• 2. 자기결정성 이론의 개념 20
• 3. 자기결정성 이론의 네 가지 하위이론 21
• 4. 자기결정성 이론 관련 연구 30
• C. 심리적 중재 요인: 학업적 자율성 및 학업적 유능감 36
• 1. 학업적 자율성 36
• 2. 학업적 유능감 38
• D. 사회적 요인: 지각된 자율성 지지 39
• 1. 지각된 자율성 지지의 개념 39
• 2. 지각된 자율성 지지 관련 연구 41
• E. 선행연구 요약 및 가설 51
• Ⅲ. 연구방법 65
• A. 연구대상 65
• B. 측정도구 67
• C. 연구절차 76
• D. 분석방법 77
• Ⅳ. 연구결과 및 분석 81
• A. 기술통계 및 상관분석 결과 81
• B. 측정모형 검증 85
• C. 구조모형 검증 91
• D. 매개효과 검증 100
• V. 논의 및 제언 104
• A. 논의 104
• B. 시사점 115
• C. 연구의 제한점 및 후속 연구를 위한 제언 119
• 참고문헌 123
• 부록 1: 설문지 139
• 부록 2: 자기결정성 동기유형별 기술통계 및 동기유형 간 상관분석 결과 144
• ABSTRACT 145

참고문헌 (Reference)

1. Self-determination andpersistence in a real-life setting: Toward a motivational model of highschool dropout. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(5),1161-1176.Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Bri?re, N. M., Sen?cal, C., & Valli?, Vallerand, Fortier, Guay, "Self-determination andpersistence in a real-life setting: Toward a motivational model of highschool dropout. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, , 1997

2. 자율성 지지, 박귀화, 정재우, 안도희, , 2008

3. 사회통계방법론, 최현철, 나남출판, , 2007

4. 알기쉬운 통계분석, 성태제, 알기 쉬운 통계분석, , 2007

5. 연구조사방법 에센스, 김범종, , 2005

6. Learning ata distance:EngagedorNot?, Chen, Gonyea, Kuh, Learning at a distance: Engaged or Not?, , 2008

7. Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.), Anderson, Black, Hair, Babin, , 2010

8. Making differences: A table of learning, Shulman, , 2002

9. Ameasureofcollegestudentcourseengagement, Sullivan, Towler, Handelsman, , 2005

10. Student interest,empowerment, andmotivation, Weber, Patterson, "Student interest, , 2000

11. Cognitive engagement as a predictor of achievement, Spanjers, Deanna Marie, University of Minnesota, Cognitive engagement as a predictor of achievement, , 2007

12. The intrinsic motivation to learn in the classroom, Corno, Rohrkemper, , 1985

13. 학업성취도 국제비교 연구성과와 과제, 한국교육과정평가원, , 2004

14. Need satisfaction and theself-regulation of learning, Williams, Deci, Ryan, , 1996

15. Studentengagementin campus-based and onlineeducation, Coates, Student engagement in campus-based and online education, , 2006

16. Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling, Finney, Bandalos, Item parceling issues in structural equationmodeling, , 2001

17. Studentengagementandstudentlearning:Testing thelinkage, Klein, Carini, Kuh, Student engagement and studentlearning: Testing the linkage, , 2006

18. 자기조절학습의 모형탐색과 타당화 연구, 양명희, , 2000

19. Intrinsic and extrinsicmotivation: A hierarchical model, Vallerand, Rattlle, , 2004

20. 몰입에 대한 학습동기와 인지전략의 관계, 이은주, 한국교육심리학회, "교육심리연구, , 2001

21. 자기결정성 정도에 따른 동기유형의 분류, 金雅暎, 吳順愛, 한국교육심리학회, , 2001

22. What matters in college? : four critical years revisited, Astin, Alexander W, Jossey-Bass, What matters in college: Four critical years revisited, , 1993

23. Preferences and learner control overamount of instruction, Hannafin, Sullivan, , 1996

24. Self-determination theory applied to educational settings, Reeve, , 2004

25. Learning for tomorrow's world: First results from PISA 2003, OECD, , 2004

26. Motivational effects on attention,cognition, and performance, Mangels, Dweck, Good, "Motivational effects on attention, , 2004

27. The role of students' cognitive engagementin online learning, Richardson, Newby, , 2006

28. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior, Deci, Edward L, Plenum, Intrinsic motivation and self-determination inhuman behavior, , 1985

29. Experiences that matter:Enhancing student learning and success, National Survey of Student Engagement, , 2007

30. Can test statistics in covariancestructure analysis be trusted?, Bentler, Kano, , 1992

31. Structural equation modeling with smallsamples: Test statistics, Bentler, Yuan, , 1999

32. Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning, Webster, Hacklley, Teaching effectiveness in technologymediateddistance learning, , 1997

33. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling(3rd ed.), Kline, R. B., , 2010

34. Structural equation modeling:Guidelines for determining model fit, Coughlan, Mullen, Hooper, , 2008

35. Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, Vallerand, Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsicmotivation, , 1997

36. Quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set, Deci, Benware, , 1984

37. Facilitators and outcomes of studentengagement in a college setting, Fullagar, Steele, , 2009

38. Motivational influences in distance education: The role of interest, Sun, , 2009

39. Parent and teacher autonomy support in Russian and U.S. adolescents, Ryan, Chirkov, Parent and teacher autonomy support inRussian and U.S. adolescents, , 2001

40. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discoverylearning?, Mayer, , 2004

41. Structural equation modeling: Reviewing the basics andmoving forward, Ullman, , 2006

42. 학습동기 변인들과 인지전략 및 학업성취간의 관계, 한순미, 한국교육심리학회, "교육심리연구, , 2004

43. 학습장면에서 자기결정론의 동기화 경로 모형 검증, 이민희, 중앙대학교 대학원, "미간행 박사학위논문, , 2007

44. Self- determination theory and thefacilitation of intrinsic motivation, Deci, Ryan, Self-determination theory and the facilitation ofintrinsic motivation, , 2000

45. Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in theelementary, Marks, , 2000

46. Asymptotic intervals for indirected effects in structuralequations models, Sobel, , 1982

47. 자기결정성이론이 제안한 학습동기 분류형태의 재구성, 이종욱 ( Jong Ug Lee ), 홍승표 ( Seung Pyo Hong ), 박병기 ( Byung Gee Bak ), 한국교육심리학회, 자기결정성 이론이 제안한 학습동기 분류형태의재구성, , 2005

48. Elements within the competitive situation that affect intrinsic motivation, Reeve, Deci, Elements within the competitive situation thataffect intrinsic motivation, , 1996

49. Ownership, literacy achievement, and student of diverse culturalbackgrounds, Au, "Ownership, , 1997

50. Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective, Ryan, Deci, , 2004

51. Towards apersonalized task selection model with shared instructional control, Van Merri?nboer, Corbalan, Kester, , 2006

52. Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove,Pervan, Beatty and Shiu, Farrell, "Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, , 2009

53. Rethinking the value of choice: A culturalperspective on intrinsic motivation, Iyengar, Lepper, , 1999

54. 자기결정성 이론에 따른 학습동기 유형 분류체계의 타당성, 김아영, 한국교육심리학회, "교육심리연구, , 2002

55. Optimal learning in optimal contexts: Therole of self-determination in education, Ratelle, Guay, Chanal, , 2008

56. An exploration of mathematicsself-efficacy/mathematics performance correspondence, Betz, Hackett, , 1989

57. The Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs inStudent Engagement and Learning in the Classroom, P.R.Pintrich, Linnenbrink, The role of self-efficacy beliefs instudent engagement and learning in the classroom, , 2003

58. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance, Pintrich,P.R., Motivational and self-regulated learningcomponents of classroom academic performance, , 1990

59. Social context, students' motivation, andacademic achievement: Toward a process model, Guay, Vallerand, "Social context, , 1997

60. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two??step approach, Anderson, Gerbing, Structural equation modeling in practice:A review and recommended two-step approach, , 1988

61. Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling, Steiger.J.H, , 2007

62. 학습에 대한 주인의식의 구성요소와 주요 관련 변인에 관한 연구, 박민정, , 2008

63. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Fomell C. and Larcker D.F, , 1981

64. Reportingstructural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: Areview, King, Stage, Nora, Schreiber, Barlow, , 2006

65. Autonomy in children's learning: An experimental and individual difference investigation, Ryan, Grolnick, , 1987

66. Development of structuredinterview for assessing student use of self learning strategies, Martinez-Pons, Zimmerman, , 1986

67. Skill and will: The role ofmotivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry, Pintrich, Zusho, Coppola, , 2003

68. Work engagement: An emergingpsychological concept and its implications for organizations, Salanova, Schaufeli, , 2007

69. 한국 남녀 중학생 집단에서 자기결정성이 학업성취도에 주는 영향, 김주환(Joohan Kim), 김은주 ( Eun Joo Kim ), 홍세희(Se Hee Hong), 한국교육심리학회, , 2006

70. Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachersdo and why their students benefit, Reeve, , 2006

71. 아동의 자기조절 학습전략과 관련이 있는 자기결정성 동기 유형 분석, 이혜주 ( Hye Joo Lee ), 한국아동학회, "아동학회지, , 2008

72. A motivational model ofpersistence in science education: A self-determination theory approach, Miquelon, Vallerand, Lavigne, , 2007

73. Enhancing adult motivation to learn: A comprehensive guide for teachingall adults(revised ed), Wlodkowski, , 1999

74. Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivationalstyles as predictors of behaviors: A perspective study, Bissonette, Vallerand, "Intrinsic, , 1992

75. Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains, Connell, Ryan, Perceived locus of causality andinternalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains, , 1989

76. 자기결정성이론에 근거한 한국형 기본 심리 욕구 척도 개발 및 타당화, 이명희, 이화여자대학교 대학원, 자기결정성 이론에 근거한 한국형 기본 심리 욕구 척도 개발및 타당화, , 2008

77. A motivationalscienceperspectiveontheroleofstudentmotivation in learning and teaching contexts, Pintrich, A motivational science perspective on the role of studentmotivation in learning and teaching contexts, , 2003

78. Reforming motivation: How the structure of instruction affectsstudents’ learning experiences, Yair, , 2000

79. Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: Anextension of cognitive evaluation theory, Ryan, Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: Anextension of cognitive evaluation theory, , 1982

80. 초등영재와 일반아동의 자기결정성동기와 자기조절학습간의 관계 분석, 최병연(Choi Byung yeon), 한국영재교육학회, 초등영재와 일반아동의 자기결정성 동기와 자기조절학습간의관계분석, , 2009

81. Internalization of biopsychological value bymedical students: A test of self-determination theory, Deci, Williams, , 1996

82. Supportingautonomy in the classroom: Ways teachers encourage student decisionmaking and ownership, Turner, Stefanou, Perencevich, DiCintio, , 2004

83. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior, Deci, E. L., The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits:Human needs and the self-determination of behavior, , 2000

84. Unidimensional versus domainrepresentative parceling of questionnaire items: An empirical example, Kishton, Widamn, , 1994

85. Autonomy, belongingness,and engagement in school as contributors to adolescent psychologicalwell-being, Roseth, Van Ryzin, Gravely, "Autonomy, , 2009

86. 수업에 대한 자율성 지각과 다중지능 및 교과흥미가 학업성취에 미치는 영향, 소연희 ( Yeon Hee So ), 한국아동교육학회, "아동교육, , 2009

87. The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual Framework and Overview of Psychometric Properties, Kuh, , 2001

88. Inner resources for school achievement: Motivational mediators of children's perceptions of their parents, Deci, Grolnick, Ryan, , 1991

89. The robustness of test statistics tononnormality and specification error in confirmatory factory analysis, Curran, West, Finch, , 1996

90. Testing models of the experience of self-determination in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice, Reeve, Hamm, Testing models of the experience ofself-determination in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice, , 2003

91. The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit andparameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling, Bandalos, D. L., Bandalos, , 2002

92. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives, Bentler, P. M., Hu, L.-T., LAWRENCE ERLBAUM MODELING, , 1999

93. Motivation in the classroom:Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement acrossthe school year, Belmont, Skinner, Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocaleffects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the schoolyear, , 1993

94. Autonomy, competence, and relatedness inthe classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educationalpractice, Niemiec, Ryan, "Autonomy, , 2009

95. Self-determination among adult Chinese English languagelearners: The relationship among perceived autonomy support, He, , 2009

96. Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics, Kuh, Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposefulactivities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics, , 2002

97. Training corporate managers to adopt a moreautonomy-supportive motivating style toward employees: Anintervention study, Reeve, Hardr?, , 2009

98. What motivates children's behavior and emotion? Joint effects of perceived control and autonomy in the academic domain, Connell, Patrick, Skinner, , 1993

99. Predicting high school students' cognitiveengagement and achievement: Contributions of classroomperceptions and motivation, Greene, Predicting high school students' cognitive engagement and achievement:Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation, , 2004

100. Evaluating engagement with, and determining the direct effects of, a curriculum teaching students learning and motivation strategies, Mosholder, Richard S, The Ohio State University, "Evaluating engagement with, , 2007

101. Whatcomes between classroom community andacademic emotions: Testing a self-determination model ofmotivation in the college classroom, Bush, Angela Melanie, What comes between classroom community and academicemotions: Testing a self-determination model of motivation in the collegeclassroom, , 2006

102. Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test using cognitive evaluation theory, Mims, Koestner, Ryan, Relation of reward contingency andinterpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test usingcognitive evaluation theory, , 1983

103. The Relation of Self-Determination and Achievement Goals to Taiwanese Eighth Graders' Behavioral and Emotional Engagement in Schoolwork, Shih, , 2008

104. Students motivational process and their relationship to teacher rating in school physical education: A self-determination theory approach, Duda, Ntoumanis, Standage, , 2006

105. The effects of instructors’ support andstudents’ autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: Aself-determination theory perspective, Deci, Black, , 2000

106. Setting limits inchildren’s behavior. The differential effects of controlling versusinformational styles on intrinsic motivation and creativity, Koestner, Ryan, Bernieri, Holt, , 1984

107. What it takes to do well in school and whether I've got it: A process model of perceived control and children's engagement and achievement in school, Connell, Skinner, Wellborn, What it takes to do well in schooland whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control andchildren’s engagement and achievement in school, , 1990

108. An instrument to assess adults' orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence, Deci, E. L., An instrument toassess adults' orientations toward control versus autonomy with children:Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence, , 1981

109. The effects of parents’ and teachers’ motivating styles on adolescents’ school outcomes and psychological well-being: A test of self-determination theory in a Korean context, Jeon, , 2007