Motivation of high-ability engineering students at university: an analysis of influential teaching factors
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14502794Keywords:
Motivation, High ability, Inclusion, UniversityAbstract
This study examines the teaching factors that influence the motivation of high-ability university students, highlighting the importance of inclusion and attention to diverse needs in the classroom. Motivated by the phenomenon of paradoxical underachievement, the study aims to identify how support for autonomy, appropriately challenging academic tasks, and teacher-student relationships contribute to meeting the needs of these students. Using a mixed-methods approach, including qualitative interviews and quantitative questionnaires, the research examines differences across groups and genders. Results show that autonomy support, task difficulty aligned with student competence, and supportive teacher relationships are key factors that positively impact academic motivation. Observed differences across groups underscore the need for inclusive practices in higher education that address student diversity. Adapting teaching practices according to these factors can optimize the academic experience, motivation, and engagement of high-ability students in university.
Downloads
References
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. The Journal of School Psychology, 46(5), 528-560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2008.04.001
Almukhambetova, A., & Hernández-Torrano, D. (2020). Gifted Students’ Adjustment and Underachievement in University: An Exploration From the Self-Determination Theory Perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 64(2), 117-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986220905525
Aubry, A. (2024). Les pratiques d’enseignement auprès des élèves à haut potentiel intellectuel. En J.-M. Perez, G. Suau, y M.-J. Gremmo (Eds.), Éducation et formation aux pratiques inclusives: Tensions entre reproduction et innovation (pp. 279–290). Nancy, France: Éditions de l’Université de Lorraine. https://doi.org/10.62688/edul/b9782384510856/21
Aziz, A. R., Ab Razak, N. H., Perdani Sawai, R., Kasmani, M. F., Amat, M. I., & Shafie, A. A. H. (2021). Exploration of challenges among gifted and talented children. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 6(4), 242–251. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v6i4.760
Buard, K., Puustinen, M., & Courtinat-Camps, A. (2024). Gifted students’ special educational programs in France: An analysis of students’ needs as perceived by headmasters — A secondary publication. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 8(4), 316–327. https://doi.org/10.26689/jcer.v8i4.6835
Chen, H., & Zhang, M. H. (2022). The relationship between basic psychological needs satisfaction and university students’ academic engagement: The mediating effect of emotional intelligence. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.917578
Cornejo-Araya, C. A., Gómez-Araya, C. A., Muñoz-Huerta, Y. P., & Reyes-Vergara, C. P. (2021). What do we know about giftedness and underachievement?. A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 7(2), 400-411. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.1481
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. Guilford Press.
Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children's academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 148-162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
Goretzko, D., Pham, T. T. H., & Bühner, M. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis: Current use, methodological developments and recommendations for good practice. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3510–3521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00300-2
Grolnick, W. S., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2009). Issues and challenges in the study of parenting and children's motivation. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 142-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903028914
Guiboux, L. (2014). Enfants intellectuellement précoces au sein du système scolaire: de la théorie à la réalité. [Tesis de máster, Université de Lorraine]. DUMAS. https://dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-01330138
Gille, M., Moulignier, R., & Kövesi, K. (2021). Understanding the factors influencing students’ choice of engineering school. European Journal of Engineering Education, 47(2), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2021.1993795
Harerimana, A., & Mtshali, N. G. (2020). Using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to understand the role of technology in nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 92, 104490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104490
IPECOM Paris. Parcoursup: Une comparaison des traitements des EIP dans les différents parcours. https://ipecomparis.com/parcoursup-comparaison-traitement-eip/
Jang, H., Kim, E. J., & Reeve, J. (2012). Longitudinal test of self-determination theory’s motivation mediation model in a naturally occurring classroom context. J. Educ. Psychol. 104, 1175–1188. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028089
Kanapathy, S., Hazir, N. binti M., Hamuzan, H. A. binti, Menon, P., & Woon, Y. H. (2022). Gifted and talented students “underachievement” and intervention: A case study. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 3(5), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2022.3.5.453
Lamanna, J., Vialle, W., & Wormald, C. (2020). Reversing underachievement in students with twice-exceptionality: Findings from two case studies. TalentEd, 32(1), 1–22
Lee, L. E., Meyer, M. S., & Crutchfield, K. (2021). Gifted classroom environments and the creative process: A systematic review. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 44(2), 107–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532211001450
Lockhart, K., Meyer, M. S., & Crutchfield, K. (2022). A content analysis of selected state plans for gifted and talented education. Journal of Advanced Academics, 33(1), 3-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X211026240
Pamela Cifuentes, V. (2021). Medidas educativas para estudiantes superdotados con altas capacidades. España, Francia, Australia. Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile, Asesoría Técnica Parlamentaria. https://obtienearchivo.bcn.cl/obtienearchivo?id=repositorio/10221/32444/1/BCN__Cifuentes_P.__medidas_para_estudiantes_con_altas_capacidadesFINAL.pdf
Razali, M., Mat, S. A., & Ismail, N. (2024). Motivational factors in gifted students' academic performance in university settings. Journal of Gifted Education, 32(1), 36-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353223112967
Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivation style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903029034
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
Shearer, C. B. (2020). Multiple intelligences in gifted and talented education: Lessons learned from neuroscience after 35 years. Roeper Review, 42(1), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2019.1690079
Schreiber, J. B. (2021). Issues and recommendations for exploratory factor analysis and principal component analysis. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 17(5), 1004-1011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.07.027
Siegle, D. (2018). Understanding underachievement. In J. L. Roberts, T. F. Inman y J. H. Robins (Eds.), Introduction to Gifted Education (pp. 285–297). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77004-8_16
Snikkers-Mommer S, Hoekman J, Mayo A & Minnaert A (2024) Triggered and maintained engagement with learning among gifted children in primary education. Front. Educ. 9, 1164498. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1164498
UNESCO. (2005). Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000146180
Unión Europea. (2016). Reglamento (UE) 2016/679 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo de 27 de abril de 2016 relativo a la protección de las personas físicas en lo que respecta al tratamiento de datos personales y a la libre circulación de estos datos (Reglamento General de Protección de Datos). Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea, L119, 1-88. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ES/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32016R0679
Van Manen, M. (2015). The tact of teaching. The meaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness. New York: Routledge
Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. J. Psychother. Integr. 23, 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032359
Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Dochy, F., Mouratidis, A., et al. (2012). Identifying configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and structure: associations with self-regulated learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learn. Instr. 22, 431–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.002
Worrell, F. C., Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Dixson, D. D. (2019). Gifted students. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 551–576. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418- 102846
White, S. L. J., Graham, L. J., & Blaas, S. (2018). Why do we know so little about the factors associated with gifted underachievement?. A systematic literature reviews. Educational Research Review, 24, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.03.001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Kumar Mahtani, Antoine Bernard (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Reconocimiento – No comercial: El material creado por usted puede ser distribuido, copiado y exhibido por terceros si se muestra en los créditos. No se puede obtener ningún beneficio comercial.
