Relationship quality time: the validation of a relationship quality scale in higher education

This study investigated the overall quality of the interpersonal relationship students have with faculty and staff, that is, relationship quality (RQ). In relationship management research, RQ is paramount for the creation of bonds with customers, which in turn is necessary for the sustainability of organizations, that is, continuity and growth. In higher education, it is not only recent changes in funding of education that urge us to further investigate RQ, as students having relational bonds with their teachers and faculty/staff is important as well. These relationships are expected to positively influence students’ college experiences. Although educational literature addresses the importance of student–faculty relationships, little is known about students’ perceptions of the quality of their relationship with their program. The aim of this study was therefore to get a more in-depth understanding of the concept and measurement of RQ within a higher education context. To that end, an existing RQ scale was used measuring five dimensions: trust in honesty, trust in benevolence, satisfaction, affective commitment, and affective conflict. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on survey responses of 551 students from a Dutch university of applied sciences. Next to the CFA, a small-scale focus group discussion was held to validate the quantitative findings of students’ perceptions on RQ. The findings confirm that the RQ instrument is an adequate instrument to investigate RQ in a higher education context. Additional qualitative findings also suggest that students acknowledge the relevance of RQ and the need for having a good relationship with their faculty and staff.     

Investigating effects of problem-based versus lecture-based learning environments on student motivation

This study examines the effects of two learning environments (i.e., problem-based learning [PBL] versus lecture-based [LB] environments) on undergraduates’ study motivation. Survey results demonstrated that PBL students scored higher on competence but did not differ from LB students on autonomous motivation. Analyses of focus groups further indicated that active learning aspects, such as collaboration are perceived as motivating. However, controlling elements (i.e., mandatory presence) and uncertainty (i.e., in selecting the correct and sufficient literature) were described as detrimental for students’ motivation. In conclusion, PBL does not always seem to lead to higher intrinsic motivation. It is therefore crucial to build in the right amount of structure in learning environments and balance controlling elements versus autonomy, even in learning environments that are intended to be motivating for students.     

The role of motivational profiles in learning problem-solving and self-assessment skills with video modeling examples

Instructional Science - In the current study, we examine the role of situation-specific motivational profiles in the effectiveness of video modeling examples for learning problem-solving and...     

Is problem-based learning associated with students’ motivation? A quantitative and qualitative study

In this study, a mixed-method design was employed to investigate the association between a student-centred, problem-based learning (PBL) method and law students’ motivation. Self-determination theory (SDT) states that autonomous motivation, which is associated with higher academic performance, can be reached when there is fulfillment of three psychological needs: autonomy, competence and relatedness. PBL aims to trigger autonomous motivation. In Study 1, 85 PBL law students (37% male; Mean age = 21.99 years) and 69 law students of a lecture-based, non-PBL program (39% male; Mean age = 22.72 years) filled out the Self-Regulation Questionnaire and an adapted version of the Work-related Basic Need Satisfaction Scale in order to measure autonomous and controlled motivation and perceived autonomy, competence and relatedness. In order to compare both groups, two MANOVAs were conducted and results showed differences neither in autonomous and controlled motivation, nor in feelings of autonomy and competence. However, PBL students experienced more relatedness. Additionally, in Study 2, focus-group discussions that were conducted indicated that PBL contains both autonomy-supportive and controlling elements, which might explain why no differences were found in perceptions of autonomy and autonomous and controlled motivation between PBL and non-PBL students. Furthermore, students reported that tutorial groups in PBL contributed to feelings of relatedness.