SpringerLink
Log in

Course-level implementation of First Principles, goal orientations, and cognitive engagement: a multilevel mediation model

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Education Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The First Principles of Instruction (FPI) represent ideologies found in most instructional design theories and models. Few attempts, however, have been made to empirically test the relationship of these FPI to instructional outcomes. This study addresses whether the degree to which FPI are implemented in courses makes a difference to student cognitive engagement, taking into account the mediating role of individual goals. A multilevel meditation model was tested with 1070 undergraduate students from 29 courses in a Korean university. Findings demonstrated that the influences of course-level implementation of FPI influence cognitive engagement through individual intrinsic goal orientation. Course-level implementation of FP does not directly affect surface strategy use and self-regulated strategy use; rather, the effect of FPI appears to be mediated by intrinsic goal orientations. Course-level implementation of FPI also appears to affect deep cognitive strategy use directly as well as indirectly through intrinsic goal orientation. The present study added novel evidence linking Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction to cognitive engagement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahlfeldt, S., Mehta, S., & Sellnow, T. (2005). Measurement and analysis of student engagement in university classes where varying levels of PBL methods of instruction are in use. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(1), 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 43–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropper, M. H., Bentley, J. P., & Schroder, K. (2009). How well do high-quality online courses employ Merrill’s first principles of instruction? In M. Orey, V. J. McClendon, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook (Vol. 34). Breinigsville: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • DeBacker, T. K., & Crowson, H. M. (2006). Influences on cognitive engagement: Epistemological beliefs and need for closure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 535–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupeyrat, C., & Mariné, C. (2005). Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement: A test of Dweck’s model with returning to school adults. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eley, M. (1992). Differential adoption of study approaches within individual students. Higher Education, 23, 231–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concepts, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frick, T. W., Chadha, R., Watson, C., Wang, Y., & Green, P. (2008). Theory-based course evaluation: Implication for improving student success in postsecondary education. Paper presented at American Educational Research association, New York.

  • Frick, T. W., Chadha, R., Watson, C., Wang, Y., & Green, P. (2009). College student perceptions of teaching and learning quality. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57, 705–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frick, T. W., Chadha, R., Watson, C., & Zlatkovska, E. (2010). Improving course evaluations to improve instruction and complex learning in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 115–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, J. (2011). Testing the efficacy of Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction in improving student performance in introductory biology courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Utah State University, Logan, Utah.

  • Greene, B. A., & Miller, R. B. (1996). Influences on course performance: Goals, perceived ability, and self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(2), 181–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. J. (1995). Applied multilevel analysis. Amsterdam: TT publicaties.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 10(3), 588–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., & Jung, H. (2013). Design and effectiveness of the face-to-face instruction applying Merrill’s first principles of instruction. Journal of Educational Technology, 29(3), 599–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, R. B. (2005). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koszalka, T., Song, H., & Grabowski, B. (2002). Examining learning environmental design issues for prompting reflective thinking in web-enhanced PBL. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

  • Krull, J. L., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2001). Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 249–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyndt, E., Dochy, F., Struyven, K., & Cascallar, E. (2011). The direct and indirect effect of motivation for learning on students’ approaches to learning through the perceptions of workload and task complexity. Higher Education Research and Development, 30(2), 135–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyke, J. A., & Young, A. J. K. (2006). Cognition in context: Students’ perceptions of classroom goal structures and reported cognitive strategy use in the college classroom. Research in Higher Education, 47(4), 477–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computer and Education, 80, 77–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meece, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. (1988). Students’ goal orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meece, J. L., Herman, P., & McCombs, B. L. (2003). Relations of learner-centered teaching practices to adolescents’ achievement goals. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 457–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (2008). Why basic principles of instruction must be present in the learning landscape, whatever form it takes, for learning to be effective, efficient and engaging. In J. Visser & M. VisserValfrey (Eds.), Learners in a changing learning landscape: Reflections from a dialogue on new roles and expectations (pp. 267–275). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (2009). First Principles of Instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. Carr (Eds.), Instructional design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base (Vol. III). New York: Routledge Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, Y., & Lau, S. (2010). Differential relations of traditional and constructivist instruction to students’ cognition, motivation, and achievement. Learning and Instruction, 20, 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2005). Influence of redesigning a learning environment on student perceptions and learning strategies. Learning Environments Research, 8, 67–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2007). The interplay of perceptions of the learning environment, personality and learning strategies: A study amongst International Business Studies students. Studies in Higher Education, 32(1), 59–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2008). The extent of variability of learning strategies and students’ perceptions of the learning environment. Learning and instruction., 18, 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36, 89–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 385–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Conley, A. M., & Kempler, T. M. (2003). Current issues in achievement goal theory and research. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 319–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning component of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 7, pp. 371–402). Greenwich CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Roeser, R. W., & De Groot, E. A. M. (1994). Classroom and individual differences in early adolescents’ motivation and self-regulated learning. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14(2), 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Student’s motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In D. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom: Causes and consequences (pp. 149–183). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2009). Understanding instructional theory. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base (Vol. III, pp. 3–26). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotgans, J., & Schmidt, H. (2011). Cognitive engagement in the problem-based learning classroom. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 465–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6), 359–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991). Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education, 22, 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E., & de Croock, M. B. M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 39–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vermetten, Y., Vermunt, J., & Lodewijks, H. (2002). Powerful learning environment? How do university students differ in their response to instructional measures. Learning and Instruction, 12, 263–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, C. O., Breene, B., & Mansell, R. A. (2006). Identification with academics, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Leaning and Individual differences, 16, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K., & Fowler, J. (2005). Assessing the impact of learning environments on students’ approaches to learning: Comparing conventional and action learning designs. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), 87–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolters, C. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structure and goal orientation to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 236–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolters, C., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms. Instructional Science, 26, 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zepke, N. (2014). Student engagement research in higher education: Questioning an academic orthodoxy. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(6), 697–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., Zyphur, M. J., & Preacher, K. J. (2009). Testing multilevel mediation using hierarchical linear models: Problems and solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 695–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zusho, A., & Pintirich, P. R. (2003). Skill and will: The role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1081–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Global Institute for Talented Education, KAIST, 193 Munjiro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-732, Republic of Korea

    Sunghye Lee

  2. Chair of the Instructional Design, Development and Evaluation Department, Department of Instructional Design, Development, and Evaluation, Syracuse University, 330 Huntington Hall, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA

    Tiffany A. Koszalka

Authors
  1. Sunghye Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tiffany A. Koszalka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sunghye Lee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, S., Koszalka, T.A. Course-level implementation of First Principles, goal orientations, and cognitive engagement: a multilevel mediation model. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 17, 365–375 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9431-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9431-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation