Student satisfaction gains an increasingly central position in the context of quality measurements. However, student satisfaction can also be stipulated as an important motivational factor for students as learners. This study combines this perspective on student satisfaction with the notion of differences in students’ ability. We hypothesize that differences in ability result in differences in student satisfaction. In line with concepts of high ability education, it is additionally hypothesized that this relation is mediated by educational stimulation - divided in cognitive, creative and professional stimulation – as well as by participation in honours programs. A structural equation modelling (N=733) of factors affecting student satisfaction in higher education shows that cognitive, creative and professional stimulation are the largest influencers of bachelor students’ sense of satisfaction. The interrelation between these three aspects of educational stimulation also shows the complexity of higher educational practice, since it suggests that cognitive stimulation cannot be realized without a creative factor, and vice versa. Professional stimulation needs both. Furthermore, the results show that educational stimulation mediates the effect of students’ ability on their educational satisfaction. This implies that changes in education can indeed influence students’ educational satisfaction, especially by providing educational quality. Finally, considering students’ ability level, it is shown that especially cognitive abler students are less easy to satisfy. The combination of educational stimulation and ability suggests that especially the more cognitive able students do not feel themselves sufficiently cognitively or creatively stimulated, and hence are less satisfied in vocational higher education.
DOCUMENT
Evidence-informed change (EIC) has gained attention recently because it is seen as a lever to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of educational change. Important questions are: how is EIC conceptualized, what counts as evidence, and what factors can support EIC in practice? Because of the complexity of EIC, we aimed to understand these factors from a systems perspective. Different parts of the educational system (e.g. policy, practice of teachers’ and school leaders, research) are interrelated and need to be aligned for effective and sustainable change. Based on our scoping review we propose a model that conceptualizes EIC, identifies and defines different sources of evidence, and discusses influencing factors describing a system's readiness and capacity for EIC. Our results are an important step forward in understanding and supporting EIC in practice and developing targeted policy. This article also defines a common ground for future research, bringing together insights in an integrated framework of evidence-informed change.
LINK
The research methodology will be developmental research, defined as The systematic study of designing, developing and evaluating instructional programs, processes and products that must meet the criteria of internal consistency and effectiveness. (Richey and Nelson, 1996, p. 1213). Using this kind of methodology will allow me to find outcomes on a Self-Direction Learning (SDL) design process together with colleagues and student teachers - and to carry out several designed learning arrangements from an educational perspective. From the pedagogic perspective I intend to improve the relation between teacher trainer and student teacher with the accent on development, stimulation and support of SDL. This will be done during the design and carrying out of learning arrangements and also by training teacher trainers in the necessary skills of SDL in the context of relational/pedagogic didactic. Looking from both related perspectives it will lead to a construction of an SDL-environment in which teacher trainers and student teacher will learn effectively together.
DOCUMENT
