conflict stress in this innovative class; a finding that conflicts with Kirton's (2003) theory

as applied in this context. No other cognitive style gap constructs were correlated with

stress constructs, motivation constructs or student engagement constructs in Class I.

 Considering correlations internal to the measurement of student stress, total stress

was correlated with the constructs: frustrations (r=.74, p<.05), conflicts (r=.67, p<.05),

pressures (r=.71, p<.05), changes (r=.63, p<.05) and self-imposed (r=.67, p<.05). The

data suggests that all of the constructs were at least substantially related to student stress.

 The motivation construct self-efficacy was negatively correlated with the total

student stress (r=-.60, p<.050), as well as stress constructs: frustrations (r=-.55, p<.05),

conflicts (r=-.35, p<.05), pressures (r=-.52, p<.05) and changes (r=-.43, p<.05). These

correlations indicated that lower levels of self-efficacy were associated with higher levels

of stress among these stress constructs. On the other hand, test anxiety was positively

correlated with total stress (r=.63, p<.05) and stress constructs: frustrations (r=.58,

p<.05), conflicts (r=.33, p<.05), pressures (r=.35, p<.05) and self-imposed (r=.52, p<.05).

This provided evidence that a relationship exists between higher levels of test anxiety and

higher levels of the aforementioned stress constructs in Class I.

 Self-imposed stress was moderately correlated with total motivation (r=.33,

p<.05) and the construct extrinsic motivation (r=.35, p<.05). This finding indicated an

association between higher levels of self-imposed stress and higher levels of total

motivation with emphasis placed on extrinsic motivation. No moderate correlations were

found between constructs of student stress and constructs of student motivation in Class I.

 Moderate correlations internal to the measurement of total motivation were found

to be moderate to substantial. Specifically, total motivation was correlated with intrinsic