200


Table 4-62 (continued).

Construct 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
1. Total gap
2. Gap-originality
3. Gap-efficiency
4. Gap-rule
5. Total stress
6. Frustrations
7. Conflicts
8. Pressures
9. Changes
10. Self-imposed
11. Total motivation
12. Intrinsic motivation
13. Extrinsic motivation
14. Task motivation
15. Control of learning .27* --
16. Self-efficacy .17 .50* --
17. Test anxiety .05 -.02 -.34* --
18. Total Engagement .41* -.01 -.17 .25
19. Academic Challenge .45* .01 -.13 .23 .82* --
20. Active Learning .31* -.01 -.09 .15 .77* .39* --
21. Faculty Interaction .12 -.01 -.19 .19 .74* .34* .55* --
M 28.6 22.2 49.2 17.7 51.6 25.4 14.0 12.3
SD 7.41 4.06 7.12 7.82 7.61 4.32 2.73 2.64
Note. Cases excluded listwise. All constructs coded: higher scores equals increased
levels. signifies p<.05

Considering the number of collegiate courses related to the subject area of Class I, a

moderate correlation was found with academic challenge (r=.44, p<.05). This finding

signifies that taking more courses related to the content of Class I was coupled with

higher levels of academic challenge.

All Students

 This study combined all participants into one group for broader data analysis.

There were 511 participants with usable KAI scores to calculate cognitive style gap. For

analysis, students retained their individual cognitive style gap with the faculty member

from their respective classes. The mean cognitive style gap for all participants was -6.30