Note that in the three classes taught by adaptive faculty members an innovative efficiency

cognitive style gap was detrimental to student motivation.

 Class I was taught by an innovative faculty member and evidence from the data

suggests that students with larger adaptive rules/group conformity gap have higher levels

of motivation. Findings in Class I differed from findings in Classes A, B and C in that

motivation increased as students bridged their sufficiency of originality cognitive style

gap. The finding in Class I may suggest evidence of coping behavior (Kirton, 2003).

 Interestingly, students in Class E with an innovative sufficiency of originality

cognitive style gap have increased levels of motivation. Note that the faculty member

instructing Class E scored 95 points for total cognitive style placing her in the middle

score teaching group. Classes D, F, G and H found no model that included a cognitive

style gap construct to significantly explain student motivation.

 For demographic variables contributing to the explanation of motivation, gender

was the most prominent variable. In Classes C, E, and F, females had higher motivation

scores. Note that these three courses were taught by women. Conversely, in Class I males

had higher levels of motivation in a course taught by a young woman. Note that the other

two classes taught by women (Classes A & G) did not have a gender effect in explaining

motivation indicating that faculty member gender was not necessarily a factor in

increasing female student motivation.

 Objective Five

Explain undergraduate student engagement based on cognitive style gap,
student stress, student motivation and selected demographic variables.

 Objective five was achieved by using backward stepwise multiple regression to

explain student engagement from the independent variables of cognitive style gap