Class I

 Regarding Class I, Two variables, efficiency style gap (P =.29) and age (P =.22)

accounted for 10% of the variance in explaining total student stress (Adjusted R2=.10,

p<.05).

 Considering total student motivation of Class I, the same independent variables

were used in backward stepwise regression data analysis to find the best fitting model

with the most explanation of student motivation. Rule/group conformity style gap (3=-

.28) and gender (p=-.20) were both considered significant contributors to the model. The

adjusted R2=.08 indicating that 8% of the variance of total student motivation was

explained by these two independent variables.

All Students

 All students participating in this study were grouped together to explain student

stress based on cognitive style gap and student demographic variables. Considering all of

the students, the best fitting model to explain total stress included the independent

variables sufficiency of originality cognitive style gap ( =. 15), college classification (3=-

.11) and number of similar courses taken (P=.09). However, the adjusted R2 was only .03

 Considering total motivation of all students participating in this study, backward

stepwise multiple regression was used to find the best fitting model with the most

explanation of the dependent variable using the independent variables cognitive style gap

and student demographics. Three independent variables were found to be significant

(p<.05) in explaining student motivation. They include efficiency cognitive style gap (3=-

.08), gender (P=. 12) and number of similar courses taken by the student (P=. 10).

However, the adjusted R2 was .03 for the model indicating that only 3% of the variance

of motivation was attributed to the three independent variables.