Learning avoidance goals are separable from learning approach goals in university instructors.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? An adequate fit for learning goals was achieved only when learning approach and learning avoidance goals were distinguished, with high correlation (ρ = .85). → Daumiller 2019

Evidence¶

Daumiller 2019¶

Daumiller, M., Dickhäuser, O., & Dresel, M. (2019). University Instructors' Achievement Goals for Teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(1), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000271

q3 · i? · associational · r2

CFA comparisons in the 1,066-instructor sample showed a single-factor learning goal model fit poorly, while "an adequate fit was only realized when disti nguishing between learn- ing approach and learning avoidance goals", which were highly correlated (ρ = .85).

"For learning goals (Hypothesis 1b), an adequate fit was only realized when disti nguishing between learn- ing approach and learning avoidance goals. The fit of a single factor model was poor."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• University instructors' performance goals split into four classes: appearance and normative components, each approach and avoidance. — related
• Task goals can be separated from learning goals and normative performance goals, each with approach and avoidance components. — related
• Work avoidance and relational goals form goal classes distinct from all other achievement goal classes of university instructors. — related
• University instructors' achievement goals differentially predict positive affect, attitudes towards help, and self-reported teaching quality, with effects invariant across status groups. — related