of 74 /74
Κεφάλαιο 6 Σχεδιασμός της έρευνας 6.1 Σκοπός της Έρευνας Σκοπός της ερευνητικής μας προσπάθειας είναι η ανίχνευση των κινήτρων που ωθούν τους ενήλικες να συμμετέχουν σε προγράμματα εκπαίδευσης, καθώς και των εμποδίων τα οποία επηρεάζουν τη συμμετοχή τους, μέσα από την καταγραφή και την παρουσίαση της προσωπικής τους οπτικής. 6.2 Κριτήρια Επιλογής του Θέματος Οι ραγδαίες διεθνείς μεταβολές στον οικονομικό, κοινωνικό, πολιτισμικό και τεχνολογικό τομέα, καθιστούν για τους ενήλικες αναγκαία την απόκτηση γνώσεων και δεξιοτήτων προσαρμοσμένων σε αυτές τις εξελίξεις, προκειμένου να ανταποκριθούν στους κοινωνικούς και επαγγελματικούς τους ρόλους. Για το λόγο αυτό, στις μέρες μας πλήθος ιδιωτικών και δημοσίων φορέων προσφέρουν προγράμματα δια βίου εκπαίδευσης για ενήλικες. Ωστόσο οι ενήλικες προκειμένου να συμμετάσχουν στα προγράμματα αυτά πρέπει να υποκινηθούν από κάτι. Σύμφωνα με τον Αλέξη Κόκκο (1999, σελ. 55-58) ένα από τα βασικά χαρακτηριστικά των ενήλικων εκπαιδευόμενων είναι ότι συμμετέχουν στα προγράμματα έχοντας κάποια εσωτερική αίσθηση ανάγκης, η διάγνωση και η ικανοποίηση της οποίας, αποτελεί κίνητρο για τη συμμετοχή και τη μάθηση.

ΔΙΠΛΩΜΑΤΙΚΗ nik

Embed Size (px)

Text of ΔΙΠΛΩΜΑΤΙΚΗ nik

6 6.1 , , .

6.2 , , , , . , . . (1999, . 55-58) , , . . , , . , , .

6.3 : 1) ? 2) ? 3) ?

6.4 . , , , , , ... Cohen L. & Manion L. (1994, . 122) , . , .

6.5 , , , , , . (Cohen L. & Manion L. 1994). -, . . , , . . (Cohen L. & Manion L. 1994).

2

6.6 . , . , . : ) , ) ) . (1991): . , , . , . , ( 1993 : 20) . : ) ) . , . . , . , .

3

(1993:.23) . , .

6.7 20 . , , . . . , , , , . , . (1996: . 154) , : , . , , , . , , . . : 1. (1-6) . 2. (7-15) . 3. (16-20) . 20

4

16-17-18 .

6.8 71 , , . 2 . , . , . , . , . . ! : ( ), ( ) ( , , ). . . SPSS. , . , . .

5

6.9 SPSS for Windows 14.0 SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences Statistical Product and Service Solutions) , , ,

6

7 , , 7.1 . 69 .

7.2 1, 69 , 44 ( 63,8%) 25 ( 36,2 %) .

Valid

Total

Frequency 25 44 69

Percent 36,2 63,8 100,0

Valid Percent 36,2 63,8 100,0

Cumulative Percent 36,2 100,0

1

60,0%

40,0%

Percent

63,8%

20,0%36,2%

0,0%

7

7.3 2 19 ( 27,5%) 30 , 35 ( 50,7%) 31-40 , 10 ( 14,5%) 41-50 , 5 ( 7,2%) 50 .

Valid

30 31-40 41-50 50 Total

Frequency 19 35 10 5 69

Percent 27,5 50,7 14,5 7,2 100,0

Valid Percent 27,5 50,7 14,5 7,2 100,0

Cumulative Percent 27,5 78,3 92,8 100,0

2:

30 31-40 41-50 50 Pies show counts

8

7.4 3 35 ( 50,7%) , 13 ( 18,8%) ,19 ( 27,5%) , 2 ( 2,9%) .

Valid

/ / / Total

Frequency 35 13 19 67 2 69

Percent 50,7 18,8 27,5 97,1 2,9 100,0

Valid Percent 52,2 19,4 28,4 100,0

Cumulative Percent 52,2 71,6 100,0

Missing Total

System

3: .

./ / / Pies show counts

9

7.5 4, 20 ( 29%) 49 ( 71%) .Cumulative Percent 29,0 100,0

Frequency Valid Total 20 49 69

Percent 29,0 71,0 100,0

Valid Percent 29,0 71,0 100,0

4: .

80,0%

60,0%

Percent

40,0%71,0%

20,0%29,0%

0,0%

.

10

7.6 5 4 ( 5,8%) , 4 ( 5,8%) , 29 ( 42%) , 7 ( 10,1%) , 8 ( 11,6%) , 10 ( 14,5%) 7 ( 10,1%) .. Frequency MHXANIKOI 4 4 . 29 7 8 10 7 Total 69 Percent Valid Percent 5,8 5,8 5,8 5,8 42,0 42,0 10,1 10,1 11,6 11,6 14,5 14,5 10,1 10,1 100,0 100,0 Cumulative Percent 5,8 11,6 53,6 63,8 75,4 89,9 100,0

Valid

5

. M X IKO H AN I . Pie sh wco n s o u ts

11

7.7 6 , 40 ( 58%) , 27 ( 39,1%) 2 ( 2,9 %) . Frequency 40 27 Total 67 System 2 69 Percent Valid Percent 58,0 59,7 39,1 40,3 97,1 100,0 2,9 100,0 Cumulative Percent 59,7 100,0

Valid

Missing Total

6

60,0%

50,0%

40,0%

Percent

30,0%

59,7%

20,0%

40,3%

10,0%

0,0%

12

7.8 : . . : 7 33 ( 47,8%) , 29 ( 42%) 7 ( 10,1%) , : 1 1 1 - 1 -

Valid

Total

Frequency 33 29 7 69

Percent 47,8 42,0 10,1 100,0

Valid Percent 47,8 42,0 10,1 100,0

Cumulative Percent 47,8 89,9 100,0

7

13

50,0%

40,0%

Percent

30,0%

47,8% 42,0%

20,0%

10,0%

10,1%

0,0%

-

, 30 , 6 , 5 , 5 , 3 , , , , , .. 30 6 5 5 3 20 Marketing

8

14

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

30

20

Marketing

6

5

5

3

1

- 9 23 ( 33,3) , 38 ( 55,1%) , 8 ( 11,6%) .

Valid

Total System

Frequency 23 38 61 8 69

Percent 33,3 55,1 88,4 11,6 100,0

Valid Percent 37,7 62,3 100,0

Cumulative Percent 37,7 100,0

Missing Total

9: , .

Pie sh wco n s o u ts

15

7.9 8: , ? ? ? 47 ( 68,1%) , 22 ( 31,9%) .

Valid

Total

Frequency 47 22 69

Percent 68,1 31,9 100,0

Valid Percent 68,1 31,9 100,0

Cumulative Percent 68,1 100,0

10

60,0%

Percent

40,0%68,1%

20,0%31,9%

0,0%

16

7.10 9: , 11, 43 ( 62,3%) , 14 ( 20,3%) , 12 ( 17,4%) ( ).

Valid

Total

Frequency 43 14 12 69

Percent 62,3 20,3 17,4 100,0

Valid Percent 62,3 20,3 17,4 100,0

Cumulative Percent 62,3 82,6 100,0

11 .

60,0%

Percent

40,0%

62,3%

20,0%

20,3%

17,4%

0,0%

__

17

7.11 10: / , 54 ( 78,3%) 15 ( 21,7%) .Case Summary Valid N Percent 54 78,3% Cases Missing N Percent 15 21,7% Total N Percent 69 100,0%

a $_

a. Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

, 12, 57,4 % , , 44,4% , 37% , 18,5% 9,3% .Frequencies Responses N (a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 24 31 20 10 5 1 91 Percent 26,4% 34,1% 22,0% 11,0% 5,5% 1,1% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 44,4% 57,4% 37,0% 18,5% 9,3% 1,9% 168,5%

12

: 100% .

18

$_ Frequencies

200,0

168,5

Varname Total

150,0

Values

100,0 91,0

100,0

57,4 44,450,0

31,0 24,0 20,0 10,0 5,0 1,0

34,1 26,4 22,0 11,0 5,5 1,1

37,0 18,5 9,3 1,9

0,0 Responses N Responses Percent Percent of Cases

Statistics

, 26 ( 37,7%) 43 ( 62,3%) .

Case Summary Cases Valid N $_ 26 (a) a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. Percent 37,7% N 43 Missing Percent 62,3% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

, 61,5% , 38,5% , 26,9% 19,2% .

19

Responses N / ...1(a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 7 16 5 10 38 Percent 18,4% 42,1% 13,2% 26,3% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 26,9% 61,5% 19,2% 38,5% 146,2%

13: .

: 100% .

$_ Frequencies146,2150,0

Varname 100,0 Total

100,0

Values

61,5 42,1 26,3 16,0 10,0 7,0 5,0 18,4 13,2 26,9

50,0

38,0

38,5 19,2

0,0 Responses N Responses P ercent Percent of Cases

Statistics

20

: . , . (.16/) , , . (.18/). , . (.20/) . (.25/).

7.12 11: ?, 26 ( 37,7%) 43( 62,3%) .Case Summary Cases Valid N $_( 26 a) a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. Percent 37,7% N 43 Missing Percent 62,3% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

, 53.8% , 42,3% , 15,4% , 11,5% 7,7% .

21

Responses N ... (a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 4 14 11 2 3 34 Percent 11,8% 41,2% 32,4% 5,9% 8,8% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 15,4% 53,8% 42,3% 7,7% 11,5% 130,8%

14

: 100% .

$_ Frequencies

130,8

125,0

Varname100,0 Total 53,8 42,3

100,0

Values

75,0

50,0

41,2 34,0 11,0 14,0 4,0 3,0 2,0 32,4 8,8 5,9

25,0

11,8

15,4

11,5 7,7

Responses N

Responses Percent

Percent of Cases

Statistics

22

7.13 12: ? 55 14 .Statistics N Valid 55 Missing 14

, 17( 30,9%) , , 38 ( 69,1%) . Cumulative Percent 69,1 100,0

Valid

Total System

Frequency 38 17 55 14 69

Percent 55,1 24,6 79,7 20,3 100,0

Valid Percent 69,1 30,9 100,0

Missing Total

60,0%

Percent

40,0%69,1%

20,0%30,9%

0,0%

23

7.14 13: , Case Summary Cases Valid N 38 Percent 55,1% N 31 Missing Percent 44,9% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

(46,3%) : , , , . .$_ Frequencies Responses N (a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 19 8 8 7 7 10 59 Percent 32,2% 13,6% 13,6% 11,9% 11,9% 16,9% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 46,3% 19,5% 19,5% 17,1% 17,1% 24,4% 143,9%

15

: 100% .

24

_ Frequencies143,9

Values

125,0

100,0

100,0

75,0

59,0 46,3 19,5 8,0 19,0 7,0 8,0 10,0 7,0 32,2 13,6 16,9 11,9 19,5 17,1 24,4 17,1

50,0

25,0

13,6 11,9

Responses N

Responses Percent

Percent of Cases

Statistics Varname Total

: . (.11/). , . (.25/) . (.34/). . . (.40/). . (.54/)

25

7.15 14: ? 68 1 . 51( 75%) 17 ( 24,6%) .Statistics N Valid 68 Missing 1

Cumulative Percent 75,0 100,0

Valid

Total System

Frequency 51 17 68 1 69

Percent 73,9 24,6 98,6 1,4 100,0

Valid Percent 75,0 25,0 100,0

Missing Total

16

25

75

26

7.16 15: , 47 ( 68,1%), Cases Valid N $__ (a) 47 Percent 68,1% N 22 Missing Percent 31,9% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

38,3 % , : , , , , . , , . .

$__ Frequencies Responses N (a) Total 16 5 5 2 3 7 18 12 6 74 Percent 21,6% 6,8% 6,8% 2,7% 4,1% 9,5% 24,3% 16,2% 8,1% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 34,0% 10,6% 10,6% 4,3% 6,4% 14,9% 38,3% 25,5% 12,8% 157,4%

17

: 100% .

27

$__ Frequencies

157,4150,0

Values

100,0

100,0

74,0

50,0

34,0 5,016,0

38,3 25,5 14,9 6,4 12,8

2,0

7,0

18,0 12,0 6,0

21,6 6,8

6,8

24,3 16,2 8,1

10,6 10,6 4,3

2,7 9,5 4,1

5,0 3,00,0

Responses N

Responses Percent

Percent of Cases

Statistics Varname Total

: . (.8/). . . ( , ). (.11/) . (.29/).

28

. (.33/) .(.35/) . (.38/) , , . (.44/) . (.69/)

15 ( 21,7%) .Case Summary Cases Valid N $__ _(a) 15 Percent 21,7% N 54 Missing Percent 78,3% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

, , . .

29

$___ Frequencies Responses N (a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 3 10 5 1 19 Percent 15,8% 52,6% 26,3% 5,3% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 20,0% 66,7% 33,3% 6,7% 126,7%

18

: 100% .

$___ Frequencies126,7125,0

100,0100,0

Values

75,0

66,7 52,6

50,0

33,3 26,3 19,0 15,8 5,3 20,0 6,7

25,0

10,0 3,0

5,0

1,0

Responses N

Responses Percent

Percent of Cases

Statistics Varname Total

30

: . . , . (.25/) (, , .) . (.4/) . (.30/) . (.65/).

7.17 16: ? , 68 ( 98,6%) 1 .Case Summary Cases Valid N $__ (a) 68 Percent 98,6% N 1 Missing Percent 1,4% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

, (47,1%) , , 44,1% , 32,4% , 25% , 20,6% -, , , , , .

31

19 .

Responses N (a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 14 1 3 30 17 22 32 4 2 4 1 130 Percent 10,8% ,8% 2,3% 23,1% 13,1% 16,9% 24,6% 3,1% 1,5% 3,1% ,8% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 20,6% 1,5% 4,4% 44,1% 25,0% 32,4% 47,1% 5,9% 2,9% 5,9% 1,5% 191,2%

19: .

: 100% .

32

$__ Frequencies191,2

Varname .

150,0

Values

100,0

Total

100,0

50,0

0,0 Responses N Responses Percent Percent of Cases

Statistics

: . (.8/) .(.10/) .(.11/). . (.15/) .(.18/ . (.36/) .(.43/)

33

. (.44/) , . . (.54/).

7.18 17: ? 67( 97,1%) , 2 .Case Summary Cases Valid N $_ _ (a) 67 Percent 97,1% N 2 Missing Percent 2,9% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

, 17,9 % . , (25,4%) , , 23,9% , 20,9 % , 17,9% , 14% , , , , , , . 20 .

34

Responses N (a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 12 17 3 16 10 4 6 2 6 4 3 14 2 12 111 Percent 10,8% 15,3% 2,7% 14,4% 9,0% 3,6% 5,4% 1,8% 5,4% 3,6% 2,7% 12,6% 1,8% 10,8% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 17,9% 25,4% 4,5% 23,9% 14,9% 6,0% 9,0% 3,0% 9,0% 6,0% 4,5% 20,9% 3,0% 17,9% 165,7%

20 .

: 100% .

35

$_ _ Frequencies

Varname150,0

100,0

Values

Total

50,0

0,0 Responses N Responses P ercent P ercent of Cases

Statistics

: , . , , , .(. 17/).

36

7.19 . 18: , 1 5 ( 1 5) , 62 7 .Statistics 1 62 7 2 62 7 3 62 7 4 62 7 5 62 7

N

Valid Missing

, - , , , . : - 1 71% 12,90% 11,30% 3,20% 1,60% 2 14,50% 32,30% 22,60% 19,40% 11,30% 3 4,80% 22,60% 37,10% 24,20% 11,30% 4 4,80% 21% 14,50% 30,60% 29% 5 4,80% 11,30% 14,50% 22,60% 46,80%

21

37

7.20 19: 67( 97,1) 2 .Case Summary Cases Valid N $_ (a) 67 Percent 97,1% N 2 Missing Percent 2,9% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

( 68,7%) , , , , , , , , . .

$_ Frequencies Responses N (a ) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 46 13 7 10 24 6 13 3 3 1 126 Percent 36,5% 10,3% 5,6% 7,9% 19,0% 4,8% 10,3% 2,4% 2,4% ,8% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 68,7% 19,4% 10,4% 14,9% 35,8% 9,0% 19,4% 4,5% 4,5% 1,5% 188,1%

22

: 100% .

38

$_ Frequencies188,1Varname 150,0

126,0 100,0

Total

Values

100,0

50,0

0,0 Responses NResponses Percent Percent of Cases

Statistics

: , , , . (.68/) , . (.35/) . (.43/) , . (.56/) , . (.69/)

39

7.21 20: ? 57( 82,6%) 12 .

Case Summary Cases Valid N $_ _(a) 57 Percent 82,6% N 12 Missing Percent 17,4% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

, (86%) , .$__ Frequencies Responses N ( a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 49 16 8 9 82 Percent 59,8% 19,5% 9,8% 11,0% 100,0%

Percent of Cases 86,0% 28,1% 14,0% 15,8% 143,9%

23

: 100% .

40

$__ Frequencies143,9

Varname125,0

100,0

Values

100,0

82,0

86,0

Total

75,0

59,8 49,0

50,0

28,125,0

16,0 8,0 9,0

19,5 9,8 11,0

14,015,8

Responses N

Responses Percent

Percent of Cases

Statistics

, , (46,7%) , .Case Summary Cases Valid N $_ _(a) 60 Percent 87,0% N 9 Missing Percent 13,0% N 69 Total Percent 100,0%

a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

41

$__ Frequencies Responses N ( a) Total a Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1. 5 7 7 10 18 2 5 8 3 14 Percent 4,1% 5,7% 5,7% 8,1% 14,6% 1,6% 4,1% 6,5% 2,4% 11,4%

Percent of Cases 8,3% 11,7% 11,7% 16,7% 30,0% 3,3% 8,3% 13,3% 5,0% 23,3%

28 16 123

22,8% 13,0% 100,0%

46,7% 26,7% 205,0%

24

: 100% .

42

__ Frequencies

200,0

Values

150,0

100,0

50,0

0,0 Responses N Responses Percent Percent of Cases

Varname

Statistics

Total

.

43

8 . , .

8.1 , . , , , , .

8.1.1 , , . , , .

8.1.2 . . , , , . , , - - . . 44

, . , , , , , . (Jaques, 2004). Freire (1977) , . , , . , . , , . , , , , , (, 2003). , , .

8.1.3 . , , . , , , , . , , .

45

, , .

8.1.4 . . ( ) , . : , , . , .

8.1.5 . . Rogers (Rogers, 1999) : 1. , 2. ( , , .) 3. , ( ). , , . , . , . 46

8.1.6 , . , . . . : , . , , , . , , . , . Rogers , , , . (Rogers, 2001). , , . . , .

47

8. 2

8.2.1 . . , , . , . . . . , . . , . . , . , .

48

8.2.2 . . . , ( ) ( , ). , , . , : , , , , , , . . - , , , . . , , , . , .

49

9 . , , , . , . . , . : 1) , . 2) , . 3) , , , . ( ). . , 4) , . . , , , . :

50

1) , . 2) (Rogers, 1999) : ) , ) ) . 3) , . , , . , , , . 4) , . , : 1) , - . . 2) . , .

51

10 , . , - . , .

52

Atkinson J.W. (1964), An Introduction to Motivation, Princeton, New Jersey : Van Nostrand. A, .-.(1999) . . -, .-. , . , & . (.), , , . : , . 21 Bell, J., 1997, . . . Gutenberg. Boekaerts, M., (2002). Motivation to learn, International Academy of Education, Unesco, Educational Practies Series, No10. Bove, Courtland L., Thill, John V. (1992) Instructor's resource manual to accompany business communication today, McGraw-Hill B, . (1991), . : B . (.) (2003). , , , . . B, . (1999). , : . . , . B, ., , . (1999). . . , , ... Carre Ph. (2000), Motivation in Adult Education: from Engagement to performance. Adult Education Research Conference: 41st, Vancouver, Canada Cohen L., Manion L. (1994), , . ., ., , Courau, S. (2000). ., , . . , .,(1993), () . , , . Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985a). The general causality orientation scale: Selfdetermination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality,19, 109134. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985b). Causality orientations theory: Personality influences on motivation. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.),Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior (pp.149175). New York: Plenum. Deci, E., &Ryan, R., (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and self- determination in human behavior., New York. Plenum.

53

Deci, E., Vallerand,R., Pelletier L., Ryan, R., (1991). Motivation und education: The self- determination perspective, The Educational Psychologist.26,325-346. Festinger, L. (1978). Die Theorie der kognitiven Dissonanz. Bern.Huber. Freire P.(1977), , , Houle, C.O. (1961): 'The Inquiring Mind: A Study of the Adult Who Continues to Learn' Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Jaques, D., (2004). , , , . Jarvis, P.(2003). . , . . . : Knox A. (1977), Adult Development and Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco,. K . (2007), : , , , K, . (1998). . : . & ., . -. . : . K, . (2005). . . : . K, . , . (1998). , - . . . K, ., (1999). . , , , . . K, ., (2002). " : , , ", . (). . . K-, . ,(1998), , , . . Leavit H. J. (1964). Managerial Psychology. University of Chicago Press, p.307, Chicago. Lewin K (1935) Dynamic theory of personality. McGraw-Hill. ayo, E., (1933). The human problems of an industrial civilization. New York. MacMilan. McCall R.J, (1963). Invested self-expression: a principle of human motivation. Psychology Review. Jul. 70, 289-303. McClelland, D., (1953). Towards a theory of motive acquisition. American Psychologist, 20, 321-333. McClelland, D.C. - Atkinson, J.W. - Clark, R.W. - Lowell, E.L. (1953) The Achievement Motive, New York : Appleton-Century-Crofts. McDougall, W., (1998). An introduction to social psychology, Bristol. Thoemmes. 54

Murray, E.J., (1967). Motivation och emotion-om manniskans drivkafter och kanslo,Stockholm. Wahlstrom and Widstrand Noe, R. A. (1986). Trainees' attributes and attitudes: neglected influences on training effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 11, pp. 736-749. Noye D., Piveteau J., , , , 2002 (2 .). Pavlov, J.P. (1979). . : . .. Premack, D.,(1971). Catching up with common sense, or two sides of ageneralization: Reinforcement and punishment. In Glaser, R. (Ed.), The nature of reinforcement. New York. Academic Press. ., (1993) , 1, - . (2005), , , . (2003), . , . 10 Rogers C., Freedom to Learn for the 80's, Merril-McMillan, N. York, 1983 Rogers, J. (1989) Adults Learning, Milton Keynes Philadelphia, Open University Press Rogers, , ( 1998 ). E . . . Rogers,J. (2001), Adults learning, Open University Press, Buchingham; Philadelphia (3 ). Vallerand, R. & Thill, E. (dir.) (1993). Introduction a la psychologie de la motivation. Paris Q Vigot Vallerand, R. (1997) Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in experimental social psychology, 29, 271-360. Academic Press Vroom, V., (1995). Work and motivation. San Fransisco. Jossey-Bass. Weiner, ., (1985). Human Motivation. New York. Springer-Verlag , ., (1996), , , ., Gutenberg.

55

1) :

2) :) 30 ) 31-40 ) 41-50 ) 50 3) : ) / ) / ) /

4) : ) ) 5) : 6) : ) ) 7) . : ) . ) , ) - ) , 8) , ? ? ?

56

. 9) ? /? .. 10) / 11) ? . 12) , ?

13) . . 14) ?

57

15) . 16) ? ( ) 17) ? ( ) . 18) ? ( 1 5, 1 5). ) . ) . ) ) ) , 19) . ..

58

20) ; .

59