is supposed to look like. Theoretically articles deviates to some extend
(according to method and section of result).
This template is recommended as a starting point for your semester task.
Åge Diseth, Department of psychosocial science
Title on your semester task.
First name middle name last name
First name middle name last name
First name middle name last name
Department of psychosocial science
University of Bergen
Teaching supervisor: First name last name
Remember:The whole document
must have double line
spacing.
No spacing between
section or between text and
a new headline.
New paragraph must
be marked with indent.
Running head 2
Abstract
A summary of purpose, variables, concepts, sample and findings, written in English, max 120
words.
Running head 3
Describe the background for the task, purpose, introduce different kind of
conception and theories, describe earlier findings, approach to the problem, hypothesis .
Level 2 Headlines
When you are going to represent a theory that need a new headline.
Level 2 Headlines
When it is elemental with another headline.
Method
Selection
For example: The selection consisted of 250 schoolchildren
(125 boys and 125 girls) in 7th grade, in Bergen. Average age was…. year.
Instrumental
Achievement Motive Scale – AMS – This instrument consist of……….
that measures………
NEO P1-R This instrument consist of………that measures………..
Procedure
Participants replied the questionnaire in the classroom.
Results
Here you must describe results and analyses. As. for example that Table 1 shows
descriptive data for the selected.
______
Table 1
______
The analyses of factor in Table 2 sows that…witch explain 55% of variants in data.
______
Table 2
______
Running head 4
Discussion
In the discussion you will show and point to the fact the result has show
and will discuss it in the light of the theory and earlier findings witch is
presented in the introduction.
Prospective conclusion and suggestion to further research.
Running page 5
References
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS Structural Equations Program Manual. Encino, Ca:Multivariate
Software, Inc.
De Fruyt, F., & Mervielde, I . (1996). Personality and interests as predictors of educational
streaming and achievement. European Journal of Personality, 10 405-425.
Diset, Å (2002). Personality and intererst as predicators of educational
streaming and achievement. European Journal of Personality,10, 405-425.
Diseth, Å (2002). Personality and approaches to learning as predictors of academic
achievement. European Journal of Personality, 16, 1-13.
Entwistle, N. J., % Ramsden, P, (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Crom
Helm.
Furneaux, W. D. (1980) ‘Historical considerations’. In Holder, R. and Wankowski, J. (eds),
Personality and Academic Performance. Guilford, New York.
Kerlinger, F. N.. (1988). Foundations of behavioral research.New York: HRW.
Running head 6
Table 1
Descriptive statistics, included average, standard aberration, skewness, kurtosis and X
______Sample______Mean______St.dev.______Skewness_____Kutosis___X____
N 1 94.01 23.17 .53 -.01 .86
2 95.46 19.47 .14 -.56 .80
E 1 122.86 16.08 -.26 -.03 .72
2 122.53 17.11 -.15 -.27 .76
O 1 128.39 18.22 .01 -.42 .75
2 119.12 18.76 -.08 -.09 .76
A 1 118.95 12.51 -.05 .16 .60
2 116.94 16.08 -.85 2.67 .75
C 1 108.30 18.25 -.03 -.24 .81
______2______103.65______17.24______.27______-.12_____.78
Running page 7
Table 2
Principal component of analysis, varimax rotation (N=250).
Factors______1______2______3______comm.
DEEP APPROACH
Seeking meaning .59 .38
Relating ideas .81 .14 .59
Use of evidence .66 .44
Related subscale
Interest in ideas .56 -.29 .48
SURFACE APPROACH
Lack of purpose .47 -.26 .38
Unrelated memorizing .18 .67 .54
Syllabus-bound ness -.15 .54 -.13 .40
Related motive scale
Fear of failure .60
STRATEGIC APPROACH
Organized studying -.78 .58
Time management -.10 .86 .69
Alertness to assessment demands -.33 .26 .12 .18
Related subscales
Achieving .10 -.24 .67 .63
monitoring effectiveness______.33______.11______.33______.30
Running head 8
Figures
Figure 1. Structural model of experienced quality of the study, the
learning effect and “approaches to learning” .
running head 9