AZ-19-2

284
was used to assess both data sets and
determine the levels of agreement.
There is agreement when the qualitative
findings are explanatory, and ‘dissonance’
when findings are inconsistent.
Such intra-method discrepancies can
be harnessed to examine each data set
more sufficiently (Moffatt et al., 2006).
Thus, we used dissonances to identify
potential explanations from theory (as
cited in Fetters et al., 2013; Pluye et al.,
2005). The coherence of the results is an
important aspect of integration. Fetters
(2013) identifies that the degree of integration,
termed ‘fit,’ may either be confirmation,
expansion or discordance.
As the findings from the two sources
diverge and expand the insights, the
level of integration was considered as
expansion in this study.
Table 2. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative findings.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics of scale results of students.
3. Results
The quantitative and qualitative analyses
associated with each of the four research
questions are presented in turn.
3.1. Results for quantitative analysis
The research question Are there
meaningful differences between the
SRL skills and motivation of ID students
with different academic achievement
levels? was studied using quantitative
data. Descriptive statistics
(Table 3) were used to describe the
sample population. Means of SRL total
and Motivation were calculated as
3.30±0.34, and 3.16±0.39, respectively.
Within SRL factors, self-evaluation
was the most frequently used, while
seeking easily accessible information
was the least used strategy. Within
motivation factors, task value had the
highest use whereas anxiety obtained
the lowest scores.
Table 4 shows the differences between
the SSRL mean scores of students,
which were 235.3 (SS= 15.48) for high
achievers and 205.1 (SS=16.41) for low
achievers. To determine if differences
are significant in scale scores between
groups, the Mann-Whitney U test was
run. Total scale scores were found to be
significantly higher for high achievers
(mean rank=13.85, U=32.5, z= -5.186,
p< .001) than for low achievers (mean
rank=34.59, U=32.5, z= -5.186, p<
.001), as were the scores of subscales
(i.e., SRL Total and Motivation).
Table 4. Group statistics and Mann-Whitney U test results of scale
and subscale scores of students with different achievement levels.
ITU A|Z • Vol 19 No 2 • July 2022 • A. Ates Akdeniz, G. Turan