Student Engagement on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Extant Research

IF 2.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Assessment Pub Date : 2022-03-06 DOI:10.1080/10627197.2022.2043151
Allison J. LaFave, Josephine Taylor, Amelia M. Barter, Arielle Jacobs
{"title":"Student Engagement on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Extant Research","authors":"Allison J. LaFave, Josephine Taylor, Amelia M. Barter, Arielle Jacobs","doi":"10.1080/10627197.2022.2043151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This systematic review examines empirical research about students’ motivation for NAEP in grades 4, 8, and 12 using multiple motivation constructs, including effort, value, and expectancy. Analyses yielded several findings. First, there are stark differences in the perceived importance of doing well on NAEP among students in grades 4 (86%), 8 (59%), and 12 (35%). Second, meta-analyses of descriptive data on the percentage of students who agreed with various expectancy statements (e.g., “I am good at mathematics”) revealed minimal variations across grade level. However, similar meta-analyses of data on the percentage of students who agreed with various value statements (e.g., “I like mathematics”) exposed notable variation across grade levels. Third, domain-specific motivation has a positive, statistically significant relationship with NAEP achievement. Finally, some interventions – particularly financial incentives – may have a modest, positive effect on NAEP achievement.","PeriodicalId":46209,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment","volume":"27 1","pages":"205 - 228"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2022.2043151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This systematic review examines empirical research about students’ motivation for NAEP in grades 4, 8, and 12 using multiple motivation constructs, including effort, value, and expectancy. Analyses yielded several findings. First, there are stark differences in the perceived importance of doing well on NAEP among students in grades 4 (86%), 8 (59%), and 12 (35%). Second, meta-analyses of descriptive data on the percentage of students who agreed with various expectancy statements (e.g., “I am good at mathematics”) revealed minimal variations across grade level. However, similar meta-analyses of data on the percentage of students who agreed with various value statements (e.g., “I like mathematics”) exposed notable variation across grade levels. Third, domain-specific motivation has a positive, statistically significant relationship with NAEP achievement. Finally, some interventions – particularly financial incentives – may have a modest, positive effect on NAEP achievement.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学生参与国家教育进步评估:现有研究的系统回顾与元分析
摘要本研究采用多动机构念,包括努力、价值和期望,对四年级、八年级和十二年级学生的NAEP学习动机进行了实证研究。分析得出了几个发现。首先,在四年级(86%)、八年级(59%)和十二年级(35%)的学生中,对NAEP表现良好的重要性的认知存在明显差异。其次,对同意各种期望陈述(例如,“我擅长数学”)的学生百分比的描述性数据进行元分析,发现年级之间的差异很小。然而,对同意各种价值陈述(例如,“我喜欢数学”)的学生百分比数据的类似荟萃分析显示,年级之间存在显著差异。第三,领域特定动机与NAEP成就有显著的正相关关系。最后,一些干预措施——尤其是财政激励措施——可能对NAEP的实现产生适度的积极影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Assessment
Educational Assessment EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Educational Assessment publishes original research and scholarship on the assessment of individuals, groups, and programs in educational settings. It includes theory, methodological approaches and empirical research in the appraisal of the learning and achievement of students and teachers, young children and adults, and novices and experts. The journal reports on current large-scale testing practices, discusses alternative approaches, presents scholarship on classroom assessment practices and includes assessment topics debated at the national level. It welcomes both conceptual and empirical pieces and encourages articles that provide a strong bridge between theory and/or empirical research and the implications for educational policy and/or practice.
期刊最新文献
Dialect and Mathematics Performance in African American Children Who Use AAE: Insights from Explanatory IRT and Error Analysis Raising the Bar: How Revising an English Language Proficiency Assessment for Initial English Learner Classification Affects Students’ Later Academic Achievements Monitoring Rater Quality in Observational Systems: Issues Due to Unreliable Estimates of Rater Quality Improving the Precision of Classroom Observation Scores Using a Multi-Rater and Multi-Timepoint Item Response Theory Model High Stakes Assessments in Primary Schools and Teachers’ Anxiety About Work
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1