澳大利亚四至六年级教师对低社会经济地位学生写作教学的看法和做法

IF 2.6 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Journal of Educational Research Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ijer.2023.102304
Clarence Ng , Steve Graham , Peter Renshaw , Alan Cheung , Barley Mak
{"title":"澳大利亚四至六年级教师对低社会经济地位学生写作教学的看法和做法","authors":"Clarence Ng ,&nbsp;Steve Graham ,&nbsp;Peter Renshaw ,&nbsp;Alan Cheung ,&nbsp;Barley Mak","doi":"10.1016/j.ijer.2023.102304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The current study examined writing beliefs and practices of 187 grades 4 to 6 teachers who taught writing in schools serving predominantly low SES students in Queensland, Australia. These participants completed a mailed survey that assessed their perceptions of preparation to teach writing to low SES students, time spent on writing instruction, frequency of writing instruction, students’ time spent on writing, efficacy beliefs for teaching writing, beliefs about these students’ cognitive attributes for successful writing, beliefs about the suitability of basic writing instruction for low SES students, frequency of teaching basic writing skills and frequency of teaching advanced writing skills. As predicted, these teachers did not feel that they were prepared adequately to teach writing to low SES students. Neither did they consider in-service support sufficient. These teachers spent limited time on teaching writing, with a majority (81 %) spending 1 or 2 h or less teaching writing each week. Most teachers held deficit beliefs about low SES students, considering them lacking cognitive and motivational attributes for successful writing. Most also considered basic writing instruction appropriate for low SES students. As expected, most teachers taught basic writing skills more often than advanced writing skills. The results of multiple regression analyses showed that teachers’ efficacy beliefs predicted frequency of teaching basic and advanced skills and moderated the effects of other teacher beliefs on how often basic writing skills were taught to low SES students.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48076,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035523001672/pdfft?md5=54c52fb245ff101a83de814b50f07e20&pid=1-s2.0-S0883035523001672-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Australian grades 4 to 6 teachers’ beliefs and practices about teaching writing to low SES students\",\"authors\":\"Clarence Ng ,&nbsp;Steve Graham ,&nbsp;Peter Renshaw ,&nbsp;Alan Cheung ,&nbsp;Barley Mak\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijer.2023.102304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The current study examined writing beliefs and practices of 187 grades 4 to 6 teachers who taught writing in schools serving predominantly low SES students in Queensland, Australia. These participants completed a mailed survey that assessed their perceptions of preparation to teach writing to low SES students, time spent on writing instruction, frequency of writing instruction, students’ time spent on writing, efficacy beliefs for teaching writing, beliefs about these students’ cognitive attributes for successful writing, beliefs about the suitability of basic writing instruction for low SES students, frequency of teaching basic writing skills and frequency of teaching advanced writing skills. As predicted, these teachers did not feel that they were prepared adequately to teach writing to low SES students. Neither did they consider in-service support sufficient. These teachers spent limited time on teaching writing, with a majority (81 %) spending 1 or 2 h or less teaching writing each week. Most teachers held deficit beliefs about low SES students, considering them lacking cognitive and motivational attributes for successful writing. Most also considered basic writing instruction appropriate for low SES students. As expected, most teachers taught basic writing skills more often than advanced writing skills. The results of multiple regression analyses showed that teachers’ efficacy beliefs predicted frequency of teaching basic and advanced skills and moderated the effects of other teacher beliefs on how often basic writing skills were taught to low SES students.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Educational Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035523001672/pdfft?md5=54c52fb245ff101a83de814b50f07e20&pid=1-s2.0-S0883035523001672-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Educational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035523001672\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035523001672","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查了澳大利亚昆士兰州 187 名四年级至六年级教师的写作教学理念和实践,这些教师主要在为社会经济地位较低的学生服务的学校中教授写作。这些参与者填写了一份邮寄调查问卷,调查内容包括他们对向低社会经济地位学生教授写作的准备情况的看法、花在写作教学上的时间、写作教学的频率、学生花在写作上的时间、写作教学的效率信念、对这些学生成功写作的认知属性的信念、对基础写作教学是否适合低社会经济地位学生的信念、教授基础写作技能的频率和教授高级写作技能的频率。正如所预测的那样,这些教师认为他们没有做好充分准备来教授低社会经济地位学生写作。他们认为在职支持也不够。这些教师花在写作教学上的时间有限,大多数教师(81%)每周花在写作教学上的时间为 1-2 小时或更少。大多数教师对社会经济地位低的学生持有缺陷观念,认为他们缺乏成功写作所需的认知和动机特质。大多数教师还认为基础写作教学适合低社会经济地位学生。不出所料,大多数教师教授基本写作技巧的次数多于教授高级写作技巧的次数。多元回归分析的结果表明,教师的效能感预测了教授基本写作技巧和高级写作技巧的频率,并调节了其他教师信念对教授低社会经济地位学生基本写作技巧频率的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Australian grades 4 to 6 teachers’ beliefs and practices about teaching writing to low SES students

The current study examined writing beliefs and practices of 187 grades 4 to 6 teachers who taught writing in schools serving predominantly low SES students in Queensland, Australia. These participants completed a mailed survey that assessed their perceptions of preparation to teach writing to low SES students, time spent on writing instruction, frequency of writing instruction, students’ time spent on writing, efficacy beliefs for teaching writing, beliefs about these students’ cognitive attributes for successful writing, beliefs about the suitability of basic writing instruction for low SES students, frequency of teaching basic writing skills and frequency of teaching advanced writing skills. As predicted, these teachers did not feel that they were prepared adequately to teach writing to low SES students. Neither did they consider in-service support sufficient. These teachers spent limited time on teaching writing, with a majority (81 %) spending 1 or 2 h or less teaching writing each week. Most teachers held deficit beliefs about low SES students, considering them lacking cognitive and motivational attributes for successful writing. Most also considered basic writing instruction appropriate for low SES students. As expected, most teachers taught basic writing skills more often than advanced writing skills. The results of multiple regression analyses showed that teachers’ efficacy beliefs predicted frequency of teaching basic and advanced skills and moderated the effects of other teacher beliefs on how often basic writing skills were taught to low SES students.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Educational Research
International Journal of Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
3.10%
发文量
141
审稿时长
21 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Educational Research publishes regular papers and special issues on specific topics of interest to international audiences of educational researchers. Examples of recent Special Issues published in the journal illustrate the breadth of topics that have be included in the journal: Students Perspectives on Learning Environments, Social, Motivational and Emotional Aspects of Learning Disabilities, Epistemological Beliefs and Domain, Analyzing Mathematics Classroom Cultures and Practices, and Music Education: A site for collaborative creativity.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Editorial Board Editorial Board Editorial Board Editorial Board
×
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