学科间的测量不变性:我们能了解到哪些与学科相关的教学质量差异?

ZDM Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1007/s11858-024-01622-7
Wida Wemmer-Rogh, Urs Grob, Charalambos Y. Charalambous, Anna-Katharina Praetorius
{"title":"学科间的测量不变性:我们能了解到哪些与学科相关的教学质量差异?","authors":"Wida Wemmer-Rogh, Urs Grob, Charalambos Y. Charalambous, Anna-Katharina Praetorius","doi":"10.1007/s11858-024-01622-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recent publications emphasize the need to take greater account of differences in teaching quality between subjects. The empirical analysis of this topic requires a comparison of teaching quality in different subjects to distinguish generic aspects of teaching quality from subject-specific ones. In this paper, we compare teaching quality in mathematics and German lessons using observational data from primary schools in Switzerland (<i>N</i><sub><i>Math</i></sub> = 319; <i>N</i><sub><i>German</i></sub> = 237). Data were collected using an observation instrument reflecting the teaching dimensions of the MAIN-TEACH model, which was developed based on a synthesis of established observation frameworks. The dimensions of classroom management, motivational-emotional support, selection and implementation of content, cognitive activation, support for consolidation, assessment and feedback, and adaptation were tested for subject-related measurement invariance. With a two-fold measurement invariance approach, differences between the subjects were investigated at both a global and an indicator level. When applying alpha accumulation correction, no significant subject-related differences in factor loadings or intercepts were found. The factorial structure of our data was basically identical for the two subjects. The comparison of latent factor means revealed no mean differences between the subjects. We discuss the implications for both the MAIN-TEACH model and research into subject-related differences of teaching in general.</p>","PeriodicalId":501335,"journal":{"name":"ZDM","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measurement invariance between subjects: what can we learn about subject-related differences in teaching quality?\",\"authors\":\"Wida Wemmer-Rogh, Urs Grob, Charalambos Y. Charalambous, Anna-Katharina Praetorius\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11858-024-01622-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Recent publications emphasize the need to take greater account of differences in teaching quality between subjects. The empirical analysis of this topic requires a comparison of teaching quality in different subjects to distinguish generic aspects of teaching quality from subject-specific ones. In this paper, we compare teaching quality in mathematics and German lessons using observational data from primary schools in Switzerland (<i>N</i><sub><i>Math</i></sub> = 319; <i>N</i><sub><i>German</i></sub> = 237). Data were collected using an observation instrument reflecting the teaching dimensions of the MAIN-TEACH model, which was developed based on a synthesis of established observation frameworks. The dimensions of classroom management, motivational-emotional support, selection and implementation of content, cognitive activation, support for consolidation, assessment and feedback, and adaptation were tested for subject-related measurement invariance. With a two-fold measurement invariance approach, differences between the subjects were investigated at both a global and an indicator level. When applying alpha accumulation correction, no significant subject-related differences in factor loadings or intercepts were found. The factorial structure of our data was basically identical for the two subjects. The comparison of latent factor means revealed no mean differences between the subjects. We discuss the implications for both the MAIN-TEACH model and research into subject-related differences of teaching in general.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501335,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ZDM\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ZDM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01622-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ZDM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01622-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近的出版物强调,有必要更多地考虑不同学科之间教学质量的差异。要对这一问题进行实证分析,就必须对不同学科的教学质量进行比较,以区分教学质量的一般方面和特定学科的教学质量。在本文中,我们利用来自瑞士小学的观察数据,对数学课和德语课的教学质量进行了比较(数学课 = 319;德语课 = 237)。数据收集使用了反映 MAIN-TEACH 模型教学维度的观察工具,该工具是在综合已有观察框架的基础上开发的。对课堂管理、动机-情感支持、内容的选择和实施、认知激活、巩固支持、评估和反馈以及适应等维度进行了与学科相关的测量不变量测试。采用双重测量不变性方法,从总体和指标两个层面研究了受试者之间的差异。在进行阿尔法累积校正时,没有发现在因子负荷或截距方面存在与受试者相关的显著差异。两个被试的数据因子结构基本相同。潜因子均值的比较结果显示,受试者之间没有均值差异。我们讨论了 MAIN-TEACH 模型和与学科相关的一般教学差异研究的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Measurement invariance between subjects: what can we learn about subject-related differences in teaching quality?

Recent publications emphasize the need to take greater account of differences in teaching quality between subjects. The empirical analysis of this topic requires a comparison of teaching quality in different subjects to distinguish generic aspects of teaching quality from subject-specific ones. In this paper, we compare teaching quality in mathematics and German lessons using observational data from primary schools in Switzerland (NMath = 319; NGerman = 237). Data were collected using an observation instrument reflecting the teaching dimensions of the MAIN-TEACH model, which was developed based on a synthesis of established observation frameworks. The dimensions of classroom management, motivational-emotional support, selection and implementation of content, cognitive activation, support for consolidation, assessment and feedback, and adaptation were tested for subject-related measurement invariance. With a two-fold measurement invariance approach, differences between the subjects were investigated at both a global and an indicator level. When applying alpha accumulation correction, no significant subject-related differences in factor loadings or intercepts were found. The factorial structure of our data was basically identical for the two subjects. The comparison of latent factor means revealed no mean differences between the subjects. We discuss the implications for both the MAIN-TEACH model and research into subject-related differences of teaching in general.

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
ZDM
ZDM
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparative analysis between three theoretical approaches through empirical experiences at university level Measurement invariance between subjects: what can we learn about subject-related differences in teaching quality? Mathematics teachers’ multiple perspectives on adaptive tasks: task evaluation and selection as core practices for teaching quality What do university mathematics students value in advanced mathematics courses? The PRIUM qualitative framework for assessment of proof comprehension: a result of collaboration among mathematicians and mathematics educators
×
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