探索教师持续使用数据化教学的预测因素。

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Learning Disabilities Pub Date : 2024-09-18 DOI:10.1177/00222194241275636
Jechun An,Emma Shanahan,Seohyeon Choi,Kristen L McMaster
{"title":"探索教师持续使用数据化教学的预测因素。","authors":"Jechun An,Emma Shanahan,Seohyeon Choi,Kristen L McMaster","doi":"10.1177/00222194241275636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this logistic regression study was to identify predictors of teacher-reported sustained use of data-based instruction (DBI) during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess the extent to which the identified predictors explained teachers' sustained use after completing programmatic support for intensive early writing instruction. We surveyed 58 teachers who participated in a professional development efficacy trial regarding their sustained use of DBI in writing. The model indicated a higher predicted probability of sustaining DBI for teachers who received the full treatment (tools, learning modules, and coaching for 20 weeks of intervention during their year of participation in the efficacy trial) compared to teachers in the control group who only received tools and learning modules at the end of their participation year. In addition, teachers who taught in-person were more likely to sustain compared to those who taught in remote or hybrid models, controlling for other variables. Furthermore, as the number of facilitators that teachers reported increased, teachers were more likely to sustain their use of DBI components, controlling for other variables. Further research could shed light on the relative impact of different types of facilitators and different levels of support.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"7 1","pages":"222194241275636"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring Predictors of Teachers' Sustained Use of Data-Based Instruction.\",\"authors\":\"Jechun An,Emma Shanahan,Seohyeon Choi,Kristen L McMaster\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00222194241275636\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this logistic regression study was to identify predictors of teacher-reported sustained use of data-based instruction (DBI) during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess the extent to which the identified predictors explained teachers' sustained use after completing programmatic support for intensive early writing instruction. We surveyed 58 teachers who participated in a professional development efficacy trial regarding their sustained use of DBI in writing. The model indicated a higher predicted probability of sustaining DBI for teachers who received the full treatment (tools, learning modules, and coaching for 20 weeks of intervention during their year of participation in the efficacy trial) compared to teachers in the control group who only received tools and learning modules at the end of their participation year. In addition, teachers who taught in-person were more likely to sustain compared to those who taught in remote or hybrid models, controlling for other variables. Furthermore, as the number of facilitators that teachers reported increased, teachers were more likely to sustain their use of DBI components, controlling for other variables. Further research could shed light on the relative impact of different types of facilitators and different levels of support.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"222194241275636\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241275636\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241275636","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项逻辑回归研究的目的是确定在 COVID-19 大流行期间教师报告的持续使用基于数据的教学(DBI)的预测因素,并评估已确定的预测因素在多大程度上解释了教师在完成强化早期写作教学的项目支持后的持续使用情况。我们对 58 名参加专业发展效果试验的教师进行了调查,以了解他们在写作中持续使用 DBI 的情况。模型显示,与对照组的教师相比,接受了全面治疗(工具、学习模块以及在参与疗效试验的一年中为期 20 周的干预辅导)的教师持续使用 DBI 的预测概率更高,因为对照组的教师在参与试验的一年结束时只接受了工具和学习模块。此外,在控制其他变量的情况下,与采用远程或混合模式授课的教师相比,采用面对面授课的教师更有可能坚持下去。此外,在控制其他变量的情况下,随着教师所报告的促进者人数的增加,教师更有可能持续使用 DBI 组件。进一步的研究可以揭示不同类型的促进者和不同程度的支持的相对影响。
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
Exploring Predictors of Teachers' Sustained Use of Data-Based Instruction.
The purpose of this logistic regression study was to identify predictors of teacher-reported sustained use of data-based instruction (DBI) during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess the extent to which the identified predictors explained teachers' sustained use after completing programmatic support for intensive early writing instruction. We surveyed 58 teachers who participated in a professional development efficacy trial regarding their sustained use of DBI in writing. The model indicated a higher predicted probability of sustaining DBI for teachers who received the full treatment (tools, learning modules, and coaching for 20 weeks of intervention during their year of participation in the efficacy trial) compared to teachers in the control group who only received tools and learning modules at the end of their participation year. In addition, teachers who taught in-person were more likely to sustain compared to those who taught in remote or hybrid models, controlling for other variables. Furthermore, as the number of facilitators that teachers reported increased, teachers were more likely to sustain their use of DBI components, controlling for other variables. Further research could shed light on the relative impact of different types of facilitators and different levels of support.
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
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Journal of Learning Disabilities (JLD), a multidisciplinary, international publication, presents work and comments related to learning disabilities. Initial consideration of a manuscript depends upon (a) the relevance and usefulness of the content to the readership; (b) how the manuscript compares to other articles dealing with similar content on pertinent variables (e.g., sample size, research design, review of literature); (c) clarity of writing style; and (d) the author"s adherence to APA guidelines. Articles cover such fields as education, psychology, neurology, medicine, law, and counseling.
期刊最新文献
Derivational Morphology Training in French-Speaking 9- to 14- Year-Old Children and Adolescents With Developmental Dyslexia: Does It Improve Morphological Awareness, Reading, and Spelling Outcome Measures? Graph Out Loud: Pre-Service Teachers' Data Decisions and Interpretations of CBM Progress Graphs. What Environments Support Reading Growth Among Current Compared With Former Reading Intervention Recipients? A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Their Schools. Ongoing Teacher Support for Data-Based Individualization: A Meta-Analysis and Synthesis. The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act: Clarifying the Relationship Between Free Appropriate Public Education and Least Restrictive Environment
×
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