Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities

Emine Önen; Mehmet Fatih Doğuyurt; Esra Oyar

doi:10.17275/per.26.44.13.3

Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities

Abstract

This study aims to define students' profiles of their perceptions in terms of teaching practices and learning opportunities and to assess the generalizability of these profiles across gender groups by using single-group and multi-group latent profile analyses. This study used Turkish national data from the PISA 2022 study (N= 7155 students from 196 schools). For female and male students, three student profiles that differed in terms of their perceptions of cognitive activation in mathematics (COGACRCO, COGACMCO) have emerged. For both groups, while Profile-1 is a profile with the lowest mean scores in all indicators, Profile-3 has the highest mean scores in all indicators. Students who are members of Profile-2, the most common profile observed in both subgroups, have scores around the average for all indicators. Results revealed that data supported partial structural similarity. Profile-1 and Profile-2 were similar in terms of all indicators. However, members of Profile-3 were found to be different between subgroups in terms of their perceptions of the learning opportunities they have for developing mathematical reasoning and mathematical thinking skills. Evidence for both predictive and explanatory similarity was obtained, which indicated that the relationships between profile memberships and both predictors and outcomes are similar across gender groups.

Keywords

Students’ perceptions of teaching practices and learning opportunities, mathematical literacy skills, profile similarity

Supporting Institution

This research received no specific grant from public, commercial, or not-for-profit funding agencies.

Ethical Statement

This study is a secondary analysis using openly available PISA 2022 data. The authors did not directly administer any interventions to human subjects.

Thanks

The authors would like to thank the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for providing access to the PISA 2022 dataset used in this study.

References

Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 243–248. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194059
Asparouhov, T. (2005). Sampling weights in latent variable modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 411–434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1203_4
Barr, J. J. (2016). Developing a positive classroom climate. IDEA Paper# 61. IDEA Center, Inc.
Basaran, B. (2024). Determining the factors affecting the ICT use of Turkish students attending PISA-2018: Multilevel profile analysis approach. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 18533–18560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12539-9
Bayram, M. A. (2024). Türkiye’de matematik eğitimi revizyonları ve matematik seferberliği [Reforms in mathematics education and the mathematics mobilization in Türkiye]. İlke Yayınları. https://doi.org/10.26414/anr12
Berger, N., Mackenzie, E., & Holmes, K. (2020). Positive attitudes towards mathematics and science are mutually beneficial for student achievement: A latent profile analysis of TIMSS 2015. The Australian Educational Researcher, 47(3), 409-444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-020-00379-8
Carnoy, M., Khavenson, T., Loyalka, P., Schmidt, W. H., & Zakharov, A. (2016). Revisiting the relationship between international assessment outcomes and educational production: Evidence from a longitudinal PISA-TIMSS sample. American Educational Research Journal, 53(4), 1054–1085. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216653180
Depren, S. K., & Kalkan, S. B. (2017). Determination of students ' profiles according to home educational resources and mathematics achievement via latent class analysis. Marmara University Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 39(2), 503-518. https://doi.org/10.14780/muiibd.384174
Dursun, N. S., & Aksoy, N. (2024). The relationship between gender (in)equity and mathematics self-concept of primary school students in mathematics lessons. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 22(3), 2075–2096. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1464170
Fielding, S., Fayers, P. M., & Ramsay, C. R. (2009). Investigating the missing data mechanism in quality of life outcomes: A comparison of approaches. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 7, 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-7-57

Förtsch, C., Werner, S., Dorfner, T., von Kotzebue, L., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2017). Effects of cognitive activation in biology lessons on students’ situational interest and achievement. Research in Science Education, 47, 559-578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9517-y
García, T., Rodriguez, C., Betts, L., Areces, D., & González-Castro, P. (2016). How affective-motivational variables and approaches to learning predict mathematics achievement in upper elementary levels. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 25-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.05.021
Genç, M., & Çolakoğlu, Ö. M. (2021). Modeling the Effects of Instructional Quality on Mathematical Literacy Performance from the Students’ Perspective: PISA 2012 Turkey Sample. Education and Science, 46(206), 1-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2020.9013
Haara, F. O., Bolstad, O. H., & Jenssen, E. S. (2017). Research on mathematical literacy in schools-aim, approach, and attention. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(3), 285-313. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9512
Hofmans, J., Wille, B., & Schreurs, B. (2020). Person-centered methods in vocational research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 118, 103398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103398
Hwang, J., & Ham, Y. (2021). Relationship between mathematical literacy and opportunity to learn with different types of mathematical tasks. Journal on Mathematics Education, 12(2), 199-222. http://doi.org/10.22342/jme.12.2.13625.199-222
Jeong, S., Hwang, J., & Ahn, J. S. (2023). Investigating students' profiles of mathematical modeling: A latent profile analysis in PISA 2012. Research in Mathematical Education, 26(3), 235-252. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmed.2023.26.3.235
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39, 5-14.
Kabael, T., & Barak, B. (2016). Research of middle school pre-service mathematics teachers’ mathematical literacy on PISA items. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 7(2), 321-349. https://doi.org/10.16949/turcomat.73360
Kaiser, G., & Willander, T. (2005). Development of mathematical literacy: Results of an empirical study. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 24(2-3), 48-60. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hri016
Kramarski, B., & Mizrachi, N. (2006). Online discussion and self-regulated learning: Effects of instructional methods on mathematical literacy. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 218–230. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.4.218-231
Kitsantas, A., Cleary, T. J., Whitehead, A., & Cheema, J. (2021). Relations among classroom context, student motivation, and mathematics literacy: a social cognitive perspective. Metacognition and Learning, 16, 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09249-1
Lazarides, R., & Buchholz, J. (2019). Student-perceived teaching quality: How is it related to different achievement emotions in mathematics classrooms? Learning and Instruction, 61, 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.01.001
Lazarides, R., Schiepe-Tiska, A., Heine, J. H., & Buchholz, J. (2022). Expectancy-value profiles in math: How are student-perceived teaching behaviors related to motivational transitions? Learning and Individual Differences, 98, 102198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102198
Li, H. X., Zhang, A. X., Zhang, M. L., Huang, B. J., Zhao, X. M., Gao, J., & Si, J. W. (2021). Concurrent and longitudinal associations between parental educational involvement, teacher support, and math anxiety: The role of math learning involvement in elementary school children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 66, 101984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101984
Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2019). Statistical analysis with missing data (3rd ed.). Wiley.
Liu, X., & Whitford, M. (2011). Opportunities-to-learn at home: Profiles of students with and without reaching science proficiency. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 375-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9259-y
Lourdes, M., Vera, M., & Francisco, P. J. C. D. R. (2014). Attitudes towards mathematics: Effects of individual, motivational, and social support factors. Child Development Research, 2012, 876028. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012
Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018). Mathematics curriculum (Primary and middle school grades 1–8). Retrieved September 14, 2024.
Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2024a). PISA 2022 Türkiye Report. MoNE Publications.
Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2024b). Meb-Approved “Free Textbooks” Will Be Required in Private Schools. Retriewed August 10, 2024, from, https://www.meb.gov.tr/ozel-okullarda-meb-onayli-ucretsiz-ders-kitabi-okutma-zorunlulugu-basliyor/haber/32922/tr
Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2024c). Common text for the curricula The Century Of Türkiye Education Model. Retrieved September 14, 2024, from https://tymm.meb.gov.tr/ortak-metin
Morin, A. J. S., Meyer, J. P., Creusier, J., & Biétry, F. (2016). Multiple-group analysis of similarity in latent profile solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 19(2), 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115621148
Mueller, M., Yankelewitz, D., & Maher, C. (2014). Teachers promoting student mathematical reasoning. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 7(2), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/24727466.2014.11790339
Muthén, B., & Muthén, L. K. (2000). Integrating person‐centered and variable‐centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 24(6), 882–891. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2000.tb02070.x
Muthén, B.O., & Satorra, A. (1995). Complex sample data in structural equation modeling. Sociological Methodology, 25, 267-316. https://doi.org/10.2307/271070
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2012). 1998-2012. Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Muthén & Muthén.
OECD (2013), PISA 2012 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Mathematics, Reading, Science, Problem Solving and Financial Literacy, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190511-en
OECD (2015), The ABC of Gender Equality in Education: Aptitude, Behaviour, Confidence, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264229945-en
OECD. (2023a). PISA 2022 technical report. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.oecd.org/en/about/programmes/pisa/pisa-data.html
OECD. (2023b). PISA 2022 Results: Learning During – and From – Disruption. Retrieved July 25, 2024, from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2022-results-volume-ii_a97db61c-en
Park, J., & Yu, H. T. (2018). Recommendations on the sample sizes for multilevel latent class models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 78(5), 737–761. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164417719111
Peugh, J., & Fan, X. (2013). Modeling unobserved heterogeneity using latent profile analysis: A Monte Carlo simulation. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(4), 616–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2013.824780
Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2004). Using the Delta Method for approximate interval estimation of parameter functions in SEM. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(4), 621–637. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1104_7
Samuelsson, M., & Samuelsson, J. (2016). Gender differences in boys’ and girls’ perception of teaching and learning mathematics. Open Review of Educational Research, 3(1), 18-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2015.1127770
Santibañez, L., & Fagioli, L. (2016). Nothing succeeds like success. Equity, student outcomes, and opportunity to learn in high-and middle-income countries. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40(6), 517-525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025416642050
Schmidt, W., P. Zoido and L. Cogan (2014). "Schooling Matters: Opportunity to Learn in PISA 2012", OECD Education Working Papers, No. 95, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3v0hldmchl-en
Sigurjónsson, J. Ö., Sigurðardóttir, A. K., Gísladóttir, B., & van Bommel, J. (2022). Connecting student perceptions and classroom observations as measures of cognitive activation. Nordic Studies in Education, 42(4), 328-346. https://doi.org/10.23865/nse.v42.3636
Smith, A. E., & Glynn, T. L. (1990). Contexts for boys and girls learning mathematics: Teacher interactions and student behaviour in two. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 19, 9–16.
Sortkær, B., & Reimer, D. (2018). Classroom disciplinary climate of schools and gender–evidence from the Nordic countries. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29(4), 511-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1460382
Stevens, F. I. (1993). Applying an opportunity-to-learn conceptual framework to the investigation of the effects of teaching practices via secondary analyses of multiple-case-study summary data. The Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 232-248. https://doi.org/10.2307/2295463
Tao, Y., Meng, Y., Gao, Z., & Yang, X. (2022). Perceived teacher support, student engagement, and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology, 42(4), 401-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2022.2033168
Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competencies: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938
Wang, F., Liu, Y., & Leung, S. O. (2022). Disciplinary climate, opportunity to learn, and mathematics achievement: An analysis using doubly latent multilevel structural equation modeling. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 33(3), 479-496. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2022.2043393
Wang, X., Houang, R. T., Schmidt, W. H., & Kelly, K. S. (2024). Relationship Between Opportunity to Learn, Mathematics Self-Efficacy, and Math Performance: Evidence from PISA 2012 in 63 Countries and Economies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10446-6
Warm, T.A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika, 54, 427–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294627
Wijaya, A., den Heuvel-Panhuizen, V., Doorman, M., & Veldhuis, M. (2018). Opportunity-to-learn to solve context-based mathematics tasks and students' performance in solving these tasks–lessons from Indonesia. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93420
Wilson, A., Madjar, I., & McNaughton, S. (2016). Opportunity to learn about disciplinary literacy in senior secondary English classrooms in New Zealand. The Curriculum Journal, 27(2), 204–228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2015.1134339
Wong, L. F., & Low, L. (2020). Strategies to foster mathematical reasoning and communication. In Mathematics Teaching in Singapore: Vol 1: Theory-informed Practices (pp. 107–122).
Xiao, F., & Sun, L. (2021). Students’ motivation and affection profiles and their relation to mathematics achievement, persistence, and behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 533593. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.533593
Zhang, W., & Lian, R. (2024). The impact of reading metacognitive strategies on mathematics learning efficiency and performance: An analysis using PISA 2018 data in China. Acta Psychologica, 246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104247

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Primary Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Emine Önen
0000-0002-0398-3191
Türkiye

Mehmet Fatih Doğuyurt
0000-0001-9206-3321
Türkiye

Esra Oyar ^*
0000-0002-4337-7815
Türkiye

Publication Date

May 4, 2026

Submission Date

February 4, 2026

Acceptance Date

March 16, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 13 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.44.13.3

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA34AD66RE

APA

Önen, E., Doğuyurt, M. F., & Oyar, E. (2026). Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities. Participatory Educational Research, 13(3), 260-281. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.44.13.3

AMA

1.Önen E, Doğuyurt MF, Oyar E. Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities. PER. 2026;13(3):260-281. doi:10.17275/per.26.44.13.3

Chicago

Önen, Emine, Mehmet Fatih Doğuyurt, and Esra Oyar. 2026. “Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities”. Participatory Educational Research 13 (3): 260-81. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.44.13.3.

EndNote

Önen E, Doğuyurt MF, Oyar E (May 1, 2026) Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities. Participatory Educational Research 13 3 260–281.

IEEE

[1]E. Önen, M. F. Doğuyurt, and E. Oyar, “Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities”, PER, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 260–281, May 2026, doi: 10.17275/per.26.44.13.3.

ISNAD

Önen, Emine - Doğuyurt, Mehmet Fatih - Oyar, Esra. “Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities”. Participatory Educational Research 13/3 (May 1, 2026): 260-281. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.44.13.3.

JAMA

1.Önen E, Doğuyurt MF, Oyar E. Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities. PER. 2026;13:260–281.

MLA

Önen, Emine, et al. “Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities”. Participatory Educational Research, vol. 13, no. 3, May 2026, pp. 260-81, doi:10.17275/per.26.44.13.3.

Vancouver

1.Emine Önen, Mehmet Fatih Doğuyurt, Esra Oyar. Student Profiles of Own Perceptions Regarding Teaching Practices and Learning Opportunities. PER. 2026 May 1;13(3):260-81. doi:10.17275/per.26.44.13.3