The Effect of Teaching quality and teaching practices on PISA 2012 Mathematics Achievement of Turkish Students

Öz

The purpose of this research is to explore the relationship mathematics teaching qualification and teaching activities with mathematics scores of 8th grade Turkish students who participated in PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) 2012 using Hierarchical Linear Modeling. PISA 2012 mathematics literacy test and student questionnaire were used to collect data and these were obtained from the official website of PISA. In this study, random effects one-way ANOVA and random coefficient regression model were developed to analyze the data. The results of the research show that there are significant differences in terms of mathematics literacy between schools. It also indicates that while the increase in the student-centered instructions within the context of classroom activities decreased students’ mathematics literacy scores, teachers’ frequency of activating cognitive processes and a good disciplined environment increased students’ mathematics literacy skill. The impacts of significant variables were discussed and implications for further research were provided.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• PISA
• Mathematical literacy
• Teaching quality
• Teaching practices
• Hierarchical Linear Modeling

The Effect of Teaching quality and teaching practices on PISA 2012 Mathematics Achievement of Turkish Students

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to explore the relationship mathematics teaching qualification and teaching activities with mathematics scores of 8th grade Turkish students who participated in PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) 2012 using Hierarchical Linear Modeling. PISA 2012 mathematics literacy test and student questionnaire were used to collect data and these were obtained from the official website of PISA. In this study, random effects one-way ANOVA and random coefficient regression model were developed to analyze the data. The results of the research show that there are significant differences in terms of mathematics literacy between schools. It also indicates that while the increase in the student-centered instructions within the context of classroom activities decreased students’ mathematics literacy scores, teachers’ frequency of activating cognitive processes and a good disciplined environment increased students’ mathematics literacy skill. The impacts of significant variables were discussed and implications for further research were provided.

Keywords

• PISA
• Mathematical literacy
• Teaching quality
• Teaching practices
• Hierarchical Linear Modeling

References

1. Aksu,G., Güzeller, C.O.,& Eser, M. T (2017). Analysis of maths literacy performances of students with Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM): The Case of PISA 2012 Turkey. Education and Science, 42 (191),247-266.
2. Akyüz, G., & Berberoğlu, G. (2010). Teacher and classroom characteristics and their relations to mathematics achievement of the students in the TIMSS, New Horizons in Education, 58(1),77-95.
3. Akyüz, G., & Pala, N. M. (2010). PISA 2003 sonuçlarına göre öğrenci ve sınıf özelliklerinin matematik okuryazarlığına ve problem çözme becerilerine etkisi (The effect of student and class characteristics on mathematics literacy and problem solving in PISA 2003). İlköğretim Online, 9(2), 668-678.
4. Akyüz, G., & Satıcı, K. (2013). PISA 2003 verilerine göre matematik okuryazarlığının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi: Türkiye ve Hong Kong-Çin modelleri (Investigation of the Factors Affecting Mathematics Literacy Using PISA 2003 Results: Turkey and Hong Kong-China). Kastamonu Üniversitesi Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi. 21(2), 503-522.
5. Anderson, J. O., Lin, H-S., Treagust, D. F., Ross, S. P., & Yore, L. D. (2007). Using large scale assessment data sets for research in science and mathematics education: Programme for international student assessment (PISA). International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5, 591-614.
6. Archambault, I., Janosz, M., & Chouinard, R. (2012). Teacher beliefs as predictors of adolescents' cognitive engagement and achievement in math. The Journal of Educational Research, 105(5), 319-328.
7. Arum, R., & Velez, M. (2012). Improving learning environments - school discipline and student achievement in comparative perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
8. Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2013). The effect of content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge on instructional quality and student achievement. In M. Kunter, J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss, & M. Neubrand (Eds.), Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers: Results from the COACTIV project (pp. 175–206). New York, NY: Springer.

9. Berberoğlu, G., & Kalender, İ. (2005). Öğrenci başarısının yıllara, okul türlerine, bölgelere göre incelenmesi: ÖSS ve PISA analizi (Investigation of student achievement across years, school types and regions: The SSE and PISA analyses). Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 4(7), 21-35.
10. Blanton, L. P., Sindelar, P. T., Correa, V., I., Hardman, M., McDonnell, J., & Kuhel, K. (2002). Conceptions of beginning teacher quality: Models for conducting research. (COPSSE Document Number RS-6E). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Center on Personnel Studies in Special Education. Retrieved from http://copsse.education.ufl.edu/copsse/docs/RS-6/1/RS-6.pdf
11. Bloom, B.S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Brophy, J. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1069-1077. Doi:10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1069
12. Bynner J., & Parsons S. (2005). Does numeracy matter more? London: National Research and Development Centre for adult literacy and numeracy, Institute of Education, University of London. Retrieved from http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10004758/1/parsons2006does.pdf
13. Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. Doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
14. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–46. Retrieved from https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/viewFile/392/515
15. Davis-Langston, C. (2012). Exploring relationships among teaching styles, teachers’ perceptions of their self efficacy and students’ mathematics achievement. (Doctoral dissertation). Virginia, Liberty University. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/497
16. Deal, S. R. (2010). Graduate students’ perceptions of teacher effectiveness. The Journal of the Oklahoma Association of Teacher Educators, 14, 9-18. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED524989.pdf#page=9
17. EARGED. (2008). PISA’da okuma becerileri, PISA’da matematik okuryazarlığı (Reading skills in PISA, Mathematical literacy in PISA). Retrieved from http://earged.meb.gov.tr/pisa/dokuman/2009/2009pisa.pdf
18. EARGED (2010). EARGED PISA Bülteni 3. Retrieved from http://yegitek.meb.gov.tr/earged/dosyalar%5Cpisa%5Cpisa_bulten3.pdf
19. Eccles J.S., & Roeser R.W. (2011). Schools as developmental contexts during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 225–241. Doi:10.1111/j.1532 7795.2010.00725.x
20. Gallagher, H. A. (2002, April). The relationship between measures of teacher quality and student achievement: The case of Vaughn elementary. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, L. A. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED468254.pdf
21. Gelbal, S., & Kelecioğlu, H. (2007). Teachers’ proficiency perceptions of about the measurement and evaluation techniques and the problems they confront. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33, 135-145.
22. Gözütok, F. D., Akgün, Ö. E., & Karacaoğlu, C. (2005). İlköğretim programlarının öğretmen yeterlikleri açısından değerlendirilmesi (Evaluation of primary education programs in terms of teacher competencies). Eğitimde Yansımalar: VIII Yeni İlköğretim Programlarını Değerlendirme Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı (ss.17-40), Ankara: Sim Matbaası.
23. Harris, D.N., & Sass, T.R. (2011). Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7-8), 798-812. Doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.009
24. Hay, McBer. (2000). Research into teacher effectiveness: A model of teacher effectiveness. (Report no: 210), Nottingham: Department for Education and Employment. Retrieved from http://ateneu.xtec.cat/wikiform/wikiexport/_media/formgest/equips_directius/st02/bloc_5/5_rr216investigacio_professors_eficients.pdf
25. Hill, P.W., & Rowe, K.J. (1996). Multilevel modelling in school effectiveness research. School effectiveness and school improvement, 7, 1-34.
26. Hill, P.W., & Rowe, K.J. (1998). Modelling student progress in studies of educational effectiveness. School effectiveness and school improvement, 9(3), 310-333.
27. İlgün-Dibek, M. (2015). PISA 2012 matematik okuryazarlığı ile öğrenme ve öğretme süreci değişkenleri arasındaki ilişkiler (Relationship between learning and teaching variables and PISA 2012 mathematics literacy). Unpublished master’s thesis. Ankara University, Ankara.
28. Jones T. (2012). Community in the classroom: An approach to curriculum and instruction as a means for the development of student cognitive, social, and emotional engagement in a high school classroom. Educational Perspectives, 44 (1-2), 58-64.
29. Kagan, D., & Fasan, V. (1988). Stress and the environment. College Teaching, 36, 75–80.
30. Kirkpatrick, N.D (2002). The effects of teacher quality variables on students’ mathematics achievement (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3067771)
31. Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805–820. Doi:10.1037/a0032583
32. Lamb, S. & Fullarton, S. (2002). Classroom and teacher effects in mathematics achievement: Results from TIMSS. Australian Journal of Education, 46(2), 154-171. Doi:10.1177/000494410204600205
33. Lee, C. Y. (2000). Student motivation in the online learning environment. Journal of Educational Media & Library Sciences, 37(4), 367–375.
34. Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., Pauli, C., Drollinger-Vetter, B., Klieme, E., & Reusser, K. (2009). Quality of geometry instruction and its short-term impact on students’ understanding of the Pythagorean Theorem. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 527–537. Doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc. 2008.11.001
35. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?. American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19. Doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14
36. McCrone, S., & Dossey, J. A. (2007). Mathematical literacy–It’s become fundamental. Principal Leadership, 7(5), 32–37.
37. MEB. (2005). İlköğretim matematik 6-8. sınıflar öğretim programı kitabı (Primary Mathematics 6-8. Classes Curriculum Book). Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. Retrieved from http://talimterbiye.mebnet.net/Ogretim%20Programlari/ortaokul/2010-2011/Matematik%20-%206%20.pdf
38. MEB. (2007). PISA 2006 Uluslararası Öğrenci Değerlendirme Projesi, Ulusal Ön Rapor (Program for international student assessment PISA 2006, national report). Ankara: Eğitim Araştırma ve Geliştirme Dairesi Yayınları. Retrieved from http://www.earged.meb.gov.tr/ dosyalar/dokumanlar/uluslarara¬si/PISA2006.pdf
39. MEB. (2010). PISA 2009 uluslararası öğrenci değerlendirme projesi, ulusal ön rapor (Program for international student assessment PISA 2009, national report). Ankara: Eğitim Araştırma ve Geliştirme Dairesi Yayınları. Retrieved from http://pisa.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/pisa-2009-ulusal-on-rapor.pdf
40. MEB. (2011). TIMSS 2007 ulusal matematik ve fen raporu 8. Sınıflar (TIMSS 2007 national mathematics and science report Grades 8). Ankara: EARGED. Retrieved from http://timss.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/timss_2007_ulusal_raporu.pdf
41. Moerbeek, M., Breukelen, G.J.P., & Berger, M.P.F. (2002). A comparison between traditional methods and multilevel regression for the analysis of multicenter intervention studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56, 341-350.
42. Ning, B., Van Damme, J., Van Den Noortgate, W., Yang, X., & Gielen, S. (2015). The influence of classroom disciplinary climate of schools on reading achievement: A cross country comparative study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(4), 1–26. Doi:10.1080/09243453.2015.1025796
43. OECD. (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world. First results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD Publishing.
44. OECD (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments first results from TALIS. Paris: OECD Publication. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/43023606.pdf
45. OECD. (2010). The high cost of low educational performance: The long-run economic impact of improving educational outcomes. Paris: OECD Publication. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/44417824.pdf
46. OECD. (2014a). PISA 2012 Technical Report. Paris: OECD Publication. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/PISA-2012-technical-report-final.pdf
47. OECD. (2014b). PISA 2012 Results: What students know and can do – Student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Volume I, Revised edition, February 2014). Paris: OECD Publication. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa 2012-results-volume-I.pdf
48. Palardy, G. J., & Rumberger, R. W. (2008). Teacher effectiveness in the first grade: The importance of background qualifications, attitudes, and instructional practices for student learning. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,30, 111-140.
49. Peart, N. A., & Campbell, F. A. (1999). At-risk students’ perceptions of teacher effectiveness. Journal for a Just and Caring Education, 5(3), 269–284.
50. Randler, C., & Bogner, F. X. (2002). Comparing methods of instruction using bird species identification skills as indicators. Educational Research, 36(4), 181–188.
51. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. London: Sage.
52. Rowe, K.J., & Hill, P.W. (1998). Modelling educational effectiveness in classrooms: The use of multi-level structural equations to model students’ progress. Educational Research and Evaluation, 4(4), 307-347.
53. Ruzek, E. A., Hafen, C. A., Allen, J. P., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., & Pianta, R. C. (2016). How teacher emotional support motivates students: The mediating roles of perceived peer relatedness, autonomy support, and competence. Learning and Instruction, 42, 95–103. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.004
54. Schaal, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2005). Human visual perception—Learning at workstations. Journal of Biological Education, 40 (1), 32–37. Doi:10.1080/00219266.2005.9656006
55. Scheerens, J. (1993). Basic school effectiveness research: Items for a research agenda. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 4(1), 17-36. Doi:10.1080/0924345930040102
56. Scheerens, J., Vermeulen, C. J. A. J., & Pelgrum, W. J. (1989). Generalizability of instructional and school effectiveness indicators across nations. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(7), 789 - 799.
57. Schleicher, A. (2007). Can competencies assesed by PISA be considered the fundemental school knowledge:15-year-olds should possess? Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), 349-357.
58. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Cogan, L. S., Jakwerth, P. M., & Houang, R. T. (1999). Facing the consequences: Using TIMSS for a closer look at U.S. mathematics and science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
59. Smith, C.J., & Laslett, R. (1992). Effective Classroom Management. United States: Routlage. Sortkær, B., & Reimer, D (2016). Disciplinary climate and student achievement: evidence from schools and classrooms. Aarhus: Danish School of Education, Aarhus University. Retrieved from http://edu.au.dk/fileadmin/edu/Udgivelser/Eboeger/Working_papers_DPU_2016_ Disciplinary_Climate_and_Student_Achievement.pdf. ID: 2347254578
60. Sturm, H., & Franz X. Bogner, F.X. (2008) Student‐oriented versus teacher‐centred: The effect of learning at workstations about birds and bird flight on cognitive achievement and motivation. International Journal of Science Education, 30(7), 941-959, DOI: 10.1080/09500690701313995
61. Tennant, J. E., Demaray, M. K., Malecki, C. K., Terry, M. N., Clary, M., & Elzinga, N. (2015). Students’ ratings of teacher support and academic and social-emotional wellbeing. School Psychology Quarterly, 30(4), 494-512. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000106
62. Usta, H.G. (2014). PISA 2003 ve PISA 2012 Matematik okuryazarlığı üzerine uluslararası bir karşılaştırma: Türkiye ve Finlandiya (PISA 2003 and PISA 2012 mathematics literacy on an international comparison: Turkey and Finland). Unpublished master’s thesis. Ankara University, Ankara.
63. Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89–122.
64. Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED447128).NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center. Doi:10.1177/019263650408863811
65. Wentzel K.R., Battle A., Russell S.L., & Looney L.B. (2010). Social supports from teachers and peers as predictors of academic and social motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(3), 193–202. Doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.002