Mismunandi gengi nemenda í PISA 2012 í stærðfræði eftir stærð skóla: Hefur menntun og starfsreynsla kennara áhrif? (Icelandic)
In: Icelandic Journal of Education / Timarit um Uppeldi og Menntun, Jg. 25 (2016), Heft 1, S. 85-107
academicJournal
Zugriff:
Examining mathematics performance in the PISA 2003 survey in Iceland reveals that higher performance was reached in large schools than in small schools (Kristín Bjarnadóttir, 2008). This was also the case in Denmark (Egelund, 2006). Mathematics was again in the focus of PISA 2012, in which most 15-year old students in Iceland participated. When the test results were revealed in December 2013, the Icelandic testing institute was asked to divide the schools into four categories: 1-10, 11-25, 26-40 and 41-128 participating students. The numbers of schools were 36, 39, 34 and 25 respectively. The corresponding numbers of students were 192, 658, 1122 and 1537 (see Tafla 1). The results in the category of largest number of students participating in PISA 2012 were again significantly better than in other school-sizes, 504 points on average against 493 points in Iceland as a whole, and only 481 points on average in schools of 11-25 participants (see Mynd 3, Mynd 4 and Tafla 4). A questionnaire was sent to mathematics teachers in 10 schools in each of the three categories with the largest number of participants, leaving out the smallest schools, as individual school results in that category were not available from PISA 2003. A total of 63 responses were collected by telephone interviews with 25 teachers in 10 schools with 41-128 participants; 21 teachers in 9 schools with 26-40 participants; and 17 teachers in 10 schools with 11-25 participants. The corresponding numbers of participants in the chosen schools were 721, 303 and 174 respectively (see Tafla 1). The questions asked of the teachers concerned their education; their experience as mathematics teachers; their experience in teaching the group participating in PISA 2012; the proportion of mathematics teaching in their teaching assignments at the time of the survey and earlier; the textbooks they used for the PISA 2012 participants; and finally they were asked if the first upper secondary school mathematics course was an option for their students. The results did not reveal much difference in the teachers' educational background. Teachers in all categories had diverse backgrounds; the average age in each category was 48, 50 and 42 years respectively (see Tafla 3), and the majority had specialized in mathematics education through different kinds of work or degrees (see Tafla 5). Nearly all teachers in the school-group with 41-128 participants had taught the PISA 2012 participants during the academic year in question, the preceding year and many also two years earlier, but not always the same students (see Tafla 6). Thus they were closely familiar with the students as well as the teaching material that led up to PISA 2012. Many of them taught multiple sections of the same class. They therefore had more opportunities to reflect upon their teaching and reconsider their methods during the repetition than other teachers. Teachers in schools with 11-25 participating students were clearly less experienced in this area. The majority of schools in all categories could offer their students opportunities to take the first upper secondary school mathematics course (see Tafla 9). According to Shulman's (1986) theories, teachers' curriculum knowledge is important, in particular familiarity with the topics and issues that have been and will be taught in the same subject area during the preceding and later years in school, and the materials that embody them. No significant difference in the use of the two textbook series available was detected (see Tafla 10). Tafla 7 informs that the proportion of mathematics in the teaching load is highest among teachers in the largest schools, which supports Egelund's (2006) hypothesis that teachers in the largest schools have the greatest opportunities to teach the subject they are best prepared for. Furthermore, one may agree with Egelund's hypothesis that large schools offer the best possibilities of teachers' collaboration and team meetings concerning a subject area. According to Tafla 8, teachers in the largest schools had the longest teaching experience compared to teachers in the two other school groups and considerably longer than teachers in schools with 11-25 participants. One might suggest long teaching experience has brought them knowledge on planning their teaching with respect to management of learning (ML), sensitivity to students (SS) and mathematical challenge (MC), although this cannot be concluded from the teachers' responses. These are the three domains in the teaching triad, proposed by Jaworski (1994) as closely interrelated areas of teachers' commitments (see Mynd 2). One may conclude that the following two factors are most important in explaining superior performance in the PISA 2012 survey in large schools compared to small schools: firstly, teaching experience, in particular the experience of teaching the students in question for more than one academic year; secondly, familiarity with the topics and issues that have been and will be taught in the same subject area during the preceding and later years in school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Athugun á niðurstöðum í stærðfræði í PISA-rannsókninni 2003 sýndi að árangur nemenda í tveimur stærstu skólunum var marktækt betri en í minni skólum. Sérstaklega var árangurinn slakur í skólum með 11-25 þátttakendur. Athugun á árangri í dönskum skólum í sömu PISA-rannsókn sýndi einnig betra gengi í stórum skólum en litlum. Þegar niðurstöður PISA 2012 á Íslandi voru komnar fram var Námsmatsstofnun beðin að flokka skólana í fjóra flokka eftir fjölda þátttakenda í PISA-rannsókninni. Árangur í flokki stærstu skólanna reyndist marktækt betri en í minni skólum. Til að grafast fyrir um hugsanlegar ástæður þessa var gerð könnun meðal stærðfræðikennara valinna skóla. Kennarar voru spurðir um menntun þeirra, starfshlutfall við stærðfræðikennslu, reynslu af stærðfræðikennslu á unglingastigi og námsefni í stærðfræði. Niðurstöður benda til þess að hátt starfshlutfall við stærðfræðikennslu, löng starfsreynsla og sér í lagi samfella í kennslu, það er reynsla kennara af að kenna sama hópi og sama námsefni yfir lengra tímabil en eitt skólaár, stuðli að góðum árangri nemenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Icelandic Journal of Education / Timarit um Uppeldi og Menntun is the property of University of Iceland, School of Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Titel: |
Mismunandi gengi nemenda í PISA 2012 í stærðfræði eftir stærð skóla: Hefur menntun og starfsreynsla kennara áhrif? (Icelandic)
|
---|---|
Autor/in / Beteiligte Person: | HREINSDÓTTIR, FREYJA ; BJARNADÓTTIR, KRISTÍN |
Zeitschrift: | Icelandic Journal of Education / Timarit um Uppeldi og Menntun, Jg. 25 (2016), Heft 1, S. 85-107 |
Veröffentlichung: | 2016 |
Medientyp: | academicJournal |
ISSN: | 2298-8394 (print) |
Sonstiges: |
|