Teaching Profiles Associated with Assessment Practices in Mathematics
Abstract
This research aims to identify teaching profiles associated with assessment practices in Mathematics and their differentiation in terms of sociodemographic variables. A sample of 4,664 teachers (Mage=38, SD=9.70, 77.36% women) at the primary educational level in the state of Baja California, Mexico was used. For data analysis, a Latent Class Analysis (LCA) was performed, and t-student and chi-square tests were conducted. Two teaching profiles were identified, the intensive and the moderate, whose distinction lies in the frequency with which they carry out the different documented evaluation practices. Although both profiles are clearly differentiated in most dimensions of the evaluation process, this was not the case for the variables on the use of evaluation techniques and instruments. In addition, differences were found in the sociodemographic variables of sex, age, years of teaching experience, institution of initial training, participation in continuous training courses, school funding and rural or urban location of the school, although with low effect sizes. However, the education level, school grade, type of working day and type of school did not represent differences between profiles. The hypothesis is partially accepted, which states that sociodemographic variables allow characterizing teaching profiles associated with assessment practices in Mathematics where, although their effect is low, they can guide the implementation of differentiated strategies to support the teaching work.
Downloads
References
Acar-Erdol, T. y Yildizli, H. (2018). Classroom assessment practices of teachers in Turkey. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 587–602. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11340a
Bauer, J. (2022). A Primer to Latent Profile and Latent Class Analysis. En M. Goller, E. Kyndt, S. Paloniemi, y C. Damşa (Eds.), Methods for Researching Professional Learning and Development: Challenges, Applications and Empirical Illustrations (pp. 243-268). Springer International Publishing. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-08518-5
Black, P. y Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
Braund, H. y DeLuca, C. (2018). Elementary students as active agents in their learning: an empirical study of the connections between assessment practices and student metacognition. Australian Educational Researcher, 45, 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0265-z
Cárdenas, M. y Arancibia, H. (2014). Potencia estadística y cálculo del tamaño del efecto en G*power: complementos a las pruebas de significación estadística y su aplicación en psicología. Salud & Sociedad, 5(2), 210-224. https://doi.org/10.22199/S07187475.2014.0002.00006
Chan, K. T. (2021). Embedding formative assessment in blended learning environment: The case of secondary Chinese language teaching in Singapore. Education Sciences, 11(7), 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070360
Chappuis, J., Stiggins, R., Chappuis, S., y Arter, J. (2012). Classroom Assessment for Student Learning. Doing it right–Using it well (2nd ed.). Pearson.
Dagdag, J. M. H. y Dagdag, J. D. (2020). Constructivism and the mathematics classroom assessments of elementary teachers. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(12), 816–823. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.12.144
Demosthenous, E., Christou, C., y Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2021). Mathematics classroom assessment: A framework for designing assessment tasks and interpreting students’ responses. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 11(3), 1088–1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11030081
Ebel, R. L. y Frisbie, D.A. (1986). Essentials of Education Measurement (4th ed.). Prentice-Hall.
George, D. y Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A Simple Guide and Reference (4th ed.). Allyn y Bacon.
Herbert, S. (2021). Overcoming Challenges in Assessing Mathematical Reasoning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 46(8), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2021v46n8.2
INEE (2018). Planea Resultados nacionales 2018, 6to primaria. Lenguaje y comunicación, Matemáticas. Plan Nacional de Evaluación de los aprendizajes, Instituto Nacional para la evaluación de la Educación. https://www.inee.edu.mx/images/stories/2018/planea/PLANEA06_Rueda_de_prensa_27nov2018.pdf
Lara, L. y Saracostti, M. (2019). Effect of parental involvement on children’s academic achievement in Chile. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01464
Leenknecht, M., Wijnia, L., Köhlen, M., Fryer, L., Rikers, R., y Loyens, S. (2021). Formative assessment as practice: the role of students’ motivation. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(2), 236–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1765228
Linzer, D. A. y Lewis, J. B. (2011). poLCA: An R Package for Polytomous Variable Latent Class Analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 42(10), 1-29. https://www.jstatsoft.org/v42/i10/
Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A., y Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: Una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 1151–1169. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
Masyn, K. E. (2013). Latent class analysis and finite mixture modeling. En T. D. Little (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of quantitative methods, Vol. 2: Statistical Analysis (pp. 551–611). Oxford University Press.
Montoya, O. (2007). Aplicación del análisis factorial a la investigación de mercados. Caso de estudio. Scientia Et Technica, 13(35), 281-286. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/849/84903549.pdf
Navarro-Mosquera, N. G., Falconí-Asanza, A. V., y Espinoza-Cordero J. (2017). El mejoramiento del proceso de evaluación de los estudiantes de la educación básica. Universidad y Sociedad, 9(4), 58-69. http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_abstractypid=S2218-36202017000400008ylng=esynrm=iso
Nylund-Gibson, K. y Choi, A. Y. (2018). Ten frequently asked questions about latent class analysis. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 4(4), 440- 461. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000176
Ondé, D. y Alvarado, J. M. (2019). Análisis de clases latentes como técnica de identificación de tipologías. Revista INFAD de Psicología. International Journal of Developmental and Educational Psychology., 5(1), 251–260.. https://doi.org/10.17060/ijodaep.2019.n1.v5.1641
Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE) (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Vol I and II) - Country Notes: México. https://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/country-notes/mexico-519eaf88/#chapter-d1e11
Paderes, B. M. y Ramos, C. (2024). Teachers’ Decision-Making in Grading Students at Risk of Academic Failure during the Implementation of the Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan. FEU Journal of Graduate Students’ Research, 1(1), 1-17. https://www.feu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Grade-Decision-Making-Paderes-Ramos-2023.pdf
Polya, G. (1965). Cómo plantear y resolver problemas. (J. Zugazagoitia, Trad.). Editorial Trillas.
Ravela, P., Picaroni, B., y Loureiro, G. (2017). ¿Cómo mejorar la evaluación en el aula? Reflexiones y propuestas de trabajo para docentes (2a ed.). Grupo Magro Editores.
Sayac, N. y Veldhuis, M. (2021). Mathematics Assessment Practices of Primary School Teachers in France. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20, 1595-1610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10229-3
Schellekens, L. H., Bok, H., de Jong, L. H., van der Schaaf, M. F., Kremer, W., y Van der Vleuten, C. (2021). A scoping review on the notions of Assessment as Learning (AaL), Assessment for Learning (AfL), and Assessment of Learning (AoL). Studies in Educational Evaluation, 71, 101094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101094
Sheikh, A. B. M. y Manap, M. N. A. (2024). Classroom Assessment Practices. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 12(3), 239-258. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2024.123018
Schildkamp, K., Van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., y Veldkamp, B. P. (2020). Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, 101602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602
Tariq, E., Asif, A., y Nazirullah. (2023). Assessment Practices and Assessment Skills of Teachers at Secondary School Level: Factorability and Associative Perspective. Journal of Peace, Development and Communication, 7(01), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.36968/JPDC-V07-I01-10
Veldhuis, M. y Van Den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2014). Primary school teachers’ assessment profiles in mathematics education. PLoS ONE, 9(1), e86817. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0086817
Wafubwa, R. N. y Csíkos, C. (2021). Formative Assessment as a Predictor of Mathematics Teachers’ Levels of Metacognitive Regulation. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 983–998. https://doi.org/10.29333/IJI.2021.14158A
Weller, B. E., Bowen, N. K., y Faubert, S. J. (2020). Latent Class Analysis: A Guide to Best Practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 46(4), 287–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798420930932
Zhao, X., Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., y Veldhuis, M. (2018). Chinese Primary School Mathematics Teachers’ Assessment Profiles: Findings from a Large-Scale Questionnaire Survey. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(7), 1387–1407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9841-3
Zulliger, S., Buholzer, A., y Ruelmann, M. (2022). Observed Quality of Formative Peer and Self-Assessment in Everyday Mathematics Teaching and its Effects on Student Performance. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 663–680. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.2.663
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Educational Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The articles and scientific documents published in RIE abide the following conditions:
1. The Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia (the publisher) has the property rights (copyright) of all the documents published and allows the reuse under the user’s license indicated in point 2.
2. All documents are published in the digital edition of RIE under a Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 España (legal document) license. These documents can be copied, used, distributed, communicated and explained publicly if: i) the author(s) and its original source of publishing (magazine, publisher and URL of the document) are cited; ii) it is not used for commercial purpose; iii) the existence and the specifications about this license are mentioned.
3. Auto-archive’s conditions. The authors are allowed and encouraged to digitally distribute the pre-print versions (a version before evaluation) and/or post-print (a version that it is already evaluated and accepted to its publication). This promotes circulation and distribution earlier and can increase the citations and significance within the academic community.
