Profiles of Chinese mathematics teachers’ teaching beliefs and their effects on students’ achievement

Critiques of coefficient alpha as an estimate of scale reliability are widespread in the literature. However, the continuous overuse of this statistic in mathematics education research suggests a disconnection between theory and practice. As such, this article argues, in a non-technical way, for the limited usefulness of coefficient alpha, its overuse, and its alternatives in estimating scale reliability. Coefficient alpha gives information only about the degree of the interrelatedness of a set of items that measures a construct. Contrary to the widely circulated misconceptions in mathematics education research, a high coefficient alpha value does not mean the instrument is reliable, and it does not imply the instrument measures a single construct. Coefficient alpha can only be dependable as an estimate of reliability under verifiable and restrictive conditions. I expose these conditions and present steps for their verification in empirical studies. I discuss some alternatives to coefficient alpha with references to non-technical articles where worked examples and programming codes are available. I hope this exposition will influence the practices of mathematics education researchers regarding estimation of scale reliability.

Section: Overuse Of Coefficient Alpha In Mathematics Education Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cronbach’s alpha in mathematics education research: Its appropriateness, overuse, and alternatives in estimating scale reliability

Zakariya

2022

“…Notably, beliefs can influence the level of personal commitment to learning ( Clark and Peterson, 1986 ; Ravindran et al, 2005 ). Research has shown that PSTs mostly hold a constructivist view of teaching and learning ( Ogan-Bekiroglu and Akkoç, 2009 ; Cansiz and Cansiz, 2019 ) and can be predicted by mastery experience ( Cansiz and Cansiz, 2019 ; Wang et al, 2022 ); while Chinese PSTs do not ( Sang et al, 2009 ); however, their views can be changed over time due to their learning environment ( McMinn et al, 2020 ; Li and Huang, 2023 ). How does constructivist belief related to other psychological attributes contribute to PSTs’ preparedness for teaching?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivation to teach and preparedness for teaching among preservice teachers in China: The effect of conscientiousness and constructivist teaching beliefs

Huang

Sang

2023

“Preparedness for teaching” refers to the degree of confidence preservice teachers have, and reflects their ability. Developing preparedness for teaching is an important part of preservice teachers’ professionalization. A substantial body of literature has documented the critical influence of the motivation to teach on preparedness; however, how this relation is impacted by mediating and moderating mechanisms remains unclear. To respond to this gap in knowledge, the present study constructed a mediated moderation model through structural equation modeling and multigroup tests using 383 questionnaires completed by preservice teachers in China. The findings indicate that the preservice teachers’ genders, entry path, and levels of certainty about their future teaching career choices all influence their preparedness for teaching. Specifically, preservice teachers who believe that they will choose a teaching career in the future have more intrinsic motivation, stronger constructivist teaching beliefs, and a higher levels of teaching preparedness. Moreover, preservice teachers’ motivations to teach can positively predict their constructivist teaching beliefs and preparedness for teaching, but their constructivist teaching beliefs alone do not have a mediating effect on the relationship between motivation to teach and preparedness for teaching. However, the findings reveal that the constructivist teaching beliefs of highly conscientiousness group can partially mediate the relationship between the motivation to teach and the preparedness for teaching. Additionally, conscientiousness moderates the influence of constructivist teaching beliefs on preparedness for teaching. The study provides meaningful insights into the within-personal traits of how and when motivation to teach affects preparedness for teaching, which may be useful for the motivation best practices for preservice teacher recruitment, training, and support to create high-quality teachers.

“…Many research frameworks have been built on mathematical beliefs ( Hannula, 2011 , 2012 ). The teaching beliefs of mathematics teachers refer to their orientations toward teaching mathematics, which involve perspectives regarding instructional activities, the cognitive processes of students, and the purpose of mathematics ( Wang et al, 2022 ). Currently, the transmissive and constructive taxonomy of teaching beliefs is commonly used in existing studies and international assessments, such as TEDS-M ( Blömeke and Kaiser, 2014 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preservice mathematics teachers’ perceptions of mathematical problem solving and its teaching: A case from China

Jiang

Zhang²,

Jiang³

et al. 2022

Preservice mathematics teachers’ accurate understanding of mathematical problem solving and its teaching is key to the performance of their professional quality. This study aims to investigate preservice mathematics teachers’ understanding of problem solving and its teaching and compares it with the understanding of in-service mathematics teachers. After surveying 326 in-service mathematics teachers, this study constructs a reliable and valid tool for the cognition of mathematical problem solving and its teaching and conducts a questionnaire survey on 26 preservice mathematics teachers. Survey results reveal that preservice mathematics teachers have a good understanding of mathematical problem solving and its teaching and are more confident in the transfer value of problem solving ability. By contrast, in-service teachers are more optimistic that problem solving requires exploration, continuous thinking, and the participation of metacognition. This article concludes that preservice mathematics teachers should focus more on the initiative and creativity of students and put students at the center of education. In addition, teacher educators should provide more teaching practice opportunities for preservice teachers. The findings also show that in-service teachers’ understanding of problem solving and its teaching is inferior to that of preservice teachers on some indicators, implying the importance of post-service training for in-service teachers.