Students' Conceptual Knowledge and Process Skills in Civic Education: Identifying Cognitive Profiles and Classroom Correlates

Zhang, Ting; Torney‐Purta, Judith; Barber, Carolyn

doi:10.1080/00933104.2012.649467

Cited by 36 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In civic education, researchers have made similar claims regarding the importance of a common knowledge base (Galston, 2007;Zhang, Torney-Purta, & Barber, 2012). Specifically, they argue that individuals' knowledge concepts and content regarding the institutions, rights, and processes encourages voting and other forms of active civic participation.…”

Section: The Case For History Content Knowledgementioning

confidence: 94%

An analysis of predictors of history content knowledge: Implications for policy and practice

Fitchett¹,

Heafner²,

Lambert³

2017

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:How and to what extent students learn history content is a complicated process, drawing from the instructional opportunities they experience; the policy prioritization of history/social studies instruction in schools; and their own cultural perspectives toward the past. In an attempt to better understand the complex inter-play among these dimensions, we examined relationships among student sociocultural characteristics, instructional exposure, and school-level variables and US History content knowledge. Using data from the 2010 National Assessment of Educational Progress Test on US History (NAEP-USH), multilevel analyses indicated that while sociocultural indicators (such as race, gender, and socioeconomic status) correlate with achievement, students' Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 25 No. 65 2 instructional exposure variables remain significant predictors of history content knowledge. Moreover, school context such as building-level demographics and state testing-policy predict between school variance in content knowledge and moderate the achievement gap. Results also suggest that, while a substantial achievement gap remains, exposure to text-based instructional practices is associated with increased knowledge. Findings from this study have policy implications for the development of a more inclusive social studies curriculum, the advocating of text-dependent instruction as a high-leverage practice among history teachers, and cautious consideration of tests as proxies for accountability in history education. Keywords: history education; social studies education; content knowledge; National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Un análisis de los predictores del conocimiento del contenido de la historia: Implicaciones para la política y la práctica Resumen: Entender cómo y cuántos alumnos aprenden sobre contenido histórico es un proceso complicado, basado en oportunidades de aprendizaje que los alumnos encuentran, en una política de priorización de la enseñanza de contenido histórico o de ciencias sociales, y en las perspectivas culturales de los alumnos sobre el estudio del pasado. Con el objetivo de entender la relación compleja entre los diversos aspectos en este proceso de aprendizaje, investigamos la relación entre características socioculturales de los alumnos, acceso a este tipo de enseñanza, y variables explicativas de escuelas y del conocimiento de la historia de los Estados Unidos. El resultado de nuestra modelación jerárquica indica que mientras variables socioculturales (raza, sexo y situación socioeconómica) se correlacionan con éxito, con datos de la Evaluación Nacional de la Prueba de Progreso Educativo en Historia Americana (NAEP-USH, por sus siglas en inglés) Académico, las variables de acceso a este tipo de enseñanza son parámetros importantes para el conocimiento del contenido histórico. Además, variables sobre la escuela, por ejemplo demografía de la escuela y políticas estaduales en cuanto a pruebas académicas, son parámetros relevantes en el análisis de varianza en con...

show abstract

Section: The Case For History Content Knowledgementioning

confidence: 94%

An analysis of predictors of history content knowledge: Implications for policy and practice

Fitchett¹,

Heafner²,

Lambert³

2017

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tatsuoka et al (2004) used the Rule Space Method (RSM; Tatsuoka, 1983) to identify the subskills underlying the Third International Math and Science Study-Revised and compared performance of students across a sample of 20 countries at the micro level of the identified attributes. Zhang et al (2012) compared the civic education achievement of students from three countries across four attributes identified through the General Diagnostic Model (GDM, von Davier, 2005). Chen (2012) compared attributelevel performance of urban and rural Taiwanese students who participated in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS).…”

Section: Measurement Invariance In Dcmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining Parameter Invariance in a General Diagnostic Classification Model

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aimed at investigating invariance of a diagnostic classification model (DCM) for reading comprehension across gender. In contrast to models with continuous traits, diagnostic classification models inform mastery of a finite set of latent attributes, e.g., vocabulary or syntax in the reading context, and allow to provide fine grained feedback to learners and instructors. The generalized deterministic, noisy "and" gate (G-DINA) model was fit to item responses of 1000 male and female individuals to a high-stakes reading comprehension test. Use of the G-DINA model allowed for minimal assumption on the relationship of latent attribute profiles and item-specific response probabilities, i.e., the G-DINA model can represent compensatory or non-compensatory relationships of latent attributes and response probabilities. Item parameters were compared across the two samples, and only a small number of item parameters were statistically different between the two groups, corroborating the result of a formal measurement invariance test based on the multigroup G-DINA model. Neither correlations between latent attributes were significantly different across the two groups, nor mastery probabilities for any of the attributes. Model selection at item level showed that from among the 18 items that required multiple attributes, 16 items picked different rules (DCMs) across the groups. While this seems to suggest that the relationship among the attributes of reading comprehension differs across the two groups, a closer inspection of the rules picked by the items showed that almost in all cases the relationships were very similar. If a compensatory DCM was suggested by the G-DINA framework for an item in the female group, a model belonging to the same family resulted for the male group.

show abstract

“…The authors argued that it was valuable to report these subscores because it led to a “better understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of civic knowledge as developed in participating countries” (Torney‐Purta et al, , p. 63). Furthermore, in a secondary analysis of CIVED data from the United States using cognitive diagnostic modeling, Zhang, Torney‐Purta, and Barber () found differences between those respondents who excelled on civic skills and those who excelled on conceptual knowledge of civics in the extent to which they had received conceptually based teaching in their social studies classes.…”

Section: Current Framework Definitions and Assessments Of Civic Comentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Civic Competency and Engagement in Higher Education: Research Background, Frameworks, and Directions for Next‐Generation Assessment

Torney‐Purta

Cabrera

Roohr

et al. 2015

ETS Research Report Series

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Civic learning is increasingly recognized as important by the higher education and workforce communities. The development of high‐quality assessments that can be used to evaluate students' civic learning during the college years has become a priority. This paper presents a comprehensive review of existing frameworks, definitions, and assessments of civic‐related constructs from approximately 30 projects relevant to higher education, and includes a discussion of the challenges related to assessment design and implementation. Synthesizing information from the review, we propose an assessment framework to guide the design of a next‐generation assessment of individuals' civic learning that takes advantage of recent advances in assessment methods. The definition identifies 2 key domains within civic learning: civic competency and civic engagement. Civic competency encompasses 3 areas (civic knowledge; analytic skills; and participatory and involvement skills), and civic engagement also captures 3 areas (motivations, attitudes, and efficacy; democratic norms and values; and participation and activities). We discuss item formats and task types that would ensure fair and reliable scoring for the assessment. The review of definitions of civic learning and its components developed by organizations, the proposed assessment framework, and assessment considerations presented here have potential benefits for a range of higher education institutions. This includes institutions that currently have students engaged in relevant curricular or cocurricular activities and also institutions that would find assessments of civic competency and engagement helpful in program development or in evaluating students' accomplishments.

show abstract

Students' Conceptual Knowledge and Process Skills in Civic Education: Identifying Cognitive Profiles and Classroom Correlates

Cited by 36 publications

References 42 publications

An analysis of predictors of history content knowledge: Implications for policy and practice

An analysis of predictors of history content knowledge: Implications for policy and practice

Examining Parameter Invariance in a General Diagnostic Classification Model

Assessing Civic Competency and Engagement in Higher Education: Research Background, Frameworks, and Directions for Next‐Generation Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About