자료유형  

 학위논문

Control Number  

0016934548

International Standard Book Number  

9798380484893

Dewey Decimal Classification Number  

300

Main Entry-Personal Name  

Dozier, Sara J.

Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint  

[S.l.] : Stanford University., 2021

Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint  

Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2021

Physical Description  

1 online resource(219 p.)

General Note  

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-04, Section: A.

General Note  

Advisor: Osborne, Jonathan;Domingue, Ben;Carlson, Janet.

Dissertation Note  

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Stanford University, 2021.

Restrictions on Access Note  

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Summary, Etc.  

요약International large-scale assessments, including the International Program for Student Assessment (PISA), influence both educational policy and practice. Studies based on results from the 2015 survey described a negative relationship the frequency of inquiry-based science instruction and student scientific literacy scores. Based on this correlation, PISA's parent organization, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), recommended that inquiry-based instructional practices be approached with caution. PISA's recommendation conflicts with numerous classroombased studies, which have found that inquiry-based instruction improves student learning. Furthermore, due to PISA's influence, articles for science teachers claiming that inquirybased instruction is ineffective now cite PISA results as supporting evidence. This dissertation uses data from PISA 2015 and student interviews to better understand the nature of this relationship.By closely examining the assumptions inherent in the primary analysis of PISA 2015 data using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, this set of studies challenges PISA's claim about inquiry-based instructional practices. The analyses indicate at least four areas in which threats to validity warrant wariness about the PISA recommendation that inquiry-based practice may not be effective. First, analyses should account for the multidimensionality of the PISA enquiry-driven instruction index. Second, linear models may not accurately describe the relationship between studentreported frequencies of inquiry-based instruction and scientific literacy scores, so other models should be explored. Third, measurement invariance for students from different SES quartiles suggests that either the items or the efficacy of inquiry-based instruction vary for students from different groups and a more nuanced perspective is needed before developing recommendations. Finally, student interpretations of the items and response space require more study if we are to use the questionnaire responses to describe the activities students have in mind and their frequencies. Together, these findings suggest that the OCED recommendations about science instructional practices should be reconsidered. Alternative interpretive models and recommendations for practice are discussed.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Education reform.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Socioeconomic factors.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Education policy.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Core curriculum.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Secondary schools.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Decision making.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Curriculum development.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Education.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Secondary education.

Subject Added Entry-Topical Term  

Sociology.

Added Entry-Corporate Name  

Stanford University.

Host Item Entry  

Dissertations Abstracts International. 85-04A.

Host Item Entry  

Dissertation Abstract International

Electronic Location and Access  

로그인을 한후 보실 수 있는 자료입니다.

Control Number  

joongbu:639632