Classroom Level Factors Promoting Qualitative Teaching For Slow Learner Students
Author(s):
Christina Ioanno (presenting / submitting) Leonidas Kyriakides
Conference:
ECER 2017
Network:
09. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Format:
Paper

Session Information

09 SES 04 B, Analyzing and Discussing the Dynamic School Effectiveness Model

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-23
09:00-10:30
Room:
W5.18
Chair:
Jan Van Damme

Contribution

This study aims to examine for the first time if classroom level factors presented in the dynamic model have any effect on slow learner students achievements results.  In addition, the study investigates which of the eight teacher factors have a bigger impact on slow learner students’ outcomes.

Literature references report a specific undiagnosed and non-mental problem student population, slow learners, with serious difficulties to follow mainstream class learning pace and with a high risk of drop out.   Therefore, the first phase of the study aims to investigate slow learners definition characteristics, identification procedure, drawn from both psychology and educational research field, and establish a learning profile of these students.   Secondly, this study examines the generic nature of classroom level factors of the dynamic model, tested for the first time in relation to slow learners.

Research hypothesis of the study is based on the attempted to relate learning characteristics of this student population with classroom level factors.  Thus, it is assumed that some classroom level factors and their measurements dimensions in the dynamic model of educational effectiveness may have a greater impact on slow learners’ achievements since these factors correspond to the five main learning characteristics of slow learners identified in the literature with a cognitive perspective. These teacher level factors are: orientation, structuring, teaching modeling, and application. 

The study aims to answer the following research questions:

1.        Does classroom level factors included in the dynamic model of effectiveness have any impact on slow learner students’ achievements;

2.        Which of the classroom level factors, if any, explains variation of achievement outcomes of slow learners?

3. Are there any teacher factors which have differential effects on slow learning students’ outcomes? 

4. Which of the five dimensions, if any, needs to be taken into account in order to measure the effect of each factor?

 

Contribution to the theory of Educational Effectiveness Research lies mainly to test teacher factors of the dynamic model, in nature generic, whether they have an impact on slow learners´ achievements and furthermore, to contribute to the research field of effectiveness with evidence related to slow learners students’ achievements.

Significance of this research lies on the fact that the data collected as well as the results will concern a population of students in high risk of drop out and in a continuous school failure.  Although slow learners are considered as a high risk of drop out and school failure group of students, theory based interventions and approaches as well as educational policies, remain to be established in different educational systems. This specific group of students has been mainly ignored in educational settings and is still over-looked by the teachers. Therefore, attempts to connect teaching slow learners to increased learning gains as well as teachers’ effectiveness can be recognized.

 

 

Method

The research method selected, aimed mainly to measure the effect of teachers on slow learner students’ achievements. Thus, a longitudinal design was decided, appropriate to the research questions set in this study. Dependent Variable: Student achievement in Greek Language Data from students (n=707), of fourth and fifth class in primary school, were two times collected, at the beginning at the end of the school year with a curriculum based test, designed to assess knowledge and skills in Greek language in accordance to the Cyprus Curriculum. Validity and reliability of the results were tested with Rasch statistical analysis. Explanatory Variables of the Research Student Level Variable: Level of intellectual functioning Based on the literature review, the main criterion for identifying slow learners is students intellectual functioning. Thus, a cognitive functioning assessment was carried out for all students with Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices (Raven SPM). A pilot study preceded the research data collection in order to examine this identification procedure of slow leareners. Student Level Variable: Two Background factors The first factor concerned the gender of students and the second, whether students were receiving educational support from the special education system. Slow learners were then identified from the data sample by analyzing their results from the Greek language test and from the intellectual functioning assessment. Classroom Level variables: Quality of teaching Data from teachers (n=40) were also collected, twice within the school year, with gab of 3 months. Research tools were used for measuring teacher level factors. These tools, with validity and reliability tested in previous researches, concerned the eight factors of effectiveness at classroom level included in the dynamic model. Multilevel Analysis of Variables All data were then analyzed in a multilevel modeling. Student and teacher’ level variables were analyzed by using two models: Multilevel Analysis (with MLwiN statistical software program) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis (with Mplus program). These statistical methodologies of analysis were applied to the three groups formed from the data: sample (n=707), No Slow Learners (n=638) and Slow Learners (n=69).

Expected Outcomes

The study is still in the phase of the statistical analyses and data are still examined. However, the first results, from the multilevel analysis (with MLwiN) of the data on classroom level factors effects on slow learner students, show that some factors have an impact on these students’ outcomes. The effect proved to be statistical significant. Some of the factors were not observed in the sample of the teachers so we cannot conclude about their impact on students’ outcomes. The learning progress of the two groups of student, slow learners and no slow learners, formed from the data collected, was compared with t-test statistical analysis. Results revealed that the group of no slow learner students made significant progress on their knowledge and skills to Greek language curriculum based, in compare to the other group of students, slow learner, which progress was minus. Despite the minus progress of slow learner students, there is a research interest to measure the effect size of the two populations examined in this study. It is expected to conclude that despite the minus progress of slow learners, the effect size of some classroom level factors would be bigger for this group of students who struggle to follow mainstream class learning pace. Moreover, after having classroom level factors analyzed with a multilevel model, there is also a research interest to examine with SEM analysis whether the factors of teacher level could be grouped according to the assumptions of the theoretical model upon which they are based (i.e., the dynamic model). Upon the results, educational policy on slow learner students would be discussed in relation to the Cypriot and other international educational policies for slow learner students in order not to be left behind and avoid drop outs.

References

Creemers, B.P.M & Kyriakides, L. (2005). Establishing links between educational effectiveness research and improvement practices through the development of a dynamic model of educational effectiveness. Paper presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, April. Creemers, B.P.M., & Kyriakides, L. (2006). A critical analysis of the current approaches to modelling educational effectiveness: the importance of establishing a dynamic model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(3), 347-366. Creemers, B.P.M., & Kyriakides, L. (2008). The dynamics of educational effectiveness: a contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. London: Routledge. Creemers, B. P. M. & Kyriakides, L. (2008). The dynamics of educational effectiveness: a contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. London: Routledge. Creemers, B. P. M. & Kyriakides, L. (2010). Using the Dynamic Model to Develop an Evidence-Based and Theory-Driven Approach to School Improvement. Irish Educational Studies, 29 (1), 5-23. Creemers, B., Kyriakides, L., & P. Sammons, P. (2010), Methodological Advances in Educational Effectiveness Research., London: Routledge Taylor Francis. Demetriou, A. (2004). Mind, intelligence and development: A cognitive, differential, and developmental theory of intelligence. In A. Demetriou & A. Raftopoulos, (Eds.), Cognitive developmental change: Models, methods, and measurement (pp. 21-73). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Demetriou, A. & Kyriakides, L. (2006). The Functional and Developmental Organization of Cognitive Developmental Sequences. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 209-242. Demetriou, A., Spanoudis G., Mouyi, A. (2011). Educating the Developing Mind: Towards an Overarching Paradigm, Educational Psychology Review, 23: 601 – 663. Goldstein, H. (2003). Multilevel statistical models (3rd ed.). London: Edward Arnold. Gustafsson, J. E. (2010). Longitudinal designs, in Methodological Advances in Educational Effectiveness Research, Routledge. Kaznowski, K. (2004) Slow Learners: Are Educators Leaving Them Behind? NASSP Bulletin, Vol.88 No 641, December. Kyriakides, L., Campbell, R.J., & Gagatsis, A. (2000). The significance of the classroom effect in primary schools: An application of Creemers’ comprehensive model of educational effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11 (4), 501-529. Shaw,S.R, (2008). An Educational Programming Framework for a Subset of Students With Diverse Learning Needs: Bordeline Intellectuaul Functionning. Intervention in School and Clinic, Journal, Vol.43, No.5, May 2008, PP. 291-299. Shaw, S.R, (2010). Rescuing students from the slow learner trap. NASSP, Principal Leadership, February, 2010. Shaw, S.R, Grimes, D. & Bulman, J. (2005). Educating slow learners: Are charter schools the last, best hope for their educational success? The Charter Schools Resource Journal, Vol. 1, n.1.

Author Information

Christina Ioanno (presenting / submitting)
University of Cyprus
Education
Nicosia
Leonidas Kyriakides
University of Cyprus
Department of Education
Nicosia

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.