SRI-Teknisk rapport-sen.v13 - DPU

More documents

Recommendations

Info

D.4 Which country/countries are the individuals in the actual sample from? D.5 If the individuals in the actual sample are involved with an educational institution, what type of institution is it? 102 equal numbers of schools (~8% to 12%) within each of the nine classifications cells. School sample for science and social studies The final sample consisted of 103 elementary schools (82 % participation) and 58 middle schools (92% participation), for a total of 161 schools. Of the 103 elementary schools, 87 were from the initial 126 that were sampled, and of the 58 middle schools, 44 were from the initial 63 that were sampled. The remaining schools were from the list of alternate schools for each classification cell. This sample repre<strong>sen</strong>ted schools from 22 of 24 systems or counties in Maryland, and there were approximately equal numbers of schools (~9% to 13%) within each of the nine classification cells. In summary, during the 2 years, 251 schools participated in the study. Final sample for the study. As a result of questionnaire nonresponse, the linking of the questionnaire data to the mean scale scores for schools reduced the sample sizes. The final samples for this study consisted of 86 of 90 schools for mathematics and language arts (reading and writing), 116 of 161 schools for science, and 111 of 161 schools for social studies. The samples for science and social studies were reduced disproportionately more than for the other content areas because both teacher and student questionnaire data were linked to science and social studies MSPAP performance data (listwise deletion). Less reduction in the sample would have occurred if only teacher questionnaire data were analyzed with the science and social studies performance data. However, student evidential variables could not have been examined. Implicit (please specify) USA Primary school (please specify) elementary and middle school Secondary school (please specify age range) Coding is based on: Authors' description
D.6 What ages are covered by the actual sample? 5-10 11-16 Coding is based on: Reviewers' inference D.7 What is the sex of participants? Mixed sex (please specify) D.8 What is the socio-economic status of the individuals within the actual sample? D.9 What is the ethnicity of the individuals within the actual sample? D.10 What is known about the special educational needs of individuals within the actual sample? D.11 Please specify any other useful information about the study participants. Section E: Programme or Intervention description E.1 If a programme or intervention is being studied, does it have a formal name? Implicit (please specify) The study uses a "free" or "reduced lunch variable" as a proxy for socioeconomic status in the stratified random sampling procedure in order to classify shcools into one of three categories (lower third, middle third, and upper third). As such the socioeconomic status of the individuals within the actual sample varies from low to high. Not stated/unclear (please specify) E.2 Theory of change Details not an intervention E.3 Aim(s) of the intervention Not stated not an intervention E.4 Year intervention started Details Not stated/unclear (please specify) No special educational needs are reported. Details Means of MSPAP scale scores for schools (linked to the 1993 assessment) in the sample from 1993 to 1997 or 1998 were provided by personnel within the MSDE. In this study, changes in MSPAP scale scores for schools were examined in relation to classroom instruction and assessment practices, student learning and motivation, beliefs about the impact of and attitudes toward the MSPAP, and the school Yes (please specify) Maryland State Performance Assessment Program from 1993 to 1998 is being studied- 103
Page 1:
Clearinghouse Forskningsserien - 20
Page 4 and 5:
Dansk Clearinghouse for Uddannelses
Page 7:
Sammenfatning Hvad ønsker vi at f
Page 10 and 11:
10 2.6 Samlet oversigt over reviewp
Page 12 and 13:
Tabeller Tabel 1.1: Plan for afhold
Page 14 and 15:
Figurer Figur 1.1: Model af sammenh
Page 16 and 17:
16 Fag Klassetrin 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Page 18 and 19:
18 Fag/klasse Profilområde 1 Profi
Page 20 and 21:
aspekter ved skolernes kvalitet. Sk
Page 22 and 23:
22 Fagområde Grundskolen 1. 2. 3.
Page 24 and 25:
24 Fag Grundskolan 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6
Page 26 and 27:
sentation af testens tema. En korte
Page 28 and 29:
Aktørerne er i denne sammenhæng p
Page 30 and 31:
Desuden er B-kategoriseringen blev
Page 32 and 33:
32 Testning/ testdata 1 4 Informati
Page 35 and 36:
2 Metoder anvendt i reviewet 2.1 De
Page 37 and 38:
ERIC er verdens største pædagogis
Page 39 and 40:
De resterende 5716 fund er blevet s
Page 41 and 42:
Genbeskrivelsessystemet er opbygget
Page 43 and 44:
3 Forskningskortlægning og forskni
Page 45 and 46:
Forskningsdesign Antal studier Case
Page 47 and 48:
elever karakterer eller mod at samm
Page 49 and 50:
Hvem der scorer testen Antal studie
Page 51 and 52: Anvendelse af skala Antal studier I
Page 53 and 54: Hvad ses den effektive testbrug i f
Page 55: Evidensvægtningen af de inkludered
Page 58 and 59: Troværdigheden vil for det andet o
Page 60 and 61: 4.2.1 Pædagogisk brug af testdata:
Page 62 and 63: 62 • at effektiv feedback på tes
Page 64 and 65: 64 • at test især er praktiske f
Page 66 and 67: Der er svag evidens for, at dens ef
Page 68 and 69: uddannelsessystemet end læreren i
Page 70 and 71: En række undersøgelser (Alderson
Page 72 and 73: 72 Relation 5 Modersmål 6 Andre sp
Page 74 and 75: Pædagogisk brug af test - virkning
Page 76 and 77: Endelig bør det noteres, at baggru
Page 78 and 79: Det er i denne sammenhæng interess
Page 80 and 81: Et centralt aspekt ved reviewgruppe
Page 82 and 83: Det blev for det første konstatere
Page 84 and 85: 84 - Svaret sig om lærerne, at den
Page 87 and 88: 6 Appendiks 1: Søgeprofiler I afsn
Page 89 and 90: "modular arithmetic" or "multiplica
Page 91 and 92: or "matrices" or "polynomials" or "
Page 93 and 94: CBCA3 backwash* OR washback* OR con
Page 95 and 96: ”land:sw tree:e (kunskapstest* OR
Page 97 and 98: 7 Appendiks 2: Et eksempel på en g
Page 99 and 100: B.5 Was the study informed by, or l
Page 101: D.3 What is the proportion of those
Page 105 and 106: 1995 518.1 22.8 506.1 20.1 512.4 17
Page 107 and 108: Section G: Study Method the educati
Page 109 and 110: I.2 What is the sampling frame (if
Page 111 and 112: K.1 Which variables or concepts, if
Page 113 and 114: K.5 Who collected the data? Researc
Page 115 and 116: L.3 Which statistical methods, if a
Page 117 and 118: M.3 Is there an adequate descriptio
Page 119 and 120: N.11 In light of the above, do the
Page 121 and 122: 8 Appendiks 3: Abstract af 43 under
Page 123 and 124: Cheng, L., Rogers, T., & Hu, H. (20
Page 125 and 126: ger på lærernes pædagogiske inte
Page 127 and 128: Relation: 4 Mason, R. (2005). The e
Page 129 and 130: faget EsF øger mængden af aktivit
Page 131: undervisning. Forfatteren anbefaler
Page 134 and 135: Dorgan, K. (2004). A Year in the Li
Page 136 and 137: Ryan, P. (1994). Teacher Perspectiv
Page 139 and 140: 10 Referencer Her opregnes alene re
show all

SRI-Teknisk rapport-sen.v13 - DPU

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?