SRI-Teknisk rapport-sen.v13 - DPU

out measurement of outcome - if relevant? variables were examined through questions in the
questionnaire:
classroom instruction and assessment practices,
student learning and motivation, students' and
teachers' beliefs about and attitudes toward the
assessment, and a school characteristic.
K.9 Where were the data collected? Educational Institution (please specify)
Section L: Methods - data analysis
L.1 What rationale do the authors give for the
methods of analysis for the study?
114
Details
Random coefficient
or growth models were used to examine MSPAP
performance from 1993
to 1998 in relation to variables derived from the
teacher and student questionnaires,
and the school characteristic of percentage of free
or reduced-price
lunches, which served as a proxy for SES. These
methodologies are
particularly well suited for studying processes in
which change is considered to
be continuous but individual differences occur in
the pattern of change (i.e.,
initial level and rate of change). Further, these
methodologies allow identification
of factors that affect the patterns of change. This
type of analysis cannot be
modeled by time-specific comparisons involving
group-level (i.e., means)
differences
L.2 Which methods were used to analyse the data? Explicitly stated (please specify)
Sets of items on the teacher questionnaire were
combined and validated by using
confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) methods and
measures of internal consistency
to reflect the dimensions described in the following
list (e.g., Lane, Stone,
Parke, Hansen, & Cerrillo, 2000). For the purposes
of the CFA, subsets of items
were combined to form two indicators for each
dimension (about equal numbers
of items) except the MSPAP Impact dimension. For
this dimension, only one indicator
was used because the items could not be divided
into two meaningful components.
The indicators within each dimension are also given
in the following list,
as is the total number of items for each dimension,
which varied to a small degree