Orpha K. Duell

Epistemological Beliefs, Mathematical Problem‐Solving Beliefs, and Academic Performance of Middle School Students

This study examined the structure of middle school students’ general epistemological beliefs and domain‐specific mathematical problem‐solving beliefs by asking whether the 2 belief systems are related and whether they predict students’ academic performance. Over 1,200 seventh‐ and eighth‐grade students completed an Epistemological Questionnaire, the Indiana Mathematical Belief Scale, and the Fennema‐Sherman Usefulness Scale. Based on regression analyses, beliefs in quick/fixed learning (i.e., that learning is fast and instinctual) and studying aimlessly (i.e., studying without strategy) were significantly related to beliefs about effortful math, useful math, understand math concepts, and math confidence. Furthermore, path analysis suggested that both general and domain‐specific epistemological beliefs predicted academic performance as measured by solving mathematic problems and overall grade point average.

Measures of People's Beliefs About Knowledge and Learning

Different measures of peoples beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning are described along with the theories upon which they are based. The initial theories tended to be unidimensional developmental theories and their measuring instruments lengthy, in-depth interviews. More recently, multidimensional theories have emerged that provide a more complex theory of epistemology. Recent measuring instruments are attempting to address these complexities using paper-and-pencil questionnaires that are easy to score. The measuring instruments differ considerably on what dimensions they measure and researchers are urged to select carefully the one that best matches their purpose. Specific descriptive information is provided regarding selected instruments to aid researchers in their choices. Both theory and psychometric properties are considered critical issues for the decision-making process.

Multiple-Choice Test Items: What Are Textbook Authors Telling Teachers?.

AbstractThe purposes of this study were to (a) Look at what teachers are being told about multiple-choice test item construction by introductory educational psychology textbook authors and (b) to evaluate the quality of test items that preservice teachers may be exposed to if their university instructors use unedited multiple-choice items provided by the publishers of their classroom text. A comprehensive survey of educational psychology texts was completed to identify the textbook authors’ recommended guidelines for teachers to follow when writing multiple-choice test items. Next, a reduced set of 12 guidelines was identified on the basis of the frequency of author recommendations. These 12 guidelines were used to evaluate 60 multiple-choice items (N = 1,080) that were randomly selected from 18 different instructor guides to introductory educational psychology texts. The results indicated that approximately 60% of the items violated one or more guidelines.

Extended Wait Time and University Student Achievement

Two experiments examined the effects of extending the pauses between teacher questions and naming a student, wait time I. Although articles addressing both preservice and practicing teachers admonish them to extend these pauses to be more effective questioners, comparisons of wait times of 1 s with 3 s, and 3 s with 6 s, detected no significant advantage for extended wait times when university students answered either low-level knowledge questions or higher level application and synthesis questions. Contrary to predictions based upon prior research with younger students, extending wait time to 6 s actually lowered higher level cognitive achievement. The findings are discussed in relationship to those of prior studies examining extended wait time and an information processing model of learning.

Overt and covert use of objectives of different cognitive levels

Abstract College students provided objectives along with a study passage scored significantly lower on a multiple-choice post-test than students given the same objectives plus an overt task for the content of each objective. Scores on lower level post-test questions were significantly higher than scores on higher level questions. Students did not perform better on the post-test on content for which they had been given higher level objectives than on content for which lower level objectives were provided. This finding was not in keeping with what would be predicted from learning from text studies employing inserted study questions of different levels.

Length of wait-times used by college students given unlimited wait-time intervals

Abstract Teacher use of wait-time after asking a question appears to be a relatively powerful teaching technique based on both theory and research data. Wait-times of 3 to 5 s after questions are often recommended in the literature. However, missing from the literature are studies investigating the amount of time students would take to respond to a question if given an unlimited amount of time to respond. The present study investigated this issue with college students and found that students asked a question and given an unlimited amount of time within which to respond on the average responded from a low of 8.82 s to a convergent question to a high of 32.95 s to a more complex divergent question. With only one exception, student level of knowledge of the content over which they were questioned did not correlate significantly with the amount of wait-time used before responding to the questions.

The Effects of Test Expectations Based upon Goals on the Free Recall of Learning from Text.

Abstract The number of facts college students correctly recalled was not affected by whether they were provided goals which did or did not encourage them to reorganize the passage material they studied. This held both for learners asked to recall all facts they could and those asked to recall only a portion of the goal-targeted facts. Learners whose recall exhibited reorganization of passage material did not differ in number of correctly recalled facts from those who failed to reorganize the passage material. Learners were more apt to reorganize the text materials when asked to recall only a portion of the goal-targeted facts than when asked to recall all facts they could. Self-report data suggest learners primarily use goals to rehearse the targeted material only after they carefully read a study passage.