Predictors of Student and Teacher Reports of Student-Centered Instruction in Secondary School Mathematics Classrooms

• In Event: Contrasting Viewpoints: Using Information From Multiple Reporters to Understand Classroom Dynamics

Abstract

Objectives and Theoretical Framework. Student-centered instruction is featured in a growing number of education policies and initiatives that aim to support equity and excellence in secondary mathematics education (e.g. National Research Council, 2012; NCTM, 2014; OECD, 2012). However, we still know very little about how student-centered instructional practices are implemented in secondary mathematics classrooms.

Research on student-centered instruction is limited by a lack of available measures and by a lack of clarity as to whose perspective should be assessed. Components of student-centered instruction tend to be integrated into teacher surveys, interviews, or observational assessments (e.g. Danielson, 2012; Pianta, Hamre, & Mintz, 2012) or student climate surveys (e.g. Downer, Stuhlman, Schweig, Martinez, & Ruzek, 2015; Ferguson, 2012). In this study, we aim to deepen our understanding of how student-centered instructional practices are implemented by: a) testing corresponding student and teacher surveys; b) examining how student, classroom, and teacher characteristics predict student and teacher reports; and investigating the (c) variation of and (d) congruence between student and teacher reports at the classroom and teacher levels.

Data and Methods. The sample includes 56 secondary mathematics teachers and 3,032 of their students nested in 194 classrooms from 4 urban and suburban public school districts. Teachers and students completed surveys in the middle of the fall semester. Teachers reported separately on each class that they taught. We used factor analytic procedures to test student and teacher reports (a). To study predictors and variation of and correlations between student and teacher reports (b-d), we tested a series of 4-level hierarchical mixed models with student and teacher reports of student-centered instruction at level 1. Including the construct scores at level 1 creates a measurement model that produces separate means and variance components for students, classrooms, and teachers (Bryk & Raudenbush, 2002; Raudenbush, Rowan, & Kang, 1991). In order to compare student and teacher reports among students with the same teacher and in order to identify within-teacher variation at the classroom level, all predictors at the student and classroom level were centered around the individual teacher means (group-mean centered).

Results. Factor analyses supported a 6-item student teacher report of student-centered mathematics instruction (see Table 1). The hierarchical models revealed several important findings, including a negative association between the proportion of minority students in class and the extent to which students and teachers reported the use of student-centered practices (see Table 2). Also, while teacher and student reports are highly correlated at the classroom level in the final model (Pearson R = .826), findings point to potentially important variation in student reports.

Significance. The study makes several contributions to our understanding of how student-centered instruction is implemented. The main effects of the racial composition of classrooms and the variation in and correlation between student and teacher reports at each level are discussed in relation to implications for education research, practice, and policy.

Authors

• Tara Lynn Hofkens, University of Virginia

• Richard James Correnti, University of Pittsburgh

• Ming-Te Wang, University of Pittsburgh