Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 2 no. 11 (2024)

A Structural Model of an Exemplary Mathematics Teacher in Junior High School

Chenie Tura-Gonzales

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study develops a structural model of an exemplary mathematics teacher featuring students' perspectives. This study used an exploratory sequential mixed method research (MMR) design. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) were conducted to determine the attributes of an exemplary mathematics teacher. The participants of the FGD were the students from the chosen two secondary schools, with eight student representatives from each school. The KII was also done with ten mathematics teachers and one mathematics supervisor. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted for the attributes of an exemplary mathematics teacher, and it yielded four factors, namely: (1) Expertise, (2) Effective Communication with Students, (3) Devolution, and (4) Teacher's Disposition. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed on the hypothesized Model with four latent variables with their corresponding observed variables using Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) version 21. Using the Structural Equation Model (SEM) technique, the findings revealed a significant influence of the factors on exemplary mathematics teaching, thus providing a theoretical foundation for this study. Moreover, the findings also showed significant contributions of the observed variables (S.Q. items) to the latent variables (factors). Based on the SEM findings supported by the literature, the structural Model of an exemplary mathematics teacher was empirically founded. The developed model could serve as one of the platforms for lifting mathematics education. Also, the validated survey questionnaire could be a tool for assessing mathematics teachers.



References:

  1. Acido, J. V., & Caballes, D. G. (2024). Assessing educational progress: A comparative analysis of PISA results (2018 vs. 2022) and HDI correlation in the Philippines. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 21(1), 462-474. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.21.1.0020
  2. Aguilar, J. J. (2021). High School Students’ Reasons for disliking Mathematics: The Intersection Between Teacher’s Role and Student’s Emotions, Belief and Self-efficacy. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(3), em0658. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/11294
  3. Alsaleh, F., Anthony, G., & Hunter, J. (2019). Preparedness of female mathematics preservice teachers in Saudi Arabia. Mathematics Teacher Education & Development, 21(2), 24-41. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ123489
  4. Ariffin, T., Bush, T., & Nordin, H. (2018). Framing the roles and responsibilities of excellent teachers: Evidence from Malaysia. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 14-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.005
  5. Bush, T., Glover, D., Ng, A. Y., & Romero, M. (2016). Master teachers as teacher leaders: Evidence from Malaysia and the Philipines. International Studies in Educational Administration, 43(2), 81–102. https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/825070
  6. Colaizzi, P. F. (1978). Phenomenologic research as the phenomenologist views it. In Ronald S. Valle & Mark King (eds.), Existential-phenomenological alternatives for psychology. New York: Oxford University Press
  7. Dowding, D. (2013). Best Practices for Mixed Methods Research in the Health Sciences John W. Creswell, Ann Carroll Klassen, Vicki L. Plano Clark, Katherine Clegg Smith for the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research; Qualitative Methods Overview Jo Moriarty. Qualitative Social Work, 12(4), 541-545. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325013493540a
  8. Kane, R. & Maw, N. (2005). Making sense of learning at secondary school: involving students to improve teaching practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(3), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640500319024
  9. Kaur, B. (2008). Teaching and learning of mathematics: What really matters to teachers and students?  ZDM Mathematics Education, 40(6), 951–962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0128-6
  10. Kaur, B. (2009). Characteristics of good mathematics teaching in Singapore grade 8 classrooms: A juxtaposition of teachers’ practice and students’ perception.  ZDM Mathematics Education, 41(3), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0170-z
  11. Katz, S., & Stupel, M. (2016). Enhancing elementary-school mathematics teachers' efficacy beliefs: a qualitative action research. International Journal of Mathematical Education In Science & Technology, 47(3), 421-439. https://doi.org/10.1080z0020739X.2015.1080314
  12. Kilag, O. K., Porio, C., Abella, J., Ledesma, M. M., Cabaluna, M. F., & Baluyot, L. (2024). Bridging the Achievement Gap: Insights from PISA on Improving Mathematics Education in the Philippines. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Research for Innovation, Sustainability, and Excellence, 1(9), 53-62. https://risejournals.org/index.php/imjrise
  13. Latterell, C. (2008). What is good college mathematics teaching? International Journal of Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 9(7), 1–13. https://www.cimt.org.uk/journal/latterell2.pdf
  14. Leong, K. E. (2014). What are the Important Attributes of Good Mathematics Teaching? The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(1), 211-223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-014-0173-6
  15. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (vol. 75). SAGE Publications Ltd.
  16. Murray, S. (2011). Secondary Students' Descriptions of "Good" Mathematics  Teachers. Australian Mathematics Teacher, 67(4), 14-21. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ956713
  17. OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. OECD Publishing.
  18. OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results. OECD  Publishing.
  19. Owolabi, H. O., Ayandele, J. K., & Olaoye, D. D. (2020). A Systematic Review of Structural Equation Model (SEM). Open Journal of Educational Development, 1(2), 27-39. https://doi.org/10.52417/ojed.v1i2.163
  20. Roxas, A. V. (2015). Teaching Competencies of Mathematics Professors in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) In the Province Of Capiz: Basicfor Instructional Enhancement Program. Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Science, 3(6), 25–32. https://repository.capsu.edu.ph/handle/123456789/201
  21. Subedi, K. R. (2021). Determining the Sample in Qualitative Research. Online Submission, 4, 1-13. https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/scholars
  22. Tarka, P. (2017). The comparison of estimation methods on the parameter estimates and fit indices in SEM model under 7-point Likert scale. Archives of Data Science, 2(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.5445/KSP/1000058749/10
  23. Toropova, A., Johansson, S., & Myrberg, E. (2019). The role of teacher characteristics for student achievement in mathematics and student perceptions of instructional quality. Education Inquiry, 10(4), 275-299. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2019.1591844
  24. Tudy, R. A. (2017). Employers’ Satisfaction on the Performance of New College Graduates. SLONGAN, 3(1), 22. https://rpo.cjc.edu.ph/index.php/slongan/article/view/13
  25. Watkins, M. W. (2021). A step-by-step guide to exploratory factor analysis with SPSS. Routledge.
  26. Webb, N. M., Franke, M. L., Ing, M., Turrou, A. C., Johnson, N. C., & Zimmerman, J. (2019). Teacher practices that promote productive dialogue and learning in mathematics classrooms. International Journal of Educational Research, 97, 176-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.07.009
  27. White, B. (2009). Student perceptions of what makes good teaching. In the annual conference of the Australian Teacher Education Association
  28. Zhou, J., Bao, J., & He, R. (2023). Characteristics of good mathematics teaching in China: Findings from classroom observations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21(4), 1177-1196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10291-5

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic