東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Development and validation of the te...

Colorado State University., Education.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Development and validation of the teacher writing to learn scale.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Development and validation of the teacher writing to learn scale./
作者:	Perkins, Mark.
面頁冊數:	213 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-01(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-01A(E).
標題:	Education, Language and Literature. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3635662
ISBN:	9781321168624

Development and validation of the teacher writing to learn scale.
Perkins, Mark.

Development and validation of the teacher writing to learn scale. - 213 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-01(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Colorado State University, 2014.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Despite numerous efforts by educators and U.S. government agencies to improve the public education system, students continue to struggle with writing, mathematics, science and reading. Researchers and educators have employed a wide range of interventions, but proficiencies are still not at desired levels. One intervention that lacks empirical research is writing to learn (WTL). Social constructivist learning theory and cognitive learning theory of information processing provide an explanation as to why WTL promises to be an effective tool for improving content knowledge and writing skills. Further, the theoretical literature on WTL and the research on general writing mirror such theories of learning. However, despite over thirty years of theoretical and inductive research, little research examines the generalizability of WTL's effectiveness on writing and other content areas.

ISBN: 9781321168624Subjects--Topical Terms:

1018115
Education, Language and Literature.

Development and validation of the teacher writing to learn scale.
LDR:03631nmm a2200337 4500 001 2056143
005 20150429102535.5
008 170521s2014 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321168624
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3635662
035 $a AAI3635662
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Perkins, Mark. $3 3169879
245 1 0 $a Development and validation of the teacher writing to learn scale.
300 $a 213 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-01(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Gene Gloeckner.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Colorado State University, 2014.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Despite numerous efforts by educators and U.S. government agencies to improve the public education system, students continue to struggle with writing, mathematics, science and reading. Researchers and educators have employed a wide range of interventions, but proficiencies are still not at desired levels. One intervention that lacks empirical research is writing to learn (WTL). Social constructivist learning theory and cognitive learning theory of information processing provide an explanation as to why WTL promises to be an effective tool for improving content knowledge and writing skills. Further, the theoretical literature on WTL and the research on general writing mirror such theories of learning. However, despite over thirty years of theoretical and inductive research, little research examines the generalizability of WTL's effectiveness on writing and other content areas.
520 $a Before measuring the effects of WTL on students, it is necessary to address teacher knowledge and efficacy of WTL. Therefore, the purpose of this proposed study is to develop an instrument to measure teacher knowledge and efficacy of WTL in the content areas of mathematics, science, social studies and language arts (which includes reading). Using the theories of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) and using the literature on effective teaching of writing, WTL and theories of learning.
520 $a This study began with item development using the literature and teacher input. Next, experts were used to test content validity and appropriate item response. The result was a six factor model to be tested empirically. Internal consistency measures using alpha and omega, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to check the response processes of the measure. The scale was correlated with other measures and differences tests were used to examine attributes of respondents.
520 $a Results indicated problems with the first, second and last factors. The remaining two factors, perceived relevance of writing to the content and efficacy of teaching with writing showed the best fit indices, though future research is needed to refine them. The final two factors negatively correlated with writing apprehension, positively with teacher efficacy (with little explained variance) and positively correlated with number of years teaching. Difference tests indicate a strong difference between content areas of teachers on both factors and a small difference in efficacy to teach writing given gender. No differences were found between urban, rural and suburban teachers and none were found between middle school and high school teachers.
590 $a School code: 0053.
650 4 $a Education, Language and Literature. $3 1018115
650 4 $a Education, Evaluation. $3 1669638
650 4 $a Education, Secondary. $3 539262
690 $a 0279
690 $a 0443
690 $a 0533
710 2 $a Colorado State University. $b Education. $3 2098461
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-01A(E).
790 $a 0053
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2014
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3635662