In dit onderzoek wordt er gekeken hoe docenten CBM-voortgangsgrafieken interpreteren en zal onderzocht worden of de factoren wiskundige kennis en grafiekkennis een invloed hebben op het begrip en...Show moreIn dit onderzoek wordt er gekeken hoe docenten CBM-voortgangsgrafieken interpreteren en zal onderzocht worden of de factoren wiskundige kennis en grafiekkennis een invloed hebben op het begrip en interpretatie van CBM-voortgangsgrafieken door docenten. De onderzoeksgroep bestaat uit 23 docenten die lesgeven in verschillende type onderwijs: basisonderwijs, voortgezet onderwijs en speciaal onderwijs. Zij hebben een demografische-en grafiekkennisvragenlijst ingevuld. Daarnaast hebben zij met de Think-Aloud-Taak twee standaardgrafieken van fictieve leerlingen hardop beschreven en geïnterpreteerd. De hypothesen zijn: (1) Er wordt een verschil verwacht tussen docenten met meer en minder wiskundige kennis. Docenten met meer wiskundige kennis zullen de CBM-voortgangsgrafieken accurater, vollediger en op een meer samenhangende wijze beschrijven en interpreteren; (2) Er wordt geen verschil verwacht tussen docenten met meer en minder wiskundige kennis met betrekking tot het aantal verbindingen tussen data en instructie dat zij maken; (3) Er wordt een verschil verwacht tussen docenten met meer en minder grafiekkennis. Docenten met meer grafiekkennis zullen de CBM-voortgangsgrafieken accurater, vollediger en op een meer samenhangende wijze beschrijven en interpreteren; (4) Er wordt geen verschil verwacht tussen docenten met meer en minder grafiekkennis met betrekking tot het aantal verbindingen tussen data en instructie dat zij maken. Uit de resultaten blijkt dat er geen significant verschil is tussen docenten met meer en minder wiskundige kennis of meer en minder grafiekkennis in hoe accuraat, volledig en samenhangend zij de CBM-voortgangsgrafiek beschrijven en interpreteren. Er is ook geen significant verschil tussen docenten met meer en minder wiskundige kennis en grafiekkennis en het aantal verbindingen tussen data en instructie. Wiskundige kennis en grafiekkennis hebben in dit onderzoek geen invloed op het begrip en de interpretatie van CBM-voortgangsgrafieken door docenten. Voor verder onderzoek wordt er aanbevolen een grotere steekproef te kiezen en de manier waarop wiskundige kennis en grafiekkennis gemeten wordt te optimaliseren.Show less
With the onset of the law Passend Onderwijs and the strive for opbrengstgericht werken, teachers are expected to monitor the achievements and progress of their students regularly. They have to do...Show moreWith the onset of the law Passend Onderwijs and the strive for opbrengstgericht werken, teachers are expected to monitor the achievements and progress of their students regularly. They have to do this by gathering student data frequently. Teachers should then interpret and use those data to make educational decisions. This study considers how teachers look at and interpret Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) progress graphs. The relation between teachers’ general knowledge of graphs and how they look at the progress graphs and how coherently they describe the graphs was studied.The participants were 23 teachers from primary and high schools. These teachers filled out a questionnaire to test their general knowledge of graphs. Then the teachers were shown two CBM-progress graphs which they had to describe while their eye-movements and –fixations were registered by an eye tracker. The results of this study show that teachers have difficulties with interpreting CBM-progress graphs. Further, there was a significant relation between teachers’ general knowledge of graphs and the cohesion of their graph interpretations (p = .021), but not between their general knowledge of graphs and their looking behaviour. Teachers with more general knowledge of graphs, have more cohesion in their graph interpretations. Furthermore there was no significant relation between the cohesion of the graph interpretations and looking at the graphs. The results indicate that it is advisable to pay attention to reading and interpreting progress-monitoring graphs in the education program of current and future teachers if they are expected to use these data properly for making educational decisions.Show less
A quarter of the students leaves primary school with an unsufficient reading proficiency. In this study 89 students with reading disabilities from grade five to eight completed a 2-minute Maze...Show moreA quarter of the students leaves primary school with an unsufficient reading proficiency. In this study 89 students with reading disabilities from grade five to eight completed a 2-minute Maze selection reading task weekly. The students’ scores on the Maze selection tasks served as an indicator of reading progress and were reported in a Curriculum-Based Measurement progress graph. Their teachers (N = 23) were asked to interpret the progress graphs to determine effectiveness of their reading instruction for individual students. This led to a correct or incorrect graph interpretation and the decision to adapt the reading instruction or not. The teachers also filled in a questionnaire that assessed their general graph comprehension. The relation between graph comprehension, graph interpretation and adaptation of the reading instruction were examined. In total, teachers interpreted 45 CBM progress graphs; 37 were interpreted correctly and 8 were interpreted incorrectly. Teachers with a low or high level of graph comprehension did not differ in their interpretation of the students’ progress graphs. In accordance with the data displayed on the progress graphs teachers performed an adaptation to the reading instruction or not by 15 of the 35 correctly interpreted progress graphs. Teachers only made an instructional adaptation by one third of the students who were not achieving their goal. Implying that there was no instructional adaptation by two third of the students who did not make enough progress according to their graph. In general, students significantly grew in their reading scores. But there was no difference in progress between students with or without an adaptation of the reading instruction. If we expect teachers to systematically monitor and report the reading progress of their students, they need assistance in the implementation of the CBM measurement system and the interpretation of the graphed reading scores.Show less
