Abstract

Achievement in mathematics is inextricably linked to future career opportunities, and therefore, understanding those factors that influence achievement is important. This study sought to examine the relationships among attitude towards mathematics, ability and mathematical achievement. This examination was also supported by a focus on gender effects. By drawing on a sample of Australian secondary school students, it was demonstrated through the results of a multivariate analysis of variance that females were more likely to hold positive attitudes towards mathematics. In addition, the predictive capacity of prior achievement and attitudes towards mathematics on a nationally recognised secondary school mathematics examination was shown to be large (R 2 = 0.692). However, when these predictors were controlled, the influence of gender was non-significant. Moreover, a structural equation model was developed from the same measures and subsequent testing indicated that the model offered a reasonable fit of the data. The positing and testing of this model signifies growth in the Australian research literature by showing the contribution that ability (as measured by standardised test results in numeracy and literacy) and attitude towards mathematics play in explaining mathematical achievement in secondary school. The implications of these results for teachers, parents and other researchers are then considered.

Purpose -This paper has two aims: to investigate the relationship of self-efficacy beliefs in terms of research on publication output; and, to identify the relationship of self-efficacy beliefs about research to the publishing outputs of neophyte lecturers. Design/methodology/approach -A questionnaire was utilised to obtain responses from lecturers working full-time at two large Australian universities (n ¼ 343). The data from this sample were analysed using factor analysis, correlation, and multiple regression analysis. Data from two sub-samples of neophyte lecturer (n 1 ¼ 47; n 2 ¼ 78) were then subjected to a multivariate analysis of variance. Findings -Four research self-efficacy subscales were derived from a factor analysis. These subscales were positively and significantly related and accounted for 46 percent of the total variance in total publications accrued. Significant differences were found between two groups of neophyte lecturer on nearly all items forming the respective research self-efficacy subscales. And, group membership accounted for 45.4 percent of the total variance. Originality/value -The findings have implications both theoretically and practically. Theoretically, the research self-efficacy construct was shown to have four underlying dimensions and to be highly predictive of a measure of publication output. From a practical perspective, the items forming the research self-efficacy subscales could be a useful tool to promote discussion about the tasks a lecturer may need to perform during an academic career. Further, the items could be ranked in terms of their discriminative capacity and, as a result, be used as the basis for researcher development and interventions to promote improved research self-efficacy and therefore increased publication output.

The study had two main aims: (i) to develop a model incorporating research self-efficacy and research disposition as predictors of publication output; and (ii) to assess the fit and robustness of this model to dichotomous groups based on gender, academic qualifications and rank. Data were drawn from a survey of lecturers (n = 331) working in two large Australian universities. The survey response rate was 33.6% and the lecturers were affiliated with a diverse range of research disciplines. Well-fitting measurement models for both research self-efficacy and disposition were produced using AMOS. However, a structural model which included these two measurement models would not satisfactorily fit the full sample. Subsequent testing yielded acceptable results when separate analyses employing the group variables of gender, academic qualifications and rank were undertaken. The model with rank offered the best fit of the data and, across all models, research self-efficacy proved to be the most important predictor of output. The results of the study provide an understanding of the scope and nature of research self-efficacy and, in addition, contribute to knowledge about the factors that underlie research disposition. As a consequence, the results have implications for career development programmes designed to foster research skills and further research. Additionally, the results point to some possible interventions aimed to boost research endeavour and output.

No abstract