Examining the Relationship Between Teachers’ Instructional Practices and Students’ Mathematics Achievement

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether relationships existed between teachers' implementation of two specific discourse-related instructional practices and students' mathematics achievement in geometry and measurement as part of a research study on the effectiveness of an advanced mathematics curriculum for kindergarten and Grades 1 and 2. The mathematics units incorporated the following instructional practices: engaging students in verbal communication in mathematics and encouraging the use of appropriate mathematical vocabulary. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to determine the relationships between teachers' use of the instructional practices and the students' mathematics achievement. Results indicated that significant, positive relationships existed; the teachers' implementation scores for the verbal communication and encouraging mathematical language instructional practices were predictors of student mathematics achievement as measured by students' percentage gain scores on the Open-Response Assessments. Implications of these findings for mathematics instruction are discussed.

Learning motivation and student achievement : description analysis and relationships both

“…The country currently needs to be tuberous on achievements produced by the process of learning activities at academic institutions, because they some countries have a fear that the process of learning, and the demands of school will end with achievement results unsatisfactory (McInerney, Cheng, Mok, & Lam, 2012;Nemeth & Long, 2012), Accordingly, student achievement in formal academic institutions can be observed from the rank-actualization in students' learning activities (Joy, Hamilton, & Ekeke, 2013;Levpuscek & Zupancic, 2008). Indicators of learning achievement can be seen on the standard value set by each institution and on changes in the level of achievement of each student from year to year in all academic subjects in tests and assessments (Firmender, Gavin, & McCoach, 2014;Lee, Liu, Amo, & Wang, 2013;Shatzer, Caldarella, Hallam, & Brown, 2013;Swanson, Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, & Caitlin O'Brien, 2011).…”

“…Gauge theory shows that learning is influenced by three main components, namely external conditions, internal and learning outcomes (Mudjiono, 2009). While the factors that affect student achievement according to previous studies including students 'motivation (Levpuscek & Zupancic, 2008), students' perception of the school environment (Gietz & McIntosh, 2014), the quality of teachers (Darling-Hammond, 2000;Heck, 2007;Jennings & Greenberg, 2009;Joy et al, 2013;Kunter et al, 2013;Lee et al, 2013;Muzenda, 2013;Ottmar, Rimm-Kaufman, Larsen, & Berry, 2015;Wayne & Youngs, 2003), the attitude of teachers (Levpuscek & Zupancic, 2008), learning model used by the teacher; a simulation model for economic subjects, blended learning, discovery and think pair share (Al-Ani, 2013;Bamiro, 2015;Porter, Riley, & Ruffer, 2004), learning strategies applied by the teacher; Instructional (Firmender et al, 2014), the class composition (Gottfried, 2012), the type of leadership of school leaders (Shatzer et al, 2013), motherly support (Swanson et al, 2011), motherly controls (Levpuscek & Zupancic, 2008;Swanson et al, 2011) and state standards that regulate education (Lee et al, 2013).…”

Teachers’ Mathematics Education and Readiness Beliefs, and Kindergarteners’ Mathematics Learning

“…With regards to teachers' instructional practices, scholars have found that certain math instructional practices, such as involving students in math related verbal communications and math vocabulary usage, were stronger predictors than others for kindergarteners' math achievement (Firmender et al, 2014;Gottfried, 2016). Likewise, there could be certain practices that may be more helpful than others to children's math learning in their kindergarten years.…”

Teacher Decisions in Selecting Vocabulary for Instruction to English Language Learners

“…While few would argue that vocabulary knowledge is vital to reading comprehension (Nation, 1983(Nation, , 2001(Nation, , 2006, recent research suggests that the development of vocabulary knowledge is key to success in academic subjects ranging from science (Shaw, Lyon, Stoddart, Mosqueda, & Menon, 2014;Weinburgh, Silva, Horak, Groulx, & Nettles, 2014), to social studies (Hedrick, Harmon, & Linerode, 2004), to mathematics (Abedi & Lord, 2001;Bernardo, 2002;Firmender, Gavin, & McCoach, 2014). The importance of vocabulary to academic success is clear.…”

“…Choosing vocabulary for targeted instruction among ELLs can be a daunting task. Numerous frameworks can be consulted to guide the selection of vocabulary for instruction among ELLs, ranging from frequency-based selection (Davies, 2008;Nation, 2006;West, 1953), to specialized lists of academic vocabulary (Coxhead, 2000;Gardner & Davies, 2014), to the tier system of selection (Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2002, which was made known more widely by Calderόn, August, Slavin, Duran, Madden, and Chung (2005). However, mainstream teachers in the subject areas must also balance the need to teach content-specific vocabulary with teaching general vocabulary to the ELLs in their classes.…”