Teacher Support, Reading Strategy and Reading Literacy: A Two-Level Mediation Model

Abstract

This study used a large-scale random sampling survey data called Regional Assessment of Education Quality (RAEQ) organized by Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment toward Basic Education Quality in 2014. The school bullying phenomenon is described from the perspective of middle school students who were bullied. Regression is used to estimate the effects of academic achievement, self-esteem, interpersonal relationship and pro-social behavior on the different types of school bullying. And the differences between urban and rural areas among the influence factors were also compared. The conclusions are as follows. First, the average frequency of verbal bullying is the highest, relational bullying is in the middle level, and physical bullying is the lowest. Second, boys are more likely to suffer school bullying weighted more in verbal and physical bullying. Third, those who are singleparent, migrant, left behind and rural origin are more vulnerable to various types of bullying. Interestingly, students from single-parent families are more likely to suffer relational bullying, while migrant and rural children are more likely to get verbal bullying. Fourth, the level of selfesteem has a U-shaped relationship with the frequencies of all kinds of school bullying, and it is more significant and clear in the relational bullying. Fifth, interpersonal relationship, including parent-child, peerpeer, and teacher-student relationship can affect the school bullying significantly, and the peer relationship has a bigger effect on the relational bullying for urban students compared with rural ones. Therefore, parents, teachers and schools should pay more attention to and even interfere with the potentially bullied students to prevent and control school bullying.

Okuma Okuryazarlığı Performansı, Motivasyon Kaynakları ve Öğretmen Desteği Arasındaki İlişkiler: PISA 2018 Türkiye Örneklemi

“…In many previous studies that evaluated the PISA data, it was found that the teacher support had a positive effect on the reading performance (Radulovic et al, 2022;Chang & Bangsri, 2020;Chen et al, 2019;Ma et al, 2021;Mercer, 2011). While the perceived teacher support of Chinese students who participated in the PISA 2018 had a 5% effect on the reading literacy performance (Ma et al, 2021), it was a surprising finding that the teacher support did not contribute to the reading performance according to the perception of students from Türkiye (1‰).…”

“…Previous studies demonstrated the relationship of teacher support with reading literacy (İnci & Kaya, 2022;Büyükatak 2022;Radulovic et al, 2022;Chang & Bangsri, 2020;Chen et al, 2019;Ma et al, 2021;Mercer, 2011), first reading (Silinskas et al ., 2016), participation in reading (Zhao et al, 2018;Berman-Young, 2014), academic achievements other than reading (Bal, 2011;Chen, 2017;Klem & Connell, 2014;Ma et al, 2017), academic feelings (Lei et al, 2018), and attitude towards school (Ertem et al, 2021) from various perspectives.…”