Measuring interaction quality in mathematics instruction: How differences in operationalizations matter methodologically

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Journal of Mathematical Behavior Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101054

Kim Quabeck , Kirstin Erath , Susanne Prediger

{"title":"Measuring interaction quality in mathematics instruction: How differences in operationalizations matter methodologically","authors":"Kim Quabeck , Kirstin Erath , Susanne Prediger","doi":"10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Quality of interaction can enhance or constrain students’ mathematical learning opportunities. However, quantitative video studies have measured the quality of interaction with very heterogeneous conceptualizations and operationalizations. This project sought to disentangle typical methodological choices to assess interaction quality in six quality dimensions, each of them in task-based, move-based, and practice-based operationalizations. The empirical part of the study compared different conceptualizations with their corresponding operationalizations and used them to code video data from middle school students (n = 210) organized into 49 small groups who worked on the same curriculum materials. The analysis revealed that different conceptualizations and operationalizations led to substantially different findings, so their distinction turned out to be of high methodological relevance. These results highlight the importance of making methodological choices explicit and call for a stronger academic discourse on how to conceptualize and operationalize interaction quality in video studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47481,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073231232300024X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Quality of interaction can enhance or constrain students’ mathematical learning opportunities. However, quantitative video studies have measured the quality of interaction with very heterogeneous conceptualizations and operationalizations. This project sought to disentangle typical methodological choices to assess interaction quality in six quality dimensions, each of them in task-based, move-based, and practice-based operationalizations. The empirical part of the study compared different conceptualizations with their corresponding operationalizations and used them to code video data from middle school students (n = 210) organized into 49 small groups who worked on the same curriculum materials. The analysis revealed that different conceptualizations and operationalizations led to substantially different findings, so their distinction turned out to be of high methodological relevance. These results highlight the importance of making methodological choices explicit and call for a stronger academic discourse on how to conceptualize and operationalize interaction quality in video studies.

查看原文本刊更多论文

衡量数学教学中的互动质量：操作上的差异如何在方法上产生影响

互动质量可以提高或限制学生的数学学习机会。然而，定量视频研究已经通过非常异质的概念化和操作化来衡量互动的质量。该项目试图从六个质量维度来理清典型的方法选择，以评估互动质量，每个维度都是基于任务的、基于行动的和基于实践的操作。该研究的实证部分比较了不同的概念及其相应的操作，并使用它们对中学生（n=210）的视频数据进行编码，这些中学生被组织成49个小组，他们使用相同的课程材料。分析表明，不同的概念化和操作化导致了截然不同的发现，因此它们的区别具有高度的方法相关性。这些结果强调了明确方法选择的重要性，并呼吁就如何在视频研究中概念化和操作化互动质量进行更强有力的学术讨论。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Mathematical Behavior EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

17.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Mathematical Behavior solicits original research on the learning and teaching of mathematics. We are interested especially in basic research, research that aims to clarify, in detail and depth, how mathematical ideas develop in learners. Over three decades, our experience confirms a founding premise of this journal: that mathematical thinking, hence mathematics learning as a social enterprise, is special. It is special because mathematics is special, both logically and psychologically. Logically, through the way that mathematical ideas and methods have been built, refined and organized for centuries across a range of cultures; and psychologically, through the variety of ways people today, in many walks of life, make sense of mathematics, develop it, make it their own.