{"title":"利用国际大规模评估数据调查新西兰奥特亚的学术韧性测量。","authors":"Georgia Rudd, Kane Meissel, Frauke Meyer","doi":"10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Academic resilience captures academic success despite adversity and thus is an important concept for promoting equity within education. However, our understanding of how and why rates of academic resilience differ between contexts is currently limited by variation in the ways that the construct has been operationalised in quantitative research. Similarly, comparing the strength of protective factors that promote academic resilience is hindered by differing approaches to the measurement of academic resilience. This methodological variation has complicated attempts to reconcile disparate findings about academic resilience. The current study applied six commonly used operationalisations of academic resilience that combined different thresholds of high risk and high achievement, to three international large-scale assessments, to explore how these different operationalisations impacted the findings produced. The context of Aotearoa New Zealand was chosen as a case study to further academic resilience research within this context and investigate how academic resilience manifests in an education system with relatively high levels of average achievement alongside low levels of educational equity. Within international large-scale assessment datasets, prevalence rates differed markedly across subject areas, grade levels, and collection cycles, as a function of the measure of academic resilience employed, while the strength of protective factors was more consistent. Thresholds that were norm-referenced produced more consistent findings across the different datasets compared to thresholds that were criterion-referenced. High levels of missing data prevented the analysis of some datasets, and differences in the way that key constructs were measured undermined the comparability of findings across international large-scale assessments. The findings emphasise the strengths and limitations of utilising international large-scale assessment data for the study of academic resilience, particularly within the Aotearoa New Zealand context. Furthermore, the study highlights that researchers' methodological decisions have important impacts on the conclusions drawn about academic resilience.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0.</p>","PeriodicalId":46725,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability","volume":"35 2","pages":"169-200"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9131980/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating the measurement of academic resilience in Aotearoa New Zealand using international large-scale assessment data.\",\"authors\":\"Georgia Rudd, Kane Meissel, Frauke Meyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Academic resilience captures academic success despite adversity and thus is an important concept for promoting equity within education. However, our understanding of how and why rates of academic resilience differ between contexts is currently limited by variation in the ways that the construct has been operationalised in quantitative research. Similarly, comparing the strength of protective factors that promote academic resilience is hindered by differing approaches to the measurement of academic resilience. This methodological variation has complicated attempts to reconcile disparate findings about academic resilience. The current study applied six commonly used operationalisations of academic resilience that combined different thresholds of high risk and high achievement, to three international large-scale assessments, to explore how these different operationalisations impacted the findings produced. The context of Aotearoa New Zealand was chosen as a case study to further academic resilience research within this context and investigate how academic resilience manifests in an education system with relatively high levels of average achievement alongside low levels of educational equity. Within international large-scale assessment datasets, prevalence rates differed markedly across subject areas, grade levels, and collection cycles, as a function of the measure of academic resilience employed, while the strength of protective factors was more consistent. Thresholds that were norm-referenced produced more consistent findings across the different datasets compared to thresholds that were criterion-referenced. High levels of missing data prevented the analysis of some datasets, and differences in the way that key constructs were measured undermined the comparability of findings across international large-scale assessments. The findings emphasise the strengths and limitations of utilising international large-scale assessment data for the study of academic resilience, particularly within the Aotearoa New Zealand context. Furthermore, the study highlights that researchers' methodological decisions have important impacts on the conclusions drawn about academic resilience.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46725,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability\",\"volume\":\"35 2\",\"pages\":\"169-200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9131980/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/5/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/5/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Investigating the measurement of academic resilience in Aotearoa New Zealand using international large-scale assessment data.
Academic resilience captures academic success despite adversity and thus is an important concept for promoting equity within education. However, our understanding of how and why rates of academic resilience differ between contexts is currently limited by variation in the ways that the construct has been operationalised in quantitative research. Similarly, comparing the strength of protective factors that promote academic resilience is hindered by differing approaches to the measurement of academic resilience. This methodological variation has complicated attempts to reconcile disparate findings about academic resilience. The current study applied six commonly used operationalisations of academic resilience that combined different thresholds of high risk and high achievement, to three international large-scale assessments, to explore how these different operationalisations impacted the findings produced. The context of Aotearoa New Zealand was chosen as a case study to further academic resilience research within this context and investigate how academic resilience manifests in an education system with relatively high levels of average achievement alongside low levels of educational equity. Within international large-scale assessment datasets, prevalence rates differed markedly across subject areas, grade levels, and collection cycles, as a function of the measure of academic resilience employed, while the strength of protective factors was more consistent. Thresholds that were norm-referenced produced more consistent findings across the different datasets compared to thresholds that were criterion-referenced. High levels of missing data prevented the analysis of some datasets, and differences in the way that key constructs were measured undermined the comparability of findings across international large-scale assessments. The findings emphasise the strengths and limitations of utilising international large-scale assessment data for the study of academic resilience, particularly within the Aotearoa New Zealand context. Furthermore, the study highlights that researchers' methodological decisions have important impacts on the conclusions drawn about academic resilience.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0.
期刊介绍:
The main objective of this international journal is to advance knowledge and dissemination of research on and about assessment, evaluation and accountability of all kinds and on various levels as well as in all fields of education. The journal provides readers with an understanding of the rich contextual nature of evaluation, assessment and accountability in education. The journal is theory-oriented and methodology-based and seeks to connect research, policy making and practice. The journal publishes outstanding empirical works, peer-reviewed by eminent scholars around the world.Aims and Scope in more detail: The main objective of this international journal is to advance knowledge and dissemination of research on and about evaluation, assessment and accountability: - of all kinds (e.g. person, programme, organisation), - on various levels (state, regional, local), - in all fields of education (primary, secondary, higher education/tertiary, as well as non-school sector) and across all different life phases (e.g. adult education/andragogy/Human Resource Management/professional development).The journal provides readers with an understanding of the rich contextual nature of evaluation, assessment and accountability in education. The journal is theory-oriented and methodology-based and seeks to connect research, policy making and practice. Therefore, the journal explores and discusses: - theories of evaluation, assessment and accountability, - function, role, aims and purpose of evaluation, assessment and accountability, - impact of evaluation, assessment and accountability, - methodology, design and methods of evaluation, assessment and accountability, - principles, standards and quality of evaluation, assessment and accountability, - issues of planning, coordinating, conducting, reporting of evaluation, assessment and accountability.The journal also covers the quality of different instruments or procedures or approaches which are used for evaluation, assessment and accountability.The journal only includes research findings from evaluation, assessment and accountability, if the design or approach of it is meta-reflected in the article.The journal publishes outstanding empirical works, peer-reviewed by eminent scholars around the world.