Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4

An Examination of Turkish Students' PISA 2015 Collaborative Problem-Solving Competencies

Pages
588–606
Publication Date
2020-12-20
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results of this examination indicate that all CPS competencies of Turkish students need improvement.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Technological advancements initially made it possible for individuals with different cultures from different parts of the world to consider working together, and eventually collaboration turned into a necessity.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Based on this necessity, OECD measured collaborative problem-solving (CPS) competencies of 15-year-old students from the countries participating in PISA assessment in 2015.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results of this examination indicate that all CPS competencies of Turkish students need improvement.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:PISA 2015 · Collaborative ProblemSolving · Cognitive Diagnostic Model

Abstract

Technological advancements initially made it possible for individuals with different cultures from different parts of the world to consider working together, and eventually collaboration turned into a necessity. Based on this necessity, OECD measured collaborative problem-solving (CPS) competencies of 15-year-old students from the countries participating in PISA assessment in 2015. The objective of this study is to examine the data on Turkey from PISA 2015 CPS survey through Deterministic-Input, Noisy-Or-Gate (DINO) cognitive diagnostic model and to determine the students’ levels of CPS competencies as well as difficulty levels of these competencies. In this context, primarily, attributes of CPS competency domain were examined and the model with the most appropriate number of attributes, classification accuracy and consistency was determined for the analysis of PISA 2015 CPS data. The sample of this descriptive study consists of 435 students. As a result of the analysis, the Q-matrix of the model data fit was observed to have the best goodness-of-fit when it had three attributes whereas model fit and classification consistency decreased as the number of attributes increased. Furthermore, the easiest competency for Turkish students was determined to be ‘taking appropriate action to solve the problem’ while the most difficult was ‘establishing and maintaining shared understanding’. Finally, latent class distribution exposed that 56% of the students did not have any of the competencies, and 35% had all. Results of this examination indicate that all CPS competencies of Turkish students need improvement.

Özet

Technological advancements initially made it possible for individuals with different cultures from different parts of the world to consider working together, and eventually collaboration turned into a necessity. Based on this necessity, OECD measured collaborative problem-solving (CPS) competencies of 15-year-old students from the countries participating in PISA assessment in 2015. The objective of this study is to examine the data on Turkey from PISA 2015 CPS survey through Deterministic-Input, Noisy-Or-Gate (DINO) cognitive diagnostic model and to determine the students’ levels of CPS competencies as well as difficulty levels of these competencies. In this context, primarily, attributes of CPS competency domain were examined and the model with the most appropriate number of attributes, classification accuracy and consistency was determined for the analysis of PISA 2015 CPS data. The sample of this descriptive study consists of 435 students. As a result of the analysis, the Q-matrix of the model data fit was observed to have the best goodness-of-fit when it had three attributes whereas model fit and classification consistency decreased as the number of attributes increased. Furthermore, the easiest competency for Turkish students was determined to be ‘taking appropriate action to solve the problem’ while the most difficult was ‘establishing and maintaining shared understanding’. Finally, latent class distribution exposed that 56% of the students did not have any of the competencies, and 35% had all. Results of this examination indicate that all CPS competencies of Turkish students need improvement.

🔖

Cite This Article

YAVUZ, E., ATAR, H. Y. (2020). An Examination of Turkish Students' PISA 2015 Collaborative Problem-Solving Competencies. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4, 588–606. https://ajindex.com/articles/717053

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Altun, M. (2000). İlköğretimde problem çözme öğretimi [Teaching problem solving in primary education], Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 147. Retrieved July 10, 2019, from http://dhgm.meb.gov.tr/yayimlar/dergiler/Milli_Egitim_Dergisi/147/altun.htm
  2. Altun, M. (2014). Eğitim Fakülteleri ve İlköğretim Matematik Öğretmenleri için Matematik Öğretimi [Teaching Mathematics for Faculty of Education and Primary School Mathematics Teachers], 18th ed.; Bursa: Alfa Aktüel Publication. Arıcı, Ö. (2019). Investigating the factors related to Turkish students' collaborative problem solving skills with mediating models according to PISA 2015 results. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Ankara at Ankara.
  3. Arslan, Ç., Altun, M. (2007). Learning to solve non-rou¬tine problems. Elementary Education Online, 6(1), 50-61.
  4. Baki, A. (2006). Kuramdan Uygulamaya Matematik Eğitimi [Mathematics Education from Theory to Practice]. İstanbul:
  5. Bilge Printing. Bozkurt, Ş. B., Çakır, H. (2016). 21st Century learner skills: An investigation of middle school students based on grade level and gender. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 39, 69-82.
  6. Chang, C.-J., Chang, M.-H., Chiu, B.-C., Liu, C.-C., Chiang, S.-H. F., Wen, C.-T., et al. (2017) An analysis of student collaborative problem solving activities mediated by collaborative simulations. Computers & Education, 114, 222 235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.008
  7. Cui, Y., Gierl, M. J., Chang, H. (2012). Estimating classification consistency and accuracy for cognitive diagnostic assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 49(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2011.00158.x
  8. Cui, Y., Gierl, M., Guo, Q. (2015). Statistical classification for cognitive diagnostic assessment: An artificial neural network approach. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 1 24. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1062078
  9. Dede Y., Yaman S. (2006). Fen ve matematik eğitiminde problem çözme: Kuramsal bir çalışma [Problem solving in science and mathematics education: A theoretical study]. Çukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 2, 116-128.
  10. Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to The Educative Process. Boston: DC Heath and Company. DiBello, L. V., Roussos, L. A., Stout, W. F. (2007). Review of cognitively diagnostic assessment and a summary of psychometric models. Handbook of Statistics, 26, 979–1030. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0