SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

The Effect of School and Student-Related Factors on PISA 2015 Science Performances in Turkey

Mehmet İkbal YETİŞİR
Kaan BATI
Pages
170–186
Publication Date
2021-04-21
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)

When the aggregated ESCS was controlled, it is observed that the school-level variables had a higher effect on students’ science performances.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a research project conducted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, which evaluates the knowledge and skills gained by 15-year-old students over three-year terms.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Within this study’s' scope, the PISA 2015 data were analysed to determine whether school-related factors [including the schools’ economic, social, and cultural status (ESCS)] were related to Turkish students’ science performances.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When the aggregated ESCS was controlled, it is observed that the school-level variables had a higher effect on students’ science performances.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:HLM · PISA · science literacy

Abstract

The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a research project conducted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, which evaluates the knowledge and skills gained by 15-year-old students over three-year terms. Within this study’s' scope, the PISA 2015 data were analysed to determine whether school-related factors [including the schools’ economic, social, and cultural status (ESCS)] were related to Turkish students’ science performances. Due to its nested structure, the released PISA 2015 data were analysed using the hierarchical linear model (HLM). Two models were considered to examine how Aggregated ESCS at the school level makes a difference. Thereby in model 1 shortage of educational material, staff shortage, student behaviours, and teacher behaviours were included in the analysis; in addition to these variables listed, aggregated ESCS was also added to the analysis in Model 2. The results of the analysis revealed that school-related factors - in particular, staff shortage, student behaviours, and aggregated ESCS indexes - were statistically related to students’ science performances. When the aggregated ESCS was controlled, it is observed that the school-level variables had a higher effect on students’ science performances.

🔖

Cite This Article

YETİŞİR, M. İ., BATI, K. (2021). The Effect of School and Student-Related Factors on PISA 2015 Science Performances in Turkey. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 170–186. https://ajindex.com/articles/768156

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Agasisti, T., Avvisati, F., Borgonovi, F., & Longobardi, S. (2018). Academic resilience: What schools and countries do to help disadvantaged students succeed in PISA. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 167, Paris, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/e22490ac-en.
  2. Algina, J., & Swaminathan, H. (2011). Centering in two-level nested designs. Handbook of advanced multilevel analysis, 285-312.
  3. Baker, D. P., Goesling, B., & Letendre, G. K. (2002). Socioeconomic status, school quality, and national economic development: A cross‐national analysis of the "Heyneman‐Loxley Effect" on mathematics and science achievement. Comparative Education Review, 46, 291‐312. Baker, M. L., Sigmon, J. N., & Nugent, E. M. (2001). Truancy reduction: Keeping students in school. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Barber, B. L., Stone, M. R., & Eccles, J. S. (2010). Protect, prepare, support, and engage. Handbook of Research On Schools, Schooling, And Human Development, 336-378.
  4. Berberoğlu, G., Çalışkan, M., & Karslı, N. (2019). Variables predicting PISA scientific literacy scores in Turkey. International Journal of Science and Education, 2(2), 38-49.
  5. Bouhlila, D. S. (2015). The Heyneman–Loxley effect revisited in the Middle East and North Africa: Analysis using TIMSS 2007 database. International Journal of Educational Development, 42, 85-95.
  6. Brewer, D. J., & Stacz, C. (1996). Enhancing opportunity to learn measures in NCES data. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Bybee, R., Fensham, P. J., & Laurie, R. (2009). Scientific literacy and contexts in PISA 2006 science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 862-864.
  7. Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64(8), 723-733.
  8. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfall, F. D., York, R. L. (1966). The Equality of Educational Opportunity. United States Department of Health Education and Welfare, Washington DC. Cooper, R., & Liou, D. (2007). The Structure and Culture of Information Pathways: Rethinking Opportunity to Learn in Urban High Schools during the Ninth Grade Transition. The High School Journal, 91(1), 43-56.
  9. Çeçen, Y. (2015). Examination of the predictive powers of sociocultural and socioeconomic variables for PISA science literacy by years (Unpublished master’s thesis). İstanbul Aydın University, Graduate School of Social Sciences, İstanbul.
  10. Çelebi, Ö. (2010). A cross-