Page 62 - Children’s mathematical development and learning needs in perspective of teachers’ use of dynamic math interviews

60
Chapter 2
possible influences of teacher/class provided a better fit than just the level-1 full model (ICC = 0.33). The prior PS achievement of the children was now the only significant predictor (M = 0.57, SD = 0.15, p < .001). The level-2 analyses showed an added class value of 10% relative to that for the full level-1 model.
Discussion
In this study, we investigated longitudinally the prediction of the development of arithmetic fluency and mathematical problem-solving during the fourth grade for some 600 children. This was done on the basis of their math self-concept, math self-efficacy, and math anxiety but also the teacher competencies of actual mathematics teaching behavior, mathematical knowledge for teaching, and mathematics teaching self-efficacy.
For the development of arithmetic fluency, both the children’s arithmetic fluency at the start of fourth grade and their math self- concept were found to be significant positive predictors; mathematics teaching behavior was found to be a significant negative predictor.
With regard to the development of mathematical problem-solving, both the children’s mathematical problem-solving at the start of fourth grade and the teachers’ mathematical knowledge were significant positive predictors; mathematics teaching behavior and mathematics teaching self-efficacy were significant negative predictors.
Child and teacher factors as predictors of mathematical development
Child factors
We expected children’s math self-concept, math self-efficacy, and math anxiety to predict the development of both children’s arithmetic fluency and mathematical problem-solving ability in grade 4. This expectation was tentative as previous studies typically involved older-aged children (e.g., McWilliams et al., 2013; Pietsch et al., 2003;