Table 7.2.7: Mean scores and Standard Deviation of 8th graders’ motivation to learn
mathematics promoted by teaching methods according to their attribution styles of success in
mathematics learning_____________________________
|
Reading a textbook |
Teacherexplanation | |||||
|
N |
M__ |
SD |
_N___ |
M___ |
SD | |
|
Ability |
58 |
2.34 |
1.24 |
58 |
2.72 |
1.25 |
|
Effort_____________________ |
410 |
2.65 |
1.21 |
412 |
3.48 |
1.13 |
|
Luck________________ |
159 |
2.24 |
1.13 |
160 |
3.09 |
1.22 |
|
Support form teacher |
196 |
2.64 |
1.13 |
196 |
3.71 |
1.01 |
|
Home support_______ |
207 |
2.49 |
1.17 |
208 |
3.08 |
1.18 |
|
Task easiness________ |
49 |
2.06 |
.97 |
49 |
2.86 |
1.15 |
|
ANOVA_________ |
F=4.986, p=. 000 |
F=14.' |
85, p=. |
000___ | ||
Table 7.2.8: Mean scores and Standard Deviation of 8th graders’ sense of security in learning
mathematics promoted by teaching methods according to their attribution styles of success in
mathematics learning______________________________________________
|
Reading a textbook |
Teacher explanation |
Individual work | |||||||
|
N...... |
M__ |
SD |
_N___ |
M |
SD |
N |
M__ |
SD | |
|
Ability |
58 |
2.88 |
1.35 |
58 |
3.21 |
1.39 |
58 |
4.03 |
1.20 |
|
Effort_____________________ |
409 |
3.02 |
1.24 |
409 |
3.71 |
1.11 |
409 |
3.95 |
1.17 |
|
Luck________________ |
160 |
2.56 |
1.17 |
160 |
3.18 |
1.23 |
160 |
3.49 |
1.28 |
|
Support form teacher |
194 |
2.99 |
1.17 |
194 |
3.91 |
.98 |
194 |
3.58 |
1.09 |
|
Home support_______ |
208 |
2.79 |
1.23 |
208 |
3.37 |
1.20 |
208 |
3.72 |
1.12 |
|
Task easiness________ |
49 |
2.63 |
1.33 |
49 |
3.29 |
1.41 |
49 |
3.82 |
1.30 |
|
ANOVA_________ |
F=4.2' |
7, p=. 001 |
F=11,278, p=. 000 |
F=5.484, p=. 000 | |||||
Table 7.2.9: Mean scores and Standard Deviation of 8th graders’ sense of progress in learning
mathematics promoted by teaching methods according to their attribution styles of success in
mathematics learning______________________________________________
|
Reading a textbook |
Teacherexplanation |
Individual work_______ | |||||||
|
N |
M |
SD |
N |
M__ |
SD |
_N___ |
M__ |
SD | |
|
Ability____________________ |
58 |
3.21 |
1.40 |
58 |
3.69 |
1.20 |
58 |
3.97 |
1.06 |
|
Effort_____________________ |
409 |
3.31 |
1.24 |
408 |
4.08 |
.97 |
409 |
4.10 |
1.02 |
|
Luck_______________ |
158 |
2.89 |
1.16 |
158 |
3.62 |
1.13 |
158 |
3.72 |
1.11 |
|
Support form teacher |
196 |
3.29 |
1.20 |
196 |
4.19 |
.89 |
196 |
3.78 |
1.09 |
|
Home support_______ |
209 |
3.13 |
1.12 |
209 |
3.74 |
1.06 |
209 |
3.89 |
1.06 |
|
Task easiness________ |
49 |
2.76 |
1.25 |
49 |
3.86 |
1.06 |
49 |
3.94 |
1.13 |
|
ANOVA_________ |
F=4.461,p=. 000 |
F=9.459, p=. 000 |
F=4.2Z |
12, p=. 001 | |||||
More intriguing information
1. Investment and Interest Rate Policy in the Open Economy2. Temporary Work in Turbulent Times: The Swedish Experience
3. Multifunctionality of Agriculture: An Inquiry Into the Complementarity Between Landscape Preservation and Food Security
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. The name is absent
7. NATURAL RESOURCE SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: A COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM APPROACH
8. Cross-Country Evidence on the Link between the Level of Infrastructure and Capital Inflows
9. APPLYING BIOSOLIDS: ISSUES FOR VIRGINIA AGRICULTURE
10. Novelty and Reinforcement Learning in the Value System of Developmental Robots