Table 7.2.10: Mean scores and Standard Deviation of 8th graders’ perceptions of frequency of
deployment of teaching methods according to their attribution styles of success in mathematics
learning _______________________________________________________________________
Teacher explanation |
Individual work |
Individual help |
Whole-class |
Group | |||||||||||
N |
M |
SD |
_N___ |
M__ |
SD |
_N___ |
M__ |
SD |
_N___ |
M__ |
SD |
N___ |
M__ |
SD | |
1 |
57 |
4.04 |
1.02 |
57 |
3.88 |
.96 |
57 |
3.18 |
1.30 |
57 |
1.82 |
1.04 |
57 |
1.35 |
.52 |
2 |
409 |
4.22 |
.84 |
409 |
4.05 |
.79 |
408 |
3.33 |
1.04 |
406 |
1.85 |
.88 |
409 |
1.54 |
.80 |
3 |
157 |
3.81 |
1.06 |
159 |
3.76 |
1.02 |
158 |
2.92 |
1.11 |
158 |
1.79 |
.90 |
157 |
1.46 |
.72 |
4 |
192 |
4.17 |
.87 |
193 |
3.84 |
.84 |
196 |
3.32 |
1.06 |
193 |
2.13 |
1.01 |
192 |
1.71 |
.93 |
5 |
207 |
4.06 |
.96 |
208 |
3.94 |
.82 |
208 |
3.09 |
1.06 |
206 |
1.97 |
.95 |
206 |
1.50 |
.69 |
6 |
49 |
4.27 |
1.00 |
49 |
3.86 |
∣1.12 |
48 |
2.90 |
1.19 |
49 |
1.61 |
1.04 |
49 |
1.37 |
.67 |
F=5.151, P=OOO |
F=3.236, p=.007 |
F=5.089, p=.000 |
F=4,225, p=.001 |
F=3.365, p=.005 |
I=AbiIity, 2=Effort, 3=Luck, 4=Support from teacher, 5=Home support, 6=Task easiness
5th graders perceiving themselves failing in mathematics learning
Table 7.2.1 T. Mean scores and Standard Deviation of 5th graders’ perceived deployment
of Teacher explanation and their affective attitudes towards mathematics learning
promoted by this teaching method according to their attribution styles of failure in
mathematics earning___________________________________________________________
Teacher |
Enjoyment_______ |
Motivation________ |
Sense of security |
Sense of progress |
Deployment | ||||||||||
J_ |
M__ |
SD |
_N__ |
M |
SD |
_N__ |
M |
SD |
N |
M |
SD |
N |
M |
SD | |
Lack of ability |
88 |
2.93 |
1.28 |
88 |
2.77 |
1.32 |
88 |
2.75 |
1.38 |
88 |
3.08 |
1.44 |
87 |
2.93 |
1.19 |
Lack of effort |
97 |
3.53 |
1.25 |
97 |
3.08 |
1.33 |
97 |
3.23 |
1.34 |
97 |
3.45 |
1.38 |
97 |
3.19 |
1.25 |
Lack of luck |
9 |
3.33 |
1.80 |
9 |
3.11 |
1.76 |
9 |
3.67 |
1.66 |
9 |
4.11 |
1.36 |
9 |
4.11 |
.93 |
Lack of support |
7 |
1.43 |
1.13 |
7 |
1.14 |
.38 |
7 |
1.29 |
.76 |
7 |
1.29 |
.76 |
7 |
2.14 |
1.07 |
Lack of home sup∣ |
10 |
2.50 |
1.51 |
10 |
2.50 |
1.18 |
10 |
2.30 |
1.42 |
10 |
2.80 |
1.32 |
10 |
3.40 |
1.27 |
Task difficulty |
34 |
3.38 |
1.28 |
34 |
3.38 |
1.44 |
34 |
3.26 |
1.38 |
34 |
3.68 |
1.41 |
34 |
3.00 |
1.02 |
ANOVA______ |
F= 5.317, p<. 01 |
F=4.016, p<. 01 |
F=4.535, p<. 01 |
F=4.984, p<. 01 |
F=2.842, p<. 05 |
8th graders perceiving themselves failing in mathematics learning
Table 7.2.12: Mean scores and Standard Deviation of 8th graders’ affective attitudes promoted
by Teacher explanation and Group discussion according to their attribution styles of failure in
mathematics earning__________________________________________________________
Teacher |
Enjoyment |
Motivation |
Sense of security |
Sense of progress |
Deployment | ||||||||||
N |
M |
SD |
_N__ |
M__ |
SD |
N |
M |
SD |
N |
M |
SD |
N |
M__ |
SD | |
Lack of ability |
88 |
3.22 |
1.32 |
87 |
2.71 |
1.37 |
87 |
3.05 |
1.39 |
87 |
3.60 |
1.26 |
87 |
3.85 |
1.17 |
Lack of effort |
487 |
3.35 |
1.22 |
485 |
3.22 |
1.21 |
482 |
3.41 |
1.20 |
482 |
3.82 |
1.06 |
485 |
3.93 |
1.05 |
Lack of luck |
16 |
3.50 |
1.21 |
16 |
3.56 |
1.26 |
16 |
3.44 |
1.03 |
16 |
4.00 |
1.16 |
16 |
3.69 |
1.20 |
Lack of support fo |
55 |
2.65 |
1.42 |
54 |
2.48 |
1.30 |
55 |
2.93 |
1.41 |
55 |
3.07 |
1.29 |
55 |
3.73 |
1.06 |
Lack of home sup |
~24^ |
3.38 |
1.31 |
24 |
^^3∕Γ7^ |
1.37 |
~24~ |
3.38 |
1.31 |
24 |
3.71 |
1.08 |
24 |
3.96 |
.96 |
Task difficulty |
58 |
3.21 |
1.28 |
58 |
3.28 |
1.25 |
58 |
3.36 |
1.29 |
58 |
3.93 |
1.01 |
58 |
3.64 |
1.12 |
ANOVA |
F=1.512, p<1.0 |
F=2.293, p<. 01 |
F=1.257, p<1.0 |
F=2√ |
170, p<. 01 |
F=1.277, p<.5 |
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence
3. Intertemporal Risk Management Decisions of Farmers under Preference, Market, and Policy Dynamics
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. Constructing the Phylomemetic Tree Case of Study: Indonesian Tradition-Inspired Buildings
7. The name is absent
8. Gerontocracy in Motion? – European Cross-Country Evidence on the Labor Market Consequences of Population Ageing
9. The name is absent
10. Income Mobility of Owners of Small Businesses when Boundaries between Occupations are Vague