The Relationships among Perceived Parenting Styles, Mathematics Self-Concept, and Mathematics Achievement in Fifth-Grade and
Six-Grade Elementary School Students.
E09909003
100 7
360
338 3饋饋 T
Pearson (1)
(饋) (3)
(4)
Abstract
The main purpose of this research is to explore the relationship among personal background of 5th and 6th graders students in elementary schools, consciousness of parenting styles and self-concept in math toward academic achievement of math. From the result of the study, we know that the self-concept in math of students has the biggest influence on academic achievement of math. According to the conclusions, some related suggestions were provided for teachers, parents and future studies.
Questionnaire was used as instrument for this study. A total of 322 5th and 6th graders students of effective samples were all from one of the elementary schools in Taichung Country, included the parenting styles questionnaire and the self-concept in math of elementary school students scale. The collected data were analyzed and interpreted by statistical methods of descriptive statistical, independent-sample t-test, one-way ANOVA and Pearson product-moment correlation. The following conclusions are drawn from this study.
1. The current levels of the consciousness of parenting style of high-grade elementary school students are mostly in good conditions.
2. High-grade elementary school students of different gender are significantly the same in consciousness of parenting style.
3. The self-concept in math of high-grade elementary school students is significant related to their gender, age and the consciousness of parenting style, but is non-related to their SES.
4. The academic achievement of math of high-grade elementary school students is significant related to their SES and the self-concept in math, but is non-related to their gender, age and the parenting styles.
Key words Consciousness of parenting styles, Self-concept in math, Academic achievement of math
i ii iii iv vii ix
1
………1
………..1
………..4
……….4
………..4
………..5
………..5
………....7
7
..7
..8
. 11 ……… 17
……… .20
………20
……… 27
………..29
……….29
………29
33 ………33
………35
………35
………39
……….41
….…..…41
….…..…44
….…..…46
………. ..…49
……… ……51
……….55
………55
……….……...55
………56
………56
………56
………57
………....57
……….…...58
……….……..60
……….…...67
……….71
……….77
1-1 ……….1
1-饋 ……….2
饋-1 ………7
饋-饋 ………12
饋-3 ………13
2-4 ……….15
饋-5 ……….16
2-6 ………..21
2-7 ………..26
2-8 ………..27
3-1 ………36
3-2 ………...37
4-1 ………...41
4-2 ………..42
4-3 ………...43
4-4 ………..43
4-5 X … ………...45
4-6 ………..46
4-7 t ………47
4-8 t ………47
4-9 t ………48
4-10 ……….48
4-11 ……….49
4-12 t ………….49
4-13 t ………..50
4-14 t ………..50
4-15 ………..51
4-16 ………..51
4-17 ………..52
4-18 ……….52
4-19 ………..53
4-饋0 ……….53
2-1 Maccoby & Martin .15
2-2 Shavelson ……….23
饋-3 Marsh/Shavelson ………..25
3-1 ………..34
88
1-1
8筱 16筱 36筱 18筱 饋筱 18筱 饋筱
9筱 饋8筱 饋8筱 4筱 6筱 16筱 9筱
5筱 5饋筱 饋1筱 4筱 5筱 8筱 6筱
16筱 5饋筱
1-饋
饋4筱 6筱 6筱 64筱 0筱
37筱 18筱 0筱 36筱 9筱
饋9筱 18筱 1筱 41筱 11筱
饋006
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; OECD The Programme for International Student Assessment PISA
饋008 TIMSS Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study; TIMSS 饋007
Foy & Olson, 饋009 1 PISA
4.1 饋.3 饋.7 饋 TIMSS 饋007
SCM
饋010
1999 1973
饋00饋
饋00饋
Acock Clair
饋009
(饋003) 1998
Kung, 饋009 ; Marsh, 1990b; Marsh, Trautwein, Lüdtke, Köller, & Baumert, 饋005
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
(1997)
authoritative
indulgent authortarian
neglectful
2008 Marsh 1999 SDQII Self Description Questionnaire II
T
饋-1
饋-1
198饋 Hoffmman 1975
1986
Maccoby&M artin
1983
1985
1989
2-1( )
1993
1993
1995
1996
1997
1998
饋001 Hoghughi &
Long 饋004
饋005
饋005
Mead 1976
( ((
( ) )) )
Fready
Freud identification
1992
( )
Piaget
1. 饋. 3. 4.
Piaget&Inhelder,1969
( ((
( ) )) )
Bandura 1991
1993 2000
( )
Sinnerg
( ) )) )
Gesell
1992
( ((
( ) )) )
Carl Rogers
1995
Levis
饋005
1996
2010
1993
( ((
( ) )) ) single single- single single -- -dimension dimension dimension dimension
single-dimension 饋008
饋-饋
( )
Baldwin (1945)
1. acceptance 饋. democracy 3. indulgence
饋004
Elder (196饋)
1. autocratic 饋. authoritarian 3. democratic 4. equalitarian 5. permissive 6. laissez faire 7. ignoring
7400
饋005
Pumroy (1966)
1. indulgent 饋. indifferent 3. disciplinarian 4. rejecting 5. protective
饋001
Baumrind (1974)
1. authoritarian 饋. authoritative 3. permissiveness
146
饋004
Hurlock (1978)
1.
overindulgence 饋.
overindulgence 3. rejection 4. acceptation 5. dominance 6. submission 7. favorite 8. expectation
饋001
2-2( )
(197饋)
1. 饋. 3.
4. 5. 6. 197饋
(1969)
1. 饋. 3.
4. 饋005
饋008
( ((
( ) )) ) two two- two two -- -dimension dimension dimension dimension
two-dimension
饋-3
( ) Williams (1958)
1.
饋.
3.
4.
loving authority
饋004
Schaefer (1959)
1. 饋.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8. 9.
10. 11.
1饋. 13. 14.
-
autonomy-control -
loving-hostility
1997
Roe &
Sieglman (1963)
1. 饋. 3.
4. 5. 6.
7. 8.
9. 10.
- loving-rejecting
-
causal-demanding
1997
2-3( )
( ) Maccoby
&
Martin (1983)
1.
authoritative 2.
indulgent
3.
authortarian
4. neglectful
responsiveness demanding
饋001
(1995)
1.
饋.
3.
4.
1995
饋008
Baumrind 1989
demandingness responsiveness
rejecting-neglecting Baumrind
Maccoby Martin 1983 Baumrind 1967
authoritative authoritarian indulgent
neglectful
2-1 Maccoby & Martin
Maccoby & Martin
1993 15
2-4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2-4( )
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
饋010
1998
( ((
( ) )) ) MM Multidimensional M ultidimensional ultidimensional ultidimensional
Multidimensional 饋-5
( ) Becker (1964)
1.
饋.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
- -
-
1997
2-5( ) ( ) Hetherin gton &
Frabkie (1967)
1. warmth 饋. dominance 3. conflict
1997
Margolies
&
Weintraub (1997)
1. -
饋. -
3. -
饋004
: (饋008)
Baldwin McCoby & Martin 1983
Becker Ainsworth Bell Stayton(1975)
Woo 1989
parental power parental affection 1996
1963 1994 1997
饋00饋 饋005 饋010
Maccoby Martin 1983
/ 2010
( )
2003
饋001 1997
2002
Luster & Youatt 1989 199饋
饋004
饋006
Maccoby 1980
2004
( )
Dwairy Menshar 2006
2008
2003
1996 A
2003
2001 2004
2002
( )
Wu 2002
Leung Lau Lam 1998
2010
1996
( )
2-6
( ) William James (1890)
self as known self as knower
empirical self
pure ego
1996 Cooley
(1956)
looking glass-self
( ) 1993 Rogers
(1961)
1995 Tomas
(1980)
image of picture
1998
(1979)
image
(2001)
(1986)
( )
1.
Shavelson Stanton 1976
1 organized :
饋 multifaceted
3 hierarchical
4 stable
1995
5 development
2-2 Shavelson 2010
6 evaluative
7 differentiable
a
b GPA
2010
2. :Shavelson 1976
0.5 ─0.8 Shavelson
Marsh Shavelson 1985
Marsh Shavelson 1985
/ /
Marsh / Shavelson 2010
饋-3 Marsh/Shavelson
“A multifaceted Academic Self-Concept: Its Hierarchical Structure and Its Relation to Academic Achievement”, by H. W. Marsh, B. M. Byrne, & R. J.
Shavelson, 1988, Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 378.
:
/ /
:
/
MATH/ACADEMIC
/
VERBAL/ACADEMIC
2-7
Marsh 1990a
1993a
Reyes 1984
Lent, Brown,
& Gore
1997
1996
2009
Shavelson &
Hubner &
Stanton
1976
1990
( 2010)
Craven, McInerney, &
Marsh, 2000
( )
:
2-8
2007
Reyes 1984
1989
2009 2009
2010
1.
(1995)
(1999)
(1996)
Marsh Byrne Shavelson 1988
Wigfield 2006
Dai Yun 2001 key school
(2010)
1. 2002
2003
2003
2005
(2008)
饋 饋饋
饋.... (2003) (2008)
(1995)
4730
2007
(2002)
(
) ( ) (
) ( )
1. (2009) ( 1995)
(1994)
Entwisle Alexander Olson( 1994 ) 455
( 1982-1990 )
Sadker &
Steindam(1989)
(饋003)
( 饋003)
( 饋006 饋007
饋006)
饋 饋饋
饋.... (1998)
(1996) (2001) Hoge Smith Crist
( 饋007) (1990)
1 11
1.... :::: ( Hearn 1991 Horan & Hargis 1991 Stevenson &
Baker 1992 1983 1996 1997 )
(1992)
( 2007)
(1987)
2.
(1986) (饋000)
(1986)
(饋001) ~
White & Brinterhoff(1981)
3-1
99 ~ T
A
B
D E
F G
H C
3-1
( )
1饋 360 338
93.8筱 3饋饋
89.4筱
(1997) 2008
2005 Hollingshead 1957 Two Factor Index of Social Position
2002 2006
I
II III IV V 5 4 3 2 1
4 7
I II
IV V
3-1
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
5 4 3 2 1
5×7 4×7 3×7 2×7 1×7
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
5 4 3 2 1
5×4 4×4 3×4 2×4 1×4
5×4+5×7=55 4×4+4×7=44 3×4+3×7=33 2×4+2×7=22 1×4+1×7=11
I. 52 55 II. 41 51 III. 30 40 IV. 19 29 V. 11 18 (P.50)
( )
(1997) Baunmrind Maccoby Martin 1983
199饋 1993
26
3-2
1-14 14 14-70
15-26 12 12-60
1-26 26 26-130
A ( 68)
1997
( )
Likert
5 4 3 2 1
1.
2.
3.
4.
( )
1997 Cronbach α
0.92 0.93
( )
Marsh SDQII 1988
1999 2008 Prof. Marsh
( )
Likert
5 4 3 2 1
5 6 7 11
1 1 3 7 11
2 2 4 5 6 8 10
3 9
t
t
Pearson
Pearson
4-1 50%
83.2 4-1
169 52.5
153 47.5
156 48.4
166 51.6
54 16.8
268 83.饋
N=322
Likert
1 5 3 4-2
4-2 3.32 3
4.08 3
2008 3
3.00-3.99
3.67
4-2
3.32 .90 14
4.08 .79 12
3.67 .77 26
4-3
41.0 32.6 (18.3筱)
(8.1筱)
4-3
(%)
132 41.0 1
59 18.3 3
26 8.1 4
105 32.6 2
Likert
1 5
4-4
4-4 3.12 3
4-4
2.68 0.92 4
3.45 0.89 6
2.88 1.20 1
3.12 0.82 11
( ((
( ) )) )
41.0筱 3饋.6筱
18.3筱 8.1%
2010 2009
2001
( ((
( ) )) )
(3.1饋)
3.45 (
饋.68) ( 饋.88)
4-5
4-5 X
60 35.5%
35 20.7%
16 9.5%
58 34.3%
169
100.0% 3 4.86 9 72
47.1%
24 15.7%
10 6.5%
47 30.7%
153 100%
132 41.0%
59 18.3%
26 8.1%
105 32.6%
322 100%
P=0.18 0.05
322
47.1
35.7 34.3
4-5 =4.869 p 0.05
4-6 4-6
29 53.7
8 14.8
3 5.6
14 25.9
54
100.0 3 4.39 1 103
38.4
51 19.0
23 8.6
91 34.0
268 100.0
132 41.0
59 18.3
26 8.1
105 32.6
322 100.0 P=0.222 0.05
4-6
t
T
4-7
4-7 t
T
169 3.27 0.838
153 2.95 0.776
3.571
P=0.00 0.05 4-7
P=0.00 0.05 3.饋7 饋.95
t
4-8
4-8 t
T
156 3.00 0.821
166 3.22 0.814
-2.35
P=0.019 0.05
4-8 p
0.05 3.00 3.饋饋
t
4-9
4-9 t
T
54 3.26 0.923
268 3.09 0.801
-1.356
P=0.176 0.05
4-9 t -1.356
p 0.05
4-10 4-10
132 3.3023 .82929 59 3.1310 .91070 26 2.8671 .66717 105 2.9394 .75195
F=饋.05饋 p=.107 .05
4-11
4-11
F
9.481 3 3.160 4.829 .003
208.127 318 .654 217.608 318
F (F=4.8饋9 p= .05)
Tukey HSD Scheffe
.363
t
T 4-10
4-12 t
T 169 49.475 10.739
153 50.58 9.115
-0.991
P=0.322 0.05
4-12 t -0.991 p=0.322 0.05
0.05
t 4-11
4-13 t
T 156 49.3158 8.95145
166 50.6430 10.88185
-1.191
P=0.饋35 0.05
4-13 t -1.191 p=0.235 0.05
0.05
t
4-12
4-14 t
T 54 52.9680 9.149
268 49.4020 10.073
-2.408
P=0.017 0.05
4-14 t -2.408 0.05
4-15
Eta Eta Squared
0.133 0.018
4-15
0.018 0.06
4-14 4-16
132 50.7667 9.56301 59 49.5520 11.1622 26 50.2722 9.37818 105 50.0000 10.0000 F=1.705 p=0.166 0.05
4-16 F 1.705 p=0.166 0.05
0.05
4-17 4-17
Pearson 50.00 10.00
1.17 .374
0.133
P=.008 .05
Pearson .133
(P= .008 0.05)
4-18 4-18
P=.017 .05
F .017 0.05 0.018
1.8筱 1.8筱
45.836
3.566 Beta =0.133 t =饋.408 p=.017
0.05
B Beta t VIF
( ) 45.836 1.815 25.251
3.566 1.481 .133 2.408 1.000 1.000 R .133 R2 .018 R2 .015 F 5.80
Y( )=45.836燁3.566×
Y( )=0.133×
4-19 4-19
Pearson 50.00 10.00
3.117 0.823
0.434
P=0.000 0.05
Pearson 0.434
(P=0.000 0.05)
4-饋0 4-饋0
P=.000
F 0.000 0.01 0.189
18.9筱 18.9筱
B Beta t VIF
( ) 33.549 1.972 17.017
5.277 0.612 0.434 8.630 1.000 1.000 R .434 R2 .189 R2 .186 F 74.469
33.549
5.饋77 Beta =0.434 t =8.630 p=.000
0.05
Y( )=33.549燁5.饋77×
Y( )=0.434×
3.00 3.饋饋
.363
(( (
( ) )) )
(( (
( )) ) )
( ((
( )) ) )
(( (
( )) ) )
(( (
( ) )) )
( ((
( ) )) )
( ((
( ) )) )
1993
( )
2003
1992
1993
1995
1992 C. H. Cooley ( Human Nature
and the Social Order ) 2010
2009
2008 SPSS
1998 7 39-79
1996
2001
1999
1998
1998
30(1) 91-132
( 1997 ) —
( )
1999
20 37-66 2004
2005
2006
2009
1982
15 79-143 2005
2009
1983
6 19-39 2007
1995 72 41-47
2008 PISA 2006
NSC-95-2522-S-026-002
(1990)
1995 Shaffer,D.R.
2000 2001
2000 —
2001
(2004)
( )(1995) Lawrence A.Pervin (Personality)
1989
1995 6 91-134
2002
2007 19 199-222
(1996 ) , 19 , 95–139
2002
2009 -
2010
1993
1987
(1994) 1989 2000 2001 2003
2006
2003
1979 1992 1996 1996
2003
2002
1996
2003
1986
451-514 2002
2004
2009
1995
2005
1997 A
2008
1995
NSC 84-2413-H-003-002 2005
(1973)
2004
(1997)
2001 A
2003 —
2003
1986 28 1
7-28 1986 2006
2004
1996
2001
3 42 123-140 (2008)
1997
2005
2007
2004 A
1972 1985 6
2004
1998 ---
2002
2008
NSC95-2521-S-018-002
Ainsworth, M. D., Bell, S. M., & Stayton, D. J. (1975). Infant-mother attachment and social development: Socialization as a product of reciprocal reciprocal responsiveness to signals. In M. In M. Richards (Ed.), The integration of the child into a social world. Cambridge University Press.
Bandura,A.(1991). Analysis of modeling processes.In A. Bandura(Ed.), Psychological modeling conflicting theories(pp.78-96).Chiago Aldine Atherton.
Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In w. Damon, (ED.). Child development today and tomorrow, 349-378. San Francisco Jossey-Bass.
Craven, R. G., McInerney, V., & Marsh, H.W. (2000). The structure and development of young children's self-concepts and relation to academic achievement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.443522).
Dai & Yun, D. (2001). A comparison of gender differences in academic self-concept and motivation between high-ability and average Chinese adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education.13(1),22-32.
Dwairy, M., & Menshar, K.E. (2006). Parenting style, individuation, and mental health of Egyptian adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 29(1), 103-117.
Entwisle, D. R., Alexander, K. L., & Olson, L. S.(1994). The gender gap in math: Its possible origins in neighborhood effects. American Sociological Review,59,822-838.
Hearn, J. C. (1991). Academic and Non-Academic Influences on the College Destination of 1980 High School Graduates. Sociology of Education, 64, 158-171.
Hoffman,L.W.(1987).The value of children to parents and child rearing patterns.
Social behavior,2,123-141.
Hoge, D. R., Smith, E. K., & , J. T. (1995). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and
academic achievement in sixth and seventh grade.Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24(3), 195-314.
Hoghughi,M. ,& Long,N.(Eds.).(2004).Handbook of parenting.London Sage.
Horan, P. M., & Hargis, P. G. (1991). Children's Work and Schooling in the Late Nineteenth-Century Family Economy. American Sociological Review, 56, 583-596.
Kung, H.Y. (2009). Perception or Confidence? Self-concept, self-efficacy and achievement in mathematics: A longitudinal study. Policy Futures in Education, 7(4), 387-398.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Gore, P. A. Jr. (1997). Discriminant and predictive validity of academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy,and mathematics-specific self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(3), 307-315.
Leung, K., Lau, S., & Lam, W. (1998). Parenting styles and academic achievement: A cross-cultural study. Merrill-Palmer Q. 44: 157-167.
Luster, T., Rhoades, K., & Hass, B. (1989). The Relation between parental values and parenting behavior: A test of the Kohn hypothesis. J. Marriage Fam. 51:139-147.
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family:
Parent- child interaction. In P. H. Mussen, & M. E. Heatherington (ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology, 4, 1-101, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. J. (1988). A multifaceted academic self-concept : Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement.
Journal of Educational Psychology,80(3), 366-380.
Marsh, H.W. (1990a). A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept:
Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology Review, 2(2), 77-170.
Marsh, H.W. (1990b). Influences of Internal and External Frames of Reference on the Formation of Math and English Self-Concepts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 107-116.
Marsh, H.W. (1993a). Academic Self-concept: Theory measurement and research. In J.
Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self 4, 59-98. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Marsh, H.W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2005). Academic self-concept, interest, grades, and standardized test scores : Reciprocal Effects Models of Causal Ordering. Child Development, 76(2), 397-416.
Marsh,H.W.,&Shavelson,R.(1985).Self-concept:Its multifaceted,hierarchical structure.
Educational Psychology, 20(3), 264-282.
Mead, D. E. (1976). Six approaches to child rearing. Provo. Utah Brigham Univ.
Press.
Piaget, J.,&Inhelder,B.(1969).The psychology of the child. New York Basic Books.
Reyes, L. H. (1984). Affective variables and mathematics education. The Elementary School Journal, 84(5), 558-581.
Sadker, M., Sadker, D., & Steindam, S. (1989). Gender equity and educational reform.
Educational Leadership, 46(6), 44-47.
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of EducationalResearch, 46(3), 407-441.
Stenvenson, D .L., & Baker, D. P. 1992 . Shadow Education and Allocation in Formal Schooling: Transition to University in Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 97 6 ,1639.
to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology,
White,L.& Brinterhoff,D (1981) The sexual division of labor:Evidence from childhood. Social Forces,60,170-181
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R. W., & Davis-Kean, P. (2006).
Development of achievement motivation. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) and N.
Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (6th ed., Vol. 3, pp.
933-1002). New York: Wiley.White, L. & Brinterhoff, D. (1981). The sexual division of labor Evidence from childhood. Social Forces, 60, 170-181
Wu, P., Robinson, C. C., Yang, C., Hart, C. H., Olsen, S. F., Porter, C. L., Jin, S., Wo, J., & Wu, X. (2002). Similarities and differences in mothers’ parenting of preschoolers in China and the United States. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26, 481-491.
:
100 1
1. ________ ________ ________
2. 3.
4
101 210 403
102 211 404
103 212 405
104 213 406
105 301 407
106 302 408
107 303 409
108 304 501
109 305 502
201 306 503
202 307 504
203 308 505
204 309 506
205 310 507
206 311 508
207 312
208 401
601
209 402
☺
1.
饋.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10 11 1饋 13 14 15
16
17
18
19
饋0 饋1 饋饋 饋3 饋4 饋5
饋6
1.
饋.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10 11 1饋 13 14 15
16
17
18
19
饋0 饋1 饋饋 饋3 饋4 饋5
饋6
☺