UPPER-SECONDARY TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE MATURA …
Transcript of UPPER-SECONDARY TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE MATURA …
217
PreliminarycommunicationUDC37.091.27:51(045)
UPPER-SECONDARY TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE MATURA EXAM IN MATHEMATICS
AmandaGlavaš1,LjerkaJukićMatić2,SaraPrša3
1FacultyofHumanitiesandSocialSciences,JosipJurajStrossmayerUniversityofOsijek,Croatia2DepartmentofMathematics,JosipJurajStrossmayerUniversityofOsijek,Croatia3 Strojarskaitehničkaškola,Osijek,[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]
Received:4February2021
This� paper� reports� a� study� on�mathematics� teachers’� perceptions� of�the�Matura�mathematics� exam� in�Croatia.� The� study� focuses� on� the�suitability�of�mathematics�school� textbooks� for�students’�preparation�for� the�exams,� the�complexity�of� the� tasks� in� the�exams,� the�grading�and� scoring� of� the� exams,� and� teachers’� level� of� satisfaction� with�student�achievement.�The�study�used�a�convenience�sampling�method.�It�was�conducted�through�a�questionnaire�administered�to�308�upper�secondary�mathematics� teachers.�The�findings� showed� that� teachers�do�not�perceive�school�textbooks�as�suitable�resources�to�prepare�for�the�higher�level�exam.�Furthermore,�the�teachers�believe�that�the�test�length�is�not�appropriate�i.e.,�the�time�given�to�students�for�the�higher�level� exam� is� insufficient.� On� average� they� are� satisfied� with� their�students’�results,�but�are�undecided�about�the�criteria�and�scoring�of�the�Matura.�Vocational� school� teachers�showed�more�dissatisfaction�with�the�requirements�and�outcomes�of�the�Matura�exam�compared�to�grammar�school�teachers.�The�results�of� this�empirical�study�can�be�taken�as�a�good�starting�point�for�re-assessing�the�requirements�of�the�Matura�exam�in�mathematics.
Keywords:��Matura� exam,� mathematics� teacher,� teacher� attitudes,�textbooks,�school-leaving�examination�in�mathematics
218
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
1. Introduction
Anationalsecondaryschool-leavingexamination,calledtheMa-tura,wasintroducedintheCroatianeducationalsystemin2010(NN,1/2013).Itisaformofgraduationofupper-secondaryschool,function-ingasanexit examfrom the secondaryeducationsystem(Holmeet�al.,2010).School-leavingexamsarealsoknownasexitexams,stategraduateexamsorcertificateexams.TheMaturaisanexternalexamconductedby theNationalCentre forExternalEvaluationofEduca-tion(NCVVO,2020).Inexternalexams,externalactorshavecontroloverthetestingprocessliketestdesign,assessment/scoring,useoftheresults/outcome,andtheindividualteachercannotobjecttohowtheseprocessesareimplemented(JonssonandLeden,2019).TheMaturaisalsoahigh-stakesexambecauseithasimportantconsequencesforstu-dentsonthebasisoftheirperformance,namelyithasanentrancefunc-tion to thedesiredhigher education institution.Lastly, theMatura isconductedinastandardisedmanner(Primoracet�al.,2009).Thismeansthatalltesttakershavetositforthesametestandunderthesamecon-ditions,sometimesalsoat thesametime(Jonsson andLeden,2019).Standardisationsecurescomparabilityamongthetesttakers.
MathematicsisoneofthecompulsorysubjectsintheMatura.Con-sideringthattheMaturawasimplementedmorethantenyearsagoandgiventhemultiplerolesithas,wearguethatitisimportanttoexaminehowmathematicsteachersviewtheexam.Therefore,weconductedastudy to investigatemathematics teachers’perceptionsof theMaturaexaminmathematicsintermsof:generalrequirements;themathemat-icstextbookused;studentachievementintheexam;andthecompat-ibilityofstudents’finalschoolgradesinmathematicswiththegradesachievedintheMaturamathematicsexam.
2. Matura in Croatia
2.1. General outline of the Matura exam in mathematics
TheMaturaissetofexamswhicharecompulsoryforstudentsfin-ishingfouryearsofgrammarschool (NN,1/2013).Upper-secondaryschoolsinCroatiaincludegrammarschools(generalorspecialisinginnaturalsciences,mathematics,foreignlanguages,orclassicallanguag-
219
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
es),vocationalschools,andart schools.Vocationalschools last fromone tofiveyearsdependingon the typeofeducationprogrammere-quiredforaparticularprofession,i.e.thevocationalcurriculumforob-tainingaqualification.TheMaturaexamisnotmandatoryforstudentsinvocationalschools,butcanbe takenby thosestudentswhoattendfour-andfive-yearvocationalschools,whowanttocontinuetohighereducation.Studentswhocomplete four-year art schoolsmayalso sitfortheMaturaexams.TheMaturaisorganisedandconductedbytheNationalCentre forExternal Evaluation ofEducation,which is alsoresponsible formarking the exams and awarding grades.Grades areawardedaccordingtotheaverageofthepopulation’sresults,andtherearenopre-setcriteriaforpassingtheexam(NCVVO,2018).
MathematicsisoneofthecompulsoryexamsintheMatura.Itcanbetakenattwolevels:thehigherlevel(A)andthebasiclevel(B)(NCV-VO,2020).Studentsselectwhichleveloftheexamtotakebasedontherequirements of the higher education institution theywish to attend.Thehigherlevel(A)oftheMaturaexaminmathematicsalsoaffordsaccess to those institutions that require the basic level (B). Studentswhotakethebasiclevel(B)ofthemathematicsexamarenoteligibletoapplyforinstitutionswhichrequirethehigherlevel.Thehigherlevelexaminmathematicscorrespondstothemathscurriculumofgrammarschools (NCVVO, 2020).However, the number of hours taught dif-feraccordingtotheeducationprogrammeoftheschool.Forinstance,grammarschoolswithafocusonforeignlanguageshavemathematicsthreehoursperweekforallfouryears.Grammarschoolsspecializedinmathematicshaveatleastfourhoursofmathematicsperweekforallfouryears.However, thehigher levelexaminmathematicsalsocor-respondstomostfour-yearvocationalschoolprogrammeswheremath-ematicsis taughtat least threehoursperweek(NCVVO,2020).Thebasic level exam inmathematics corresponds to the cross-section ofotherfour-yearuppersecondaryprogrammeswheremathematicshastheminimalnumberofhoursperweek.Forcomparison, some four-yearvocationalschoolshavemathematicstwohoursperweekforallfour yearswhich places vocational students in a difficult position intermsofaccesstothehigherlevelMaturaexaminmathematics.
Thehigherlevelexaminmathematicslastsupto180minutes,andthebasiclevelexamlastsupto150minutes(NCVVO,2020).Thebasic
220
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
levelexamhas28tasksintotal–16multiplechoiceand12shortan-swersandparticipantscanachieveamaximumof40points.Thehigherlevel examhas30 tasks in threecategories–15multiplechoice,13shortanswersand2longanswersandparticipantscanachieveamaxi-mumof60points.
2.2. Studies related to the Matura in Croatia
Evenbefore theMaturawas introducedinto theCroatianeduca-tionalsystem,Bezinović(2009)pointedoutthatitpromotesinequal-itybecausestudentsfromgrammarandvocationalschoolsareexposedtocompletelydifferentcurriculaduringtheirsecondaryeducationbuthaveto/will takethesameexam.Namely,theuppersecondaryvoca-tionalschoolcurriculainCroatiapromotediversity,whilsttheMaturaconcentratesononesetoflearningoutcomes.Recently,Baketaet�al.(2020)conductedastudyrelatedtotheperceptionofequalityandfair-nessoftheMaturafromthepointofviewofupper-secondaryschoolprincipals.Theopinionsoftheprincipalsofgrammar,vocationalandmixedsecondaryschoolsdifferintermsoffairnessofaccesstohighereducation.TheprincipalsofvocationalandmixedschoolsbelievethattheMaturaismoretailoredtogrammarschoolstudents.Moreover,theybelievethatthisinequityisreflectedintheenrolmentrequirementsofhighereducationinstitutionswhichcallforthehigherlevelMaturaex-ams.Consequently,vocationalstudentsare less likely tobeacceptedinto thehighereducation institutionof theirchoice.Evidenceof thiswasalsoshowninthestudyofŽauharet�al.(2016)whoanalysedthestructureofstudentsenrolledattheFacultyofMedicineandtheFacultyofHealthStudiesattheUniversityofRijeka,beforeandaftertheintro-ductionoftheMatura.Theirstudyshowedthattheproportionofstu-dentswhohadattendedgrammarschoolsincreasedsignificantlyaftertheintroductionoftheMaturacomparedtotheproportionofstudentswhohadattendedvocationalschools.
2.3. Research foci
Ourliteraturesearchshowsthat thenumberofstudiesrelatedtoMaturaexams is small.Studies that examine themathematics teach-
221
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
ers’role,beliefsorpractices in thecontextof theMatura,arepracti-callynon-existent.MathematicsteachersworkwithstudentsteachingthemandpreparingthemfortheMaturaexamthroughupper-secondaryschool,butalsohavetheopportunitytoparticipateinthedevelopmentoftasksfortheMaturaexams,toreviewexammaterialsandmarktheexampapers(thetasksthatrequireshortandlonganswers)everyyear.Accordingly,wedesignedastudythataimedtocoverteachers’opin-ionsandattitudesaboutseveralaspectsoftheMaturaexaminmath-ematics.Theresearchfociofthisstudyareonteachers’opinionsandattitudesconcerning:
–thesuitabilityofschooltextbooksforpreparingstudentsfortheMaturaexam
–thedesignofMaturamathematicsexamsovertheyears–scoringintheMaturaexaminmathematics–satisfactionwiththeresultsobtainedbytheirstudents.Moreover,weare interested in lookingat teachers’opinionsand
attitudesinrelationtothetypeofschoolatwhichtheyteach.
3. Studies related to the research themes
Inthissectionweproviderelevantresultsandstudiestosupportourresearchthemes.
3.1. Mathematics textbooks
Thefirstresearchthemeinourstudyisrelatedtomathematicstext-books.Mathematicstextbooksgreatlyinfluencemathematicsteachingpractice,maybemorethaninotherschoolsubjects(Fanet�al.,2013).Becauseofthis,thetextbookusedbythestudentsaffectstheopportuni-tiestolearnthattheyareprovidedwith.Studiesinvestigatingstudentachievement insomeformofexternalevaluation, likeTIMSSorna-tionalexams,showedthatthereisacorrelationbetweenbetterstudentachievementandmathematicstextbooksthathavehighercognitivelev-eltasks(Hadar,2017;Törnroos,2005).TextbookanalysishasshownthatCroatianlowerandupper-secondarymathematicstextbooksmost-ly contain taskswith a lowcognitive level, namelyprocedural tasks
222
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
dominateoverconceptualones(GlasnovićGracin,2018;Glavašet�al., 2019).
3.2. Design of exam tasks in mathematics
Oursecondresearchthemeisconcernedwithteachers’perceptionsoftheMaturaexaminmathematicsovertheyears.Thisthemeisap-proached from the perspective of task design inmathematics educa-tionanditscomplexity.Theterm‘complexity’refers to theextent towhichthetaskdiffersfromperformingasimplecalculationtoacom-plexsynthesisintegratingproblemsolving,communicating,reasoning,andmakingconnections(Suurtammet�al.,2016). Mathematicsteach-ersshouldbeawareofMaturaexamtaskfeatures,nottoteach�to�the�test,buttoenhancetheirteachingpracticeifnecessaryandtopreparestudents for theMaturaexamadequately.Moreover, acomponentofteachingmathematicsisrelatedtotheselection,modification,design,utilizationandevaluationoftasks(Dietekeret�al.,2018)andsuchworkisachievedusingthetextbooksorothercurriculummaterials,suchaspastpapersoftheexam.
The catalogue of the Matura exam in mathematics (NCVVO,2020)prescribeswhichmathematicaldomainsandassociatedlearningoutcomesmayappear,butnotwhatmustappearintheexam.Thisalsocontributestotaskdesignanditscomplexity.
3.3. Grades awarded by teachers and external evaluation
The third research theme in our study is concerned with scor-ing in theMaturaexams inmathematicsand, consequently,with thegradesstudentsobtainintheexamandthoseawardedbytheteacher.Thereliabilityofateacher’sgradeisimportantforschools,teachers,families, and students. Some studies have examined the relationshipbetween thegradesgivenby the teachersandsomeformofexternalexamination. Inoneway, the teachers’gradesaremore reliable thanoutsidemeasurebecauseof theirholisticnature, i.e. the teacherscanmakereliablejudgementsaboutstudentachievementbecauseoftheirinteractionswithstudentsovertime(Marlowet�al.,2014).Incontrast,formalassessmentcanbeconsideredmoreaccurateandobjectivethan
223
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
theteacher’sassessment(Blacket�al.,2011).Areviewofstudieswhichexamined theaccuracyof teacher judgementcomparedwithexternalexamsdescribedmixedresults–somestudiesreportedstrongaccuracyandsomestudiesreportedweakaccuracy(Brookhart,2013).
3.4. The impact of students’ Matura exam results on teachers
Ourfourthresearch themeisconcernedwith teachersatisfactionwithstudents’resultsattheMaturaexaminmathematics.Theresultsofsuchahigh-stakesexamcanhavevariousconsequencesforteachers.Somecountries implementedpolicies to evaluate teachers’ effective-nessbasedontheirstudents’examresults.Thismeansthatteachersarebeingheldaccountableforstudentsuccess.Suchpoliciescontributetoanincreaseinjob-relatedstressexperiencedbyteachers(e.g.Ryanet�al.,2017)andhaveanegativeeffectonteacherself-efficacy(Abramset�al.,2003).Moreover, teachersoften feeluncomfortableorhumili-atedwhen their students’passing ratesarepresentedat schoolmeet-ings(Booher-Jennings,2005).Sometimeslowpassingscoresresultinpenaltiesforteachers(vonderEmbseet�al.,2016).Ontheotherhand,teachers’dissatisfactionwithstudents’resultscanleadtothenarrow-ingofthecurriculumandteachingonlytothetest(e.g.Abramset�al.,2003).InCroatia,teachersarenotpenalisedforstudents’lowscoresintheMatura,butitispossiblethattheresultsimpacttheirself-efficacyandteachingpractice.
4. Methodology
4. 1. Participants and data collection
Thestudypresentedinthispaperwasconductedin2019,usingaconveniencesamplingmethod(Cohen�et�al.,2018).The teachers forthestudywererecruitedthrougharesearchparticipationpoolatalo-caluniversitywheremanyteachersparticipatedinmathematicsprofes-sionaldevelopmentworkshopsorconferences.Wesentanemailtotheparticipantswith a link to the digital formof the questionnaire.Theparticipants’responseswerecollectedanonymously,meaningthatwedidnotcollectanyinformationthatcouldrevealtheteacher’sidentity
224
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
suchasname, email address,ornameof the school.Data collectionbeganattheendofJuly2019andlastedforamonth.Completionofthequestionnairetookabout15minutes.
We took care that the sample of teachers for the study to someextentagreeswith theofficialdataonstudentswho took theMaturaexam inmathematics in2018.Thereforeparticipantswereasked so-cio-demographicquestionsthatprovidedinformationontheirgender,yearsofservice,careeradvancement,typeofschooltheyworkat,andwhethertheycorrectedMaturaexams(Table1).Among392uppersec-ondary school programmes inCroatiawhose students took the stategraduationexamin2019,189(48%)aregrammarschools,and203(52%)arevocational schools (MZO,2018).Thesampleof teacherswhoparticipatedinthisstudyagreeswiththistosomeextent:51%oftheteachersworkinvocationalschools,andtherestworkingrammarschools.Morethan40%oftheteachersparticipatedinmarkingMaturaexamsinmathematics.Giventheinformationwehaveabouttheteach-erswhoparticipatedinthestudy,webelievetheirattitudesandopinionsareagoodrepresentationofupper-secondarymathematicsteachersinCroatia.
Table 1.Informationabouttheparticipants
Participant information N (%)
Gender
Female 268(87%)
Male 40(13%)
Typeofschool
Grammar(non-mathematics) 112(36%)
Grammar(mathematics) 38(12%)
Vocational 158(51%)
Teachingexperience
<5years 37(12%)
6-15years 95(30%)
225
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
16-25 84(27%)
26-34 71(23%)
35+ 21(7%)
Teacherpromotion
Nopromotion 168(54.4%)
Teachermentor 90(29.2%)
Teacheradviser 50(16.2%)
ExperienceinmarkingMaturaexams
Participant 130(42%)
Non-participant 178(58%)
4.2. Instrument
Wedesignedaquestionnairethatsoughttocaptureallrelevantas-pectsof the research themes.Thequestionnaire (Appendix,Table2)contained32itemstodeterminetheopinionsandattitudesofmathe-maticsteacherson:thesuitabilityofschooltextbooksforstudentprepa-rationfortheexam;thedesignandcomplexityoftasksintheMaturaexamovertime;thequalityofpassingcriteriaandscoringmethodsfortheMaturaexaminmathematics;andteachersatisfaction.Eachitemwastobeevaluatedonafive-pointLikert-typescalewhere1=stronglydisagreeand5=stronglyagree.Theresult isexpressedas themeanvalueoftheresponse.
The questionnairewas designed exclusively for the purposes ofthisstudy,thusitwasnecessarytoperformanexploratoryfactoranaly-sis(EFA)usingtheprincipalaxisfactoring(PAF)methodbeforepro-cessing the data. Initially, all itemswere examined and this resultedin recoding items 11 and 22.TheKaiser-Meyer-Olkin andBartlett’stest(0.876,p=0.000)wereusedtoexaminetheadequacyofthedata.Weretainedfivefactorswhosecharacteristicrootsexceed1.Thefac-torsobtainedbytheanalysisofthemaincomponentsexplainatotalof63.21%ofthevarianceofthemanifestvariables.
Thefirstfactorreferstotheteacher’sopiniononthesuitabilityofthetextbooksusedtopreparestudentsforthebasicleveloftheMatura
226
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
exam(items1–4).Thesecondfactorrelatestoteachers’opinionsonthesuitabilityofthetextbooksusedtopreparestudentsforthehigherlevelMaturaexam(items5–8).Thethirdfactor,whichreferstothedesignoftheMaturaexamovertime,consistsof4items(recoded11,15,18,19).Thefourthfactorconsistsoffiveitems(23,25,26,27,29),andreferstotheteachers’opinionaboutthescoringoftheMaturaexam.Thefifthfactor, referring to the criteria of theMatura exam, consists of threeitems(20,21,24).TherotatedfactormatrixcanbeseeninTable3.
Table 3.Rotatedfactormatrix
Factors
1 2 3 4 5
Item6 .853 .283 -.057 .084 .096Item5 .815 .181 -.034 .135 .144Item7 .784 .288 -.073 .170 .071Item8 .771 .346 -.137 .034 .117Item2 .328 .815 -.120 .219 .122Item4 .343 .712 -.165 .215 .169Item1 .363 .695 -.108 .215 .156Item3 .411 .672 -.053 .300 .111Item29 -.009 -.086 .771 -.027 -.022Item26 -.159 -.060 .716 -.154 -.166Item23 .045 -.067 .643 -.033 .022Item27 -.034 -.041 .633 -.089 -.253Item25 -.169 -.065 .609 -.089 -.217Item15 .170 .193 -.005 .808 .148Item18 .116 .177 -.104 .784 .124Item11 -.043 .121 -.255 .646 -.065Item19 .211 .165 -.020 .502 .259Item20 .065 .081 -.113 .096 .810Item21 .108 .107 -.143 .108 .729Item24 .155 .164 -.261 .106 .547
227
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
However,thefactoranalysisexcludedalargenumberofitems(9,10,12,13,14,16,17,22,28,30,31,32),whichwefindrelevant toour study, thereforewe included them in the results section aswell.Dataanalysisincludeddescriptiveanalysis,ANOVAvarianceanalysis,Games-HowellandBonferroniposthocpairedcomparisons,t-testandcorrelations.TheanalysiswasperformedintheSPSS.
5. Results and discussion
Inthispart,wepresenttheresultsonmathematicsteachers’opin-ionsandattitudesconcerningfouraspectsoftheMaturaexaminmath-ematics:thesuitabilityofcurrentlyvalidtextbooks(variablesTextbookA&TextbookB);thedesignoftheexamovertime(variableDesign,Items9,10,12,13,16&17);scoringandcriteriaforpassing(variableScoring,variableCriteria,Items22,28,30);andtheteachers’satisfac-tionwith the students’ results (Items31&32).Descriptive statisticsfornewvariablesandotheritemscanbeseeninTable4.ProportionalresponsedistributionsfortheItems9,10,12,13,16,17,22,28,30,31&32arepresentedinFigure2.Inthefollowingsubsectionswepresentresultsinmoredetail.
Table 4.Descriptivestatisticsforthequestionnaireitemsandcreatedvariables
α N M SD
TextbookA 0.92 308 3.11 1.10
TextbookB 0.92 308 3.76 1.08
Design 0.81 308 3.24 .97
Criteria 0.78 308 3.34 .92
Scoring 0.82 308 2.69 .86
Item9(AppropriatenessAlevel) 308 4.06 1.07
Item10AppropriatenessBlevel) 308 2.37 1.17
Item12(DemandingAlevel) 308 2.30 1.20
Item13(DemandingBlevel) 308 1.72 .99
228
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
Item16(TimelengthAlevel) 308 3.28 1.39
Item17(TimelengthBlevel) 308 4.39 .95
Item22(Scoringcorrect-incorrect) 308 2.94 1.21
Item28(Lowpassingscore) 308 3.35 1.31
Item30(Scoringcomplications) 308 3.86 1.14
Item31(Satisfaction) 308 3.44 1.04
Item32(Grade) 308 3.35 .99
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Item9Item10Item12Item13Item16Item17Item22Item28Item30Item31Item32
1 2 3 4 5
Figure 1. Proportionalresponsedistributionfortheselecteditems
5.1. The suitability of currently valid textbooks
In this section,we describe results for the variablesTextbook�A (Cronbach’sα=0.918)andTextbook�B�(α=0.921)onteachers’opin-ionsonthesuitabilityofschool textbooksforpreparingstudents(in-dependentlyandwith the teacher’shelp) for thehigher levelMaturaexam (A) and for the basic level (B), respectively.Teacher’ opinionisexaminedconcerningthetype,numberandappropriatenessoftext-booktasks.VariableTextbook�Awascreatedfromitems1–4,andText-book�B�fromitems5–8.Onaverage,teachersbelievethattextbooksare
229
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
moresuitableforpreparingstudentsforthebasiclevel(M=3.76,SD=1.08)thanforthehigherlevel(M=3.11,SD=1.10).Theanalysisalsoshowedastatisticallysignificantdifferenceinopiniononthesuitabilityof textbooks for taking thehigherandbasic levelof theMatura (t=-12.731,df=307,p<0.001).
Also, there are statistically significant differences between theteachers from vocational and non-mathematics specialized grammarschoolswhenitcomestothesuitabilityoftextbooksforthebasiclevel(Table5).TheteachersfromvocationalschoolsassessedthesuitabilityoftextbooksforpreparationfortheMaturawithalowerscore(Table6, p=0.008).Therewerenostatisticallysignificantdifferenceswithregardtothetypeofschooltheyworkatandthesuitabilityoftextbooksforthepreparationforthehigherlevel(Table5).
Table 5.OnewayANOVA
SS df MS F p
TextbookABetweenGroups 6.120 2 3.060 2.535 .081WithinGroups 368.147 305 1.207Total 374.267 307
TetxbookBBetweenGroups 10.148 2 5.074 4.437 .013*
WithinGroups 348.773 305 1.144Total 358.921 307
DesignBetweenGroups .392 2 .196 .206 .814WithinGroups 291.181 305 .955 Total 291.573 307
ScoringBetweenGroups .679 2 .340 .448 .639WithinGroups 231.102 305 .758Total 231.781 307
CriteriaBetweenGroups 1.168 2 .584 .694 .500WithinGroups 256.490 305 .841Total 257.658 307
Appropriateness Alevel(Item9)
BetweenGroups 1.616 2 .808 .658 .519WithinGroups 374.446 305 1.228Total 376.062 307
230
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
Appropriateness Blevel(Item10)
BetweenGroups 4.529 2 2.264 1.654 .193WithinGroups 417.533 305 1.369Total 422.062 307
LengthlevelA(Item16)
BetweenGroups 26.953 2 13.477 7.204 .001*
WithinGroups 570.589 305 1.871Total 597.542 307
Demanding Alevel(Item12)
BetweenGroups .031 2 .015 .011 .989WithinGroups 444.083 305 1.456Total 444.114 307
Demanding Blevel(Item13)
BetweenGroups 6.497 2 3.248 3.381 .035*
WithinGroups 293.045 305 .961Total 299.542 307
Satisfaction(Item31)
BetweenGroups 10.334 2 5.167 4.904 .008*
WithinGroups 321.367 305 1.054Total 331.701 307
Teacher’sgrade(Item32)
BetweenGroups 8.347 2 4.173 4.339 .014*
WithinGroups 293.328 305 .962Total 301.675 307
Note.*p<0.05
TeacheropinionisconsistentwithresearchontheanalysisofthecontentofmathematicstextbooksinCroatia(GlasnovićGracin,2018;Glavašet�al.,2019),whereitwasfoundthatproceduraltasksdominateinCroatianmathematicstextbooksandtasksthatdemandhighercogni-tivelevelsarevastlyunderrepresented.ThebasicleveloftheMaturaexaminmathematicsisinaccordancewithlessdemandinguppersec-ondaryschoolprogrammes;thus,thisresultisnotunexpected.More-over,theteachersfromvocationalschoolsweretheleastsatisfiedwiththetextbooktheyuse.SchooltextbooksinCroatiamustbeapprovedbytheMinistryofScienceandEducationinCroatiaandteacherscanindependentlyselectatextbookfromamongthem(NN,116/2018).Fu-tureresearchcouldexaminewhichtextbookmathematicsteachersfromvocationalschoolsuseastheirprimarycurriculummaterial.
231
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
Table 6.Posthocpairedcomparisons,withGames-Howell/Bonferroniadjustmentdependingonthehomogeneityofvariances
School type M (SD)Post hoc paired comparisons
with Games-Howell /Bonferroni adjustment, Md (p)
Variablesanditems VS MGS GS VS&
MGS VS&GS GS&MGS
TextbookB 3.6(1.13)
3.75(0.99)
3.99(0.99)
-.154a (.686)
-.392a (.008*)
.239a (.416)
Item13 1.85(1.02)
1.76(1.09)
1.54(0.86)
.092(1.0)
-.313(.030*)
-.221(.706)
Item16 3.35(1.30)
3.92(1.32)
2.96(1.46)
-.573a (.053)
.382a (.072)
-.955
a(.001*)
Item31 3.33(1.07)
3.92(1.09)
3.42(.94)
-.586(.006*)
-.086(1.00)
0.499(.032*)
Item32 3.18(.99)
3.54(.96)
3.52(.98)
-.362a (.127)
.337
a(.016*)-.025a (.989)
Note.*p<0.05,a=Games-Howellposthoctest,otherwiseBonfferoni,VC=vocationalschool,MGS=mathematicsspecializinggrammarschool,GS=non-mathematicsspecializinggrammarschool,Md=meandifference
5.2. Design of the Matura exam in mathematics over time
InthissectionwerefertothedesignoftheMaturaexaminmath-ematicsoverthelast10yearswithregardtothecomplexityofthetasks,thelengthofexamsandschoolprogrammes.Forthedescriptivestatis-tics,wereferthereadertoTable4.
Fromitems11(recoded),15,18and19,wecreatedanewvariablecalledDesign(α=0.81),whichexaminestheopinionofparticipantsonthedesigncomplexityoftheMaturatasksovertheyears.Onaverage,teachersareundecided(M=3.24,SD=0.97)andthereisnostatisti-callysignificantdifferencewithregardtothetypeofschoolinwhichtheteacherswork(Table5).
Teachersgenerallydisagreethatthebasiclevelexamismoreap-propriateforgrammarschoolsthanvocationalschools(Item10,M=2.37,SD=1.17).Moreover,wedidnotdetectastatisticallysignificant
232
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
differenceintheteachers’responsesdependingonthetypeofschoolatwhichtheyteach(Table5).Forthislevelexam,teachersbelievethatthetimelengthissufficient(Item17,M=4.39,SD=0.95),anddonotconsiderthattasksaretoodemanding(Item13,M=1.72,SD=0.99).However, the teachers’ responses to this question differ significantlydependingonthetypeofschoolatwhichtheywork(Table5).Thereisstatistically significantdifferencebetween teachersofvocationalandnon-mathematicsgrammarschools (Table6,p=0.030);namelyteach-ersfromthevocationalschoolsdisagreewiththestatementtoalesserextent,meaning that thebasic level is challenging for their students.This is also supported, for instance, bypsychometric analysis of theMaturaexamfor2018(Bugarin,et�al.,2020)whichshowedthat thebasiclevelwasquitedifficultforexamcandidates.Vocationalschoolstudentsconstitutedaround70%ofthosecandidates.
Teachers believe that the higher level exam ismore appropriateforgrammar schools thanvocational schools (Item9,M=4.06,SD=1.07).Onaverage,theyareundecidedaboutthelengthoftheexam(Item16,M=3.28,SD=1.39),but thereexists statistically signifi-cantdifferencebetweentheteachersfromnon-mathematicsgrammarschoolsandmathematicsgrammarschools(Table6,p=0.001);name-ly, teacherswhowork in non-mathematics grammar schools believethatnotenoughtimeisgivenforthehigherlevelexam.Itseemsthatteacherswouldproposeanincreaseinthedurationofthehigherlevelexam.But an increase in the amount of time allocated for the exammayaffectstudents’performance.Somestudiesexaminedhowextend-edconditionsaffectstudents.Laitusiset�al.(2007)foundthatstudentstakingahigh-stakesexamunderextended-timeconditions(i.e.,moretime-on-task,butnotmore items)experiencednodifference inexamperformance.Thiswouldappeartoconfirmtheteachers’viewthatstu-dents’performancewouldimproveiftheyhadmoretimetocompletetheexam.ButAckermanandKanfer(2009)cautionthatthereismuchtolearnabouthowstudentsregulatetheirefforttoachievehigherscoresdespitelongertestsessions.
Teachersdonotconsiderthatthehigherleveltasksaretoodemand-ing(Item12,M=2.30,SD=1.20).Thereisnostatisticallysignificantdifferencedependingonthetypeofschooltheyworkat(Table5).Ad-ditionally,thecorrelationcoefficientshowedthatteacherswhoconsider
233
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
thetasksatthehigherleveltobetoodemanding,alsoconsiderthatthedurationoftheexamisinsufficient(Spearmanr =-0.344,p<0.001).ThiscorrespondstothepsychometricanalysisofdifficultyofMaturaexamsconductedbyNationalCentre(Kapovićet�al.,2019;Bugarin,et�al.,2020),whichshowedthatthehigherlevelexamsaremostlyofaveragedifficultywith an average task index at both levels between0.4and0.5.Thehigherlevelexaminmathematicsisthethresholdforstudentswhoenrolintechnicalandnaturalsciencestudyprogrammes.Thusthetasksshouldmoredemandingthantasksinthebasiclevel.Thequestionistowhatextent,ifteachersbelievethatthetextbookstheyusearenotsuitableforpreparingstudentsadequatelyfortheexam?
5.3. Scoring and the criteria for passing the Matura exams
InthissectionwedescriberesultsforthevariableScoring,variableCriteria,Items22,28,and30.Forthedescriptivestatistics,wereferthereadertoTable4.
ThevariableCriteria (α=0.78)examinestheteachers’opinionsontheexistingcriteriaforscoringtheMaturaexams,namelywhetherthecurrentscoringprovidesarealpictureofstudents’knowledgeandwhetheritcorrelateswiththeirgradingcriteria.Thevariablewascre-atedfromitems20,21,24.Itseemsthatteachersareundecidedwhethertheexistingscoringcriteriaareappropriate(M=3.34,SD=0.92).Giv-enthatitisdifficulttostudycriteriawithouttakingthescoringmethodintoaccount,wecreatedthevariableScoring(α=0.82).Thisvariablewas created from Items23, 25, 26, 27, 29.Herewe also found thatteachersareundecidedaboutscoringmethods(M=2.69,SD=0.86).Statisticallysignificantdifferencebetween the teachersdependingontheschoolwheretheyworkwasnotdetectedineithervariable(Table5).Onaverage,teachersareundecidedaboutwhethertasksshouldbescoredaseithercorrectorincorrect(Item22,M=2.94,SD=1.21)butbelievethatscoringtheentiresolutionprocedurewouldmakemarkingcomplicated(Item30,M=3.86,SD=1.14).
ThescoringoftheMaturaexamsisprescribedbytheexaminationcatalogue(NCVVO,2020).Atthebasicleveltherearemultiplechoicetasksandshortanswertasks,whereacorrectanswerreceivesonepoint.Atthehigherlevel,inadditiontothesetwotypesoftasks,therearealso
234
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
longanswertaskswherethesolutionprocedureisalsoscored,notjustthesolution.MostteacherswereundecidedabouttheappropriatenessofthescoringoftheMaturaexams,butbelievethatscoringthesolutionprocedurewouldmakemarkingtheexamsmoredifficult.Incontrast,various researchershavepointedout that scoring the solutionproce-dure is beneficial from a psychometric perspective because a higherdistributionofpointspertaskincreasestestreliability(e.g.Ebel,1979).Withinmathematicseducation,someresearchers(SwanandBurkhardt,2012;Suurtammet�al.,2016)arguethattheexamitemsshouldprovidestudents an opportunity to demonstrate theirway of thinking i.e., toexplainandargumenttheirsolutions,eveniftheendresultisincorrect.Moreover,theyarguethatincreasingthenumberofpointsinthetasksallowsdifferentlevelsofachievementwhichwouldbeveryusefulinaccomplishingtheexitfunctionoftheMatura.Thefactthattheteach-ersareundecidedastowhethercurrentscoringgivesarealpictureofstudentknowledgeandabouttheappropriatenessofthescoring,showstheneedforrevisingthecurrentscoringmethodsintheMaturaexaminmathematics.
Further,teachersareundecidedwhetherthelowcriteriaforpass-ingtheexamhasaneffectonstudentmotivationinpreparingfortheexam(Item28,M=3.35,SD=1.31).Thepassinggradeovertheyearshasvariedbetween24–25%correctanswersfor thebasic level,and25–28%forthehigherlevel.Perhapsahigherpassingthresholdwouldmotivatestudentstobetterprepareforgraduationbecausesomestudiesshowthathigh-stakestestscanmotivatestudentstoputmoreeffortintolearning,especiallyinthecaseofmathematics(e.g.,Ryanet�al.,2007;Simzaret�al.,2015).
5.4. Satisfaction with the students’ results on the Matura exam
Inthissection,wedescribetheresultsforItems31and32whichare related to teacher satisfactionwith theMaturaexam.For thede-scriptivestatistics,wereferthereadertoTable4.
Mostteachersaresatisfiedwiththeirstudents’resultsontheMaturaexaminmathematics(Figure1,Item31).Theteachers’attitudesdifferdependingonthetypeofschoolatwhichtheywork(Table5).AscanbeseeninTable6,thereisastatisticallysignificantdifferencebetween
235
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
theteachersfrommathematicsgrammarschoolsandnon-mathematicsgrammar schools (p = 0.006) and between teachers frommathemat-icsgrammarschoolsandvocationalschools(p=0.032).Furthermore,thereisastatisticallysignificantcorrelationbetweenteachers’opinionsregardingthesuitabilityoftextbooksforthehigherlevelandsatisfac-tionwith their students’ results (Spearman r = 0.238p < .001), andregardingthesuitabilityoftextbooksforthebasiclevelandsatisfactionwiththeirstudents’results(Spearmanr =0.244,p<0.001).
MostteachersbelievethatthegradeachievedattheMaturaexamcorrespondstotheirfinalgrades(Figure1,Item32).However,teacheropiniondifferssignificantlydependingonthetypeofschoolatwhichtheywork(Table5),namelybetweenthosefromvocationalschoolsandnon-mathematicsgrammarschools(p=0.016),withthelatterbelievingthattheirfinalgradesareclosertothegradesachievedattheMatura(Table6).ThereportontheMaturainCroatiain2018and2019showsmoderatecorrelationbetweenschoolgradesandthegradesobtainedintheMaturaexaminmathematics,whichmeansthatstudentswhohavehigherschoolgradesmostlyhavehighergradesontheMaturaexaminmathematics(Kapovićet�al.,2019;Bugarinet�al.,2020).However,thereportalsoshowsthat thegradesachievedontheMaturaexamwereslightlylowerthanthegradesachievedatschool.Forinstance,inthe2018examthebasiclevelMaturagradeswerelowerthantheschoolgradeswhilethehigherlevelMaturagradeswereclosertothegradesgivenbytheteachers.
ThefindingsofthestudypointtotheunfairnessandinequalityofMaturaexams.Theteachersfromvocationalschoolsaretheleastsat-isfiedwithstudentachievementontheMaturaexam(Table6).Somevocationalschoolstudentsonlyhavemathematicsasasubjectfortwoyearsintheirupper-secondaryeducation,whilesomehaveitforfouryearsbutperhapsonlyonehourperweek.Ifvocationalschoolstudents,whohavebeentaughtalessdemandingmathscurriculum,choosetositforthehigherlevelexam,theyhavetofillanygapsintheirknowledgeontheirown.Itispossiblethattheydonothaveadequatecurricularre-sourcestoconverttheireducationalexperiencetothevaluesmeasuredon theMatura tests (Ćosić,2017).On theotherhand, somestudentshavemathscurriculasimilartogrammarschools.Theseandtheabove-mentionedconsiderationsledustotheconclusionthatmanyvocational
236
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
schoolstudentsareatadisadvantage,i.e.accesstohighereducationisnotavailabletothemtothesameextentasitistogrammarschoolstu-dents.Therefore,thelowlevelofteachersatisfactionwithvocationalstudents’resultsisagoodindicatoroftheinequalitytheirstudentsex-perience.
Moreover,vocationalschoolmathematicsteachers’opinionsofthetextbooks, thehigherandbasic levelexam,andstudentachievementcouldalsobeindicativeofstress-relatedissues.EventhoughtheMatu-raiselectiveinvocationalschool,thoseteachersfeelpressuretoensurethe successof their students.The studybyĆosić (2017) showed theMatura expanded subject teachers’ classroompractices in vocationalschools.Teachersfeltthatvocationalcurricula,whichhasfewerhoursandalightersubjectload,disadvantagedtheirstudentsindemonstrat-ing thekindofknowledgeandskill requiredat theMaturaexamina-tions.Additionally,theyfeltresponsibleforconvertingtheirstudents’learningintogoodMaturaresults.
Although the Matura is designed as a school-leaving exam forgrammarschoolstudents,whodonothaveanyvocationalqualificationonfinishingschoolandareexpectedtocontinuetheireducation,math-ematicsgrammarschoolstudentsmaychoosetotakethebasiclevelofthe exam.This shows thediscrepancybetween thedesign intentionsof theMaturaand theCroatianeducationalsystem.ManyvocationalschoolstudentstaketheMaturaeveryyear(Kapovićet�al.,2019;Buga-rinet�al., 2020),but somestudiesalready show that theirnumber isdecreasingincertainhighereducationinstitutions(Baketaet.�al,2020;Žauharet�al.,2016).
6. Conclusion
Thestudyreported in thispaperrepresents teachers’voicesonahigh-stakestestinCroatia.Teachersareasignificantfactorintheedu-cationsystemandtheiropinionsandattitudesabouthigh-stakestestsarereflectedintheirteachingpractice:inthestrategiestheyusetoworkwithstudentsintheclassroomorinthechoiceofcurriculummaterials(e.g.Au,2011;Leightonet�al.,2010).Therefore,itisimportanttoheartheirvoicesontheproblemstheyencountersuchasthesuitabilityofmathematics textbooks for students’exampreparation, students’ lack
237
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
ofmotivationconnectedwiththe(low)passingcriteria,andtheirbe-liefsonthemismatchedscoringofcomplextasksinMaturaexamsinmathematics.Thelatterstemsnotonlyfromtheperspectiveofteach-ers,butalsofromtheperspectiveofexammarkers(Table1).Thus,theresultsofthisempiricalstudycanbetakenasagoodstartingpointforre-assessingtherequirementsoftheMaturaexaminmathematicsmorethantenyearsafteritsintroduction.
6.1. Limitations
Onelimitationofourstudyisconnectedwiththemethodologicalaspectofthestudy.Wedidnotdifferentiatebetweenvocationalschoolprogrammesandtheirmathscurricula,soourresultscanbeconceivedasoverlysimplistic.Futureresearchshouldaddressthisissue.More-over,therewerenoartschoolteachersincludedinthestudy;itwouldbefruitfultoengagewiththoseteachersandincludetheirvoices.
BibliographyAbrams,LisaM.;Pedulla,JosephJ.;Madaus,GeorgeF.(2003),“Viewsfromthe
classroom:Teachers’opinionsofstatewidetestingprogrammes”,Theory�Into�Practice,42(1),pp.18–29.doi:https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4201_4
Ackerman,PhilipL.;Kanfer,Ruth(2009),“Testlengthandcognitivefatigue:Anempirical examinationof effects onperformance and test-taker reactions”,Journal�of�Experimental�Psychology.�Applied,15(2),pp.63–181.doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015719
Au,Wayne(2011),“TeachingunderthenewTaylorism:High-stakestestingandthestandardizationofthe21stcenturycurriculum”,Journal�of�Curriculum�Studies, 43(1),pp.25–45.doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2010.521261
Baketa,Nikola;RistićDedić, Zrinka; Jokić,Boris (2020), “Jednaki i jednakiji:perspektiveravnateljaodržavnojmaturiimogućnostimaostvarivanjaviso-koškolskihaspiracijaučenikastrukovnih igimnazijskihprogramauHrvat-skoj”,Revija�za�Sociologiju,50(2),pp.223–251.doi:https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.50.2.4
Bezinović,Petar(2009),“Državnamaturakaozaprekapristupuvisokomobrazo-vanju”,Revija�za�socijalnu�politiku,16(2),pp.175–176.
Black, Paul; Harrison, Christine; Hodgen, Jeremy; Marshall, Bethan; Serret,Nastasha (2011), “Can teachers’ summativeassessmentsproducedependa-ble results andalso enhanceclassroom learning?”,Assessment� in�Educati-
238
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
on:� Principles,� Policy�&� Practice, 18(4), pp. 451–469. doi: https://doi.or-g/10.1080/0969594X.2011.557020
Booher-Jennings,Jennifer,(2005),“Belowthebubble:‘Educationaltriage’andtheTexasaccountabilitysystem”,American�Educational�Research�Journal, 42, pp.231–268.doi:https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312042002231
Brookhart,SusanM.(2013),“Theuseofteacherjudgementforsummativeasse-ssmentintheUSA”,Assessment�in�Education:�Principles,�Policy�&�Practice, 20(1),pp.69–90.doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2012.703170
Bugarin, Jelena; Ćurković, Natalija; Krašić, Sandro; Lukačin, Lorelaj (2020),Statistička�i�psihometrijska�analiza�ispita�državne�mature�u�školskoj�godini�2018./2019.,Zagreb:Nacionalnicentarzavanjskovrednovanjeobrazovanja.
Cohen,Luis;Manion,Lawrence;Morrison,Keith (2018),Research�Methods� in�Education(8thedition),NewYork:Routledge.
Ćosić, Ivana (2017), “Theorizing standardized assessment inCroatia”, in: Silo-va, Iveta; Sobe,NoaW.;Korzh,Alla;Kovalchuk, Serhiy (eds.),Reimagi-ning�Utopias:�Theory�and�Method�for�Educational�Research�in�Post-Socialist�Contexts,Rotterdam:SensePublisher,pp.227–244.
Dietiker,Leslie;Males,LorraineM;Amador,Julie;Earnest,Darrell(2018),“Cu-rricularnoticing:Aframeworktodescribeteachers’interactionswithcurricu-lummaterials”,Journal�for�Research�in�Mathematics�Education,49(5),pp.521–532.doi:https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.49.5.0521
Ebel,RobertL.(1979),Essentials�of�Educational�Measurement,EnglewoodCli-ffs,NJ:Prentice–Hall.
Fan,Lianghuo;Zhu,Yan;Miao,Zhu(2013),“Textbookresearchinmathematicseducation:Developmentstatusanddirections”,ZDM�–�International�Journal�on�Mathematics�Education,45(5),pp.633–646.doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0539-x
GlasnovićGracin,Dubravka(2018),“Requirementsinmathematicstextbooks:Afive–dimensionalanalysisoftextbookexerciseandexamples”,International�Journal� of�Mathematical�Education� in�Science�and�Technology, 49(7), pp.1003–1024.doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1431849
Glavaš, Amanda; Staščik, Azra; Jukić Matić, Ljerka (2019), “What types ofknowledgedomathematicstextbookspromote?”,in:Kolar-Begović,Zdenka;Kolar-Šuper,Ružica;JukićMatić,Ljerka(eds.),Towards�New�Perspectives�on�Mathematics�Education,Osijek:FakultetzaodgojneiobrazovneznanostiiOdjelzamatematiku,SvučilišteuOsijeku,pp.229–241.
Hadar,LinorL.(2017),“Opportunitiestolearn:Mathematicstextbooksandstu-dents’achievements”,Studies� in�Educational�Evaluation,55,pp.153–166.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.10.002
Holme, Jennifer J.; Richards, Meredith P.; Jimerson, Jo Beth; Cohen, Rebec-ca W. (2010), “Assessing the effects of high school exit examinations”,Review� of� Educational� Research, 80(4), pp. 476–526. doi: https://doi.or-g/10.3102%2F0034654310383147
239
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
Jonsson,Anders;Leden,Lotta(2019),“Theambiguousinfluenceofhigh-stakestesting on science teaching in Sweden”, International� Journal� of� Science�Education,41(14),pp.1926–1943.doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1647474
Kapović,Iva;Džida,Marija;Novak,Josip;Ćurković,Natalija(2019),Statistička�i�psihometrijska�analiza�ispita�državne�mature�u�školskoj�godini�2017./2018, Zagreb:Nacionalnicentarzavanjskovrednovanjeobrazovanja.
Laitusis,CaraC.;Morgan,DeannaL.;Bridgeman,Brent;Zanna,Jennifer;Stone,Elizabeth(2007),“Examinationoffatigueeffectsfromextended-timeaccom-modationsontheSATreasoningtest™”,College�Board�Research�Report�No.2007-1.NewYork:TheCollegeBoard.
Leighton, Jaqueline P.; Gokiert, Rebbeca J.; Cor,M.Ken;Heffernan, Caroline(2010),“Teacherbeliefsabout thecognitivediagnostic informationofcla-ssroom versus large-scale tests: Implications for assessment literacy”,� As-sessment� in�Education:�Principles,�Policy�&�Practice,17(1), pp.7–21.doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09695940903565362
Marlow, Ruth; Norwich, Brahm; Ukoumunne, Obioha C.; Hansford, Lorraine;Sharkey,Siobhan;Ford,Tamsin(2014),“Acomparisonofteacherassessment(APP)withstandardisedtestsinprimaryliteracyandnumeracy(WIAT-II)”,Assessment�in�Education:�Principles,�Policy�&�Practice,21(4),pp.412–426.doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.936358
[MZO] Ministry of Science, Education (2018), ŠeR� -� Školski� e-rudnik (Vol.3). Available at: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiOTUxN-TE3YmQtM2E3MC00MDc0LTg3OTQtYTExZWZhYzU3Y2FlIiwidCI6I-jJjMTFjYmNjLWI3NjEtNDVkYi1hOWY1LTRhYzc3ZTk0ZTFkNCI-sImMiOjh9[14August2019]
[NCVVO]National�Centre�for�External�EvaluationofEducation(2018),Godišnji�izvještaj� o� radu� i� poslovanju� nacionalnoga� centra� za� vanjsko� vrednovanje�obrazovanja�za�2017.�godinu,Zagreb:Nacionalnicentarzavanjskovredno-vanjeobrazovanja.
[NCVVO]National�Centre�for�External�EvaluationofEducation(2020),Ispitni�katalog� za�državnu�maturu�u� školskoj�godini�2020./2021. Matematika,Za-greb:Nacionalnicentarzavanjskovrednovanjeobrazovanja.
[NN]OfficialGazetteof theRepublicofCroatia (2013),Pravilnik�o�polaganju�državne� mature, 1/2013. Available at: https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2013_01_1_35.html[2February2013]
[NN]OfficialGazetteoftheRepublicofCroatia(2018),Zakon�o�udžbenicima�i�drugim�obrazovnim�materijalima�za�osnovnu�i�srednju�školu,116/2018[19December2018]
Ryan,KatherineE.;Ryan,AllisonM.;Arbuthnot,Keena;Samuels,Maurice(2007),“Students’motivationforstandardizedmathexams”,Educational�Researc-her,36(1),pp.5–13.doi:https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X06298001
Ryan,ShannonV.;vonderEmbse,NathanielP.;Pendergast,LauraL.;Saeki,Eli-na;Segool,Natasha;Schwing,Shelby(2017),“Leavingtheteachingprofe-
240
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
ssion:The roleof teacherstressandeducationalaccountabilitypoliciesonturnoverintent”,Teaching�and�Teacher�Education,66,pp.1–11.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.03.016
Simzar,RahailaM.;Martinez,Marcela;Rutherford,Teomara;Domina,Thurston;Conley,AnneMarie (2015), “Raising the stakes:How students’motivationfor mathematics associates with high- and low-stakes test achievement”,Learning� and� Individual� Differences, 39, pp. 49–63. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.03.002
Suurtamm,Christine;Thompson,DenniseR.;Kim,RaeYoung;Moreno,Leonno-raD.;Sayac,Nathalie;Schukajlow,Stanislaw;Silver,Edward;Ufer,Stefan;Vos,Pauline(2016),Assessment�in�Mathematics�Education:�Large-Scale�As-sessment�and�Classroom�Assessment,Cham:Springer.
Swan,Malcolm;Burkhardt,Hugh (2012), “A designer speaks:Designing asse-ssmentofperformance inmathematics”,Educational�Designer:�Journal�of�the�International�Society�for�Design�and�Development�in�Education,2(5),pp.1–41. Available at: http://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume2/issue5/article19/[11October2020]
Törnroos,Jukka(2005),“Mathematicstextbooks,opportunitytolearnandstudentachievement”,Studies� in�Educational�Evaluation,31(4),pp.315–327.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.11.005
vonderEmbse,NathanielP.;Pendergast,LauraL.;Segool,Natasha;Saeki,Elina;Ryan,Shannon(2016),“Theinfluenceof test-basedaccountabilitypoliciesonschoolclimateandteacherstressacrossfourstates”,Teaching�and�Teacher�Education,59,pp.492–502.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.013
Žauhar,Goranka;Dresto-Alač,Branka;Lekić,AndricaandRavlić-Gulan,Jagoda(2016),“UpisinavisokaučilištaSveučilištauRijeciprijeiposlijeuvođenjadržavnemature”,Medicina�Fluminensis,52(1),pp.102–115.
STAVOVISREDNJOŠKOLSKIHNASTAVNIKAMATEMATIKEOISPITIMADRŽAVNEMATUREIZMATEMATIKE
AmandaGlavaš,LjerkaJukićMatić,SaraPrša
U�ovom�radu�predstavljena�su�mišljenja� i�stavovi�nastavnika�matematike�o�ispitima�iz�matematike�na�Državnoj�maturi�u�Hrvatskoj.�Cilj�rada�bio�je� ispitati�mišljenja� nastavnika� o� prikladnosti� srednjoškolskih� udžbenika� matematike� za�pripremu�učenika�za�ispite�državne�mature,�općim�zahtjevima�ispita,�ocjenjivanju�i� bodovanju� na� ispitima� te� o� uspjehu� učenika.� Istraživanje� je� provedeno� putem�upitnika� na� prigodnom�uzorku� od� 308� nastavnika�matematike� koji� poučavaju� u�srednjim� školama� u� Hrvatskoj.� Rezultati� pokazuju� da� nastavnici� matematike�školske�udžbenike�ne�smatraju�prikladnima�za�pripremu�učenika�za�ispit�više�razine.�Nastavnici� smatraju� da� je� vrijeme� predviđeno� za� ispit� više� razine� nedovoljno.�
241
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
Većinom�su�zadovoljni�rezultatima�svojih�učenika,�no�neopredijeljeni�su�po�pitanju�kriterija� i� bodovanja� na� maturi.� Nastavnici� strukovnih� škola� u� većoj� su� mjeri�nezadovoljni� zahtjevima� i�postavkama�državne�mature�u�odnosu�na�gimnazijske�nastavnike.�Rezultati�ovog�empirijskog�istraživanja�mogu�poslužiti�kao�polazište�za�ponovno�razmatranje�općih�zahtjeva�državne�mature�iz�matematike�nakon�više�od�deset�godina�nakon�njezina�uvođenja.
Ključne riječi:��Državna�matura,�nastavnici�matematike,�stavovi�nastavnika,�škol-ski�udžbenici,�ispit�iz�matematike
Appendix
Table 2.Questionnaireitems
1.ThetasksinthetextbookaresuitableforpreparingstudentsforthehigherlevelMaturaexam.
2.TheschooltextbookprovidesasufficientnumberoftasksformetopreparemystudentsforthehigherlevelMaturaexam.
3.ThetasksinthehigherlevelMaturaexamareofthesametypeasthetasksintheschooltextbook.
4.Ibelievethatstudentscanpreparequitewellforthehigherlevelexamusingonlythetasksfromthetextbook.
5.ThetasksinthetextbookaresuitableforpreparingstudentsforthebasicMaturaexam.
6.TheschooltextbookprovidesasufficientnumberoftasksformetopreparemystudentsforthebasiclevelMaturaexam.
7.ThetasksinthebasiclevelMaturaexamareofthesametypeasthetasksintheschooltextbook.
8.Ibelievethatstudentscanpreparequitewellforthebasicexamusingonlythetasksinthetextbook.
9.Ibelievethatthetasksinthehigherlevelexamaremoreappropriateforgrammarschoolsthanforvocationalschools.
10.IbelievethatthetasksatthebasiclevelMaturaexamaremoreappropriateforgrammarschoolsthanforvocationalschools.
11.IbelievethatthecomplexityoftheMaturatasksisincreasingfromyeartoyear.
12.IthinkthatthetasksatthehigherlevelMaturaexamaretoodemanding.
13.IthinkthatthetasksatthebasiclevelMaturaexamaretoodemanding.
242
METODIČKI OGLEDI, 28 (2021) 1, 217–242A. Glavaš et al., Upper-secondary...
14.ThecontentitemsintheMaturadonotdeviatesignificantlyfromeachotherfromyeartoyear.
15.IbelievethatthecomplexityoftheMaturatasksisthesameeveryyear.16.IthinkthatthetimeallowedforcompletingthehigherlevelMatura
examissufficientgiventhecomplexityofthetasks.17.IthinkthatthetimeallowedforcompletingthebasicMaturaexamis
sufficientgiventhecomplexityofthetasks.18.Ibelievethatthereisnodifferenceinthecomplexityofthetasksinthe
firstandcurrentMaturaexams.19.IcanmakeassumptionsonthecontentofthenextMaturaexambased
onthecontentofpreviousexams.20.IbelievethatthecriteriaforscoringthetasksatMaturaareappropriate.21.ThecriteriaforscoringtheMaturatasksalignwithmycriteriafor
exams22.IthinkthatitisappropriatetoscoremosttasksattheMaturaonthe
principleofcorrect-incorrect.23.Ibelievethatthesolutionprocedureshouldbeevaluatedinagreater
numberoftasks.24.Ibelievethattheexistingcriteriaforevaluatingtasksgivearealpicture
ofstudents’knowledge.25.Ibelievethattheexistingcriteriaforscoringtasksreducetheoverall
resultinMaturaexamsinmathematics.26.IbelievethattheoverallresultsoftheMaturawouldbebetterwitha
changeintheexistingscoringcriteria.27.Ibelievethatthescoringoftaskswith2ormorepointsdoesnotmatch
thenumberoftaskoutcomesandthecomplexityofthetask.28.Ibelievethatthelowcriteriaforpassingtheexamaffectsthe
motivationofstudentstopreparefortheexam.29.IbelievethattheresultsoftheMaturaexamwouldbeimprovedifthe
solutionprocedurewerescoredinagreaternumberoftasks.30.Ibelievethatscoringthecompletesolutionprocedureinagreater
numberoftaskswouldmakemarkingtheexammoredifficult.31.Asateacher,Iamsatisfiedwiththeresultsofmystudentsatthe
Matura.32.IbelievethatthegradesattheMaturaagreewithmyschoolgrades.