Validation of the Diagnostic Teacher Assessment of Mathematics and Science (DTAMS) Instrument

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 110, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 180-192

  Saderholm, Jon ^a   Ronau, Robert ^b   Brown, E Todd ^b   Collins, Gary ^c  

^a BEREA COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE   (United States)

^c Duchess County Department of Mental Hygiene   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864264330     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00021.x     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED458219)
3. Ball, D. L. (1988). Research on teaching mathematics: Making subject matter knowledge part of the equation. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education.
4. Ball, D. L. (1995). Developing mathematics reform: What don't we know about teacher learning–but would make good working hypotheses? (NCRTL craft paper 95–4). East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education.
5. Ball, D. L. (1996). Teacher learning and the mathematics reforms: What we think we know and what we need to learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 500–509.
6. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian mathematics education study group (pp. 3–14). Edmonton, Alberta: CMESG/GCEDM.
7. Begle, E. G. (1979). Critical variables in mathematics education: Findings from a survey of the empirical literature. Reston, VA: Mathematical Association of America and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
8. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
9. Bloom, B., Engelhart, M. D., Hill, W. H., Furst, E. J., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: Longman.
10. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Byrne, B. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., Parker, D., Kulm, G., & Raulerson, T. (2002, January). Conventional wisdom is wrong: Anyone cannot teach and teachers are not born. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New York.
13. Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., Parker, D., Kulm, G., & Raulerson, T. (2005). The mathematics content knowledge role in developing preservice teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 20, 102–118.
14. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.
15. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences. (2001). The mathematical education of teachers. Washington, DC: American Mathematical Society and Mathematical Association of America.
16. Corcoran, T. C. (1995). Transforming professional development for teachers: A guide for state policymakers. Washington, DC: National Governors' Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED384600)
17. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 166–173.
18. Davis, B., & Simmt, E. (2006). Mathematics-for-teaching: An ongoing investigation of the mathematics that teachers (need to) know. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 293–319.
19. Educational Testing Service. (2001). Praxis test at a glance. Retrieved on December 1, 2002, from http://www.ets.org/praxis.
20. Educational Testing Service. (2006). State Requirements. Retrieved October 9, 2006, from http://www.ets.org/praxis/
21. Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
22. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
23. Graeber, A. O. (1999). Forms of knowing mathematics: What preservice teachers should learn. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 189–208.
24. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25. Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 65–97). New York: MacMillan.
26. Hill, H. C., Schilling, S. G., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers' mathematics knowledge for teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 105, 11–30.
27. Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (1995). Model standards in mathematics for beginning teacher licensing and development: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
28. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2006). Lisrel (Version 8.80) [Computer Program]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
29. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In J. A. Colbert, K. E. Boyd, K. A. Clark, S. Guan, J. B. Harris, M. A. Kelly, & A. D. Thompson (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 3–30). New York: Routledge.
30. Lewis, L., Parsad, B., Carey, N., Bartfai, N., Farris, E., & Smerdon, B. (1999). Teacher quality: A report on the preparation and qualifications of public school teachers. Statistical analysis report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
31. Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7(4), 328. Retrieved October 27, 2006, from http://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt74m.htm
32. Linacre, J. M. (2005a). Winsteps Rasch measurement (Version 3.58.1) [Computer Program]. Chicago: Winsteps.
33. Linacre, J. M. (2005b). A user's guide to Winsteps Ministep Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago: Winsteps.
34. Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3–11.
35. Mathematical Sciences Education Board. (1996). The preparation of teachers of mathematics: Considerations and challenges a letter report. National Research Council, Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
36. Miller, J. D., Kimmel, L., Hoffer T., & Nelson C. (2000). Longitudinal study of American youth: Users manual. Chicago: International Center for the Advancement of Scientific Literacy, Northwestern University.
37. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017–1054.
38. Mullens, J. E., Leighton, M. S., Laguarda, K. G., & O'Brien, E. (1996). Student learning, teaching quality, and professional development: Theoretical linkages, current measurement, and recommendations for future data collection (Working Paper No. 96–28). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
39. Muraki, E., & Bock, D. (2008). Parscale 4 [Computer Program]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
40. National Center for Education Statistics. (2004). The condition of education 2004. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
41. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
42. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional teaching standards. Reston, VA: Author.
43. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1992). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
44. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
45. National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. In J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, & B. Findell (Eds.), Mathematics learning study committee, center for education, division of behavioral and social sciences and education (p. 375). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
46. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
47. Peressini, D., Borko, H., Romagnano, L., Knuth, E., & Willis, C. (2004). A conceptual framework for learning to teach secondary mathematics: A situative perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56, 67–96.
48. Piaget, J. (1952/1963). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: W.W. Norton.
49. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.
50. Reese, C. M., Miller, K. E., Mazzeo, J., & Dossey, J. A. (1997). NAEP 1996 mathematics report card for the nation and the states. Findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED406223)
51. Ronau, R. N., Niess, M. L., Browning, C., Pugalee, D., Driskell, S. O., & Harrington, R. (2008). Framing the research on digital technologies and student learning in mathematics. In L. Bell, L. Schrum, & A. D. Thompson (Eds.), Framing research on technology and student learning in the content areas: Implications for educators (pp. 13–31). Charlotte, NC:Information Age Publishing.
52. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
53. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
54. Skemp, R. R. (1971). The psychology of learning mathematics. Baltimore, MD: Penquin Books.
55. Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. (1980, May). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA.
56. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10.
57. Tuffte, E. R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
58. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.