Category: Hsu
-
128) =1.651
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: When a student has difficulty understanding a mathematics concept, Hsu, Table 29. ANCOVA Result for Item 19 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics methods courses (M=4.2). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was a significant difference in Item 19 [F (2
-
128) = 4.457
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: Given a choice, Hsu, Table 28. ANCOVA Result for Item 18 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics methods courses (M=4.0). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was a significant difference in Item 18 [F (2
-
128) =. 759
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: If parents comment that their child is showing more interest in mathematics at school, Hsu, Table 24. ANCOVA Result for Item 14 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics courses (M=3.8). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was no significant difference in Item 14 [F (2
-
128) =2.207
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: When a low-achieving child progresses in mathematics, Hsu, Table 20. ANCOVA Result for Item 10 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics methods courses (M=4.0). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was no significant difference in Item 10 [F (2
-
128) = 2.780
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: If students are underachieving in mathematics, Hsu, Table 17. ANCOVA Result for Item 7 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics methods courses (M=3.3). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was no significant difference in Item 7 [F (2
-
128) =.495
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: When the mathematics grades of students improve, Hsu, Table 14. ANCOVA Result for Item 4 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics methods courses (M= 4.0). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was no significant difference in Item 4 [F (2
-
128) = 4.923
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: Even if I try very hard, Hsu, Table 13. ANCOVA Result for Item 3 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics methods courses (M=3.5). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was a significant difference in Item 3 [F (2
-
128) = 4.1099
—
by
in </p, </td, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", Dependent Variable: When a student does better than usual in mathematics, Hsu, Table 11. ANCOVA Result for Item 1 Comparing One Mathematics Methods Course and Two Mathematics Methods Courses.</em, Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.</emand those who have had two mathematics courses (M = 3.8). The ANCOVA results suggested that there was no significant difference in Item 1 [F (2
-
p=. 018) at the 95% confidence interval. Therefore
—
by
in .018</td, .359</td, .829</td, </p, </td, </td, </td, </td, </td, </td, </td, </td, </td, </tr, </tr, </tr, <div class=""list-content"", <div class=""webkit-scrollbars webkit-scrollbars–table"", <em, <p, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <td, <tr, 2.01</td, 2.430</td, 3.670</td, 6.78</td, 66</td, 95% Confidence</strong, df</strong, df</td, Lower</strong, Mean Square</td, Mean</strong, Pair 1</strong, Paired Differences</strong, Post-total</td, Pre-total</td, Sig.</strong, Sig.</td, Standard deviation</th, Std. Deviation</strong, T., T</strong, Table 9. Paired Sample T-Test Results of Pre-service Teachers self-efficacy after the Content Pedagogy Courses.</em, Therefore, these results indicate that pre-service teachers self-efficacy decreased between the beginning and the end of mathematics content pedagogy courses.</p, Upper</strongthe paired T-Test results in Table 9 indicate that there were differences between the pre-test and post-test instrument scores in self-efficacy among the respondents (t=2.43
-
as pointed out earlier
the question is simply whether those participating in the process will make all decisions based on the best interests of the student. All of the teams in the planning process