Edd 1006 - Dap1

Running head: PRE-SERVICE MATH TEACHER PERCEPTIONS 1
National Differences in Perceptions About the Nature and Value of Mathematics Education:
An Exploratory Factor Analysis of Selected Variables From the Future Teacher Survey
Long Island University
Mary Kudla, Naomi Lucas Anthony, Cristina Montagna, and Cassandree Thime
February 2018
PRE-SERVICE MATH TEACHER PERCEPTIONS 2
Abstract
In the United States, math achievement scores have lagged behind many other countries, pushing
educators to reform both policy and practice. Examining the future of math teacher efficacy and
student achievement in mathematics begins with an examination of the perceptions of preservice
teachers. This study examined factors that contribute to preservice math teacher perceptions of
mathematics education in the United States and compared them with their counterparts outside of
the United States. Using exploratory factor analysis, three factor solution emerged: rigor,
creativity, and application. Differences existed between U.S respondents and those from
countries outside of the U.S, in regards to rigor and application of mathematics education.
Educational institutions should increase rigor and other changes in mathematics education.
Keywords: mathematics education, pre-service teachers, teacher perceptions, math pedagogy,
exploratory factor analysis

National Differences in Perceptions About the Nature and Value of Mathematics Education:
An Exploratory Factor Analysis of Selected Variables From the Future Teacher Survey
Major technological shifts have forced math teachers around the world to revisit the
questions, “Why do I need to know this?” and “Am I really going to use any of this when I grow
up?” These questions have plagued math teachers for centuries, but now with the commonplace
use of computers and smartphones, there is an added distraction to student engagement. While
many students report using technology thru mobile devices, teachers still have doubts (Project
Tomorrow, 2010).
Despite these issues, technology is changing the face of education. In the United States,
the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) piloted the use of tablets as a
replacement of pencil and a bubble sheet with plans to convert completely to tablet by 2020
(Cavanagh, 2014). This shift in testing to a digital base seems inevitable and will likely trickle
down to all K-12 school settings, including math classrooms. Many educators in the math field
have embraced these changes and as a result have technology-infused classrooms that rely on
mathematical software on computers, tablets, and flipped classroom instruction. Research of
evidence-based practice in this area is emerging, but there are studies that suggest that there is a
rich potential to the use of technology in math education (Crawford, Higgins, Huscroft-d'angelo,
& Hall, 2016). In the same way that the calculator was initially met with hesitation, strategic use
of technology might improve student perceptions of math education.
Student achievement in math education may be complicated by shifting technology
paradigms in the 21st century and beyond, but the push for rigor and high scores remains a
primary concern. This is largely a result of the Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA). PISA scores are used to measure and rank the academic achievement of students
worldwide. These scores have become a benchmark for nations across the globe, who have
quickly integrated and embedded results into educational institutions (Breakspear, 2012). Math
rankings have had a dramatic effect on education, pushing countries to reform both policy and
practice. Educational stakeholders hoping to improve scores and global ranking need to evaluate
not only curriculum and testing, but also components of teacher efficacy in high ranking
countries.
Any attempt to understand the future of mathematics education, must begin with an
examination of teacher education programs and the perceptions of pre-service teachers. Many
believe that mathematics is a universal language shared and understood across continents
regardless of spoken language or culture. Despite this generally accepted belief, it is clear that,
regardless of the universal nature of mathematics, there are varied perceptions which may impact
the approach and would, therefore, explain variations in achievement scores across countries.
The purpose of this study is to examine and compare differences in views of pre-service teachers
from the U.S. and those from other countries regarding the nature and value of mathematics
education. The following research questions guided this study:
 RQ1: What are the major beliefs about the nature of mathematics held by pre-service K-
12 math teachers?
 RQ2: To what extent to pre-service K-12 math teachers see practical value in the mastery
of mathematical content knowledge?
 RQ3: Do the views of American pre-service K-12 math teachers differ from pre-service
K-12 teachers of other nations?

Methods
Pre-service teachers from six countries were surveyed regarding their perceptions of
mathematics education. The survey data originates from Michigan State University’s larger
research project on teacher preparation programs. The following discussion presents information
regarding participants, data collection and instrumentation, measures, and data analysis.
Participants
This study included total of 2,628 pre-service primary and secondary mathematics
teachers in their first or last year of study at higher education institutions (1,540 females, 1,081
males, 7 skipped) from the following countries: Bulgaria, Germany, Korea, Mexico, Taiwan and
the United States. Participant age ranged from age 18 to over 40. Responses were invalidated if
there was missing or skipped answers, resulting in a final usable population of 1,260 participants.
The United States made up 14.6 % (n = 384) of the total usable population (Schmidt, 2013).
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The data used in this study was collected from Mathematics Teaching in the 21st Century
at Michigan State University, an international study of the preparation of mathematics teachers
(Schmidt, 2013). The overall research project included multiple surveys of teacher education
institutions, faculty, and pre-service teachers. The current exploratory study focuses solely on
the future teacher survey. Pre-service teachers responded to questions about their background,
certifications, course-taking, program activities, and content knowledge relevant to their
teaching. The survey also included multi-item Likert-type scale accompanied statements
regarding mathematical and pedagogical beliefs.

Measures
The current study extracted 24 manifest variables from the larger data set. The first
variable, country, is a categorical variable that reflects participants' nationality. Even though it
originally had six levels, the current study collapsed this variable into a binary value, where the
code "0" represented "outside the USA." and "1" represented the "USA.” The other 24 variables
were Likert-scale type items that reflected statements on the nature and value of mathematics.
These variables used a 6-point scale that was analyzed as continuous interval level data.
Using an exploratory factor analysis on these 24 variables, three-factor score variables
were produced. These three-factor scores were used as dependent variables on independent
samples t-tests and used normal deviation with M = 0 and SD = 1. These factor variables are
described in the results section.
Data Analysis
This study employed several types of software and programs. It utilized Stata/IC 15.1 to
perform statistical analysis of the data, as well as developing corresponding graphs. Two user-
written programs, sortl.ado (Enzmann, n.d.) and factabexcel.do (Red Owl, 2018), were used after
factor rotation. The sortl.ado program produced a sorted factor loadings table, and the
factabexcel.do program added labels and other factor information to the table, which was then
exported to Microsoft Excel 2016 for further formatting.
Data analysis began with conducting an initial unrotated exploratory factor analysis
(EFA). The results presented a set of initial factors and unrotated factor loadings, which were
reviewed in order to determine the number of factors to extract for subsequent rotation. Three a
priori methods were utilized to extract and rotate these factors.

The first method involved looking at the percentage of variance explained by each of the
unrotated factors (based on eigenvalues) and then extracting factors that explain at least 75% of
the variance in the data. The second method used follows Kaiser’s Rule which suggests
extracting all factors with eigenvalues greater than or equal to 1.0. As eigenvalues are expected
to increase after rotation, this rule was modified to extract factors with eigenvalues greater than
or equal to 0.90. The third method involved inspecting a scree plot of eigenvalues and extracting
factors that explain the largest amount of variance (i.e., factors at or above the elbow).
The unrotated EFA was performed again, extracting three factors, based on the
aforementioned methods. These three extracted factors extracted were then rotated orthogonally,
using the varimax rotation procedure and Kaiser normalization. To simplify reading the rotated
factor loadings table, an a priori cut-off level criterion was established as λ ≥ |+/-.30|.
The factor scores for the varimax-rotated factors were saved and then sorted using the
sortl.ado program. The factabexcel.do program was then used to add variable labels,
eigenvalues, and proportion of variance explained to the rotated factor loadings table. This data
was then exported to Excel. Descriptive statistics for the factors with positive factor loadings,
which satisfy the cut-off level criterion (i.e., λ ≥ |+/-.30|), were also calculated.
This study intended to explore differences in views of pre-service teachers, pertaining to
math education, as indicated by U.S. respondents and those from other countries. Thus,
independent samples t-tests were conducted on each of the three varimax-rotated factors, in order
to determine statistically significant differences in the views of these two groups. These results
were evaluated as one-tailed t-tests with an a priori criterion of α = .05.

Results
Exploratory factor analysis revealed three-factor variables, aligned with the three a priori
methods that were utilized to extract and rotate these factors. Figure 1, a scree plot of the initial,
unrotated solution, shows that the first three factors account for most of the total variability in the
data. After rotation, a factor loadings table showing the three factors, Table 1, was produced.
The three factors explained 98.69% variance of the 24 manifest variables, exceeding the 75%
cutoff criterion.
[Insert Figure 1 about here.]
[Insert Table 1 about here.]
These three factors also satisfy Kaiser’s Rule, as each has an eigenvalue greater than one.
The uniqueness of these three factors have a minimum of 0.477, maximum of 0.878 and median
of 0.688. Only two items did not load at or above the cutoff criterion on any factors. The
following discussion presents the findings for each of the three factors.
Factor 1: Rigor
The first factor (Factor 1) was analyzed as "rigor". Factor 1 had an eigenvalue of 3.08
with percent variance of 38.82. Eight items loaded on this factor, at or above the cutoff (i.e., λ
≥|.30|). The factor loadings were all positive. The mean for this factor was 0.56, with a
minimum value of 0.50 and a maximum of 0.72. The median U statistic was 0.69.
Factor 2: Creativity
The second factor (Factor 2) was analyzed as "creativity". Factor 2 had an eigenvalue of
2.86 with percent variance of 35.94. Eight items loaded on this factor, at or above the cutoff
(i.e., λ ≥ |.30|). The factor loadings were all positive. The mean for this factor was 0.49, with a
minimum value of 0.39 and a maximum of 0.63. The median U statistic was 0.69. Two of these
items, also, loaded on the third factor.
Factor 3: Application
The third factor (Factor 3) was analyzed as "application". Factor 3 had an eigenvalue of
1.9 with percent variance of 23.93. Eight items loaded on this factor, at or above the cutoff (i.e.,
λ ≥ |.30|). The factor loadings were all positive. The mean for this factor was 0.47, with a
minimum value of 0.30 and a maximum of 0.53. The median U statistic was 0.69. As
previously stated, two of these items, also, loaded on the second factor.
Comparison of Factor Scores by US vs. Other Nationality
Using Stata/IC 15.1, independent samples t-tests were conducted on each factor (i.e.,
rigor, creativity, application) to contrast the perception of respondents from the U.S. to those
from countries outside of the U.S. For each factor, a histogram was created which was overlaid
by country comparison represented by transparent bars. The following discussion presents the
results of the one-tailed independent samples t-tests.
The independent samples t-test was significant for Factor 1. The mean of Factor 1 for
pre-service teachers outside the U.S. (M = 0.047, SD = 0.03) is greater than the mean for U.S.
future teachers (M = -0.276, SD = 0.061) at a highly statistically level (one-sided t(1,205) = 4.402,
p < .001). This is depicted visually in Figure 2.
An independent samples t-test was conducted to determine whether the means of Factor 2
differ for pre-service teachers in the U.S. and those outside of the U.S. There is insufficient
evidence that the difference in mean scores on Factor 2 was due to nationality status of the future
teachers who participated in the survey (one-sided t(1,205)= 0.963, p = .168). This is depicted
visually in Figure 3.
An independent samples t-test found that the means of Factor 3 differed by nationality at
a highly statistically significant level (one-sided t(1,205) = -14.809, p < .001). Pre-service teachers
from outside the U.S. had a lower mean score on Factor 3 (M = -0.132, SD = 0.024) than U.S.
future teachers (M = 0.780, SD = 0.046). This difference is shown graphically in the histogram
presented as Figure 4.
Discussion
This study explored emerging factors of the perceptions of the nature and value of
mathematics education in U.S. pre-service teachers. The results of our analyses created a three-
factor solution of rigor, creativity, and application. Rigor explains the demanding balance of
conceptual understanding and procedural fluency (New York State Education Department
[NYSED], 2017). Creativity explains the ability to create models linking classroom mathematics
to the outside world. Application explains the practical ability to prove, operationalize and apply
mathematical functions to life.
Additionally, this study compared these three-factor solutions with those from other
countries. When analyzing the perceptions of mathematics between respondents from the U.S.
and those from outside of the U.S., the data presented in this paper shows statistically significant
differences in the area of rigor and application of mathematics education. Respondents from the
U.S. had lower views of the rigorous nature and higher views of the applications of mathematics
education. Both respondents from the U.S. and outside of the U.S. held similar views on the
creativity of mathematics education.
Conclusion and Implications
The findings of our study offer several implications to institutions that prepare teachers to
work in mathematics education and educational policymakers. One important finding from this
study is that pre-service math teachers across countries do hold similar values regarding
creativity in mathematics education. Educational institutions should continue to promote and
explore creative practices in mathematics education. Existing science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM) programs should include the arts and continue as the rebranded
STEAM.
Differing views, based on nationality, were found when examining rigor and mathematics
education. Because respondents from the U.S. viewed mathematics as less rigorous, institutions
may want to re-examine their curriculum to increase the challenge and fluency level for pre-
service teachers and their future students. Educational policies should, also, promote an
increased rigorous K-12 mathematics curriculum, providing opportunities for advancement and
higher-level course options. This change may help increase U.S. competitiveness in STEM.
Additional studies may aim to quantify the relationship between an increased rigor in
mathematics education on U.S. PISA scores.
Respondents from the U.S. stressed the application of mathematics more than those from
outside the U.S. While it is important to consider math’s relevance to a country’s economy or
workforce, perhaps pre-service teacher perceptions need to shift to more basic and immediate
needs of the classroom and student. Teaching should focus on immediate needs of the student,
not molding instruction to their future career aspirations.

Future study and collaboration should be encouraged across countries. Differences can
reveal areas in need of improvement, however it is important to consider that there are many
other reasons for variation, beyond teacher perceptions. This study focused on the values held
by pre-service math teachers, but another area of interest may involve looking at how teacher
instruction reflects their beliefs. Instructional tools may include manipulatives or visuals instead
of memorization and practice drills. If a global community shares what works with each other,
perhaps the world can move away from ranking that lifts one country above another and instead
all can rise together.

References
Breakspear, S. (2012). The policy impact of PISA: An exploration of the normative effects of
international benchmarking in school system performance. Paris: Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Retrieved from http://0-
search.proquest.com.liucat.lib.liu.edu/docview/934354439?accountid=12142
Cavanagh, S. (2014). NAEP outlines plans to deploy tablets for tests. Education Week, 33(29), 1-
13. Retrieved from http://0 search.proquest.com.liucat.lib.liu.edu/docview/1520763107?
accountid=12142
Crawford, L., Higgins, K. N., Huscroft-d'angelo, J.,N., & Hall, L. (2016). Students' use of
electronic support tools in mathematics. Educational Technology, Research and
Development, 64(6), 1163-1182. http://0dx.doi.org.liucat.lib.liu.edu/10.1007/s11423-016-
9452-7
Enzmann, D. (n.d.). Sortl [Data file]. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
New York State Education Department. (2017). New York State Mathematics Next Generation
Standards. Retrieved from http://www.nysed.gov/common/nysed/files/nys-next-
generation-mathematics-p-12-standards.pdf
Project Tomorrow. (2010). Creating our future: Students speak up about their vision for 21st
century learning. Retrieved from
http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SU09NationalFindingsStudents&Parents.pdf.
Red Owl, R. H. (2018). Factabexcel [Data file]. College Station, TX: Stata Press
Table 1
Factor Loadings (After Varimax Rotation With Kaiser Normalization)

Factor Factor
Variable Factor3 U Label
1 2
TBMSTMTR .72 .04 .02 .48 Math is characterized by rigor of definition and formal argumentation.
TBMSTMTL .63 .19 .13 .55 Fundamental to mathematics is its logical rigor and preciseness.
TBMSTMTH .61 .14 -.10 .60 Definitional rigor is essential for mathematics with exact/precise language.
TBMSTMTE .55 .02 .06 .69 Math involves remembering/applying definitions, formulas, facts and procedures.
TBMSTMTI .55 -.19 .09 .66 To solve mathematical tasks you must know the correct procedure or be lost.
TBMSTMTS .52 -.05 .17 .70 Mathematics requires practice correctly applying routines and strategies.
TBMSTMTD .51 .24 -.01 .69 Hallmarks of mathematics are clarity, precision and unambiguousness.
TBMSTMTT .50 -.12 .33 .63 Mathematics means learning, remembering, and applying.
TBMSTMTA .29 -.20 .16 .85 Math is a collection of prescribed rules and procedures.
TBMSTMTB .26 .22 .04 .88 Mathematical thought is characterized by abstraction and logic.
TBMSTMT
M .06 .63 .08 .60 Mathematical problems can be solved correctly in many ways.
TBMSTMTG -.10 .62 .09 .59 In mathematics many things can be discovered and tried out by oneself.
TBMSTMTJ .01 .54 .13 .69 If one engages in mathematical tasks, one can discover new things.
TBMSTMTO -.14 .52 .26 .64 Every person can discover or rediscover mathematics.
TBMSTMTF .11 .49 .11 .73 Mathematics means creativity and new ideas.
TBMSTMTP -.04 .49 .42 .59 Many aspects of mathematics have practical relevance.
TBMSTMTC .19 .48 .09 .73 Usually there is more than one way to solve mathematical tasks and problems.
TBMSTMTK .11 .39 .33 .72 Mathematics entails a fundamental benefit for society.
TBMSTMTN -.01 .26 .53 .65 Mathematics is useful for every profession.
TBMSTMTQ .03 .46 .49 .55 Mathematics help solve everyday problems and tasks.
TBMROLEC -.03 .19 .48 .73 Mathematics is needed for many jobs and careers.
TBMROLED .25 .03 .48 .71 To succeed in school, it is important to have learned math.
TBMROLEB .23 .11 .47 .72 To be a well-educated person, it is important to study math.
TBMROLEA .22 .24 .30 .80 Mathematics helps you learn to think better.
EV 3.08 2.86 1.90

% of
Variance 38.82 35.94 23.93
Note. Total % variance = 98.692, Note. Factor 1 = rigor; Factor 2 = creativity; Factor 3 = application; U = uniqueness.
Figure 1. Scree plot of the initial, unrotated solution, shows that the first three factors account for
most of the total variability in the data.
Figure 2. Histogram displays statistically significant one-tail t-test between pre-service teachers
inside and outside the U.S on the factor of rigor (Factor 1).
Figure 3. Histogram displays non-statistically significant one-tail t-test between pre-service

teachers inside and outside the U.S on the factor of creativity (Factor 2).
Figure 4. Histogram displays non-statistically significant one-tail t-test between pre-service

teachers inside and outside the U.S on the factor of application (Factor 3).
Appendix A
Stata Log With Commands and Output

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
name: <unnamed>
log: C:\Users\Public\Documents\DAP1-log.txt
log type: text
opened on: 15 Feb 2018, 12:23:09
.
. *****************************************
.
. ** DAP 1 - Exploratory Factor Analysis **
.
. *****************************************
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 3a
.
. * Load Future Teacher Survey (2012) data set from the web.
.
. use "http://datalibrary.us/DAP1.dta", clear
(ICPSR 34430 Mathematics Teaching in the 21st Century Future Teacher Survey 2012)
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 3b
.
. * Display codebook.
.
. codebook, compact
Variable Obs Unique Mean Min Max Label

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
COUNTRY 2628 6 . . . Country
TDGENDER 2621 2 1.412438 1 2 Gender (0 = Male 1 = Female)
TBMROLEA 1318 6 4.08346 0 5 Mathematics helps you learn to think better.
TBMROLEB 1316 6 3.069149 0 5 To be a well-educated person, it is important to study math.
TBMROLEC 1317 6 3.990888 0 5 Mathematics is needed for many jobs and careers.
TBMROLED 1314 6 3.395738 0 5 To succeed in school, it is important to have learned math.
TBMSTMTA 2543 6 3.375934 1 6 Math is a collection of prescribed rules and procedures.
TBMSTMTB 2549 6 4.704982 1 6 Mathematical thought is characterized by abstraction and logic.
TBMSTMTC 2544 6 5.523192 1 6 Usually there is more than one way to solve mathematical tasks and problems.
TBMSTMTD 2549 6 4.572381 1 6 Hallmarks of mathematics are clarity, precision and unambiguousness.
TBMSTMTE 2544 6 4.531447 1 6 Math involves remembering/applying definitions, formulas, facts and
proced...
TBMSTMTF 2539 6 4.594722 1 6 Mathematics means creativity and new ideas.
TBMSTMTG 2537 6 4.763106 1 6 In mathematics many things can be discovered and tried out by oneself.
TBMSTMTH 2545 6 4.601179 1 6 Definitional rigor is essential for mathematics with exact/precise language.
TBMSTMTI 2540 6 3.414961 1 6 To solve mathematical tasks you must know the correct procedure or be lost.
TBMSTMTJ 2534 6 4.923836 1 6 If one engages in mathematical tasks, one can discover new things.
TBMSTMTK 2530 6 4.877866 1 6 Mathematics entails a fundamental benefit for society.
TBMSTMTL 2526 6 4.416469 1 6 Fundamental to mathematics is its logical rigor and preciseness.
TBMSTMTM 2536 6 5.358044 1 6 Mathematical problems can be solved correctly in many ways.
TBMSTMTN 2531 6 4.758989 1 6 Mathematics is useful for every profession.
TBMSTMTO 2529 6 4.665085 1 6 Every person can discover or rediscover mathematics.
TBMSTMTP 2531 6 4.786646 1 6 Many aspects of mathematics have practical relevance.
TBMSTMTQ 2524 6 4.807052 1 6 Mathematics help solve everyday problems and tasks.
TBMSTMTR 2526 6 4.059778 1 6 Math is characterized by rigor of definition and formal argumentation.
TBMSTMTS 2528 6 4.528481 1 6 Mathematics requires practice correctly applying routines and strategies.
TBMSTMTT 2533 6 3.84169 1 6 Mathematics means learning, remembering, and applying.
TBWOLRNA 1311 6 4.742944 1 6 The best way to do well in mathematics is to memorize all the formulas.
TBWOLRNB 1304 6 3.721626 1 6 Students need to be taught exact procedures for solving mathematical
probl...
TBWOLRNC 1304 6 5.320552 1 6 Understanding a math problem doesn't matter if you get the right answer.
TBWOLRND 1296 6 3.682099 1 6 To be successful in mathematics, a student must be a good listener.
TBWOLRNE 1293 6 2.213457 1 6 To be good in mathematics you must be able to solve problems quickly.
TBWOLRNF 1299 6 3.372594 1 6 Students learn mathematics best by attending to the teacher's explanations.
TBWOLRNG 1302 6 2.048387 1 6 More emphasis should be put on getting right answers than on the process.
TBWOLRNH 1299 6 5.504234 1 6 Beyond right answers in math, it's important to understand why they're
cor...
TBWOLRNI 1290 6 5.016279 1 6 We should let students having difficulty with a word problem to try to
sol...
TBWOLRNJ 1294 6 5.272025 1 6 We should allow students to figure out their own ways to solve math
problems.
TBWOLRNK 1287 6 2.393162 1 6 Nonstandard procedures should be avoided since they can interfere with
lea...
TBWOLRNL 1284 6 5.338006 1 6 Hands-on math experiences aren't worth the time and expense.
TBWOLRNM 1287 6 4.68143 1 6 Time spent on why a problem's mathematical solution is right is time
well ...
TBWOLRNN 1289 6 4.128782 1 6 One can learn a lot by watching an expert mathematician think aloud.
TBWOLRNO 1280 6 4.638281 1 6 Students can figure out a way to solve mathematical problems without our
h...
TBWOLRNP 1281 6 4.675254 1 6 We must encourage students to find their own math solutions, even messy
ones.
TBWOLRNQ 1284 6 5.327882 1 6 It's helpful for students to discuss different ways to solve problems.
TBWOLRNR 1288 6 4.485248 1 6 For students to get better at mathematics they need to practice a lot.
TBWKGRP1 1273 6 2.874313 0 5 There is too much time pressure from the curriculum for group work.
TBWKGRP2 1273 6 2.183818 0 5 There's too much planning and preparation involved in using student
group ...
TBWKGRP3 1262 6 1.583201 0 5 Student work groups are seldom used by other teachers.
TBWKGRP4 1271 6 1.842644 0 5 Students are not familiar with the student group work approach.
TBWKGRP5 1262 6 2.495246 0 5 Student work groups are too chaotic and noisy.
TBWKGRP6 1266 6 2.578989 0 5 There are too many students in classes for the group approach work well.
TBWKGRP7 1266 6 1.262243 0 5 Student work groups are only appropriate for the introducing new content.
TBWKGRP8 1266 6 2.112954 0 5 There are not enough appropriate materials to use for the group approach.
TBWKGRP9 1267 6 3.006314 0 5 Group work makes it too easy for students to goof off.
TBIAEMPA 1263 6 3.806017 0 5 Explaining mathematical ideas to the whole class is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPB 1266 6 3.421011 0 5 Having students work in small groups is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPC 1258 6 3.557234 0 5 Having students work on mathematical problems alone is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPD 1256 6 3.583599 0 5 Reviewing homework intensely is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPE 1255 6 3.477291 0 5 Working out math problems at the board as a teacher is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPF 1248 6 3.892628 0 5 Having students work out math problems at the board is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPG 1255 6 2.890837 0 5 Having students make oral reports in math class is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPH 1253 6 3.327215 0 5 Having students do special projects on mathematics is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPI 1251 6 3.752998 0 5 Organizing student discussions of math problems is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPJ 1254 6 3.367624 0 5 Measuring student achievement with written tests is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPK 1236 6 3.509709 0 5 Diagnosing student learning with formative assessments is very appropriate.
TBIAEMPL 1244 6 3.756431 0 5 Having students write about their thinking in mathematics is very
appropri...
TBTROLE1 1249 6 3.972778 0 5 I believe that teachers can often learn from students during mathematics
t...
TBTROLE2 1249 6 3.39952 0 5 If a student asks a question in mathematics, the teacher should know the
a...
TBTROLE3 1247 6 2.436247 0 5 A teacher must serve as the judge of what is or is not correct.
TBTROLE4 1242 6 3.958132 0 5 The role of the teacher is to impart knowledge to students.
TBTROLE5 1247 6 3.828388 0 5 A teacher creates learning opportunities but learning must be done by
stud...
TBSNAPA 1198 6 5.224541 1 6 The main job of schooling supporting the personal development of each
stud...
TBSNAPB 1180 6 3.827119 1 6 The main job of schooling is fairer sorting of children than happens
elsew...
TBSNAPC 1191 6 4.940386 1 6 The main job of schooling is to develop children to improve society.
TBSNAPD 1183 6 3.422654 1 6 The main job of schooling is to sort children fairly in a diverse society.
TBSNAPE 1193 6 5.217938 1 6 The main job of schooling is to transmit knowledge and skills.
TBSNAPF 1180 6 4.34322 1 6 The main job of schooling is to sort students objectively for future life.
TBSNAPG 1185 6 5.361181 1 6 The main job of schooling is to develop each pupil's potential.
TBSNAPH 1189 6 4.238015 1 6 The main job of schooling is to protect pupils against social pressures.
TBSNAPI 1185 6 4.324895 1 6 The main job of schooling is to transmit the values of the national culture.
TBDIVSEA 1182 6 4.263113 1 6 We should avoid grouping students by ability or level of performance.
TBDIVSEB 1183 6 3.34235 1 6 Teachers with slow learners should focus mostly on minimum competency.
TBDIVSEC 1179 6 4.768448 1 6 We should give problems that force better students to go beyond examples.
TBDIVSED 1177 6 3.081563 1 6 It's impractical for us to tailor instruction to different students.
TBDIVSEE 1167 6 3.850043 1 6 Regular students benefit by being in classes with special needs students.
TBDIVSEF 1169 6 4.223268 1 6 Students with special needs benefit from being taught in a regular
classroom.
TBDIVSEG 1166 6 3.531732 1 6 Students with special needs learn academic subjects best when taught
separ...
TBGDTEAA 1177 6 4.187766 0 5 It's very important for me to develop my own style of teaching.
TBGDTEAB 1175 6 2.754043 0 5 It's very important that I copy techniques from other teachers at school.
TBGDTEAC 1172 6 3.321672 0 5 It's very important that I read research to be a good teacher.
TBGDTEAD 1172 6 3.357509 0 5 It's very important that I obtain the good teaching techniques from
textbo...
TBGDTEAE 1171 6 3.04953 0 5 It's very important that I learn the school policies on teaching techniques.
TBGDTEAF 1174 6 3.918228 0 5 It's very important that I observe other math teachers and talk with them.
TBGDTEAG 1170 6 3.117949 0 5 It's very important that I take more courses at a college or university.
TBDISTRA 1136 6 4.529049 1 6 Even if I'm disrupted, I can maintain my composure and continue to teach
w...
TBDISTRB 1132 6 4.619258 1 6 I know that I can motivate my students to participate in innovative
projects.
TBDISTRC 1132 6 4.587456 1 6 When I try really hard, I am able to reach even the most difficult students.
TBDISTRD 1130 6 4.436283 1 6 I can maintain a positive relationship with parents even when tensions
arise.
TBDISTRE 1126 6 4.430728 1 6 I can carry out innovative projects even when opposed by skeptical
colleag...
TBDISTRF 1129 6 5.249779 1 6 I am convinced that I will increasingly capable to address my students'
ne...
TBDISTRG 1126 6 4.412966 1 6 I can successfully teach relevant content even to the most difficult
stude...
TBDISTRH 1127 6 5.021295 1 6 If I try hard enough, I can positively influence my students' development.
TBDISTRI 1123 6 4.666073 1 6 I know I can develop creative ways to teach well and also cope with the
sy...
TBDISTRJ 1126 6 4.671403 1 6 I'm confident I can be responsive to my students' needs even on bad days.
TBTPROF1 1111 6 5.061206 1 6 Being a lower secondary teacher of mathematics is something to be proud of.
TBTPROF2 1109 6 2.116321 1 6 This profession offers very few satisfactions.
TBTPROF3 1107 6 2.30533 1 6 I often think that I would like to choose a different career.
TBTPROF4 1110 6 5.236937 1 6 The teaching profession is very important for my country.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 4
.
. * Generate a new variable usa to compare USA respondents
.
. * to respondents from other countries.
.
. gen usa = 0 if !missing(COUNTRY)
.
. replace usa = 1 if COUNTRY == "USA"
(384 real changes made)
.
. label var usa "Respondent Origin (1=USA 0=Other)"
.
. label def usaval 0 "Other" 1 "USA"
.
. label val usa usaval
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 5
.
. * Conduct initial, unrotated EFA.
.
. factor TBMROLEA - TBMSTMTT
(obs=1,207)
Factor analysis/correlation Number of obs = 1,207

Method: principal factors Retained factors = 11
Rotation: (unrotated) Number of params = 209
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factor | Eigenvalue Difference Proportion Cumulative
-------------+------------------------------------------------------------
Factor1 | 4.19611 1.50028 0.5281 0.5281
Factor2 | 2.69583 1.74600 0.3393 0.8674

Factor3 | 0.94982 0.33747 0.1195 0.9869
Factor4 | 0.61236 0.17187 0.0771 1.0640
Factor5 | 0.44049 0.05984 0.0554 1.1194
Factor6 | 0.38064 0.11853 0.0479 1.1673
Factor7 | 0.26211 0.11720 0.0330 1.2003
Factor8 | 0.14491 0.05988 0.0182 1.2186
Factor9 | 0.08503 0.04469 0.0107 1.2293
Factor10 | 0.04034 0.01273 0.0051 1.2343
Factor11 | 0.02761 0.03258 0.0035 1.2378
Factor12 | -0.00497 0.03889 -0.0006 1.2372
Factor13 | -0.04386 0.01207 -0.0055 1.2317
Factor14 | -0.05593 0.00660 -0.0070 1.2246
Factor15 | -0.06253 0.03969 -0.0079 1.2167
Factor16 | -0.10222 0.02814 -0.0129 1.2039
Factor17 | -0.13036 0.02953 -0.0164 1.1875
Factor18 | -0.15990 0.01698 -0.0201 1.1674
Factor19 | -0.17687 0.01414 -0.0223 1.1451
Factor20 | -0.19101 0.01770 -0.0240 1.1211
Factor21 | -0.20871 0.01560 -0.0263 1.0948
Factor22 | -0.22431 0.02538 -0.0282 1.0666
Factor23 | -0.24969 0.02945 -0.0314 1.0351
Factor24 | -0.27915 . -0.0351 1.0000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LR test: independent vs. saturated: chi2(276) = 7575.89 Prob>chi2 = 0.0000
Factor loadings (pattern matrix) and unique variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variable | Factor1 Factor2 Factor3 Factor4 Factor5 Factor6 Factor7 Factor8 Factor9 Factor10
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TBMROLEA | 0.4376 -0.0023 0.0827 -0.2808 0.0649 -0.0671 0.0257 0.0646 -0.0443 -0.0803
TBMROLEB | 0.4447 0.0573 0.2857 -0.3444 0.0664 -0.0336 -0.0888 -0.0102 0.0453 -0.0028
TBMROLEC | 0.3651 -0.2090 0.3093 -0.2024 -0.1512 0.0200 0.1169 -0.0311 -0.0587 0.0689
TBMROLED | 0.4103 0.1141 0.3370 -0.2164 0.1649 -0.0380 -0.0869 -0.0549 0.0322 0.0472
TBMSTMTA | 0.1121 0.3220 0.1797 0.0713 0.1104 0.1149 0.2294 0.1266 0.0835 0.0155
TBMSTMTB | 0.3109 0.0803 -0.1359 -0.1209 0.0114 0.0500 0.2584 0.1655 0.0021 -0.0102
TBMSTMTC | 0.4598 -0.1372 -0.2091 -0.0428 0.1101 0.3418 -0.1444 0.0008 -0.0025 0.0067
TBMSTMTD | 0.4322 0.2714 -0.2306 -0.0795 -0.0780 -0.0696 -0.0691 0.0980 -0.0176 0.0140
TBMSTMTE | 0.3511 0.4281 -0.0681 0.0343 0.0525 0.0815 0.0745 -0.0286 -0.0935 0.0310
TBMSTMTF | 0.4335 -0.2124 -0.1795 -0.0603 0.2571 -0.1460 -0.0654 0.0284 -0.0816 -0.0044
TBMSTMTG | 0.3924 -0.4506 -0.2221 0.0727 0.2044 -0.1552 0.0623 0.0057 -0.0296 0.0283
TBMSTMTH | 0.3752 0.4249 -0.2835 -0.0896 -0.1821 -0.0565 0.0402 -0.0791 -0.0523 0.0705
TBMSTMTI | 0.2297 0.5346 0.0638 0.2145 0.1407 -0.0681 -0.0363 0.0193 0.0488 0.0341
TBMSTMTJ | 0.4244 -0.3161 -0.1696 0.0194 0.0777 -0.1363 0.1351 -0.1089 0.0391 -0.0200
TBMSTMTK | 0.4901 -0.1842 0.0547 -0.0619 -0.1792 0.0219 0.0304 -0.0887 0.0872 -0.0569
TBMSTMTL | 0.5427 0.3795 -0.1158 -0.0081 -0.1679 -0.0757 -0.1113 0.0846 0.0806 -0.0417
TBMSTMTM | 0.4796 -0.3183 -0.2650 -0.0198 0.0379 0.3264 -0.0198 -0.0332 0.0434 0.0012
TBMSTMTN | 0.4419 -0.2321 0.3120 0.2033 -0.0402 0.0948 -0.0573 0.0657 -0.0122 0.0635
TBMSTMTO | 0.3993 -0.4477 -0.0257 0.1719 0.0590 -0.1388 0.0292 -0.0247 0.1329 0.0397
TBMSTMTP | 0.5109 -0.3743 0.1051 0.1782 -0.2415 -0.0460 0.0253 -0.0020 -0.0597 -0.0155
TBMSTMTQ | 0.5668 -0.3164 0.1634 0.2128 -0.1139 -0.0003 -0.0443 0.0825 -0.0634 -0.0333
TBMSTMTR | 0.4397 0.5542 -0.1496 0.0732 -0.1029 -0.0839 -0.0758 -0.0116 0.0376 0.0212
TBMSTMTS | 0.3469 0.4241 0.0607 0.0693 0.0286 0.0826 0.1571 -0.1849 -0.0161 -0.0428
TBMSTMTT | 0.3789 0.4181 0.2378 0.2688 0.1793 0.0174 -0.0400 -0.0360 -0.0572 -0.0616
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
Variable | Factor11 | Uniqueness
-------------+----------+--------------
TBMROLEA | 0.0376 | 0.6995
TBMROLEB | -0.0165 | 0.5829
TBMROLEC | 0.0059 | 0.6403
TBMROLED | -0.0247 | 0.6152
TBMSTMTA | -0.0106 | 0.7450
TBMSTMTB | 0.0098 | 0.7669
TBMSTMTC | -0.0099 | 0.5742
TBMSTMTD | -0.0690 | 0.6494
TBMSTMTE | -0.0691 | 0.6574
TBMSTMTF | 0.0392 | 0.6304
TBMSTMTG | 0.0198 | 0.5165
TBMSTMTH | 0.0312 | 0.5373
TBMSTMTI | 0.0242 | 0.5811
TBMSTMTJ | -0.0418 | 0.6324
TBMSTMTK | 0.0053 | 0.6668
TBMSTMTL | 0.0069 | 0.4862
TBMSTMTM | 0.0094 | 0.4865
TBMSTMTN | 0.0504 | 0.5872
TBMSTMTO | -0.0185 | 0.5662
TBMSTMTP | -0.0448 | 0.4892
TBMSTMTQ | 0.0164 | 0.4795

TBMSTMTR | 0.0362 | 0.4452
TBMSTMTS | 0.0482 | 0.6204
TBMSTMTT | -0.0354 | 0.5092
---------------------------------------
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 6a
.
. * Create a scree plot of eigenvalues from unrotated factors.
.
. * This scree plot will be Figure 1 in your DAP1 narrative.
.
. * Note: The following code must be on a single line.
.
. scree, yline(1, lcolor(red)) ylabel(0(.5)4, labsize(vsmall) angle(hor) format(%3.1f)) ytitle(Eigenvalue)
xlabel(0(1)25,
> alt labsize(vsmall) format(%2.0f) grid) xtitle(Factor Number) title("") scheme(s1color) name(DAP1screeplot, replace)
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 6b
.
. * Export the scree plot as a high resolution graph file to the working directory.
.
. graph export DAP1-screeplot.tif, width(800) replace
(note: file DAP1-screeplot.tif not found)
(file DAP1-screeplot.tif written in TIFF format)
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 7
.
. * Conduct initial, unrotated EFA.
.
. factor TBMROLEA - TBMSTMTT, factors(3)
(obs=1,207)

Rotation: (unrotated) Number of params = 69
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factor | Eigenvalue Difference Proportion Cumulative
-------------+------------------------------------------------------------
Factor1 | 4.19611 1.50028 0.5281 0.5281
Factor2 | 2.69583 1.74600 0.3393 0.8674
Factor3 | 0.94982 0.33747 0.1195 0.9869
Factor4 | 0.61236 0.17187 0.0771 1.0640
Factor5 | 0.44049 0.05984 0.0554 1.1194
Factor6 | 0.38064 0.11853 0.0479 1.1673
Factor7 | 0.26211 0.11720 0.0330 1.2003
Factor8 | 0.14491 0.05988 0.0182 1.2186
Factor9 | 0.08503 0.04469 0.0107 1.2293
Factor10 | 0.04034 0.01273 0.0051 1.2343
Factor11 | 0.02761 0.03258 0.0035 1.2378
Factor12 | -0.00497 0.03889 -0.0006 1.2372
Factor13 | -0.04386 0.01207 -0.0055 1.2317
Factor14 | -0.05593 0.00660 -0.0070 1.2246
Factor15 | -0.06253 0.03969 -0.0079 1.2167
Factor16 | -0.10222 0.02814 -0.0129 1.2039
Factor17 | -0.13036 0.02953 -0.0164 1.1875
Factor18 | -0.15990 0.01698 -0.0201 1.1674

Factor19 | -0.17687 0.01414 -0.0223 1.1451
Factor20 | -0.19101 0.01770 -0.0240 1.1211
Factor21 | -0.20871 0.01560 -0.0263 1.0948
Factor22 | -0.22431 0.02538 -0.0282 1.0666
Factor23 | -0.24969 0.02945 -0.0314 1.0351
Factor24 | -0.27915 . -0.0351 1.0000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factor loadings (pattern matrix) and unique variances
-----------------------------------------------------------
Variable | Factor1 Factor2 Factor3 | Uniqueness
-------------+------------------------------+--------------
TBMROLEA | 0.4376 -0.0023 0.0827 | 0.8017
TBMROLEB | 0.4447 0.0573 0.2857 | 0.7174
TBMROLEC | 0.3651 -0.2090 0.3093 | 0.7274
TBMROLED | 0.4103 0.1141 0.3370 | 0.7051
TBMSTMTA | 0.1121 0.3220 0.1797 | 0.8515
TBMSTMTB | 0.3109 0.0803 -0.1359 | 0.8785
TBMSTMTC | 0.4598 -0.1372 -0.2091 | 0.7260
TBMSTMTD | 0.4322 0.2714 -0.2306 | 0.6863
TBMSTMTE | 0.3511 0.4281 -0.0681 | 0.6888
TBMSTMTF | 0.4335 -0.2124 -0.1795 | 0.7347
TBMSTMTG | 0.3924 -0.4506 -0.2221 | 0.5937
TBMSTMTH | 0.3752 0.4249 -0.2835 | 0.5983
TBMSTMTI | 0.2297 0.5346 0.0638 | 0.6574
TBMSTMTJ | 0.4244 -0.3161 -0.1696 | 0.6912
TBMSTMTK | 0.4901 -0.1842 0.0547 | 0.7229
TBMSTMTL | 0.5427 0.3795 -0.1158 | 0.5480
TBMSTMTM | 0.4796 -0.3183 -0.2650 | 0.5984
TBMSTMTN | 0.4419 -0.2321 0.3120 | 0.6535
TBMSTMTO | 0.3993 -0.4477 -0.0257 | 0.6395
TBMSTMTP | 0.5109 -0.3743 0.1051 | 0.5878
TBMSTMTQ | 0.5668 -0.3164 0.1634 | 0.5519
TBMSTMTR | 0.4397 0.5542 -0.1496 | 0.4772
TBMSTMTS | 0.3469 0.4241 0.0607 | 0.6961
TBMSTMTT | 0.3789 0.4181 0.2378 | 0.6251
-----------------------------------------------------------
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 8
.
. * Rotate the 3 factors using varimax orthogonal rotation with Kaiser normalization.
.
. rotate, orthogonal varimax normalize

Rotation: orthogonal varimax (Kaiser on) Number of params = 69
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factor | Variance Difference Proportion Cumulative
-------------+------------------------------------------------------------
Factor1 | 3.08419 0.22839 0.3882 0.3882
Factor2 | 2.85579 0.95401 0.3594 0.7476
Factor3 | 1.90178 . 0.2393 0.9869
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rotated factor loadings (pattern matrix) and unique variances
-----------------------------------------------------------
-------------+------------------------------+--------------
TBMROLEA | 0.2237 0.2400 0.3011 | 0.8017
TBMROLEB | 0.2346 0.1065 0.4650 | 0.7174
TBMROLEC | -0.0293 0.1949 0.4835 | 0.7274
TBMROLED | 0.2510 0.0257 0.4809 | 0.7051
TBMSTMTA | 0.2856 -0.2035 0.1598 | 0.8515
TBMSTMTB | 0.2646 0.2237 0.0389 | 0.8785
TBMSTMTC | 0.1864 0.4808 0.0902 | 0.7260
TBMSTMTD | 0.5054 0.2413 -0.0051 | 0.6863
TBMSTMTE | 0.5540 0.0167 0.0634 | 0.6888

TBMSTMTF | 0.1050 0.4915 0.1125 | 0.7347
TBMSTMTG | -0.1014 0.6226 0.0918 | 0.5937
TBMSTMTH | 0.6085 0.1444 -0.1031 | 0.5983
TBMSTMTI | 0.5460 -0.1896 0.0927 | 0.6574
TBMSTMTJ | 0.0143 0.5396 0.1319 | 0.6912
TBMSTMTK | 0.1116 0.3917 0.3335 | 0.7229
TBMSTMTL | 0.6306 0.1918 0.1326 | 0.5480
TBMSTMTM | 0.0625 0.6253 0.0819 | 0.5984
TBMSTMTN | -0.0060 0.2561 0.5300 | 0.6535
TBMSTMTO | -0.1351 0.5247 0.2588 | 0.6395
TBMSTMTP | -0.0406 0.4875 0.4158 | 0.5878
TBMSTMTQ | 0.0253 0.4606 0.4851 | 0.5519
TBMSTMTR | 0.7214 0.0435 0.0230 | 0.4772
TBMSTMTS | 0.5223 -0.0499 0.1692 | 0.6961
TBMSTMTT | 0.4992 -0.1167 0.3348 | 0.6251
-----------------------------------------------------------
Factor rotation matrix
-----------------------------------------
| Factor1 Factor2 Factor3
-------------+---------------------------
Factor1 | 0.5539 0.6424 0.5297
Factor2 | 0.8074 -0.5696 -0.1536
Factor3 | -0.2030 -0.5128 0.8342
-----------------------------------------
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 9
.
. * Save the factor scores for the 3 varimax-rotated factors to the data set in memory.
.
. * Note: The factor names F1-F3 are at the researcher's discretion. Please use these for now.
.
. predict F1-F3
(regression scoring assumed)
Scoring coefficients (method = regression; based on varimax rotated factors)
--------------------------------------------
Variable | Factor1 Factor2 Factor3
-------------+------------------------------
TBMROLEA | 0.03277 0.02732 0.08026
TBMROLEB | 0.02773 -0.03924 0.19711
TBMROLEC | -0.03710 -0.01595 0.19399
TBMROLED | 0.02882 -0.06596 0.20636
TBMSTMTA | 0.05871 -0.07476 0.07082
TBMSTMTB | 0.05816 0.05106 -0.02524
TBMSTMTC | 0.04503 0.14335 -0.05229
TBMSTMTD | 0.12343 0.07710 -0.07613
TBMSTMTE | 0.13547 -0.00423 -0.01232
TBMSTMTF | 0.02137 0.13927 -0.03454
TBMSTMTG | -0.03363 0.21735 -0.06083
TBMSTMTH | 0.18422 0.07224 -0.13056
TBMSTMTI | 0.13620 -0.08216 0.03625
TBMSTMTJ | -0.00154 0.15161 -0.02726
TBMSTMTK | 0.00358 0.06560 0.08390
TBMSTMTL | 0.18320 0.05588 -0.02053
TBMSTMTM | 0.01722 0.22460 -0.07871
TBMSTMTN | -0.04406 -0.00814 0.21490
TBMSTMTO | -0.06163 0.13392 0.04982
TBMSTMTP | -0.05307 0.10916 0.13753
TBMSTMTQ | -0.03769 0.08446 0.18663
TBMSTMTR | 0.24421 0.01295 -0.06849
TBMSTMTS | 0.12019 -0.04221 0.05235
TBMSTMTT | 0.12629 -0.10977 0.15775
--------------------------------------------
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 10a
.
. * Install/update the sortl.ado program to sort the rotated factor loadings.
.
. * Note: The final character in the program name is a lower-case "l" rather
.
. * than the number 1.
.
. * You will need to cite this program in your References list.
.
. ssc install sortl, replace
checking sortl consistency and verifying not already installed...
all files already exist and are up to date.
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 10b
.
. * Sort the rotated factor loadings with sortl.
.
. sortl
Rotated factor loadings (pattern matrix) and unique variances sorted
----------------------------------------------------------
-------------+------------------------------+-------------
TBMSTMTR | 0.7214 0.0435 0.0230 | 0.4772
TBMSTMTL | 0.6306 0.1918 0.1326 | 0.5480

TBMSTMTH | 0.6085 0.1444 -0.1031 | 0.5983
TBMSTMTE | 0.5540 0.0167 0.0634 | 0.6888
TBMSTMTI | 0.5460 -0.1896 0.0927 | 0.6574
TBMSTMTS | 0.5223 -0.0499 0.1692 | 0.6961
TBMSTMTD | 0.5054 0.2413 -0.0051 | 0.6863
TBMSTMTT | 0.4992 -0.1167 0.3348 | 0.6251
TBMSTMTA | 0.2856 -0.2035 0.1598 | 0.8515
TBMSTMTB | 0.2646 0.2237 0.0389 | 0.8785
TBMSTMTM | 0.0625 0.6253 0.0819 | 0.5984
TBMSTMTG | -0.1014 0.6226 0.0918 | 0.5937
TBMSTMTJ | 0.0143 0.5396 0.1319 | 0.6912
TBMSTMTO | -0.1351 0.5247 0.2588 | 0.6395
TBMSTMTF | 0.1050 0.4915 0.1125 | 0.7347
TBMSTMTP | -0.0406 0.4875 0.4158 | 0.5878
TBMSTMTC | 0.1864 0.4808 0.0902 | 0.7260
TBMSTMTK | 0.1116 0.3917 0.3335 | 0.7229
TBMSTMTN | -0.0060 0.2561 0.5300 | 0.6535
TBMSTMTQ | 0.0253 0.4606 0.4851 | 0.5519
TBMROLEC | -0.0293 0.1949 0.4835 | 0.7274
TBMROLED | 0.2510 0.0257 0.4809 | 0.7051
TBMROLEB | 0.2346 0.1065 0.4650 | 0.7174
TBMROLEA | 0.2237 0.2400 0.3011 | 0.8017
----------------------------------------------------------
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 11a
.
. * Load Red Owl's factabexcel.do program to use in adding variable labels
.
. * to the factor loadings table and exporting the sorted and labeled table
.
. * to an Excel file.
.
. * You will need to cite this program in your References list.
.
. run "http://datalibrary.us/factabexcel.do"
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 11b
.
. * Run the factabexcel.do program to add variable labels, eigenvalues, and proportion
.
. * of variance explained to the rotated factor loadings table, add labels, and export
.
. * the Excel file Table1.xlsx to the working directory. After running this step, you
.
. * will find the Excel file dap1Table1.xlsx in the current working directory on your
.
. * computer.
.
. putexcel set DAP1-Table1.xlsx, sheet(FactorLoadings) replace
Note: file will be replaced when the first putexcel command is issued
.
. putexcel close
.
. factabexcel DAP1-Table1.xlsx FactorLoadings
(1 real change made)


(2,604 observations deleted)
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Variable | Factor1 | Factor2 | Factor3 | U |
| TBMSTMTR | 0.721 | 0.043 | 0.023 | .4772312 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Math is characterized by rigor of definition and formal argumentation. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTL | 0.631 | 0.192 | 0.133 | .5479945 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Fundamental to mathematics is its logical rigor and preciseness. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTH | 0.608 | 0.144 | -0.103 | .5982719 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Definitional rigor is essential for mathematics with exact/precise language. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTE | 0.554 | 0.017 | 0.063 | .688837 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Math involves remembering/applying definitions, formulas, facts and procedures. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

| TBMSTMTI | 0.546 | -0.190 | 0.093 | .657378 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| To solve mathematical tasks you must know the correct procedure or be lost. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTS | 0.522 | -0.050 | 0.169 | .696108 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics requires practice correctly applying routines and strategies. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTD | 0.505 | 0.241 | -0.005 | .6863058 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Hallmarks of mathematics are clarity, precision and unambiguousness. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTT | 0.499 | -0.117 | 0.335 | .6251018 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics means learning, remembering, and applying. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTA | 0.286 | -0.204 | 0.160 | .8514827 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Math is a collection of prescribed rules and procedures. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

| TBMSTMTB | 0.265 | 0.224 | 0.039 | .8784515 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematical thought is characterized by abstraction and logic. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTM | 0.062 | 0.625 | 0.082 | .5983751 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematical problems can be solved correctly in many ways. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTG | -0.101 | 0.623 | 0.092 | .5936618 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| In mathematics many things can be discovered and tried out by oneself. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTJ | 0.014 | 0.540 | 0.132 | .6911991 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| If one engages in mathematical tasks, one can discover new things. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTO | -0.135 | 0.525 | 0.259 | .6395023 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Every person can discover or rediscover mathematics. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

| TBMSTMTF | 0.105 | 0.492 | 0.113 | .7346869 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics means creativity and new ideas. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTP | -0.041 | 0.487 | 0.416 | .5878402 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Many aspects of mathematics have practical relevance. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTC | 0.186 | 0.481 | 0.090 | .7260118 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Usually there is more than one way to solve mathematical tasks and problems. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTK | 0.112 | 0.392 | 0.334 | .7228834 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics entails a fundamental benefit for society. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMSTMTN | -0.006 | 0.256 | 0.530 | .6534831 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics is useful for every profession. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

| TBMSTMTQ | 0.025 | 0.461 | 0.485 | .5519224 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics help solve everyday problems and tasks. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMROLEC | -0.029 | 0.195 | 0.484 | .7273567 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics is needed for many jobs and careers. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMROLED | 0.251 | 0.026 | 0.481 | .7050768 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| To succeed in school, it is important to have learned math. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMROLEB | 0.235 | 0.107 | 0.465 | .717373 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| To be a well-educated person, it is important to study math. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TBMROLEA | 0.224 | 0.240 | 0.301 | .8017031 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Label |
| Mathematics helps you learn to think better. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Factor1 Factor2 Factor3

-------------+------------------------------
Eigenvalue | 3.084 2.856 1.902
% Variance | 38.816 35.941 23.935
Total % Variance Explained = 98.692
file DAP1-Table1.xlsx saved


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 12
.
. * After saving the Excel file DAP1-Table1.xlsx in STEP 11b above into the current working
.
. * directory, open it in Excel and make the necessary manual modifications for APA style.
.
. * You will need to change the font to 12-point Times New Roman and bold-face the factor
.
. * loadings that satisfy the interpretive cut-off level. Read the APA Manual and
.
. * Red Owl's APA Tips to make sure the table is formatted consistent with APA style.
.
. * Do not assume it was acceptably formatted for APA style when it was exported from Stata.
.
. * Include descriptive names for the factors in a note to the table. See the APA Manual
.
. * for help in formatting the table notes as that is more complicated than you might expect.
.
. * You will then be able to copy this table from Excel into the Word document for DAP1
.
. * as Table 1 with the title "Factor Loadings (After Varimax Rotation With Kaiser
.
. * Normalization)."
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 13
.
. * The following code calculates various descriptive statistics for the
.
. * factors with positive factor loadings which satisfy the interpretive
.
. * cut-off criterion (i.e., loading > .30) and for the U statistic.
.
. * You should include these statistics in the results section of your DAP1 text.
.
. * You could manually calculate these statistics by reviewing the results in
.
. * the Excel file in DAP1-Table1.xlsx, but I am providing the following code to
.
. * simplify the task for you. I recognize that this Stata code is complex and
.
. * I would not expect you to be able to develop this code yourself at this point.
.
. cap restore
.
. preserve
.
. import excel DAP1-Table1.xlsx, first sheet(FactorLoadings) cellrange(B4:E28) clear
.
. forval i = 1/`=_N' {
2.
. if abs(Factor1[ì']) < .30 | Factor1[ì'] < 0 replace Factor1 = . in ì'
3.
4.
5.
. }
(1 real change made, 1 to missing)

.
. format Factor1-Factor3 %5.3f
.
. tabstat Factor1 Factor2 Factor3 U, statistics(min median max n) format(%5.3f)
stats | Factor1 Factor2 Factor3 U

---------+----------------------------------------
min | 0.499 0.392 0.301 0.477
p50 | 0.550 0.492 0.465 0.688
max | 0.721 0.625 0.530 0.878
N | 8.000 9.000 9.000 24.000
--------------------------------------------------
.
. restore
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 14
.
. * Calculate descriptive statistics on the factor scores, which were
.
. * predicted in STEP 9 above.
.
. tabstat F1-F3, stats(mean sd min p25 median p75 max n) format(%5.2f)
stats | F1 F2 F3
---------+------------------------------
mean | -0.00 -0.00 0.00
sd | 0.91 0.88 0.82
min | -3.31 -4.67 -3.18
p25 | -0.59 -0.49 -0.52
p50 | 0.08 0.10 0.05
p75 | 0.66 0.64 0.57
max | 2.27 1.96 2.22
N | 1207.00 1207.00 1207.00
----------------------------------------
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 15
.
. * Conduct independent samples t-tests on each factor to determine
.
. * whether there are statistically significant differences in the
.
. * mean factor scores between US respondents and those from the
.
. * other countries included in the study.
.
. ttest F1, by(usa)
Two-sample t test with equal variances

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
Other | 1,032 .0469218 .0284358 .9134942 -.0088769 .1027205
USA | 175 -.2767047 .0612087 .8097153 -.3975118 -.1558976
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 1,207 -7.96e-10 .0260802 .9060752 -.0511676 .0511676
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | .3236265 .0735148 .1793953 .4678577
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(Other) - mean(USA) t = 4.4022
Ho: diff = 0 degrees of freedom = 1205
Ha: diff < 0 Ha: diff != 0 Ha: diff > 0

Pr(T < t) = 1.0000 Pr(|T| > |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 0.0000
.
. ttest F2, by(usa)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
Other | 1,032 .01005 .0274535 .881938 -.0438211 .0639212
USA | 175 -.0592664 .0661088 .8745378 -.1897449 .071212
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 1,207 -2.81e-10 .025354 .8808465 -.0497429 .0497429
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | .0693165 .0720126 -.0719674 .2106004

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(Other) - mean(USA) t = 0.9626

Pr(T < t) = 0.8320 Pr(|T| > |t|) = 0.3360 Pr(T > t) = 0.1680
.
. ttest F3, by(usa)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
Other | 1,032 -.1323338 .0241682 .7763977 -.1797582 -.0849093
USA | 175 .7803911 .0456362 .6037103 .6903193 .8704629
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 1,207 1.28e-09 .0235827 .8193081 -.0462677 .0462677
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -.9127249 .0616331 -1.033645 -.7918048
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(Other) - mean(USA) t = -14.8090

Pr(T < t) = 0.0000 Pr(|T| > |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 1.0000
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 16a
.
. * Create a histogram of F1 overlaid by country comparison represented by transparent bars.
.
. * This will be inserted as Figure 2 in the DAP1 narrative.
.
. twoway (histogram F1 if usa==1, percent width(1) bfcolor(green%10) blcolor(dkgreen)) (histogram F1 if usa==0, width(1)
> percent bfcolor(teal%10) blcolor(blue)) , ylabels(0(5)45, angle(horizontal)) xlabels(-3(.5)3, format(%3.1f))
xtitle(Fa
> ctor 1 Score) legend(order(1 "USA" 2 "Other") pos(10) ring(0) col(1)) scheme(s1color) name(DAP1histF1Xusa, replace)
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 16b
.
. * Export graph file to working directory.
.
. graph export DAP1-histF1Xusa.tif, width(1000) replace
(note: file DAP1-histF1Xusa.tif not found)
(file DAP1-histF1Xusa.tif written in TIFF format)
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 17a
.
.
.
xtitle(Fa
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 17b
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 18a
.
.
.
xtitle(Fa
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 18b
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. * STEP 19
.
. * Close the log file, saving it to the working directory on your local computer.
.
. * You will copy/paste this log file into the DAP1 project document per the instructions.
.
. cap log
close-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Factor Analysis Articles Used as Models
Worrell, F. C., Roth, D. A., & Gabelko, N. H. (2007). Elementary Reading Attitude Survey
(ERAS) scores in academically talented students. Roeper Review, 29, 119-124.
doi:10.1080/02783190709554395
Xu, J. (2005). Purposes for doing homework reported by middle and high school students. The
Journal of Educational Research, 99, 46-55. doi:10.3200/JOER.99.1.46-55

Researchers’ Contributions and Statements of Academic Integrity
Mary Kudla
Mary read and reflected on Worrell, F. C., Roth, D. A., & Gabelko, N. H. (2007) and Xu, J.
(2005) as models of factor analysis. She met with the team on 2/10/18 and 2/15/18 (11 hrs. in
person). Mary formatted Table 1 and all diagrams in consultation with her team members. She
ran all of the factor analysis code herself even though other members of the team did the same.
Mary participated in every aspect of the project. She also assisted in reviewing the draft with
Red Owl’s APA Tips and the APA Manual to make sure the documents were fully compliant
with APA guidelines.
Total time spent on DAP1: 35 hours, 0 minutes.
I, Mary Kudla, did not consult on any aspect of this project with anyone other than my official
team members (if any) and Red Owl, and I did not review any previous examples of this project
from previous sessions of the course. I have not shared a copy of any part of this project in draft
or final form with anyone other than my official team members or Red Owl, and I promise not to
publish this project in any form (including posting on the internet) without Red Owl’s written
permission. If I include this project in my digital portfolio, I will password-protect the web site
or the project document or both.
Naomi Lucas Anthony
Naomi read and reflected on Worrell, F. C., Roth, D. A., & Gabelko, N. H. (2007) and Xu, J.
(2005) as models of factor analysis. She met with the team on 2/10/18 and 2/15/18 (11 hrs. in
person). Naomi formatted Table 1 and all diagrams in consultation with her team members.
She ran all of the factor analysis code herself even though other members of the team did the
same. Naomi participated in every aspect of the project. She also assisted in reviewing the draft
with Red Owl’s APA Tips and the APA Manual to make sure the documents were fully
compliant with APA guidelines.
Total time spent on DAP1: 35 hours
I, Naomi Lucas Anthony, did not consult on any aspect of this project with anyone other than my
official team members (if any) and Red Owl, and I did not review any previous examples of this
project from previous sessions of the course. I have not shared a copy of any part of this project
in draft or final form with anyone other than my official team members or Red Owl, and I
promise not to publish this project in any form (including posting on the internet) without Red
Owl’s written permission. If I include this project in my digital portfolio, I will password-protect
the web site or the project document or both.
Cristina Montagna
Cristina read and reflected on Worrell, F. C., Roth, D. A., & Gabelko, N. H. (2007) and Xu, J.
(2005) as models of factor analysis. She met with the team on 2/10/18 and 2/15/18 (11 hrs in
person and via FaceTime). Cristina formatted Table 1 and all diagrams in consultation with her
team members. She ran all of the factor analysis code herself even though other members of the
team did the same. Cristina participated in every aspect of the project. She also assisted in
reviewing the draft with Red Owl’s APA Tips and the APA Manual to make sure the documents
were fully compliant with APA guidelines.

I, Cristina Montagna, did not consult on any aspect of this project with anyone other than my
Owl’s written permission. If I include this project in my digital portfolio, I will password-
protect the web site or the project document or both.
Cassandree Thime
Cassy read and reflected on Worrell, F. C., Roth, D. A., & Gabelko, N. H. (2007) and Xu, J.
(2005) as models of factor analysis. She met with the team on 2/10/18 and 2/15/18 (11 hrs. via
FaceTime). Cassy formatted Table 1 and all diagrams, in consultation with her team members.
She ran all of the factor analysis code herself even though other members of the team did the
same. Cassy participated in every aspect of the project. She also assisted in reviewing the draft
with Red Owl’s APA Tips and the APA Manual to make sure the documents were fully
compliant with APA guidelines.
I, Cassandree Thime, did not consult on any aspect of this project with anyone other than my
Owl’s written permission. If I include this project in my digital portfolio, I will password-
protect the web site or the project document or both.

Edd 1006 - Dap1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Edd 1006 - Dap1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Edd 1006 - Dap1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: PRE-SERVICE MATH TEACHER PERCEPTIONS 1

Long Island University

student achievement in mathematics begins with an examination of the perceptions of preservice

Keywords: mathematics education, pre-service teachers, teacher perceptions, math pedagogy,

exploratory factor analysis

mathematical software on computers, tablets, and flipped classroom instruction. Research of

of technology might improve student perceptions of math education.

Student achievement in math education may be complicated by shifting technology

education. The following research questions guided this study:

of mathematical content knowledge?

K-12 teachers of other nations?

Data Collection and Instrumentation

at Michigan State University, an international study of the preparation of mathematics teachers

certifications, course-taking, program activities, and content knowledge relevant to their

regarding mathematical and pedagogical beliefs.

Using an exploratory factor analysis on these 24 variables, three-factor score variables

described in the results section.

exported to Microsoft Excel 2016 for further formatting.

priori methods were utilized to extract and rotate these factors.

This study intended to explore differences in views of pre-service teachers, pertaining to

were evaluated as one-tailed t-tests with an a priori criterion of α = .05.

[Insert Figure 1 about here.]

[Insert Table 1 about here.]

items, also, loaded on the third factor.

Comparison of Factor Scores by US vs. Other Nationality

results of the one-tailed independent samples t-tests.

p < .001). This is depicted visually in Figure 2.

[Insert Figure 2 about here.]

[Insert Figure 3 about here.]

[Insert Figure 4 about here.]

mathematical functions to life.

creativity of mathematics education.

Conclusion and Implications

creativity in mathematics education. Educational institutions should continue to promote and

explore creative practices in mathematics education. Existing science, technology, engineering,

mathematics education on U.S. PISA scores.

not molding instruction to their future career aspirations.

all can rise together.

international benchmarking in school system performance. Paris: Organisation for

Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Retrieved from http://0-

13. Retrieved from http://0 search.proquest.com.liucat.lib.liu.edu/docview/1520763107?

electronic support tools in mathematics. Educational Technology, Research and

Development, 64(6), 1163-1182. http://0dx.doi.org.liucat.lib.liu.edu/10.1007/s11423-016-

Standards. Retrieved from http://www.nysed.gov/common/nysed/files/nys-next-

century learning. Retrieved from

Factor Loadings (After Varimax Rotation With Kaiser Normalization)

EV 3.08 2.86 1.90

Figure 3. Histogram displays non-statistically significant one-tail t-test between pre-service

Figure 4. Histogram displays non-statistically significant one-tail t-test between pre-service

Stata Log With Commands and Output

Variable Obs Unique Mean Min Max Label

. * to respondents from other countries.

Factor analysis/correlation Number of obs = 1,207

Factor2 | 2.69583 1.74600 0.3393 0.8674

Factor loadings (pattern matrix) and unique variances

TBMSTMTQ | 0.0164 | 0.4795

(file DAP1-screeplot.tif written in TIFF format)